The Sun. — London, England, 1846-05-26 00:00:00

THE _SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 26, 1846. they were considering a tuestion in agreem , nt with a policy which had been acte.i upon for a long period, and which would not be elonei way with, without occasioning a dreadful revulsion. The 'question N57.a how to carry out a measure in agreement with !be circumstances in which the country was placed.—( Hear, ' e ar.) These (continued the Noble Duke) were the grounds Tn which the measure of 1821 was recommended to the House by Mr. Rnhinson,—(Laughter. ) I will now call the atten tion of your Lordships to another speech made, not by Mr. in on, hot by the Noble Lord. It was made in 1841 in This Rotate, when the Noble Lord was not sitting on the Minis terial 'oeetch, and h 3 would read a short extract from it. I do Minis this tr, show that the Lord Ripon of a former day was not the —°ll. 's Ripon of to-day, and that I conceive him better entitled to 'oe followed then than now. The Noble Duke then read the 4?ztract which was to the following effect .—" Looking at the -Motives and principles by which men are governed, he could 'not think o f abandoning all the settled political rules upon -which they had hitherto acted. It appe are d t o hi m t h a t th e 'Government scheme was both vicious anti fallacious." There 'vas no word there of Lincoln-heath. "He could not doubt that - under th e operation of the new corn-law a considerable portion of the country would be thrown out o f cu lti va ti on ."—( H ear , heath, Rut if sou w a it a momen t you w ill get to Lincoln you only require to allow e the next sentence or two. ''' Th e evil once commenced no m one. could see where it would * ten, or what disastrous consequences would result from it." So that nay Noble Friend looks forward to the light-house being Useful after all.—(Laughter. ) Now, looking to another speech !_f, Illy Nobl e F r i end ' s, a speech made in 1842, and here he ""es a different view of the question, " The great evil which I anticipate from the adoption of the principle that all restrict linns en foreign corn should be withdrawn is this, 'hat the "People of this country will be compelled to depend on other l'_ c ations for the supplies of f on d , not to meet any ocessionel de "cieneY , but to depend altogether on other countries for the Main portion of their supplies. Such dependence is indeed ha nging upon a broken reed, for they would ever he in danger 'of a failur e of those supplies." No one doubted that " the pro gress of agriculture, for many years past. trs been most r t e rn - arkahl e ; the pregress i s no t, i n d ee d, a ble to keep pace with the People, but with a little addition from foreign countries, we zn aY, indeed, be said to rely upon our own resources. For my case, it i s no t necessary to enter i nto t h e coa t o f agricultural Product s i n t hi s coun t ry . Th at cost h as b ecome hi g h er th an in any other country in Europe." That is true—it was true then, and it is true at this time. It is quite true that the cost of ag ricultural produce is higher here, but. this would not be the ease if it were not for the particular and heavy burdens'to which the land is subjected. " If we take away protection from the Leine producer, you will cause the withdrawal of a considerable portion of that produce from the land ; at a time, !no, when you may not be able to depend on support from foreign countries; and you will also withdraw the use of that 7 ineital which is i nves t e d in the land throw n ou t o f cu lti va ti on. " ~ O s re e l ay Noble Friend appears to have be en d rawn t o a d m i t IT point. It was stated by some of the Members of the prise that it was not the intention of the Government that ets Bill of 1842 should be a fi na l measure, and thereupon my be e Fri en d says, " If we can imagine that the Ministry had teen guilty of the crime of endeavouring to deceive the People of this country on this eubject. I c n only say that they Will be guilty of one of the most miserable as well as base Political vices of which a Ministry can he considered capable." . e !Loud ch eers. ) " I am convinced that this Bill will be re "ed by you as a satisfa.ctory a dj us t men t o f thi s grea t Tanstion." Well, it app e a rs th a t m y N o bl e F r i en d th e N o bl e Ilike on the cross benches (the Duke of Buckingham) was s?: satisfied w i th that declarat i on ; and what answer did my Noble Friend opposite make to him ? He certainly had not "4le arrogance to state that any law Parliament should pass :I t, i s subje c t, or any other, s h ou ld b e taken as f i na l . A l l he l for u se l d ' a Y for himself was that if he had brought ot b, lld be a measure intending and wishing that it should final he would say so. He hoped this measure 111 final, he thought it was a good thing if it were. .:hteletrt should not be his fault if it were not.—(Protection P i raeus ) Now, my Lords', it appears however, that my Noble t e .., e as . admits that very large sums of money have been ex -,,,i upon the improvement of land in this country. My ~,e _ ru, a great deal o f th a t money was i nvested i n such im- 12;:7 ments bef ore t h e year 1842, and I am sure that there are t h a n t e y of you r L ordships here present who will remember that , one money having been laid out on the faith of protection was . b. „ . _ nt the ma i n arguments which were adduced to recommend -1, 0 wa r r Lordships to reject, the Committees that were moved ~,,h eY ear after year to in c h ire into the corn-laws. I ask „ her that argument has not been strengthened since 1842? measure have eas read the speeches of the Minister who proposed the ...' n _ .or tire in this House, and I ask whether it was not perfectly SZTr lot's that large sums of money had been expended in this ,`:!t laudable and desirable object on the faith of the Nee ' , of Parliament. Then, coy Lords, I ask 2p ass will you now pass a measure—will you now Z,' . ! .a retrospective line of confiscation of preperty—will you iPirtvefl the capitalist—he he the owner or the occupier of the vh , - -uf the means of gaining that fair return for his outlay "w oe I ch be made on the faith of the existing law? Now, what ._s another authority say on this subject? He says, that 'taller the system of protection which had existed for above 200 'Years, wild, heather land has been reclaimed, extensive tracts a: :)r Country h ave b een d ra i ne d , b y which a healthy population t ve be en emp l oye d, an d t h e i r li ves prolonged ; land this not , the ex p ense o f t h e manu f actur i ng prosperity. My Lords, I make that quotation, because I see that it is applica ble to the present moment. But, my Lords, your Lordships Are aware that under this system of protection, those for whom Iknow you will always feel the liveliest and deepest interest, *he working classes in this country—those that are agricultural, and those that are operative—for I feel the same sentiments towards both of them—will be the great sufferers. Look, my : Lords, at this return : at the present moment there are in the s alings' banks 1,600,000 accounts, with an average of 27,. ie ell i 600,003 depositors with au average of 71. each ; the total (and it seems to indicate how this country ~„ been pauperised by prot ec ti on ), amounts to ?d,oooooo'. sterling. That is th e resu l t o f pro rp which is now about to be arrested from us. It ;_a e y be ar rested from us by force, but never, my Lords, while ''ea stistatements are before us, will they do so by argument. LLIY Lords, we are told that we are to have free trade. The amanufacturers—no,_aet not the manufacturers, but a section of the "":3°v!it. urers—a section of Manchester cotton-spinners, tell t ake n " we know nothing about farming; and they say we will r farms from you, we will bring capital—l wonder Chang 7 not Say experience --and work them properly. This remove they say shall be made, and we are called upon 20te r:no've from our farms and from their occupation from 14 ; 1. TO to 30,0 i -es oe of the tenantry of this country. But. my berg n 's if you remove them from their occupations, what is to the e of them ? Why, tuned Lords, all this tenantry with go s r atni lies, when they are turned out of employment, must :ni--esiattieletounion workhouse for their daily bread, or they must the manufacturing districts, where, if it is their tn eu n Y t ° seek employment, they will serve under these very km wile have been the cause of their ruin and destruction, , u the whole of their worldly prosperity; but, my Lords, I Lorca you will not sanction this. You know too well, my th e L .; that these manufacturers have a deep hostility against ba.. ! ruler s of England, because they know that the farmers the.eyer been warmly attached to our Constitution, and to thou Tights and liberty of the Crown. They wish also to lower ~e . v,s l ) ! *l es of produce, and to get a large number of agricultu (iaetLinrtko.their towns for the purpose of lowering the wages of people. They wish permanently to lower the wages pros u ta e tperative, not only from a desire to obtain greater or themselves, but they do it also for the purpose of .Presenting those strikes which seldom take place when wages become in w• Ru ee of th t' my Lords, again let nee ask you what is to wish to k now e Y"lnen and tenantry of this great country 1 I e,h_ ~ , when the value of produce is so diminished, and l e n the poor -rates are so much increased—l should ask iZnarerLfoorrdships how they wll be enabled to do any thing but a .few years? My " Lords, it is a, curious circumstance, l' ;e nd g o e ne which you are no doubt aware of, that in this country e `" re _ n rat when the price of produce falls poor -rates in ,„,ase.--( Hear, hear.) I have taken the trouble of esiradin -5 from the tenth report of the Poor-law Commis s.!°aers some figures with respect to this. I have tkenthem from that report, and I could only find them down to t the year 1843, b ut still, at the same time, I bring this return forward, to show Your Lordships that what I have stated has occurred. I find by that report, that whilst the price of wheat was 68s. per Varter, the cost upon the p o p u l at i on f or t h e maintenance of Itke poor, and for out-door relief, was 4s. Bd. per head. My -Lords, in the year 1843, when wheat was 545. 4d. per quarter, t he rate of expense upon the population per head was ss. sd. ; therefore showing that when the price of wheat is low the poor rates are higher; and that when wheat is at a remunerat ing price those rates diminish. And it is self-evident why they re so redu ce d ; b ecaus e the people get employment.—( Hear, —ear ') Non, my Lords, one of the attacks made by my Noble riend, and dby his colleagues—the Anti-Corn-law Leaguc— a this . , that the tenantry of this country have no capital nn ski ll. My Lords, I believe there is no country in the World where farmers are more skilful and more intelligent "(Hear, hear) — and where they are more upright, and n re 1, t ueY behave better to their humble neighbours awe labouring classes. I think I may state this, because I ,ii more personally acquaintedacquainted with the farmers of this emrire One of your Lordshi empire fat s, and I contradict the assertion le tt h.eY are not skilful, anti P I think it would be too badif ofa linen by ulster was to turn round and to taunt that important body say in the g that th have not lare capitals. Lors, h eavy, the unequal, y the unjust, the unfair manner My in which t he tenantry of thi s country are taxed—(Cheers)—coupled with i g au ll i s r i r , ncy Bill of 1819, have decidedly dimished their means t O imp r s o t :e n e t h e e; e b o u u t o t t h r ey have no w su ff ic i en t cap it a l t o be enabled country and more capital would flow from the 'rnProvereent ifhttshe land. But the new schemes, the new plan would prevent° P r ovenae d n im t ; for if they want to get capital for the ins ionf.sthe land, this Bill would prevent it, because it !bold .but it is my i h the value of their produce.—(Hear, hear.) Nobl • Friend's areument that it will not produce it ; Out if you do not admit that it will reduce the price of provisions, e it will be diandgoerous indeed, for that clearly will be the result. ‘1), be passniontgthink that I should myself be justified in much ' c 'nger tre upon your Lordships' attention. 1 have btaeivneupon at:moment disguised the strong feeling which I enter 'relieved also I , great and momentous question, and I think I am ta,f . your Lot:15h); doing so from believing that the great majority a Loud cheers.) My ps dislike this measure as much as I do.— foLords, I believe, and as I stated upon a ri fler eceasion I will repeat it now, that if the votes upon thi s question were t i c i i be taken by ballot in this House—( Hear, bear)—l do not of it.—(Loud cheersevaentcll' tighter.) ere would be twelve balls in favour there are some of your Lorldaeu hiMy Lords, however, conics ; it's no use contendingwho say " Free trade must a Lo s t . h e contrary ; you had better give way at once ; there is of th a e eiternent out of doors." Now I deny that the great body in favour of this measure—(HZP7atives in this country are d r a , re the ve r y h oe _ jareer)—and I say that the have a public meet- Anti-Corn-law League has never ing without tickets, even at Manche:tete' bed of their sedition—(Cheers)—they do not tives at a public meeting without tickets. rust th e opera - there that even if it were so—if were excitemeYnt Lords . I think --it would be a bad argument to use. I think th7tutti;)f doors, Mit that argument once it will be converted into a daY"rad precedent—(Hear, hear ) : _—a e n o agußeonbtlewtoich would Cedan.s. gerous in future times Then Lord there are ter_ say y " We never taint y other;Noble L gds who ervteted against the ,' We do not Government."—( Laughter. ) like to vote against the Government of this country."—( Hear, hear.) s. , abandon our 1 e have" laPported Sir R. Peel—we cannot leader," is not his party who have ea $b an _ hear.) My Ler s,. R. Peel who happens au doned Sir R. Peel, but it is Sir to have abandon e d hi s p a rty—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) ) A n d, my aug Lords, o th ers a g a in come forward and support Sir R. Peel on Peel has lost all c h aracter but Sir R. th e groun d o f cons i s t e ncy, . will man in this country ever for consistency, for there is no consistency, confidence of the large classes of the community.— (Cheers.)i'egain the oftenor twelveyears before It took him upwards he could gain unfidence, after the year 1829—( ear, ear)-- 5 0(1 he has no more chance of regaining the confidence of the k e of this coun try—(Hear, now than he has of sitting on the throne co sre hear, and laughter.) Well then, e•—(Hear,. my Lords, I h tives which were nnist call your Lordshipa' attention to t e !no of Parliament, but of those PUblicly avowed. I will not speak . out of d .ors. They publicly avow that their object is to crush th e aristocracy of the country.—(Cheers, M L d hens will not say one of the most respectable, be e , y f the most respeetable mem , use certainly not one 3 because of the Anti-Corn-law League, bat a Mr. Bright, fairly a" ° P e nlY , at all the meetings, states that his desire is to crush the aristocracy.—( Hear, hear.) My Lords, I hope and triust that your Lordships will remember that this is a question ( . 1 . vast importance—( Hear, hear)—that your Lordship will 7`te,ellect the eventful times which we are looking forward to— ii:_ear, hear)— that it le e' , lie grec.tt,' imporai,t'e to th 3 0 jedointary Legislature of this country—it is their duty, in my p P B. l7' s to vote without favour or affection—to lay aside 0 I feeling and political bias, and to vote according 4194 conscieucea upou meaning lading the " 61 of the large masses of their fellow-subjects.—(Hear, hear ) It is incumbent on you, not only upon this highest ditty of all, but also incumbent upon you, from reasons of expediency. My Lords, the Anti-Corn-law League are carrying on the agitation with a view of destroying the Church, impairing the constitu tion of this country, changing the constitution of this House. My Lords, you. will be powerless if you do not possess as here tofore the good opinion of the great body of the middle classes of this great country. 1 tell it to your Lordships with perfect respect, this will he the consequence except you do maintain that good opinion, and you cannot maintain that go.id opinion if this great body find you voting against your former promises, and against your former pledges; and if you have not them with you, you are powerless. In conclusion, I will only, though at the same time most earnestly, implore your Lordships to vote against this measure, because I believe that it is (if you do not reject it) accepted only as an instalment of future and still greater changes ; and I ask your Lordships now, at the out posts, to fiwht your battles, or else, depend upon it, you will have a difficulty hereafter in showing a proper front. —( Hear.) My Lords, I vote against this Bill, be nesting upon my honour that it is a measure which which Church, will and shake e r theis only fo o o t h d a e t i fi o o rs s t o as t ! a t c h k e — T t h lt it danger our institutions, and convert a hitherto happy and con icsraippmlesasthuere tented people into wretchedness and misery ; and because I believe it will lead to endless confusion and anarchy, and that your Lordships are now called upon to make that stand which I humbly hope you will do.—( Cheers. ) Earl FITZWILLIA3I and the Marquis of LONDONDERRY both rose together, but in consequence of the calls of the House the Marquis of Londonderry gave way. Earl FITZWILLIAM then said that his Noble Friend who had just sat down '..ad read, at the conclusion of his speech, a list of formidable dangers with which he had threatened their Lordships if they consented to this measure. He thought his Noble Friend would have done well if he had pointed out with more distinctness the grounds upon which he expected that their Lordships acquiesence in these measures would lead to such formidable results. He (Earl Fitzwilliam entertained none of these apprehensions. He was still willing to think that their Lordships would deal with this measure of great and beneficial political policy—( Hear)-- without any reference to these fears which he has thundered out, and nursed in his rnir d, in order to alarm your Lordships. He would pass to a consideration of the measure, and should not go into any part of his Noble Friend's speech, nor should he trouble himself with its details, but he could not help saying that they had a right to expect an explanation of the state of things which should exist consequent on the passing of the mea sure. If his mind did not deceive him, his Noble Friend on all former occasions—and he was a man of large experience— had condescended to inform the Houses of Parliament, which ever he might have addressed, what state of things would he consequent of a nteasure. On the present occasion, however, he leaped to a conclusion, and called on them to go at once from restriction to free trade. He must defend the Noble Lord from any charge of inconsistency, because he had not only now, but on former occasions, expressed himself as adverse to any duty on the import of foreign grain. However,the warfare was concluded. He had been long enough engaged in it, and it gave him the greatest satisfaction to contemplate the time of peace when this Bill would pass, for he could not contemplate that a time would come when the Noble Lord upon the Wool sack would propose a revival of the corn-laws. He was not one of those who believed that any disastrous consequences would accrue to their Lordships from the measure. His opi nion was quite the contrary; and, from circumstances which had came to his knowledge whilst the measure had been de bated in another House, which strengthened him in that opinion. he must speak his mind on this subject. He was about to vote fur this Bill; he trusted that it would be passed—he be. lieved it would ho passed by a great majority. But he was free to say that if it had been his lot, on coy other occasion, to have been successful in inviting th. it Lordships' attention to the kind of Bill now propoted, the present Bill was not the one he would have submitted for their Lordships' consideration or adoption. He was not one of those who dealt in language which he thought was more fit for ancient ladies—(A laugh)— than for grave statesmen. They were told of the cruelty of taxing the necessaries of life, but he was not one of those who believed that there was anything inhuman, even under the pre sure of the greatest scarcity, in maintaining the duty on the importation of foreign corn. He did not believe that there was any difficulty in levying the duty on that import, and in that respect he disapproved of the present Bill, as it wasted a !arge revenue which they could have raised. They had wasted a revenue which they must replace by other taxes, to be con tinued or to be imposed. He said that other taxes were to be continued or to be imposed, because even under that system of law which has ja t been condemned in the Hou e of Commons—and after the anticipated (if he could use such a word with regard to the anticipation of the decision of their Lordships), after the anticipated vote of their Lordships, he might venture to call that law absurd—but even under that sys tern a large revenue was placed in the exchequer of the coun try. That revenue was about to be removed, and they must find a substitute for it, and where it was to be found he knew not ; whether in an increase of the income-tax, or by the in crease of the Excise duties, if they could be increased to any greater extent. It so happened that when he was first mace acquainted with this anticipated legislation, he was at a gr• at distance from this country, and he heard that it was said in the other House of Parliament that gen tlemen were not to take the measure by itself they were not to look at the Bill for the abolition of the corn laws by itself, but they were to look at the whole measure—they were to look at everything that might be given on the principle of compensation. He did not believe that the landed interest would suffer in consequence of this measure, and he therefore did not believe that there was much in the way of compensation to be given. Other persons would view it in a different light, with regard to the compensation to be given to the landed in terest, but he thought it was not a very unnatural expectation, that what was considered a great boon to the landed interest— nay, the existence of the present corn-law, should require com• pensation on its removal. When he was told in Italy that they anticipated a great reduction in the taxation, he certainly did not expect that it would be made up by a new tariff. There might instead, he thought, have been a considerable reduction in the excise-laws, and he had had a sanguine expectation that her Majesty's Ministers, who seemed to care nothing about taxation, would have done something of this kind. He thought there might have been at least a considerable reduction, if not an entire repeal of the malt tax.—(Hear, hear.) That would have been a large and proper compensation ; he thought also that the landed interest should have had that tax repealed, as it operated, not only unequally, but oppressively upon them. This tax was not only injurious to the landlords, but more especially to the farmers and occupiers of land, as it operated to raise the price of beer to the persons whom they employed. The repeal of that tax would involve the laying on of other imposts ; but in meeting that, he would not add to the income-tax, for he wished it repealed, but he would lay a large additional tax on real property. There was another point on which he entertained a strong feeling. They were to have a bit of a sliding scale for three years ; but what the use of that was he could not see. The general opinion of those engaged in agriculture was, that if the question was to be settled, it ought to be settled imme diately. ( Hear, hear.) He had always been averse to any other course of dealing with the law —he had always been, and was, opposed to a gradual abolition. On these grounds he was always adverse to gradual aboli. tions, and if he were to propose a law on this subject, he would propose one very different from that which was brought in by her Majesty's Ministers, and he was not surprised at the indig nation which it excited among many of their Lordships. It seemed unfortunately as if there were a sort of race, a sort of St. Leger or Derby, between the advocates of the Corn Bill and 'he present Ministry, as to which should render themselves most unpopular, but the Treasury had gone a-head of them on this question. Well, inasmuch as it got rid of the question of protection, he rejoiced at it, but he could not but think the Bill one of which their . Lordships had reason to complain He complained of it, but he must vote for it ; he was driven into a corner, he had no help for it bat to do so. He must vote for this Bill or he must run the risk of losing the Bill for a year. He valued the measure for the abolition of protection to corn, and he could not therefore run the risk of such an event. He might not perhaps to say what he was now going to say, but expressions had been used that made it necessary for him theirte. d o o s o p. . peo vs eSi opposition; oh m oe e l; p N hm o i s b e .a l eLsLwor,eld me."—(Laughter.) uo g h ha thosedt e r as: N e d o yb h ol i uo m hLa t o o vred h stehl must therefore ot e rme be— You no just right to ask for my help on the present occasion. But even if he were willing to give tat support, he could not give it cHoonstihstoeungthlyt twhiothGhoivsevrinezesootf otfheeat object s o f t h e measure. country acted unf a i r ly t o the House. H e t h oug h t the Househad thisgreat r o f reason thi tot to a c g o o m i g plain of them. Wh y, i n propounding a measure tude—not merely a measure of this magnitude—but L or d s hi ps he a mea sure t which must hav e surprisedall he asked whether it was right to measure in such a way as to pre p e r l o u p d o e se their s Lordships from effecting a desired settlement of the question, by introducing certain amendments ? He asked if it was decent, if it was fair towards their Lordship? House, to propose this measure in this manner ? It was according to the practice, in a measure of this great importance, that resolutions should have been produced in the other House, and communicated to this House in the first instance. This would have been the proper rule for the Ministry to have pursued. They could then have had an opportunity of considering this question with the other House, and of associating their views with the views of the other House of Parliament. Now the ground was cut from them. They could not enter into such a negotiation. The smallest amendment to the Bill would be fatal to it, and he would not be one to risk so awful an event. Disapproving of the conduct of her Majesty's Government, adopting not their opinions, but adopting all the views which were expressed by his Noble Friend on the Oppo. sition bench (the Duke of Richmond) with respect to the conduct of the Government on this question, he felt precluded from acting in any other manner than that which he was about to do. He implored and entreated their Lordships not to risk that great question, and he made that appeal not only to those who were with him in wishing to set this question at rest, but he made it with almost equal canfidetre to those who thought the existing law ought to be maintained ; for it was a measure which would do away with a system which had been mischievous to every class of society ; and there was no class which had reaped such bitter proofs of it as the agricultural interest. The Duke of CLEVELAND regretted that he should be compelled to oppose a Government with which he had always hitherto acted. In 1843, he was invited by the Noble Duke .at the head of the Government in that House, to move the address in answer to the speech from the Throne ; and, con curing then in the principles of the Government, he readily consented to undertake the duty, but before doing so he re minded the Noble Duke that rumours were abroad that Minis ters intended to change the corn-law which they had passed the year before. The Noble Duke, however, informed him that there was no foundation whatever for any such rumour, and he (the Duke of Cleveland) upon that authority, not only contradicted the rumour, but went further and declared that ao far as the present Government were concerned, that measure at least was intended to be final. And he understood as much from what the Noble Duke had told him.—(Cheers.) A corn -law could be traced as far back as the reign of King taken .Ttohn, and modifications and improvements had been made in ipasfsreoz time to time up to the period when the present law was one of the strop plate againstcontended the that cor the Corn B ißill agitation ought which i c h .h av h e ad b r e e en cen r t e ly . British farmer pressed by the G they would find ov"am"t' industry of the ferei g not but if they assented to the measure it impossibl e to retrace their steps, which teas ?yeast objections he could urge against it. The with the rest of t the heavy burdens unLoruntr hen farmer, if he were placed on equal terms afraid to compete with the skill or poor-rates, or if those tones which it laboured, namely, taxes and Sr, and freed from the influence of country. He would now refer y borne by thely, rest of the it had been said had beenerrtocetnhtel yg made o i n e c e f a s s v i o o o n r s o w f h t i h c h e first concession made was a re couldwlaTi.eb itNwoas said that the farmer it so happened that the farmers of this country. ducting upon linseed, that the small obtain it at a cheaper rate. the next con . and large farmers grew their own Now w ec ell and farmers could mot afford to use it. cession was, the reduction in clover seed. 'EL' believed that the greater part of the farmers grew their own they would of course derive no benefit from the e ' gs e c d The last concession he believed was the reduction of the duty on French brandy. Now the fact was, that the farmers of t this n country scarcely knew what French brandy was; they drink that brandy which was distilled by themselves, and very much resembled in colour a black dose._( Hear, hear.) Those were the only cances'ions that he knew of as having been made ..i fa: , ur ~; tii: , I,::itish f:murr. lie c,,ai“ncied 11v., , 11113 mea sure was the most cruel, unjust, and oppressive measure that was ever attempted to be passed by the Legislature upon an industrious, loyal, and an independent people—(Hear, hear) — la it was adopted for the purpon of oppressing that elan for the benefit of another class, who had proved themselves upon all occasions to be of all classes the most disloyal, most turbu lent, and most seditious.—(Hear hear.) The last night that Lord John Russell was leader in the House of Commons he gave notice of his intention to bring forward a measure for a fixed duty of 83. on the importation of all description of foreign grain. That notice (for it was only a notice) was met with evident marks of disapprobation, not only on the part of the Conservative members of the House of Commons, but also of many of the principal Whig members, although they had on all other occasions given their support to the Premier. There was no person more against that measure than the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government. No sooner was the notice given by the Government than he assem. bled a number of his political associates at his own house, and consulted with these persons as to what was best to be done in order to save the country from these ealamities. There were several Lords in that House who, as well as himself, were present on that occasion. The result of those deliberations was, that Sir Robert Peel should bring forward a motion of want of forward, and made,confidenceinthe a s Government. usual That motion he brought a very able speech s but he rusted his case upon two points—first, the proposed altera tion in the sugar duties, on which the Government had been beaten by a majority of 40 ; the other point was the proposed alteration in the corn duties—a fixed dut; of Bs. in lieu of the existing slidi ng sca l e . Af ter f our or five nights de bate, this motion was carried by a majority of one, there being 312 in favour of the motion, and 311 against it, which, with the 4 tellers, made 627 who voted on that on that occasion, being the largest number who ever voted in the House of Common a He (the Duke of Cleve land) might assume that his vote had turned the scale ; it was quite clear, however, that if he had voted the other way, the Government would have had the majority. He challenged any person to prove that he had ever given two votes in direct contra-distinction to each other, or that he had ever given one upon other than conscientious motives. It was with this view that he belonged to party, and though he had always belonged to party, he had not always belonged to the same party—( A laugh )—and he could assure their Lordships that it was not because the name of one party was Peel, and the other Rus sell, that he supported the former, but because he believed the principles of the one were better than those of the other. But he had no hesitation in saying that if he could have fore seen that the very same Minister would have, after five years, changed his opinions—he who was the keystone of Conserva tism—he need not tell their Lordships that he would sooner have cut his right hand off than have given the vote he did. There was no doubt that the opinions of the Right Hon. Baronet were very able, but alter all they were the very same he himself had answered when Vr. Cobden had urged them on him three years after. He would inform their Lordships that he was favoured with a perusal of this Bill previous to the meeting of Parliament. He did not complain of the informa tion being given to him individually, but he must say that before a great measure of this description was proposed— e measure which would make such a change in the policy ol this country and of the Government—he thought it was the duty of the Government to have asssembled their friends 'n both Houses, and to have given them information of their in ended measure, said of the power they had of enforcing it. He was told that the Right Hon. Baronet, by pursuing those arguments which it was known he could use so plausi bly, had converted a number of wealthy landowners to his own views. He was not one of those oho would find fault with the opinion of any man, nor had Le a right to do so, but he did not concur in the opinion given. The wealthy landowner did suffer by this measure, but the greatest sufferer would be the small landowners and country gentlemen.—( Hear, hear.) Another class of sufferers would be the one which ought to be, and was, the pride of the country—he meant the yeomanry, who derived incomes of from 2001. to 3001. per annum from landed property ; and whatever reduction this measure would make on the amount of their oroduce, from 10 to 20 or 30 per cent. would inevitably fall on 'here yeomen.—( Hear, hear.) The next class of sufferers would be the tenant-farmers ; and with respect to that subject he had heard of an argument so absurd that he was sure that it would not be used in that House. He had heard it said that this was a landlords' question, and that it would not make the least difference to the tenant. In South Briton, in conse quence of the management of the land there, this measure would make a material difference. The tenant took a farm from his landlord, paying all dues and taxes, not excepting the property-tax, the amount of which he was allowed to deduct from the rent. He took all risks of season and disease in the crops, and the surplus money which remained on the sale of the stock and the payment of all expenses, was divided between the landlord and tenant, the latter taking all the risk. Very few landlords received more than a fourth of the produce of the land in rent. Let them take a farm of 3001. rent yearly, this m-asure, he was pursuaded, would reduce the gross pro duce of such a farm 201. per cent. This would leave the rent 2401., while the 900 a, which was the property of the tenant, would be reduced to 7201. Thus it appeared, that while the measure would take 180/. from the tenant's 9001., it took but 601. from the landlord. He now cams to another class that would be effected—the agricultural labourers. He was per suaded that the effect of this law would be to throw tens of thousands, he might almost say hundreds of thousands, out of employment. He could not see how the poor lands were to be maintained in cultivation ; and if so, those who were employed upon them, would be sent adrift. The tie between the labourers and the farmers, by which the former had his root in the soil, and which existed in no other trade or branch of industry, would be torn asunder., and they would have no longer fuund them the means of subsistence by their industry. Not only would the labourers on many tracts if land be sent adrift, but the farmers engaged in the cultiva tion of superior lands would employ a less number of hands then they did at present. Just in proportion as land was thrown out of cultivation, the number of factories and mills would be increased, and then employment would be given to the labourers who would be withdrawn from the land. He hoped their Lordships would pause before they passed the Bill for the displacement of labour. Let them contrast the agricul tural labourer, who lived it might be in a small, but certainly in an independent manner, who resided in the bosom of. his family, and breathed the healthy dews of the morning—let them contrast him in this state with his condition if removed to a manufacturing town, breathing the atmosphere of a room where sick and healthy huddled together, where in winter he could not see the sun at noon day; vet this was the condition, it was proposed to transplant the agricul tural labourer to, in the event of the passing of this Bill, The small tradesmen in country towns, the small shopkeepers and artizans, who derived their subsistence from the landowners or labourers, would be materially injured, and after them came another class of persons of a superior sort, who were not un worthy of their Lordships' consideration, he meant the parr) . - chial clergymen ; no class would suffer more by the passing of this Bill than they. The landlords might in some degree be' compensated for their loss by an improved system of agricul ture. But the parochial clergyman was bound down to a cer tain quantity of wheat, no matter how the prices might vary in the market. He had no hesitation in saying that an attempt would next be made by Sir Robert Peel and his putty on the Irish Chureh.—( Hear, hear.) A clamour had been raised against the Irish Church, and if on this question the Legis lature were called upon to concede to clamour, he contended they must yield to clamour hereafter on that and all great questions.—( Hear, hear.) And after the Irish Church had been destroyed, an attempt would be speedily made to destroy the Church.—( Hear, hear.) If this measure were passed they would find that both one Church and the other would be destroyed in a very few years, and he did con jure their Lordships to pause before they gave their assent to such a measure. The House of Lords had always stood in a high estimation, and he hoped that by their conduct on this occasion, they would not forfeit their high character. They ail knew that a buildinne not very tar from their Lordships' House, was often infested with a peculiar sort of vermin —( Hear, hear)—but he hoped that such vermin would never be seen running across their Lordships' House, He begged to apologise to their Lordships for having so long tres passed upon their attention. He hoped that if he had animad verted in any strong manner upon the Government, he could assure them it was not with a view of giving offence to any of its members. Nothing could be further from his intention. But placed in the independent position which he occupied, and which he hoped he should ever maintain—( Hear, hear)—he considered it his duty to call upon their Lordships to defend those interests on which he believed depended the peace of the country at large, and the welfare and the prosperity of the whole community.—(Cheers. ) The Marquis of LONDONDERRY felt anxious to address their Lordships for a short time, with respect to what had fallen from his Noble Friend (the Noble Duke on the cross benches). He felt called upon to do so, because they were inhabitants of the same town, and in a great measure connected with the same county. He had not defaulted to be present in their Lordships' House when his Noble Friend presented the petition from the county of Durham, for he would have wished to say a few words on its presentation. His Noble Friend would, no doubt, admit, that the meeting at which that petition was agreed to, was held before there was an explanati on o f h er Majesty ' s Government as to the course they Intended to pursue u p on t hi s quest i on. Th e meet i ng was held at an early period after the publication of Lord John Russell's letter to the electors of London. It was the first meeting, he believed, held in England on the subject of the corn-laws, after the publication of that letter. The meeting was only partially attended, and many of the Noble Duke's own tenants were present at it. After a canvas through the whole county, the total number of signatures attached to the etition was two thousand and three or four hundred. Now, considering that Durham consisted, he believed, of about 12,000 registered farmers, there being 7,000 in one, and be tween 4,000 and 5,000 in the other division, he thought that a petition signed by 2,300 only, could riot represent the feelings of the people of the county of Durham. He believed that the people of the North of England generally entertained a very strong feeling as to the desirableness of this measure. He confessed he had not mixed with the farmers of this country as much as his Noble Friend (the Duke of Richmond), but he thought ha might say, that Sir 11 Peel did e on the whole, pass;ess the confidence of the people of this country. He could assure his Noble Friend that he had mixed with the farmers of his own neighbourhood, and the majority of them were of opinion, that although this measure might be of a momentary injury to them, yet that it would ultnnetely lead to the prosperity of themselves and their fellow countrymen ; and considering that the Government of which Sir Robert Peel was the head had so prosperously ruled the destinies of this country, he thought that it was not asking to much of their Lordships, by voting for this measure, to secure the ser vices of such an eminent political leader.—( Hear, hear.) Tneir Lordship. would find that there were Conservative pro tectionists and Conservative free-traders, and that this question was by no means a party one, but that it was divided between those who were interested in agriculture on the one side and commerce on the other ; and it was most unfortunate for the country that it should b 3 placed in its present position between' two powerful contending parties. Exaggerated statements had been made en both sides of the question, and it was necessary to judge deliberately upon it. He gave the highest credit to the Noble Duke for the ability he had displayed in his speech that evening. He (the Marquis of London derry) would not follow him ; but he had, at the same time, an opinion of his own. He found that those individuals with whom he had usually acted in. public life, who one and all supported the country, and brought it safe from all its difficulties during a long crisis, had ,thought it ex pedient to change the system by which the country had here tofore been governed upon this point. Change was no reproach. How many of their Lordships had , voted for free trade on a nrevious occasion ?—(Great cheering from the Protectionist Peers.) Osly six had voted; and would it be said that the many converts to free trade in their Lordships' House were to i' e o b d b l e h l Duke m E s a e r l l f had reproachedquoted Hansard,for the ir h e changeans answer to i n o the polit i cs ? speech r of h t h e uthpeouPtheidgerneat t o t f ri t h h a e li lloa w r h d i o ch f C he on fa tr h o c l i , ed an h d e had had p m lu a eN d m N e o e .—( Hear, hear.) He (the Marquis of Londonderry) thought that he could, if he wished, make use of the same weapons, and show his Noble Friend that he too had not always been consistent in his political conduct.—( Hear, hear. ) Such changes as had been adopted by the present head of the Government had brought forward great statesmen. ( Ironical cries of " Hear, hear.") tslhtne receivetQh a e e et words nh es san cti on o o the yartiim N ef o nnit b th l oteeon Legislature?Dt hh u es k c e a , rr h i e e d c o o n u f d T thh w ei i s s N h moe t b o al seu a Dr s e k ud khowDuke had ao f d a t bycoauttrehidetpheaotpSleirofßothbert Peel had lost the confidence of the His Noble Friend had eitee'vcd that th is measure try, but lie (the Marquis of Londonderry) knew this, that during the last twel ve the church. Now he (the would not a murmur had been raised country against his political measures. t fi h n a i t s , h . e t d h h t i I s s i p r R Lech .p b e y e s l h ta a t d i n g distinctlyth at h e stated, on the 28th Ma g rc . h, t o the a Whig lead to the destruction of only say in answ er (the Marquis of Londonderry) could g party in the House of they happened to agree With him on Cl:n/ I MM that, although this measure, yet on other questions the difference be- I tween himself and them was as great as ever. The Noble Mar quis then proceeded to read extracts from the report of the Ecclesiastical Commission, and that of which Lord Devon was the head, to show that the oeinions of those who bad bestowed the most deliberate attention to this subject, believed that the repeal of the corn-laws would be beneficial to England as well as Ireland, and concluded by stating that he felt bound to give this measure his melt cordial support—( Cheers). Lord STANLEY—It is with great mistrust of my own abilities and powers, but combined with the most unhesitating conviction of the truth and strength of the case which I have to support, that I venture to submit myself to your Lordships' indulgence while I enter into the defence of a system of law which has been designated by a Noble Earl as an " absurd system ;" a measure which is most vehemently and dangerousily assailed by those by whom it has hitherto been most ably and strenuously supported, and to whom it owes its very existence. I feel how much need I have for your indulgence, as I find beets hitherto on the the present leaders occasion o t i the sod gat to all parties your Lordships' House and the other Housave been divided. re t But, my Lords, however painful I may feel the inequality of the contest in point of ability, I cannot admit that the weight of authority is in favour of those who propose a repeal of the House h those e o into who have which corn-laws. My Lords, I will not appeal (it would be invidious in me if I were to do so) against the present authority and opinions of the Noble Lords upon the other side of the House , to the opinions which have been fo r med antih have b >en made use of by those Noble Lords themselves. which the expressions But I will venture, my Lords, to appeal from the authority of the living to the authority of the dead.—( Cheers. ) I will venture to appeal from the authority of the statesman of the present day to all those great names whose measures have been made the liberal and commercial policy of England in time not long gone by —to the brilliant names of Chatham, of Pitt, of Huskisson.—( Cheers.) And, my Lords, when I mention the names, and refer to these whose eloquence is still ringing in your Lordships' ears—and would to God their prudence and wisdom still directed the counsels of this great country—l trust I shall be forgiven by those of my Noble Friends who now occupy seats in your Lordships' House, even if against their opinion I refer to those who first cast an unble,nished lustre on the names of Canning and Liverpool.— ( Cheers.) From those it is that I have to appeal to the states men of the present day. And, I believe, I may also appeal to the authority of all those who ha ve swayed the destinies of the country, or who have taken a prominent place in the nations of the world.—( Cheers.) I meet the Noble Earl, who opened the discus'ion, and who says that the question has not been raised by former Govern cents, upon the principle of protection, and I say, that if my Noble Friend will search the record of history, front the earliest time down to the present day, he will find successive statistics in successive ages that the principles which guided the Ministers of this country were the principles of encouragement to domestic industry and protection to the agriculture of the country.— (Cheers.) So early as the reign of Edward the Fourth, I recollect a memorable preamble, which might be applied to the state of society in the present day, which recites, if I remember right, " That, whereas the labourers and occupiers in husbandry"—not the grew owners, but the great proprietors of laud—but Whereas, certain la bourers and occupiers in husbandry, being grieviously endansaged by the bringing in from other countries and ports of corn into the realm when the price of corn grown within this realm is low." The Act then goes on to prohibit that importation until the price of corn was as high as 6s. a quarter. The same principles have guided the Legislature from that day to the present, varying according to the circumstances of the country, varying according to the exigencies of the times, varying ac cording to the state of husbandry, or the state of the relations of the country with foreign powers. But through all, and at all times, this pinciple has been considered necessary in order to secure the independence of this country upon foreign na tions for the supply of food. It has ever been the policy and interest of this great country to give encouragement and pro tection to the cultivation of its own soil.—(Loud cheers.) My Lor.'s, I will not be satisfied with home authorities upon the subject. There is not a nation in the world at the present time of any eminence, not one but has acted upon the same principle. There is not one that has ventured up to this hour on that bold and rash experiment in which your Lordships are invited to join. I mean leaving provision, the food of the people, unrestrained by legislative, unprotected by fiscal regulations, and subject to mere chances, subject to the changes consequent upon unfriendly relations, or the inability of supply from foreign countries. My Lords, go through the nations of the earth—France and Holland have both of them not only a system of protection but they have a sliding scale. Prance has a sliding scale infinitely more complicated. Belgium, Den mark, Sweden, Norway, the Germanic Confederations, Por tugal, Spain, the Roman States, Greece, Austria, Turkey, Egypt, United States of America. Having gone through the principle nations, I will tell you there is not one who ventures to leave it's agriculture unprotected, and leave the provision for the food of its people dependent upon chance. And when I see all this, not only I cannot admit the weight of authority is with the promoters of this Bill, but I venture to doubt the authority of that which has been put forward as an indisputable axiom—that the prima facie inference is in favour of an unrestricted trade.—(Cheers.) Upon the contrary, with all the weight of evidence past and present, with every variety of denseness of population, and scarceness of popula tion, with every possible variety of civil institutions from the highest form of absolute monarchy to the lowest firms of re publicism, when accompanied by the authority of all the coun tries i n favour of a sy stem of protection, I am compelled to admit that that which is held to be an indisputable axiom in favour of free trade, is I contend rather prima facie inference that statesmen in former times, and all countries of the present day, are not only not destitute of sound opinions, political wisdom, and sagacity, but that tile single theme of enlightenment which has dispelled the universal darkness was not that flash which simultaneously, and with marvellous power, enlightened the statesmen of the present day in the month of November last.—, Cheers.) I hope I need not assure your Lordships that, however deeply I may deplore the course that I am compelled to take, no words which may fell from my lips in the course of the observations which I have to make, will in the slightest degree be inconsistent with the deep respect I entertain of my friend's public anti personal character, nor that the slightest shadow of sus picion can find a place in my mind with respect to the entire purity of his intentions—if the prominent position which the Noble Duke occupies did not place him, I will not say beyond the reach of criticism, but above the appre hension of censure. Let me refer your Lordships to the high mindedness of my Noble Friend's ebarseter—his utter forget fulness of self. I will not call your Lordships' attention to that trait of his character—his abhorence of all that is low, mean, or selfish. There must be sufficient grounds to your Lordships and the world that whatever may be the circumstances in which he is placed, his decision has been formed upon the sense—l think a mistaken sense, but I doubt not a sincere sense—of what is best for the public good ; nor will I presume to judge of the convictions of my Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Goverment. I believe that he considered this measure was called for by the great emergencies of the country. —((Cheers.) A man of his great and close experience could not hove failed to foresee, as the inevitable consequence of this measure, the complete dislocati o n and disruption of all party ties, without which, in my judgment, the government of any country cannot be s t ea d ily conducte d.—(Cheers.) He might have foreseen the s h oc k which would h ave b een given to public confidence in publi c men—he m i ght h ave f o reseen the shock which would have been given to the confidence of the people in the consistency of their representatives — to the confidence of the country in the House of Commons ; and forgive me, my Lords, for saying to your Lordships' House, if, unhappily, you should imitat e t h e too fac i le convers i on of the House of Commons. He mu s t h ave known, my Lords, the painful and convuhieg struggl e b etween persona l a ttachment and public principles to which he w as expos i ng his warmest and most devoted friends—he tritest have felt equally the injury he was doing to his public reputation, to the destruction he was causing to the means of his own usefulness, and believing that he foresaw all these consequences, I cannot but conceive that he conscientiously believed, in m a ki ng t hi s c h an ge that it was called for in consequence of the e mergency o f the country. I think, however, that he committed t h e mos t f a t a l error which a statesman can commit, that of taking the noisy torrent of , agitation for the still, deed, noiseless torrent of public opinion. It will not be the least of the unhappy consequences of these un happy measures that this country and the world will believe that a triumph has been gained b y an organ i s ed and inte rested association over the first Minister of the Crown, and that a still more fatal triumph has been gained by a first Minister of the Crown, acting under the 'influence of that association, over his political supporters, and the independence of Parliament. ( Hear, hear.) Now, my Lords, with these observations I dismiss all personal opinions. With regard to this measure I must, however, express my re gret that any Noble Lord should have thought it becoming him to cast any censure upon those noble-mintiest men who, abandoned by their former friends, have put themselves forward in a struggle, and who have exhibited talent which reflects the highest credit upon them, because so long as they could con fide in their f. mends they had the modesty to keep these opinions from public view.—( Hear, hear.) It is not my intention to follow the Noble Marquis. I do not desire to speak on the present occasion to your passions, but to your reason. I do not wish to aggravate your feelin g s of mortification ; I might use a stronger word than th a t ; I might refer to such feelings as in w whom would be felt bpynttheir persons trust.findingN themselves will I enter lyesdeceived übpynnthe those glestion of consie eney ; if I were to do so I should have to direct attention to Noble Lor-ds upon both sides of the House. There has been upon both sides of the House a difference of opinion, not so much on the real question of protection as the amount of protection to be afforded. And such, my Lords, I believe to have beon the case down to the period of that memorable conflict, that verbose grarailoqua, in November, IB4s.—(Loud cheers.) It may be that some of your Lordships were about to vote in favour of the second reading of this Bill—are de sirous of recording your opinion against the principle of a sliding scale, and that you intend, in the progress of the mea sure, to give effect to that opposition to the sliding scale by sup porting a fixed duty. If that be the case, I have not a word to say against the perfect honour, fairness, and consistency of the course. Now, turning from personal matter to a much more important point, namely, the arguments upon which the Bill is founded, I must say that the-difficulties of the question were not much removed by my Noble Friend who opened the di bate. I do not complain that neither he nor any other Member of the Government has yet stepped forward to explain the grounds upon which they vind icate their conduct, for w hen we have asked the Right Hon . Baronet at the he ad of the Government in the o ther House what he anticipated as the result of this measue, his simple answer has been, " we must decline to prophecy; our prophe c y f ailed in 181.2 ; we will not run any risk of our reputation .as prophets hereafter ; and if you ask what will lie the effect of these measures we frankly tell you we don't know what it will be. He tells you that he does not know the possi ble or the probable result of this measure. As the old proverb says: Fiat experiment° ineorpora vini.—(Cheers. ) T ry i t i n some insignificant corner of the globe, some inartifieial state of society. Let him try it, where a mistake once made is not irrecoverable, where an error of judgement will not lead to formidable consequences. But why are you to try in the midst of the mightiest empire in the world, in this England of ours, highest and mightiest amongst the nations of the world— a nation which is in the most artificial state of society of any country in the world—a nation in which the slight es t derange ment of the social scale, the slightest variation in the relation, s e n t e public may produce the most extensive and the most i rremediable called objects upon and g s your nin g their h sanctioneir own to interests. me mischief. And in this country, supported by such argil ments as you have heard from, your N o bl e F r i end to night, It may be very well for the. Anti-C orn -l aw League, engaged that their own interests are cons i s t en t w i t h thc weal —but it may be very well f o r such a body, if not legitimate, at least it is natural by tl teir agents to hold different in you their are p own lan guage to different classes of' persons—to speak o f c h eap bread and high wages—of a grinding aristocracy —and of heartless landlords, anti all that clasp-trap by which a multitude are deceived—and then to turn, round to the agriculturists and say, such will be the universal prosperity which this measure will induce that you must not for a moment apprehend the fall of prices—they will rise, and you will be shareholders in the blessings about to be poured upon the country. B read will be cheap, but you will get a good price for yo ur corn. But if this conduct be net , oral and legitimate in such a body, it is neither natural nor Z egititnate in the first Minister of the Crown, wielding the authority of the Crown—speaking in the name of the Crown—exercising the influence which his high character and station rgive him, to carry a measure of see i great and ?p importance with a ( b i ng e face. My Lords, you should be told by the Minister on such an occasion as this e what is the object, and what are the means by which that object is intended to be effected; and you have a right to see whelk ter that oiled is iu itself desirable, and whether the means proposed to obtain it will effectuate it. You have a right to know from threfirst Minister ef the Crown the probable effects of such a measure-but in the silence of the Government, we have en argument against it. One of those used in the discussion of the measure, was the apprehended famine*in Ireland, and the successful operation of the tariff in 1842; but this does not relieve me from a difficulty-one of these arguments may be valid, but valid they both cannot be, immediately contradictory as they are the one to the other. If the repeal of the corn-laws be calculated to relieve thefamine in Ireland, supposing the famine always to exist, it must be by bringing a large amount of corn into the markets at so low a price as to bring it within the reach of the starving population ; and on the other hand it is alleged that prices will rise on ac count of the increased demand. Let me examine these two questions of the famine, and the operation of the famine, and if on entering on this topic I am compelled to trouble your Lord shipsat much gr eater l ength than I desire, I must pray your Lordships' indulgence, and on en tering on this dry detail of statis t:cs, I cheerfully an d willingly sacrifice all advantage I would de rive by alluding to more exciting , because more personal, topics. -( Hear, hear, and cheers.) begyonr Lordships' atten tion in the first Place to the latter end ofOctober,. or the com mencement of November last. My Ns ble riend has told you that the famine was not the immediate cause introduc tion a this measur e t o your withLordships-but,of h tair ctft. to my Noble Friend, I must say that if it had not been the apprehension of scar c i ty i n I reland, your Lordships woug never have been asked, i n t hi s session at least, to hav passed this measure.-( Hea r , h ear .) When the Cabinet was called together at the close of October last, it was called together for the purpose of considering the state of Ireland. Papers were laid before us showing the failure of the potato crop, and reports of certain professors were placed before us, which in my. opinion, tended very much to aggravate the evil of which they complained. We were called on to consider what steps were to he taken for the relief of Ireland, for it was for their relief that we were convened, and we were invited to open the ports by an order in council. I was of opinion then, as I am of opinion now, that at the close of October the real state of the case was wholly unknown to the Government. In the first place, not above one-third of the potato crop had failed, and in the next, there never was a season in the history of Ireland, when, so far from there being a famine, there was so large a supply in the country of all descriptions of food for the consumption of the inhabitants. We were also told that foreign countries were taking steps to prevent the export of food, and it was stated to us that on the continent there was a scarcity in their crops. I certainly thought that that was an additional reason for not acceding to the invitation, and for this reason, because the effect of opening the ports would be to stimulate consumption, when it was necessary to discourage it by every means in our power-( Hear, hear)-and it would be likely to aggravate distress, if distress existed.-(Cheers.) But I en treat of you to bear in mind the wide and manifest distinction between scarcity and famine, and great local and individual dis tress.-( Cheers.) I speak of the famine as an utterly baseless vision, which haunted the imagination of the Government.- (Hear, hear, and cheers.) I speak in very different terms, and with very different feelings, of that amount of destitution and distress which naturally prevailed on the failure of the potato crop, but upon which the repeal of the corn-law can produce no more effect than if you were to pass a law that should reduce the price of pine apples.- (Cheers.) Distress existed then not because corn was dear, for it might be said never to be dear ; it had never risen to any extraordinary high pitch. Their state of suffering arises from a very different circumstance-it is this, because they are not as the labourers are in England, working for steady and permanent wages-it is because they have invested their labour and their capital in the cultivation of some small plot of groun•l for which they pay a large rent-the produce of tha- failed, and they had no labour to look to, and having no means of employment they have no prospect of buying food, and that is the state of the cottiers. Another class, and not an unimportant one, comprising about 5,0(10,000 or 6,000,000 of the people, namely, the small farmers and occupiers of land in Ireland, in what state were they? They find their potato crop has failed they find that it is unfit for individuals, and not a few of them have converted the diseased potatoes into food for cattle, and a very good kind of provender it has turned out to be. They bad thus the means of relieving themselves from the loss of their potato crop ; but the corn had been very successful, and they had thus also a means of redress. And by the way of further relieving them, you propose to enact a law which has for its object a reduction in corn, upon which they rely ; there fore, when appealed to about the famine, I took the liberty of recording my opinion against the opening of the ports ; but at the same time so strongly did I feel the importance of unani mity, so strongly was I convinced of the evils consequent on the breaking up of any Government, I intimated my entire readiness to yield my own opinion, and consent to the suspen sion of the corn-laws, provided o n l y a suspens i on was i nten d e d - ( Cheers. ) But Aen I was told that this temporary exi gency was to lead not to a remedy commensurate with the evil, and that a suspension was to be made for the purpose of not re-enacting the corn-laws again, I felt I should not take a course consistent with my own feelings, as an honour able man, were I to support such a measure.-( Hear, hear. ) An adjournn.ent of the question at all events took place, suffi cient information not being before us. In the close of No vember, when the Cabinet met again, I cordially concurred in the measures of the Government in the appointment of ail the heads of those departments of the Government which might have the best opportunities of furnishing employment, and of communicating with the Lord-Lieutenants of the diffe rent counties for the purpose of distributing relief when it should be wanted, and by a wholesome check of the markets to prevent prices from rising to an extravagant height. I gave my cordial consent to these .measures, but I conceived that the repeal of the corn-laws would be most unjustifiable, and would be, in additien, an injury to the people of Ireland.-(Hear, hear.) The question, when the Cabinet met again, was nominally different; and it was with some surprise, anti no little disappointment, I found myself alone in my opposition. I felt deeply and painfully the prospect of separation. I felt most painfully the weight of responsibility which I was about imposing upon myself. I am not ashamed to say that I Belted for a period of eight-and-firty hours to decide my mind.- ( Hear, hear.) It was no sacrifice in me to abandon office. I had to examine, and I did rigidly examine my own mind whether I was influenced in the conduct 1 adopted by an anxious desire to escape the burdens of office.-( Hear, hear.) I tried to school myself into the belief, that under certain circumstances the interests of the country must require the adoption of such a measure, but I could not bring myself to such a humiliating conviction ; and most reluctantly, but without difficulty, I felt myself constrained to abandon office, sup ported as I was by one of my own colleagues, whom, if I could name, his high position and character, in his subsequent adhesion to the Government would shield him from the slight estshadow of a doubt that he has not been actuated by the highest and the purest motives ; but supported by one of my colleagues I was compelled to resign.-( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Upon that the Government of Sir R. Peel was broken up. Your Lordships have the whole of the subse quent circumstances which have been already stated to you, and I feel that I owe a great apology to your Lordships for aaverting to them at such length. Then we are compelled to investigate the corn-laws of 1842, and have year predic tions upon that event being falsified? Have they not been fulfilled in a wonderful degree? The object of a corn -law I apprehend to lee, to place this country in a state of independence as regards food with respect to foreign countries; and though this view may be scouted, it was not thought unworthy the attention of great and eminent men; and if your Lordships will forgive me, I would refer to a letter of Mr. Huskisson, who placed the question in a much more able point of view than I am able to do. He says, even in peace all dependence on foreign nations for supply is most dangerous.-( Heer, hear.) During the last three years, 741,000 quarters has been the average of our home consump tion, showing a very considerable increase. Has that been produced by measures of proscription or by the increase of prices? These are the greatest fallacies, but formed to lead us into errors in defending the Corn Bill. Statements are attributed to u s which were never made by us. We are said to have asserted that it was the intention of the corn-law to guarantee the farmer a price of 555. per quarter. The inten tion of the corn-law was no such thing. The intention of the corn-law was, that if by legislation we would fix the average price of corn, that we should fix the price from 545. to 58s. The object of the corn-law is, that when the prices are above 58s. the consumer shall be protected by a large influx of foreign corn; and if the price is below 515., that the producer shall be protected against any other competition than that which he met on equal terms those exposed to the same vicissitudes deriving the same ad vantage and subject to the same variations as himself. What, in point of fact, has been the result, as far as the consumer is concerned, of the operation of these corn-laws ? The average prices of the last twenty years have been 575. per quarter, and the average prices of the last three years havebeen 595. 9d. per quarter. The prices of the last year, which they were told was a year of great scarcity, was 50s. 10d. per quarter. My Right lion. Friend said that he wished to keep the prices between 545. and 535. If I were to refer to the average prices of last year, the result would be the statement of a price of from 50s. to 503. 10d. But a return has been laid before the House of Commons, giving a more accurate measure of the cor-law un der the sliding scale, and of the manner in which they operated to check any tendency to a rise or fluctuation in the price of corn. There is the return of the weekly prices of corn, from March, 1844, to March, 1846 ; and of those 104 weeks, this was the result : -The prices were before 545. and 58s. per quarter for no less than 48 weeks of that period ; the price was below 545. per quarter in 54 of those weeks; and the prices were above 58s. in 7 of those weeks only ; and the prices never rose in any week above 555. So far as the commercial interest was concerned, have we any right to say that this corn-law, in its operation, have deceived the expectations which have been formed upon it, although it is quite true that the price of corn has fallen considerably below what was expected by my Right Hon. Friend? If we look at the total amount of im ported, since the first great rush,of two and a half would quarters, since the introduction of this measure, they that it was two millions of quarters t iat have come into the market since that time. There entered under 555. per quarter only 395,000 quarters; and between 59a. and 555. per quarter, the point at which we desire competition to bear, there en tered 1,445,000 quarters;; and there entered above 595. per quarter, only 69,000. That shows that the present law operates in the manner, and to the extent which was expected. He was sorry to trouble theirLordships-(Hear)-so long but he would take another point with regard to the fluctuation of prices in corn. Since the corn-laws passed the total amount of fluctua tion between 1844 and 1846 was only 58s. to 455. All the difference between any two succeeding weeks during those two years did not amount to a difference of 30 per cent. The greatest fluctuation between any two succeeding weeks, one week succeeding another, was only Is. 6d. ; and the greatest fluctuation between any two months in those years was 4s. and no more. I recollect when these corn-laws were introduced in 1842, it was put forward as a matter of wonder at what they could do, when it was stated they had only produced a fluctua tion of 49 per cent. in one year, the smallest, they had ever known. Let us look to the fluctuation of other countries, and see what has taken place from December 1814 to Deeenaber 1845. During those two years the amount of fluctuation was in Dantzic, 663. per cent. ; in Hamburg, tabs. per cent. ; in Rostock, 64r. per cent. ; and in Odessa, 84s. per cent. They were told that this was the effect of the sliding scale and the corn-laws. He would refer to the year 1842, when the Secretary of State for the Colonies stated that the fluctuation in New York was between 30 and 40 per cent., the maximum at New York being 703. ; at Phila delphia, 763 ; at Portsmouth, 721 ; and at New Norfolk 62 ; and that continued to the present time from be tween the years 1841 and 1843, when our fluctuations did not on the average exceed 30 per cent; while between 1844 and 1845 they did not exceed 70 per cent. In answer, we are told that these fluctuations were the effect of the sliding-scale; but so far as I see, during the three years of the existence of the law of this country, it had produced a great steadiness and cheapness of prices. This was the law introduced in 1842, and which now was about to be abandoned. If we wished to see the history of these fluctuations, let us look at what took place in Europe from the year 1792 to 1805, when we were dependent entirely on foreign corn. Let them listen to an ex tract from the work of Mr. Malthus, who states that, during the last century, that part of it in which the greatest importa tion took place, namely, from 1792 to 1805, there were no years in which a greater amount of fluctuation took place. In 1792 the price was 425. per quarter, in 1796 it was 775. per quarter, in 1801 it was 118 s. per quarter, and in 1803 it was down to 665. per quarter ; so that between 1792 and 1801 the price of corn was trebled ; and from 1798 to 1803 the price arose from 50s. to 118 s. per quarter, and fell again to 565. This was the period of that century in which this ceuntry was most dependent on a foreign supplly of corn. (Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) I will now ask you to look at some other articles of consumption. The fluctuations of corn have been taken and attributed to the sliding scale ; look at the price of the potato —there was free trade in that article of consumption, there was no restriction on its importa' ion, and yet the price varied from 150 to 100 in the course of a single year. Let. us take the in ice of upland cotton in Liverpool during the years 1836 and 1837—it was no sliding scale that then regulated the supply —in January, 1836, it was 641. per lb. ; in December, 6P. per lb. ; in November, it was Illd. per lb. ; in March it was 101 d. ; in May it was SP. per lb. ; iu December it was BP. again ; and in April it was down to SP. again. Is there any fluctuations to be compared with those in the prices of this article, of which we had a regular and systematic supply? With re gard to another most important branch of operation in this country, their Lordships would excuse him if he adverted to one particular point—the supply in a period of the greatest exigency. You will recall to your Lordships' recollection what was the state of the different countries of Europe at the be ginning of the present year. There were apprehensions of a scarcity, and measures were taken for their own protection and security ; and that I may not be supposed to misrepresent facts, I will read it from the statement of the First Lord of the Treasury. It stated th a t i n B e l g i um , on the 24th of Septem ber, the Chamber prohibited the exports, and encouraged the imports of corn. The manufacturing portion of the country had materially increased since the operation of this lam, and even trash. s and professions, of every description had nearly doubled their profits of late sears. It is stated that it will defraud the trade and commerce of the country ; but, belonging as I do to a manufacturing county myself, and anxious as I am to do whatever is calculated to advance the prosperity or to add to the comforts of the manu facturing classes of the country, I cannot think that the aban donment of the present system will be calculated to meet those ends, b u t rat h er that it will be productive of great and serious t e h v e il.— ine ( a H u e ti a o r u , s he d a e r v . e ) lop ‘ m V e h nat t has ofou h r it productive herto been the p have fou n d prosperity succeeded oweresff?ectworef by a glut i n the market, ad versity follow upon a full demand. Do nothing to check the prosperity of the country, or that is really calculated to serve the interests of the manufacturing classes, but do not lead them by au unwise system of legislation to depend for their existence on an urns holesome system —( Hear, hear)—in which, I be-. lieve, the interests of these classes themselves most seriously involved. But if it is desirable to alter the present system for the sake of the commercial interests of the country, it is not clear to my mind that the repeal of the corn-laws will have the tendency of increasing the manufacturing industry of the country. If there is little or no variation in price, if there is to be no great reduction in the price of corn, then no great increase in the consumption of the article can take place, and the only argument that remains is, the transfer will take place from the home grower to the foreign corn raiser—substituting one class of corn growers for another. If her Majesty's Govern ment are to be believed on the present question, the price of corn will rise instead of fall. I must say, if you believe that, then will you believe as great a fallacy as was ever palmed on the credulity of any body of men. Who ever heard of in creased competition raising the price of an article. Reason was against it, and not only reason, but facts were against it. True it is the reduction of a halfpenny .a pound in the duty on wool did not check competition in that trade. The demand for the article went on increasing. and the supply was not able to keep pace with it. What took place in 1925, when Mr. Huskisson reduced the duty on wool ? In 1824 the duty im posed on that article was 6d., and he reduced it to ld. in 1825. While the price of wool in 1825, before the alteration, was Is. 4d. a lb., in 1830, just five years after the alteration was made, the price was 10d., showing a reduction of exactly the whole duty taken off—( Hear, hear.) Then the silk trade has been referred to. While the duty has been reduced on manu factured silks, it must be admitted that the duty on the raw silks imported has also been taken off, so that the alteration made in this particular branch of industry is not to be taken as a fair indication of the results of the tariff. While the two al terations I have referred to have somewhat balanced them selves, the various branches of the silk trade stilt had a pro tective duty on it, averaging about thirty per cent.—(Hear, hear.) Take next the case of timber. The price of Baltic timber has not fallen in proportion to the reduction of the duty, I admit, but Canada timber has. But it is not to that alone we must look. What compensation has been given for the fall in the price of timber at home ? What is the price of British timber now? Why the fifty cubic feet of timber that was 103 s. before the passing of the tariff, has been since 91s. 3d., and last year it fell as low as 86s. Bcl.—( Hear, hear.) I see the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests in his place, and if there is any doubts in the fall in the price of Bri tish timber, he can speak to its correctness, for in a sale of timber last October, in the Forest of Dean, all that was offered was but 41. 10s. a load, instead of 61. 10s. Viscount CANNING—It was so. Lord STANLEY—That does not alter the effect of the price. I will not enter into the price of butcher's-meat, as your Lordships are all aware of the causes that have led to the in crease in the price of that article ; but I calculate this year that the number of sheep imported has been 7,000. Now, in a single market—that of Smithfield—he supply of sheep this year, as compared with last, has been 16,00. to 27,000. There can be no doubt that if this law is abrogated there will be a considerable reduction in the price of corn. But before leaving the tariff, there is one point towhich I will refer, as we have been told a great deal o f th e e ff ect i t h as produced on iritish shipping. Great stress has been laid on the fact that the tariff has in creased in a large degree our commercial activity. Now, I have got a table of the tonnage and number of ships emplc•yed in 1842 as compared with 1845 • and how does it stand ? The tonnage, in 1842, w as 3,619,000, and the increase in 1t345 was 17,000 tons. If I go back to 1833 I find an annual increase in the tonnage for each year, with the exception of one, and the total amount is 985,00:), or, dividing it into biannual periods, of 197,000 tons each period. This was the increase from 1833 to 1845, while all the increase since the passing of the tariff is but 17,000 tons.—( Hear, hear.) Why, in one branch of our shipping there has been a larger increase than has resulted from the tariff altogether, and this branch has had no connexion with the tariff, but has arisen entirely from agriculture. The trade to which I referred is the guano trade, a trade which only originated in 1841. In 1843 it was 4,560 tons, and employed 202 seamen. In 1845 it amounted to 219,000 tons, and employed no less a number than 11,434 seamen. Thus from 1843 to 1845 the increase in the guano trade has been upwards of 200,000 tons to set against the 17,000 tons increase from the tariff.— (Loud cheers.) I admit that the fall in the price of corn will not be equal in all cases to the reduction in the amount of the duty, but it will be so to a very great extent, and I reason from the experience of the present tariff. I find when the price of corn has been 555. a quarter large importations of fo reign corn have taken place. This has been when the duty was 15s. Therefore we may anticipate, if we take off the duty there will be a large portion immediately brought into our mar kets at 40s. I have received a letter this morningfrom one of the largest corn-dealers in England, whosays that he holds two car goes of red wheat imported from the Danube, which he bought free on board at 145., and the freight to Liverpool was 9s. 6d.; and the party in question had no doubt that he should at the end of the three years be able to supply 5,000,000 of quarters of foreign wheat at an average price at from 365. to 40s. per quarter. If we go back to 1845, we will find we then im ported 140,009 quarters at 455. a qearter, which paid 20s. duty, thus chewing that it could be imported at a price of 2 . 51. or 2 is. a quarter. The reduction may not be so great as this, still that will not reverse my objection to the measure, as I have no doubt corn may be supplied in such quantities, and at such prices as will press most severely on the English producers, who will be obliged to compete with them. I have no doubt also that capital from this country to foreign countries will facilitate the raising of supplies, and thus operate in a very injurious manner, on all those interested in the cultivation of the soil at home. It is not the least of my objections to this measure that it en courages the foreign groWer, while it throws in a correspond ing degree the land at home out of cultivation. But now we are told that if the price of corn falls then the manufacturer can get an outlet for his manufactures, because he can sell so much more cheaply. Well, he sells them so much more cheaply ! How is this effected ? Why, if effected at all, it is effected by a reduction of wages.—( Hear, hear.) Now, my Lords, I thought that that was a doctrine foreign to the Anti-Cern law League. I thought that the price of corn had nothing to do with the rate of wages, yet somehow or other the anticipa tion is that the manufacturers will be enabled to produce their goods more cheaply. I cannot understand how they can do so except by paying their labourers lower wages. Now, my Lords, I do not mean to say that in the manufacturing or agri cultural districts the rates of wages exactly follow the price of corn. I say that wages do not always follow the fluctuations in the price of corn, because they were considerably regulated by the proportion existing between demand and supply. I say that although wages do not exactly follow all the fluctuations in the price of wheat, yet those prices must be steady, whether high or low, for if the markets oscillate the labourer, not ac customed to economise hie wages when wheat is low, will be correspondingly depressed when the price is increased. It then surely becomes the duty of your Lordships to balance well the advantages and disadvantages of this measure to the la bourer before you fully pass it into a law. Let your Lord- ships suppose a man with a wife and family of three childen in a manufacturing district—suppose fur a moment that that fa mily, on a low calculation, consumes five quarters of corn in the year —suppose also a fall of 10s. per quarter in the price of wheat—and suppose that in consequence of that reduction in the price of grain, the wages of one member of that family is reduced one shilling per week, and that, I presume, is the very lowest estimate we can take. The one shilling thus re tained from that family more than counterbalances the advan tages of the reduction in the consumption of five issa_r_els w lZ year. But we were also told that if the prier of wheat should tall, we shall have a highly increased trade with f ore i gn coun tries. United Staten,W re led d to believe eltiaekvee c ss a t u a, se an w d e the do not take their produce in return. Now there never was an our tha t manufactures a n d le u argument less founded upon fact than this. It is a fact, that with regard to all the countries from which we draw our corn at the present moment, our imports large re l nra y p m r t e ou d e o h minate over us.gre aterHaedre voauorteaxgpeosrts,thaanod wtehecyonsegqiivieentlyinallorwettuh is the trade of the United States, for example, and your Lordships m ay b e surprised to learn that the amount of value of cotton alone imported into this country, in one year, greatly exceeds the value of the whole exports put together that we sent in the same period to the United States. In the five last years, the exports to the United States had been to the extent of 7,500,00j1. Yet, in the eighteen years preceding, the amount had been 7,500,000/. Your importation of cotton alone, in the last five years, is not a less sum (assuming that we take four-fifths of our cotton from the United States, and calculating the price at 4d. per lb.) than 7,817,0001. Now what is the advantage that we shall receive from the United States in return? I believe that you will receive no advantage (coin the passing of this measure. I find that in the last six years an importation into the United States had been made of 253,000,000 dollars, while their exportation to this country had reached 354,000,000 dollars, leaving a balance of 1 01,000,000 dollars in favour of the United States. Here is the comment of the Secretary to the Treasury 'upon it :—" This," he says, " is the nominal value, but there should be 25 per cent. added to make up the real value. There has been a balance in our favour in each of the past six years, and, with the exception of 1839, in each of the last nine years. Our export trade is annually increasing, while our imports remain the same, and any modification made in the corn-laws of Great Britain, which will admit our bread-stuffs on reasonable terms"—he does not calculate on this very liberal measure—" will give an immense impulse to the export trade." " On the other hand," says the Secretary for the Treasury, "every improvement and increase made in our manufactures establishes our ability to supply the horns demand both in the cotton and woollen manufactures, and tends to reduce our impor tation from other countries." You are told here that as soon as they can dispense with your assistance they will do so. With regard to Russia and Prussia, the case was the same. In Russia, in the year 1838, Mr. APGregor stated that their total exportations amounted to above 11,000,000, while their average importations were only 6,177,000, showing a balance of some 5,000,000 in their favour. And in Prussia the exportations amounted to 3,138,000, while the importations reached only 505,000. The duties charged upon our manufactures by the United States were almost pro hibitory—they ranged from 45 up to 150 ; and in the ar ticle of glass they reached '243 per cent. The tariffs of Russia and Prussia are equally pro t tibitory. Mr. M'Gregor states that the Russian duties are prohibitory, because the Government there wished to discountenance the importation ofany article that can be drawn by the serfs from the mines or forests. are Ac cordingly in the whole of Russia your manufactures sub jected to an average duty of 65 per cent g w t h you are charged from 50 to 130 per cent. the ile in Pa russi But argument is boldly put forward that our duties are equal l y p rohi b ito ry , because we impose 25 per cent. on the article of corn. It is mose no . less than pretended that this duty prevents ourtaking the goods of other heldwle was out countries, although these countries five fold on the goods received from us . Dr. sent out by a Noble Lord lately office, expectations that a modification of the timber duties would be beneficial to the country. They had now taken off some o f those timber duties ; they had taken off some of the duties on cotton, and he should like to know whether the exports to Prussia had increased, as it was expected they had not? ( The Noble Lord then read several statistical details in corroboration of his argument.) Do we find that our shipping trade has been improved ? No. Merchants, it is said, will not enter into the corn trade, because it is a speculative trade, but all trades are speculative, for all depend upon the seasons, and the markets of the country; yet it is said in this year that it is hazardous to engage in any commercial speculation. The Baltic trade in 1837 employed 612 British ships against 560 foreign. In 1845 the Baltic trade employed 609 British ships against 1,84 e foreign. In 1839 the Baltic trade em ployed 148,000 British tons against 147,000 tons foreign. In 1839 the Balti c t ra d e emp l oye d 6, 016 B r iti s h seamen aga i nst 6,352 foreig n . I n 18 45, the Baltic trade employed 5,375 British seam en aga i nst 1 7 ,169.—( Hear, hear.) Fell, I have done with the foreign trade, I have done with our foreign prospects. I will admit to your Lordships, that a large ex portation will produce a la rge i ncrease in the imports, but only for a time, during which you puff up trade to an extraordinary state of p-nsperity. When that fails, when distress and diffi culty etirnes, the returns will fall off, and I rather think my Noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Department, in the event of a war taking place with the United States, wi'l find, that instead of four. fifths, oukcountry will only be indebted to the United States for a small portion, indeed, of our supplies. When war comes, then the markets upon which you have relied are closed against you, while, in the meantime you have destroyed your home market; and when you have destroyed your home market, and the foreign market fails you, then comes the period of oppres sion and bitter suffering amongst your manufacturers—of bitter expressions of feeling against those who are now deluding their unhappy dupes with a pteispect of increased wages and cheap bread.—(Cheers.) Do not let your Lordships, do not let the country undervalue the importance of this home market.—( Hear, hear.) The estimates and statements I see put forward with respect to it are most ridiculous. If we are to believe these statements, the whole consumption of the home-mirket in cotton goods amounts only to 1 / 3 of the entire produce, and that amount will give you somewhere about 45. per head to every one of the population. Your Lordships will be the best able to judge of the accuracy of that statement when I tell you, that in the year 1840 the average consumption of cotton goods by the inhabitants of the West waslndie not 4 5 ., b ut 1/. 6s per head. Now, can you bee hove,! if the West Indian eegro ' consumes 1/. 65. worth of cotton mk ei ne cotton goods, th a t t h e consumption of this country is only 4s. per head ar ? t — ( Ch t e t e o r n s . stands No to : the foreignldono not. m l ar fe k e e l t in that htphreophormtioen of at least 14 to 17. In the year 1820 we exported 218,000 tons of cotton goods; in 1844 the quantity was increased four fold, or 146 millions. In 1803 Mr. Huekissen estimated the value of the cotton goods consumed in England at 32 millions sterling. I fled that the quantity entered for home con sumption was 73 millions in 1820 ; it has since increased to 2 , 60 millions of lbs. of worked up cotton goods, employing British labour and bought by the British con sumer. In 1844, the home coteussplion had increased four fold, not only in eottnn, hat in every other articles of Beisish produce, such as cotton-wool, linen, ti.k-aarn, hardware, leather, cabinet-ware, and paper. These articles in the home market produced 148,340,000/., while the whole value for for eign and home consumption was 280,200,0001. And this is the market you are about to abandon—these are the customers you are about to sacrifice in your blind zeal to promote the export trade. Then lam told a reduction in the price of con increases the consumption of other articles ; but, my Lords, you must remember that cheapness and dearness are relative terms, and not posite. Wheat may be cheaper in Poland than in England, but the population in England, from peculiar cir (eminences find their food cheaper than the people of Poland. Now, my Lords, I have gone over a great part of this question. Latio net know how 1 have dole it, but 1 mutt not leave the &Mate of the question without knowing where the loss must fall. It will fall most assuredly upon the majority of this country. We have heard of the danger and the difficulty of administering the affairs of Government, without reconciling the conflicting claims of an ancient monarchy. a proud aristocracy, and a reformed House of Commons. Now, my Leeds, I admit, that if you legislate for the interest of one class against the interest of another—that is to say, if you materially alter the social relation of different classes of the community, it is not in.- dieting a private injury, but a public wrong. a here may, however, be sense difficulty in keeping a balance in a reformed House of Com mons, but, my Lords, the difficulty will not be met, if for the proud you substitute a pauper and a dependent aristocracy. If you break down an ancient aristocracy, you demolish the firmest breakwater that cats possibly be established between a monarchy and a repub licanism.—(Hear, hear.) When I speak of an aristocracy, Ido not speak exclusively or mainly of the body I am now addressing—l speak of men, not ennobled in rank, many of them undistinguished in life, but who, with their ancestors before them, from generation to generation,*have had centred in them or in their circles a sort of prestige, conducting ably the business of their respective houses, influencing the opinions of their respective neighbourhoods, and exercising over their tenantry, who have a hereditary claim upon their constituents, a useful and beneficial control. My Lords, these are the aristocracy of this country. Reduce these men and you inflict an irretrievable and irreparable injury upon :Ws country.—(Hear, hear.) You lower them in the scale of society. God forbid, my Lords, that I should grieve that the suc cessful manufacturer, or that the princely merchant, should take his place among the lauded aristocracy of this country.—(Hear, hear.) Such infusions add fresh vigour and fresh power to that class of the community.—(Hear, hear.) But depend upon it if you sweep that class away all at once, and all the old associations with which their names, their bietories, and the associations which they have acquired to their families, and if you substitute a new body of capitalists, and go amongst the 0 nantry where no associations are connected with their name, the expenditure will be a severe one—their moral in fluence in society is irretrievably lost to the country.—(Cheers.) list, my Lord., I say I should not be satisfied if I were to believe that the loss would mainly fall upon the landed proprietors of this country ; but I am satisfied, my Lords, there never was so great a delusion as this. Why, the red uc ti on o f 10s. upon every quarter of wheat is a reduction of 40s per acre of land in this country, and that will be accompani d by a corresponding reduction in the price of articles of produce in this country. My Lords, my Noble Friend on the cross benches has ably argued this question, and I will not pre tend to follow him. lie has frilly shown what will be the effect not merely upon the landlords, but the tenant-farmers of this country. —(hear, hear.) And the first step that these tenant-farmers' will take to relieve themselves will be to suspend all improvement of their land.—(Hear, hear)—will be to discharge their labourers— (Hear, hear)—will be to reduce wages—(Hear, hear)—will be to pour those unhappy labourers into the manufacturing districts, and increase the competition there—(Bear, hear)—for the lowest class of employment in manufacturing labour. They will there go and live in wretchedness, and pine away in the manufacturing towns, and lower the wages of the manufacturing as of the agricultural artificer.—(Hear, hear.) Why, my Lords, what will be the conse quence to the landed pro2rietors of this country? Assuming even the case, that one of your Lordships is free from ineumbrances, although I do not. know that that is the fact—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—but I will assume it to be so. But what is the first thing that he does? Why he dismisses a certain portion of his establish ment, which Is a sacrifice of every comfort to him, he thus turns upon the labour market a treat number of fresh competitors.— (Hear, hear.) And, my Lords, whatever else may be said against the landed proprietors of this country, 1 do not think this, at least, can be laid to their charge, that they are a class of men who accu mulate wealth, but do not spend their incomes, for I think they spend them as fast as they receive them.—(Hear, and laughter.) Well then they reduced the number of the employed, and now mind my Lords what we are told ? Why we are toll " True, but you make no loss to a - navel - et—vote have way to a 1 p the real prin ciples of free trtyle ?—(Latiihter.) Well, n'y les 's, whet are these real principles of freeatrade.—(licair, hear.) Th, y arc to dismiss " every useless and unprofitable hand. They are to employ no man beyond what is absolutely required to make profit." They are to have no consideration for tenants who may have been their tie• pendants for the last fifty years—(Hear, hear) —for they say "Oh: it is more profitable to have one large than three small farms ; poor tenants have not capital, turn them off—(Hear, hear)—let them ga and starve.—(Hear, hear.) There are above 600,000 small farmeas —at least that was about the number in 1844. But your Lordships must not stop at that—those are but as many drops in the ocean— (Hear, hear)—and you must drive them awey cue and all in com pliance with the wishes of the Anti-Corn-Iv, Leagna. The law im poses, however, the exclustve batten on the landowners of the coun try of maintaining all the poor manufacturers as well as agricultural labourers. But, my Lords, I have too good an opinion of the land lords to think that they would act upon the principle recommended by the free-traders. I believe that they would continue to give aa much employment as they could. I believe that they know that they have to deal, not with stocks and stones, but with men—with men filled with the same feeling, with the seine attachment, and with the same affection as themselves; and I do not believe that, were the pressure of the most extreme description, the landlords of England as a body will adopt doctrines of political economy prescribed by the advocates of free trade.—(Hear, hear.) But, my Lords, if this system is to be adopted in England, if you venture to recommend this system in England, will you dare to advise that it should be put into execution in Ireland ?—(Cheers.) In Ireland, my Lords, the bulk of the population are small farmers, whose farms vary from twelve to thirteen acres at the largest; they have little capital and very little skill. They exhaust the land, I admit ; they do not pay you,l admit, but by the applications of more skill and more capital you might extract more from the land. Carry into effect in Ireland your doctrines of political economy. The landlords are to suffer, but they may recover themselves ; the clearance system was denounced as at the root of half the riots and half the bloodshed in Ireland, but the doctrine of free trade will require you to push forward the clearance system. You may make mach more money, you may preserve yourself (rein all loss, turn off the farmers of Ireland. turn off the tenants, give the lands to the capitalists, and the restot ,` the population send off to die of starvation. Ile would be a bold Minister who would advise the experiment. He would be a bold as well as a hard man who would act upon it (Cries of " Hear, hear.") And, my Lords, to tell me the measure—this repeal of the mra-laws —is brought forward as a measure to relieve Ireland, of all countries.—(Loud cheers.) You may be told that it is for the relief of England, and that it is for the benefitof her populatian. I doubt whether it may be so in the long run, but Ireland is exclusively an agricultural exporting country 8 . 1 u v n a t i r le t their tell us that you are to benefit Ireland by the co mforts of life and the ar , ports, by which alone she obtain eati_ ie receives from you ; and that you are tides of maimeacturee - whieh ei to benefit Ireland b y reducing the value of her exports to the value a million and a ball, or to two millions a year, is a proposition should venture to put alongside that increased coM• petition tends to increase the price of our article,—(Hear.) Lastly, (and I muss quite sure that your Lordships will be very glad to hear that I am coming to a conclusion), I wish to speak of one branchot the question, which is of the utmost importance, and particularly K to me, from the situation which I had the honour to hold.—(Hear, hear.) I mean the effect which Is to be produced by the repeal of the corn-laws, and the carrying out of the principle of free trade, and the doctrine of the removal of protection upon your colonies.--(Heara hear.) Now, my Lords, your foreign trade takes a very large amount Of foreign shipping, and a very small amount of British. I beg to call your Lordships' attention in the first place, to the fact which ap pears in the returns of the House of Commons in 1845, namely, that the tonnage of shipping in the colonies, was 1,273,395; vs-Mist against that there was entered not one single ton of foreign. Your colonial trade, therefore, be it what it will, is exclusively carried on by British. You employ British seamen. My Lords, I will not enter upon the extent of that trade. It is certain that the number of exports to your colonies amounted in 1844 to 1,427,0004. You invite them to trade with other nations—you tell them that. they may quit the country, and the moment they quit the shores of England and land in a British colony, you tell them, you are nc more to us than the Dutchman, the German, or the American. Trade where you please ; yon are entitled to no favour from us. We give you no protection ; we don't seek to impede your trade with ' other countries; you are just as much connected with them as with us. I have heard it put forward that this measure will benefit the Australian colonies. I cannot exactly see how this can be done by this measure. The present duty on Australian corn is ss. a quarter, and they have the advantage of buying or selling their corn in pro. tected markets, which you take away from them. Then with railer. ' once to Canals, you passed a 131111ast year on the faith of which the Canadians imposed a duty of 3s. a quarter on American corn. Yon encouraged her to commence great works, and you lent her money to do them with, and you are now going to undo all that you have done; you are going to destroy the great communication of the St. Lawrence, and make New York, instead of Monti eel and Quebec, the channels of your trade, ant it has been thefolic; 01 the United States to pass a Bill encouraging the trade in this direction. I hope this will open your Lordships' eyes as to the dangerous policy you are pursuing in attempting to pass this measure. I hope your Lordships have read the dispatch of the Governor- General of Canada upon this subject. The Noble Lord then pro ceeded to read extracts from the dispatch of Lord sletc alfe t h e ef Go vernor Genegal of Canada, which went to show t he necessit y continuing protection to the trade of Canada, in order to enable them to fulfil their engagements with th is country. Mr. Gregg Showed that our trade had declined in the various markets of the world—that the cutlery of Sheffiel d was beaten by that of Alsace— that the hosiery of Saxony- was 25 per cen per than that of Leicester, an ]lad cheaper d that the stocking frames there la been diminished from 4,590 to 250, and that the only way we could hope to compete wltis foreign nations would be by cheapening food, in order to cheapen wag es. That was the language of Mr. Gregg, and that was the dangerous experiment they were about to try. Why one would thi n k the force of " folly can no further go."—(A laugh.) I trust your Lordships will not be led away by these feelings. lam fully sen sible of the great length, and:of the feebleness with which I havs discharged my duties, but I hope that I have the credit of keeping close to the question—(Cheers)—and that no observation which have made was calculated to wound the feelings of any person, but before I sit down I must be permitted to say a few words to your Lordships, who, in your hearts, go with us in the argument, and dis approve of the measure at which you are alarmed, yet nevertheless are prepared to give it your sanction, I can conceive many motives which would influence highly honourable men. There may be those who fear the authority of the Commons ; there were others influenced by the opinions of the Commons, but I ask you how are you to col lect the opinion of the Commons? Where is it to be found—is it to be found in 1842, 1843, or 1844?—(Hear, hear.) Why, I find that in 1843 this measure was rejected by a majority of 113; at another time by 165 ; again by 114 ; in 1843 by 250 ; in 1844 by 209 ; in June, 1845, by 132 . —(L oud cheers. ) A n d I fi n d that now a majority 0(98 , composed of the same men who then rejected, have assented to the measure. There were others who disapprove of the measure, yet from personal feelings to the minister, supported it. I can sym pathise with those feelings, but I cannot assent to the justice of them —(Hear, hear.) The sacrifice would be ineffective, it would be made in vain ; there never was a Government which could maintain itself, when it existed on the sufferance of its opponents, with the disguised support of ashamed supporters. There might be those who hoped that It might put an end to WWI= i When 1114 awaked I .: r