The Sun. — London, England, 1852-11-27 00:00:00

) RENTALS. ❑g Pricey Busineso done• --------- 0 0 BOSIVCS 1) S '' . till' ...-------- oi I i t a --------- _ i t he jay, . 1)11 _,Abo Fraw c ur' revion4 N is° gr i ' P e rt ) les, 4:1 . 1, o beli _cis, ew o u ts, ; cot' . 16 07 els n V: 3 3. „toe 9 l ; F °l' 6(lt o ts, 0 di°' ,er bop 4 id 4. t 42° 87; cd .0 ij v e OW, cerorb;o43lo) ig aro f r°u' [oaf. o ck h ; fl 16a ditto, 5 to 03 ceps co , 3° 10; uP e gf; O Are Sti ,10 2° ry e ., ls; - 71 to NA 9 0 4 A to h P lutter, °A 3e " )j; Irepi' Dd Fish, o ls to i od , ' l °o° l3 od pe r . • doz en ! 1 13 )▪ v" to 0 ., 0 0 ° I; din nto clove r r 100u* clov er r lod' 71 i 11 10 1 l 51a 2 3 I - IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS.—YESTERDAY. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at 5 o'clock. ehe Earl o f DON OGHMORE gave not i ce t h at h e th °ll 3 en Tuesday, present a petition complaining of city of Cork election. "It NORTH AMERICAN FISHERY QUESTION. q a ii tiswer toquestion from Lord Whamcliffe, L or d No LMESBURY said that the question of the of rt oo u_Araerican Fi s h er i es h a d occup i e d th e a tt e ntion th e ver nment for the l as t fi ve mon ths. He assured !noble l ord that so far as her Majesty ' s Government ere con cerned, the mi sun d ers t an di ng which had taken P l aoe Pa hd from not arisen e ith er the orders given to the anfficers of her Majesty's Navy on that station, or from new . interpretati on p u t by h er Majesty's Govern en the treaties of 1818. He could not exactly say 4 , 4 a ' was the cause of that misunderstanding, but so far th e hic u al teration in the naval force was concerned, occasion ed to h ave b een th e more immediate inel of it, it was t a k en s i mp l y as a m eans of giving easd effi c i In'ote • ency to the force which watched over the Poli ee etl " a British interests. It was a mere matter of it , and so far as the number of guns were concerned, ti Was actually smaller than before. Before that altera- G c :, ll , w as made, he intention. ven notice to the American ti o - n y s ern uient of his At present, the negotia _ were in such a state as to oblige him to refuse eligYee re quest to l a y th e p a p ers an d correspond sap °II the table of the house. In fact, he might w4that the negotiations were only just begun. Mr. pro p o s al had before his death earnestly embraced the go e k °I . her Majesty's Government to enter into ne tti 4, ion s upon a much wider field, including not only lel6llPet uterteha e with reference to the fisheries, but also the other -6 al ibied of our trade to the Canadas, and to our 4 at , colonies. From the moment he had written the had acted throughout in a friendly spirit te?nciliation and had expressed his anxious wish continue before his death that these two countries should O ther e n terms of friendly intercourse with each eou tt .2l -is death was greatly to be deplored by this Whe /1 "Y„ , but more peculiarly at the present moment,. ea wi l l"., l .ad led to the interruption of the negotiations (Loreu e " he was engaged. Up to the present tim e he of he y 4"-alMesbury) had received no official intelligence . dent pccessor having been appointed. From Presi of n , o , more he had received the warmest assurances e xe ° J wishes towards this country, and in fact with the Writte n of that first letter which appeared to have been Wag a moment of excitement, while Mr. Webster as 4 hZ e ling from the effects of his sickness, every desire sac n shown by the United States to bring the differ- Lie ah t 0 an amicable termination. At the proper moment the table feel gr ea t sa ti s f ac ti on i n l a yi ng the papers on Theule of the h ouse, b ut at presen t h e mus t decline. ir lordships then adjourned. p h , 110 11 SE OF COMMONS.—YESTERDAY. -ktie () 'elo c k . RAXER took the chair at a few minutes to 4 kr. p NEW WRITS. Abi rino • ZI ACKENZIE moved for new writs for °1 0 (11 14 4' °n ) A ll g u r ry eed St io. E dmunds, the city of Durham, and laan ed t j,le motio n of Mr. HAYTER, a new writ was g 'C'r Peterborou h. Sir J PETITIONS. Pate • V • T SHELLEY presented a petition from the into the of the conical flour mills, praying for an inquiry A i t he merits of the invention. Liverpool P. MACKENZIE presented a petition from I m a l , ee t Bigned by 20,000 persons, praying for the in col e : I ,f nunne r i es. (L aug ht er .) aIo"LPIN prese n t e d t w o petitions from Bedford ofi a g a inst the grant to M aynoot h , an d a l so i n f avour Ate BRIG freeom of election in Ireland. presented a petition from the Commer aboiitZociation at Manchester, praying for the immediate of th e protective duty on British silk an di ate The s ELECTION PETITIONS. thhaedirrpuletitti 411 v "All ER informed the house that he had received kiria'al_nlation from the petitioners against the return for that it was not their intention to proceed with ; also that the Examiner of Recognizances a.. ai ePtrted that the recognizances of the petitioners tst the return for Plymouth were sufficient. It 7, PETITIONS. strop-- DUNCOMBE presented a petition from the . toraolisrpraying for the liberation of Edward Murray 4)41' D• 1) STUART presented a similar petition. :ISSION OF THE PUBLIC TO ST. PAUL'S. )4 -..t0,11,,the moti on th at t h e h ouse a t it s ris i ng adj ourn un til Dr ay next, i.J I, ll et t d D. STUART inquired of the Governmentuer any s t eps h a d b een t a k en t o o b via t e th e in for v Hs e nience whi c h arose from the defective arrangeme n t s T' us of th e p u blic into St. Paul' s ? i s .gis question received no reply. tick GLYN complained that, in consequence of the a t 5 being issued in Broad-street, which was in the kg' of the city, g rea t crow d s co ll ected i n the vicinity, ''Yery much impeded the transaction of business. b e '_,lr DE L. EVANS h oped that another week would 141 0 wed to the public for admission into the Cathedral, 1. G RATUITIES TO LETTER CARRIERS. A G 41 ,,, t • T. DUNCOMBE wished to know whether the tarrlraaster-General had is s ued o rd ers preventing letter if 4 erB in the me t ropo li s rece i v i ng Ch r i stmas- b oxes, an d , eort;', Whether it was his intention to award them any )I L l sen sation for the loss. l'o st r ' HAMILTON said it was not the intention of the tr o ta.as„ceiter-Gevinneral rat ito prohibit lotter-carriers in the me te d o. DE ggrat p. L. EVANS suggested that gratuities should ella i ; 4 away with, and, that instead of depending on the addi o f tio c'f' the metro ' P olis they should have a fixed amount nal pay. IK r SPIRITS IN BOND. the iut • ROCHE wished to know whether it was r u of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to o _ Ito k e a remission of duty in regard to the evaporation f rti e l illa ct r _e spirits in bond ? it Iv e QuANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said , 143 sure the house would agree with him, that 10t . ,. 4 5 8 not fair for him to state what were -91 e of Government with respect to the remission Ties, on the eve of a financial statement. (Hear.) C E STATEMENT OF THE xi A 1 '''.-I`4, 1, C ELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER. t he t RUSSELL inquired when the Chancellor of to the% 7 _ e quer proposed t o make his financial statement T he - Ltuuse, the di,beli-ANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER s as ai k d e i d f fu, f ale shed to-night, Monday was already Nv a t 4 business of some interest to the house ; but he t ev er , el d that it very probable the debate would no conclude was (Cries of " Oh, oh.") hlC°l3ecl himself that would. (Hear, hear.) Th mo e . ti o4 04,1,1(1 learned member for Southampton, had athese ci r ,„_' a Personal character for Monday, and under he thought that probably this day-week r Il lalti rk , u , e , the most convenient day on the whole f 41.13 financial statement. -m,„4.,3,TOIJRNED DEBATE.—THE NEW 14,i 4 ~,,--.-NDNIENT OF LORD PALMERSTON. 4 44: ''',IAC-A-RDO said a resolution of Lord Palmerston wordedie- e the paper to-night, which was differently N ed . tonthe amendment which he had previously pro inr certain important particulars, the words which lef t alnes Graham said, last night, he had inserted, be `sesullitiellt• ire was anxious to learn which of . the two ;`)), p , 11 ,,, a . of the noble lord the Government inten h d . e e t - meY l)- "' they having withdrawn the amendment w henally proposed Ivithr2l-IANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he tePitlioh-lv,,his amendm en t i n d e f erence to the general ur c r ei the h ouse, pre f err i ng that t h e reso l ution o f o 4 v..,_!ln ie rston should b e p u t, an d as th e on ly resolu the t a bl l eh that noble lord proposed was the one now on 4 Ware eof the Ho use . (Hear, hear.) He was not .rgear,)that th e noble lord had, prepared any other. 'pr °IS ftEMPLATED NATIONAL GALLERY. ill teu t r e Pt. litunEß inquired whether the Government gr°ll 4d u . t° erect a National Gallery on the site of t p h ia e zi, 4 ib t i e t t i Y el rir c h ase d by the Royal Commissioners of of 1851 ? If so, whether they contein f°r tl d i e llial ing an application to Parliament for a grant The ^.lllll4se ? , tha t the &CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied La t. : o f the of St a t e hadlai a d nd on it th w e ou ta l b d le so t o h n e rbee _e h e h a , jai Commissioners,when Z. l 4e lutly• they were suffi aeclaint:leNr4tihnetinhebcoern• contents, he proposed to that attention of the honse to m,mda ton pro the t. v:ert te; abliudt it specifically to e should ol feeltthebneappliitedhis duty p ° jeet to which the would member had adverted. Ur, m o „.„ NOTICE OF MOTION. the reces, 1, - ` e '' E gave no ti ce th a t, on an early day after e '4llollld move the appointment of a select Irland, ell the subj ect of the Esta b l i s h e d Ch u rch in the raotionO4f On Vi v l r N. BANKS. 33 G R S OTHE returns were ordered of the total t accounts open o f f 1%18 ovember, 1852 Balioga banks • number of deposit the 20th day in more names than one on the credit RT . N, 11 17 'efo u re eh m ace "nts ; d istinguishing the accounts , and the total amount as opened_ose o the 20th day of November, 1844, from those o fore since that date • showing, year by year, in totals . the e ach year, when Buell accounts' were first opened, and iih e tota ount thenplaced at their credit. And dal7lllg tamdistribution of such accounts, on the 20th in Ytl,c)i l‘ioveraber 852, into the several classes set forth 0f..x.,".e classification)for the annual return to the 20th day 4.lovernber, 1851. In reply to 11r. RELIGIOUSmO NcREI TESTS. F:F, f.)t• WALPOLE stated that it was not the intention eite;`'e c+overnment to bring in a bill to abolish religious fists in the universities of Scotland. tftMr. MONCREIFF gave notice that immediately .enr the. Chr.istmas recess he should move for leave to In g in a bill on the subject. li.ln reply to a COUNTY COURTS. question, r. 'WALPOLE stated that Government had it in !cuternplation of xtend the jurisdiction of the courts tor the recoverysmall debts. CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS. The SPEAKER acquaintedthe 41 Ice of the Ad of Parliament he had nominated the house that in pursu toramittee of selection for controverted elections, and ordered a list to be prepared of the names of members wile were exempted either by age or otherwise from Mr. PRENCR serving on Election Committees. said, there were 117 petitions already Drekientedi and he should therefore object to memb ere ' - AYE• being exempt from serving who were under 60 years of age, other than her Majesty's Cabinet Ministers. SIR HENRY BULWER'S MISSION TO ROME. In reply to a question from an honourable member, Lord STANLEY said, Sir Henry Bulwer went to Rome to investigate the case of Edward Murray ; and while he was in the holy city the honourable baronet had several interviews with members of the Papal Go vernment on other subjects of interest to the country ; but as these interviews were of a private character, he did not feel himself justified to lay their results before the house. THE CASE OF EDWARD MURRAY. gentleman commenced by saying, that he was to give an account of the conduct of his party in respect of the question of free trade, since the passing of the act of 1846, and that such account should be distinguished for faithfulness and accuracy ; but so full of inaccuracies was that statement that he confessed he felt not only surprised but at the same time grieved. (Hear.) There were many gentlemen sitting on the opposite benches with whom he had long been connected in political matters, and although now no longer connected with them in that respect, but knowing their respectability, it was not without pain that he heard statements made, and a course of action pointed out, which laid these gentlemen open to be convicted of misrepre sentation of the deepest die. (Hear, hear.) They all knew what had taken place between 1846 and 1852 in respect of this question. (Hear, hear.) Had there been no agitation throughout the country? (Hear.) Were there not protection societies established everywhere for the avowed purpose 7of abolishing the free-trade system (cheers)—and still in full operation ? (Hear, hear.) As to the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, he ac quitted him of any misrepresentation in the matter, for he confessed that he never believed anything that he pretended he believed on this subject. (Laughter) All that time his mode of action was, to make it appear that hebelieved what he did not believe. (Renewed laughter.) But, as to the others, he must say that he felt pained for them. The noble marquis, the member for Leices tershire, a man of honour,—unfortunate, he must say, in his principles, but still honest and honourable in the maintenance of them—(hear, hear)—he still manfully stated that he was a Protectionist, and that he would maintain his principles by every honourable means in his power. (Hear, hear.) In the country the farmers had been told that they were to Oie relieved, and that protection would be restored to them. But what would be their feelings when they heard what was taking place up here ? (Hear, hear.) The noble marquis, however, repudiated this charge, and he commended him for his candour, He was at one time one of the leaders of the party, and knew something about their actions, as well as did the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; for there was a time when the leadership of the party was put in commission, and it was for a time managed by a trio, namely, the noble marquis, the right hon. gentleman the member for Stamford (Mr. Herries), and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But now let him for a moment re vert to the time the party was formed, and see what was the excuse set up for its formation. Now, several gen tlemen had read extracts containing the former opinions of those who now formed the Government and some of their supporters. Now he wished in any extract he might read—and they should be few—he wished it un derstood that he was not going to taunt any one for changing his opinion ; he felt all along that those who held Protectionist opinions must, before a long time had passed, even give up their dogmas ; for, from the com mencement of their operations, he was of opinion that protection was a great bubble which only required to be kicked out to burst. (Hear, hear.) But now, of his country, and he (Mr. S. Herbert) would say that of any man more than he had changed his opinion,he needs but look to the other side of the house. (Hear hear, and laughter.) He would, then, upon the grounds he had stated, give his supp or t t o th e amendment of the noble viscount. (Hear, hear.) He rajoiced to think that a large majority of the house were about to give their vote on that question. They should not be un mindful how much political disturbance and social evil had been avoided by the passing of the repeal of the corn laws ; and he must now say, that in their future legis lation he would suggest that they should so legislate as not to give any specific exemption from burdens to any class of the country. (Hear, hear.) Mr. H. DRUMMOND (who was very imperfectly heard in our gallery) said that he felt it was very neces sary to have a very large supply of the Dantonian quality, referred to the previous evening by the hon. member for Middlesex (Mr. Osborne)—that quality which was sometimes translated as "modest assurance" in rising to speak from that (the Ministerial) side of the house—for on the Opposition side sat all the talents of the house with the solitary exception of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Great laughter.) Once before upon a time " all the talents" were arrayed on one side ; but at that time they were on the side of the Crown and government, while this time it was just the other way. (Laughter.) But notwithstanding all the misfortunes of standing at that side of the house, he could not consent to be silent ; for he, for one, would not be mystified, or dragged through the dirt by any party. He had a duty to perform to those who had sent him into that house, and also, to those who had no hand in electing him, the labourers of the district he represented ; but he also owed a duty to him self, and he would endeavour to clear his way through this complicated debate. As to the question itself, it seemed to him merely a difference be tween hocus and pocus—(laughter)—the difference be tween twice three making six and three times two making six. But if importance was to be attached to words, let hon. gentlemen be careful of pinning the words arranged by others to their own sleeves. He was not puzzled himself, as to his choice ; for it was 25 years ago that he had first advocated a free trade in corn—that being a time when, of the ardent free trade party now living by the principle, those opposite had been suggesting fixed duties, and those on the ministerial side were announcing that the men who thought of abolishing protection were mad. (Laughter.) Now they were all concentred to a common point ; and it was desirable that if all their in tentions were the same they should make no mistake in the expression. As he took it, some such motion as this was absolutely necessary. (Hear, hear.) And he thought the words selected by the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Villiers) were the proper words. (Cheers from the Opposition.) If the party on his (Mr. Drummond's) side would take his advice, they would accept that motion, and so confess their delusion boldly. He could not un derstand the reproach of inconsistency, nor the shame of allowing an error ; and, as regarded the convenience of that house, he heartily wished that " Hansard " was at the bottom of the sea ' • he was sure it was heavy enough to sink. (Great laughter.) To hear people talk one would have supposed that the his tory of England began in 1846. Gentlemen who called themselves independent members—that is, who talked independent nonsense—(laughter)—had spoken of re sisting a reversal of the policy of 1846, and the phrase was current too, at that (the Ministerial) side of the house. This just showed that hon. and enlightened members had not a notion of what the former policy of the country was, or of what the present policy was. Why, the measure of 1846 was no commencement of a policy—it was the apex of a policy—it was the key-stone of the whole arch. (Hear, hear.) The policy they were now swearing fealty to began at the conclusion of the war ; and people might as well talk of restoring the heptarchy as of reversing this policy. He thought he could explain this clearly to the bucolic mind—to the biggest Boeotian behind Ministers. (Great laughter,) They had only got to right notions of their national interest very lately. The fact was, they must admit the Anglo-Saxon was a supremely stupid fellow. (Great laughter.) When the French first did us the honour of coming into this country—(laughter)—they were then called Normans —they found the Anglo-Saxon so astoundingly backward, that he couldn't make steel breeches. (Much laughter.) Hence the im portation of artificers in armour, who were called smiths—a circumstance which accounted for the large family of Smiths at this day. (Laughter.) This was the beginning of our commercial system ; and it went on in the same way. The Anglo-Saxon never could do any thing himself, and was perpetually in need of clever fel lows, such as the Flemings and the Lombards, to teach him civilisation, and who always made the condition of their settling here, that they should have a monopoly. Our commercial history was a history of monopoly, up to the time of the wars occasioned by the French Revo lution ; and in the course of that war, the Anglo-Saxon, by this time largely adulterated, and getting keen, found out that though Europe was closed against him, he got all he wanted in raw material, and in fact, rather im proved his trade, in proportion to the strictness of the customs exclusion of him on the continent. ' Free-traders owed something to Adam Smith ; but a good deal, too, to the smuggler. Napoleon taught us that monoplies and protections were dead for ever ; but we were slow to learn the lesson. When Louis XVIII. got his throne, Baron Louis, his Minister, at once proposed to give to the Government of this country a free trade with France —that was to say, an ad valorem, duty of 10 per cent, on both sides. But no one, except Huskisson, appreciated the value of the offer—and Huskisson, at that time, was kept down in a subordinate office ; and his colleagues did not back him. But Huskisson stuck to his idea, got it into some favour at last ; and, from that moment, England had gone on removing her prohibitions ' • and now, at last, we had got to the only wise, just, and poli tic course of perfect free trade, which was to leave every thing to unrestricted commerce. (Cheers.) When, therefore, he heard men talking of "reversing" that policy, he asked, were they ready to jump back to Wil liam the Conqueror's time ? (Cheers.) It was said, however, that these words in the hon. and learned gen tleman's (Villiers') motion were offensive. But at least they were not new words for the party : he held in his hand an address printed by the Anti-Corn-law League in 1842, and there he found these identical " odious " words. (Hear, hear.) As to the question of compen sation, he was ready to consider it ; but the compensa tion he meant was not what country gentlemen meant. What he wanted to set about was a reduction in the cost of production. (Cheers.) Mr. MUNTZ said he was in the difficult position of not approving of either of the resolutions. He was one of the earliest opponents of the corn laws, but he was little prepared to say that the repeal of the corn laws was just. All he said of the present Government was, that if they proposed good measures for the country he should support them ; and if not they should have his opposition. The Marquis of GRA-NBY agreed with the hon. member who had just sat down, that it was impossible for him to agree with either of the resolutions, but he must disagree with him so far that he was unable to vote for either of them. His reasons were threefold. He could not agree that the prosperity of the country was as great now as it had been under a different and a wiser system. In the second place, admitting the prosperity, he thought it Was to be accounted for by other causes than recent legislation, and unlimited com petition. The reason was that, supposing that that prosperity was owing to recent legislation, that legisla tion was not stamped with the principle of unlimited competition. For these two reasons he found it quite impossible for him to consent to either of the resolutions. The noble lord concluded by reiterating his determina tion to vote neither for the one resolution nor the other ; for, to his mind, the one was hocus and the other pocus. (Great laughter.) Mr. FITZROY wished to explain, in a few words, the line he intended to pursue, as an independent mem ber of the house. Undoubtedly th eir pos iti on was one of great difficulty ; for they all wished to take a course that should at once be satisfactory to his conscience and the public, and to those friendly or party associations which clung almost to every man. Under the circum stances, and from gratitude to the distinguished man whose policy they all now approved, he should give his vote most decidedly for the motion of the hon. membtr for Wolverhampton. (Hear, hear.) Mr. N. KENDALL (the new member for East Corn wall) said he saw no reason for changing his opinions. It was his conviction that, but for the operation of other causes apart from free trade, not only the working classes themselves would very probably have demanded a reimposition of the import duty on corn—but another class, a more dangerous one, those who represented the manufacturing interest, would have pursued the same course. (Laughter.) Mr. BLACKETT said he should vote for the original ' motion, ra ther than for the amendment. Col. SIBTHORP said—The prosperity of the country, which was so much spoken of, Was owing to the dis covery of Californian and Australian gold. He believed the poor man would not be compelled to leave his own country, if he were only properly treated at home. But they introduced exhibitions and such things to encou rage the foreigner, at th e expense gf th e h ome p r oducer, and the result of which was, that there never was so much disease in the metropolis as since the day it opened. (Laughter.) The resolutio n o f the noble lord Palmerston w as a mere trap t o it catch the unwar wns a composing draught fo r her Majesty's Government— —(laughter)—a compromises as it was called. He de tested all compromises. (Laughter.) He would not vote for anything—and would walk ou t o f th e h ouse when the question came to a vote. (Laughter.) Mr. WARNER (Norwich) said he should give his support to the resolution of the hon. and learned member for Wolverhampton. Sir J. GRAHAM—I shall promise not to occupy long the attention of the house, which has now debated for several nights a question merely turning on the use of words, and must be anxious to have the discussion brought to a close. I am the more ready to promise this, because I have already, almost unwarrantably, trespassed on the indulgence of the house—if strictly within the rules, still in a manner I should blame, if I had not thought it called for by the circumstance s. The hon. member for Cornwall says nothing is se painful as to swallow the opinions of another. I must tell him th a t th ere i s an other thing not very agreeable—having your own words, in the shape of a \notion, suddenly brought upon you when you least expect it. A great deal has been said about old stagers, an d a great deal of a d v i ce h as b ee n given to young members. I am afraid I must consider myself an old stager, and as such I will give those young members one piece of advice—never to supply the words of a motion for which they were not responsible, nor to endeavour to frame one which should please everybody. I must tell you that this is utterly impossible : and, peLhaps, the predicament in which I stand this evening In reply to Lord DUDLEY STUART, Lord STANLEY stated that the life of Edward Murray had been saved, and his sentence commuted by the Papal Government from punishment of death to banishment for life. THE NEW FOREST. In reply to a question, Mr. HAMILTON stated that a report on the sub ject of the New Forest would be laid on the table to night, while the claims of those parties to compensation on account of the removal of the forest were now under the consideration of the Government. when the history of a party was to be ascertained, perhaps the principles on which it was originally founded were the most conclusive as to the ends and objects of the party, for while men might change they would remain. Now, he found those principles laid down on the occasion of a de monstration got up in favour of the late Lord George Bentinck at Lynn, soon after the passing of the act of 1846. In a speech delivered by the noble lord on that occasion, he found a statement to the effect that the great end of the party then forming was in the first place to restore protection, but failing that to endeavour to pass measures for the purpose of relieving agriculture from the burdens it bore ; and the noble lord went on to say, "As you, the farmers of England, must do your own work, you must not trust to your landlords," a warning which, from the conduct of those now in office, would seem to have been well timed, and one which the farmers of England will now perhaps recollect. The noble lord was followed by others on that occasion, who reiterated the same sentiments. Among these was the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, who asked where was now the great agricultural interest. Let them come out in their defence, for he could not believe that this nation—and by the nation he meant all classes of the community—would submit to be governed by words, whilst their rights and interests might be de generated into a mere distinction between hoens and poens. (Laughter.) If, however, it was not the policy of the party in this house to disturb the policy of 1846, in the other house it was the avowed object of the leaders of the party there, and such was held by Lord Derby up to 1851. He did not, however, as he had stated, refer to those matters for the purpose of taunting honourable gentlemen opposite. He confessed he was himself in 'no position to do so. He had passed through the ordeal himself, and he had to do so because circumstances had altered his convictions, and holding at the time a station of responsibility he considered it would be wrong in him to hold those convictions and not act upon them. (Cheers.) But since 1846, the Protectionist party had proposed a fixed duty on corn. The honourable member for Stamford did so in that house, and the Chaneellor of the Exchequer supported him. True, it might be that they did not divide the house upon the question, and for that there might be reasons. A division, however, might be taken, but, perhaps, some friend hinting to the right honourable gentleman that there was but a thin house—that there were scarcely any members in the smoking-room, he did not know whether there were any in the library or not— (laughter)—he might have seen the propriety of letting the motion drop oil the paper as quietly as possible. (Hear.) But what of that ? Mr. O'Connell carried on the agita tion for the repeal of the union after bringing forward motions in that house for the repeal of it ; but no one ever heard him say that he was carrying on that agitation to maintain the act of 1840. (Hear, hear.) Well then, it was said this question must go to the constituencies, and the Government gave out that as they decided so would they. The appeal was made, and answered unmistakeably in favour of free trade. Then came the Speech from the Throne, where it was to be hoped an avowal would be made that it was the inten tion of the Government to maintain and extend that system of free trade. But no such avowal was made, There was a paragraph, it was true, in reference to the subject, but it was simply in effect : "if you feel some thing which you don't, perhaps you will do something which you won't. (Laughter.) Now that could not have been satisfactory to the house or to the country. (Hear, hear.) And the confessed lie was 'much disap pointed with the statement. If there had been any technical difficulty in putting words into her Majesty's mouth which would have had the effect of satisfying the house on the subject, there could have been, cer tainly, no difficulty in putting them into the address. But that not being done, what course was the house to adopt ? They could not test who were Protec tionists and who were not, without a vote of the house, and, therefore, the resolution of the honourable member for Wolverhampton was now submitted. A counter one was put by the Government, and therefore they stood equal, but he must say that the discussion of them had not: impressed him with much love for abstract resolutions. (Hear, hear.) He considered the amend ment of the Government was bad, for by the very terms of it, it should have been put before Parliament was dis solved, and he must say that in dissolving Parliament and going to the constituencies to get their opinion as to a system Of established legislation, was to him a new principle, and one which he was afraid, if often had re course to, would operate prejudicially, and was there fore calculated to give alarm. He therefore preferred the words of the hon. member for Wolverhampton. So far as those words, which had been the subject of so much debate, the words " wise, just, and beneficial " were concerned, it was impossible he could refuse to give his assent to the fact that the measure of 1846 was "wise just, and beneficial." (Cheers.) He apprehended that Government would hardly declare as they did by the re solution of the noble lord the member for Tiverton, that they would extend the system if it was otherwise than a wise; just, and beneficial one. (Hear, hear.) He did not, however, think that it was politic to put these words into a resolution, the object of which was t gain the support of as large a portion of the house as pos sible, as he confessed he thought the words had a ten dency to hurt the feelings of honourable gentlemen oppo site. He confessed that 'he considered generosity the best policy, and more particularly when regulated ac cording to the strict rule. The whole history of this country was full of instances in which parties had found reason to change their opinions. It had been said that they were influenced by a species of propagandism; and all that was true ; and he confessed that he should be glad to see that every party who saw reason to change his former opinions, should be at liberty to'do so, with out being subject to humiliation in the opinions of those who differed from him. (Hear, hear). He recollected an exceptional case wherein religious missionaries of all denominations had made proselytes, with the exception of the Jews, and in explanation of that exception, it was said by a party, that such was not to be wondered at, for who would like to commence his religious conversion with a surgical operation. (Much laughter.) He felt that he would not be right if he were to blame gentle men that came to his opinion, and state to them that they must commence their penance for change of opinion, in "white sheets," In his opinion, the resolution of the noble lord the member for Tiverton (Lord Palmerston), was not so strong now as it was at the commencement. It stated, " That it is the opinion of this house that the policy, firmly maintained and prudently extended, will, without inflicting injury on any important interest, best enable the industry of the country to bear its burdens, and will thereby most surely promote the welfare and contentment of the people. That this house will be ready to take into consideration any measures, consis tent with these principles, which, in pursuance of her Majesty's gracious speech and recommendation, may be laid before it." He (Mr. S. Herbert), said with regard to the repeal of the corn laws, that it was in the first instance an act of justice ; but he would now ex press the opinion that he first formed that if any one class in the country were to receive more than they were duly entitled to, it could not be done without in justice to other interests. He said that of the class to which he himself belonged—the landed interest. He must say, that he objected to anything that could have the effect of tending to bind the country to any course that had a tendency to enhance prices, to the prejudice of other interests, whether for fiscal pur poses or otherwise. The resolution, to his mind, em braced the whole question, and applied to all articles that had been cheapened. (Hear, hear.) Some com memoration of Sir Robert Peel was necessary, and he might say of him, that his fame stood on a pedestal which no revolution could disturb. (Hear, hear.) He admired Sir Robert Peel, and had followed him as a political guide, and loved the man, believing that he was actuated by just principles. (Hear, hear.) He sat behind him when the vilest language was addressed to him—(hear)—and when he was accused of the meanest of crimes. But Sir Robert Peel was a man of a generous nature, whose memory deserves to be revered, and whose course was worthy of the highest vindication. (Hear, bear.) His menwry was embalmed in the opinion THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER, 27, 1852. may be a warning to some new members. Now, I should like to state to the house that the result of this dis- cussion has been very painful to me, because of our having to discuss the comparative merits of the original motion, and of the words with which I have already stated my con nection. The Chancellor of the Exchequer complained of the epithets in the original motion, namely, that the _ _ repeal of the corn law in 1846 was a just, wise, and beneficial - measure. He designated these epithets as odious. Now, if any epithets are to be applied at all, it is my idea that the English language supplies none so apposite as those in the original motion. The right hon. gentleman perhaps naturally demurred to the proposition that the repeal of the corn laws was just and wise. Then how shall I tell you my astonishment at the words of the amendment, to which I understand her Majesty's Government are now parties ? These words assert broadly that "it is the opinion of this house that the improved condition of the industrious classes is mainly the result of recent legislation, which has established the principle of unrestricted competition, has abolished taxes imposed for the purpose of protection, and has thereby diminished the cost and increased the abundance of the principal articles of the food of the people." But am I wrong now ? Did I not understand the right hon. gen tleman to make some reservations with regard to sugar ? Is not sugar a part of the people's food ? Has not un restricted competition been admitted, or is it not in pro gress of being admitted by - a descending scale of duties. I do not wish to refer to speeches at the late election, but I may remind the right honourable gentleman that at his own election he stated, in reference to what I had said with respect to the Government opposite having risen to power by the ladder of protection, and having thrown that ladder down, content to do in office what they had found fault with in opposition—to this the right hon. gentleman gave an unqualified denial, and said that with respect to sugar, he still maintained all the prin ciples he had ever entertrdned. He thought the West Indian colonies had been ruined and unjustly treated by the removal of protective duties, and he maintained that opinion as strongly as ever. The house will recollect what took place in June last. The descending scale of duties was about coming into operation on the Ist of July. The right hon. gentleman then said he maintain l all his opinions, and that it was only his being in a hope less minority which prevented his attempting to enforce them. Well, if he maintain his opinions, why does not he say that he will not vote for the amendment of the noble viscount ? I see, in. a work of political biography, a most graphic description of what took place in refer ence to this very question. of the West Indian colonies. It appears the West Indian interest did not take a very decided part in resisting the repeal of the corn laws, and a proposition was made to the late Lord Geo. Bentinck that, in consequence of their not having supported the Protectionists here, his lordship should be a party to no longer supporting the protection which the West Indian colonists enjoyed. Lord George replied, " No ; we exist only by our principles ; we are not priiir councillors, but we are honest men. We must stand by our principles, and we must protect the West Indian interest." "Now, sir, gentlemen opposite have abandoned the principle of pro tection. Shall I draw thJe inference ? If so, I say I should be unjust in the emreme. I am not prepared to say that this change of opinion on the part of hon. and right hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches is a dishonest change. I recollect an admirable speech made by the noble lord the member for Tiverton, on the repeal of the corn laws, in 1846, in which speech he, with his own most powerful mann e r, and with the utmost brevity and succinctness, stated the whole arguments in favour of free trade, and illustrated them with his usual clear ness. He had, indeed, one passage which I thought heterodox—that in which. he advocated a fixed duty on corn ; but with this one exception, all was admirable, and has proved correct. "If," he said, "the force of circumstances should ever place these gentlemen (includ- Lord G. Bentinck and others) on the Treasury bench, I am satisfied six montlig will not elapse before their opinions will undergo a great change and modification." The noble lord went on to say that certain climates were specifics for certain diseases, and that if you took any case of protection, I et the fever be as inflamma tory as you pleased, and :placed the patient in Downing street for six months, he would undertake to say that his opinions would undergo a change. In this opinion I agree. Put any Protectiocnist in that position, and he will find the value and the t.!uth of the information of the facts collected by the lato Mr. Porter, whose loss I most sincerely deplore. It is h ardly possible to persuade gen tlemen that our exports ?h ave increased seventy millions, our imports a hundred millions, annually ; and that, returning to sugar, whilo, the duty was diminished 100 per cent., the quantity bu.ported increased one-third, and the retail price fell one-h; d.f. All these things seem in credible. But there is irt,y right hon. friend the Presi dent of the Board of Trade, capable of sifting the facts, and responsible for the. documents whence we derive them. I have no doubt he has investigated them fully before giving his signatu re, and, as the result, supported a resolution in which the: *benefits of free trade are recog nised as broadly and ope nly as could be desired. There is another topic on whi.:•ll I desire to say just a word. The righ- hon. gentlemaa the Chancellor of the Exche quer, rather commented: last night on the use of the word " oomponoation." woo -bhp+ that word had ever been, used by him ; that possibly I might find it by hunting among election speeches ; but that in the house no su rh word had ever been used by him. Now, I am not dis posed to go word-catching at this time, but I cannot refrai t from expressing the surprise with which, whilst listerring to the speech of my gallant friend the member for Mil ldlesex, I heard him read a cer tain passage in which that , word and the name of the right hon. gentleman occurre c I. As the hon. and gallant member for Middlesex In w said, the Chancellor of the Ex chequer took advantage o f Mr. Grantley Berkeley's mo tion, in May, 1850, to sv,y, " I ask you to protect the rights and interests of la k our generally; in the first place, by allowing no imports from foreign countries which meet you with countermi ling duties, and, in the second place, with respect to ag r icultural produce, to compen sate the soil for the bun I ens from which other classes are free, by an equivalent duty." A good deal has been said about bowing to p riblic opinion. Now, I would first of all observe that th e repeal of the corn laws was not carried by bowing. But in the next place, with re ference to the use of strmag language, I would ask, whe ther those who supported that repeal were always treated with the exact courtesy or Parliament—whether the ex pressions used with refers nce to such persons were what we hear in society? The: hon. member for the West Riding has referred to wl :at he called the Christian for bearance of the friends a nd colleagues of the late Sir R. Peel ; and he expressed soi ne surprise that they should have been so moderate in their language, and so forbearing in their retaliation. Now, sir, I said last night, and said truly, that in framing these resolutions I endeavoured to frame them in the spirit and in the t e mpe r with which I believed my rig ht hon. friend, had he been now alive, would, under present circumstances, him self have framed them_ And, sir, the term used by the hon. member LTA' the West Riding, was a very happy term. He used the term " Christian for bearance.' Now, I know my right hon. friend well; the right hon. member for South Wiltshire (Mr. Sidney Herbert) has paid him an eloquent but a just tribute this evening : and of all his characteristics, I should say his Christian temper and forgiveness were perhaps what most distinguished him; and, sir, I say also that he al ways regarded what in th e circumstances of public affairs it was politic to do in reference as well to the good of the house and of the cows try as to the maintenance of a great cause. The hon. member for Surrey has referred this evening to the ancient history of this country as far back as the Anglo-Saxons. Perhaps I may, without pedantry, go back still further, and refer to a passage in Liv, commented upon by Machiavelli. I refer to that passage where a portion of the Roman army having suffered great disgrace at the hands of the Samnites, and being brought to the Favees Caudince, the question arose how they were to be treated. The first advice given was that they should be set at liberty ; the next, that they should be exterminated.. Ultimately, they only passed under the yoke. Now, I do not accuse honourable gentlemen opposite of anything unworthy in the course which they deem it their duty, from a sense of necessity, to take. I do not wish to stigmatise them by asking their consent to that which their honour may refuse. I think it is enough to sustain this great cause by words which, whilst they have nothing offensive in them, cover all the principles for which I have contended, and for which I shall be ready to contend when the measures of the Government are brought forward. There is no gentleman 5n any part of the house more de termined than I to reject the doctrine of compensation to land, and no one by whom any measure founded on that claim will be more earnestly resisted than by me. On the whole, I am not surprised that the Ministerialists object to saying, in express terms, that the measure of 1846 was wise, just, and beneficial • and I, for one, shall not depart from the words which I admit are, verbatim e; literatim, what I myself prepared. Though it is most painful for me to vote against the propositio n of th e hon. andt r gentlemen l y learned agree, with should member w for h o m thi ninkprinciple myself Wolverhampton,on entirelythis a n r ad unworthyta those I o other en tirely f the confidence of any part of my . fellow -countrymen if I did not abide by that which I sincerely meant and in tended. (Cheers.) Mr. J. H. PHILIPS,amid a storm of cries f or a division, which rendered his remarks perfectly inaudible, stated his reasons for offering his support to the amend ment of Lord Palmerston. Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, I now entertain the hope from the appearance of the house, that there exists a strong desire to bring this discussion to a close to-night —(cheers)—and I ant sure that the exhausted state of the debate would well justify us in not prolonging the debate so as to extend it into another week. (Loud cheers.) But, sir, I have borne too large a part in these discussions, and I have been too frequently re ferred to in the course of this debate, not to ask the in dulgence of the house whilst I make some brief obser vations on the state of the question now under our con sideration. My hon. friend the member for (Hear, hear.) n, in r.) a speech remarkable for its ability, V ilit l y, iv b e ut rilm w (aHer hici t was confined very much to the ques tions on which he had to treat—those questions of econo nomical and commercial policy which have been for so many years under the consideration of Parliament — m oved certain resolutions, the first of which went to affirm the bcoeunnefitrt,y, and pa benefits which e r s ec e e c n ill tle y gislation had conferre d u p on this the second, the extensio u n po o n f t f h re e e trade, as industriouso classes ; opposed dto protection, would be the best mode of enabling the pro perty and industry of the country to bear its burdens ; and the third, that the house would be ready to consider any measures which her Majesty's Ministers might lay on the table on these subjects. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, if there had been anything of a party character in the speech of my hon. friend, the right hon. gentleman oppo site (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) might have been justified in saying that the object of his motion was t) displace the Government and make the matter entirely a party question. But my honourable friend gave no opportunity for any remark of that sort. (Hear.) His impartiality was rather the subject of comment. He said that Governments had such a family likeness to each other, that he did not much care whether the Go vernment of the day was formed from gentlemen on this side of the house or from gentlemen on the other side certainly no very strong party declaration on the part of a person who has been said to have brought forward h resolutions solely from party motives, and with a view to the displacing of the Government. (Cheers.) How ever, the right hon. gentleman chose to consider the question in that light, and instead of making any answer to the statements of my lion. friend, instead of contro verting any of his arguments, he entered into statements as to the conduct of the party of 'which he has been the leader for the last few years, and declared that it would be dishonourable for them to accept the resolution of my hon. friend. Now, sir, as the right hon. gentleman has chosen to bring that question before the house— although it was not before the house formally—l shall not refrain from making a few observations on his statements. (Hear, hear.) But I think it is due to the question itself that I should state my view of the resolutions now under consideration. My hon. friend had proposed these resolutions. I understood they had been assented to by most of the hon. gentlemen who have taken the lead on the great question of free trade. I understand that my hon. friend, acting as I think it was his duty to do, in order to conciliate all parties, has consulted various members of this house ; amongst others the hon. member for the West Riding and the hon. member for Manchester, who had a right to be consulted, the noble lord the member for Tiverton, the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Oxford, and the right hon. gentleman the memhc.-- for Carlisle_ I—uudernaall, professing to know their individual sentiments, my, hon. friend had the full concurrence of those hon. members. However, the right hon. baronet the member for Car lisle, made a statement last night, with respect to an other form of resolution, of which evidently the noble lord the member for Tiverton had heard, and of which, " for the sake of greater accuracy," he had obtained a copy. (Laughter' and cheers.) 'The noble lord, in the speech which he addressed to the house, asserted that gentlemen on the other side of the house could not agree to the resolutions before them, and stated various grounds for changes of opinion, and observed that the house had nothing to do with the private opinion of public men, in which remark I cannot say that I concur with him—(hear, hear)—and the noble lord concluded by proposing certain resolutions which appeared to please hon. gentlemen opposite, and give them immense relief. (Laughter.) Those resolutions, whilst relieving the minds of hon. gentlemen opposite, caused a great divi sion amongst hon. members on this aide of the house, who had before been united. (Opposition cheers.) Such being the state of the question, I have to consider what course I ought to pursue; and in the first place I must declare that both sets of resolutions are exceedingly well framed, that both seem to me to go generally to the same object. (Hear, hear.) Each is divided into three parts. Each affirms in the first place the benefits which our commer cial legislation, during the last few years has conferred upon the country and upon the working classes—each affirms that it is necessary to maintain and pursue that policy—and also that the house will be ready to listen to the measures that may be brought before the house. Therefore, sir, it would appear to me that the resolutions which were first produced by a member of this house, in whom all those who value free trade principles could confide—(cheers)—are entitled to precedence, and it would ill become my sense of duty to give a vote which would set aside those resolutions. (Loud cheers.) That, sir, is the question which you will have to put at the end of this long discussion, for you will have to ask the house whether the words proposed to be left out shall stand part of the question, or in other terms, whether those words are to be at once rejected, and not put to the house as the main question for consideration. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I own I should have been disposed to say that if the resolutions proposed by the noble lord the member for Tiverton, drawn by the right hon. gentleman the member for Carlisle, had been proposed in the first place, and the resolutions of my hon. friend the member for Wolverhampton had been moved as an amendment, I should have pursued the same course which lam now taking. I should have voted for the resolutions of the - noble lord standing part of the question, and against the resolutions moved as an amend ment. (Cheers and laughter.) They appear to me to be ' very nearly the same. Ido not mean to say that they are the same in the views of hon. gentlemen opposite. But a.s they both coincide and concur with my senti ments, I think it my duty to prefer that which was first proposed to the house. (Cheers.) But, it is said, there are words in the resolution of my hon. friend which give csir.r. t.-gentlemen oppoolin ...<1 that, being an assem bly of gentlemen, we ought not to ask them to concur in that which is offensive to their feelings and degrading to their honour. (Hear, hear.) I certainly do not wish any gentleman to agree to that which he thinks contrary to his honour. I am only speaking of my own senti ments and views, and I certainly could not ask lion members to Concur in resolutions to which they attribute that effect. (Hear, hear.) But I do not see why I should make my vote depend upon their feelings. (Cheers.) But let me ask what is it that gives this great offence, because I own it does appear to me that they are more sensitive than the case naturally calls for ? (Hear.) The words objected to are that the repeal of the corn laws in 1846 was " wise, just, and beneficial." (Hear, hear.) Well, as I stated last night, hon. gentle men have no hesitation in declaring that that policy which rendered corn cheap—which provided for the admission of foreign corn, and thereby made the food of the people abundant and cheap, as the noble lord declares in his resolution—they have no hesitation in saying that Parliament was " wise" in enacting the law, but they will not say that the act was a "wise act." (Laughter.) That seems to me to be a very remarkable refinement. (Cheers.) Then with respect to the word "beneficial." You have no hesitation in declaring, ac cording to the resolutions of the noble lord for which you are all going to vote, that the improved condition of the country, and especially of the working classes, is owing to recent legislation, and also that that policy should be further pursued. When gentlemen admit that great benefits have flowed from that policy—that the food of the people have been improved thereby, and that great benefits have been conferred on the great body of the people—l do not see why they should deny that that policy has been beneficial. (Cheers.) Ido not see why they should say—" Here is a measure which Parliament in its wisdom has enacted, and which has conferred great benefits on the people, but yet we will never say it is either wise or benefical." (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman the Secretary for the Colonies (Sir J. Pak ington) has no objection to admit the wisdom of Parliament, or the benefits that have flowed from the measure ; but as to saying it is " wise and beneficial," he declares that he will oppose the expression, and that nothing shall make him consent to it. I con- raider this to be a very fine scruple, and it reminds me of a remark made by Lord Plunkett with reference to one of the scruples of Lord Brougham—that it wal more fit for a novel, to be called " the delicate distress' (Laughter.) Now, with respect to the word " just.', I do not see why that word should be any great stumb ling-block to honourable gentlemen opposite. I had al ways considered the corn laws as laws not imposed f or the benefit of any particular class, or to be con tinued on, that ground - but as being, in the first pl ace-r-ien har mony with the general policy of the country, w hih was the protection of native industry—the protection amongst o ther producers, of the producers of corn. And in the next place, understood the question to be one of public policy, and that it was considered desirable to raise within ourselves, within our own soil, sufficient food for the sustenance of the people. These were the public reasons for the maintenance of the corn laws. But the moment Parliament decided that it was not wise to keep up the system of protection—that it was not wise to diminish the food of our own people, and make the food dear in order to obtain the advantage of having it all produced within ourselves—from the moment such a declaration was made these laws ceased to be just, be cause they could only be considered just when justified on the ground of the public welfare. So soon as Par iament declared that they were not for the public wel are—that none but a certain class, such as the owners fof land, could profit by them, and that the great body of the nation were not benefited by them—the laws at once ceased to be just, and were stamped with the mark of injus tice. (Cheers.) Now, willing as I should be to see a reso lution to which the whole body of Free-traders in the house will assent, yet I own I cannot say that the ob jections stated by the hon. gentleman opposite are to reasonable that I ought to alter my vote, and refuseeunt vote for the motion of my honourable friend, , , of the difficulties which have been raised. may be said There is, however, another reason why it el of the corn on (ul c l c eers . . , ) some injustice was attached to the P laws, and that is that the repeal was d ustly, and that been said that the sudden repeal acte J sroeinsue. dden. It has a great body of the most deserving But if that be so, I do not class were thereby exposed to great hardships. m y eea year last 18n4i0g,lit proposed, I had see that I am at all to blame in uthat respect, because, as the right hon. gentleman redntndtehde in the year 1841, and indee the change might be more an Bs. duty, in order that gradual. (Cheers.) A n d even in 1845 I still proposed a fixed duty with a similar view. But honourabl e gen tl em en opposite wou ld never listen to such a chan ge as that. And altiniotuVirtnalrepeatedly told, amongst othe r present persons , the p Prime Minister, Lord Derby, th a t if lie would not consent tq such change he would find himself at last depri ved of all p rotection, he still went on o b s tinately refusing any such change. (Hear, hear.) The change occurred as I had su pp osed . It swept awa y the whole of the corn laws ; and Lord Derby, who treated me as the greatest enemy of the farmers in 1845, and said that Bs. was no protection at all, endeavoured in 1851—but endeavoured in vain—to get some member of the house to propose a duty of not more than ss. (Cheers.) I mention these facts, because I was placed at that time in very painful cir cumstances. I was held up in 1841, as the great enemy of the farmers, as wishing to destroy their prospects and their interest, and every effort was made to render me odious in their eyes. (Hear.) Certainly it is some satis faction to me now to see that the very measure for which they held me up to odium is aboon which they own to be unattainable, and which they would be very glad to de- FEES AT THE GENERAL ELECTION. On the motion of Mr. PHINN, a return was ordered of all fees, disbursements, or expenses charged by any returning officer or his deputy, or by any sheriff, under sheriff, sheriff clerk or sheriff's officer, clerk of the peace or town clerk, to any person returned to serve in the present Parliament for any county, division of a county, city, borough, district or place, or to any candidate seek ing to represent any county, division of a county, city, borough, district or place, in the United Kingdom. Also a return of all sums received by any returning officer or his deputy, or by any sheriff, under-sheriff, sheriff clerk or sheriff's officer, clerk of the peace or town clerk, in respect of such fees, disbursements, or ex penses, from any person so returned, or from any candi date so seeking to represent any county, division of a county, city, borough, district or place. ST. PAUL'S. In reply to Sir DE L. EVANS, Lord'J: MANNERS said that he did not feel him- self justified in calling upon the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's to extend the period which had already been fixed upon for opening St. Paul's to the public with the funeral fittings. OUR COMMERCIAL POLICY.—THE AD JOURNED DEBATE. On the motion for resuming the adjourned debate, Mr. M. GIBSON said he wished to say a few words on the subject of the resolution proposed by his honour able friend the member for Wolverhampton. He repu diated the notion that the original resolution was in tended as a vote of want of confidence in the Govern- Lent, and insisted that its object was to perpetuate the principles of free trade. He, therefore, found fault with those who had ventured to character ise it as a vote of want of confidence. No one, it would seem, could dispute the affirmation of the resolution that the law of 1846 was a just and wise measure, and he was at a loss to un derstand how any one could object to it, or take exception to it on the ground that he had already stated. But he took exception to the views of those who affirmed of the principles propounded in 1846, simply because free trade had produced cheapness of provisions. He could not consent to that mode of dealing with the question. Such a mode of argument would justify confiscation, for confiscation might, under some circumstances, produce momentary prosperity, but he must contend that, looked at from every point of view, free trade had been just and righteous, and he could not possibly bring himself to the amendment of the noble lord the member for Tiverton. It would seem, however, that the object of the noble lord was to save the feelings of hon. members who supported the Govern ment, but he for one was at a loss to understand how the Protectionists could agree to the amendments, and yet not accept the original resolution. The amend ment called upon Protectionists to affirm not that the free trade policy of 1846 was wise and just, but that under all the circumstances it had been sound and politic, and for the life of him he could not see why the one, as well as the other should not be equally accept able to honourable gentlemen. Well, then how were they to choose between the two ? Why in this way —they were both pretty similar in spirit, though not in detail, but the one proposed by the hon. and learned member for Wolverhampton, would be more acceptable to the country than that of the noble lord the member for Tiverton. They would not do their duty to the memory of Sir R. Peel if from any mistaken morbid sentimentality, they refused on this solemn occasion to record that the measure which he advocated was not a wrong, nor a great public mischief, but was founded on the eternal principles of justice. This was after all a great question, and it was absurd to agree to the proposal of the noble lord, for the purpose of showing a general unanimity which it was well known did not in fact exist. They wanted to shew the world that the policy of free trade was not based on low considerations, but on the principles of civil right and justice. If the house shrunk from declaring that the policy was wise and just, the people would be induced to be lieve that the Trouzc of Cluunnoxtz -vver3 somewhat rotten. After all, the House of Commons long laboured under the influence of the landed interest, on the question of protection. If there was an appearance of rottenness now in the house, they might depend upon it, that no thing would strengthen so much the cry of Parliamen tary Reform, for the general opinion would be, if the words in question were omitted, that the representation was not a reflex of the public opinion, and that some covert attempt might be made to restore the nefarious system of monopoly. (Hear, hear.) He therefore: hoped that hon. members would rally round his hon. and learned friend, for neither the noble lord (Palmer. ston) nor the Chancellor of the Exchequer had any cairn to take the quostion out of his hands. Let every honest free-trader vote for his motion, and he would undertake to say that their constituents would approve of their conduct. (Cheers.) Mr. M. G.A.SKELL thought the allusion of the right hon. gentlenr►an to the question of Parliamentary reform was the best explanation that could be given of the na ture of the motion proposed by the hon. and learned member for Wolverhampton. (Cheers from the Govern ment benches.) He was convinced that so far from as serting a great public principle, there was no reason whatever for the motion. (Cheers.) There was a very serious difference between the two resolutions for whereas while the amendment simply affirmed that free trade had succeeded in producing the present prosperity of the country, the other went on to add that the conduct of those who opposed Sir Robert Peel in 1846 was unjust and uncalled for. The arguments of those who opposed the amendment were somewhat strange ; they declared that the Earl of Derby had no principles whatever, and therefore his friends ought to abandon him. Now it was somewhat strange that those who held this line of argument were not quite settled in their own minds as to their own policy. (Hear.) He should be the last - man to impugne the motives of the late Sir Robert Peel in passing the repeal of the corn laws, but he must be allowed to take exception to. the manner in which that measure was carried, for the Parliament of 1842 was returned to support, and not to reverse, protection. It was therefore unjust at that time to adopt free trade without an appeal to the country, and to that exte at he took exception to the conduct of the late Sir Robert Peel. (Hear, hear.) But the House of Commons now met under very different circumstances — it was returned to affirm the principles of free trade, and he for one was quite willing to bow to the decision of the country upon that great question as it was enun ciated in the amendment of the noble lord the member for Tiverton, though he was not prepared to throw that blame and censure upon the country party for their conduct in 1846, which the original resolution of the hon. :and learned member for Wolverhampton implied, if it did not in fact distinctly affirm. (Cheers) No doubt there were conflicting opinions on that side of the house aa to the effect of the repeal of the corn laws, but no man doubted of the intentions of the Government. (Hear, hear..) The real question at issue was between a Government prepared to carry out the commercial policy of 1816, and a set of gentlemen who were agreed upon this pocint, certainly, but between whom, on other points, thero was irreconcileable, endless, and vital diffe rences. (Loud cheers.) Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT said he trusted the house would give lim an opportunity of stating the course he intended to take on this question, and the reasons which had induced. him to come to that decision. Let him in the first plane assure the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, :as well as the hon. member for Manchester, that in coming that decision he had kept out of view, and out of mind altogether, what effect the vote would have on the present Government. When a threat was held question out by. wrwhich nmight Government ght b that ife pending, de f d e defeated on any certain would resign, that was a matter which no doubt would have weight with parties whose interest it might be to keep them in office ; tut with with respect to those independent of them, 'lt was not whether Government should go out or st2by in, but whether they would be justified in doing so. They had been told that the resolu tion submitted by the hon. member for Wolverhamp ton was one of non-confidence in the Government ; but shores, awkwardness and bungling never suggested a resolution of non-confidence which concluded by say ing that its supporters would give every consideration to the measures which the Government might propose. t a h rnlua not t in io a n (Laughter...) To revert to the commencement of th e the debate. ho n rlaeterf originally nr c commenced m e ned Wolverhampton, ment of the Government. Now betw een these two he could not lave had one moment 's hesitation. (Hear, cwith and t e h so hear.) Re saw a resolution moved by a gentleman who originally brought this question of free trade under the consideration of the house. He knew that he had fought that battle with great skill and constanc y , and brought the question to a successful terthination. In opposition to that an amendment had been moved, which, on this question at any rate, did inspire confidence, and he could ha ye, therefore, had no hesitation in voting for the resolution. (Hear.) Then how did the debate go on? After the hon. and learned member for Wolverhampton concluded his address, the Chancellor of the Exchequer rose ; but he confessed that his speech, impressive as it was in. point of delivery, and ingenious in point of argument, he confessed that it left a very unfavourable impression his mind. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. cure. (Cheers.) Having said thus much with regard to the past advice which I ventured to give them, I will venture to say a few words with respect to a question which has been raised within the last few days, which is likely to become a question of very great importance, and upon which, I fear, we have had the signal of a fresh struggle held out by the right hon. gentleman the Chan cellor of the Exchequer—l mean the question of what he will not call "compensation," but which, I believe, he calls "relief" to the landed interest. Sir, I am afraid I shall be as little believed by the landed interest and by the farmers when I speak upon this subject as when I said that the corn laws would probably be repealed, and that an Bs. duty would be more than the farmers could get. But, sir, it is certainly my opinion that it would not be wise for the landed interest to ask for any special relief, or any special benefit, whether it be called com pensation or relief. (Cheers.) In the first place, let the house observe that the landed interest, the owners and occupiers of land, and the labourers, upon that lat. form a great part of the property and population of the coun try, and that it is byno means a matter of indifference to them when you relieve the inhabitants of the counter at large from any species of taxation upon industry or property. (Cheers.) The right hon, gentleman, in his calculations, used to reckon the property of the landed interest as about one-third of the whole property of the country. It does not much signify what the pro portion is, but taking it at one-third, you will observe that if you have a reduction of 12,000,000/. of taxation, 4,000,0001. of that relief is given to the landed intdrest. (Cheers.) If you have, as no doubt you have had, within the last ten years, 7,000,0001. of taxes remitted over the amount imposed, more than 2,009,000'. of the taxes so remitted have gone to the landed interest. (Cheers.) And that is a remission of taxation of whickno man can complain. That is a just and fair advantage, which they, being a part of the property and population of the country, highly deserve. They enjoy, with the rest of the com munity, that great benefit. The cost of production is rendered less, their whole industry is made more pro ductive, and not a single manufacturer or merchant will say a word against their receiving that benefit. (Cheers.) But if you say you will give a special relief to the landed interest, and if you say that that special relief is to be given by the two houses of Parliament, which consist in a great measure, if not mainly, of persons who are owners of the land, you at once set up the landed interest as an object of suspicion and of envy—(hear, hear) — you are making the other classes of the country think by tnewuntry atlarge, but that you show a favour and preference to one particular body. From my birth I have been connected with ilbe great agricultural proprietors, and I beg, for the sake of the landed interest, that you will not in your approach ing statement ask for some special favour for them, whe ther you call it compensation or otherwise ; but if you can remit taxes—if you can confer a benefit on the people of this country—make it large and general, and do not make it special and particular. (Cheers.) With respect to these conflicting resolutions, I will take this oppor tunity of observing that I do not agree in the view which I understand to have been taken by the hon. member for the West Riding, that the word "just" shuts out all question of compensation to the landed interest for the losses which thay May have sustained. I think it would certainly bar any positive claim—it would bar their say ing "we are losers of so much, and are entitled to so much." But it never would prevent a minister from saying " the landed interest are in a state of difficulty and distress, and I prOpose to you to give relief to that interest." Long before the corn laws were touched, I remember Chancellors of the Exchequer coming down and proposing considerable relief , to the agricultural in terest without reference to their having suffered losses in consequence of the corn laws. Nothing would be easier than to give that turn to any proposal. Although the insertion of the word "just" may seem to shut out the claim of compensation, I do not see that it effec tually does so ; and I do not see that there is any difference between the two sets of resolutions on that special ground. (Hear, hear.) An hon. gentleman has adverted to the advice which we, as Ministers of the Crown, gave to the Sovereign with respect to the insertion of certain words in the Speech from the Throne ; and it has always been represented that that Speech described the agriculturists as in a state of distress, and that her Majesty had called the attention of Parliament to the distresses of the agricultural interest. Now, I must ask the house to listen to the terms of that Speech, and it will then see that the meaning has not been exactly re presented, and that omissions have been made of very great importance. The following are the words in the Speech which her Majesty was pleased to deliver at the opening of the session of 1851 : "The state of the com merce and manufactures of the United Kingdom has been such as to afford general employment to the labour ing classes. I have to lament, however, the difficulties which are still felt by that important body among my people who are owners and occupiers of land. But it is my confident hope that the prosperous condition of other classes of my subjects will have a favourable effect in di minishing those difficulties, and promoting the interests of agriculture." Now, sir, these words were especially meant to show that the Government did not propose any particular relief for agriculture, but that it was the belief of the Government of the day that agriculture would recover from its difficulties owing to the prosperous state of the commerce and manufactures of England—(hear, hear)—and I believe that that expectation has been completely fulfilled. (Loud cheers.) Aly belief is that the increased consumption which has followed from your cemmerpial legislation has been such that, r.,- - pect to - many aa:ticres of farm produce, a very suffi cient, not to say a high price is obtained, and, above all, that the value of the article of land has been lately very considerably enhanced, and is now of very great value in the market. (Cheers.) A statement was made the :other day by the hon. and learned gentleman tho Attor ney-General for Ireland, which showed that in Scotland the value of land had greatly improved ; and only the other day an estate in Northamptonshire was sold for 40 years' purchase. (Cheers.) My belief is that the agricultural interest is not to be • taken for a dis- tressed interest • and on that ground I s h a ll o bject to any special relief on the ground pointed out. (Cheers.) Having stated my views with respect to these resolu tions—having stated the course which I took when I was a Minister of the Crown—l will now refer for a few moments to the speech made by the right hon. gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answer to the argument of my hon. friend. The argument of the right lion. gentleman went to show that he, and the party with whom he acts, had since the year 1846 never attempted the restoration of protection, but that they had endeavoured to alleviate the burdens, to mitigate the distresses of certain interests that were affected, without disturbing the settlement then come to. (Hear.) Now, sir, that argument was very ingeniously carried out, and the right honourable gentleman's quotations were very apposite ; but the great defect was that the argument was wanting i n t ru th . (L oud cheers.) By picing out a speech made by one member, and a state ment made by another, by pointing out the conduct which he himself had pursued at various times, he seemed to afford som e thi ng lik e a proof that the conduct of his party had been such as he described it to have been. But it is necessary to look to other facts, and some of those facts were stated by the hon. member for Mid lesex, in a manner not very agreeable, I believe, to honourable gentlemen opposite. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) There are abundance of facts all around us. Supposing every volume of Hansard to be burnt, there would remain in our memories sufficient to prove that the Protectionist party have been trying to restore pro tection, and destroy the system of commercial policy established by Sir R. Peel. (Hear, hear.) I must say that I consider them to be men of the highest integrity. The Duke of Richmond always said, 1 " Turn out the Ministry, get a dissolution of Parliament, and you far mers will have protection back." I cannot be so much surprised as hon. my friend that the noble d u k e h as not lately appeared in his foriner prominent position. His position is a very embarrassing one. (Laughter.) I have no doubt he made that promise to the farmers in the assurance that the Earl of Derby would fulfil it, and it must be a great mortification to him to find that he has unintentionally been the means of deceiving a great body of his fellow -countrymen. (Cheers and laughter.) But beyond what passed at these meetings, the Protectionist speeches made during the elections showed that many honourable gentlemen opposite were fully persuaded that they could restore protection. (Hear, hear.) What thei the hon. member for Dorsetshire say Protectionists were divided into classes. can three ? lie said te t first class is composed of those who think that thosea n e never be restored ; the second of thtoisiee that it may be restored in time ; andVithrespectito the two who would re-establish it at once. l ith regard to the first, protectiont wh who imagine o i m f latter I have nothing to say; protections very ad of them stored, I must say that it c''O'uasntry that if their friends those namely who think that bulw never can be to tell tell the farmers of poweris they would at once see high should be placed in hear.) Well, but the right hon. and that case is, I think, not a prices gentleman rest restored. .a case, (Hear, gentleman. But his, and one of granting the case as by the right hon. nting that he has a character like that very pleasant one forttohtlaiase been stated gentleman—gra • ( 1 beinga ugh t er) which has been given predecessor of the ablest and wittiest of his predecessors—Mr. Towns end, I mean, of whom Mr. Burke said that he was infi nitely h a o b n o . v g e en h t a le vi ma n likeright opinion—(laughter)—giving prede cessor in that respect, why then you must come to the c onclusion that without thi n ki ng prote ctioncould be re stored, and being rather in favour of free trade, he has allowed this great party, the great party of the farmers of the country to b e li eve that ho would restore pro tection, when he never believed • any thing of the kind. think that some part of the ous those ho are called the Manchester school—may be described as interested parti es ; but I think the farmers have this owing t o them that they should know the truth, and that they should know the opinions which emi nent men in thi s country equally entertain ; and I think that if the right hon. gentleman has known all this, that it would be imp oss ibl e t o res tore protection, and that bene fits to the land must be sought elsewhere, I think it was due to that body to tell them so (hear, hear) ; and I be lieve the farmers of this country to be as respectable and worthy as any body of m en in the kingdom. I do not believe that upon these economical matters they have reasoned the matter to the foundations, though they may have gone through Adam Smith, or some of his disciples. And therefore I think it was due to th em t o tell them what w as the settled opinion of ahe last House of Commons, and of what would probably be the settled opinion of this house (hear, hear). I remember, with re gard to the Roman Catholic question, when the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel proposed the settle ment of that question—l remember meeting a farmer and asking him his opinion. He said My opin ion would certainly be against the Roman Catholics, but I see all the great men in Parliament are for them, and therefore I give up my opin ion to theirs." Why, upon this question of pro tection, I believe :that if a fair statement had been 106. 31 S 11 i i 2.1 clov e , • /OA" •