The Sun. — London, England, 1846-05-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL P7IRLEAAI33T. ing on her subjects to disobey her authority. It was not for that reason that this statute was enacted, but because it was found 1 impossible to define the bulls in such a way as to make it • HOUSE OF 1,01?DS, ;f ay 11. I sale to permit the introduction of any bulls at all ; ' Their Lordships met at Five o'clock. I and therefore it was that this statute very wisely, as ST. ASAPH AND BANGOO. he thought, prohibited all bulls whatever. He should The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition from the be very glad if they could possibly discover any Rural Dean of Swansea against the union of thes e sees . mode in which the introduction of these bulls SELLING SPIRITUOUS LIQUORS ON THE could he punished in a lighter manner; but the act SABBATH. of introducing hulls into this land interfered with the The Archbishop of CANTERBURY p r esented a petiton Sovereign power of the land, and was therefore h from the town of Canterbury, against the sale of spirituous in i tself an act of hi g h tr eason ; and thermore liquors on the Lord's-day , and praying that the law which it was that those two great men, Sir Mathew Hale and Coke, regulated the sale of those liquors in London on that day might defended this particular Act as necessary for the best interests be extended to the provinces. of the country ; that very Act it was now proposed to rescind, CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL. He should be glad if the Noble and Learned Lord, when h e The Most Ray. FnELATE also presented a petition from the proposed to strike out this statute, would propose to i intro- Corporationfrom of Deal against this Bill. He had heard that there duce a something which would protect them gen a e n ra d ly if they was no eor; oration in the kingdom which acted m ore censc i- the introduction o f Papal bulls Unto this country, t hi so bject, b ect, then he entiously in the application of the funds entrusted to their care, found that the common law did not affect for charitable purposes. than the C o rporation of Deal. clausetr usted whichth at w t ,, h u e ld SUNDAY TRADING,object. Lord ßefo r e w j o h u e l would ,' a i tn see w itn The Earl ST. GERMANS presented a petition against and that Learned the sale of spirituous liquors on Sunday. Noble answer was only that feeling the want of these w he felt it necessary to make one or two remark la s, s be h ca o use had SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR. this Papal power The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition, signed by They were called upon to acknowledge . been compelled to ask the Noble Lord these whichquestions. all the clergy of a rural deanery in Wiltshire, against the union had for ages been the bane of nations without the slightest rea of the sees of St. Acaph and Bangor.son being urge CHArZITABLE TRUSTS BILL. Those who had introduced itse t l h f is for B t i h n eir hdaoding not Lord theßill Lord FAVERSHAM presented petition s f rom Y or k, against taken upon themselves the peril , to say that . it the Charitable Trusts Bill. was expedie nt to re p eal this p ower. There was scarcely a Lord Eldon, the Bishop of Winchester, and Lord Campbell, single statute which did not give some reason, in the shape of presented similar petiti ons . preamble , far i t s bein g p assed ; and were the y in thisinstance Lord CAMPBELL postponed his Registration Bill, which to depart from the constitutional rules of the country, and stood to-night for the fi rst rea di ng . pass an Act , without sa y in g wh y or wherefore, which CLE UK S OF THE CROWN (IRELAND). affected the supremacy of the Crown of England? It was The Marquis of CLANRICARDE ga ve notice that he remarkable that it was only two y ears ago since the Noble and would, on Friday next, ca ll th e att en ti on of the House to the Learned Lord struck out of the Bill the ver y clauses he now in late appointment of Cl er k s o f th e C rown i n I re l an d. troduced. The Noble and Learned Lord opposite had, upon The Earl of ORKNEY presented a petition in favour of the occasion to vt ich he alluded introduced a Bill for b free trade. repealing these Acts, and he applied to his Noble Lord BROUGHAM p resen t e d a p e tition from the Rev. and Learned Friend to know how such an Act Dr. Magee, of Harold's Cross, Dublin, praying the House not was to be met, and to express an earnest hope to pass into a law a measure which had been introduced by the that it would not be Permitted to pass, and he had the satis- Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, and which would faction of finding afterwards that it did not pass. It was for sanction the introducti on o f Papal bulls into this c ountry, by these reasons that he thought it necessary to appeal to the which he would be much alarmed. Noble and Learned Lord who represented the Government GRAND JURY ASSESS RATES (IRELAND). in that House, and to the other Noble and Learned Lords on Earl GREY presented a petition from Basingsloe against the opposite Benches to apply their judicial minds to the ques the rates levied under this Bill. tions which he should take the liberty of propounding to them. CONDITION OF RAILWAY LABOURERS. The Right Rev. Prelate concluded by proposing that the fol- The NOBLE EARL also presented a petition from Glasgow, lowing questions be submitted to the judges :--Whether, praying their Lordships to adopt some measures to improve the independently of so much of the Act passed hi the first condition of the labourers employed on the numerous railways year of the reign of Queen Elisabeth, intituled, "An throughout the country. Act restoring to the Crown the ancient jurisdiction HIGH CONSTABLES' BILL. over the estate ecclesiastical and spiritual, and abolish- On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND this Bill was ing all foreign powers repugnant to the same," a 3 makes read a third time and passed. ft punishable to affirm, hold, stand with, set forth, maintain, THE RELIGIOUS OPINIONS' RELIEF BILL. or defend, as therein is mentioned, the authority, pre- The Bishop of EXETER then rose to propose that the ques- eminence, power, or jurisdiction, spiritual or ecclesiastical, tions of which he had given notice with respect to this Bill of any foreign prince, prelate, person, state, or potentate, should be put to the Judges. He said their Lordships would theretofore claimed, used, or usurped within this realm, or to readily believe that it was with the deepest reluctance that he put in use or execute anything for the extolling, advancement, rose to move their adoption, and that he hesitated much before setting forth, maintenance, or defence of any such pretended he prevailed on himself to give the Learned Judges the additional or usurped jurisdiction, power, pre-eminence, and authority, trouble, which, in the event of their Lordships acceding to or any part thereof, and of an Act passed in the fifth year them, would be imposed upon them. He felt this the more be- of the said Queen, intitled "An Act for the Assurance of cause at the present m o ment they were much oppressed by the the Queen's Royal Power over all Estates and Subjects additional amount of business which they had to discharge - . within her Dominions," it is an offence against the taw of He did not think their Lordships need go further for an England, and punishable by the same, by writing, prini leg, opinion as to what the law actually was than their own walls, teaching, preaching, express words, deed, or act, advisedly He hoped that the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack and maliciously to deny the Queen's supremacy, or to s.ffirro, would feel himself bound peculiarly to look upon the maintain, and defend any such pretended or usurped power, matter in a judicial point of view. The Bill be- jurisdiction, or authority of the Pope, or any foreign prince, fore their Lordships was brought in by the Noble and Learned prelate, person, state, as.- potentate within this realm? Lord himself. By this Bill it was proposed to strike out of The LORD CHANCELLOR said he wished to offer a few the statute-book those important statutes or parts thereof observations with respect to that portion of the "Right Revereod which have been ever considered as the main bulwarks of the Prelate's address, which referred to some supposed ineonsis• constitution of England—England, as an independent mo- tency on his part with respect to the Bill to which the ques'ion narchy. In the Bill before their Lordships, which had been he had just proposed ref; rred. He was sure that when he re read a second time, and which it is hereafter proposed to ferred to what took place on the occasion alluded to by the gu into Committee upon, their Lordships would be Right Reverend Prelate, that their Lordships would at once invited to repeal so much of an Act passed in the first year of acquit him of the charge which had been brought against him. the reign of Queen Elizabeth to restore to the Crown its The Noble Lord to whom allusion had been made, introduced ancient jurisdiction over the state of England. Their Lordships the measure referred to. That Bill had not been previously would see that the tendency of that Act was to make it no longer communicated to him (the Lord Chancellor), neither had he punishable to assert the supremacy of the Pope. He needed not any communication with reference to it, but on referring to to remind their Lordships that this supremacy had been claimed the particular Acts of Parliament to which it had reference, he by the Pope prior to the reign of Queen Elizabeth. lie had saw at once that it was perfectly clear that every man of liberal claimed and exercised that power in deposing King John. The p•inciple and feeling must assent to a great portion of it.— same Pope (Innocent 111 ) claimed jurisdiction and power over (t. peers.) But with respect to the other portions of it, clauses a succeeding King in the year 1215, in these words—" Is not might have been introduced on which inquiry was necessary, the King of England our vassal, or, rather, our slave?" and therefore the course he pursued was this—to that part of This was the power to be restored by this Bill, the Bill to which lie felt no reasonable objection could be made, should their Lordships think fit to pass the same, lie at once assented. But he informed that Noble In those remote times Paul 111. deposed Henry VIII., and Lord, that if he would entrust the Bill to him released his subjects from their allegiance. Just before the he would refer it to the Committee then sitti n g Act in que s ti on p asse d P au l IV. ha acted with equal vio- on criminal law ; and that he would request them to consit'er lenee towards Queen Elizabeth, He declared it was the the subject, and make report upon it. It was for this reason, height of presumption for Queen Elizabeth to claim the and for this reason alone, that those parts of the Bill were crown of England without his permission. It was under struck out, that he had thought or expressed any opinon those provocations that the first statute of Elizabeth upon it. But as the sulject was one of such great import was passed, and unless there was some inherent vigour in the mice, and involved questions of such great magnitude, the constitutional laws of England, which would make it, in spite Noble :Lord ought not to call upon him to express his opi of the statue which the Noble and Learned:Lord proposed to re- nion upon it. He referred those Bills to that Committee; peal, penal for any one to put forth the power of the Pope to they had made their report upon the subject, and it was in any such extent, we will no longer protect it from pursuance of that report he had brought in the present Bill and the recurrences of such attempts at power. The laid it upon their Lurdships' table.—( Hear, hear.) Having object of his motion was that their Lordships would made these statements, he was sure that their Lordships would satisfy themselves of that inherent power in the constitution acquit him of inconsistency as to the course of conduct he had to prevent such offences as those. He had thought it right to pursued. He felt most anxious that the Bill should pass with . propose these questions, b eca u s e it was not directly in the Bill the full concurrence of the Right Reverend Bench, anti, if pos before their Lordships, nor in the Act which they proposed, to Bible, with the concurrence of the Ri g ht R everen d repeal any clause which made it punishable to write, print, teach Prelate himself. He had been m os t anx i ous t o by express words, deed, or act, or maliciously deny the exclude from the Bill anything which could give Queen's supremacy. The express denial of the Queen's rise to any difference of opinion among their Lordships. supremacy was not made p un i s h a bl e by the Ist Since he had laid the Bill upon the table of the House a log g of Elizabeth. It asserted the Queen's supremacy, but time had elapsed before he brought the Bill before their Lord it said nothing on the subject of denial, nor did the Bill ships for a second reading. He did this for the purpose of which he held in his hand. Of course the Queen's supremacy receiving such suggestions from Noble Lords, Right Reverend was as clear, undeniable, and unquestionable as any part of Pi elates, and from other quarters. He had received a suggesti, m the constitution of this land, over things spiritual as well as from a Right Reverend Friend, for whom he entertained tl to temporal, and to deny that supremacy must be a grave offence utmost respect for his learning and ability. He had adopt, td against the constitution, and ought to be punishable at this suggestion, and the amendment which he should in corm !- common law. But it was absolutely necessary for quence propose, he should introduce when their Lordships wel It this House to know whether that was the case or into Committee on the Bill. There was one satisfaction whic h or not before they proceeded to legislate with respect to the he had received from the speech of the Right Reverend Prelate, penal enactments of the Ist statute of Elizabeth. On the sub.- he had directed their Lordship's attention only to two points feet of Royal supremacy, he need not tell their Lordships that of the Bill, all the rest of the Bill he might, therefore, consider they had the highest legal authority for stating that it was a as having met with his assent. There were two points only, part—a special part—of the monarchy of this land.— namely, that which related to the statutes of the Ist. and 13th:. ( Rear, hear.) He need not say that Lord Coke and of Elizabeth. Sir Matthew Hale had expressed their opinions on that subject, The Bishop of EXETER here made some remarks, which on the strongest terms. He, th ere f ore , h o p e d that the were inaudible in the gallery. denial of that supremacy must be an offence against The Lord CHANCELLOR.—The Right Reverend Prelate the common law. He s h ou ld b e qu it e con t en t if the had confined his attention to the two heads to which he had Noble Lord on the Woolsack would answ er that question referred. He knew that upon former occasions the same decisively and say that it was punishable by the common law. Right Reverend Prelate had stated that upon those poi nts, When on a former occasion h e a dd ress ed their Lordships on affected by the Bill before their Lordships, no differ,' nee the second reading of this Bill, w hen hi s N o bl e an d Learned of opinion could be entertained. He concluded, thereft ire, Friend on the Woolsack proposed the insertion of a declaration that the Right Rev. Prelate had no very decided objection to of the Queen's supremacy, he d ec l are d th a t h e should the other portion of the Bill. Now the Ist of Elizabeth—the have no hesitation in expressing himself sa ti s fied with Act of Supremacy it was called—expressed in the fullest and that, if his Noble and Learned Friend would go one most comprehensive terms the authority of the Sovereign of step further—if he would consen t t o a punishment this country in all matters spiritual and ecclesiastical. b e i ng an nexed for the crime of denying the Sovereign's sill - Au- Nothing could be more comprehensive, distinct, or decisive, macs. But his Noble and Learned Friend refused to advance than the terms of the Act. It is expressed in terms that no this step ; he said that this was what he could not do ; that it persons on reading could entertain the slightest doubt upon was contrary to the policy which had actuated them in the subject. It afterwards proceeded to impose an oath, calling bringing forward the Bill ; and this was the reason why upon persons filling certain offices to declare their adherence he wished to extort from his Noble and Learned to the doctrines therein set forth. It afterwards proceeded to Friend the inquiry whether the denying of the Queen's impose severe penalties upon persons, not who should deny the supremacy would be punishable at common law supremacy, but who should maintain and defend the spiritual The Pope claimed a spiritual jurisdiction ia fro exteriorum, and ecclesiastical authority of any foreign power, prince, or but if the claims advanced by him were allow ed, it would give potentate. Now it was perfectly clear that the abridgement a power to him which their ancestors viewed with great jealousy, of those penalties in effect rested with this Act of Parliament. because they thought that it gave to a foreign power an essen- But what was the state of the Roman Catholic Chureih now, tial authority over the Crown of this country. But he (the not in England alone, but over the world? The Act Bishop of Exeter) must be permitted to say, that o f P ar li ament i n fli cte d t h e severest pena l t i es, as for thejurisdiction of the Pope in furo exteriorum high treason and mis-prison of treason it inflicted was of that extended character that the subjects the forfeiture of all property on those who admitted of this country could not allow. The Pope's claim the spiritual or ecclesiastical supremacy of any foreign pri rice, an faro interiors, affected the conscience, and was, p relate, or potentate. Was it not a matter o f p u bli c no t or iety therefore, of a most f orm id a bl e c h aracter . Th e Pope —did moment doubt it—th a t an y R o tan" had the power o f d e p os i ng ki ngs an d governments , Catholic, ny in this empire, or in any othe r , did not look up to by absolving men fro m t h e i r oat h s o f a ll eg i ance . I t was , the Pope as his spiritual and eccl e sia s ti ca l' head ?If there was therefore, he thought, necessary to protect this country against any doubt upon the subject, he would refer their Lordships t such influence if they could do so consistently, and through the the speeches of the Right Rev. Prelates who had spoken when medium of an Act of Parliament. The House would find that this Act of Elizabeth w . as in Progress . through Parliament. It the Pope not only still had that power, but that it was was by them admitted, in the most distinct, the most precise, justided by some of the most modern and liberal ' and the plainest terms. Their Lordships would find this prin ciple admitted in the speeches of the Archbishop of York end Roman Catholic writers of this corn ry. Dr. 'Milner and Dr. O'Connell , than whom there was not a more liberal ma n , the Bishop of Chester. B u t more t h an this, it they looked to t f o r instance, justified , nay , ad v ocated the power of the the canons o the R oman C at h o li c Church, they would find Pope to absol v e parties from their allegiance. The this doctrine stat e d i n th e most di st i nct the f that.mos r direr hn ' , Romanand ex t r act from the work o f the Rev. Gentleman went to Catholic clergy took their oaths to conform to these tenets. They show the great danger of the power , of absolution from oath must therefore take it as part of the doctrines of the Romish by the ministers of the Roman Catholic religion. An officer Church that they regarded the Pope as their superior --as the of the army, for instance, professing that faith, might person whom they were to look up to as their i t s h ir e i i t r u l al and i ec be absolved from the oath which , he . had taken clesiastical head. They had admitted this in and disavow his allegiance to his Sovereign.—( Hess,) enactments. He would refer them to the oath contai t i led a i t n iv a e The individual was not allowed to judgeforhim himself, but was particular f statute n of prince, offices.Eliz apbr prelate, i t a h ßt , , ey, st which tbaatte,o w ao • tr a t i s epcelrahsraoevndes thatholding s ti. o entirely in the power of those who were the heads of the reit irn the p os ed parties shouldnn d gion which he professed, as they led him to N b ee e t l i ie h v ed e ,s t a h y a t t ha ti t ie .io y could absolve him from any inc ig . y . 1-anal or ecclesiastical jurisdictionwithinpotentate, any pi this consisted the whole danger to which he referee . He said by these realms. That this power of absolving from oath, . which was admitted the must not be set forth form was used—that oath was universally administered, until highest Roman Catholic authorities, within late - ears when they th - -. power could not cmeelvas had altered it. They in this Protestant land—that such a had altered ') in ' country. —(Hear.) it deference to the opinions of persons professing exist without great danger to the . d d'ff the Roman Catholic religion. They found it impossible to there was a wi e i Lrence Their Lordships would see that impose such ttitv- forth oaths on their fellow-countrymen, and they had, between entertaining an opinion, and extolling, pu p ' therefore, struck out the words spiritual and ecclesiastical, and and maintaining it to the world. Let those persons in corn- inserted the words civil and temporal. After having done munion with the Pope believe, if they pleased, his supremacy, it not clear that they admitted that persons professing tl le Roman and let them in their conscience act as they thought the doctrine Catholic religion looked up to the Pope as their religious and taught them; but let them not feel at liberty t o set forth to the ecclesiastical superior? Then, when they allowed in this world those opinions. They are immoral, and being immoral, country the free exercise of the Catholic religion, and when they are consequently indecent. Would the opinion of the they knew that this was a fundamental principle of that reli- Anabaptists be tolerated in this country, who maintain that gion—when they knew th a t p ro f essors of that re li gion every thin; , • hill , should be held in common? The remarks discharged their duties by maintaini ng th e pr i nc i p l e, how he was making did not of course refer to those could they consistently with themselves v i s it t h em w i t h t h e p Noble Lords present who were in co mmunion with the oee. penalties due to high treason and prenzunire? How could statutes from the statute- they confiscate and take from them all theirpersonal It was propesed to strike out these . property ? forward ' ' •which inconsistency he was anxious to remove by book without any practical evil having been brought , . This was an . No ,this the introduction of law.—(Hear, hear.) He would say as resulting from their continuance on the statute-book. but improper to retain the old. laws. They it was not said that there was any grievance of that kind, they were told that they were put i nto a n invidious had gone too far. They should not have taken the steps that . position. If they were a people of that sor t he had, they had already taken, if they were not prepared to follow to be for his own part, not the slightest objection to the subject by this final step, said this law consistentwould with lead extend to them any privileges which were consistent themselves. But then it was with the full security and enoment of the Protestantbecause they did not to a great deal of mischief, ~ term "spiritual. Constitution of this country. Hewould now proceed to say know exlctly what was meant by the something with reseect to the other uestion that he should And then it was said that it night lead to the the monarch move their Lordships Learned Judges—he to propuse to the absolving of subjects from their allegiance to meant that which asked, whether independently of so much of of this country, but in reply to the statement of the Right Rev. the said Act of the first year ofthe • reign of Elizabeth Prelate he would again quote the case to which he had ' referred, before recited, and also before said Act passed in the fifth it distinct answer, which was this—that if any person and the year of the Caine reign,circulated and inculcated immoral principles, he also of the Act, passed in the trill-- in the country teenth year of the ' reign of Queen Elizabeth as is above recited, was amenable law, to the and liable to be punished by the corn intituled " An Act against the bringing Elizabeth and• cution of bulls, writings, ' in in exe putting mon law of the country. It was not necessary to have any en or instruments, and other superstitio us actment for that purpose. . The common law was sufficient to things, from the See of Rome " i "description, and if any such case were car of England, and punishable as ~e bt is to o n offence against the law reach cases of that Mon any such bull, writings,or instruments bring in or put in execu-properly animadverted ried into a court Of justice, it would be ...it been He was not sure whether this question trom the see of Rome. upon by the person who might preside on it . iaad would receive from the that if they repealed Learned Judges such an answer urged, both in the House and out of doors, as would fully satisfy ' abro eate and this case. He was afraid that those learned him in the penalties of those old laws, they would in fact ~, would hesitate before they spoke of bulls a persons abolish the supremacy of the Sovei eien of England.—( No, no.) in such a manner. He eished they mieht. gent rally A He was glad to find that that argument had not. been repeated that they might. Bulls were matte r s k nown to the ' lah o h p e " f that night, although on a farmer evening they had heard much England- They were mentioned in the Statutes and hews of that sort of argument. But supremacy rested upon a founds of England. The, efore the Learned Judges would 'be tion too solid to be so shaken—( Hear, hear)—and did. not de prepared to put a construction upon the word " bull ,; pe e d upon the Act of Parliament to which he had referred. Their Lordships would permit him to say that bulls It was past of the common law of the land.—( Hear, hear.) 'llse were instruments that had passed as it w ere under Right R ev . P re l ate h a d adm i tted that i t was so . The the Great Seal of the Folic of Rome. They law upo n th at su bj ec', he was prepared to s h ow, if were in fact such instruments as passed u n d er th e Great it were necessary to d i so—he was prepared Seal of our own Gracious Sovereign. " Briefs " were, to show that it had been recoenised by repeated on the contrary, under the Seal of Rome. b Acts of the Legislature, and that it "had been laid down y the judges of this country ' Bulls were so called (if hair y Lordships would ( H ear, hear) he made the explanation from , Lord Coke, in that masterly case to which he forgive him whilst „., . (the Lord Chancellor) hadreferred, • a barbarous Greek word, " boula, which s igni- I commented in an able manner upon the law and the facts, and fled a leaden instrument. There were "bulls of grace" and summed . up the whole by showing that, by ancient and " bulls of justice, the seals of the former being attached to iof Parliament, by long practice and wage, decisions—by Acts ac the written documents by twine, whilst those of , knowledgment, and established be \ theoundage'and continual the latter consisted of some less dignified material. doubt—the supremacy of the Crown in possibility of a of these bulls, he would remind their Lordships tees was a part of the common-law of this eou e n c t cle,iasti cal mat- In respect that it was not until a late year that it was absolutely compel- be no danger, therefore, in repealing those penalties ry. There could Elisabeth to propose to Parliament and on Par • they were—there could be no danger to the supsema ' c sev o e f re t as sore on Queen he liament to enact this statue; which was now about to , monarc h. lie felt that it was the duty-of their Lorishi •f be expunged. 1 hat statute not only made ,t, i not to repeal, at all events to modify to a considerable extent l ' high trees' n to introduce a bull such as j (Hear, hear.) The Irish Act to which the Bill had reference that which Pine the Fifth issued against Queen Elizabeth, ' I was still in force. By that Act, if a party maintained the spiri.. deposing that Sovereign, declaring her throne vacant, and call— tual;npremacy of the Pope, for his first offence he was liable to the forfeiture of his personal estate; for his second offence r he was liable to be punished by prernunire, and their Lordships were well aware what an infliction that was; it deprived the party of all his property, and at the same time deprived him of a a l 1 benefitt fo h r e mer oce occasion, it laws—soit wasonce much that,h d s o o ubt ed as whether h e stated at upon pr y who had subjected himself to a premunire might not be killed with impunity. — ( He ar, hear.) For the third o offence (and this was a part of the law of the land) he was guilty of high treason. So that they tolerated the free exer cise of the Catholic religion, and they knew that it was always a fundamental part of that religion that a party should main tain and defend the spiritual supremacy of the Pope. And it was, therefore, incumbent upon them to do so ; and if they did their duty the laws of England still declared that they should be punished in the severe manner to whirls he had referred. --( Hear, hear.) It was impossible to maintain such laws. All these penalties were not in force in Ireland, and he only now asked their Lordships to repeal them with respect to England.—( Hear, hear.) But, said the Right Reverend Prelate, how monstrous it was to introduce this Bill without a preamble, Why, the Bill spoke for itself ; but he did not wish their Lordships to repeal these Bills, unless they were satisfied that they ought not to remain any longer upon the statute book. IN by was it necessary to point out that which must he obvious to everybody ? Was it necessary to point out the expediency cf repe a li ng un j us t, crue l, an d vexatious laws ? Was it necessary to have a pre amble to explain a purpose like this?—(Hear, hear.) Fie thought not, and therefore it was why he had introduced none. The thing spoke for itself. —( Hear, hear.) But for fear any one should imagine that they were striking any blow at the supremacy of the Crown, he was prepared to introduce a proviso, with the view of restricting the repealing power of the Bill to those provisions which imposed the penalties. — ( Hear.) This, however, did not coincide with the wishes of the Right Rev. Prelate. He wanted, it would seem from his question, still to have some punishment for offenders against these Acts.—(hear.) Well, then, he would tell the eight Rev. Prelate, that c if any parties wilfully and maliciously in fringed the provisions of these Acts, they still would be liable to punishment under the common law of the land. If any person called in question the supremacy of the Crown of Eng land, that person was liable to prosecution by the common law of the country. He now came to the 13th of Elisabeth, by which the importation of bulls from the see of Rome was declared to be high treason. That was a simple statute en actment, and therefore he proposed to remove it. Whether or not it should be entirely repealed, or whether it should be varied and altered, it was not for him at present to say. That would be a subject for consideration. It _was perfectly well known that bulls were constantly imported from the see of Rome, and they were obliged to wink and connive at it. They declared a particular act high treason, and yet when it took place they did not attempt to prosecute. What a state for the law to be in ; and how degrading was such a state of thit,gs. But it was said that if they repealed that statute they would sanction the introduction of bulls for political purposes, directed against the Crown, against the authority of the Government, and against the temporal interest of a private individual. He felt equally indignant with the Right Reverend Prelate, at the insolent assumption of power which had been exhibited by Pope Gre gory, in the time of Henry IV. of France, and of the Pope in the time of Napoleon, but did that apply to the present case ? The common law was sufficient to protect them from bulls being introduced for improper purposes , was it necessary then to keep this Act of Parliament in the statute hook? A question had been raised as to whether they should qualify the repeal of this Act, or whether they should leave the common law to take its course. His answer was, that if they attempted to draw nice distinctions they might do that which they did not intend to do. It was a dangerous course to adopt. Nothing could he more important in a Bill of this description than its being car ried without haste through the House, and therefore if their Lordships should be of opinion that the question of the Right Reverend Prelate should be submitted to the Learned Judges, he fur one should not offer any opposition to that course. Lord BROUGHAM was glad to find that the Right Rev. Prelate had said that he swath be satisfied with the opinion of the law Lords. There could be no doubt that it was com pe for them to submit a question upon legislative matters to the consideration of the Judges, but he would fain submit to their Lordships whetht r it would not be better to confine such appeals to the Judges to cases of eminent difficulty. Now, if this was a doubtful question, they would not be able to get an answer this session, and if it was not a doubtful question, it need not, be referred to the judges at all. He entirely con curred with his Noble and Learned Friend in the answer which he had given to his Right Rev. Friend. He had no doubt upon the subject. Nothing could be more offensive than the interference of a foreign prince, and this opinion was held in France, for there no bull was allowed to go into the country without being first examined. Yet the Pope called the King of France the eldest son of the Church. There was no penalty in this country, according to the common law, for the intro duction of bulls, rescripts, or other writings from Rome, pro vided they contained nothin7 that was blasphemous, seditious, or immoral. If they contained such doctrines, they were liable to prosecution, like all other papers with similar contents, come from where they wculd. There could be no doubt that that which gave rise to this statute of Eliza beth was an infamous overt host of treason; but such an act could be punished by the common law of the land. He had further observations to make on this subject, but he should re serve them for the Committee. After a few words in explanation from the LORD CHAN CELLOR, Lord DENMAN said he had heard with great satisfaction the Right Rev. Prelate state that he was willing to accept the opinion of the law Lords in that house. An appeal to the judges would draw them from those important duties which now pressed upon them. He would, however, take the liberty of saying, that he was quite sure that if any doubt could possibly be entertained upon the question now submitted, they would sacrifice their own convenience, and even a portion of the pub• lic convenience, rather than allow that doubt to exist for a sin gle hour. He had been surprised to hear the Right Rev. Pre late doubt whether the Crown of this country was imperial and independent. Even during the time when the Pope had most power in this country, it was acknowledged that he had no in fluence over the Crown of England— that he had no power above the supremacy of the Crown, and any per son who attemi ted to impugn or to endanger that supremacy, was liable to the punishment of loss of life, of banishment, and of confiscation of property. He had no hesitation in answering the Right Reverend Prelate, that ncthing in the shape of a bull, or edict, or anything of the sort, could be introduced into this country which could in any way injure the supremacy of the Crown ; for the supremacy of the Crown depended not upon the statute, but the common law of the land.—( ear, hear. ) . _ Lord CA 41PBELL said he:wished to add a few words to whst had fallen from his Noble Friend who had just sat down. It was a mistake to suppose that the Church was higher than the Crown, for the Crown had power over all authorities, whe ther civil or religious ; that it was this power which was under stood to be the supremacy of the Sovereign. That supremacy was established by the common, and not by the statute law, and any person who attempted to injure it—nei matter howsoever he did so—was liable, under the common law, to the severest punishment. With regard to the first question of the Right Reverend Prelate, he could state that the Bill applied to all bulls, no matter at what time they were issued, and nothing could be introduced cr published in this country which could in any way endanger or stigmatise the dignity or supremacy of the Crown. He re joiced exceedingly that the time had arrived when they could repeal these obnoxious Acts, but he thought it was the duty of Government to follow it up by taking steps to restrict the influence of the Pope in this country. In no pact of the world could Popery prove more powerful than in this, and he for one thought that some diplomatic intercourse should be established with the Pope; for in const.quence of the non existence of that intercourse: the Pope possessed more influ ence over the people of this country than he otherwise would do.— ( Hear, hear.) Lord BEAUMONT did not think it would have been ne cessary for him to trespass on their Lordships' time, but the Right Rev. Prelate, instead of confining himself to the ques tions of which he had given notice, had entered into other sub jects, and had attributed to the Catholic faith powers and in fluences which he totally denied. On a former occasion he attempted to explain to their Lordships the great difference which existed between dogmas of faith arid matters of disci pline, and declared that the Pope had no power over the su premacy of the sovereignty of this country. Their Lordships, however, did not feel satisfied with his humble authority for this, and he would therefore quote to them Roman Catholic documents in favour of his declaration. The Noble Lord then quoted several answers to queries put by Mr. Pitt to the faculty of divinity of Louvain, in which it cas stated that the Pope had absolutely no power or authority over the supremacy of the Sovereign of any country out of his own domains. He thought this was a sufficient answer to wha t had fallen from the Right Rev. Prelate, but as a proof of di ese answers made by the faculty of the divinity of Louvain he c( odd state that there was no connexion whatever between the Pope and the Roman Catholic clergy of that empire, excepting 'through the Bishops, who were answerable to the State for every thing they did, and whose edicts and orders were submittthi to the State before they were issued. With regard to the :Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, having struck out of the Bill, which he had the honour of introducing, a clause re pealing some of the very Acts annulled by the present Bill, ho begged to remind their Lordships that the Noble and Learns tl Lord did so, be cause he thought th a t th e Bill i n i ts t h en f o rm was imperfect, but at the same time the Noble and Learned Lord promised to introduce in a future session a Bill to rope: sl these obnoxious Acts.—( Hear, hear.) h op ot the e E X f a c E u T t E y R of,, i L n o r u e v p i replying, ca, were r . e ri narked,th promulgated,t sinceand the answers Bishop of even within the last five years, the Pope had exercised his authority over the supreme power of the so vereign of Spain. He had confiscated the property of several ecclesiastical divines and declared some of the Acts of the sovere;.gn of that country to be absolute nullities.--( Hear, hear. )---1 t was very true that Popery would be more powerful in this o 3untry than in any other if this Bill should pass. There s ,vas no country in Europe where they would suffer the Romi: sh bull to be intro duced without the consent of the Secretary of State. He con sidered it absolutely necessary that these i‘ culls should not be introduced free of penal enactments. If Uto bill were passed they would have no security against papal t ,ulls. It had been found necessary in every country to restrain t he bulls of Rome. He had always opposed the spread of Poperl - , and he hoped they would continue to do so. He consider tid that to allow the extolling of Popery, and to sanction the introduction of bulls would be little short of treason. The Right Reverend Prelate concluded his speech by impressing their Lordships with the necessity of determining in Cora t nittee on some measure which would ensure the tree exercise of the opinions of the Catholic people without, however, extolling the authority of the Pope, and which would support the independence of the Crown, and prevent the introduction of 'papal bulls into the country. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES 131 LL. The Friendly Societies' Bill was advanced a stage. CHARITABLE TRUSTS The consideration of this Bill was furthoi: postponed from Thursday to Monday next. Their Lordships thee, rose at half-past S_ev e n o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, .117ay 11. The SPE t.KUR took the Chair at Four o'el oek. BILSTON GAS-LIGHT AND COKI COMPANY. The report on this Bill was agreeil to, ak ordered to be en• grossed. DUBLIN, DUNDRUAL AND ENNIS KERRY RAIL. WAY BILL. This line was read a second time and or dered to be corn. mitted. BURY WATERWORKS . The report on this Bill was brought up an d agreed to. LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM I lAILWAY. Mr. GREENE mov, , d that the London and Birmingham Railway (Coventry to Nuneaton) Bill be re; id a second time, notwithstanding the time prescribed by the essional order has expired, the agents not having obtained the b reviate till the 4th of May.—The motion was agreed to. REPORTS. The following reports were brought tic., the a mendments and alterations agreed to, and the Bills orders .d to b e engrossed : St. Austell Small Debts. York and North Midland Railway (v l / 4 1 hitby and Pickering _ Extension). Forth and Clyde Junction Railway. Stirling and Dunfermline Railway. Bristol Waterworks. Wath-upon-Dearne Improvement. Leeds and Thirsk Railway ( St. Helen's mut AI Deviation Leeds and Thirsk Rail way (Knaresborougl t Extension). Dundee and Perth Railway Amendment. Slamannan Railway ( Rathgate and Jawcra ig Branches). Scottish Central Railway (Peal; Termini i trol Stations). THE SUN LONDON, TUESDAY„MORNING, MAY 12, 1846. Caledonian Insurance Company. Hartlepool Gas and Waterworks. Lincoln Waterworks. Scottish Central Railway (Denny Branch). Warrington Waterworks. Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Dunfermline Branch). Great North of England Railway ( Boroughbridge Branch). Great North of England Railway ( Bedale Branch). SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were read a second time, and ordered to be committed, viz. : Scottish Central and Caledonian Junction Railway (by order). London and Birmingham Railway (Coventry to Nuneaton). Goole and Doncaster Railway. South Yorkshire Coal Railway and Canal. Belfast and County Down Railway. Earl of Blesinton's Estate. Bury Improvement. Exeter Great Western Railway. s vc u • th Dock Purchase) (by c n a d st e l r e lan an d d ß D ai a l tn y gt a o n n d Jon Railway ou ( Durham and Ne order). SOUTHPORT IMPROVEMENT. This Bill was read a third time and passed. LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY. Mr. WILSON PATTEN moved that the following recona rnendation contained in the Twelfth Report on Railway Bills Classification be considered, viz. :—" Your Committee recom mend that the Lancaster and Carlisle and Lancaster and Pres ton be divided into two Bills; and that the amalgamation with the Lancaster and Preston be included in a separate Bill, and be referred to Group 59, and that the other powers be included in a separate Bill, and allowed to remain in Group 45." That the Report from the Select Committee on Petitions for Private Bills pre sented Ist May, in reference to the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway (Extension to Caledonian Railway), and Lancaster and Preston Junction Railways Amalgamation Petition, be read. That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amalgamate the Lancaster and Preston Junction Railway Company and the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway Company ; and that Colonel Lowther and Mr. C. W. G. Howard do prepare and bring it in. The motion was agreed to. WEXFORD, CARLOW, AND DUBLIN JUNCTION RAILWAY. This Bill was read a second time. LUNATIC BUILDINGS' ACT. Mr. YORKE presented several petitions from Cambridge against the Lunatic Buildings' Act. Mr. F. SCOTT preserved a petition from Australia praying that wheat maize and flour should be admitted into this king dom on the same terms as the wheat maize and flour of Canada. MR. S. O'BRIEN IN THE TOWER! Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Hull, pray ing for the release of Mr. William Smith O'Brien from the Tower.—(Great laughter.) CHELSEA PENSIONERS. Captain LAYARD presented a petition from 660 Chelsea pensioners, complaining that five per cent. had been deducted from their pensions, and that the periods of settlement had been reduced from three to one month in advance. _ THE IRISH COERCION BILL. Mr. O'CONNELL presented; petition against this Bill. RATING OF SMALL TENEMENTS. Mr. J. BLACKBURN presented a petition from the guar dians of a poor-law union (the name of which we did not hear), praying that the owners of small tenements should be rated instead of the occupiers. Mr. WALKER presented a numerously signed petition praying the House to restrict the sale of spirituous liquors on Sunday. THE POLICE AND THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY begged to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, of which he had given him notice. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what were the regula tions with respect to the attendance of the Metropolitan Police force on their religious duties ? Sir J. GRAHAM said the Noble Lord was probably aware that in the admission of privates into the police force no inquiry whatever was instituted with respect to their re ligious duties. The force was open to all denominations. With the exception of those on actual duty on Sunday, the members of the force were at liberty to attend any place of re ligious worship they thought fit. Those belonging to the Es tablished Church had seats provided for them in almost every church in their respective districts ; and with regard to the others, they were left at full liberty to go wherever they pleased. BRIDPORT ELECTION. Mr. G. BANKES said he had a petition to present of rather a peculiar nature, and he trusted he should have the indulgence of the House if he departed from the general rule which had been laid down, that no Member should address the House on presenting a petition. The petition, however, which he had to present on this occasion involved a matter of privilege, and a matter upon which the House would have to decide. He believed he might at once state that there was no precedent to be found similar to the case he had now to lay before the House, and he had some doubt whether it would be considered a question of privilege or not; at all events, supposing this petition to be true, and he had no reason to doubt that it was true, it deserved the serious at tention of the House. He would state the substance of it, in order that the House might judge for itself Gf the degree of importance to be attached to it. The petition was signed by William Lockhart, an elector of the borough of Bridport. The House was aware that the minutes of the evidence of the Bridport Election Committee had been printed. It would be seen from that report that the decision of that Committee turned solely upon the question as to whe ther the vote of an elector—who was the Mr. Lockhart in question—which gave the majority for the late sitting Member, had been erroneously placed in the return. The Committee found that it had, and the decision caused the sitting of the Hon. Member who now sat in the House for Bridport. The SPEAKER intimated to the Hon. Member that the question involved no matter •f privilege, and it was out of order to speak on the presentation of the petition. Mr. BANKES—It would appear, then, by this petition that there were grounds of objection to Mr. Baillie Cochrane's elec tion, but it was also certain that there were equal objections to the election of Mr. Romilly ; but durin g the last year the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had declared the determination of the Committees should be satisfactory. The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member must give notice of a breach of privilege before he can introduce the subject in this manner. Mr. BANKES—Then I must rest upon this position, that the petitioner should be heard at the bar of the House. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. ORDERS OF THE DAY. The Bill for the Northern and Southern Connecting Rail way was postponed. HANTS POLICE CASE. Mr. COLLETT wished to ask whether there was any foundation for the statement that police-constable Hale still remained in the police force of that county, and whether Sir Charles Hay wood still remained in the magistracy? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that the question put by the Hon. Member, the House would see, had been put upon an exparte statement. Mr. COLLETT said that that statement was the founda tion of his question ; and he had every reason to believe it was correct. Sir JAMES GRAHAM hoped that some time longer than four days would be given to make an inquiry such as that called for by the Hon. Member into the character and conduct of a gentleman of high character, and well known to them all. Mr. O'CON NELL—Let the Hon. Member hand the state ment to the Right Hon. Baronet. Mr. COLLETT said he would persevere in his notice to ask the question, and begged to baud the statement to the Right Hon. Gentleman. THE CORN BILL. Sir J. GRAHAM moved the order of the day for the third reading of the Corn Bill. The Marquis of GRANBY said, that in rising to address the House upon this question, he trusted he would receive the in dulgence of the House for a abort time. He would oppose this Bill, because upon it depended the fate of the poor man and the labourer, and because it was a question of whether the Eng lishman was to be superior to the foreigner. Before he entered on the question before the House, he wished to make a few ob servations on the manufactures of this country. The Noble Lord near him (Lord G. Bentinck) the other night said, and said truly, that they did not desire to see the manufactures of this country decline.—( Hear, hear.) They did not wish to see the stream of its prosperity conducted into worn-out and useless channels. They wished to see it, like the noble river outside those walls, flowing in a continued and full stream, and not like a rushing torrent, that at one time inundated the country, and at another dried up to an useless he :hey: augmented an onceß sweepinga thatrco on ne considered i o f and unprofitable pool. They did not wish to see the manufacturing interests decline, although they knew the evils of the present system ; for when properly conducted they were of benefit to the country. If any proof of that fact were wanted, the Right Hon. Baronet the omlrae F pemit i eee r tn s rei t :tt Minister of the Crown, whom he did not then see in his place, had given it to them the other night. The Right Hon. Gen tleman had said that those counties in the neighbourhood of the manufacturing districts were more prosperous than those counties further removed. The inference that should be drawn from that was, that they should endeavour to draw the two in terests closer together. They should endeavour to create a better circulation of the blood in their own veins, and should not assist other counties which did not require it. These were the principles which should be applied, and he believed that these were the principles which had long been entertained by many of the manufacturers. He did hope that they would show the world that her Majesty's Government were not bound by the Anti- Corn-law League, by not giving up their present principles. The object of the corn-laws was much misunderstood. They (the anti-protectionists) said that they starved the people. He denied it.—( Hear, hear.) He said that their object was to supply food to the people at a constant and moderate price.— ( Hear, hear. ) There were two great principles involved in this question. The first principle was that by the continuance of protection they would be able to feed the people from the produce of their own soil. Employment would be given to the employmentpe ople of t this i u s n d c country — ' i t ! nt which,r y --- h if f al m t h a y n y a of fd thosem a nl yg gentlemen l p e l m o y e n m eat—an wh 0 at till a late hour in this heated and ill-ventilated apartment would have recourse to, they would in a short time become Much more vigorous, and capable to discharge their duties thdeamooierneoyetfifocoakcypiaooTihne trecosinipdpipyroini cytrichpiomlweemieerenrwetoinaswoatbfno,tl produce t oce i f f and they would be enabled to have from their colonies as much as would meet that deficiency, and by this means the colonies would be benefited; but if scarcity arose, and the corn-laws pti were roon v eadb with abolished , l h i s a h t e t dh their , e colonial.f ore capabilitiesig foreign produce,produce of w t ht o oi u s the l c d o t u h nd e et n : —( Hear.) The Noble Lord near him (Lord G. Bentinck) the demands of its increasing population ; for from theheeeot r g e o t a u r r t n er o s f tohfe increase e s hoof corn o we a d s thatoorn compared dre with h re 18 1 4 3 2 ,000 ._ (, Hear, hear," from Lord George Bentinck). Another point which, though not immediately connected with the corn-laws, had yet an indirect reference to them, and was of very great himephooritdang. hisA s h it an w d as h m e uc ‘ h vo b o e ld tte t r ak s e tat teh d e i4a book which r o e f ad Aair.pasAllison she ' w ‘ e speculators and bonded till sheaving n erty of woapulation." ntrchkonsidered diminished the supply m i a n yk o e u t r . the foreign corn had read ingt' sm f co h aao errnke NobleiScarcity. toyst.: from ghw t 'thisoi ul p a d period of vndheaerdaesdiunrpfeoorl politic, s iecd, that wtheer were beforeonblouse He would advise the House to pause and consider well what effect such a system had upon the scarcity of corn, and, therefore, whether it would not be better to reform such ' an unjust. Looking at the amount of taxation in this country, and ' abuse,t theha that House.t h t e l i s e a than a towT laws which powah Rightssi e s h u c h h He at the amount of capital which had b een s pent on the faith of those laws in improving land, he could only say thatthey were not unjust, but highly politic and state of the country.—( 4. Hear, hear," from Lord G. Bentinck ) But he went en to state that there was great distress . - He feared that might under the present corn-law. cases, but he thought that the farmer who threw off his good warns great coat on a winter's day because it was cold would act just as wisely as the farmer who threw off pro tection because some distress existed.—(Cheers.) They were also told that protection was the bane of ag ri . cu lt u re, and that it wanted competition t o exc i te it. He denied that protection was such ; but if it was, must it net also be the bane of manufactures ? It was not likely that it should be b ane of the on e and not of the other. Why, what a' great injustice—the Hon. Baronet was fond of the word—to protect the one and leave the other defenceless. of c ow, the answer would be that p rci t tet i ou was glow e d to the former for the purposes of revenue ; and be would ask, had not agriculture the same claim upon them. He had, he considered, a plan which he could recommend to the Right Hon. Baronet. it was a great commercial plan, and one which would answer all purposes. They might read in the first pages of almost all political economists, that moderate taxation did considerably stimulate industry.— (Hear, hear.) Why, this then was the very thing which they wanted. Let him adopt this plan and he would do away with the injustice and double the revenue.—( Hear, hear.) But, in truth, protection was a benefit in one case as much as the other. He held in his hand a letter, written by a Noble ancestor of his more than two cen turies ago, and he considered that the cause of protection could be stated by few in that House in a clearer manner. The no bleman to whom he referred was Lord Franc's Roos. The letter was addressed to Mr. Carey. In this letter the writer said that an importation of corn was an exportation of money, and that even in a case of necessity it was a hurt to the common wealth.% If the importation of corn was unlimited, the effect of it would be to destroy husbandry, and therefore the poor would starve for the want of work, as tillage laud would be thrown into sheep pasturage. What, asked the writer, was the use of corn being cheap if the poor man had no money to purchase it with? This was the opinion entertained in 1610 on *his subject. He now came to the most important point in the argument. It was the relation of the rate of wages to the price of fwd.— ( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, said that he could no longer sup; ort the corn-laws because the price of corn did not affect the rate of wages. The Right Hon. Baronet dismissed the manufacturing labourers at once from his consideration. To that he (the Noble Marquis) would say he had heard it stated, by more than one Member on the opposite aide of the House, that the principal argument why the corn-laws should be repealed was, that by the reduced wages paid the labourers they could better compete with foreigners.—( Hear.) This was a po i nt, h owever, in his (the Marquis of Granby s) opinion that should not be determined in such a summary manner. But he would proceed with the argument as it related to the agricultural labourers. The Right Hon. Baronet said that during the year 1837 the price of corn varied 38s. Between 1837 and 1841 the variation of the price was 38s; whereas, during the same period, the rate of wages varied but Is., varying from 10s. to Ils. per week. Now, he (the Marquis of Granby) must say, had this been the case, there would have been some show of reason for not maintaining the corn-laws ; but he submitted, the Right Hon. Baronet had been mistaken, in the argument. If the Right Hon. Baronet would go down to Thetford, he would find it otherwise than he had repre sented, and that though the money rates of wages might not have much varied, the actual wages received in other modes than by money had greatly altered. He (the Noble Marquis) relied on certain returns furnished to the House of Lords by a Noble Relative of his, and these returns showed what had been the variation in the rate of wages in the neighbourhood of Bel- voir. In 1838 he collected the average gages cf forty-two labourers near Belvoir, by going throughout the different cottages of the labourers. The price of corn in 1838, was 60s. a quarter ; in 1839, it was 525. ; the wages of the labourer in 184'2, were lls. 2d. a week; in 1839, according to the return which has been made to the House of Commons, they had risen from 12s. to 13s. a week, so that the difference between the rate of wages in 1838 and 1839, was ls. a week. although the difference in the price of corn was not more than a fifth of that amount. It appears by the same returns, during the year 1838, the labourer consumed on an average, during the week, 3lbs. 1 loz. of meat, while in the year 1839 the _ . . . consumption was 3lbs. 6Aoz. So that the labourers abso lutely consumed as much as 421bs. of meat less in the cheap year than they did in the dear year. If they were to take this calculation as the basis of their consideration, it would he conceived be quite satisfactory. If such were to be taken they might very well set the ques tion at rest, but if they were to have recourse to a further test, namely, that of the proportion of the labourer, they would find that those wages varied from 40s. to 50s. per cent., and that the lower price prevailed during the years when there was a cheaper price for corn. This principle held throughout the returns which had been furnished by the corn markets, and as shown in the reports from the various towns in which the corn markets were held ; so that no doubt could pos sibly exist upon the subject, where the competition of the labour market came into contrast with those of the prices of the corn market. If the Hon. Members on the Treasury benches wished to convince him that the poor man would be better off for having the price of corn lessened, he would say to them, let them give up their salaries for one year—(Laughter)—and then tell him they found bread cheaper, and he would believe them.—( Hear, hear.) Even if they did that, still they could not feel any effects from it, for they would have something to fall back upon, while the labourer had nothing but his employ ment ; and deprive him of that, and you deprive him of every thing.—( Hear, hear.) He would now make a few observations, and only a few, upon the Irish part of the question. He believed that all parties in that House would agree that a great deal of distress did prevail in that country. But he could not see why that should be made the foundation fora repeal of the corn laws. It had been said that if the ports had been thrown open to relieve that distress, it would be impossible ever to close them again ; but he could not for the life of him understand that argument ; and he believed the Government were now be ginning themselves to see that that was a bad argument. — ( Hear, hear.) They also argued that it would be better to relieve the distress in Ireland by repealing the corn-law than to call upon this country to subscribe money every year, for a number of years, for that purpose. Now he should say that he regretted very much that the Government had introduced, with the Coercion Bill, no better measure for the relief of the distress in Ireland.—( Hear, ksar. ) He would refer to the observation made by the Hon. Member for Lynn, who had said that by this measure they would throw out of employment 500,000 families, and add to the two millions of destitute already in that country three millions more. He had not heard that observation con tradicted. They would have to ask the people of this country to feed twice the number that they would otherwise have to feed, and at the same time diminish their powers of going to the relief of the Irish people, although they would be still as anxious as ever to do so.—(Hear,f hear.) Ile now came to the arguments held out to them to induce them to consent to the repeal of the corn-laws, and here he was met by a head-sea—a sea which, in nautical language, was called a confused sea. He no sooner recovered from the shock he re ceived on one side, than he recoiled from a shock on the other. lie had been told by some that the advantage of the repeal would be the cheapness of the bread, and immediately after he was told by others, and in some instances by the same people— ( Hear, hear)—that the people were not born, and the country not discovered from which this great supply of corn was to come. In his confusion and distress he naturally turned to the prime mover of all these great measures, in the hope that he should find some consolation, and derive some enlightment from him.—( Hear, hear.) Alas, it was going from the shades of evening into the depths and darkness of night—(Cheers and laughter)—it was confusion worse confounded.—( Cheers ) The Right Hon. Gentleman would tell them nothing, because be said that he could not.—(Laughter.) When he asked him and the House if it was about to vote for a great social altera tion like the present on such a fatal error—which would rend asunder the ties and associations now existing—which would increase the evil of the present day, instead of alleviating it, and unite the manufacturer with the foreign agriculturist, instead of rivetting those ties which ought to exist between him and their native brothers and friends—he received no answer. He was not sufficiently acquainted with the subject himself to be able to bring forward facts in proof of his position, but he learnt from those friends around him that in the event of the abolition of the corn-laws the price of corn would range from 335. to 40s.—(Hear, hear.) If so, the statement which had been made at one of the late agricultural meetings was per fectly correct. (The Noble Lord then read an estimate of a Mr. Everett as to the effect on the produce of 300 acres of land by the abolition of those laws.) The price, at present, of certain produce of this farm was 1,964/., by the proposed alteration it ' would be 1,3471. 10s. The Noble Lord could state that there was a farm which now brought in 1,8411. 55., which would only produce 1,3001. ss. after they repealed those laws. —(Hear, hear.) He had endeavoured to prove to the House that the repeal of the corn-laws was most impo litic and unjust, and he would go further and say that if there really had arrived a necessity for the settlement of them, there could be no permanent arrangement under the present Government.—(" Hear, hear," from the protection benches.) The Right Hon. Baronet had come into power by the support of the agricultural body, and he would read to the House an extract from the Quarterly Review to prove that the Right Hon. Gentleman had defeated the Whig Ministry upon this question in 1842. The reviewer took the lan guage of the Right Honourable Baronet, and then commented upon it ; and what said that Hon. Baronet? He held the same language now as he did then, and he upheld the principle of a graduated duty, but, if they asked him to what amount, or the exact details, he could not pledge himself. Well, then, he considered, by accepting these conditions, the Right Hon. Baronet did pledge himself to maintain a corn law ; " and this remarkable and bold declaration," says the Re viewer, " strongly enforced by lucid arguments, was fol lowed by a celebrated division, in which 362 Conservative Members accepted the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet, and called him to power by an unexpected majority of ninety one. Sir R. Peel declared boldly on what terms he would accept power. Those conditions were accepted; support was given with unexampled enthusiasm." But what was the pre sent conduct of the Right Hon. Gentleman ? Before those measures could come into operation, the Parliament should be dissolved, and he did ask the Righti Hon. Baronet, supposing the corn-law should be repealed in another Parliament, would it be a permanent measure ?—( Hear.) Well, they had been told that they should have discovered that at an earlier period, but had not Lord Grey discovered it, who was a bitter but an honest opponent.—( Cries of " Hear.") He could not presume to say what the effect of the proceedings to which he had alluded might be, but this he would presume to say, that it did behove the several Members who supported the Right Hon. Baronet to consider what he might say next, and to consider whether he might not ask whether the point which be had propounded might not be discovered sooner? He would not say this of the minority of this House, but he would appeal to the great 240 by whom that Right Hon. Ba roner's opinions had been approved. He did not wish to depart from the facts before the House, but he could not help re minding the Members of that House, that they were asserting the principles which the Prime Minister chose to dictate.— ( Cheers.) He and the friends around him had supported the corn-laws because they thought them to be right, and they refused to negative them because they did not conceive them to be wrong.—(Cheers.) He thought that what was right for the benefit of one class could not be contrary to the interests of another.—(Cheers from the Opposition benches.) He was anxious to support the present corn-laws, because they took care of the interests of the tenant as well as the landlord, of the labourer as well as of those of his employer.—( Cheers.) He would entreat them to believe that they could not injure the roots of the tree without at the same time doing a detri ment to its branches ; and he would still further entreat those Hon. Members who usually and most energetically supported the Government, to recollect that they could not injure the interests of any other class without affecting their own, and that they could not now interfere with the rights of those classes without at the same time allowing that there was an equal claim to interfere with their own rights also. But even if the Right Hon. Baronet was right, and the landed interest would not be injured, he thought it would be but poor recompense for the loss of the yeomanry of England. —( Loud cheers.) He did not believe the Legislature would sanction the present measure; but, if they did, he hoped the anticipated evil would prove incorrect.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped the explanations of the Right Hon. Baronet, however vacant, would be verified. The Right Hon. Baronet said he would not retain the helm of state unless that helm was al lowed to traverse freely. He (the Marquis of Granby) feared that, if the Right Hon. Baronet succeeded in altering the course of the vessel of state from its direct and tried course to the port of posterity, he would meet the fate of many a mariner that had gone before him.—( Hear, hear.) He would be drawn aside by tides and currents, until at last, tossed about by the winds and waves, his vessel would become a wreck on the barren and inhospitable shores of free trade.— (Loud cheers.) If that should happen, then he had no doubt the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, with his crew, would come to the assistance, and do what they could to get the Right Hon. Baronet off.—( Hear, hear.) But his fear was, that then relief would come too late.—(Hear, hear.) He thanked the House for the attention it had paid him, and he would now sit down, by moving that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. (The Noble Marquis resumed his seat amidst loud cheers from the protection benches.) Mr. GASKELL said he rose to second the amendment, and in doing so he felt it to be no small disadvantage to follow the admirable speech of the Noble Lord who had just sat down; however it was a duty from w h i ch he could not shrink, when he considered, the auspices and other circum stances un der which this measure had been introduced, and he thought that 04 was the time when Hon. Members were called upon to state before the House and the country the reasons why their opinions still remained unchanged upon the mea ure. Had the intervals that had elapsed between the different stages of the discussion upon it admitted, he would have called upon his constituents to express their opinion upon it, and if they differed from him, he would then have requested of them to find some other gentleman in whom to repose the trust con fided to him.—( Hear, hear.) He should confess he was at a loss to see the validity of the argument that if the Forts had been thrown open it would be impossible to close them again. If the ports had been thrown open, then the question as to closing them should be legitimately tested.—( Hear, hear. ) At that period it was expected that the arrangemen• s then ex isting would never have been disturbed. He could not conceive how the experience of three years justified the sweeping changes which were contemplated by the Government. He believed that the free importation of foreign grain would have the effect of throwing the land out of cultivation, and the labourer oat of employ. He would tell the operatives that corn could not be introduced into this country at a lower rate than at present. Mr. M'Culloch had stated that it was impossible for foreign corn to be told in this country under 525. per qr. They bad been told that the withdrawal of protection would be the dissolution of the constitution. They had been told that the proceedings of the League were intended as an attack on the landed interest. He knew that a section of the party oppo site had acquired great influence out of doors and in that House. If those measures were to be successful either in the p b e r e a s e t t n e t nd Parliamentedwith itb t b e o r be i in e a fi n t y s t t i e th e ther, h p e e t e r p u l s e t e w d that they the would Gentle men would d o p b p e os a i s t a i t g i c s i a p t a i t s e fa d e . ti n W t h n a t t b e v e entr thatmight b e b y e b t a l d i e n r e e t s u g l e i n t up a system founded on settled principles for a new-fangled doctrine. They (the protectionists) had this satisfaction that they hadnever abandoned or betrayed the trust which had been committed to them. Mr. SHERIDAN wished to take the present opportunity of speaking on a matter of a personal nature, which was indi rectly connected with the business before the House. The Hon. Member for Dorsetshire, in bringing forward the report on the Corn Importation Bill, had thought proper to cast some imputation on th e veracity of the statements which he (Mr. Sheridan) had made. He trusted that he might be allowed on the present occasion, as it was a matter that affected his char acter, to occupy the attention of the House, while he endea bvoeeunre e c to n p a r o b t s c e h r i a m e a i e t l f b f y r or b e t h H e n u n n . j i s e t In a T e e; s f o r n D s n w r h s e i which hi h r a e d . He thought that that Hoyn. Gentleman would be better employ ing his time if he were t o l oo k i nto the condition of his own poor in Dorsetshire than occupying himself with comparing the amount of destitution i n I re l and with other parts of th ; country. The Hon. Gentleman had asserted that the quota tions which the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland had made use of on a recent occasion were in direct variance with the truth. He would not go into any detailed statements with respect to these accounts. They were made public on his au thority, and he was responsible for their truth. He was satis- fled as to the correctness of his statements. Since last Friday he had addressed various letters to persons in the country, and in reply had received letters from clergymen which stated that the rate of wages in their county averaged 7s. per week. The Hon. Gentleman then read a letter from the Rev. Sidney - Osborne, with respect to the labourers of the Blandford Union. It was a document dated 1843 ; but the Rev. Gentleman was well persuaded that the description contained in it with respect to the labourers of the Blandford Union was equally applicable to the present year. The labourers were divided into two classes ; the first class received wages averaging from Bs. to 9s. per week ; out of which they had to pay house-rent, the other class received wages averaging from Bs. to 9s. per week, and these accounts tallied exactly with the information he had derived from his own inquiries The Hon. Member for Dorsetshire had stated that he did not know of a case in which wages were so low as 7s. per week ; it did appear to him a strange circumstance, that a gentleman, holding so high a position in the country, and so highly re spected as the Hon. Member, and who was chairman of the beard of guardians, should come forward and coolly state in his place in Parliament that he did not know of a single instance in which the wages in his county were so low as 7s. per week, when day after day, month after month, and year after year, he was in: the habit of affixing his name to the reports in which those very cases occurred. He had written to the relieving officer of the Dorsetshire Union, and in reply he received a letter, dated the 10th o f M ay , 1 846. That letter contained an account of the wages of the able-bodied risen, who had applied for relief at the union. it s t a t e d t h e average rate of wages in the district did not exceed 7s. or 7s. 6d. per week. He had asked the relieving officer, and he would ask his Hon. Friend, whether he could state a case in the county of Dorset where a man, who is paid by the day, received more that Sc. per week. The relieving officer of the Dorsetshire Union, in answer to his question, had said that he did not know of a single instance of a man working by the day receiving more than Bs. per week; neither did he believe that there was an instance in that county. Se much, then, for the statements of the Hon. Alember with respect to his veracity with respect to wages in Dorsetshire. He thought he was justified in saying that his Hon. Friend had done him great injustice when he stated that his ( Mr. Sheri dan's) assertions were not in accordance svith the statements that had appeared in the public prints. The Hon. Member had said that it might be true that in some places the agricul tural labourers received a very trifling sum per week ; but to explain the cause of his smallness of remuneration was, that he " was not up to his work." Why, how was it possible for a man that was compelled to feed upon horse-beans and turnip-tops to be "up to his work ?"—( Hear, hear.) The agricultural wages were scandal )usly low.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped the House would consider that he had fully answered the statements of his Hon. Friend. He firmly believed that the withdrawal of of all protection would not have the effect of improving the condition of the agriculturists. Wages did not vary with the price of corn. The Hon. Member having read the letter of an agricultural labourer, which has appeared in the morning papers, to show that the wages of that class were stationary and fixed, proceeded to say, that as long as the poor-law was administered in its present state, so long would those poor people remain in their present degraded condition.—( Hear, hear.) The Poor-law Commissioners, when applied to for relief by an agricultural labourer who had a family, refused to admit him into the workhouses if he were able-bodied, and only gave him a few loaves, or something of that sort ; he was consequently to return to his customary labour for any sort of remuneration. Notwithstanding the present flourishing state of the country, there had not been the slightest increase in the wages of the agricultural labourer, during the last year, in Dorsetshire or the other argricultural counties adjoining—( Hear, hear)—and he therefore believed that the adoption of free trade would not benefit the agricul tural labourer. Mr. FLOYER then explained some statements which he had made on a previous evening. The Noble Lord the Secre tary for Ireland had stated, on the authority of his Hon. Friend Mr. Sheridan, that the average rate of wages of agricultural labourers in the county of Dorset was 7s. per week. But if the public believed that statement they would be labouring under an erroneous impression, the average rate being 93. per week. In his (Mr. Floyer's) own neighbourhood he believed that the common rate of wages was 7s. per week, but it must be recollected that they were allowed a certain quantity of fuel (perhaps not as much as they were entitled to), a house rent-free,', and some potato ground, which would make their wages equal to 9s. per week at the least. He did appeal to that House, whether he was not entitled to stand up and make some remark when he heard the Dorset. shire peasant compared with the poor Irish labourer.—( Hear, hear.) He had risen to address the House unprepared, and he trusted that some allowance would be made to him if he spoke in a stronger method than he intended. The words he used upon the occasion referred to were, that the rate of wages in • Dorsetshire were from seven to eight shillings a week, but the Noble Lord mis-interpreted the expression that the state ments made by him (the Noble Lord) led to an impression which was wholly at variance with the truth. He (the Noble Lord) considered that he (Mr. Floyer) said that his statements were wholly at variance with the truth. Now he never said any such thing—he never meant to make such a charge upon his Noble Friend, who always weighed his words carefully, and spoke them with consideration. And now with regard to the present state of the Dorsetshire labourer. He believed that he had already stated, that it was quite as good and even better than it was at almost any period. He employed a great num ber of them during the winter at certain task-work, and the earnings of these men varied from ten to eleven shillings a week. The present winter he had employed men in the same manner, and gave them the same work to do, and of precisely the same quality; but some of them, from the demand for labour prevailing, left off working and went to other employments, and he ad duced that as one of the reasons which caused him to say that the present state of the Dorsetshire labourer was better than usual. As to the condition of the poor-house, it de pended, as Hon. Gentlemen were aware, upon very different circumstances, and on matters which had very little reference to the state of wages. But he was able to state that very few able-bodied labourers, not above four or five at the most, speaking usually, were inmates of the house over which he had the honour to preside as chairman. But he was sure the House would agree with him that the poor-house was not a safe criterion to go by, in judging of the condition of the la bouring poor. And with regard to potatoes, they were selling, as he believed, at from seven to eight shillings a bushel. —( Hear, hear.) The stack was by no means what is termed " over," nor had it deteriorated since it was first stored ; in fine he might state in conclusion, that he believed the condition of the labouring peasant was as good as he had known it at any period since he had known anything about such matters; and before he would sit down, he wished to state that be ha d no in tention to address the ouse that evening, but he had been called up by the rem th a a r t ks th o e f ratheteHofonl.aboGeenrtlieem Dorsetshire ee n ts o h r i h re ad w h a e s any desire to sal , h su e ffi t e t i h e e n r t e , was indee are i ed t e was of f p ar ay f i ro ng thmwehm etrat t h h eco w u egs, ld e wish it to be; which had been adopted in many instances, and which he considered liable to a great deal of unfairness.—( Hear, hear.) That mode was by paying so much corn per week—which es twta w rAhtae a eenm s asdt c ae e e wasrttitea ofni whatne hw l f t y tehae g nsec i eo v tr nhm e a lu n t jes much Hn o eeAyu sb e p artu bus he l onenlf when etoyhf atpolf taken i a ewnne r a e dgi dneoutsf into were :ere, account ah e ne — at paid per fortnight, dm o bwe r yeitrt p ohet e him r ste: week, at a rate of about five shillings the bushel, and the remainder of the wages was given in the shape of money. He considered that he had a right to place these facts within the knowledge of Hon. Gentlemen, and he hoped his Hon. Friend would forgive him for exercising that right.—( Hear, hear.) He was happy that he was able to agree with him in the latter part of his speech, for he did not see how an alteration in the duty on corn could better the condition of the labouring poor. In considering this question, they should consider to what extent the people of that country could consume corn ; and with regard to this, he would allude to a return quoted by his Noble Friend below him (Lord G. Beutinck), by which it appeared that in the year 1835, which was a year of remarkable agricultural pros perity, that there were seventeen millions of quarters passed through the markets of this country ; bread was at that time accessible to the poorest man—not one that had a shilling to pay but could get sufficient.—( Hear, hear. ) The people had as much as they wanted ; indeed, corn was se profuse that it was given to cattle. They had in hand at the present moment one million and-a-half of quarters of wheat, and before the close of the year they would have it amount to two millions. Now, could any person con sider that corn could be introduced profitably to the agricultu rist at a rate below the present rate of duty ? or did any person consider that if they repealed the corn-laws, that the importa tion would be limited to the amount he had already men tioned? No, surely not. All other nations, finding here a free market, would pour in their surplus corn in their most abundant seasons. The consequence would be to throw an im mense quantity of land out of (salivation, and instead of seven teen or eighteen millions of quarters of wheat they would have some hundreds. In conclusion he would say that he wou!d oppose to his utmost the principle of the Government measure as destructive to the best interests of the country.—(Hear.) Sir JOHN EASTHOPE said, so far the wretchedness had been allowed, and they should not be much longer detained to inquire whether those poor creatures were existing onosfotmhee seven shillings per week, and they were told by the life of them, how an importation of corn . , representatives of this country, that they cannot underst and hrom som e keepingf for But if they down the pr;ces, can benefit these poor creatures earnestly hoped could not understand, he humbly and most epoloorthcreawtuornelsdtahneamseerlytehse, he they y matter of now a t h n a d t itfhteni they y ha had luminaries enoughwo l u i l f d e gl left t to i in them creatures living on seven whole family, and that question satisfactorily. con sequence to have bread . shillings per week, to f said rf po ro ra t be cheap or dear, it was all the same to them. They let bread cheap wished to be sent to the country on the question. He thanked p Theyr ovi d e God it would go to the country, and their advocacy of the people would be properly understood. He availed himself of the opportunity of expressing the obligations of those labourers, who were not reduced and their unbounded gratitude for less of all consequences, in which come forward, and confer upon the benefits which the country had ev , the Hon. Gentlemen would di let them be sure that the ig pool that they were in error ; they knew that it was not the fact that the price of bread did not materially alect them, and it would be a common waste of time—it would be an insult to the common sense of the country, to cons .der the question further. He did not intend to go into the tletate, for he considered that the question had been worn threadhtre-- ( Hear, hear)—and he would conclude by once more off, ring his warm acknowledgments to the Minister for the manly and. noble course which he had so generously adopted and so I tar. lessly pursued. Mr. W. MILES would challenge all aho conceived they knew more of agriculture than those who cultivated the la ads, to go with him into the question of the effects of these coot em plated changes, and he would prove to their satisfaction that they would be injurious, not only to the landowners but tc the farmers and labourers. He would in the first place refer tc the law as it was in 1828. He would then glance at the present state of the law, and thirdly, to the effect of the proposed alterati The Hon. Gentleman, after detailing atleonsiderable 7,th„ and with as much gusto as if that were the first night of the de bate, what in his opinion the law of 1828 conferred uporr the country, proceeded to say that the law of 1842, as compared with that of 1628, was good for the consumer as well as the producer, and was equally beneficial to the state. During the law of 182 ,the quantity of wheat imp or t e d i nto this country for the thirteen years which followed was 13,626,315 quarters. This was im ported on an average at 14s. per quarter, and was productive of a yearly revenue during this period of 255,493/. Since the law of 1842 came into operation, the quantity of foreign corn imported amounted to 4,944, 762 quarters. The average price per quarter at which this was imported was and it brought to the revenue the sum of 690,368/. Thus it ap peared that by the law of 1842, as compared with that of 1828, the price of corn was lower to the consumer while there was in a larger amount of revenue to the State. The inference deduci ble from this comparison was clearly favour of the law of 1842. He would now allude to the state of things which migkt be expected in the event of the alterations which he had proposed being car ried into effect. His Noble Friend near hint (Marquis of Granby) had with great perspicuity stated what would, be the effect with regard to two farms, the statistics of which he gave. But as these estimates referred to farms cultivated= the three course system, he (Mr. Miles) would show that th same injurious consequences would take place to the agricultur ists. The Hon. Gentleman, after illustrating his argument, by o farms by fo ther the newEo that a t t i w t w detailing t h e anticipated prices which, accor di ng ofto his ca l cu l at i on, would be paid for the produce English li t 3 a h r tariff proceeded i colt oristto contend ' ,ntend o l sai with the foreigner. What, he , Inr c ‘ could ask, were the prices t a Odessa in Feb ruary l ast ') ebruary, 1829, the ?rice was from 16s. to 17s. On the 14th June , 1845, the price was from ; 21s. to 255. so that th e fluctuat ion 4s. Now if the freight be addedtdhuering that period was only 245. 9d. to 28s. 9d., as t h e freight could e owootulld be ran afeuifated rom higher than 7s. 9d. per qua r t er . At Stettin and Holste in,cthe prices ranged from 255. to 265., w hil e the freight was on l y from 3s. to 45.; nor did it appear, f rom any of the retu rns which he held in his hand, and which were carefully and accu rately prepared, that the average price of foreign wheat was more than 345. 9d. from any place it might be expected. He found that when the price of wheat in England was at 335. 6d., it was selling at Odessa for 265. Oid. ; and this would show the effect of the importation of foreign corn on the markets of this country. He should prove to the House how land would be depreciated by free trade. He would take a farm in Nottinghamshire and show how much it would. suffer under a free-trade system. The Hon. Member here read several documents, to prove that when wheat was selling in this country at 38s. and at 455. the quarter, it was to be had at Odessa for 275. The Hon. Member then stated that, with reference to a farm in Nottinghamshire, it at present pro duced 2,355/., and under a free trade it would only bring. under the most improved system of culture, a sum of 1,323/. 10s., making a reduction of about 11. Is. 10d. per acre. Was not that a consideration ? If they were to carry cultiva tion from the lowest valley to the top of the highest hills o they could not snake up the deficiency which would be caused by a free-trade law. He would advise the House to pause before they meddled with the agricultural interest. It was pr wed, that if it required 100/. per acre for the purposes of a farm, they would be interfering with two hundred and fifty million: of agricultural capital. He would read statements to the House which were on most undoubted authority. Those statements, he would contend, for they were confirmed by the accounts which had been received from the northern dig: ricts . He found by some returns he held in his hand, that the relative prices of labour and corn for the forty years from 1804 to 1840 ranged at about 6a. sd. and 10s. qd. for labour. But in the year 1815, when prices were at an un usual price, the rate of labour was 155., while the price of wheat went so high as 120 s. He had thus endeavoured to show, in corroboration of the statements of his Noble Friend who had spoken to-night, that in some comities in England the prices of labour did not rise and fall with the price of wheat. He now only wished he was able to show the differences of prices of those articles between this country and other coun tries; but he would at least show the difference between this country and other coun!ries in regard to the amount of taxa-. tion. He would ask the House to look at the amount of the taxes per head in this country and in America. It appeared that in the United States of America the land taxation. amounted to about 6s. 2d. per head, and what was called the state taxes amounted to about ss. 9d. per head : while the taxes in England amounted to about I/. 7s. 9d. per head.. Again, in America the payment of those taxes was made, and the revenue raised by the sale of land, which was general,' at the rate of about ss. per acre, or at the enormous rate, on thirty years' purchase, of 2d. per acre. Then they had, in England the fact that the sale of land brought 11. per acre ; and they had bogs amounting to about 1/. lls. per acre; so that with. these facts before them, he would ask how could this country come into competition with America? He would not now dwell upon Russia, for he was aware that he wearied the House when he last addressed it upon this question ; but this he would say, that if that country were regarded with attention, he did think that just cause would be found for alarm, be, ause it would be found from statistical works that had been pub lished upon the subjects, that there were parts of Russia so fertile, that that country would in time undersell all the world, in agricultural produce ; for even now, after R lasi.. had exported supplies to all countries, she still had twenty-eight millions of quarters in store. He had now endeavoured to call the attention of the House to the pas sition in which this measure would place the landlord, the far suer, and the labourer ; and with regard to the latter, he would say that the rights of the agricultural labourer had as good a sight to be respected as those of the manufacturer. There was one point, however, which he bad not heard al:oder:I to, and that was the effect which this measure would have upon clerical tithes. It would be recollected that the Tithe Com mutation Act was passed in the year 1835, when corn was se low as 395., and it was upon an average then taken that the commutation was struck. But the effect of this measure on the clerical tithes would be to reduce the income of a clerg, man. having 3001. a year one-fifth. He would next ask the House to consider their colonies. What reward would they give their colonies who had stuck to them with so much fidelity? Were they to be cast off in favour of hostile countries? He would just show the House the state of the exports from this country to America for a few years past. The Honourable Member then read a long statement, showing the number of 3 ards of calico exported to America for the last five years., If they would cultivate our American colonies, which took so much larger a quantity of our produce than any other cows. tries-if they would use those colonies, they would do snore good to the agricultural population, than they could effect by throwing open a free trade with countries in the face of hos.. tile tariffs. If they were mad enough to throw themselves on the mercy of foreign nations they would endanger the sifety and prosperity of all the mercantile classes. Th'ey bad been. told of compensation ' • he wished that word had never been used in the House of Commons. It was an insult to every class of farmers which possessed sufficient knowledge of arith metic to do a common sum. He would refer to the compen.. sation to be given in the county of Essex alone. He would. take that county as a fair sample of all the rest, and by re.. ferring to figures which he held in his hand, he could show that the proposed compensation was utterly inadequate. He would show, that the actual loss to the farmer in Northam's-. tonshire was 1/. Is. 10d. per acre, and in Lincolrshire 1/. 10s. He would refer to the opinions of the Hon. Alder. man the Member for Stoke-upon-Trent, (Alderman Cope-. land), as lately published in a letter to his constituents, and which letter at once indicated the course which the Government ought to pursue with reference to this change.. He would also refer to the pamphlet of Messrs. Morton and Trimmer, in which the evils of the present course were distinctly pointed out. He had also come across a state moot of the opinions of America on free trade; and if be had laboured fur an hour, he could not sum up those opinions mo re . effectually than they had been summed up in hunts' p t . ta a kf the ne in 1832. With the permission of the the work. e wouldlt stated that liberty of reading a short extract from m ofh the protective system. the opinions of America were in favou r t of the country inge neral because it would promote the interes .policy in the people there was no question of national It. state people had so deep an interest, as to promote the manufacturing te ,an d save the capital of 300 , 000 , 000 of dollars, which ' w n ere re s s o t usefully employed in it. They were in favour of pro. tection, because it promoted the interest of the labourer ; the interest requiring most protection. If the times were hard, the money of the rich men became more valuable to them, and allowed them to 'indulge in greater luxuries than they before attained. But to the labourer prostration of work was a ruin, and the protective policy would reward him, and give him his rightful inheritance. He (Mr. Miles) agreed with him that it was a labourer's question. It would injure those classes who. have only interest on their side, and not capital, and who acted as a medium to raise the labourer to a higher condition. It was for these many reasons that he took the strong ground be did, and stated at once he eould give what opposition he could to the passing of this Bill. He thanked the House for the at: tention they had shown to him, on every point he had thought it necessary to adduce. He thought that when they considered the situation in which that question was, they had held out 0 good moral lesson to those who had succeeded them inthisS House. When deserted by their natural leaders they had sea flinched from the colours they first hoisted-they bad shown sus self-interest in condemning the alteration of the system of out commercial policy-they had evinced a willing desire to defend the manufacturing interest, and had striven for the agrienl..., tural interest. They were yet undaunted in their defences in that House, and they were yet unshaken amidst the wreck et principles and party. It had been said that they had delayed this measure, but he should like to know when s subject of such high and immense importance ha& ever been brought forward to the House of Commons-.e when an entire change in our commercial policy was deter. • mined, and against that commercial system under which they had so long existed. They were going to new and theoretical principles, brought forward by one whom they Ma all admire. The talent he had universally displayed weary , * to 1 im to want the political firmness and constancy . which ,. vo:e!! • the attributes of every great statesman. He milb told that in this world di ffi culties and changes occurred wh ich but , dered it impossible to carry out those political princ i ples, occurred to induce he should like to know what difficulties had turn his br.ek on his the Right Hon. Baronet ti us t o hd alver . s been ready old friends ? Difficulties they a to meet with him. They could hear no_ more about Inc lan d every remedy the Rig ht on. Baronet had brought forward sent t they had been ready .to as sent t o, and therefore Ireland could not in their faces. H e was s tillunch anged, at be d not be thrown conceived that when sitting with those 150 Gentlemen who backed the Right Hon. Baronet in 1834, when he advocated principles which he admired and defended, he felt hiiaself placed in that situation which, deserted by their leaders, all the arguments in support of the cause were to fall on persons who had taken little part in it. There was another co deaf through which the Bill n,ust pass, before it became the h w of the land-( Hear, hear)-and he hoped that when the prof able effects of the Bill were calculated, and the letter of the wc rthy Alderman widely known and considered, that the persons to whom this Bill be entrusted would, unaned by popular clamour and unswayed by party feelings, justly decide upon. its merits, and would judge between the people and a Minister who now held office nearly at the will of his former political opponents. Sir J. GRAHAM-I have longed for the opportunity of expressing myself on this important question, which now, for nearly three months, has been the subject of discussion in this House ; and having on several occasions before addressed the House on this subject, I am most g, unwillin needlessly, to occupy t he atten tion of the House; but, at the same time, I should be unwilling to appear wanting in respect to the Ii ebl lU - a V - t•'/: ' -- j, * t_ . --•‘` `," I s 13 Ii a „a •- e - i - Rm7abillOn t th 4,044 er,sretardy ► th Mir ca ta • • cm e _ ver4l 144ec1,, liscover the talatitfa at e labouring poor 1. - w w