The Sun. — London, England, 1846-03-28 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 27. Their Lordships met at Five o'clock. SELLING SPIRITS ON SUNDAY. A petition was presented at the bar from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of the city of London, against the sale of spirituous liquors on Sunday. LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a person near Barnet against this line of railway, on the ground of the grist damage it would do to his property. Also, a petition from a place in Lincolnshire to the same effect. CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY. Lord BROUGHAM held in his hand a Bill, the first read ing of which he should now move, the object of which was to redeem the pledge which he had last year given of extending the wholesome and salutary provisions of two Acts passed last session for simplifying the conveyance of landed property by sale and tea s e. Those Bills gave certain formula, and shortened the conveyance, and was a great comfort to those whe had property to convey, although it was a discomfort to the coun sel and practitioners. But he did not care for that, he looked only to the client and his interests. The Bill also extended to town leases, to mortgages, to settlements, and sales ; and exchanges of all sorts, and to wills and farm leases. The ex. pense of conveyance was one of the greatest evils under which the landed interest laboured. They had a body of evidence upon the subject which was frightful. They found that the price of land in other countries, where the expense of con veyancing was little or nothing, was thirty-five and thirty-six years' purchase in one country, thirty-eight in another ; and another, where the expense of conveyance very small, it was forty-eight years' purchase. There was a reluctance in the profession to use the forms prescribed in these Bills, and they could not be compelled to do se, but he had inserted in this Bill a provision, giving taxing masters power to disallow the expense of a long conveyance when.the short one could be used. Lord CAMPBELL heartily concurred in the Bill brought forward by the Noble Lord. He was glad to see that the Noble Lord had become a convert to the principles which he (Lord Campbell) had long since advocated on the same ques tion. It was, therefore, a source of satisfaction to him that the Noble and Learned Lord now supported a system which he formerly opposed. He was quite sure that it would be supported also by the legal profession. Lord BROUGHAM intimated that the most eminent bar risters were advocates of the plan now proposed. Lord BEAUMONT congratulated all interested in the sub ject that it was now taken up by such able hands as the Noble Lord, who had brought it forward. He could state, that owing to the difficulties which surrounded the conveyance of property by the existing law, a large amount of capital, which would find its way to investments of this nature, was diverted into another channel. He merely rose for the purpose of congratu lating all interested in the matter, that a Bill was at length brought forward for doing away with those difficulties, and fa cilitating the conveyance. The Bill was then re first time. MUTINY BILL. The Duke of WELLINGTON moved the second reading of the Mutiny Bill. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed. CASE OF T. S. DUNCOMBE, ESQ., M.P. Lord BEAUMONT said he had to present a petition from a Member of the other House of Parliament, complaining of having had great injustice done him by certain allegations which had been introduced by petitioners in an appeal case in allusion to him. The petitioner was Thomas Slingsby Dun combe, Esq., and the petition further stated, that that gen tleman was in no way interested in the appeal case mentioned, and it prayed that their Lordships. would immediately adopt such means as would allow the petitioner to disprove, on oath, the grossly injurious slanders which were aimed at his cha racter. Thu Earl of CHARLEVILLE said the petition had been presented by the Earl and Countess of Glengall in an appeal case. Extracts were subsequently taken from it, and it was designated as a gross perversion of the truth. The petition was presented in the usual way, and when it was brought under the consideration of the House it was referred to the Appeal Committee. This was on the 27th of February. The Lord Chancellor would then have received any petition with the object of showing that the Earl of Glengall's petition was incorrect, and contained irrelevant matter, and the solicitor who appeared on behalf of the Hon. Member who now addressed the House had had every opportunity of objecting altogether to the allega tions it contained. The Earl of Glengall's petition did not allude to any individual in. particular; but as to the appellant acting under the influence of a certain individual, that was a sufficient ground for going before the Appeal Committee and having the case adjudicated on. Every allegation in the Earl of Glengall's petition was founded on affidavits, and the case was proceeding in the Vice-Chancellor's Court, where the fukest opportunity was afforded for the Hon. Member to meet those allegations, instead of petitioning that House. Lord BROUGHAM said there was one circumstance to which he would refer. It was quite a mistake to suppose that a breach of privilege was committed in presenting these peti tions. The petition of the Earl of Glengall was presented, not in his capacity as a Member of that House, but as a private in dividual. In that capacity he came before the House and pre ferred certain charges against the Hon. Member (Mr. T. Dun combe), and it was perfectly competent fur the latter Hcn. Member to deny these dharges. This was no breach of pri vilege, as each had a perfect right to prefer charges in their individual capacity. But he by no means agreed with the prayer of the petition presented that night. The Appeal Committee agreed that it was not a matter for the conside ration of the House, but for the Court below. He (Lord Brougham) considered that the Hon. Members ought to seek redress from the court below. Still he did not complain of the presentation of the petition under the circumstances. The• Earl of CLARE quite agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord. Mr. Duncombe had filed an affidavit in the Vice-Chancellor's Court, and he would have an opportunity of meeting the charges there without coming as a petitioner to that House: The LORD CHANCELLOA said that at the presentation of the Earl of Glen all's petition, it was considered that it was referred to the Committee, and that therefore the House had no jurisdiction in the matter. The Appeal Committee was of opinion that the proper course was to refer it to the Court below, and decided accordingly. Certainly the petition reflected on the Hon. Member, but the proper course for him swas to seek redress in the Court below ; and if he was not atisfied with the decision, then it was competent in him to bring the matter before their Lordships in the form of an appeal against the judgment. He agreed with tl:e Noble and Learned Lord (Lord Brougham) that any allegations that the petiiion of the Earl of Glengall might contain could not be looked upon as a breach of privilege. Lord BEAUMONT said that after what had fallen from the Noble and Learned Lord he had not another word to say. He must say, however, that they had nothing to do with the proceedings of the Court below. The Marquis of CL AN RICARDE thought they had some thing to do with the Court below in this matter. Lord Glenp,all was accused of having brought this accusation against Mr. Duncombe, and of publishing it for the first time. Now the fart was that the accusation was first embodied in a petition presented to the Court of Chancery by the solicitor of Lady Byng. It was the letter of Mr. Kensett, embodied in an affidavit, which gave rise to this matter. A copy of that therefore could have been obtained from the Court below. After a few words from the Earl of CLARE, the subject dropped. NEWRY, ROSSTREVOR, _AND WARRENPOINT RAILWAY. The Earl of ROSEBERRY reported from the Committee on thin Bill that they had passed the preamble. Lord MELBOURNE presented a petition, signed by the chairman of the board of the Glastonbury poor-law union, on behalf of that board, praying that the present system of levying, poor-rates may be abolished, and a national rate substituted. The Earl of LIARDWICKE presented a petition from the county of Cambridge, vdlich was adopted by a meeting held in the open air against free trade, and praying that all measures baring a tendency to reduce the protection on British industry may be rejected. The Earl of DENBIGH presented a petition from the Trustees of the Rugby Charity, against the Chatitable Trust The Marquis of SALISBURY said he had to present a petition of a similar nature, from the Mercers' Company. He did not know whether he ought to move that they be heard by counsel at the bar of the House, or that they be heard in the Committee. Lord BROUGHAM said they had the Bill before them last year, and never was a Bill more fully heard. There were one or two of the details which he would wish to have amended. He considered, however, that the petitioners ought to have presented their petition before, in order to allow them to be heard against the Bill. He was himself a great friend to the Bill, and for that reason he thought that a few amendments introduced into it would save all opposition. The Earl of ELDON said, that when the petition was pre sented to him, he pointed out to his Friend the difficulty under which they laboured. He hoped the Noble and Learned Lord would make such alterations in the Bill as would prevent op, position, either on the second or third reading. Should no alteration be made in the Bill, hg should certainly oppose it in all stages. The LORD CHANCELLOR said the Bill was precisely similar to the 13i11 of last session. That Bill was sent to a Select Committee, was supported by the Right Reverend Bench, was passed without opposition, and was sent down to the other House, where it was only prevented passing by the lateness of the session. He had no objection to refer this Bill again to a Select Committe. There was one clause different from the last Bill, and that was with respect to the persons from whom the selection of the tribunal was to be made. After a few words from Lord ELDON and the LORD CHAN CELLOR, Lord COTTENHAM said, that if the Bill should assume the same shape as the last one, he should find it to be his duty to reject it altogether. Lord CAMPBELL said that as this was a proposal to put of the Bill till after Easter, to afford more time for its considera • tion, he could not oppose it. The Noble Lord, however, had the whole of the long vacation to consider its provisions, since it was formerly before their Lordships, and he ( Lord Camp bell) considered it strange, if, at the suggestion of the Noble Lord, who sometimes sat there (pointing to Lord Brougham's seat), hut who was now sitting on the Woolsack—(Great laughter)—he should now postpone it till after the Easter holi days. He would like that the Noble Lord should confine it to charities of small amount, so as to keep them out of the Court of Chancery. The expenses there would entirely eat up small charities. The object should be also to simplify the proceed ings as much as possible in that Court. He would most heartily support the motion, but not with the machinery sought to be introduced. Lord BROUGHAM considered that his Noble Friend must have grievou'ly mistaken his intensions when he stated that his proceeding was quite irregular. He had merely wished that the consideration of the 1 ill should be put off for the pur pose of making certain changes, which would make the Bill pass—he would not say unanimously—but certainly with less opposition in their Lordships' House. He had not had an o„r_ portunity of conferring with his Noble Friend , in consequenc e of their many engagements. His Noble Friend would leave town at the end of the week, and he should not have an oppor tunity of conferring with him uoless the Bill was put off for a few days. The present Bill was confined to small charities— Lard CAMPBELL—No, no. Lord BROUGHAM—If his Noble Friend would allow him—ha had read the Bill. The object in extending the pro visions of the Bill to all charities was not to interfere in their management, or the disposal of their funds, but simply to in quire into their accounts. Nobody had objected to his two Charity Bills. He believed that there were Companies, having large funds at their disposal, who " dreaded the light," he would not say " because their deeds were evil ;" he believed them, on the contrary, to be very goood. They were in the habit of very hospitably entertaining their friends. He had himself partaken of their hospitality, They had great funds at their disposal, and they did not like to have them inquired into. He knew of one man who had 6001. a year at his disposal, and it surely was not too much to ask for power to have such interests inquired after. He would recommend that the further consideration of the matter should be postponed for a week at the latest. The LORD CHANCELLOR—The principle of the Bill was to administer small charities. That was the main part of the Bill. It was to call for an annual account of their receipts and expenditure, and it would afford an opportunity. This would be for the benefit of all. If the trustees of charities thoupht proper to let out their property, why should they not? He should be ready to make any personal sacrifice to pass this measure. Lord COTTNEHAM would remind his Noble and Learned Friend, that he, by this Bill,, gave a power to the trustees, which the Crown and the Court of Chancery did not possess. It gave the trustees the power of selling the property. This power the Court of Chancery never had, and never claimed to have. The jurisdiction was limited in respect to small charities, but with regard to large municipal charities it would lead to the swamping of the existing charities. He hoped that when the time came for the consideration and dis cussion of the Bill, these matters would be explained. The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was necessary some thing should be done to meet existing difficulties. He had often, when applications had been made to him to fill up vacancies, felt their force, and he never listene d to their appli cations till such time as the numbers were so reduced as to im peratively require the filling up of the vacancies, the costs were so enormous in:the filling up of these charitable trusts. He might instance, that the filling of a trust in Hereford cost 700/. ; in Shrewsbury, 400/. ' • and in Exeter, from 6004 to 700/. It was to rectify this flagrant abuse that he wished to engraft this part of the Bill which he had prepared, on the other portions of the Bill. In answer to Lord COTTENHAM, The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the filling up of a trust in the city of Norwich had cost the enormous sum of 5,000. The further consideration of the Bill was then adjourned. Lord ELDON presented a petition from the Merchant Tailors of the City of London against the Charitable Trust Bill ; also one to the same effect, from the Incorporated So. ciety of Coopers, of the same city. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 27. The SPEAKER. took the Ch R air at Four o'clock. SECOND EADINGS. The following Bills were read a second time and ordered to be committed, viz. : Bristol and Birmingham and Midland Railways. St. Alban's, Luton, and Dunstable Railway. York Improvement. Harrogate Waterworks. Midland, Barnsley, Sheffield, Dewsbury, Leeds, and Bradford Railway. North of Norfolk Railway. East Dereham and Norwich Railway. Glasgow, Paisley, and Johnstone Canal Sale. Warrington Warterworks. Shrevrskury and Herefordshire Railway. Bristol and Birmingham Railway (Gloucester and Stouehouse Junction). Buckinghamshire Railway ( Tring to Banbury). Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway. Midland Railway (Erewash Valley Extension). Midland Railway (Erewash Valley Branches). Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway. Worcester and Porthdynllaen Railway. Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway. West London Railway Improvement and Extensions. Glasgow Union Arcade. St. Austell Small Debts. London and Birmingham Railway (Birmingham Extension.) Bristol and Gloucester, and Birmingham and Gloucester Railways. The following reports were brought up, and ordered to be laid on the table, viz. : Sunderland Gas. Sunderland Waterworks. Bromsgrove Improvement and Small Tenements. Burnley Improvement and Waterworks. Maldon, Witham, and Braintree Railway. Eastern Union and Hadleigh Junction Railway. Brighton and Chichester Railway (Bognor and Littlehampton Branches). South-Eastern Railway (Godstone Station to East Grinstead). Mr. LAW moved that the Administration , of Justice Bill be read a first time. It was ordered to be read a second time on Wednesday next. Petitions were presented from the Chamber of Commerce at Edinburgh, in favour of the Tea-hour Factory Bill, and for the abolition of the duties on Timber. INTERMENT IN TOWNS. Mr. 11PKINNON presented a petition from Wolverhamp ton in favour of the Bill for the prevention of interments in towns. GOVERNMENT MEASURES. Sir R. PEEL said be had to present a petition from the merchants, bankers, and other persons at Bristol, who stated that the stagnation of trade was great, and that it was to be remedied by the measures proposed by her Majesty's Minis ters, and they therefore prayed the House to pass them into a law. The petition was signed by over two hundred of the largest and most respectable houses. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. BRISTOL WATER-WORKS. This Rill was read a first time. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Mr. CARDWELL moved the adjournment of the House, a its rising, until Monday Agreed to. WINDOW DUTIES. Lord DUNCAN, according to representations which had been made to him by his constituents, owing to the delays which had taken place in the discussion of the corn-laws and the commercial duties introduced by the Government, deemed it expedient to postpone his motion on the subject of the window duties until after Easter. THE GOVERNMENT MEASURES. Mr. NEWDEG ATE wished to asklher Majesty's Govern ment when it was their intention to introduce the Bills for affording facilities for the draining of estates, for the consolida tion of highways, for the payment of schoolmasters in union workhouses, and the Bill respecting the payment of the Irish constabulary force, which were referred to in the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury when announcing the Government measures ? Sir R. PEEL said—With respect to the last two questions —namely, what steps the Government had made for intro clueing Bills for the payment cf schoolmasters in union work houses, and for supporting the constabulary force in Ireland at the public charge —he begged to inform the Honourable Member that provision could not be made for these objects until the next Committee of Supply. With respect to the Bills for improiing the drainage of estates, and consolidating the highway rates, the Hon. Gentleman was, no doubt aware, that since the announcement of these measures, there had been an extreme pressure on the time of the Government. Their announcement brought a great number of suggestions, which required much time for consideration.—( Hear.) They had, however, lost no time in doing so, and he hoped on this day week to be in a condition to lay them on the table of the House. THIE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 28, 1846. METROPOLITAN IMPROVEUENTS. Sir It. H. INGLIS inquired when the Bills for improving the metropolis, and for making a p&rk at Battersea, like the one at the east end of Londun, would be laid on the table. The Right Hon. Baronet observed, that his only object was that the Bill should be laid on the table ofttie House. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that the Bills were already pre pared, and the (hafts had been printed. His Noble Friend had gone to Ireland; and, as he took such great trouble in pre paring them, he wished the (hafts to be sent after him for his revi!ion. LOANS TO LANDED PROPRIETORS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF PROPERTY. Mr. ESCOTT wished to ask the First Lord of the Trea sury whether he was prepared to lay on the table of the House that portion of his scheme for the improvement of land, where by it was intended to give loans to landed proprietors on proper security ? Sir R. PEEL said that the Government had been exces sively occupied, but he hoped by this day (Friday) week that he would be able to lay that Bill upon the table of the House. INFORMERS' (IRELAND.) Mr. S. O'BRIEN said he would move for a return of the total amount of money which had been paid for services, by the Government, to a man named Robert Reilly, alias Robert Alexander, alias William Roberts, alias Hugh who had been sentenced to transportation at the last Tyrone assize-3. lie would also move, on Tuesday next, a resolution to the effect that several royal commissions had been instituted with a view to the improvement of Ireland, and that these commis sions had laid before the Government a variety of sugges tions, not one of which had been acted upon. PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. HUME gave notice of his intention to call the atten tion of the House on Wednesday next to the adoption of means by which the private bu-iness of the House might be lessened. ADJOURNED DEBATE.—CORN-LAWS. On the question being put that the order of the day be now read, Mr. COBDEN rose to present a petition from 114 tenants on the Right Hon. Baronet's (the Secretary of State for the Home Department) estate — 6l' . Netherby, in Cum berland. The petitioners stated that they viewed with satisfaction the measure of the Government, but they would rather that the repeal had been total and immediate.-- ( Hear, hear.) The petition was signed by twenty-seven names, and he found that the rentals placed opposite these names amounted in the aggregate to B,ooo'. He might state, that on a former occasion, the Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn, had presented a petition, which he said emanated from 3,000 of the Netherby tenants. He (Mr. Cobden) congratulated the Right Hon. Baronet on the fact, that some of his tenantry entertained more rational opinions upon this great question. Sir JAMES GRAHAM then rose and said—l can assure you, Sir, that I am very unwilling to protract to any fur ther length this debate, which the country generally, I be lieve, are as anxious to see brought to a termination as i am by a decision in some way or other, be that what it may.—( Hear, hear.) But not hav ing been able to secure an opportunity of addressing you last evening until an hour so late that I could not then think of trespassing upon the time of the House, while I was at the same time extremely desirous that this discussion should not terminate until I had made some reference to the discus sions and arguments that have been used by some Hon. Members on this side of the House, I will now take this opportunity of addressing the House.—( Hear, hear.) And I can assure the House that in respect to what has fallen from one Hon. Mem ber upon a subject somewhat personal to myself, that I was not cognisant of the occurrence he has stated with regard to my tenantry. I can, however, assure the Hon. Member and the House, that I have never, either directly or indirectly, in terfered with the expression of the opinions of my tenantry upon- this question—( Hear, hear)—but on the contrary, 1 have invariably left them to the full and free exer cise of their own opinions and judgment upon a question in which I conceive they hal as deep an interest as myself.— ( Hear.) With thi !brief explanation upon this point, I shall now proceed, with the permission of this House, to make some allusion to the speech of the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn. I shall first dispose of his peroration, and which I must say was, like many of the other speeches delivered by Hon. Members in opposition to her Majesty's Ministers from this side the House, characterised almost entirely by a continual outpouring of personal invective.—( Hear, hear.) I shall not, in the course of my observations, indulge in a like strain of severity upon the language in which their opinions were, I believe, sincerely and honestly made. Neither shall I say— for I could not say so with truth—that I do not appreciate the grounds upon which other Hon. Members on this side of the House differ from the Government, for amongst them are several Hon. Members upon whom I have many times relied, and never relied in vain.—( Hear, hear.) In considering the public necessity which I. as a Minister of the C rown, vrit conceived existed for this measure, I do say it was Sir, I nain I felt that necessity urged upon the Government. was prepared, and I am prepared, en public grounds, regardless of all taunts and obloquy that may be attempted to be heaped on 'me —I rep ea t, I arnprepared, from a sense of public duty, to meet the present emergency by the main tenance of this measure, which, in my conscience, I be lieve to (Cheers.) Although, Sir, I may be taunted bew i n tl e i c in e l arY nsisren c y, yet steadily, firmly and fearlessly, I hope t o be able to discharge m y d uty ; and in persevering in that course, I am consoled by this single reflection, that the time is not far distant when the country gentlemen of England will be satisfied that her Majesty's Minis ters now in office have not betrayed their interests, but that, on the contrary, they will be reconciled to the fact, that the interests of the great body of the community, w h ose prosperity is more immediately the object of this measure, will be materially benefited by this House giving its sanction to the measure.—(Cheers.) I hope, Sir, to be allowed to advert t o some of the arguments of the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn. The arguments adduced by the Noble Lord were the most stringent and unanswerable of those urged by the opponents of the sliding scale ; and I will, Sir, with the permission of the House, advert to the first position taken up by the Noble Lord. Speculating on the price of wheat, the Noble Lord, with a view of forming an estimate of the prices of wheat in this country and France, went through a most ex traordinary process of argument.—(Cries of " Hear; heir.") Now, Sir, it appears to me that the great argument in favour of the free importation of corn is, that in the present circum dthThreahel trade w di stances of this country it w ill su pply a l arge num be r a f the population, who wou ld o th erw i se fi n d a difficulty in obtaining from the land a n a d equa t e supp l y , espec i a ll y as t h e i r nu mb er is increasing. The effect of the measure will be to lower the prices in this coun t ry , an d t o ra i se t h e pr i ces on t h e Con tinent of Europe ; and it will theref ore eq ua lise the prices beth here and abroad, W e s h a ll th en o bt a i n th e o bj ec t so desirable ; for the pe o pl e o f E ng l an d w ill h ave a secur ity I against the unc er t a i n an d ex t ravagant r i se o f pr i ces , an d th e commercial interest will not only have f r ee t ra de, but they will have an opport un ity o f an i n t erc h ange o f coenmodities. The prices of corn w ill r i se i n E urope , an d th e rai s ing of prices is no l ess an o bj ec t to the manufacturer than an • increased price fo r his own produce. The Noble Lord, o n p rocee di ng t o argue w ith reference to the steadiness of price s , p ro d uc ed a t a bl e , which illustrates in a more clear manner than any other table I have hitherto seen, a fact whieh the enemies of the sliding scale regard as inherent in our present system of corn-laws. He has demonstrat( d very clearly in the table which be has produced that the . great fluctuation s of prices on the continent depended mainly on the d eman d from England. He adduced the table of fluctuation s w hi c h shows that the rise or fall of prices on the contin en t i s i n exact proportion ro the demand from England. It would a pp ear f rom that document that the places most affected b y th ese fluctua t tinny, are Hamburgh, Amsterdam; Da n t z i c , an d Odessa— mfher distanceoao o rd s m R t alßawmroegrardeteleieysarl.uji liable ci eae T offnnt h edosc e i tdf ser N ueorpra o moi b b onl l ue e Nts, e L w o r y d also is d i e n c f l e a r r i e o s r, that a the s e Odessa— in fact from those places from which we are accustomed to s h ei nf a toe n rr d eri the ugpnt iomn as r ik p ne a tt r 11 : i e e fi o s r r t wr n ab ' , ate had we done ? So far as our p resen t exper i ence goes, we had been, in fact, preventing the production of those crops of corn which are necessary for the keepi ng u p o f a constant an d stea d y supply; and th e r effect is, that we are teuding to con vert these corn-growing countries not only into com mercial rivals, but into actual enemies. This cannot but act in preventing our obtaining those supplies which are necessary to preserve an equality in the corn-market. In con sequence of the uncertainty which prevails among the agricul turists abroad, they never know at what rate their corn would sell in the British market, and the supplies therefore are un certain and irregular. On the whole the conclusion is strong that they can place no reliance whatever on the state of the British market, and they therefore impose higher rates of duty on our manufactures in order to realise the advantages which they ought to reap ,from their corn trade, and thus despairing of ever obtaining the advantage to which I allude, they are led to measures which have the effect of depressing the whole in terests of the country. This then is one of the reasons which indicate the cause of those fluctuations to which the Noble Lord has alluded, and which have rendered the British markets so uncertain that the supplies have been irregular, and, apart from other considerations, offers me one of the greatest reasons why the corn-laws should be altered. The Noble Lord has said, and has laid great stress upon the point, that there has been great evenness of price since the alteration of the law in 1828. Why 1 have said repeatedly in this House, that I have always considered that evenness and steadiness of price neither more nor less than a nuisance, and so it is considered by the grow ers abroad. The Noble Lord considers that this evenness has been a benefit, but what have been the real effects ? It is well known, and I appeal to the oldest farmer for a confirmation of the opinion that during the present year there has been no such effect created. I believe that during the present year the price of the best wheat in the home market has varied from 565. to 725. a quarter, and that this state of things is a constant stress upon the trade, and a continued nuisance, and it is on account of this imperfection in a portion of the sliding-scale that I believe it ought to be altered. Then the Noble Lord has another ob jection which he says is occasioned by the importation of foreign corn, in foreign instead of British ships. Why, it is this very uncertainty of the sliding-scale which prevented the merchants and the foreign growers from knowing what the condition of the market would be on the arrival of the cargo, and what the price would be at the moment of its import which lost to British ships their charter age. The Noble Lord had stated that the corn trade should he rendered as certain as possible, in order that when the importation does take place, the British ships should bring the foreign corn. The circumstances which I have stated are the very reasons why foreign ships obtain the cargoes, instead of British ships.—( Hear, hear. ) But, Sir, the Noble Lord then proceeded to state that the farmers looked with dread and consternation at this measure. The petition presented by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Stockport (Mr. Cobden) clearly shows that all the farmers do not entertain such a dread. But the Hon. Member for Huntingdon said that if this protective law were removed a great deal of land must be thrown out of cultivation, and the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Cambridgeshire, said, as I under stood, that the panic in Cambridgeshire is so great that drainage was suspended, and that agricultural improvement had suddenly ceased. Now, Sir, I must beg to observe, that to the best of my knowledge, the panic to which the Hon. Member for Cam bridge has referred, prevails much more within these walls than amongst the farmers of this country. My inquiries do not lead me to believe that either the landlords or the tenants, vt he are not /exposed to the dangerous atmosphere of this House, are affected by the panic to which those Hon. Gent , emen have referred —( Hear, hear.) Now, I think that some Hon. Gentleman stated in the course of this debate, that a certain landlord in Somersetshire had offered to his tenants to release them from their engagements, and sixty of those tenants had refused that offer. Now, Sir, lat once admit that that refusal on the part of the tenants is no sure criterion that they are satisfied with the present measure—( Protectionist cheers)—because the tenants having a large capital em barked in the land—( Hear, hear)—cannot suddenly with. draw that capital without an immense sacrifice. But having made that admission, I must contend, on the other hand, that at the present moment we have no conclu sive evidence to show that the farmers generally are dissatis fied with this measure. Now, Sir, perhaps as this matter is of great importance, and as I am sincerely of opinion that there is no ground for the alarm entertained by any of the Hon. Gentlemen on this side of the House, who sit below the gangway, the House will allow me to sate sonic facts that have come within my own knowledge. I allude, Sir, to the farmers of East Lothian, in Scotland. I have a letter in my hands from a Noble Friend of mine (Lord Glenelg). The letter is dated February 21. He says, " I have had an opportanity of learning the opinions of the farmers of East Lothian and Berwickshire to a considerable extent. One of the factors to a large proprietor in this neighbourhood tells me that there is sot a farm in the country now to be let but for which there are more and higher offers than have ever been made, and that too by men of capital and skill. I asked them (he says) how they accounted for that circum stance. His answer was that the corn question is now considered to be settled, and that the prospects held out by Government of getting their lands drained by a grant from the Treasury, in stead of having themselves to advance the money, has created a general feelingof confidence throughout the country. A gentleman who is a trustee of sonic property in the neighbourhood, has also informed are that offers have been made for some of his farms ten per cent. above the prices for which they at present let. These are (be continues) facts which are worth more than all the arguments adduced in favour of an altera tion of the corn-laws, coming as they do from one of the greatest corn growers in this part of the country." Now, Sir, allusion has been made to the county of Gloucestershire. I will inform the House with re ference to the prevailing opinion upon the subject of the corn laws, that Mr. Charterishas every chance of being returned as a Member for that county upon the principle of an alteration in the corn-laws. Then, Sir, I will allude to the Isle o f Ely, in Cambridgeshire. It has been said that if the corn laws are repealed, the land will be thrown out of cultivation, and the fens will revert to their primitive wild ness. Now, Sir, I hold in my hand a letter from a . very large proprietor of land in that county, dated the first week of 111areh, The letter stated that the writer had received a communication from his agent at the Isle of Ely, stating that he had let two farms to two intelligent men, a father and son, with ample capital, at an increased rent of 126/. per annum. The agreement had been entered into since the introduction of Sir R. Peel's mea sure, and he expressed his opinion, that facts like these were worth more than Sgures, Now, Sir, that relates only to the rents of land, but what has been its effect on the fee.simple value of land. On the introduction of the measure now proposed, I am told that several of the most eminent land- surveyors were opposed to the alteration, but they have since altered their opinion, and have expressed their surprise at the wonderful effect the settlement of the corn question has had upon the value of landed property. There is, for instance, an estate in Essex, with which I am acquainted—and so is, I believe, a Noble Lord opposite—which has been offered for sale for some time past at thirty years' purchase. The rent of the property was 630/., but for three years no offer was made for the pro perty— ( Hear,)—while in the last three weeks, however, an offer had been made for the property which came up to its value. This showed the effect the measure had had on the fee simple value of land, and yet it is said that the measure will have a tendency to throw land out of cultivation. Now, with respect to this alarm, are Honourable Members aware of the desire which exists for inclosing land with a view to its future cultivation. Last year we gave facilities for the in closing of lands, and let me just read the number of applica tions which have been received for leave to inclose waste lands. In the month of September applications to the amount of 3,298 had been received. In October the number of acres which were sought to be enclosed was 4,500. This was under protection--extreme protection—and when there was no expectation in the public mind that the Government intended to propose any alteration with respect to corn.— ( Hear, hear.) But in the month of November, it was well known to the public that her Majesty's Ministers proposed an alteration of those laws. The applications in October to these Commissioners were 4,578; in November, 7,847.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) In December they were 7,205; in January, 5,600 ; and in February, 3,595 (Loud Opposie tion cheers)—but in the first week in March there were 1,500 applications; and within the last fortnight applications have come in from Yorkshire, each by permission of the Com missioners, to inclose a common of inferior land—very inferior land—to the extent of 14,000 acres.—( Hear, hear.) Another application has also come in from the same county for per mission to inclose 2,500 acres—that is to say within the last fortnight ; two applications have come to the Inclosure Commissioners to inclose 16,520 acres of common land,— ( Cheers.) Now, Sir, I must be permitted to call the attention of the House to a Bill now in progress. It is a Bill for reclaim ing and inclosing land from the sea—to reclaim certain tracts of land which form part of. the great estuary at Lynn.— ( Cheers and laughter.) This is not a question of growing lands—it is not a question of inclosing waste land, but rather the question of following the example of the Dutch, and car rying out the principle of . scooping counties out of the ocean —( Hear, hear)—a most laudable and praiseworthy under taking. But what name is on the back of the Bill ? The first name I find on the back of the Bill is that of Lord George Bentinck.—(Loud cheers, and laughter.) The second name that of Mr. Bagg, one of the Members for Norfolk. This plan originated in 1846, when the plans of the Govern ment were well known to all parties.—(Hear, hear.) Lord G. BEN TINCK—.No, no. It was projected in November. Sir J. GRAHAM—The capital invested is proposed to be 1,500,000/4; 200,0001. was proposed to be' borrowed:; and, among the subscribers, the first name which I find is " William George Frederick Cavendish Bentinck," commonly called " Lord George Bentinck"—( Roars of laughter)—and among the directors the first name I find is " William George Frede rick Cavendish Bentinck," commonly called " Lord George Bentinck." That measure was contemplated in the last ses sion of Parliament, and inasmuch as it was the intentian of the Crown to establish its claims to certain rights, there was a negotiation entered upon between those parties and the Board of Works, which negotiation had not, however, been brought to a conclusion. But in the Bill before the House this year, there was an admission of the rightsofthe Crown. The admission is of a very remarkable kind. It is that in the contemplation of such an immense outlay one per cent. should be paid to the Crown • thus, on the large outlay of 500,0001., as stated in the Bill, at least 5,000/. will revert to the Crown. Now, Sir, the House will, perhaps, permit me to venture a question which has been often put by the Noble Lord to my Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Government. If the Noble Lord will allow me, I will ask what is his estimate of the price of wheat— (Laughter) —in the event of the Government measure being passed?—(Continued Laughter.) Is it a matter of mere chance that this speculation will repay its promoters? If not a matter of chanc e , the Noble Lord will, perhaps, again allow me to ask him, what is his estimate of the price of wheat, that he has been induced to be a party to this undertaking? Now, Sir, I will refer to the greater and more serious part of the Noble Lord's statement, and the House will at once anticipate that I allude to the state of Ireland. I heard last night, with very great surprise, the statement of the Noble Lord, tint in his opinion, and every day's experienUconVinced him, that the state of famine in Ireland was a gross delusion ; and the Noble Lord added, that a greater delusion was never, in his opinion, palmed upon the country by any Government. The Noble Lord proceeded to argue that because the fact was that the price of potatoes was 41. a stone, there was no pressure on the people of that country. Now, Sir, I beg to explain in what the real difficulty lies. The price of pota toes cannot be taken as a criterion of the state of things in Ireland. I may observe, in passing, that the price of 4d. per stone is exactly double what it is on ordinary occasions ; and however trifling this may appear to the Hou , e and the Noble Lord, the difference between 2d. and 4d. is a question of some 100 per cent. to four millions of persons in Ir,•land. Then the Noble Lord referred to the small exports from Ireland, and drew the inference from thence that no destitution existed in that country. I think it rather argues that apprehensions of famine were entertained. But, Sir, it may be said that this view of this question might be taken by the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, independent of the condition of Ireland. But the actual state of that country has been confirmed by the statements of other Hon. Members, although an Hon. Mem ber of high authority—l mean the Recorder of the City of Dublin—has stated that there was gross exaggeration in those statements. . Mr. SHAW—I said "great exaggeiation," not 6' gross." Sir JA NIES GRAHAM—With "great" exaggeration. — (Laughter.) Now, I hope the House will bear with me while I read some extracts in reference to this subject, which is in the shape of e idence, and which is deserving of attention, for it really has now became a matter of great importance. The information which reached me in the month of October last, in reference to the state of Ireland, was of such a character as confirmed me of the necessity that existed for the introduction of this measure, although that was not the only reason I had for doing so. In the month of November last I received a letter from the Secretary of the Agricultural Society of Ire land, at my private residence, which I shall now read. I should premise by stating that the Agricultural Society of Ire land is an institution bearing the same character as the Agri- . cultural Society of. England, and numbers amongst its mem bers the Duke of Leinster, Lord Downshire, Loi d Shannon, and many others of the most respectable nobility and gentry in that country. That letter is to this effect. (Here the Right Hon. Baronet read the letter, the substance of which was that the writer enclosed extracts from the Dublin morning papers, containing accounts of the measures which the Irish Agricultural Society had taken in refer ence to the state of the potato crop.) I received several letters in answer, stating that the disease was not spreading, but I subsequently received letters from most of the 120 associations, assuring me that the disease was increasing. I may state there is not a county in Ireland, that is not more or less affected by the disease ; and my office is filled with specimens of the diseased potato. The council of the society have directed their labours to obtain information on the subject, and to transmit the same to the entire society ; and they are of opinion that enough has transpired to gratify them in calling on the Government to take immediate steps in the matter.—( Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, with that letter came another from ,the colleague of the Hon. Gentleman, bearing date 18th October, in which the Hon, Gentleman stated that he was sorry it would not be in his power to attend the council of the society, as be apprehended the accounts that would be received from the different parts of the kingdom would confirm the failure; and that, therefore, the matter should be brought at once under the notice of Government. I will now refer to a representation made in the month of Oc tober last from the secretary of this society, and such was the urgency of the case that the secretary w: ote to me in the letter I have just read to the House. I will now shortly state to the House what is the. more recent information that the Government has received. The Member for Lynn declared that these statements were the grossest—most palpaple deceits ever palmed upon the country by any Government. I will now read a letter which I received from a gentleman in the county of Waterford, and dated the 19th of March. It is from the commissary resident there to the commissary in the city of Dublin. It stated that the price of potatoes was so high that they were no longer used in the poor-houses. They have been discontinued and bread substitoted. The price of potatoes is 6d. per stone, and therefore quite beyond the reach of the poor. A subsequent letter, dated the 21st of March, stated that the proportion of potatoes destroyed in Waterford, was one-third or one-half of the whole crop. In every case where the potatoes had been pitted, they had been found in such a state as to be fit only for manure. Except in Wexford, where the crop is said to be in a tolerable state of preservation, there is some reason for think ing that the same state of things exists throughout all the dis trict which this Gentleman is commissary. I said to the House, on a former occasion, that we were only in the begin ning of this most formidable calamity, and it is now proved that the seed of the diseased potato is not to be relied on. A crop of potatoes, landed in January, were exported, and in even,' case the seed was found to be rotten. Even in the pits of those persons who had sunk them deep, the potatoes were smoking from decomposition. In a letter from a coast-guard, residing in the Isle of Man, to his officer, he reports that there is a universal rot in the potato crop ; in fact they were so bad that they were shoveling them away, instead of picking by the hand, according as the crop was dug out. One person, with a family of six children, stated to him that his crop had been reduced to one-third. Ireland was di vided into 2,000 electoral divisions, and from the reports which they had received, they found that, taking the average, more than one-half of the potato crop was totally destroyed. In a letter which hail been addressed from Colonel M'Arthutsto the Commander of the forces, the following passage occurred : " The difference in the price of the potatoes was one-third more than it was at a corresponding period." The communi cation is from Mr. Redmond, of Carrick-on-Suir ; it is dated on the Ist of March, and states that the disease in potatoes pre vails in the largest extent ; that one person, had purchased as many as 1,500 barrels of potatoes, and that, with the excep tion of a few barrels, they were all found to be in a putrid state. At a meeting which was to be held on the Bth March at Fermoy, at which Lord Mountcashel presided, this matter of the loss of the potatoes was felt to be of the utmost import ance ; and resolutions were unanimously passed expressing that fact. One of those resolutions stated the potatoes were then selling at did. per stone. Mr. SH A W—That is a weight and a half. Sir J. GRAHAM—Yes; but what is the reason of this price? The 4id. was not for sound potatoes—not for those which were free from taint, but for those which were in a putrid state. The consequence was that these were found to be as dear as oatmeal or fiver. Then comes a resolution that the actual state of the potatoes was known to be such that the people were selling those potatoes for the purchase of oatmeal. From Lord Mountcashel's personal examination, both of the pits and barrels, it was found that in some places one-third and olie-half in others, were entirely destroyed. Those, poor people were possessed of small cabins, and if they were obliged to go into the workhouse, they would have to part with all their furniture, and the parties who had projected the meeting, therefore, felt it their bounden duty to bring the matter under the consideration of the Executive Government, and the Poor-law Commissioners, in order that some mode might be defined, for bringing some relief, by giving them a supply of cheap food, or giving them food gratuitously. It .appeared, from accurate statements, that the people in that, district were actually obliged to sub,ist on potatoes not fit to make starch of, and which, of course, were not fit for the food of man.—( Hear, hear.) And yet, after all this, the Right Honourable Gentleman bad said that the reports of the panic in Ire land were gross exaggerations.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") And now, for the purpose of ascertaining whether those reports were a gross exaggeration, let us take other proofs. The Lord-Lieutenant on Monday last received a de putation from the city of Limerick—no small district, com prising as it doss an immense number of inhabitants. What was the representation made by that deputation to the Lord- Lieutenant? I understand that that deputation consisted of the Mayor of Limerick, Sir David Roche, and other men of equal respectability and wealth. The Right Hon. Gentleman will, I think, admit that a more respectable deputation could not have been composed out of the inhabitants of Limerick. They state that the destitution of Limerick and the neigh bourhood arises from a supply of bad potatoes. The state ments were confirmed by Lord Clare, who lived in the neigh bourhood, and that Noble Lord had excellent means of ascer taining the true state of the people in that district. Now this is the state of things in the south, and it will certainly be six months before the new cl op is got in.—( Hear, hear.) And yet the Right Hon. the Recorder of the City of Dublin stated that it was all a gross delusion.—(Hear, hear.) Well, but 'he Right Hon. Gentleman has made, in my opinion, a moat fearful admission. He said this—that about this time of the year destitution and dysentery, and in some cases famine, took place in Ireland. Believing that the Irish people are suffering from disease and want, and that the people of this country are suffering too, but'in a smaller degree, he could not reconcile his mind to provide for the wants of the former by grants of money from the public purse, while it might be done by adopt ing the principle of Adam Smith, and at once reconcile the trade in corn to the rules of nature and common sense. I say that is the noble principle—and one which I did not lose sight of when the state of Ireland was presented to me its all its awful magnitude—that was the moving power, the earnest and leading principle of the measure which we are now discussing. —( Hear.) But then the Hon. 'Wernher for the University of Dublin (Mr. Shaw)' stated that we have betrayed our party by the conduct which we have pursued. I have already stated that I cannot reproach Hon. Gentlemen with entertaining the opinions which I once entertained. I have also expressed an opinion that those who now oppose our measures, will soon find that we have not be trayed them, and that, in the whole course of our proceedings, we have had due regard to their interests ; but the Hon. Mem ber for the University of Dublin has cast our horoscope—he has said that we are a falling Government, and, sitting behind us, he kicks us, because he thinks we are falling.—( Loud Op position cheers.) lam free to confess that I hope the Hon. Gentleman may, under a protective Government, obtain a satisfactory settlement of the recorder's pension.—( Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") Then he does not look to any place or power, but perhaps he may look forward to hold, under a protective Government, the Irish Secretaryship. I hope Ire land will improve under his benign sway.—( Cheers, and " Oh, oh" from the protectionists.) At all events, we are now aware what actuates his conduct towards us ; but, speaking for myself, I may say that his censure sits lightly on me, and that I prefer his open hostility to his smouldering resentment. He referred to the question of the operation of this measure as it affected tithes, upon which the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn (Lord G. Bentinck) had more than once spoken. I am sorry to trespass on the House, but I wish to refer to this point. The Hon. Member for Oxford stated, as his opinion, that this 'measure was inconsistent with the interests of tithe owners. Nothing could be more accurate than his statement that tithes varied in quantity, but that they varied in price With respect to the Tithe Commutation Act, there could be no doubt that that was a measure greatly in favour of the landlords of Ireland. The present corn-laws either materially affect the price of the first article ofj necessity, or they do not affect it. If they do not affect it, I wish to know why there is any objection to the proposed alteration in the duty which is intended in the price of corn ? I do not know on what ground the corn-laws should be maintained, for, in my opinion, they tend to paralyse the market—they set class in opposition to class—they destroy the social bonds of the whole community, and endanger even its very existence. But if they do affect prices, and cause an artificial value in the cost of provisions, then, as interfering with the great question of the interests of the consumer and receiver of wages, I call upon you to do away with these imposts, and diminish the price of food to the con sumer. It cannot be denied that throughout the whole of the manufacturing districts the importation of goods from distant parts of the country has progressively increased. Manchester and Liverpool now draw their supply of agricultural produce from Ireland, Scotland, and the northern provinces of England, and simultaneously with the increase of import has beets the increased demand. It may, perhaps, be thought that the value of land in the neighbourhood of these towns would have diminished, but the reverse is the fact ; and to substantiate my position, I can refer to the opinion of Mr. Wilson. In writing on the corn-laws, he says—" Of late years the facilities of steam navigation have enabled the peasants of Ireland to dispose of the produce of their industry in the profitable markets of Liverpool, Manchester, and other places ; and while we find that this has tended to furnish pro visions at a cheaper rate to the consumer, it has not at all de preciated the value of land in the neighbourhood of these large towns." Now, Sir, there is only one other point to which I am anxious to draw the attention of the House, and that is the important question of the bearing of the price of corn upon wages. I have stated on a former occasion my reasons for not thinking that high prices are conducive to high wages, and low prices result in low wages. No, the reverse is the case. I believe that low wages produce high prices, and that high prices produce low wages..--( Hear, hear, arid cheers.) The first evidence I will refer to w ill be the evidence of the Sot tish weavers, who say that th e on ly measure they de ire is the repeal of the corn-laws, and that in increasing the price of food you diminish the amount of employment, and that it becomes burdensome to all. In an examination csmducted before Mr. Fletcher, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, Andrew Heman is asked, " Have you given any reason for the cause of your distress?" lie says, " I have, and I ascribe it to the operation of the corn-laws." " In what way do vou consider that they affect the cause of your distress?' "By preventing the ex tension of commerce with other countries, and the consequent diminished employment at home." Another weaver, James Crowley, gave similar evidence as to the depreciating effect of the corn-laws in the wages and employment of weavers. The Hon. Member for Rutlandshire proposed, in justice to the working classes, that there ought to be a sliding-scale for wages, to assimilate them with the sliding-scale of the eorn laws ; and not only a sliding-scale for wages, but that they should also be fixed at a minimum price. lam bound to state, that this appears a most impracticable and cumbersome mode, and impossible to be entertained with .any hope of being car ried into effect. I cannot overlook the fact, that the Govern ment of the country is practically vested in this House, and that the landed interest proponderate in the other House. I cannot take it upon me to recommend the pursuit of any course which is manifestly in opposition to the public feeling. A government to be sustained, must be impartial in its enact ments., When you consider the concentration, the union, the intelligence, the great number, and the enormous proportion ' of the manufacturing population, and that this opinion is deeply rooted in their minds—that the corn-laws have the effect of causing low wages, and compel them to pay the more while they receive the less depend upon it you cannot convince that population, of the necessity of the corn-laws; neither can any government be justified in enforcing such an impost in opposition toll their 'nest emphatic disavowal of the necessity of its continuance. You may reason as you will, but on this point they will not be otherwise convinced--( Cries of " Hear, hear.") They cannot be cajolled by fallacies.—(Loud cheers.) I am satisfied that they are right in their opinion, that high prices do produce low wages, and that the effect of the corn-law is to place them in a most unfair position as compared with the agricultural interests. I could produce evidence to show you that the increase and diminution of crime, was influenced in proportion to the high or low price of food. 1 could also sliest. , you distinctly that the amount of mortality was influeneed in a similar proportion to the price of hod. I have now endeavoured to substantiate all the positions which I have advanced, and I am bound to I state, that looking at the matter with the most favourable dis position to elicit the truth, and with the wish to avert conse quences which threaten the peace of the country, I have no he sitation in giving my most unqualified support to the Bill now before the House.—( Hear, hear.) lam also of opinion that our foreign relations will be greatly improved- and satisfied by this measure. National dependance is a preservative of public peace. The commercial community at large are loud ip their demands for public peace, and, after all, the best means for preserving the tranquillity of the world, will be found in the benefits which the extension of commerce will confer Looking forward, as I do, to the happy day when London shall, indeed be the emporium of the world, in consequence of the wide-spread influence of her commerce with foreign nations, when peace in all countries shall prevail and be preserved ; in the words of the poet, who has so emphatically and beautifully described such a condition, I feel satisfied that, " The time shall come, when, free as seas or wind, Unbounded Thames shall flow for all mank nd, Whole nations enter with each flawing tide, And seas but join the region they divide ; Earth's distant ends our glory shall behold, And the new world launch forth to seek the old." That is the real description of the effects of the measure which we are now discussing; and again, I say, that in rejecting it, you are inflicting an injury on the country at large. I, there fore, earnestly entreat that you will not oppose the second reading of this Bill. Mr. STEWART claimed the indulgence of the House while he offered a few observations on the great measure before it. He gave every credit to the Right Hon. Gentle man for the honesty of his convictions.—( Hear, hear.) He heard with the deepest regret the motives which were im puted by the Right lion. Baronet to an Honourable Gentle man who spoke on the question ; but nothing would induce him to indulge in that kind of imputation. He, however, should exercise his own judgment, and not be led away by the in licence of any authority, no matter how great. He re .a embered what the Honourable Member for Stockport, whom he saw in his place, had said in that House and elsewhere. That Honourable Gentleman stated that the Government of the country were overridden by the landed interest.—( Hear, hear.) He did not quarrel with that Honourable Gentleman's opinions, but when he heard the Right Honourable Baronet stating that the time had come when the landed proprietors had ,an undue interest in that House.—[Sir James Graham—" I did not say undue. I Well, not undue, but a preponderating influence. He con sidered that the two gentlemen very nearly coincided in their views, and he would ask, then, what had become of the Re form Bill? When he heard the Right . Hon. Baronet state that they were to look to public opinion, he (Mr. S.) con sidered that they could not appeal to a more revolutionary tri bunal. That House was the fair representative of all inte rests—commercial as well as agricultural ; but if they were to be told that they were to look to the public opinion of the manufacturing districts alone, he asserted that there never was a more dangerous doctrine propounded. He would not enter into the question of free trade, but he contended that the very existence of the manufacturing and mercantile interest was entirely dependent on agriculture. The cotton mills and the large manufactories owed their origin and their stability to the fertile fields and broad acres of England.—( Hear, hear.) And he believed, that when the - cotton mills and factories would moulder into decay, the fertile fields would remain and per petuate the glory and the prosperity of the country. The system under which they were now acting was protection to all—protection to manufactures • and protection to agri culture. By this measure, however, all protec tion to agriculture was at an end, while it was continued to manufactures. The arguments, as regarded free trade, were strong, he confessed, in theory ; but, from the best con struction he could put upon the Right Hon. Baronet's speeches, that Right Hon. Gentleman stated that it was overpowering necessity, not principle, that induced him to take the course he new pursued. If the Right Hon. Gentleman was sup ported on that ground by his followers, he contended that this overpowering nece city should be proved. He denied, how ever, that suck was the case ; and even if it did exist, the re medy was not surely to be found in the ruin of the landed interest.—( Hear, hear.) He would ask if the disease and fever of Ireland would be removed by the abolition of protec tion ?—( Hear, hear.) tie did not attach much credit to the reports of the gentlemen who were sent to Ireland, for he believed they drew them up with a view to the purpose for which they were employed to make them, He did net mean to throw any discredit on the gentlemen, but i' was difficult to com mand clear and undoubted evidence under such circumstances. The Hon. Member then read an extract from a speech made by the Hon. Member for Stockport at a public meeting, when he stated the agricultural gentlemen and the landed proprietors were tmobies, who did not know the river St. Lawrence from the Ohio. Now such statements were always met with the .exultation of 'the idle and dissolute.—( Hear, hear.) It had been so from the time •of Jack Cade downwards. When the Hon. Member for Stockport, and his colleague, the lion. Member for Durham, were at public meetings, they invariably used language which, if used in that House, would be sufficient to deprive them of a hearing.—( Hear, hear.) Yet these were the men whose principles were adopted by the Right Hon. Baronet. Why a Government should allow themselves to be so miserably deceived he could not for the life of him imagine. —( Hear, hear.) What were the arguments in favour of the present measure? Why, till that night they had had but one argument in favour of the Government measure. The former was by the. Hon. Member for Wolverhampton.—(Hear.) On that evening they had an able speech from the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, but it was not such a one as would convince him of the necessity of the repeal of the corn-laws. The H onourable Members of :free trade principles, had signalised themselves by . their arguments out of doors, and even in that House, bet now that her Majesty's Ministers had taken up their question, all argu ment seemed to have forsaken them.—( Hear, hear.) It might be that they con.idered their interests in safer hands, and there fore they thought it better to keep quiet, and not spoil their position.—(Laughter.) With respect to the letter put forth by the Noble Lord the Member for the City of London, he (Mr. Stewart) had no doubt that the Noble Lord felt the result to have been a successful political stratagem.—( Hear, hear.) He had no doubt the Noble Lord intended it as a political feeler. The Right Hon. Baronet said he could not venture to predict what the nature of the weather would be in a year hence. He agreed with him; but the real question was, what would the effect be upon the price of coin in 1850, if the crop in 1846 should be a failure ?—.( Laughter.) It had been said by a Noble Duke, who thought this measure unwise, that it would be well for the public to wait until they had heard what the opinion of the Right Hon. Baronet would be; but what were they to think, now that the Right Hon. Baronet had charged his opinion ?—( Hear, hear.) This had been called a great and comprehensive measure, but he denied that it was such ; on the contrary, he looked upon it as a partial measure, affecting a class. If it was a fair and just measure, he would like to hear proof that it was such; but he had heard no such proof as yet. All that he -had heard went only to prove that all protection was to be taken away from agriculture, and preserved to manufactures.—( Hear, hear.) If it was come to this, that her Majesty's Government threatened the country with a change of opinion in reference to the protection now afforded to manufactures, we would call that a falling Govern ment, and it should be got rid of, for nothing could be more deplorable than such a Government, or such a state of things, as would compel men to vote against their own feelings and conviction. This he would look upon as the very worst state of degradation; and was, on the part of the Government, brought about by their yielding to mob terror. If those mobs should meet again in Lincoln'slnn-fields,and threaten that House, the Government should prevent such meetings and threats, and if it did not, it did not deserve to be continued as a Government. j The doctrine of the mobs appeared to be that the volumes of Hansard should be thrown aside, and that the law hence forth should be taken from their mouths, for that was what had been said by Jack Cade.— (Laughter.) He thanked the House for the patience with which he had been heard, and begged to apologise if he had spoken at greater length than he had intended. Mr. BOUVERIE said the Hon. Member opposite was in dignant with him because he smiled at an observation he made ; but he smiled at bearing the argument used in defence of protection. The Hon. Member appeared to be displeased at the idea that other Hon. Members were of opinion that the preponderance of the landed in terest should not be allowed to continue; but the Honourable Member might rely on it that that preponderance could less be supported by such laws as protective laws, than by the system of coercion resorted to in other times for upholding that preponderance. The landed interest assumed that those laws had been produc tive of great good to the country; yet the fact was, that this country had been more and more dependent every year since the passing of those laws, upon foreign countries fur a supply of corn. For instance, for nine years after the year 1815, the quantity of foreign corn imported was 300,000 quarters; for the next nine years it increased to 800,000 quarters ; and during the next nine years it had increased to 1,400,000 quarters. But Honourable Members opposite who opposed this mea sure did not appear to take into consideration the like lihocd of a war with some of those countries, which would have the effect of preventing the continuance of this supply. In fact, he had only to refer to statements of the Right lion. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to show that those corn-laws bad only the effect of encouraging the continuance of crime and pauperism, and that no system of policy could he invented which would be more productive of a general pernicious result than that system which would advocate the permanency. of those laws. He maintained, that the farmer had been reined by the operation of the law in the first measure, and could not be more injured in the pre sent instance.—( Hear, hear.) He would next come to the case of the labourer. At present, instead of being well fed, and clothed, and housed, the labourer, in many districts of the country, was in a condition quite the contrary. The ne cessaries of life he had not in sufficient abundance, and as to the luxuries of life, they were strangers to him.—( Hear. ) Mr. Arthur Young, an eminent authority on agricultural facts, had recorded various instances of the condition of the labourer in 1776 as compared with his present state. At that time the wages of an ordinary labourer did not exceed ss. 6d. or 6s. a week, and though the wages at present amounted to Bs., yet, in consequence of the increase in the prices of bread, meat, butter, &c., the wages were I not in reality more than in 1776.—( Hear, hear. ) He believed that the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government was actuated by the finest and most philanthropic feelings in introducing the measure ; and though his party had in a great measure thrown him overboard, because, in his opinion, they were incapable of appreciating the wisdom that dictated such a change, yet the Right Hon. Gentleman might rest assured that ho would receive his reward from a grateful country and an admiring posterity.—(Hear, hear.) The Marquis of WORCESTER wished to know what the consequenco would be if the present measure should, as it undoubtedly would, reduce the lower order of farmers to labourers 7—( Hear, hear.) In his opinion they would be driven to emigration or to the workhouse, when the taxation for their maintenance would increase to so extraordinary a degree that the landholders • could. not pay it.—( Hear, hear.) He could make every allowance for an alteration in political opinion, but he certainly felt deep sorrow that the Bight Hon. Baronet had given way at the very first attack on the constitu . tion of this eountry. Mr. GARDNER said that he considered the report of the failure in the potato crop as a panic and nothing but a panic. He had taken the trouble to look at the special returns made the last six years, and comparing those returns with the prices of this year. On counting the number of parishes mention ing the returns, he found that the whole number to which reference Was .made, was 404. He found that in • 107 towns the ordinary prities were not increased; and that left 295 out of the 40.4 in which the prices had arisen. There were eleven towns in which the prices had increased sine farthing per stone. In fifteen towns the prices had increased one halfpenny ; in 10 towns, three farthings ; and in 5'3 towns, one penny.: He believed it was the duty of the Governmen: to have given some-compensation to the landed interest by the removal of the burdens on land, before lowering the prices of agricultural produce. Besides, if free trade were to be given to this coun try, it should also be accorded to the colonists, who had as good a right to benefit by the alteration as we have. He had no doubt that if the present measure was passed, plenty of corn would be imported from America, the continent of Europe, and all other countries. (The Hon. Member here had quoted from Mr. M'Gregoes report, showing the great amount of corn which was raised in the United States in 1842.) It was stated that the country in the United States west of the Ohio, raised in that . year 26,000,000 of bushels of wheat, one-half of which was grown for exportation. The amount of Indian corn raised in that country was also enormous. He (Mr. D. Gardner) was satisfied that the home market wOuld be seriously affected by the large amount of corn that would be imported from the Vnited States, if the measure before the House was carried. The Hon. Member concluded by intimating his in tention of voting against the motion. Mr. MILDM AY and Lord PALMERSTON rose together, but the former, having caught the Speaker's eye, proceeded to address the House, amidst considerable manifestation of im patience, and cries of " Palmerston." Tho Hon Member said he only wished to offer a few words, and he would not disap point the Noble Lord in addres , ing the House for any length of time. It' was hot his intention to go into a long discussion on the corn-law. Hcmerely rose at that stage of the debate, for the perpo4 of. expressing his reasons for taking a different course now to what .he had formerly taken; or that he ever thought to take, namely, that of opposing the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, whom he had previously supported.. He had not opposed the going into Committee' on the question, on account of the expressions employed by her Ma jesty in the opening speech from the throne, but they had now arrived at a stage on the discussion in which he must declare whether he should support or oppose Hear, hear.) /le would take a straightforward course and that would be in op position to the measure. —(Cheers.) He must express him self against the laudatory view of the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Liskeard (Mr. C. Buller) respecting the changing of opinion. It would seem to that Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that the oftener a man changed his opinion the better it was.— (Loud cheers from the Conservative benches.) If Hon. Members were so fond of turning round, he at least could ' not so easily change his opinions. There ought to be some principle in the matter, and changes should not be made upon such slight grounds as is the question before the House. It seemed Hon. Gentlemen wanted a pretext to turn round, and they jumped at the potato failure in Ireland for that purpose. And what were they doing ? Importing Indian corn into the country duty free. Why did not they do that at first, to relieve the people of Ireland, without altering the whole laws relating to agricultural protection? But the Right Hen. Baronet had a foregone conclusion, and required only such a pretext for making a change. For this purpose they had joined together two things that were not necessarily connected; and it must be admitted that Ireland could not be benefited by .the measure which was now before the House. Nor did the state of the country require the measure. In 1E45, the country was in a general state of prosperity ; and all experience went to show that the iepeal of the corn-taws was unnecessary. The Right Hon. Baronet assured them, that the agricOlfural interests of the country would not be injuriously affected, but his (Mr. Mildrnay's) experience convinced him, that the measure must operate most injuriously. He was satisfied, the g' eatest injury would be inflicted on the agricultural interests of the country, if the present Bill passed.,—( Hear, hear.) What, he apprehended, regulated the production of any article was its bein g , remunerative, and, supposing that there was not capital in that country to go on increasing their products, they must get their supplies' from other parts. Let them look at cotton. - At the end of the last century they had not a bale of cotton from the United States. Now, such was the peculiar capability of the Southern States that cotton from America regulated the price of cotton from the East Indies, and indeed from all parts of the world. —( Hear, hear. ) So with indigo; and, in the same way, they would be ex posed to a competition in corn, which would completely ruin the home grower. With these views, he would give his vote against the second reading of this Bill, because he felt that a sufficient caution had not been exercised to prevent injurious. consequences to the revenue. Before he sat down, he should like to refer to the petition presented on that night by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, from the merchants of Liverpool and Manchester, who stated that the stagnation in their business was attributable to the prolongation of this debate. But was there not, stagnation in every interest over the country? and why, therefore, should those Gentleraen attribute this depression to the delay which had been thrown in the way of passing this measure ? He thanked the House for the attention with which they had listened to him, and he would conclude by expressing his determination to vote against the measure of the Government. Sir. R. PEEL and the Marquis of GRANBY rose together to address the House, but their being loud cries for Sir H. Peel, the Marquis of Granby gave way to the Right Hon. Baronet. Sir R. PEEL said, Sir, I did not intend to have again in truded myself upon the attention of the House, in the course of the present debate, but since I last had an oppor tunity of addressing the House. I have been accused with wil fully betraying the agricultural interests of the count rS—( The Hon. Baronet was here interrupted by a remark from a pro tectionist Member, which was inaudible in the gallery). Well then, take it that it is your impression that 1 have done so; but, at least, after the accusation you have preferred against me, you - cannot' refuse to concede:to me the privilege of a defence, and to listen to what I have to say in answer to the charges "you have made. In the observation, I have made throughout this debate, I hive not quarrelled with any man for offering his decided opposition to the opinion I have lately enunciated. No, I have respected 'the opinions of others, and endeavoured to secure the mainte nance - of their co-operation. -I knew not by whom-the mea sure which I have proposed would be supported on this side of the House, and I tried to influence no man. I have listened to the charges which have been made against me with sorrow, but not with anger. I think it natural that you should have made a resistance to this measure, and that some Hon. Gen tlemen should retain their former opinions.- I entreat them, however, to extend to me the privilege which I conceded to them, and for the sake of courtesy, to hear with patience my answer to what they have said against me. If I were a private individual, strong in the conviction that I have acted from nothing but a sense of duty—(Loud cheers)—strong in the conviction that. I had acted from pure and honourable motives —I would have let these accusations . pass by ; but I ams not in the situation of a private individual, and it is right ass Minis ter of the Crown that I should vindicate the course I have taken as an executive Minister of the Sovereign.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Sir, it is irregular under ordi nary circumstances to refer to what has passed in a' former debate, hut I am sure the House will permit me to refer in general to the questions that were put to me, and the charges that were made against me, after I had the opportunity of last addressing the House. It was said in the course of the last discussion that I had expressed an opinion that the charge of this measure for the adjustment of the e.irn-laws would have been committed with much greater propriety to other hands than mine; and yet at the same time I observed that I pro posed to the Cabinet to undertake the conducting.of this mea sure, and that the Cabinet had been unanimous eirs deciding that the conducting of such a measure ought 'to be committed to my hands ; and therefore it is said that there is an apparent inconsistency between the opinion that it would have been better to have committed the measure to other hands, and ray undertaking to make a permanent adjustment 'of this question after the suspension of the corn laws. Now the facts are most correctly stated. I did give an opinion that it would have been better had it been intro duced under all ordinary circumstances by others more entitled to the credit of such a measure, rather than that. I should have the conduct of it. Yet it is perfectly true that in the Cabinet I proposed, and the Cabinet confrmed, that I should - undertake' the proposition of this measure. I did so under these circumstances. On the Ist of November , I proposed, with the concurrence of my Right Hon. Friend who has spoken before, 'on account of the reports from Ireland, to take precaution against the impending danger—what I thought was the natural precaution, namely, the suspension, either by order in Council, or by Act of Parliament, of those laws which prohibited the importation of foreign corn. I renewed that proposition towards the close of the same month, and if the measure I proposed to Government had been simply a suspensiou of the law, with a guarantee that the existing corn-law should be revived, I do not believe that there would have been any very serious oppo sition to it. There, must have been a difference of opinion as to the extent of the danger in Ireland ; but I think that if the measure proposed had been merely the suspension, with a gua rantee on my part that I would, at the termination of the sus pension, propose a continuance of the existing law, I am not aware that there would have been any difference of opinion about the measure. But I distinctly refused to undertake or to, guarantee the revival of the existing law at the termination o the suspension, 'and I did so upon these grounds. . As I have said before, I thought suspension was become a necessary act.—( Hear, hear.) But the Right Honourable Gentleman the Recorder for the city of Dublin says, we were deluded by the accounts which we received from Ireland. He says he was alarmed himself by these accounts; but after in quiring into the matter, he found, from the representation of parties connected with the agrictetural interest of Ireland, that the alarm was but ill-founded. Why, it is easy for an indi vidual to collect these reports, but,what is a Government to do, responsible as they are for the well-being of the country— deeply responsible for famine and disease, shculd they come and no precautions taken ? What was Government to do in circumstances like these—receiving reports from all quarters— from the highest authorities, from private individuals, from parties most interested? It was no easy or enviable position for a Government to be placed in. Their alarm may be un founded, their precaufions may be superfluous. What, do you think, where there are good' grounds for expecting a general and wide-spread famine, that Government ought to neglect to take precautions, even should those precautions ultimately turn out to be superfluous ?—( Cheers.) I, for one, would not undertake the responsibiltty of the Government, if I thought I should be compelled to neglect taking precautions until the famine and disease had become evident. But the Right Hon. ' Gentleman the Recorder of the City of Dublin says we were deluded. • I deny it altogether. I formed my impressions in November last —my convictions are still the same. Why, how are we to ascertain with accuracy the utmost extent of the disease—how are we to decide . upen the very moment when the Hon. Gentleman would have us take precautions? Are we to sit calculating in the Cabinet how much charrhosa, dysentery, and reflux the whole people of Ireland can bear before it was necessary to find food for them?—(Cheers.) The precautions may be superfluous,. but look at the danger that might arise if these precautions were not taken. Is it not better to err on the side of precaution than to err on the side of neglect?—(Cheers.) I say, then, that with the reports we had received, Government would have been deeply culpable had they not provided for the emergency, and therefore it was that I advised a suspension of the corn-law ; but then arose t the question, what will you do when the period for terminating g the indeed, and suspension shall come? That was an important question and I was asked, will you undertake to guarantee the revival of the corn-law ? I said, I cannot for m an y reasons. — (Hear. ) In the first place, in the last session of Parliament, I expressed a decided opinion that you could not long continue a different principle, in respect of protection to agriculture, trade. I• I from that which - you have applied to other ar ticles • any told, however, that I have wade a sudden change in my .opinions. 1 - • , i Now hear coy defence to that charge. I made aspeecboa th e corn-laws in the, course of last year, when this resolution - of. 1 ": Hon. Member for - Wolverhampton was under considers of Well, I opposed that resolution, blit I stated that I could o r defend the existing law upon many of the grOunds of We r th days. I could not say that I thought wages varied o ' o the price of corn ; nor could I defend the l aw ul!°, the ground that we ought to be independent Of foreig i; supplies. ' I stated then, that in my opinion, the same prine'P„, that governed yogi . ordinary commercial policy mus t be it plied, p!ied, at no remote period; to cornS I was follow ed on ("a d occasion by the Noble Lord, the then itiember for Sunderlan b ; who stated expressly that I had made no object ion to 1. first resolution. 1 will quote the Noble Lord's very vrords(., ii Th ere was not one word in the speech of • f,ir R. Peel t,ilitaF, any objection to the first resolution. To the last resolutiori,:, worded to the effect that it. was expedient that all restrietili; on importation should be gradually abolished, ti.e Right „p Baronet's speech would haveheen an unanswerable Weech' n ' - ': port of the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Wolvevhain st ,l 4 motion." Now, that was a speech made by Earl GNI' , ta - 1 , es Lord Howick. But what was the resolution of the Prot e t : o s Society, passed in December, when the declaration I "'i made was never expected? 1 . , find the Protection Soele t i,_' ' '' s the month of December, came to this resolution, " Tu a " 0 1 1 . ' consequence of the declarations made by several leading tu e io , hers of the Government in the last session of Parliament, ~, timating that future reductions would be made, at no lollop S''' . „ tant period, in the already greatly diminished proteetof now afforded to agriculture ; and in consequen ce s r the interpretation put upon these declarations, vt is .._ well or ill-founded, being calculated to destroy all confidenesto the stability of the present corn-laws, and to resist the er,g o il now making in the permanent improvement of the inf erio %ni of the country, it was resolved to the utmost to opp ose ter changesin the laws " That was the resolution of the Plot Lion Society in December, before they were in the sbg co d degree aware of the measures about to be, Tito by the Government. I say , then, there is no fouills',o4 fur the charge that I have changed my opinions s uddenly V OO , I say, therefore, that when the question , whether I wos.urios dertake to guarantee a revival of the existing law at th e v ote nation of the suspension, I said distinctly, that such a guar t o on my part would be inconsistent with the previous de e es . tions I had made in this House. Besides, the reviva l of tb? i 0: isting law at the termination of the suspension must ha re o us volved the permanent maintenance of the law, and YP u l e tli have roused all your energies in its defence, r i e s in Lords and Commons, and amongst the constituesure, It was impossible that I could be prepared for such a ° t oo and I declined to give the . guarantee, thinking at the sam e + e s. that it would be impossible for Parliament, under existing 0 1 cumstances, to revive a law which had worked tolerably slit during three favourable seasons, hilt which was in tb e .„sr period of pressure compelled to be suspended. Had th,sfoll posal for the revival of the law been made, I am sure it Tt i , i g base been impeached on the ground of its inefficacy. .. a , r ipi suggested by a Noble Lord, when proposing asfixiid duty' ''' . , t e the difficulty of maintaining a permanent duty in the ev e ' oil scarcity arising, that power should be given t° o i t) , Cabinet to suspend the duty in a time of scar s •ot I - stated -- then that in the' present state of orr,',, upon the subject of the corn-laws it would be difficu'is attempt to impose thelaw again upon the country after its a 0 pension. Suppose now the law had been suspended -4'l oi , September—what would be then. position in the W A t ot July ? What would be the opinion of the House as to svb f e be o or no the suspension should be continued or whether,s4 to should be a revival of the old law ? Suppose there sbleeisi good grounds, not certain, ; but probable grounds for belideff that next year the potato crop would be .at tive—suppose there should be, as there lug oe st will be, disease in Ireland in July, in cons'i v est 0 of scarcity. Suppose you were to have such a July in '52,00 as you had last, with continued and invariable rains; that,7b,s the boldest hold his breath for the time — do you drill,' d under such circumstances; I should have been able to M i ro l guarantee of reviving the old law ?s:-(Loud cheers.),.e op then again, I was not insensible of the progress of puba oilt nion. Ido not say that you should yield to public 1,01; against your own conviction, but I say that that tea ° s t worthy of holding office if he totally disregards th e car cane public opinion. Placed in these circumstances , and I `, n 10' the advanced opinion of the public upon the corrislau',;,llo' i fused to give the guarantee. But it is said that th e c° t s? were suspended in 1765 and re-enacted in 1793, 'spud r., urged that this was a precedent in favour of aost enactment now. Why, can any man be 5 ° ~,,r s o, to the progress of public opinion as to suppose that,. w-i;g, there was a precedent of 'the . law being re-enacted In . 0 s! we ought to adopt that course now ? I say, if you Ili pct' regard to these technical Parliamentary precedents il t tr i v sent state of public opinion, you will involve this coati • iit the course of time, in' inextricable difficulties. I lete ; sr' unwilling to make statements with regard to the Pas ep ait . ceedings of the Government, having already, w ith the P op e , sion of my Sovereign, detailed to the House the circuut.:oo,4 in which we were placed, and the measures which we ' be it advisable to adopt; but, after the charges which h aye lloll P „ made against me, it is` important that I should put t s he i o iti t in possession of a letter which I read to the Cabinei ct i s al vernber last, when it was determined to issue iest rg ; es t ' l ' a Commission with respect to taking precautions agaSs o sl a anticipated scarcity. In that letter I stated my , oP iel e s ° ; s' T the same opinion I hold now. The following states's ri read previous to the dissolution of the Cabinet:— „ ~„c i erta i . " I cannot consent to the issue of these instructions, and " ii i itit• at the same time to maintain the existing corn-law. ShP;igcti cl o cations of the existing law, as the consequence of these ins‘wrill.. or immediately following them, would in my opinioa A'aoleq, good em'. The proposal of them would add to the , soq i of defending that portion of the corn-law which it ,7, of .; . to maintain. I think we ought to suspend - the operat'°"eide"s. existing law for a limited period. There is conflicting there.. that as to the degree of pressure from the scarcity of fopd , 1 §til' loo,l,,, that probability of severe pressure a few months hence th e ",k my opinion amply justify the precautionary measure of oi l ; . 0 , 0 , 4 import. We have written authority that would justify' it i :4 l 9 o authority which, should the anticipations of those front re ,pol , v receive it prove correct, would impose on us a beau' t sli o y bility for having neglected a precaution which has hee n o tfic s .4 former periods of scarcity in this country, and by some oo t oe v i i Europe within the last few weeks. But, independently 'l i does f , ' I siderations, the issue of these instructions fully justl , fle° , I 'o, - 1001 require, the temporary removjel of impediments to the: fre' it otv" corn. They contain a proof not only , that the crisis is gre_estrel/0 that there Is the probability of severe suffering from the lc, food, but the proof that we are ourselves convinced of i i i te iro w i, pears to me that the suspension of the core la would be 1 ; r to 4 . most consistent with these instructions. I will not role 44 preceding discussions In the Cabinet, but the issue of these , ( 4.:i lions, placing on record our deliberate conviction as to the 0 extent of the evil with which. we may have to contend, If ve t i event. By acting now, the lapse of time since we l as 'o e t Cabinet would be accounted for. lam prepared, for one, toil or,' responsibility of suspending the law by an order in C00 0 17,4r,1 calling Parliament at a very early period, and advising in 5",,, of,' from the throne the suspension of the law. I conceal fr e " - gasr:' none of the difficulties that attend a suspension of the law. p , e to, sion of the law will compel a very early decision on: the ct o ola s t , pursued in anticipation of the period when the muspensloo pie (iti, pire. Suspension will compel a deliberate review of the Vi' ve De', tics of agricultural protection., I firmly believe that it ivoilli t i o o tlie for the country tha: that review should be undertaken ~. i a lis,, Under ordinary circumstances . , I should advise that it sin to ` e undertaken, but I look now to the immediate emergencY , i'''„0 01 !: duties it imposes on a Minister. lam ready to take the:ZA,, bility of meeting that emergency, if the opinions of rof c ur 1' as to the extent of the evil and the nature of the remedy CO i - , Is, mine." . , 000°'" 4 rii (Loud cheers.) • Therefore, continued the Righ t r i r asla i Baronet, 1 thought that the adjustment of the eu__ . ,,,,i . 1 would be one of the natural consequences of its su. e ribs t s and I felt it would be inconsistent with my duty, seel g e uell,; was prepared to incur the legitimate consequence s ! so lidi suspension, not to offer to attempt immediately th e , 0 t" ment of the question, notwthstanding my declaratt:er , 1 under ordinary circumstances it would be be best, other hands to undertake it.—(Cries of " He ar ' so l i I think that the course I took on this question TsSie % w ee, 0 a Minister of the Crown ought to take in such clean° osbt e ', ( Hear, hear.) • But other Hight Hon. Members of th°ool l 4 differedfroto me, and the Cabinet was therefore...„%etsblD '• And now, an Hon. Friend of mine the Member for ,of t ,jd 9 blamed me for the . course which ' I have taken. rae st , an al do that course was a most unconstitutional,. and a I n the of one.—( Hear, hear.) Unusual, I admit it to be, u",, i , . 0 cumstances were - altogether constitutiots. . 4 01 constitutional ! I cannot admit that a privy,couneillohi, i lf , 0 1/i ri under very peculiar circumstances, the -course svhi e re ls a :1' lieves it is proper to pursue—l cannot admit that the - e oes be i thing unconstitutional in a privy councillor,' in , e 'ef sr . emergency claiming his right to 'seek an cud riot/ r0.t..., ,Majesty, for the purpose of giving his advice: A Pr' ,spie , O, cillor has a right to do that. I was no longer he r r igh t Minister, but as a privy councillor I had a perfect ht 00, 1 intimate to her Majesty the course which I , th oa g b ur pn' e ( ! have heen adopted. I did it with that view, for the!. r ar i preventing embarrassment, and I conceiiethat I h ad i e OO . right to intimate to her Majesty the opinions %chi c :a, 1 e tc` tamed upon the emergency.—(Hear, hear.) I 1 w ss s r o s, ceive, a perfect right to state to her Majesty, that , t , tp s , pared to - support, as a private Member of Parl iaroe ! llo ioteregi st • 1 measures which, I had proposed whilst I Was a a t ees' )11 the Crown. Had I not a right to say that I was ~.! P ar ,) .t i f e give those mea-ures a cordial support ?—( Hear, ~",e;sero Hon; .Friend says I prevented the formation of a l'' Government. 1 did no such thing. Mr: BANKES-LOf a prbtection 'Government. tin t Sir . R. PEEL— dd,no su tin. co * Mr. BANKES I I ' i beg pardo ch n, h Sir g . What 1 sa id t oil you Sir prll evented PEEL a dissolution o Member aho states t hattb" f Pliament. AO . . O al ' which I took was unconstitutional. titu t ' es' Mr. 1:-1ANKES-1 beg pardon, I did not say unconsoss I said it was unprecedented, and would afford a dal* 00 1, ample. stita ti° Os t Sir R. PEEL—WeII, but that is very like unea n s old le d, —( Hear, hear, and laughter.) My Hon. Friend " ce de', say that it was mean-spirited, but that it was unprevater:, and would be a dangerous example.—(Laughter .) er iente d ;o r dented ! and were not the circumstances unpre e ,, e pree'e ( Hear, hear. ) I have felt it to be my duty to ta` s , sn 0 0 that course which has been taken on previous o ceal; se e o f similar circumstances. I felt it to be my duty to g f t th °9 t es service of her Majesty, and I distinctly intimated olio- pot sise my colleagues, who differed in opinion from me, 0 ,, „seis,,,,) pared to form a Government themselves that wow" r. lie" i se continuance of the principles of protection.---( °e Serta v b ise t Why, the Noble Lord (Lansdowne) declined to u n rhe C' ilex formation of a Government until the majority 01 t i o n. it , $ were prepared to support the principles of prot ec t , 0 . 60 , Majesty sent for the Noble Lord. The Noble Le r ,„ sorns a ,ser minority, and he therefore declined to undertake t'' , ; e ss ra e ss, of a Government. Well, now the circumstances c _ ro tsa ie s unusual ; but I ask any man whether, under the course which I took should not have been taker e l r c i f di e sl ster of the Crown? I resigned my trust into theLer proS:bo, Majesty, when I found that the measures whie•'' r' 9ri# were rejected by the Cabinet ; and, I afterwards P r° , a, • 0/ if those measures were brought before Parlianseal . te t hets.t u age vale Member of Parliament, was prepared to 8' ri to los, cordial support.—(Hear, hear.) I ask any ,ef re s--(Whyt whether that was unconstitutional or unpreesos" e ? r e the eir ._u ~ s idler hear )—and whether I was justly deserving of b . 13 , ta d 6 0ce ip g: when the Noble Lord proposed to accept the reinosse of lir ,. 1 merit, I induced him to accept office, for the Puri settie llie so n n r" ing the question of the corn-laws to a speedy °f 4 t he et' enabled her Majesty to inform the Noble Lora ' oil p o' which I mys-lf had taken, and that - I intended to g ave l . see , e rtt dial support to • the measures which I sugge c ' u te in d s tance ; iii l thing unprecedented in that ; but the cir .,e _ s o ) W o rel , nnprecedented, but I see nothing in that coursnit'',, l , d the slightest degree, dangerous to the Gov lultres.strirttil d b i u s t sn m ln y ti s pa th ri a i t am th e a n t t c ; o a u nd rohya4,:sesnoi.arritsernl Of and others have blamed vein for not advising a ",,' ee e ,t .t i e e dissolution of i F he rie p n r d ese i n a ti Parliament. Sir, in mypon it would have i_i d tool",icti inconsistent with the duty of a Minister to adviseuaser is l e be of Parliament under the particular circumstancess,ould i „r , this question has come before us. Well, wb l y w i u th th % l i rl utterly impossible for this Parliament to des ..., e i e sti .. %. o . sent proposition of the Government ? After 11., :o or S e pt 1841, this Parliament passed a law for the red.ac",ooo,4, tection of agriculture.—(Hear, hear.) Thi s , ; t he _'..// passed a tariff—( Hear, hear)— to destroy altog!tu'd coroviii, tern of prohibition with respect to the ques t n Cot e . ten t ( Hear, hear.) This Parliament passed a g enera iriceos is eoeo t (Hear, hear,) Why, then, should it be utter!): _ t he Pr istit with the functions of this Parliament to entertisreers,? . _ bet proposition of her Majesty's Government?—(Couch bl i be I would not consent to the dissolution ul'?.. a .s,ls O w r to grounds than the se I have mentioned. That,' tniieiste, o iss a „ dangerous precedent "—(Hear, hear)— to 43t0 the enter' 4..1 admit the present Legislature is inconspetentn__ be for , i u, sl l ment of any such proposal as that which is U2 t w hich ), ' t og ( Hear, hear.) Sir, that, indeed, is a pieced .. _r a u tsit , vs lose , not establish.—( Hear, hear.) I never wit; s a ve take', t . Arg may have been the circumstances that may, Dt,., li i e o . I never will sanction the - dootritie that any sau ..~... coons is incon for the public 'trines you wo should be ba the time of "Ai not mair slightly allude the message Was elected Principles m sitlan slightly Lament to de time, reepectii the onset—he the first obj tiernan °noel competent to CO act upon t 'obtained the A - k .a i 14 fi ver bit IttereTY re itionb, e t 'einerg e 0y ben efit to th th isb ee • In n Conten 'lllterefits of I ,l protection, /ietierr pourers, tr e always h hohe n '' o nourable ilerettll,Lase t reoc e to v ._ n operatir 11`11-w°8;; argui .