The Sun. — London, England, 1841-05-19 00:00:00

MORNING EDITION .161 th 4 Tile r s out aro de ul4 ,IN . 7 r ;, ✓~ L and again I say that I do not contemplate office upon a departure from those principles respecting the Corn-laws.-- Vehement cheers from the Opposition.) Do you ask me then, hoar is it possible for me to consent to the relaxation of the restrictions upon commerce, and yet to retain the Corn-laws.— par, hear.) D o you, 'who appeal to the opi n i ons o f Mr. Huskisson, and who think his authority is all-conclusive upon these subjects, allow me to remind you that the relaxation of restrictions upon trade was made by Mr. Huskisson at a time when those Corn-laws existed—(Cheer3)—and when those Corn -laws were maintained by Mr. Huskisson?—(Renewed cheering.) An Hon. Gentleman has quoted, in the course of the night, opinions which he supposes to have been expressed by Mr. Huskisson some time after he lea office and shortly before his lamented death. All that I know is that whilst I was in official communication with Mr. Huskisson I knew no man who was more opposed to a fixed duty or more in favour of masntaining the sliding scale—( Hear, hear)--- and no man would more have scouted the idea of introducing absolute principles of free trade.—( Hear, hear. ) I beg to read his opinion at the very time I refer to. He said, in 1827, "it has been quoted against me that I held the opi nion that England ought not to depend too largely and too frequently on other countries for the supply of corn." I maintained those doctrines in 1815 and I maintain them now. I think nothing could be so dangerous to this coun try as to be obliged to rely on foreign nations. Mr. Hus kisson says not only that he was an advocate for a gra duated scale but he claims the merit of being the author of it. He said in the year 1827, " Being myself the party who as a private Member of Parliament had proposed in 1814 a graduated scale of prohibitory duties, which was afterwards perfected by the wisdom and experience of Lord Liverpool, it is not likely that I should recommend a prin ciple utterly inconsistent with that scale." In the veer 1828 Huskisson used these words :—" The Hon. Gentleman has spoken in favour of a fixed duty ; assuredly that might look well enough, but when they regarded the circumstances of the country and the wants of the people, they would see the impossibility of adopting such a principle. It' a high per manent duty were imposed, then in a period of soarer}', the Poor would be exposed to extreme suffering and misery which the borne grower could not relieve, while the agriculturist received a compensation of a high rate of duty when corn was at a low price. While they were legislating on this sub ject they were hound to look to the different and va eircumstancea of the country, and the wants and necessities of its inhabitants. A fixed duty was therefore out of the question."—( Cheers from the Opposition benches.) That Was the opinion of Mr. Huskisson in the year 1828, only twq pars before the termination of his useful career ; arid after n e had perfected those improvements in our commercial code, to which the Noble Lord had referred in terms of such well- Merited praise. The Noble Lord, however, is now about to advocate a different course, and 1 will offer him my opposition because I do not think that a fixed duty can be permanently Maintained. The Hon. Member for Marylebone says he sup ports the proposal, not on account of its own merits, but of the perfect conviction that it is but a 3 tepping- s t une towards a t o t a l repea l. Wh en t hi s Fxed duty is established, and when the Noble Lord shall °Aye realized the plan which he entertains—when he admits that his prineiple is to give a protection to agriculture, to which he thinks it fairly entitled, and when he will therefore lay a tax upon foreign corn—when he does this, suppose the Noble Lord's fixed duty should be assailed by the arguments by which the graduated scale is now as tailed. Suppose the Hon. Member for Finbury should come d own with d e tails of individual suffering, and suppose the 'nun. Member for Wolverhampton should detail similar cases taf severe privation and distress—suppose the cry against the " bread -tax," be again raised—suppose the Noble Lord be met by those illegitimate instruments 'of warfare by which he has been met, but for the use of which he has set the example.— (Lotrod Opposition cheers.) Suppose this were the case let me as k the Noble Lord what are the grounds of his confidence that he will be able to maintain a fixed duty ? Sup pose' torn were to attain the price of 80s. will the fixed duty be enforced ? Suppose on the other hand that there was an abundant supply of corn in this country, and—suppose the same season was favourable to the different nations of Eu rope, and suppose that in addition to our own supply—more tha,n sufficient of our consumption—there was in consequence of the low price on the• Continent, and in conse quence of the necessity of disposing of it at any rate, a grev.t influx of cern from foreign parts—then did not the Noble Lord think that that influx would have a discouraging effect 'un British agriculture?—( Hear, hear .) Has the Noble Lord w e ll cons id ere d w h at wou l d be he consequence of a fixed duty as regarded the interests of the agriculture of this country? For my part, I cannot help thinking that the fixed duty pro- Posed by the Government would be found totally insufficient to strait: Min the present state of the agricultural prosperity of Englrind. Ido not wish to enter at any length into this sub ject. I should have been perfectly content to discuss the sugar duties .on its own merits, and I will not enter further upon the c onsideration of the subject of the Corn-laws. When that question comes before the House I will enter into the details of it. But I think the House will feel that after the Challenge addressed to me I could not avoid saying What 'were my opinions respecting the Corn-laws. But it will be said there is another subject that is mentioned in the country ; and we are asked what we propose with respect to the timber duty. Why, I say frankly to the Noble Lord that I reserve to myself the unfettered right of deciding upon that question ; and I will ask the Noble Lord before I con sider ehe timber duties to give me the benefit of that informa tion which he possesses, and whirls he has derived from the Governor-General of Canada.—(Opposition cheers.) You ask us, the Opposition, to make a peremptory, positive decla ration on the subject. Now I will, for the purpose of prevent ing you from charging me with a wilful concealment of my opinions, and in order that I may gain a subsequent advantage by acting on them. I will, so far as I can, declare my sentiments on the question on which you challenge me to express them, I have told you my opinion with respect to the sugar duty and with respect to the corn duty. You now ask me for apositive opinion with respect to the timber duty; but how is it possible that any rational man can pronounce an opinion on the subject without having an opportunity of considering it, not merely in its financial and commercial, but also in its political bearings? Does the Noble Lord himself apply the principle of free trade to the timber duties ; and on reading the report of 1836 did he come down to the House to pro pose an alteration in those duties ? No, the Noble I sord took the advantage which his office gave him—he i '''nsie'ered that there was a great political crisis in Canada— e looked to the state of that country, and the great experi °lent imu are making there for the union of the two provinces, 1 , 113 d tl ie introduction of a representative Government, before took any step whatever in the matter.—( Hear, hear.) 41 e doubtless considered the excitement and party spirit in eident to the elections in Canada, he no doubt considered the relations between this country and the United States, he no doubt recollected that the United States was the nets. 9eirhbour of Canada, lie recollected the arrest of APLeod, and t he unsettled state of the question relating to the Boundaries °f tl re United States. The Noble Lord said before I can dohs to the question of these timber duties 1 must consider thp ropri e t y o f k eep i ng t h e pu bli c m i n d i n C ana d a at ease on fle s übject; I must not unnecessarily add to the excitem nt in that country : and what did the Noble Lord do ? Why, in stead of coming down to debate the question on the prin ciple's, of f ree t ra d e , h e wr it es t o th e G overnor o f C ana d a, a forth er colleague of his own, a Nobleman in the full confidence of the Government, to ask his opinion as to the propriety of propos lug any alterations In the timber duties. And what is all the inform ation which the Noble Lord has given us on the subject ? What '° the information on which he thinks it right to call upon me to neelaire my opinions on the subject ? His Noble Friend the Go_ Verner of the Canadas had said, as might naturally be expected, That " if they touched the question of the timber duties, it would iskid rnoterially to the difficulties of his situation."—(Cheers.) I `Zii . eve I quote th e N o bl e Lord correctly.—(Ch eers. ) A n d t hi s i s th e information on which I am called on to declare my opinion at 4 titre when the papers state, I trust untruly, for I have shared in supported the measure for the union of the Canadas, and I will i'°l shrink from my share of the responsibility : and therefore I It that thepapers untruly state that the result of the elections i7re has been to give only a narrow majority in favour of the hk kn. In such a case as this I should say in the words of Lord (bonrne, " That man most be a madman who woule exclude political considerations from such a question."— oo h L ets.) And if the Governor of Canada. a Nobleman high in yo ur confidence, tells you that to touch the timber duties would add materially to the difficulties of his situation, reserving to myself he run, free, and unfettered right to discuss hereafter the qu es ti on o t 're timber duties, I tell you, when you require to know my ° Pinl'on on the subject, that I require to know all the information Sit the subject which you possess, before I can give a decided opi nion on the subject.—(Cheers.) But the Governor of Canada says 'note, he says there is another measure which I proposed simulta neousily with the alteration in the timber duties, may have the e ffect of obviating many of those difficulties, and of reconciling the Put she mind in Canada to the proposed alterations. .Now, what is that measure-- (Loud cheers)—what is that measure which it is necessary to adopt to quiet the public mind in Canada 2—(ln_ creased cheering.) Not the slightest intimation has the Noble L ord gi ven of what that measure is, but with merely a statement that ttoa touching the tirnber . .cluties will add materially to the diffi. culties of the Governor of Canada, and with an intimation that there as some other measure which, if proposed simultaneously with, it array set the public of Canada at ease on the subject_ lam called u pon to state my opinion on the question of the 'Timber Duties. lir answer is, that reserving to myself the full and perfect right of Unfettered action with regard to the Timber Duties, I will not s tir one step until I am in full possession of all the information you Possess, and have frilly considered all the political considerations connected with the subject--(Cheers.) So much for commercial `distress, and for the remedies which are proposed for its relief. But tin addition to a great commercial crisis, it is said there is a great , hancial crisis also. There is a great financial crisis, and for thr t great financial crisis,' in my opinion, you are mainly responsi ble,_(Loud opposition cheers.) You have had possession of power ainee 1832, you have since that time had the admi laistration of the country. You refer to your successes With triumph as proofs of your wisdom and sagacity. Ido riot sl ay that failure is a proof of the want of those qualities, but I do lay, that from she first the whole course of the Government has been marked by a deficiency in the revenue, with an increase in the , e xpenditure. That uniform course of failure greatly diminishes 'to soy confidence in the success of your financial propositions.— (Loud Opposition cheers.) For the last five years you have been going on with an annually increasing deficiency, which has amounted at last to 7,500,0001. That has been the result of your financial administration ; and instead of finding, as I expected, you ° ukl come down to this House with a confession of your own kt..eaPacity—(Clicers)—and maladminioration—(lmmense cheer_ ink' from the Opposition)—you represent yourselves as mar. tYrt to free trade, and call upon me to furnish you with a Bu dget.—(Loud:Opposition cheers.) lam not surprised at your Confidence in me—(Continued cheering)—when you recollect that before I left office in 1830, the Administration with which I was c onnected had, during the period of their management of the fin a neeo reduced the public debt by the amount of twenty millions of the capital of the debt — (Cheers)—reduced the charges on the debt for interest annually by one million—(Continued cheers)—and left surplus of 2,400,0001. of revenue over expenditure.—(Long lvtieoanvteinued cheering) How much w ill th e Ri g ht H on. G ent l eman ?— (Cheers.) [The Chancell or o f t h e E xc h equer, w h en the cheering had subsided, said, in a quiet conversational tone, across the table," the Right Hon. Gentlemen has not left yet." This Sally,_u which se eme d qu i te to take Sir Robert Peel by surprise, pro. el uted a loud b urst of laughter. The Right Hoi ourable Baronet, _ l ien the Laught er h a d somewhat subsided continued as fol,ows :-3 owever after the reduction of twenty millions of capital, of n nual charge of i n t erest after the remission of taxes, we had ,u ntrived to leave a surplus. I state it at the lowest, as , v 600,000/., an d recollect with all the difficulties of an un urrneo parliam en t . —( Cheers.) You lave had your own way for ' five years—you have had the benefit of cheap l Government. --( Hea r , h ear. ) Y ou have had that superior advantage—you hav e • . got cheap government —you have had the Admistration 'now for ten years. While you had these illiberal colleagues 1 1 h You g Lind a surplus of revenue!got rid o f them in 18:34, a nd the moment you were disembarrassed of your own free will and fre e way, from that them, m that you n h a a n d . m ending cheap government, and t h e aid of a Reformedomct "" I t ariia. trent, from that moment your difficulties began to encompass every year presented a deficit, and 'come with your deficit of 7,500,0001., and then( clamour , m ow an after 3.ou man, upon us to favour you with a budget. —(Loud (Ler(si.i)eneli:yoeud recollect, no doubt, the aid I gave you on - J• —when I rescued you from the consequences of your own evi l wa ys—(lmmense cheering)—when I enabled ycu to r Pular re presentative Government—when I prevented you from P°- tbrarle & the foundations of society in every other colo ny baste of popular and representative rights—when you weyrewciMni eu ed to take my advice--and when you afterwards bad the moot:- _cohusoma:liroirt.....that you heartily rejoiced that you had met with such Lbi g t be tempted to If the circumstances were the same give you similar advice. I confess I view with k 4 int will) iympathy, the position of the Chancellor of the Excllie' , quer. It is said that to see a goad man struggling with adversity is a sight worthy of the Geds,--(Laughter.) lam sure that the Right Hon. Gentleman, both in respect to the goodness of the man, and undoubtedly in respect to the adversity of his position, presents that spectacle to the Gods.—(Continued laughter.) Sir, I cannot conceive a more lamentable proceeding than to see the Hon. Gen. tleman, to see the Chancellor of the Exchequer, seated on an empty chest by the side of bottomless deficiencies, fishing for a budget.—(Roars of laughter.) I won't bite.—(Renewed laughter.) I'll leave the Right Hon. Gentleman to return home with his punier as empty as his chest. And I reiuse my aid upon this ground, that I cannot conceive anything more utterly unfitting, which would really in ca p ac it a t e me f or th e p ossess i on of public con. fidence, as if I, out of o ffi ce , without the means of collecting in. formation in this financial crisis, were to offer my budget in com petition with yours.—(Cheers from the Opposition benches.) What is the nature of the budget which lam to propose ? What should I avow ? The Right Hon. Gentleman paid me the compli. went of believing, that when I spoke, I should not relieve public expectation upon that point. The Right Honourable Gentleman knew that no man, not being a Chancellor of the Exchequer, not having access to official information, would commit his character by a precipitate declaration as to the best mode of re lieving the finances of this country.—(Hear, hear.) There may have been some young Member silly enough to suppose that I would whisper something about a property tax or the revival of the i additional postage. I intend completely to disapprove t.— (Cheers.) I freely avow that I bring forward no rival project. I consider the vote to-night as a question of confidence--(Tre mendous cheers from the Opposition beaches)—and I will not seek confidence by raising the expectation that I will bring for ward plans for the alleviation of the distresses of this country or encourage the expectation of relief. Sir, an Honourable Gentle. man opposite has quoted from a speech of Mr. Huskisson. I find that in 1830 Mr. Huskisson was upon this point of the same opinion as myself. He said, " Being in opposition when my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer opened, as it was his duty to do, and I trust no other person will ever presume to do, the budget for the year." Those were the opinions of Mr. Hus kisson, and in the correctness of those opinions I entirely concur.— (Cheers.) I therefore, Sir, do not want to attach public confidence by any professions upon the subject of finan cial difficulties; and I say this, that were I in office I would not 7 1 am obliged to discuss this. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Lambeth has said, " Don't cover yourself under the solemn plausibility that you are not in office when the House has a fair right to demand from those who are competitors for power what they intend and what they will do." Be it so—no man has a right to presume that he is to be entrusted with the power of his Sovereign; it seems to me presumptuous to anticipate such an event ; but you challenge me to state hypothetically what are my intentions, and I say that . if I were in office to morrow, my first step would be to demand the confidence of the House otCommons, and to ask that I might not be required to take any sudden or precipitate step.—(Cheers from the Opposition benches.) I would say I have been excluded during ten years from office. You have created a large deficiency, to the amount of 7,000,0001. I cannot now say what my measures will be. This I will promise you, but that must be alt, I will give a most careful conside' ration to the circumstances of the country, but that my decided opinion is that a deficit during peace is to be deprecated as an intolerable evil. I wilt make some effort to equalise the income :Ind the expenditure, but while I avow that I would ask for a de monstration of confidence from the House of Commons, I would ask them to consider the position of the country, and try to find out the best mode of applying relief.—(Loud cheers.) And I say it would be encouraging false hopes and expectations, if I were to give any opinion as to whether a property tax would be a more preferable mode of raising the revenue than a reduction of duty, a revision of the Import tarifF. Indeed, the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite might well say to me were Ito do so—l expected that you had teo much good sense to have been guilty of that presumption. Sir, my belief is, that I cannot assign any particular case in which the present difficulties ought to be met. I know that you have had great demands made upon you. There was China, last year— I do not want to mix up the enlarged question of foreign policy with - to-night's debate; but I know you have been called upon in Canada, and other instances, to incur large expenses; but after snaking all these allownances, still, notwithstanding all these things, you arc the responsible parties. It has been through your general mismanagement that these evils have arisen, and you must be responsible. Ido not want—l hope I have not, spoken with the slightest disrespect of any one of the Ministers of the Crown. I admit their ability, I respect their character. It is not from want of ability in your departments; in my opinion these evils have arisen, because, as a Government, you have been acting in violation of the spirit of the Constitution— (Tremendous cheering)—in retaining power when you were not possessed of that degree of public confidence which enabled you to execute the measures you proposed. Sir, I think it is dangerous to the public interests, and so do you yourselves. You have written your own condemnation on this subject. You retired when you had a bare majority on the Jamaica question, distinctly on the ground that you thought the confidence of the colonists would be shaken in you by the narrow majority you then main tained. When I retired in 1835, upon the proof that I had not the confidence of the House of Commons, —having persevered as long as I could,—you told me that I had acted in the spirit of the. Constitution.—(Loud cheers.) In 1839 the head of the Govern ment, after quoting the explanation of King William to Bishop Burnett, in which he said that he had heard of many debates about tha best form of Government, whether democracy, aristocracy, or monarchy, he did not know; but this he did know, that the worst form of Goverdme nt was a monarchy that was unable to give effect to the laws necessary to the public welfare. Apply ing that principle, Lord Melbourne said he did not know what was the best Government, but undoubtedly the worst for the country was that which did not possess sufficient of the pub lic confidence to enable it to carry its own measures into laws. Sir, it is my opinion that these evils have mainly arisen, not from the want of individual ability in her Majesty's Ministers--they have arisen from the course that you have been trying, with great dexterity I admit, to carry on the Government in violation of the spirit of a Representative Government.—(Loud cheers.) We say it is not for the interests of a Representative Government, or of Constitutional principle, that these things should continue—we think it is not right that the House of Commons should be ex hibited to Europe as withholding its confidence from a Govern nt, and yet take no steps for removing them. We think that it is not for the best interests of the Monarchy—(Loud cheers) — that you cannot carry those measures which you, as faithful servants of the Crown, recommended to the House. It is not fair to the measures themselves, because they lose the grace and favour in the public eye if they are believed to spring not from the well-formed pure con. victions of your own minds, but that they are pro positions made to prop (up your falling fortunes—(Hear, hear, and cheers)—and to conciliate the good-will of a party. It is not, believe me, an honour to your characters as public men. You have made these great proposals, but the public—l do not mean the men to whose passions you have appealed, or those whose dis. tresses you have painted—but it has been described by the well judging majority of the public, as their belief, that you have pro. posed these measures without the slightest hope of carrying them. I lament the course the Noble Lord has taken. I lament his con trast between the condition of the negro and the working classes in this country. I lament the appeal he made to the state of the population. The same appeal was made against himself when he pi oposed grants of public money on the Poorelaws, the Noble Lord was obstructed in the same manner, and if he now succeeds in carrying a f.xed duty, he must expect to be interfered with in the same way. —(Cheers.) Ido not deny the power of the people.—(Cheers.) I do not deny that you will by such appeals, considering the situation in which you stand, give them an overwhelming power.—(Cheers.) You may easily provoke the conflict. You can easily raise excited passions against what you call class.interests.—(Continued cheers.) It is possible amid the conflict of passion, it is possible that you may be able to gather up the fragments and combine the elements of increased party strength—(Cheers)—but, depend upon it, such elements of strength are unruly and uncontrollable instruments of Government.—(Cheers.) Depend upon it you will read this lesson to the country, that when authority condescends to support itself by alliance with agitation—(Great cheering)—it calls into aid—to its assistance—a powerful ally, which will be its master, but not its slave. (The Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amid the most en. thusiastic cheering from the Conservative side of the House.) Lord PALMERSTON—Mr. Speaker, the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Kent, in the short speech which he addressed to the House this evening, expressed his regret at the duration of the debate. Sir, that regret did not surprise me, because, un doubtedly, a debate favourable to one side of the House—(Loud and general cheer.ng)—and attended, in point of argument, at least (whatever may be the result), with the greatest triumph to the other side, I have never had the honour to witness.—(Hear, hear.) I can well understand, therefore, that the Right Hon. Ba ronet the Member for Kent may have regretted the protracted du ration of the debate ; and, notwithstanding the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet who has just sat down, and although I am ready to admit the great dexterity with which he handled the various topics of which he treated, I don't think that even that speech will induce his Right Honour able Friend to retract the regret he has expressed.—(Loud laughter.) Sir, the the Right Honourable Baronet who has just sat down was pleated to make himself exceedingly merry with what he conceived to be the forlorn condition of my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer fishing for a budget. Sir, my Right Hon- Friend is fishing for no budget.—(Cheers and laughter.) My Right Hon. Friend has caught his budget and has laid it on the table—(Loud cheers)—my Right Hon. Friend does not go a begging to the other side of the House for a budget. He has been teproached on former occasions, and ridiculed to night for playing:a part which would be utterly unworthy any Chancellor of the Ex chequer. My Right Hon. Friend has to deal with a deficiency in the revenue—he has to bring forward a budget to supply that deficiency, and it is with a full consciousness of his responsibility, and of all those duties incumbent upon a Chancellor of the Ex. chequer, that instead of coining down to the House and proposing to increase the burthens of the people, he proposes to fill up the deficiency by relieving them of a portion of the burthens.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet is mistaken in supposing we ask him to get us a budget instead of our own. What we stated was this, and to that he has not in my opinion given us any answer; tell us, aye or no; we pro. , . , . pose to supply the deficiency by relieving the people of a part of their burdens—by striking a blow at some of these great monopo lie6—(Loud cheering)--which have hitherto retarded the pros perity of the country. He would object, upon narrow and insuffi. cient grounds, to the proposal. Tell us:plainly, aye or no, do you approve of supplying the deficiency in the way :we propose, or are you prepared to vote new taxes for that purpose ? (Cheers.) Sir, that is the question which has been put to the other side of the House, and to that we have had as yet no answer. The Right Hon. Baronet stated that he would with the greatest frankness give his opinion upon the three questions of corn, timber, and sugar; but what were these answers ?—(Great cheering and laughter.) What were these explanations, which were to be given with such unreserved frankness ? Why, he throws overboard at the com mencement of Isis speech the principles and doctrines contained in :ho resolution. He said that he should not, at least for the next year, take any steps for the alteration of those duties—that he should wait and see whether the increased production from India should supply the deficiency, and that he should hold him. self free for the future. Beyond the next year he would not commit himself. What are unreserved opinions on the question of Corn ? —(Hear, hear.) A preference of a sliding-scale over a fixed duty; a sliding-scale may be a very slippery thing.— (Loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet took good care to avoid committing himself, and, if I misunderstood him, I should be glad to he cor rected, but he guarded himself against declaring whether that sliding-scale which he wished to slip into would be a scale mate. rially diminishing or not the amount of protection which at present exists.—(Hear, hear.) That was the gpestion which the House was called upon to answer. Is he willing or not to supply the deficiency in the revenue by admitting a large and more free inter- course and trade by a change in the amount of the duty ? Then, Sir, upon timber, he has made an equally unreserved and frank declaration, for, if my ears did not deceive me, his frank declara tion seas, that on the timber duties he should keep himself totally unfettered—( Great cheering)—until he knew that which was known to my Ncble Friend—until he was put into the confidence of the Governor-General of Canada it was impossible for him to give an opinion upon the subject. I say then, Sir, that I never remember a great question like the present brought forward on one side of the House and debated on such narrow and inadequate grounds. The question is whether the great streams of industry shall be relieved from some of these obstructions which have hitherto retarded their development, or whether those streams shall continue to be choked up for the sake of private interest or privileged classes.—(Much cheering.) The ques. tion is between free trade--and by free trade I mean a trade open to free competition—on the one hand, and monopoly on the other. The question is between reason and prejudice—between the interests of the many and the profits of the few--(Loud cheers.) Hon. Gen tlemen opposite have shrunk from the question, and do not dare to grapple with it. They are afraid to join issue with us on the real merits of the case, because they know the verdict of the country would be against tbern.—(Much cheering.) They have endeavoured to narrow down the question to one collateral point, arid upon pre tences entirely unfounded and delusive, to endeavour to entrap the country into an erroneous decision.—(Cheers.) Some evidence which has been used on this side of the House, and applied to the resolution, has given offence. They do not like to be called hypo critical, but 1 say that is tire homage which monopoly is obliged to Ipay to free trade; but se relu c t an t an d cons t ra i n ed is it, that they are not able fairly to assume 4 virtue they do not feel.—(Cheers.) They have left themselves a loophole to escape in that notable pa renthesis which my Noble Friedd so ably exposed in the course of his speech—they have left themselves a door to retreat from their high position, and take post upon the low level of expediency.— (Loud cheers.) The course they have pursued on this occasion reminds me of that which their friends the Carlists pursued in the ci vil wars of Spain. On more than one occasion did the Carlist bands put forward a number of their helpless prisoners in the front of the column to cover their attack in the same manner that the Hors. Gentlemen opposite now put forward the sufferings of the Africans. Sir, I shall forbear to inquirelew many of these who have been loudest in the cry have had their share in these suf ferings—(Great cheering)—although undoubtedly things have passed in the course of this debate that might tend to throw some light on the subject.—(Hear.) I shall forbear to press the inquiry; but they trust under that pretence to rush forward and scale the fortress. Sir, I honour and respect principle—(Much laughter from the Opposition Benches)—l admire the man even though in follow. ing up this principle he should thwart and obstruct my path, but let principle be the rule and not the exception—(Cheers)—let it be the guide of conduct and the inspirer of actions, and not put forward as a mere pretext. They are the principles of humanity— but humanity, like charity, begins at home.— (Hear, hear.) It is true there are millions of suffering Africans abroad, but are there not also millions of our suffering countrymen at home, and is it not right in adjudicating on this matter that some regard should be paid to the interests of our countrymen, as well as of those so remotely connected with us? But the principle is not to consume the produce of slave labour. Well, Sir, admit that principle—that is the principle of the Noble Lord who moved this resolution—it is not so clearly the principle of the Right Hon. Baronet who spoke last, because it was remarkable that one benefit has arisen to the other side from the protraction of the debate, that they have the evidence of what is passing in other places, and of the manner in which the public viewed the subject; and I am not surprised, therefore, that the principle with which they comn enced has been in some degree allowed to pass from notice.—(Hear, hear.) That principle is, not to consume that which is the labour of slaves. Then if that is the principle, apply it honestly, carry it cut, pro hibit cotton, prohibit tobacco, prohibit rica, the produce of slave lebuur.—(" Oh, oh," and cheers.) Gentlemen laugh at me when 1 talk of such things. They shrink from such an application of their principles.—(Hear, hear, hear.) they say that it would ruin and distress millions of our fellow. countrymen, that it is not expedient to carry their principles so far. Then tne principle is a principle the application of which is to depend upon comparative expediency.—(Hear, hear.) They may think they have an answer to the argument—they say it is one thing to submit to an evil which exists, but it is another thing to create a new one. They say we now encourage the labour of slaves in North America, but that is no reason why we should encourage the labour of slaves in South America. But do we not encourage the labour of slaves in South Amc. rica ? Would that be a new evil ? Do we not send out our commodities to the market of Brazil, and do we not receive payment for those commodities in sugar and coffee ? Is it not a fact, therefore, that we encourage the labour of slaves first of all in North America to produce cotton, which we then export to South America to set the slaves then at work to produce sugar in exchange for it ? It is worth while to attend to the different stages of their transactions. We say to the Brazilians, " Here is a quantity of good cotton, cheaper and better than you can get else where, will you buy it 2" The answer is "Certainly, and pay for it in sugar and coffee." We reply "No ; sugar and coffee are the produce of slave labour, we are men of principle, our consciences will not allow us to consume slave produce."—(Hear, hear.) Does the transaction end there—do we go to other markets ? Not so, we try to help them out of their difficulties. We say, "We can't consume the sugar and coffee ourselves, but the Germans are not so conscientious as we are; take your commodities to Germany, and sell it for money, which we shall have 710 scruple to accept"— (Cheers and laughter.) But the Brazilians say, " There is a diffi culty;these Germans reside across the Atlantic ; we have few ships that could cope with the waves on such a voyage." What do we do ? Why, we say, " We have ships in plenty, and will carry it for you."—(Laughter.) Slave labour must not contaminate our plates or tables, but ships are different things. Then the Brazilians have another difficulty, for there is no end to these difficulties, They say, " The Germans like sugar, but we believe they use re fined sugar, and we cannot well refine our own sugar." Then we step in again and say, "We will refine your sugar for you— (Laughter)—it may be sinful to use slave labour sugar, but it can not be sinful to refine it." We refine it and it goes to Geimany, and we think it is done with, but not so. We have a great deal of sugar, more than the Germans want, what shall we do with the rest ? We have assisted you so far but we cannot eat it ourselves, that is against our consci ences but we will send it to our colonies, the people there are only colonists, and have no right to consciences —(Cheers and laughter) —it can do them no harm whatever to eat slave labour sugar, and in order to prevent any other difficulty if by any accident sugar gets dear in our markets we will eat your sugar ourselves."—(Cheers and laughter.) Then I say is it not the grossest hypocrisy— (Cheers)—to refuse an arrangement intended for the relief of our commerce and the assistance of our finances on a pretence so weak and inconsistent ?—(Cheers.) Well, but then it is said, "We will not encourage the slave trade." Now I can only encou rage the sieve trade as far as I give additional encou ragement to slave labour. The matter: which I have la boured with the greatest anxiety, and with not the least success, during the period that I have had the honour to conduct the foreign affairs of this country, has been the suppression of the slave trade —(Cheers.) Sir, that suppression is to be effected in two ways—first, by treaties, which would enable us to put in action measures for the purpose; and, secondly, by those mea sures which foreign Governments may adopt, either at their own suggestion, or on account of treaties concluded with us. Now, I contend that this measure will materially assist us in both these respects. I will show tire House how, when we came into office, in 1830, we found the slave trade car. ried on to a great extent under many flags, notwithstanding that treaties had been concluded with many Powers, especially by Spain and Portugal, notwithstanding the declaration of the Congress of Vienna, which cannot be mentioned with too much honour. But these Treaties with Spain and Portugal were insufficient for the purpose, n ince they only involved the suppression of the slave trade to the :;orth of the Line.—(Hear, hear.) The first thing we did was to obtain from France, a Power with which there was no treaty on tire subject —a treaty giving a mutual right of search to both countries, and when you remember how the national mind had been ef f ected by the proceedings of the war, and how calculated such a measure was to excite distrustful feelings in both countries, they will sea that there must have been sincerity on boils sides to enter into such a treaty.—(Hear, hear.) That put an end to the slave trade with France.—(Cheers.) We thus obtained from France more:complete engagements to abolish the trade; arid I say that lithe Governors of the Spanish colonies had fulfilled the engagements of the Spanish Crown, the slave trade with Cuba would have been put an end to.—(Cheers.) But while we have these, treaties will never be of any use for the suppression of the slave trade, until we have a treaty with :every State in the world.—(Cheers.) We have now treaties concluded and ratified with France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, the Hans Towns, Sardinia, and Tuscany in Europe, and with Brazil, Venezuela. Buenos Ayres, and Hayti, in America. We have an additional treaty concluded, but not yet ratified with the Brazils, Chili, Monte Video, Mexico, and Texas. We are negotiating a treaty, the signature to which is only delayed by circumstances uncon nected with it, and arising out of late events which is to be concluded between England, France, Austria, Russia, and Prussia, founded on thej treaty which was concluded with France. I have the best reason for be lieving that when that Treaty will be concluded, the adhesion of Belgium and Hanover will not be delayed. We have recently ' prevailed on Government to pass a law prohibiting the slave-trade, carried on by Greek ships in the Mediterranean. When that shall be done, we shall have engaged every state in Europe, or rather in Christendom, in the Christian league of Anti-Slavery.— (Ministerial cheers.) We are negociating, moreover, with an-, other State in America, and if we succeed in these negociatioh a which I have every reason to hope we shall, there will then re. main of all the States in Christendom oniy the Untted States of America, which wiil not engage in the sacred league, for the sup pression of slavery and the slave-trade, and I cannot believe that the American people descended as they aoe from the same ances tors as ourselves, and receiving from them the same principles of liberty and common religion. I cannot, I say, bring myself to be. lieve that the United States will permit themselves to be the only state in Christendom to remain out of that sacred league. They have hitherto been deterred from joining this league by the right of search. I trust, however, they will 'not allow themselves to be carried away, and that they will investigate the nature of the question. I think then we may assert that our conduct proves that we feel no indifference towards the slave.trade, We are not the men who, in order to save themselves from temporary difficul ties, would sacrifice the principle and object for whirls we have toiled ourselves Ilke slaves since we have had the charge of Go vernment. (Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) But, Sir, then I say by these measures, we shall attain additional facili. ties for indecing other powers to enforce those regu. lations which are enacted against the slave bade. What is the case with Cuba and Brazil? In both these countries, if the authority of the law were enforced, slavery would have been put an end to. But why do they not enforce those laws? It is because they distrust us. They cannot believe in our sincerity. They say on the one hand, that we shut our markets against foreign produce. They cannot believe that for the, sake of humanity we mean to put down slavery. They think that we were actuated by a jealous rivalry in commerce, and I am afraid that the debates of of the last fortnight (for they have now lasted nearly that time) will not tend to undeceice them in that respect. For whereas we told our colonists when proceeding to emancipate the slaves in our colonies that free labour was more advantageous than slave labour—we told them the truth—in spite of the; experiment which is now being tried, I say nothing has occurred which can shake the truth and justice of that assertion, but what has been said in this debate by tine Hon. Member for Cambridge. That Hon. Gentleman said he opposed the measure now proposed by her Majesty's Government, because his very existence, as far as his West India interest was concerned, would be destroyed by tho motion being carried.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.) The argu ment was, that it was impossible to compete with the Brazil slave-grown sugar. What was the Hon. Member in say ing this but teaching them that we had told them an un truth—that we have been endeavouring to palm upon them the aholition of the slave trade under false pretences, knowing that slave labour was cheaper ? Convince them by your actions that your doctrines are sincere. Convince them that you believe and know that free labour is cheaper than slave labour, by admitting tine produce of the colonies to a fair competition—if I cams call that a fair competition which gives an advantage of fifty per ccnt. to colonial over foreign produce. Prove to them, I say, that you are sincere in your principles by admitting them to at least some competition.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) I believe that if the measures proposed by the Government were carried, if I could prove that there was no commercial hostility or rivalry between this and other nations, and that we really enter tained a belief, and proved it by our conduct, that the produce of free labour was at least as advantageous as the labour of slaves, then I am satisfied that I should enter into negotiations with foreign powers with a better chance of persuading them, to give effect to the laws for the suppression of slavery.—(Hear, hear.) It is only from England that the hope of extinguishing slavery or the slave trade cars be desired, because we are the only people who take any sincere intere; t in:the matter. England at present holds a proud position among the nations of the earth. sWe claim, and we exercise a mighty influence over the destinies of mankind, that influence is owing, in the first place, to our wealth and unbounded resources, to our military ar.d naval strength ; but it is owing, if possible, still more to the moral dignity which marks the character and conduct of the British people.—(Cheers.) I fear that the resolu tion of the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool tends to destroy, or Impair at least, the sources of our strength, because I cannot but believe that the respect which foreign nations have hitherto entertained for the sincerity, the plain-dealfng, and straigh for wardness of the English character must be diminished if they see the House of Commons adopting a resolution in which the princi ples of morality, humanity, and plainelealing, are, I am sorry to say, so prostituted to serve the purposes orparty.— (Cheers.) I regret to think that we will sap the foundations of our greatness if we en deavour, by continuation of our restrictive and prohibitory regula tions, those great commercial and manalacturing interests which are the mainsprings of our power. I say, then, that those who wish the principles of liberty to thrive and prosper —ought to cherish with an almost religious veneration the domi nion of Great Britain, for so long as England rides pre-eminent, as she now does, over the ocean of human greatness, there is for. tunately no power which can be shipwrecked so desperate and for lorn, that it may not turn with hope to the light which beams from hence.—(Loud cheers.) They might be beyond the immediate reach of our assistance, but our moral influence and our sym pathies would support them in the hour of distress, enabling them to bear up with their difficulties, and to look forward to a better fate. But if ever by the faults or errors of misguided men England should fall, and her star lose its lustre, the hope of the slave, whether in 'the African continent, or in the wide regions of America, would be reduced to comparative despair.—(Cheers.) I know very well that in that case Providence would raise up some other nation to inherit our principles and imitate our ex ample; but when I look at the other States of the earth, as they are constituted at present—and I say it With regret, but with the con. TFIE SUN, LONDON", WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1841 viction of its truth—l know of no other nation now ready in this respect to supply our place.—(Hear, hear.) Now I say that those who are the friends of that cause of which we are advocates—and useful supporters—instead of giving their support to the resolution which was founded on hollow pretences, should have given us their support.--(Hear, hear.) The question as stated by my Noble Friend is, between monopoly and freelirade. The Noble Lord the Member fur North Lancashire, and the Right Hon. Baronet who spoke tonight, have given us their views of the meaning of the worp free trade, and have contended that as we maintain that doctrine here we have a desire to abolish all duties. But, Sir, that is not my notion of free trade. We must have establishments, we must have revenue, and in my opinion there is no more convenient means of raising revenue than on duty on foreign commodities.-- (Hear, hear.) But I say let this duty be for revenue—not to enable men to carry on a losing trade at the expense of every other class in the nation.--(Cheers ) I know it is impossible in an artificial state of society to carry out the principles of free trade in the extreme letter of the word.--(Hear, hear.) I know that in the att_ mpt thousands would be ruined. But it sheafd be our aim to do so as closely, and to carry out the principle as strictly as possible. Protection in the sense in which it is used by the supporters of the Noble Lord's resolutions, attacks upon the skilful, and inteL ligent, industrious, and enterprising, for the support of the un skilful and the indolent—(Loud and continued cheer ing)— is not only injurious to other classes, but to the classes fur whose benefit it is imposed. Show me a free trade and I will show you men with skill, with activity, and with success.—(Cheers.) Show me a protected trader, and I will show you an indolent, unskilful, unsuccessful, and generally embar rassed class.—(Cheers.) Protection is also injurious to our inter course with fiireign nations.—(Hear, hear.) It is a tune which two can play at.— (Cheers, and laughter.) When we tell foreign nations that they ought to diminish their tariffs, because competi tion is the life of trade, they listen to us with civil incredulity, but tell us to look to our own tariffs. (Hear, hear.) This has happened to us with most of the nations with which we have commercial relations. They invariably say, from first to last, " You ask us to take your commodities, you take ours.--(Hear, hear.) Commerce is a system of exchange. If you exclude our coffee, our sugar, our timber, and our corn—(Cheers) —how are we to take your cotton, your hardware,and your delf."— (Cheers.) Since the time of the peace other nations have seen into our trade, and they have been disposed to imitate our system— some from honest prejudice, others from a feeling of coercion, from a notion that they might drive us to a different system.—(Hear.) The league which spread over the middle States of Europe has just been renewed.—(Hear, hear.) Next year a meeting is to be held to revise the tariff; and we should be aware that if we were to adopt different principles, they would not only lower the duties which exclude our commerce, but most probably those duties would be erased from their tariff.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Russia and Sweden prohibit a great many of our articles, and when we ask them to alter their tariff they say, take cur corn and our timber and we will willingly do so.—(Cheers.) It was only last year that a Norwegian nobleman was sent over in order to attempt to obtain a change, but we had then had some experience of the manner in which such a proposition would have been met, and knew that it was of no use to make it. France, which ought to be a large market for our commodities—a country so near us, and producing so many articles which we stood in want of, and she wanting so many of our manufactures.—France has a tariff which excludes many of our articles. She refuses, and we cannot expect her to do otherwise, to do anything in the way of putting our trade upon abetter footing, unless we set the example. The mania for tqe protecting system was so strong that they now exclude by pro hibition our cottons and our manufactured iron. Nay, so minute has she descended in the scale, that she is now prohibiting, by heavy duties, our needles anti fishing.hooks, In Belgium they are running wild with the notion of protection, and it is of no use• far us to attempt to show the absurdity of doctrine— they say England has risen to prosperity and greatness under the system, and when they are as wealthy as we are, they will talk of thematter. It is in vain to tell them that we have grown great and prosperous in spite of that system.--(Hear.) Until we prove by our conduct our sincerity, we can make no impression neither on France, or Russia, or Sweden, or any ether country. Again, in the United States they have followed onr practices ; it has hap ;ivied that the Southern States produce out cotton, which it is thought necessary for us to take, even although it is the produce of the slave, because it conduces so much to our prosperity. Then, in Mexico, that State is fast following our example; and who are the parties who are making these demands fOr additional protection against the manufactures of this country? Why, they ,are, rene gade sons of England, who having voted themselves Mexi cans, set up manufactures lu Mexico in rivalry to our own, and now make loud demands for protection. Sir, that is the course which is evetywhere persued. and such are the effects which these prohibiting duties uniformly produce.— (Loud cheers.) Now, what is the state of our trade with foreign countries. It is perfectly true as stated by the Right Hon Baronet, that there is nothing in the complexion of our foreign trade which should inspire despondenco, for, I trust that the resources of this country are too deeply rooted to be destroyed eveu by this vicious system which has so long cramped and crippled its development.— (Loud cheers.) But if we look to the state of our foreign trade, we shall see the disastrous and ruinous effects of these prohibiting duties. We slash see how the Act cripples and destroys our manufacturing industry. Year after year a smaller proportion of our manufactured articles are exported on which a large amount of labour has been expended, and year after year a great proportion of our exports consist of articles in the prod uc ti on o f w hi c h a less anouritofilnlust c ry has been employed, an d w hi c h are, in fact, merely a means f furnishing employment to the forei gn manuf turer, by furnishing him with the materials on which industry is to be uf employed, actu such as yarns and other go o d s on l y in first stage of n (Cheers.) While such i s t h e case, w i th regard to manufacture.—(Cheers.) our exports, our native artizans are leaving our country to seek employment in foreign nations. Our capitalists go and establish themselves elsewhere, where labour is cheaper, and where com merce is unchecked. In the meanwhile, in consequence of our prohibiting regulations, we arc excluded from market after market, and we shall go on excluding ourselves—(Cheers)—if this system is to go on—(Cheers)—until at length we shall be obliged to have re course to that thriftless industry which has recently been recom mended the expense of the machinery ltself.—(Loud cheers.) Yes, Sir, the time will come if this system is not altered when the export of the ready made machinery itself would be had recourse to as the most profitable article of exportation.— (Loud cheers.) Now, on these measures there can be no question as to which side of the House was advocating the true interests of the country—(Loud cheers)—and the true interests more espe cially of that class whose claims aer now put °stelae tiously forward as a sort of defence for monopoly. The Right lion. Baronet has said that we have brought ourselves into these difficulties by the improvidence of our Administration, and that we have been the cause of all these excesses of expendi ture. The Right Hon. Baronet does not surely charge us with the rebellion in Canada?—that was no act of ours.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet has very fairly abstained from contending the question of China; but that question is not yet ripe for tote decision of the House.—(Hear, hear.) Has the expenditure arisen from an undue increase of our military estublishments ? —has it arisen from our augmenting improperly our naval forces ? Why, we have been reproached with too much economy.— (Cheers.) The Gentlemen opposite have no right to attribute to our misconduct results which have arisen from a combination of circumstances, over which no person could have any control.— (flheers.) I say the question is, whether the Budget of the Go vernment, which consists in the reduction of certain great taxes, and yet proposing to increase the revenue—the question is, whether it shall be ad opted, or whether the House shall be led by the Gen tlemen on the other side to affirm a principle which will lead to no other alternative but the imposition of fresh taxes.—(Hear.) Sir, my conviction is, that whether those monopolies are brought down on this occasion or not, their days are numbered.—(Hear, hear.) The only question is, whether they shall fall by our hand, or whether they are destined to fall at the hands of those who op. pose us. 'The general feeling of all who are engaged in the com merce of the country is too strong to be resisted. What has been the whole course of Parliament for some years past ? Why, we have done nothing but destroy monopolies--(Loud cheers from the Liberal benches.) First of all, there was the monopoly which under the Tcst and Corporation Act, the members of the Church of England had against Dissenters ; and my Noble Friend oppo site and the Right Hon. Baronet concurred in putting an end to this monopoly. Then there was that monopoly by which the Roman Catholics were placed under civil disabilities. It was at tacked ; great was the struggle; fierce was the re , istance ; it mea sured its length upon the ground.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and a laugh.) Then came another monopoly, which consisted of the privilege which a small portion of the community had of returning a majority of Representatives to this House. That was attacked again. There was a much fiercer struggle because greater interests were then concerned. The contest almost sho{,k the country to its foundation, but the result was certain, and the success was great and signal.—(Cl.c;rs.) Well, then, Sir, came the monopoly which certain self-elected 'corporations had in every part of the United Kingdom over their fellow townsmen in regard to their local affairs. That monopoly was attacked also. The resiAance was less strong, it fell. Then came the monopoly which the East India Company had, by which they excluded the rest of their countrynien from those vast re gions in which their own operations were conducted. Why, Sir, monopolies were so much out of fashion at that time that they fell with scarcely any resistance.—(Hear, hear, and loud cheers) I trust my Right Honourable Friend has also to announce that lie means to apply the principle to other parts of our tariff, and to redeem the commerce of the country from many of the trammels which beset it ; upon that principle we stand.-- (Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) The principle is, in my opinion, sufficiently intelligible and plain. We might, I think, have an intelligible statement with both sides as to what they in tend to do and what they do not. We might have known whether they would have found their principle of finance upon the abolition olmonopoly, or upon the maintenance of monopoly. They have not hitherto chosen to do this, but I will venture to say that before these subjects have been fully discussed in the House they will be compelled to speak out. It is due to themselves—it is due to us— it is due to Parliament—it is due to the country, that their opi nions on this matter should not be shrouded in mysterious silence or in evasive declarations.—(Hear, and cheers.) We have a right to call upon them not to give us a new budget—we do not want it, and we should reject it if it were offered —(Cheers)---but we have a right to ask them aye or no will they adopt the principles upon which our Budget has been based—a prin ciple of which the country approves—(" No, no," front the Opposi tion Benches)—and which I venture to predict that though they may resist it to-day for the purpose of getting a vote of a majority of this House--that if the result should be to place them in a situa tion to determine what should be dune in regard to the finances and commerce of the country they themselves would be obliged to pro pose and to carry it.—(Loud and long.continued cheers followed the conclusion of the Noble Lord's speech.) Lord J. 'RUSSELL then rose and said, it will be for the conveni ence of the House that I should state the course I intend to pursue with respect to the resolution I have proposed. I proposed that reso lution in the first place, that I might record the principle upon which my Right Hon. Friend has proceeded with the Budget which he has laid before the House; and, in the next place, because I thought that it was desirable that the debates should be as general as possible. I shall content myself, after the division, with mov ing the resolution. With respect to some statements which have fallen from the Right Hcn. Baronet the Member for Tam_ worth, I beg to conceived that he had misconceived my meaning. 1 do not think that I can state that the merit of supporting Mr. Huskisson was to be assumed by us, and that it did not properly t elong to the party by but to tho se w h o acted whom he was surrounded. What I stated in the discu ss i on b e f ore Easter was this, that the wh ole cr edit of these principle s o f f ree , t v r i a t d h e lii was n n , that ot d l tte ~t a c is .l kw i ra . s only,Hquuistkeisvisoinlline that the whol e mer i t o f having proposed the measures to Parliament was du e t o th em, and that we were content to f ollow in their steps,_(H aar, h ear, hear.) Sir, the Night H o n. Gentleman h as a ll u d ed in terms of which I do n o t complain, the v ery use o f the term hypocrisy as applied to a certain party, I never intended to apply that term to my Right Honourable Friend. I acknowledge with regard to the question of privilege; with regard to Canada ; with regard to the Poor-law, and with regard to some other questions, the conduct of the Right Hon. Gentleman h a s been as far as possible from deserving the epithet question. (Hear, hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman conclu, Jed with some remarks, in which after acknowledging the the talents for speaking In high terms of the characters of i adi vidual members of the; Government, he asserted that we hai i not acted ie accordance with the spirit and principles of the Con- I think in that res p e ct he has stitution. hardly made is fair comparison between the conduct which he pursued and the cc nduct which we have pursued. The Right Hon. Gentleman was pla tied by the late King in that situation of entire confidence by his Soy, ..reign, in which we have been placed by the present Qu m. The . Right Hon. Gentleman is the first instance, without any great q uestion being before Parliament, without any public measures of import ance before the House, had recourse, for the sake of mail .staining the Administration, to an immediate d issolution. I :ertainly thought that step ought not to nave been t a k en except trpon some large ground either of necessity or of extensive public 'poi [icy, but it was resorted to solely because the Right Hon. Ger.ttlei nan had taken the place of Lord Melbourne, and to obtaiai a majority in that House.—(lleac.) After this he was deficient in the in the choice e r first place a Speaker nex he was defeated on the address. Oth r questions aro'e... There was a question with respect to London Universities, upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman was defeated, by a majority of more than 100. There were several other questions, and, with the ex ception of one, upon which I stated that I would not give any op. position, the Right Hon. Gentleman was defeated. In that case he obtained a majority of 16. Being in possession of the highesl place in the Councils of his late Majesty, he did obtain a proof of thelconfidenre of this House. But, without admission, upon some re.. marks being made by the Noble Lord the Member for North Lanca shire, whe sits opposite, and some other remarks made in this House. Th Right Hon. Gentleman consented to what I considerec a very de rogation to the honour and dignity of the Crown, by that an am. bassador, who had been formerly appointed as the representative of the CrOwn at foreign Court, should be recalled, and was induced in consequence of that debateto give in his resignation. The appoint meet of the Crown was overruled by a conversation in the House. After that there took place three discussions on the Irish Church ; but with regard to these debates, which lasted for several nights, and on which there were no less than four divisions, that the Right Hon. Gentleman was In each instance left in a minority. I never blamed the Right Hon. Gentleman for his perseverance in that case. The Right Hon. Baronet then came down to the House, and announced his resignation, stating that it was from no love of power or clinging to office that he had retained it so long, but that he considered it his duty to his Sovereign and to his country Sir, I give him credit for sincerito in making that declaration, and I do not blame him now, and the only thing I said of his resig. nation was that he dcted perfectly in the spirit of the Constitution, and whatever other circumstances might arise, I stated that the Right Hon. Gentleman was not likely to obtain the confidence of the country after a dissolution.—(Hear, hear.) Bnt when I say that I don't blame the Right Hon. Gentleman's conduct on that oc. casion, I must add that I thtnk it affords a far stronger instance of a Government retaining office than anything that has since occurred. (Laughter from the Opposition benches.) In the last Session of Parliament they thought it necessary to bring it to the test whether the party sitting on this or the other side of the House possessed the confidence of the House of Commons, and upon that question, which was fully debated, and which every question of the merit or demerit of the Government was discussed, the House decided against the Right Hon. Baronxt bra majority of 21 (Cheers.) Now Sir, is not that a totally different case from that which accurred during the administration of the Right Hon, Barouet.—(Hearf bear.) If the Right Hon. Baronet had obtained a vote in a full House, with a majority of 21 upon a proportion, of a want of con. fidefice, would he not have felt him elf justified in continuing in office ? lam persuadud he would. Looking back to what has oc. curred I cannot think that we have been wrong on the various oc casions on which we have been accused of unduly retaining power when we should have offered our resignations.—(Hear, hear.) It is evident that our successors would be those who site upon the opposite side of the House, and it never seemed to me that they had the confidence of the country in such a de gree as would entitle them to take our places.—( Cheers.) I will not say what may be the case now, but with regard to those single elections that have happened since this Parliament was first elected I must be excused for saying thaf they don't afford any decisive opinion of public sentiment.—(Loud cheering.) The Right Hon. Gentleman in his speech of tonight in going over the various questions of the sugar duties, timber duties, and the Corn. saws, has, I am sorry to say, held out, as I think, very little hope that he wili be favourable to these measures. I should certainly rather have heard that he had held more encouraging opinions on these subjects, even although he defended his vote of to-night by the peculiar circumstances in which the West Indies were placed ; but with regard to corn in particular, I think the Right Hon. Gen tleman held out very little hope of any alteration. Sir, I have en. deavoured myself, contrary to my original opinion, to see whe ther some proposition might not be devised by which many of the evils of the present Corn-laws might be avoided, but I have not been able to succeed. I believe that fluctuations and gambling will take place, and that there will be a con. stant interruption of our trade with foreign countries, and that a want of markets will still be found to exist. It is possible, undoubtedly, that a great alteration with respect to the amount of Protection may be made; but if any great alteration is pro posed, that would be opposed with as much vehemence by those who oppose any change In the Corn-laws as any Chang from a graduate to a fixed duty. I wish to make an observation with regard to a principle stated by the Noqle Lord the Member for North Lancashire. The Noble Lord said that the producer of corn depended not on his own skill or itigamity, but on sunshine, and rain, 'and storm: That obser vation is quite true with regard to the producer in particular coun tries, or in particular positions. It is quite true, as the Noble • Lord says, with respect io the production of his crops he must de pend upon ihigher Power ; but it seems that that higher Power, ' which sends the storm and the thunder, also sends a remedy for it. Such is the bounty of Providence, that if in one country you have a' bid season and a deficient harvest, that same bounty in another country produces a plentiful crop. It is in the power of man, by his skill, and by the means he has of traversing the ocean, to take advantage of that bounty which thus remedies partial evils. But if you do not allow that intercourse to take place, it is not to a higher power—to the inflictions of Providence, that you owe the de ficiency of food—lay it at the door where it is justly due— (Ministe rial cheers)—lay the blame on your own laws, which prevent the operation ofthis great and maguificentscheme, whereby plenty would be distributed among the various nations of the globe, and by which they would be made to depend one upon the other by joining in an intercourse with each other. If that intercourse shall not take place, the curse of sterility, and barrenness, and scarcity must prevail, instead of that plenty which would exist if the gracious designs of Providence were not marred by your unujust legisla tion.—(Cheers-) Sir It. PEEL--Sir, I beg to be allowed to say one word in ex planation. The Noble Lord referred to the appointment of a Noble Friend of mine to the Embassy to Russia. Now there was no vote on that occasion. A mation was made for the pro duction of the appointment, but none had theu been made, The retirement of my Noble Friend was no act of mine—it was the unsuggested ae,t of my Noble Friend. There was no vote—had the House of Commons addressed the Crown respecting that ap pointment, it was my full intention to have retired. The Honse then divided, when the numbers were— For the resolution of Lord Sandon 317 Against the resolution. 2Bl Majority --36 The announceement was received with some cheering on the Oppositicn benches. On our return to the Gallery we found Lord JOHN RUSSELL moving the following amendment, " To leave out from the word considering ' to the end of the amendment, in order to add the following words, that it is practicable to supply the present in adequacy of the Revenue to meet the expenditure of the country, by a judicious alteration of protective and differential duties, with out any material increase of the public burthens, such a course will, in the opinion of this House, promote the interests of trade, afford relief to the industrious classes, and is best calculated to pro v:cle for the maintenance of public faith and the general welfere of the people." Upon which strangers were ordered to withdraw, but the amend ment was negatived without a division. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Twenty Minutes to Four o'Clock. MEDINA IMPROVEMENT BILL. We have received from a Correspondent at Newport, Isle of Wight, a statement, contradicting in certain respects, and affirming in others, that which appeared in The Sun last week on this subject, but it is drawn out to such a length, that we cannot afford space for it. Our Correspondent states that Mr. Ward can have no claim to the property in dispute, as " the question had been disputed before Mr. Sergeant Manning and several Revising Barristers, and the votes were admitted on• the evidence of the Town-clerk and others, that the soil and bed of the river and Cowes harbour were the property of the Corporation, and within the borough of Newport; all the Learned Gentlemen holding the mere jurisdiction would net be sufficient. Should Mr. Ward succeed in defeating the claim of the Corporation to the property in question, he will at the same time strike forty or fifty Conservative voters off the re gister of the borough of Newport." His letter thus concludes:— " The measure is supported by neatly all the inhabitants of Newport, by many of the landowners and principal agricultu rists ; by most of the masters of vessels, boats, and barges em ployed on the river, and has the countenance and support of the County Member for the Isle of Wight, and the represen tatives of the Borough. Nearly 300 shareholders have enrolled their names in Newport and its neighbourhood; and as soon as the Bill shall have passed through Parliament, there is no doubt but the few remaing shares will be taken up. The in habitants of Newport ask Parliament to be allowed to improve their own river at their own expence, reserving to all others any rights which they may possess, and there can be no doubt but Parlianment will accede to their reasonable request." MARRIED.—On the 13th inst., at St. Mat thew's, Brixton, by the Rev. Edwin Prodgers, Thomas Smith Daniel, eldest son of George Daniel, Esq., of Canonbury-square, Islington, to Mary Ann, eldest daugh ter of R. W. Herring, Esq., of Brixton-rise, Surrey. ST. MARTIN'S-IN-THE- FIELDS.—THE CORN.. LAWS.—Yesterday morning, at eleven, a very nume rous and highly respectable meeting of the inhabitants of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields was held in the Vestry-room, " to take into consideration and to adopt such proceed ings as may give success to the proposed measures for the reduction and alteration of the taxes on sugar, corn, and timber." Mr. Cobbett, Senior Churchwarden, presided, when resolutions were proposed, seconded and agreed to, Approving of the measures introduced by her Majesty's Ministers for the alteration and modification of the duties upon corn, sugar, and timber. The Hon. P. Bouverie,M.P., Messrs. Hutchings, (late Churchwardens), Ridgway, Hawkes, Cockrane, Wilson, &c., addressed the meeting, which was unanimous in its condemnation of all mono polies, and the utmost enthusiasm prevailed in the sup port of her Majesty's Government. The resolutions having been adopted, a petition founded upon them, to be presented to both Houses of Parliament, was ap proved of, and it was further resolved, that the Mem bers for the City of Westminster be requested to pre sent the one to the House of Commons. Mr. Sydney Smyth, the Anti-Corn-law lecturer, addressed the meeting. HONIE STEAMING.—The competition among the steamers has become so great, and their numbers have so much increased of late, that 17 vessels are daily engaged in conveying passengers between Gravesend and London. Some of them charge 2s. in the after cabin and Is. 6d. in the fere part of the steamer for each passenger, others Is. 6d. and Is.. and a few Is. only all over the vessel, while the steamers from illackwall to Gravesend carry passengers for Sd. each. Four teen steam-vessels are engaged in carrying passengers between London and Greenwich, and a majority of them have lately reduced their fares to 6d. each. Eight steamers are constantly moving to and from Woolwich, and they will receive a great accession in a few days, by the fast and elegant boats of the Watermen's Steam-packet Company. There are sixteen small steamers, belonging to different Companies, steaming away from morn till night above bridge ; and on Sunday last they carried upwards of 55,000 passengers, at 4d. per head, between the numerous piers between London-bridge and Chelsea. So me of them were shamefully over-crowded. Monday afternoon an adjourned inquest . ..took place at the Cumberland Head Tavern, City-road, to investi gate the circumstances relating to the death of Mr. James Mottram, aged 50, a proprietor of the Rockingham Leeds coac'.i. Mr. Hammond, City-road, on the 4th of February las'„ at about six o'clock in the evening, was alarmed by a laud crash in the road opposite his house, and on going out saw the Rockingham Leeds coach, drawn by four horses, over turned on the foot-pavement, and the luggage strewed in all directions over the pallisades fronting his shop. With the as sistance of several persons, the passenger.: were extricated, and the deceased and another person (since dead) were taken to a surgeon's in the neighbourhood, and the deceased, after his wounds were dressed, was removed to his lodgings in York street, City-road. Tho accident was occasioned through the driver of the coach attempting to pass a loaded waggon in the centre of the road, in the most dan4erous part, and as it w a s c l o se to the kerb, the vehicle swered and immediately over turned. The Coroner adjourned the inquiry for further evidence. GRAND REVIEW AT CHATHAM.—THE Queen's birthday will be kept on the 21st inst. The whole of the troops will be stationed along the ramparts, facing the town and the river Medway, and the heavy artillery from the battery will fire several rounds. The troops after firing a feu de joie. will return to the lines, and go through the grand evolutions of a review, before the Commandant of the garrison. The Earl and Countess of Eglintoun, arrived in town on Saturday last, from Eglintoun Castle, Ayrshire. We understand that the statue of the Queen, in Victoria-square, Pimlico, will be thrown open to the public to-morrow, the 19th inst. COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL. DEFEAT OF THE MONOPOLISTS. A Special Court of Common Council was held yesterday in the Council Chamber, Guildhall, in consequence of a requisi tion to the Lord Mayor, for the purpose of taking into con sideration the propriety of petitioning both Houses of Parlia ment for the repeal or revision of the Corn-laws. The Lord Mayor entered the Court, and took the chair pre cisely at two o'clock. The minutes of the last Cohrt having been read, and the routine business of the Court having been disposed of, The LORD MAYOR said that the Court had been specially called by him, in consequence of a requisition. Whatever his private opinions were upon the subject:of the Corn-laws, he considered it to be his duty to give every member of that Court an opportunity of considering and expressing his opinions upon that important subject.—( Hear, hear.) As he felt no doubt of being supported in that chair, he would refrain from giving any opinion, leaving it to the Court to enter into the discassion, and come to that decision on the subject which they thought correct. Mr. STEVENS then rose for the purpose of moving the first two resolutions. Year after year discussions had taken place in that Court, and resolutions had been passed, to the effect that the Corn-laws were most injurious to the poor man, and greatly detrimental to the commercial interests of the country ; and now that her Majesty's Ministers had been converted to the opinion of the necessity of the revision of the Corn-laws, it became that Court to meet and discuss the subject. He saw some members of the Court now pre sent from which he Ras induced to hope that the Corpo ration of London were determined to feel for the poor man. It was said that this was a political question; he admitted that it was so, as far as good measures were better than bad. He should have been happy if the task of urging this sub ject forward had devolved on abler hands, but he trusted the Court, in the course he should adopt, would give him credit for the best of motives.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the establishment of a fixed duty was necessary for the prosperity of the country. If Gentlemen looked back to the period that had gone by they would see that the poor man and the labouring man had been sinking lower and lower since the introduction of the Corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) Since that period he had been obliged to buy food at a high price while his labour had been paid for at a low rate, and the result of this was disaffection and despair.—( Hear, hear.) The Corn laws were a tax upon the poor for the purpose of putting money into the pockets of the rich—it was a tax upon the whole population of the country for the benefit of one class in society.—( Hear, hear.) It was bad in every point of view, and he looked to the Government, which had now taken the right step, to bring forward measures that would protect the community against the acts of the selfish. He trusted the time had now arrived when the question of the repeal of the Corn laws would ring from one end of the country to the other, and if that was the case he felt that eventually they must be repealed. If the present Administration were to go out to-morrow he would venture to say that no other Administration could stand for a single day without bringing forward some measure with respect to the modification of those laws.--(Hear, hear.) He was not one who was inclined to convulse the different orders of society; he wished to do things by degrees, but his firm opi nion was that all trade should be free. He thought that the enacting of a fixed duty upon corn would do great good to the commerce of the country, and to the people at large. He looked at this question as a great commercial one, and his firm belief was, that if the Corn-laws were repealed the commerce of the country would be considerably benefited.—( Hear, hear.) The countries on the Continent were chiefly agricul tural, and the result was that the existing Corn-laws prevented them from trading with this country as we could not take their corn in exchange for our manufactures. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the following resolutions : " That all laws which, under the pretext of affording re quisite protection to the agricultural interests of this king dom, impose exorbitant or fluctuating duties on the importation, of corn and other provisions, are injurious to commerce, ruin ous to the manufacturer, and tend to the misery and degrada tion of the working classes, and are delusive as to the benefits which they affect to confer even on the agricultural classes themselves. " That this 'Court,. continuing to be impressed with the magnitude or the evils flowing from the present state cf the 'Corn-laws, and fully convinced of the large remedy that would be afforded by reducing the dutyl to a fixed amount, do again petition both Houses of Parliament to substitute a moderate fixed duty for the existing graduated scale." Sir MATTHEW Woon seconded the resolutions. He had always been, and ever should be, the advocate of free trade. Every vote that he had given in the House of Commons was based upon that principle. Her Majesty's present Ministers, in consequence of the relief they had given to the people in taking off several millions of taxes, had run short in the reve nue, and they had brought forward a proposition in the House of Commons, by which they hoped to make up this deficiency without imposing further taxes upon the people, What, he would ask, would those gentlemen think who opposed the pre sent proposition, if the Government, instead of adopting the course it had done, had resorted to a property tax ?—(Hear, hear.) No one could doubt that the Corn-laws bore most heavily upon the working classes, and it was surprising to him (Sir M. Wood) how many of the poor people lived as they diJ. The other day he had attended a meeting on the subject of the Corn-laws, which had been held in the ward of which he was Alderman. The parties that attended there were of a most respectable character, and happy was he to say that not a single hand had been held up against the resolutions wl uch were proposed, the object of which was to deprecate the Co.rn laws as they at present existed. At that meeting a vote of thanks was carried to her Majesty's Ministers for the cou.sse they had pursued. The cry was, " Down with monopoly, anti up with her Majesty's Ministers."—( Great cheering.) If meetings like those he had adverted to were held in all parts of the country, he would venture to say that it would not be many months, let who might be in power, even ,Sir Robert Peel, before a measure would be brought forward and carried for the repeal of the Corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) The RECORDER having put the resolutions to the Court, Mr. R. L. JoNes rose. He thought it most extraordinary that his worthy Friend, who had introduced the resolu tions to the Court had not thought of the repeal of the Cora laws at an earlier period of his life. As to her Majesty's Ministers bringing forward this measure, they never thought of the repeal or alteration of the Corn-laws until they lost Not toigham, and found the country going against them. Then, and not till then, had they brought forteard these measures. They were like a drowning raan, and were catching at every straw by which they thought they would be enabled to retain office. The last straws they had caught at were sugar, timber, and corn.—(Laughter.) What, he would ask, was the conduct of Lord Melbourne last year? Why, he actually stated to the House of Lords, that that man must be mad who would attempt to in terfere with the Corn-laws as they at present existed. ('fhe Hon. Gentleman here read a long extract from a speech of Lord John Russell to the electors of Devon, in which the Noble Lord expressed his dissent from many of the doctrines of the political economists.) Those had been the opinions of Lord John Russell. A great deal had been said of the dis tress of the manufacturers ; those distresses had for years past occurred periodically, in consequence of over-production ; and, as on former occasions, they had passed away without legislative interference, so they would on the present. It was only a scheme to bolster up the Ministers, arid he had great satisfaction in proposing, as an amendment, the previous question. Sir PETER LAURIE seconded the amendment, and com plained of the short notice which had been given of the meet- ing. There had been no opportunity to organise any opposi tion, and those who supported the motion were wise in not giving longer notice. They recollected what had happened two years ago, and he did not doubt but that they would be de feated on the present occasion, as they had been then.— ( Cheers.) Ministers were aware of the perilous situation in which they stood, and this was a mere attempt to prolong their tenure of office. The pretence was, a care for the hungry poor ; the reality was, a care for the hungry placemen.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The members who had proposed the reso lution had stated that they were not prepared with their figures in support of it ; therefore, he thought they could not do better than vote for the amendment, in order to give these gentlemen time to be prepared with their case..--(A laugh.) The fact was, the Ministry was in jeopardy, and they had called this meeting to lend them a helping hand. Mr. STEVENS—No one said that. Sir PETER LAURIE—That, however, was the intention of the resolution.—(Cheers.) Their defeats at Nottingham and Sandwich had made them alive to the advantages of a cheap loaf, but he hoped the Court would not be led away by any such flimsy pretext. The sense of the country was against them, and if they appealed to the country, which he hoped they would do, he felt convinced, that in a new Parliament, there would be a majority of 70 or SO against them.—(Cheers.) Mr. STACEY supported the original motion. The :plea of more time to consider the question was groundless—he had had plenty of time to make up his mind on the subject, and the first intimation he had had of the meeting was at the hospitable board of the worthy Alderman who had last spoken, so that the worthy Knight had had at sill events more time than he (Mr. Stacey) had had. Those who opposed this resolution complamed that the farmers would be. ruined by an abolition of the Cern.laws, but let them look at the condition of the labourers, who were now shoeless, houseless, and almost coverless. They could net be in a worse condition under any system, and were they not justified in thinking that their condition would be bette r if a fair market for their manufactures were opened to them ?—(Cheers.) They had been told that Lord John Rnssell was a recent con vert to the doctrines of free trade, but what would they say to Lord Ashburton ?--(Cheers.) If Lord John Russell had been converted to good ways, Lord Ashburton had been per verted to evil ones.—( Cheers.) The subject of the Corn-taws had been so frequently debated there that he did not think much time could be required for preparation for discussion. Surely the expenses of freight, and the duty of eight shillings per quarter, wisich the foreign importer would have to pay was a sufficient protection to the British agriculturist. It had been complained that the resolution only went to the Corn-laws, and left the questions of the sugar duty and the timber duty untouched.—(Bear, hear.) Why the Corn-law was the key to the whole corruption of the House of Com mons.—(Loud cheers.) Repeal that, and the Members of that House would be ready enough Ito abolish all monopolies which pressed upon themselves.—(Cheers.) Allusion had been made to Nottingham and to Walsall. How had those places been carried? Why, by Tory gold.—(Loud cheers.) The Tories at Nottingham had formed an unholy alliance with the Chartists, in order to endeavour to suppress the spirit and the intelligence of the country, which they feared.--( Cheers.) He was glad to hear of the act of justice which Ministers had pro posed in bringing forward this measure for abolishing the Corn-laws. All other trades had lowered their rates of profits at the return of the peace. Not so the agriculturists, they'had by the Corn-laws endeavoured to keep the war rents, and they ought in justice to come down to the level of the other trades. He cordially supported the original resolution.—(Cheers.) Mr. OLD would vote for the previous question. If Ministers had been convinced of the necessity of making these changes, they ought to have announced them in the speech from the throne—( Cheers )—and the fact of their not having done so, convinced him that they had only resolved on those measures which they had brought forward with such indecent haste, after their defeat upon the Irish franchise question. He did not believe they had any serious intention of carrying them, for if they had they would have proposed them at the time they could have commanded a large majority of th e House of Commons. The haste exhibited in concocting that meeting was almost as indecent as that exhibited by Ministers. A MEMBER—It has been on the paper these three weeks. — ( A laugh.) it emanated Rat.ed'fa h Lto t a hi w s o o u r ld fro s m up t p h o a r t t pthaertyre,sola.utiohne,oanosoet because Mrs the principle contained in it would, b principle had for the benefit of the people.—(Cheers.) ifhactarried out, be by that Court. been debated and affirmed over and o ver ag There had been nothing hitherto in the r s e p f e e a r e m e c t l: c e e s o t f o the p o c p s - , porters of the resolution which had any e l altogether d th e e r h o a f d a political character. The speakers on t carefully while those of its opponents hadhbeeeontha t m iv e e r a its pr o h l le t ip h l e e Nqvuheiesh taibositi.ai n T ed he fr y om did sa n y o i t n they knew laughter)— therefore he gave them not how soon their friends might find it convenient fikaenydi h re i ncgtly as to to n t e h g e a. to adopt—( Cheers, and uestion and they might t r ! e r l e y di o t n fo it r th th at e wmleonveinvger t t h h e ey rr sh e l l ul u d s fi g nd it convenient to adopt those views they would have his hearty support, as he was totally uninfluenced by anything like party motives.--( Cheers. ) They had been told that the Administration had only been driven into the adoption of these opinions by the election of Mr. Walter for Nottingham. It happened, however, some what singularly that they had had time to write to Canada to their former colleague, Lord Sydepham, upon the subject, and MORNING EDITION. to receive his reply and that reply showed that their minds had some time since been fully made up on the question. A letter without date had been read from the John Bull of Sunday last, for the purpose of showing that Lord John Russell had changed his opinions. That letter contained the opinions he had held as a very young man, when he represented an agricultural constituency; but had not Sir Robert Peel and the Duke cf Wellington changed their opinions on Catholic Emancipation ?—( Cheers.) H a d not Lord Stanley changed every one of the opinions which he had' held as a young man?(Cheers.) But he had nothing to do with the changes of opinion of any man, he supported the resolution on principle, because he thought it would be for the general in terest of the country, and for the benefit more particularly of the labouring population. The agricultural labourer received only 9s. a week wages, and the manufacturing labourer was quite as ill paid, and because both were in distress that was considered a sufficient reason for leaving matters alone. They were taxed to the amount of double the value of the bread they consumed, and that not for the support of the revenue, but to go into the pockets of the monopolists.—(Cheers.) He did not approve of many of the details of the New Poor-law, but he thought the principle of it ajust one, that the labourer should be taught to rely upon his own resources and frugality ; but the labourer had, at tt e same time, a right to demand tnat he should be afforded a sufficient supply at a fair market price, and the principle of the New Poor-law was not applicable un less the Corn-laws and all other monopolies were abolished. —(Cheers.) Allusion had been made to the recent elec tions. He, for one, considered it no disgrace to the Ministry to be in a minority in the present House of Commons, be cause that House was composed of a majority of monopolists. —(Cheers.) They had heard of the immense sums which had been spent by the aristocracy in the recent elections, in de bauching the morals of the people, and in bribery and cor ruption. Now was it to be supposed that this expenditure had been incurred for the sake of mischief alone? No such thing. It was because they got by it, and they could well afford to corrupt electors, when by means of the protecting system they Niue enabled to squeeze sixty millions annually from the pockets of the unfortunate people.— (Cheers, and cries of "St. Alban's.") Well, admitting that bribery had been practised at St. Alban's, what did that make against his argu ment? They could not out of two evils make a good. (Cheers. ) He was actuated by no party motives, but he would do the Ministers the justice to:say that their conduct, in. his opinion, showed they had taken up the question honestly —(Cheers)—because, without regard to the chance of being beaten, they had boldly attacked the three monopolies at once. --(Cheers.) That s h owe d t h at t h ey were actuated rather b y principle than by party tactics—(Cheers)—and they certainly had adopted the most honourable course by so doing. Mr. GADSDEN defended himself for sending out • a circular in opposition to the proposed address. He had been requested to act as secretary to a number of gentlemen who were op posed to it, and he had not made it general met ely in accord ance with their feelings. He was astonished to hear such respectable men as the mover and seconder of the address deal in such sweeping charges against the landowners of the coun try. They were, probably, not so well acquainted with land owners as he was, and he broadly asserted that if the land owner were to give up every farthing of rent. it would not make the loaf a halfpenny cheaper.—( A laugh.) He etas tended that the whole rental of the country did not reach IL an acre. If the Corn-laws were repealed, the agricultural in terest would be destroyed, and would become dependent upon foreign countries. _ M. BOWER had always, and would again that day, vote against the motion. The reduction in the price of corn was only sought by our manufacturers for the purpose of getting their labour cheaper, and so enable them to compete with the foreigner. What benefit, then, would the workman receive? How could that Court, which had so often petitioned for the abolition of slavery—(" Oh, oh")—give their support to a set of men who would repeal the Emancipation Act ? Could the Court come to a vote which in effect would be to say that the bust of Clarkson was unfairly placed in that Hall ? Mr. PEWTRESS was astonished at the arguments of the last spea' er, for was it not one of the strongest and most often re peated arguments in favour of emancipation, that slave labour could not stand against tree labour—(Cheers)—aud what did Ministers propose? Not to put slave sugar upon an equality with the produce of our free colonies. No ; they proposed to give the latter a protection of 50 per cent. He thought the . present propdsition of the Government a fair one for the benefit of the country ; and, therefore, lie , gave -it his warmest sup port. It was absolutely necessary that they should remove the restrictions. upon the importation of food, for the landlords refused . trstake steps by which they would be- enabled to sup port the population. He had always thought it would be im possible to carry out all the stringent enactments of the new Poor-law without some such measures as those now proposed. Let them become the law of the land and the large union workhouses would be useless, for the whole population of the country would have plenty of work and would want no pa rochial relief.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") 'I he plan was too comprehensive to have been brought out upon the spur of the moment—it must have been long under consideration, and he trusted that a large majority of the Members cf that Court would do justice to their constituents, and vote in favour of a measure that was fraught with un mixed good to the country. Alr. LAWRENCE ridiculed the cry of humanity that had been raised against the introduction of Brazil sugar; the great humanity-mongers, the great growers of sugar in the West Indies. had no horror at using slave-grown sugar when they could obtain it for less than they compelled us to pay for their produce. The price of labour had nothing to do with the price of corn—at least so far from lowering the price of labour when corn was low, it had always, since the peace, been then much higher. More labourers than were wanted reduced the price of labour in the market. Make labour plenty, and its price would he high, whatever the price of corn might be. The question was not one as to who should be in or who should • be out; it was one of life and death to the people of the country, and would within a very short time force itself upon the attention of all, and the people would not confine them.. selves to a demand for the abolition of the protective system as applied to corn only, they would extend their demand to the abolition of the system altogether. Mr. Alderman HEVGATE contended that the question wa as political one--(" No, no")—it was brought forward for the pur pose of bolstering up an Administration which the people of England had repudiated at every election which had occurred of late. The present was not the proper or fit time for consider ing the question, it ought to have been brought forward not in the month of May, but in a speech from the throne. (Laugh ter.) He trusted the Court would not lend any assistance to men who, because they could not live in a house, set fire to it. Mr. HALL felt hound to say that the sentiments expressed by the worths , Alderman were not the prevailing ones in the ward he presided over. The Court, to be consistent, ought to agree with the address, for the same proposition was carried in 1639, and also in 1840. Surely it would be unbecoming in that Court to refuse to come to some determination on the -im - portant question, as they were asked to do by the amendment. Mr. Alderman 13eowsr rose amidst loud cries of " Divide." He said it was a strange feature in that' debate that all the supporters of the proposed address had carefully denied that they had brought forward the motion with any intention of aiding a Government who were incapable, and eelebrated for nothing but a tenacity of office, which reminded him of the eel. He contended that the price of bread would fall with a repeal of the Corn-law, and consequently the price of labour, --(Laughter, and cries of " Oh.") The Corn-laws were not intended as a pi otection for the rich man against the poor ; they were for the general protection of all.—(A laugh.) Mr. J. LART instanced the ease of America, where food was very cheap and labour high ; while in this country the price of corn was twice as high as in 1835, yet wages were never so low as at the present moment. The Hon. Gentleman con tinued to speak at considerable length, but the Court was so impatient that. his voice was drowned. Mr. AsoURST remembered when King William refused the Reform Bill, the worthy Alderman quoted Scripture to him, (Mr. Ashurst), and told him to " Fear God, and honour the lng." Now he was disposed upon that occasion to return the compliment, and the passage he would quote was, " He that withholdeth corn, the people shall curse. "—(Cheers.) So well had the people of former times understood the question, that even in the time of Solomon that had become a maxim,God, for•the purpose of protecting his creatures, caused corn to grow in every country on earth. There were two instances which he was anxious to state to the meeting. The first was Holland, that country could not grow corn enough for her sub sistence: she had not land enough for the purpose—she was not cursed with a Corn-law, yet she had at all times a stiffs,- cient supply of food.—( Cheers.) The people of that counter trusted to God's providence, and they were liberally supplied. Again, take the case of Ireland—she hada Corn-law, under the operation of which her labourers were starving on 6d. a day, and every fourth one was a pauper, that was the state of things under a Corn-law. But then he was told that he must nok go to a country where corn is cheap, or his 6d. a-day will dwindle in proportion. Now, suppose he was to leave Ireland and land at New York, there he would find the wheat selling at 255. a quarter, having left it in Ireland between.7os. and 80s. Well, remembering what he was told by the pretended friends of the labourer at home, he would naturally fancy that his 6d. would not be more than 2d. or 3d. a day, how astonished then would he be to find plenty offering him work at a dollar a day.—(Loud cheering.) Let them contrast those two cases, and then say whether the poor had anything to do with the Corn-laws. If labour had been represented in the Legislature would those things ever have been allowed. The real root of the evil was this. In this country we had a labouring power equal to 600 millions of men—the population was 28 millions—and if' they bringo wl btuia.i t mhTyeeahtteßiesee aiaasr manufactured to such an extent, it was clear that they could net d consume the productions ; they must therefore starve if they could not have the advantages of foreign trade. With such a population as outs in a starving condition, would life and pro perty be safe ? It could not. Then he called upon the Court to take their choice of the least of two evils, for it was a moral. impossibility to put a stop to the powers of s team.—(Cheers.). Mr. Davison did nat desire to see the previous quesdon carried, nor could he agree in the resolutiodproposed. When an opportunity offered he intended to propose ar, amendment to the effect that the present Corn-law had uot given a satisfaction. —(Cheers.) aa latL buttted, o to revise the. —(Cheers.) That, he believed, he would only consent to call upon the 1..! fur their guidance, system, without pointing out any course the Mr. WELLS would cheerfully previous Quest* support_roe. and that because he was a friend of the poor.—( Laughter. ) was univer• 11 'Mons ofdebt.—( Cheers. ) 'the from even alluding to the 800 millions out ofthe B Berlin and Every one who had spoken on the question had carefully shrunk Prussian League was a mere carrying . of England again to such a Governors should have to se open the gold of Did Hon. G Milan eGentlemen e d m e decrees, e l e v s a , I and st t carried further. drain n u p degraded position as thboaelgt its d assistance from the Bank of France. o again on their knees, to previous question, vvhiets but only occasional customers. o question that the corn Mr. STEVENS rep e imported of late year was Only demanded - from this country ; but that g us, be. divided on the ' by a majority of lb. The Lord cau i s l e e w c e was negative d for Mayor, 6 Al dermen,d ne eommoneis voting it ; while 2 Aldermen, an commoners voted against it. and 79 p a visoe then proposed the following amendment : o w u e r i t e t n h o en t p That this Court, being impressed with a conviction that the existing Corn-laws have not worked beneficially for the va rious interests of this country, and fully convinced, therefore, of the iicresity of the subject being revised, do petition both Houses of Parliainent for a revisal of the laws which regulate the importation of corn, with a view to the introduction of such measure or measures as in the wisdom of Parliament shall be calculated to itimeasa the trade, both domestic and foreign, of the country at large, an d ameliorate to the utmost the condi tion of the labouring population." A desultory and , egr •d . • 3 discussion arose on points of order, in the midst of which Mr. King made several motions for ad journment. The amendment was negatived. Many of the members made their escape by the Alderman's entrance door. Mr. KING then put it to the Lord Mayor whether, some Members having left the Court after the question had been put, the Court was not dissolved.—( Much laughter. ) Mr. Alderman COPELAND moved that the Town-clerk read the oath taken by Common Councilmen. After considerable confusion the resolutions and the petitions founded upon them, were *Wowed to be carried without a divi sion. • to be The petition to the Commons was ordered,. presented by the Sheriffs, and Earl Fitzwilliam be requested to present that to the House of Lords. The Court adjourned at half-past six o'clock. Lord Headley, who succeeded to the family title on the death of his uncle, in 1840, is about to lead to the hy meneal attar Miss John, dau g h ter of 111 r. W il l i am Johnson, one of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas, Ireland. His Lord s hip arrived at Branh am H a ll, hi s seat i n Y or k s hi re, from Aghadoe, Ireland