The Sun. — London, England, 1842-02-17 00:00:00

SPIRIT -of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. PIRO% THE EVENING PAPERS OF TUESDAY. GLOBE. —Mr. Gladstone made last night as plau sible a speech as could be made for the Peel Corn bill. Mark how a plain tale shall put him down ! Mr. Gladstone says, that Corn-laws have subsisted for 500 year ; and that the principle of a maximum duty has been in' force during all that time, until it was first violated by the prohibitory law of 1815. There are Corn-laws and Corn-laws : there are merely nominal and there are really prohibitive maximum duties. It may not be inconsistent with the character of an Oxford High Churchman to practice a little Protestant (we beg pardon, Anglo-Catholic) Jesuitism in his_statements as well as in his arguments. But frauds, even pious, must be ex posed. What can the correct Mr. Gladstone mean by talking of the old BriFlish Corn-laws, as if they had anything prac tically in common with the more modern ones ? Was not the main object of the former to prevent exportation, " forestalling , " " regrating, and all the other chimerical supposed causes of dear ness ? Was there ever a law enacted, before Charles the First,' which bore on its front the sole Object of preventing corn from being too cheap? Again, what can Mr. Gladstone mean by adducing the maximum duties of the Act of 1773, as affording any sort of precedent either for those of the present law, or the Peel abortion for its amendment ? The Act of 1773 opened the home market to foreign supplies of wheat at a duty of sixpence per quarter when the price exceeded forty-eight shillings, and prohibited exportation when the price rose to 445. Here• was still the spirit of our old laws. To secure cheapnesss and plenty 'in the home market (though by superfluous precautions) was still always the prominent ostensible object of corn legis tion. Mr. Gladstone must know perfectly well " that the. maximum duty of 205." was practically a dead letter, under the Act of 1773. Neither that, nor the higher duties imposed between that epoch and 1814, ever were chargeable but at a few short intervals. The trade was practically free • the tide had turned ; from an exporting we had become an importing country at prices at which the maximum duty was not chargeable ; and Mr. Gladstone has himself confirmed the statement that " from 1765 to 1795, agriculture, manufac tures, and commerce, advanced with rapidity hand in hani." Why were they not let alone ? Will Mr.. Gladstone give us back the maximum duty of 1773 ? We will answer for it there is not a " total repealer" who will not gladly accept this return to the wisdom of our ancestors, and a regular corn trade. As Mr. Gladstone has the coolness to assert an iden tity of principle in the Corn-law commended by Adam Smith and the recent series of slippery-scale-devices his decent and orthodox official assurance may well be deemed equal to anything; and it is not at all surpris ing that he asserts the identity in principle of Sir Robert Peel's, project with Lord John Russell's. The assertion is just as glaringly false of the one, as it is of the other. _ _ _ STANDARD.—Lord John Russell asserted in the debate last night that a settled Corn-law never to be modified, is indispensable. How settled ? Can his Lordship, on one side settle immovably the advances of agriculture, or on the other, • the value of money ? 'From the nature of things, a Corn-law, to be just, must be subject to frequent revision, as pe remptory, if not quite as frequent, as the Mutiny . or Appropriation Acts'. And from whom does this argument for a settled-Corn-law come ? From a man who has, within twenty years, changed his views of the la* almost as many times, and who is himself the party unsettling the law in the present instance. To all his Lordship's taunts about disturbing the existing law and making concessions there is this one answer : " it is all your own work ; you began it." But then the sliding scale, says his Lordship, eausesirregular impor tation,. To be sure it does ; it is intended to do so, and it ought tO'do so. The purpose is to meet a constant and re gulai demand by such foreign supplies as may be rem; dered necessary by deficiences in the domestic supply. This it does effectually, as we see ; but if the domestic supply is irregular—and who can control the seasons? —the complement of. that supply must be irregular also. If the foreign supply were not irregular, it must ruin domestic agriculture, on one side, or leave the people without a sufficient supply in seasons of scarcity. Lord John's inconsequences are, however, leading us too far ; we must leave him in the hands of Mr. Gladstone, whose speech, while it convinces by its reasoning, will gratify every reader of good taste by its brilliant eloquence. COURIBR.—Lord John - Russell's attack last night on the plan propounded by Sir Robert Peel for the adjustment of the Corn-law • question, though ranking high as an effort of Parliamentary skill, and though evidently the result of great care and severe preparation, will, in our humble j udgment, contribute more towards the final success of the measure against which it wag aimed, than will. the speeches of its ,abrest ,defenders.. Clear, close, and argumen tative as was the reply which Lord John Rus sell drew from the Right 'Honourable the Vice- President. of the Board of -Trade—forceful, and conclu sivq, as - was his refutation of the Noble Lord's strongest points=and as was his-retort of the impu tation r of the do-nOthing policy—still we firmly and siverely believe his lucid and felicitous vindi cation of the measure -no* before the Commons and the --eountry will fail to recommend it half so , pd-*erfolly the mode and arguments with which tOrd JOhn Russell assailed it. Uyoti a care ful perusal of the speech delivered last night by the leader of the Opposition, it is utterly impossible not to awive at the conclusion that between hini and Sir R. , Peel hardly a shade of difference, as regards the really fundamental principle at issue, is perceptible. Lord J. Russell admits the right, on equitable grounds, of British agriculturists to protection against foreign producers. That is all the Government contends for; and yet, with this admission, thus voluntarily and freely given, the Noble Lord took upon himself to rebuke the framers of the proposed measure, because in conceding they had not succeeded in conciliating. FROM TIM EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE:—The mistake into which the Tories, as a party, have constantly fallen, they appear to be about, to repeat. They have always resisted con cession to popular claims until concession has ceased to possess the power to conciliate. They haYe- yielded to force- what they might, at an earlier stage, have conferred by . favour. Thus they acted in the case of the, Catholic disabilities. They opposed the relaxation of the civil bonds in which the Irish Catholics were held, until the degradation and oppressions to which those disabilities gave rise roused the public feeling to demonstrations of resistance, which the Government found itself un able to suppress ; and then, and not till then, Si r R. Peel and the Duke o f Wellington —who had obsti nately refused all concession—consented to abolish evert - civil disl!bility under which the Roman Catho lios•ihen laboured, and introduced the famous Bill of 1829,, which is, in fact, what it professes to b e i n f orm , the Magna Charta of Civil and Religious Liberty to -Ireland,.the . greater part of whose people had, until then, peen by law and in fact excluded from the pale of the Constitution. The Tories manifested the same blind obstinacy in the matter of Parliamentary Re font- which they displayed on the question of Catholic EniahciPation. The resistance of Sir Robert Peel, and the Cabinet of which he was the leader in the House of Commons, to the proposed transfer of the franchise from close boroughs convicted of bribery and corruption, to the populous towns which were unre presented in Parliament, naturally excited the people to more' firmly compacted and determined exertions to purify the House of Commons from the pollutions , which had gradually fOund their way into the systlm of elections, and had rendered the idea of representation a mockery and an insult. The re fugal of Sir Robert Peel to transfer the franchise froth East Retford - to Birmingham, Manchester, or Leeds, provoked popular demonstrations, which the events of every .Sueceeding year tended to strengthen, until the Duke of Wellington's declaration against Parliamentary Reform at the opening of the session of 1830, sealed tie fate of close boroughs, and termi na t e d the career of the Ministry, by which their existence had been maintained as the perfection of human wis dom, as exhibited in the formation of a system of Par liamentary representation. STANDARD.—The speeches of Sir Edward Knatchbull and Sir James Graham were both dis tinguished by a masculine frankness of tone as well as by great ability. Whatever may be thought by op ponents of the weight of their arguments, no one can impute to either of the Right Hon. Baronets pet tifogging or chicanery. The same masculine frank ness certainly does not characterise the speech of Mr. Labouchere, though the best opposition speech of the two night's debate. It would be easy, if we had roorn, to prove that Mr. Labouchere's ad dress is a ti?,sue of false principle; • and misapplied fees from the beginin g t o the end. A few sample must suffice in our, narrow limits. _The R:ight Honourable Ge n tl eman protested against' the d trin,e that the relative polt'on of - the landed ?e in terest, and, of course, of ;IT depen v, dent upon that interest, ought to be eeing five-sixths this preservation of the relativebllt po n sition 0 f Of ':the population fact a refusal to aggrandisement of the a llow the supposed re maining sixth, or rather of th e five-hundredth part of that sixth, the protest assume s any thipg but an impartial shape. But what is the prin ciple of this protest ? Is it not that classes may be properly proscribed for the benefit of other classes ? yet as the Queen owes equal protection to all her 3utal6cts, but owes the means of protec tion more immediately to those who are threatened, so the Legislature may, without devia tion from the frost imperfect partiality, provide specially for a class in danger; and, in truth, if classes are not to be protected as classes, what is the ireient pother about the necessity of protecting IRAlltleteturers as a class ? Next, Atr. Labouchere argue s t he question of a fixed duty, as if such a trade a preremptory foreign corn trade could be carried on upon the common steady principles of fair and pru dent commerce ; as if he had never heard the word spe culation ; as if the presen t sufferingi► of the country were not principally due to gambling . and monied manufacturers. Every man who is not blind to what is passing must be well aware that the opening of the foreign corn trade permanently would give rise to a system of stupendous gambling such as the world has never seen, the early effect of which must be to reduce home prices often below Conti nental prices, r as totally to ruin the British farmer --to raise prices often above the highest British prices so as to starve the people, and the end of which must be to desolate our fields, and to destroy our ma nufactures themselves, by alienating the capital of the country. It is folly to suppose that trade, under a particular system, must be governed by the same principles after that system shall have been changed. STATE OF TRADE. • (From the Manchester Guardian.) The feeling in our market yesterday was one of ex treme depression. There was very little demand, either for goods or yarn ; the business was generally at prices a shade below those of last week, and consequently lower than were ever known in this market at any former period. ROCHDALE FLANNEL MARKET, MONDAY, FEB. 14. To-day has been one of the dullest markets we have had this year ; indeed there has been little or nothing done in the shape of regular business. Those who have been obliged to sell have done so at considerable sacrifice. The wool market has been as still as the piece market, and prices stationary. HUDDERSFIELD MARKET, TUESDAY, FEB. 15.—Trade still continues in a dreadfully fitful state in this market; and all parties are alarmed by the dismal prospect before them. In short, there scarcely ever was seen in this town so agitated a market day. Deep and loud were the threats and complaints of nearly all partie , that Government should refuse to relax the prohibitory system. As to sales and prices, it is vain to quote. There is literally no business doing ; and the confidence of tradesmen is daily growing worse. LAW INTELLIGENCE. ROLLS' COURT, Feb. 16. GORDON V. THE GREAT WESTERN ♦ND CHELTENHAM RAILWAY COMPANY, The arguments in this part-heard cause were concluded to.day, when his Lordship delivered judgment. The plaintiff, Mr. Gordon. filed a bill against the above Company, who were the defendants in this cause. In that Bill the Act of Parliament under which the Company was constituted; the contract into which, according to the provisions of that Act, they entered with him; and the acts committed by the Company which, the plaintiff alleged, con stituted a violation of the Act of Parliament. were set forth, and the plaintiff prayed for an injunction to restrain them from committing these acts. To the motion for an injunction the defendants had put in a demurrer, denying the plaintiff to- be in a position which entitled him to the protection of the Court. With regard to the demurrer, the arguments turned upon the construction in the Act of Parliament of the word " public," which was alleged to have a particular meaning that extended to every word in that clause of the Act in which it occurred. The clause was to the effect that it was not lawful for the Com. pany to make or establish any public station, yard, wharf, &c. for loading and unloading goods, or for the convenience of passengers, &c. on the estate of Mr. Gordon, or within fifty yards of his estate or residence, without his previous consent. Upon that part of the line of railway which constituted o portion of the estate of Mr. Gordon, the defendants had erected a wooden building, which they called an engine -house, for de positing engines to be used on the railway. In that building they had erected a forge, so that it was a place for repairing engines. They had also built there a stable and two cottages. Mr. Gordon alleged that their so doing was contrary to the clause referred to. The defendants said other. wise. They said that the word " public" had reference to every word in the clause—that it meant a place to which any person constituting a portion of the public had a right to resort—that the place of deposit for the engines was not for the use of the public, but for the private use of the Company. It Was very much to be wished that clauses in Acts of Parliament were expressed with more precision than they commonly were. However, that being the case of the demurrer it ought not to be allowed if there was any relief to be had upon the bill. His Lordship would not say there was any relief to be had upon the bill, unless he adopted the construction put upon the word "public" by the defendants. On reading the, clauses of the Act, particularly the 17th and 136th, he could not satisfy himself either that the word " public " was to be applied to every part of the sentence, or if it was to be so applied that he could attribute to it the meaning which the defen dants did. That it was ambiguous, he thought, must be admitted. It was not easy to give clear and demonstrative reasons, one way or the other. However, even if the word " public" did extend to all parts of the sentence, It could not admit of the exclusive meaning attached to it by the defendants. He could not, therefore, see that the plaintiff was not entitled to the protection of the Court on that point, and he should accordingly overrule the demurrer. Then came the question of the motion to restrain the defend ants from using the buildings which they had erected, and from building others. At the tenacity with which the arguments on the point of the plaintiffs' acquiescence in this respect were urged, his Lordship was much surprised. If there had been acqui escence on the part of the plaintiff; his Lordship would have heard of it in a form very different from that in which it had been mentioned. There was no acquiescence, then, which could deprive the plaintiff of any right to which he was entitled. The next and most important point was the inconvenience that might arise to either party by the granting or withholding of the injunction. On this particular point he thought it best to abstain from granting the injunction till that matter was further investigated. He would, therefore, reserve that point till he consulted the decisions of Lord Cottenharn on questions of this nature. He would pronounce his final decision on Mouday next. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 16. STEAM-BOAT COLLISION. -CUNNINGIIALI AND ANOTHER V. WILSON This was an action against the old Woolwich Stearn-boat Corn. pany, for wilful damage done to the steam-boat, the Queen Vic ' toria, belonging to the plaintiffs, by the boat, the Naiad, having run againsk her. The witnesses for the plaintiffs swore positively that the boats, between which there had been, from the tint time the Victoria went upon the Woolwich and Hungerford passage, a sharp rivalry, started from Woolwich at the same time, on the morning of the 19th of June, 1840. For some distance they kept a parallel course, but the Victoria, which was considerably the swifter of the two, as well as the smaller, arrived at the Nile pier, where she stopped to take in a passenger, the Naiad being about a hundred yards behind, and further from the, shore. They stated that the outer course, nearer the centre of the river, and that which she was, till then, taking, was her proper course, the tide being low and running down ; and that she was sheered from that course, and her head deliberately turn.:d in shore, and ran into the Victoria's quarter, to the imminent danger of the passengers, of whom many were ladies. It was stated that after the first collision the paddles were kept on, instead of being backed, and she was again driven against the Naiad, where by a second damage was occasioned; the rail and staunchions of the Victoria's starboard quarter being carried away. The actual injury was not great. The Victoria arrived first at Hungerford : and the repairs, for which damages were laid, amounted only to 41. 6s. I Id. For the defendant.; (of the Naiad), a number of witnesses, who, however, as Mr. Justice Creswell observed, were shareholders or servants of the Company, swore that the collision was accidental, and owing to the mismanagement of the Victoria. The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 41. 6s. I Id. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Feb. 16. (Sittings st Nisi Prius in Guildhall.) ALLEN V. DREW. This was an action of assumpsit for work and 1 .bour done as a brieklayer by the plaintiff for the defendant. The facts of the case were totally devoid of public interest, although it occupied the Court up to two o'clock - .--A verdict was given far the defendant. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Feb. 16. IN RE BILL Al4O BROOKES. The final examination of these bankrupts took place this clay. Mr. Kearsley (the solicitor) having examined the bankrupt, Mr. Brookes, as to several, particulars in his accounts, informed him that it was intended to resist any claim which might be put in for an alleged debt of 1,0001. fro m th e fi rm to Mr. Brookes's father. • Mr. Robson, of the firm of Robson and M'Gregor (Chcapside), wished to remark upon two extraordinary circumstances which he observed upon examining the books of the bankrupts. One was, that up to 1837, when they were solvent, and Going well, their books were kept with regularity. At that time the clerk absconded, and it w..as s tid took the cashbook with him, since which they had kept all other books correctly, but no cash-book whatever. The COURT considered it extraordinary how the other books could be kept at all without a cash-book. Mr. Alderman T. WOOD, who appeared for the bankrupts, ex. plained that on the clerk's absconding, and carrying off the books, their accounts were left In disorder, and had not afterwards been rightly kept. But the petty cash.book and the banker's book would supply the want of a cash-book. The COVia could not be made to believe that. Mr. Robson begged further to remark that goods obtained from his firm were to the value of 8391. transmitted to Gibraltar to a brother of Mr. Brookes, who was a clerk under twenty.one years of age, who was represented to have sold them at a loss on the whole of 3381. Ifs 5d., or about 41 per cent. Mr. Brookes explained that the amount of sale had been received by the assignee since the bankruptcy, and the statement of his brother was that other goOds of the same quality were in the market at the same time, at the price for which he sold ; and if he had kept the goods back the season would have been lost. Mr. Commissioner EVANS observed that the matters pointed out by Mr. Robson were extraordinary ; but he would not, on that ac count, refuse to let the bankrupts pass. If, however, Mr, Robson should discover that anything had been concealed or misstated, he could have the bankrupts brought before the Court again. The bankrupts were then passed. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Feb. 16. --- - IN RE EDWARD RLIASON. The insolvent in this case, who was the wellknown Director of the Drury. lane Concerts, applied to be discharged on bail. Messrs. Simpson, of the Albion Tavern, Little Russell-street, and Lewis Levi, offered themselves as sureties, and were accepted in the sum of 1,1001. each. Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS said there appeared an irregula. rity on the face of the insolvent's schedule, inasmuch as certain property upon which it was alleged his landlord had a lien for rent, had not been properly described in it. In the next examination, he (Mr. Commissioner Reynolds) would require the landlord's at tendance. The insolvent was then liberated. Nine other town bail cases, and seven country, were then dis posed of, in which there appeared no features of general interest IN RE PETCHING. The insolvent's application to be discharged was opposed by Mr. Woodruff', on behalf of Mr. David Davis, a coachmaker, carrying on business in Vl' igmore street, Cavendish square. The opposing creditor said that, in the year 1839. the insolvent came to him, and stating himself to be a very extensive ship. owner trading to Hobart Town, and the possessor of numerous houses and large tracts of land, then purchased a number of car riages for shipment to that place. Reference being given to Messrs. Gordon, of Billiter-square, who gave a most satisfactory answer, he accepted a bill in payment for the amount, and the goods were taken away. Soon afterwards the insolvent returned to Van Diemen's Land, where he reraained nearly a year before he came back to England. In the nicest time the bill was dishonoured, and the insolvent executed a bill of sale of his property in favour of the Messrs. Gordon, and he (the opposing creditor) being apprehensive he was about to leave the country, caused him to be held to bail upon a Judge's order. Charles John Miller, the steward on board the Sir George • Arthur, deposed that the ship was the property of the insolvent, and likewise to his possession of property at Hobart's Town, and his son in-law keeping the Waterloo Hotel there. Mr. WoonaoFee cross-examined the insolvent at considerable length rssspecting the disposal of several vessels, of which he had been proprietor at Hobart Town and Sydney, but elicited not hi ng material, when the Learned Counsel said, after hearing the very fair and staaightforward evidence of the insolvent, no one could for a moment think of attaching any blame to him. Mr. Corniaissi-ner REYNOLDS said, from the evidence, the in. sOlvent appearet, to have been deeply injured, and that without a ' ,suspicion of dishonesty. He should therefore order his discharge I forthwith, TURKISH EXCHEQUER FRAUD. CONSTANTINOPLE, JAN. 17.—A fraudulent transaction lately discovered, in connection with the public trusts and deposits of the Bezestan, has created as great a sen sation among the Turks as the recent affair of the Ex-' chequer bills produced in England. The Bezestan, as many of our readers must be aware, forms a part of the bazaars of Constantinople, and, from the solid and fire proof nature of the masonry of which it is constructed, has been selected as the locale of a sort of bank of de posits, which bears no interest, however, but consisting chiefly of gold, jewels, and other valuables, placed there merely for security. Should the proprietors of these effects die without heirs or intestate, the whole of the amount reverts to the Imperial treasury. Tho most singular feature of the Institution, and one alto gether Oriental, is, that its keepers or trustees are all Kurds, belonging to a particular tribe in Kurdistan, which is responsible for_ their integrity. A certain indi vidual, about 20 years ago, was proceeding on the pilgrim age to Mecca, made a deposit of the value of two to three thousand pounds at the Bezestan. On his return, which, for somecause or other, had been so long deferred, to Con stantinople, he applied to the keepers for his property, but was informed, to his great dismay, that it could nowhere be found ; the place was searched, rummaged, and ran sacked again and again, but no such deposit could be dis covered. Still the liadg,i, little satisfied with the result of the search, however zealously it had been pursued, bethought himself of applying to the Grand Vizier, who at once undertook to investigate the matter, and, accompa nied by a whole train of mashes or policemen, set out immediately on this voyage of discovery to the Bezestan. Ilis researches, it appears, were attended with much better success ; for, on examining the registers of the in stitution, it was found that there was not only this, but many deposits whose disappearance could by no means be satisfactorily accounted for. The fact was, that though there was no previous instance of fraud against indivi duals, yet many deposits, of which it was presumed the proprietors were dead, had been appropriated by the keepers, instead of being transferred, as the law directs, to. the Imperial Treasury. The effects of the Ha,dgi in question had, it seems, been also embezzled in this man ner. The upshot of the affair is, that nine of these res pectable Kurdish bankers have been soundly bastinadoed and sent to the bagnio ; and that in future the Govern ment, whi'e taking charge, through its own functionaries. of these trusty deposits, will not lose sight of its own interests. The amount of private property in the Bezes tan has been found to be upwards of 300,000 purses, or a million and a half sterling. Similar measures will be adopted with respect to Mosque deposits. IMPERIAL PARLIA MEN T. HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 16. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before 4 o'clock. Lord ACHESON took the oaths and his seat for Armagh. Leave was given to bring in a Bill to Light the Town of Nottingham with Gas. Leave was given to bring in a Bill to improve the Manchester Infirmary. Leave was given to bring in. a Bill to Improve the London and Greenwich Railway. Leave was given to bring in the Birkenhead Improve ment Bill. _ Leave was given to bring in a Bill to alter and enlarge the powers of the Midland Counties Railway. CORN-LAWS. Sir J. EASTHOPE presented a petition from a cler gyman of the Church of England, praying for the total repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. YORKE presented a petition from York, signed by 4,000 persons, against the proposition brought forward by. Sir Robert Peel with' respect to the Corn-laws. Mr. STRU rr presented a petition from Derby, signed' by 6,836 individuals, against the Government proposition respecting . the Corn-laws ; also a petition from the same place, signed by the female inhabitants, praying the House to repeal the Corn-laws, and to re lieve the distresses of the poor.—(Cheers.) Mr. BYNG presented a petition from the Inhabitants of Battersea-fields, praying the House to open the Bridges on thedThames to the public. Sir G. LARPENT presented a petition from Not tingham against the Corn-laws. Sir J.COLEBROOKE presented a petition from Taun ton to the same effect. Mr. HASTIE presented a petition to the same effect. Dr. BOWRING presented a petition from Shoreditch, signed by 19,250 persons, against the Corn-laws ; also 49' petitions from Bolton and its neighbourhood, one of which was signed by 8,700 individuals, and another by 3,000 females. An HON. MEMBER presented three petitions from Labder;'Stirling; and another town in Scotland, against the proposition'of Sir Robert Peel. . Mr. 'JOHNSTONE presented a petition from the hand-loom weavers of Lanark, stating that they viewed with surprise and indignation the propo sition of her Majesty's Government, and praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws ; also petitions from Ayr to the same effect. Sir G. STRICKLAND presented several petitions, all praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. - Mr. STANSFIELD presented 110 petitions from various places in the counties of York, Oxford, Devon, &c., signed by upwards of 12,000 people, praying for the repeal of the - Corn-laws. One of the petitions was signed by those who had already sent up many previous petitions to that llouse, praying- for the same object, and it stated that the petitioners viewed with indignation and alarm the measure introduced by her Majesty's Ministers, and strongly protested against any such measure being introduced. Mr. WIGNEY presented a petition from Brighton, praying - for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. MARTIN presented petitions frcm Tewkesbury with the same prayer. Mr. - M. GIBBON presented petitions from two parishes in the county of Lancaster, against, Sir E. reel's proposed Measure ; and fifty trade petitions from Lancaster, praying for the total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. Sir W. CLAY presented similar petitions from White chapel and Stepney, signed by 31,159 individuals. POOR-LAW. Mr. O.DUNCOYBE presented a petition from the Chi chester Union, in the county of Durham, praying for the repeal of the Bastardy Act in the Poor-law Amend ment Bill. THE sun, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING►, FEBRUARY 17, 184 k. Sir G. Grey. Mr. Loch, Mr. J. W. Patten, and Sir. W, Somerville. Several petitions, including those from Bridport, Har wich, and Sudbury, were then referred to the Committee. INTERFERENCE OF PEERS IN ELECTIONS. Mr.THESIGER then rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, with respect to the right of Peers to interfere in the election of Members of Parlia ment. The question involved points of great interest to the privileges of that House. It was whether it was com petent to a Peer of Parliament to interfere with elec tions, by becoming a petitioner against the return of a Member of that House. The question arose upon two petitions presented against the late return for Bel fast. One of those petitions was presented by Lord Innishowen, and the other by Archibald Hamilton, one of the electors of Belfast, but the Noble Lord was the only person who had entered into recognizances. The circumstances of the case were new ; he had not been able to find, upon inquiry, or by his own research, anything like it. Cases of the pre • sent kind wore to be decided by principles which were familiar to them, and no doubt could be enter tained as to the course it w as necessar y t o pur sue. At the late election for Belfast, a Com moner, the son of a Peer, was unsuccessful. There was no doubt it was competent to the Noble Lord to come to the House and petition against the return. But in the present instance, immediately after the return, and before any petition was presented, the Noble Lord was called to the House of Peers by the title of Baron Innishowen and Carrickfergus. It was clear, that when the Earl of Belfast was called to the Upper House, he was entirely disqualified from being an elector, and he could have no personal interest in elections and any interference would be a breach of the privi leges. They were all familiar with the sessional orders which were passed every Session, _ and which were the same now as at the time of the Act of William. That order, after stating that no Peer of the realm has a right to vote at any_election except those for Irish Peers, went on to state that it was a high infringement of the liberties of the Commons for any Lord of Parlia ment to concern himself in the election of Members to serve in Parliament, except only as Irish Peers. There might be some doubt as to the correct interpretation of that order; whether it referred merely to the period of election. But if the Honourable Members would look to the circumstances of the present case, ' they would see that the order applied to it ; for it was plain that if a party applied to that House for the purpose of voiding an election, what did he but interfere in that election ? Lord Belfast 'baying been a candidate could no doubt have petitioned -- against the return before ho. became a Peer. But no doubt whatever that he could not petition . now that he had become a Peer, for it would be an infringement of their privileges. The moment he was made a Peer the ground was cut from under him. This appeared to him to be a matter of importance to the House, and it was necessary that it should be determined. He thought it right to say, that the decision of the House could make no difference whatever with respect to the inquiry, because there was another petition presented from the electors, which was a good petition, and the -rejection of Lord Innishowen's would not prevent the in vestigation. He had devoted much attention to the rules and privileges of the House, and he could not help thinking this question worthy of their consideration; but he did not desire to press the subject more than the House might think the case required. The House could not be too jealous of its privileges which were granted, not for the benefit of the Members themselves, but for that of the country. He concluded by moving that the. two petitions from Lord Innishowen and Archibald Hamilton should not be re ferred to a Committee. Mr. RIGBY WASON knew a case which went pari panic with the case alluded to by the Honourable and Learned Member. In that case the petitioners bad entered into r ecogn i zances , an d had paid witnesses for their attendance. lle considered it would be extremely inconvenient if the House were to take cognizance of these cases. The proper place for considering them was in Committee, and he considered it would be extremely irregular for the House to interfere in the pre sent instance.—(llear, hear.) If the petition were referred to the Committee, and that Committee found that the petitioner was not qualified to present a petition, the Committee would report that there was no valid pe tition against the return, and the sitting. Members would be declared duly elected. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL suggested that the proper course to be pursued was to refer the petition to the Committee. Sir G. CLERK said that the present was perfectly a novel case. lie believed that in a reference to the journals, no case could bo found in which an unsuccessful candidate at an election, who had presented a - petition against the return to the House, had been called up to the House of Peers in the interim between the presentation and the trial of the petition. But there were several instances orthe qualifications of candidates having been under the - consideration of the house and the Committee, which, though not exactly the'same, bore a strong analogy to the present case. In the Honiton case, the election having been declared void, and no special report having been made to the House, the candidate returned at the previous election went down to the second election and was defeated ; he then became a petitioner. There was nothing on the face of the petition which would disqualify him from being e. petitioner ; but the House inquired . whether he was disqualified or no. In the ' same way in an other election, notice was given that the qualifi cation should be the: question, and the . Com mittee went into the merits of the case, before they allowed him to go before the House. That applied to cases where nothing appeared on the face of the petition. In the Carma+tthen election in 1803, there were three. petitioners, stated to be freeholders in the county of Carmarthen, but it did not appear "en the face of the petition that they were entitled to vote ; the House had, however, referred the petition to the Committee ; and in other cases the- House consi dered whether the qualification of the electors war Suf ficient, showing that the character of the petitioner should be declared b the House. C ou ld t h ere b e any doubt that George Itemble Chichester, Baron Innishowen, had been a candidate for the representation of Belfast, being then a commoner ? Was it possible that Lord Innishowen could appear before the House in the character of a petitioner ? He would ask the House what course it would adopt when a person had petitioned against a Peer. Would the House allow that Peer to go before them and defend himself ? Certainly not. If the person petitioned against is called to the other House, he was not allowed to appear before the Com mittee ; and if this objection appears on the face of the petition itself, . it was clear that it could not be referred to the Committee. If there was no other petition, except that signed by the Noble Lord and the elector, it could only be taken as the petition of that individual elector himself. He therefore thought that this - was an entirely new case, and that the House would be establishing a very dangerous precedent, if it, for the first time, referred to the Committee a petition that bore on the face of it, that it was signed by, and was the petition of a Member of the other house of Parliament. He should certainly vete for the motion of his Hon. and Learned Friend, that. the petition be not referred to the Committee. M. ROEBUCK wished to hare the words of the pe tition read, that they might see how the fact appeared on it. No one in that House knew that Lord InnishoWen was a Member of the other House of Parliament. The Clerk read the petition, from the wording of which it appeared to be the petition of " George K. w Chichester, Baron of Innishoen, Carrickferg us , being the'n a Commoner." - Mr. ROEBUCK would put it to his Hon. and Learned Friend who had brought forward the motion, whether there was anything in the words of that peti* time, which ought not to go before the Com mittee. He wanted to know what there was in that petition to show that the petitioner was a Peer of the 1..a1m. It was stated in the petition that he wus a Commoner, but there was nothing in the petition to show that he was not a Commoner still. But as there was no evidence of that kind there was no reason 36t shown why the petition should nut be referred to the Committee. • Sir G. CLERK said that that House was cognizant of the Journals of th„.., House of Lords, and of the Gazette s both of whieh showed that Lord Inni,showen had been called to the Peerage. -- Mr. ROEBUCK said that in that MO the proper course would be to adjourn the disetission Until the Jour nals of the HouSe' of Lords or Olt) Gazette had been consulted. - .. . An HoN. ...IESIBEIt On the Opposition benches wished to put t to the 'Speaker whether the point at issue illi7;et not be acced e d by the Committee. The SPEK AER said question was the whether the petition of L or d I nn i s h owen was such a brea c h o f th e privileges of the House as mcglit be referred to an Elec• tion Comniittee. In hio. 'opinion as the question related to the privileges tli the b ase , the House itself should take it int o it s cons id erat i on , a nd s hould not refer it to a Committee. Mr. WATSON said as this was a matter ... requiring the most serious consideration of the h House, they the one, candidates notis ' e : to be candidates, heforetey ca . me to a a right to be ought to to search for precedents , decision —(Hear.) There were two _kinds of persons a right . _ The question was, d w e 'lko me h a d d a a t ri a th e t i t e o ct p io e n ti , t iN io .h n o th h e ad ,a,hreiguhthewitihvains tohnee,maenaidlinghatohdfait no.t a right to be a candidate and who declared tithe t 4.,, h;: . 1 he not subsequently the Act to petition the turned ; , the .other the wee had not Lord Innishowen a decision the House . howesi to be heard by ) At all events, they House, and ought not Lord t r ihm n ee ll awr s He could not iestion with his pre- Indeed, the great object of the as ol s 't i h ug e House. counsel at the bar?—(Hear, precedents. of the ces:itigiietlhij, ‘lknowledgerinzi first ot. hll: E o c : n a t l i e l s ito.ato,f:lsievtta,.onr apprehended u c i_ hdi on e r sqPntrtiseieisisiticit:o- questions pt h o ped that his Hon. Friend election law was to keep such Act t , t h h i s e (I 'a i s r t it e b ert. would Postpone it.— tlemen who was to have Mr. VERNON small su ggested the postponement of the question, for in point of fact there was no that even one of the Hon. Gen netice•of it given. So little was known about it, been sworn on the Committee had not known himself that it was intended he should be on it until a few mo ments before .he was called upon to be sworn ; it woe quite impossible that the House could come to. a just conclusion ; at present, therefore, it op- , peered ti) : him (Mr. Smith) that no person except the I Learned Member, who had brought forward the questiore and the' S 2 cretary to the Treasury with whom no dou - bt there was commun!cation upon the subject, had brought forward precedents With respect to it. Mr. TH;GISIGER had not the least objection that tithe should be taken: to consider. the. question, as it 'was one of conSiderable importance. Honourable , Gentlemen stated that the House was taken by firstlll)ee questionea 1 1 . o surprise; but he (Mr. Thesiger) had given notice dis tinctly on Monday last that he would call attention to the subject. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said there was no mention of the matter in the Votes of the House this morning. - After a desultory conver sa ti on , i n w hi c h theCLIAN CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. ROEBUCK, and some other Members took part, the further consideration of the question was postponed to Friday next. The SPEAKER informed the House that the exa miner of recognisances had reported to him that the sureties entercl into for the prosecution of the petition against the return of Mr. Gregory for the county of the City of Dublin, were unexeeptiOnable. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON .THE CORN-LAWS. On the Order of the Day being read for resuming the debate on the Corn-laws, Mr. E. BULLER rose to address the, House. The Hon. Member stated that Hon. Gentlemen opposite had taken'credit for advocating the sliding scale solely on public grounds. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Aylesbury went still, further. lie stated that even if his opinion were that the sliding scale now proposed by the Right Honourable Bart. would have the effect of reducing the value of agricultural capital one-fifth, or 20 per cent., yet, such was his attachment to the Right Hon. Baronet that, with some thing like Roman virtue, he would support the sliding scale at this enormous cost. He altogether repudiated the Roman virtue of the lion. Member for Aylesbury. He had no hesitation in declaring that were any measure to emanate from either side of that House, whether from the Right Honourable Baronet, or the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell), if, in his conscience, he believed the effect of that measure would be to reduce the value of agricultural capital one. fifth, no considerations of party, no personal predilections, would prevent him from giving the measure his decided opposition. He disclaimed for himself all that disinterestedness of which Hon. Members on the other side so loudly vaunted. In every speech he made, and in every vote he gave on .the subject of the Corn-laws, he looked to his own interest as a landed proprietor, and as an occupier of land.—(Hear.) But he thought his own interest was in the prosperity of the country, the wel fare of the labouring classes, and the increase in num ber and wealth of the nation, all of which , he thought would result from the abolition of . the Goraslaws. • It was his conviction that tde interests of agriculture would not suffer by the abolition of these laws.—(Hear, hear.) Looking at the information which had bean laid upon the table of the House respecting the places from which sup plies of corn could be had for this country, he was greatly surprised at the concession of Tamboff,—((lear, hear.) It was calculated that 26,000,000 of quarters was the necessary supply for the 26 millionS which he found to be the population of this country, and of these twenty-six millions, one million quarters had been imported. But the population of this country went 'on increasing at the rate of 300,000 or 400,000 p2r annum, and in ten years there would be an increase of between three millions and four millions of inhabitants, and how, he would ask, could the hoine production be made to satisfy the wants of the whole population ? He had said that he took that volume of information laid upon the table • for the name of Tamboff, but he threw it down again in despair. It would be in the recollection of the 'House, that the Noble Lord,. the Member for , North Lancashire, had seared all England from its propriety, by declaring that thirty-eight millions of quarters, the production of a single province of Russia, were loading in the port of St. Petersburgh to meet the wants of the people of this country, But what were the facts ? The population of that place was only 1,700,000, and the whole amount of wheat produced amounted, instead of 38,000,000, to something between 21,000 an d 35,600 quar t ers .—(H ear , h ear .) Instead of being twice the annual consumption, it dwindled down to something like six hours' con sumption.—(Hear, hear.) He did not adopt the opinions or sentiments of the gentlemen occupying the opposite benches, neither did he admit much that had been said on that side of the House. He (lid not admit that the Corn-laws were - an impious prevention of the d es i gns o f P rov id ence . He did not admit that the Corn-laws were the cause of the whole distresses of the country, but he believed they were the cause of increasing that distress. Ile believed that in times of prosperity they injured the country an d aggrav ated the distress. For his own part he was satisfied that the combining causes of the distreis of the country arose from the monetary system in America, our want of trade with China, and other . causes. Giving the Right lionoureb!e Baronet credit for the fullest intention of relieving the distresses of the country, still he could not but think that the present was the smallest measure of relief - ever given by a great Minister to a starving people. Though he gave gave him credit for his motives, he could not but lament his straightened circumstances, which precluded him front carrying out a more enlarged plan. In the few observations which he- intended to make, he would state as correctly as - he could the value of the plan the Right Honourable Baronet intended to produce. He . could not help remarking the great discrepancy between the speech of the Right Honourable Baronet and the scale which he had laid before the House. The Right lion. Baronet said that if prices could range between 545. and 585., the duty would be an , admirable protection to the farmer, and calculated -to benefit the other interests of the country. lie (Mr. E. -Buller) confessed he could not understand why, with these views, the Right lion. Baronet laid hiSseale on the toile of the House, when he (Mr. E. B u ll er ) f e l t satisfied that the framer of that scale intended that its effect. should be to raise prices to 665.; and he (Mr. Buller) felt convinced that it would have the -effect of raising the price as high as 735. He (Mr. E. Buller) could not help remarking another discrepaney• be tween the speech and the scale. The Right Honour - able Baronet was decidedly an advocate of the sliding scale, alai when he (Mr. E. Buller) looked at the scale • lain upon the table of the House, he must say, whoever • framed that scale did not even frame it with the inten; tion of supporting the scale. He believed that his object was a fixed duty, but of an enormous amount. Now he be lieved the parties who had framed that scale expected that a very large portion of the future importations of corn to this country would be entered when the price was 665., and the duty 68. per quarter. He believed that if this scale should be carried the Right Honourable the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, would, in a very few years, come down to the house, a nd repeat his language of former evening. —(Hear, Mar.) He (Mr. E. Buller) was sure that if this proposal was carried, it would be attended with all the evils which the Vice-President of the Board • of Trade acknowledged were attendant upon the 'present scale. The great ob jection to the present scale equally applied to the pro posed plan. There was an inherent defect in the sliding scale which nothing could wash out vit., that it held out to the persons who had iri their possession a quan tity of corn an inducement to keep that corn back. Now the scale proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet was open to that objection on that score. It was true the Right Hon. Baronet had endeavoured to reduce the amount of inducement to the holders of corn to withhold their corn from bond! but the inducement still remained when the price of corn was rising and the duty was falling ; and all that he (Mr. Buller) could say of the Right Honourable Baronet's Measure %VAS, that it wits a palliative and not n Cure ; that it -was at best only a mitigated misfortune: No title could look at the rettirns which hall been laid tiptin the table Of the House, but must adiiiit that the existing 'scale was to prevent the admission of foreign corn, sinless it had reached the maximum of price and the. iiiiliiititirit of duty. His lion. Friend the Witmer for Mallen had shown the extremely small quantity of corn which had been admitted when the. price was falling end the ditty fisifig, at the dutits of 8(1.. 64% dd., and 2s. Bd. They might say that the objection contained in that statement , to the scale now before the House, applied to the present law! 'there was a great induteitietit iviith there Was a difference of 4s. of duty, amid (oily Is. in price. When they came to the price of 725., the duty was 2S: Bd., and th ere was, an indueenieet to the holders of foreign corn to withhold it fruit! the market when there was a difference of Is, in- the price and ls: Bd. in the duty: The scale now before .the house proposed to reduce, iu tbit eiretinistattees ; the inducements to withhold corn from bond to is.: in duty and is. in price. It appeared, to hini (Mr. Buller) that the indtttements under' the proposed, settle Were ; as nearly as possible, as grea t as existed tinder 'ilia present scale, when the price . Was betWedii it,Ml 13s: When the prices had arrived at tils:; thoitigi the indtitie ,, meat tt) withhitchl rvair sti-luw ; under the scale proposed, in. no 'instance had any foreign corn been intrOdueed at that duty, so long sl •Cdrit edfitiiiiied 1-. y rise. In 1828, in' tlit Ilf§t week • in Novenitier, the slaty was *2s. Bd., and the quantity imported that week was 1,585 quarters. In the folio*tuf s the quantity was upwards of 10001130 and in the next six weeks, it was as much as 700,009 i lii the lletti iniilg Of March, 1831, the price 11* 1 1.si M .:, and the duty w as 2s. Bd, In the following fortnights; whilst the dutyre maltied at 25.. Bd.; the tpiiiiitity Of coin itiipOrted was no more than 1,01 quailers. 'But ni the following week the duty fell to is:, tuid the quantity of corn imported in that 'week was do less titan 191,346 quarterss—(Hear, hear.) iii the 'next month in six weeks the intpertati ii'as more than one million.—(lleals) to 158., in the first week of Seb tember, the price of corn fell front and the duty was 2s. Bd, and the tinantitv of corn introditced was 2,800 quarter!, The following week the duty *tilt to is,, and there was the late qutaity Of 1,200;000 quar ters imported,—(Utar, hear) Thus it its aitleilt that corn was withheld at a duty of N, 'oct: uY.itcr the present scale, as - it wou ld be Utter any other scale at that duty, which Was found to be a sufficietit !Mince meat to prevent owners from bringing in their corn: The present proposed settle ; .therethre; etintaitied pro cisely the same Inducement to withhold corn, and would -operate in the same way. Notwithstanding the reduc tion of duty effected by it, the scale of the Right IlOh. Baronet still left Sidlicient inducement to keep that corn, to prevent it froint coming to Market while prices were rising, and as a necessary coils sequence the effect would be to raise prices to the highest possible point, and the lowest duty. 'There was another point in the scale, and that Wits the rest he could not understand why this rest had been intro duced at 18s. A duty of 189. was as effectual a prohi bition, as a duty of 20S. or 30s. He had really come to the conclusion, th a t th e r est was introduced there not for use, but for ornament; and that the Hon. Gentlemen who bad devised the scale, thouitt symmetrical, if it was arth iiitrodu would be more e top of the scale, than at the bottom. IC it • was the expectation of those who devised the scale. 'that - corn would come in free at 665., he Was - perfectly certain that they would be disappointed in that expectation. And why would they be disappoirited'? Because it still retained the great vice of - every' scale; an induce, ment to withhold corn from Market... The rest was placed too high, because it was fixed at a priceWlileh was never attained except in years of dedetent hOine.produotion when they must necessarily have recourse to a foreign supply. Whenever the price reached 665., they would scarcely find an instance in which it failed, during the ensuing harvest, to reach the maximum price. Those, therefore, who were in possession of corn had not only a probability, but an absolute cer tainly of seeing it rise to the highest pcint of 735.1 t appeared to him that the:effect of the proposed measure would be to keep up prices at the highest amount, and he be lieved that the rest at 565. was of no value ; but if these things were true, he did not see how Hon. Gentlemen opposite could say that it was nit improvement on the former system. He had looked at it in every view, and he could not find how it would benefit the consumer. He could not understand the course pursued by her Majesty's Ministers upon the subject. Theywere pledged, they said, to the sliding scale in this country, and yet they were determined upon introducing a fixed duty into Canada. But the reasons which should govern them in the one case were the same as those which should govern them in the other.—. (Hear.) • There were changes of season, and fluctuations of price, in Canada as well as in England. and there was no reason why the same system should not be adopted in both countries. It would appear as if Ministers thought it desirable to try the principle of a fixed duty, and had selected Canada for the experiment.—(Hear, hear.) When these deductions are made, they show what the scheme of the Right Honourable Baro net really is ; and he was sure. that if the House calculated the value of the proposed mea sure to the consumer, Honourable Members, he (Mr. Buller) was quite convinced, would agree with him in thinking that the advantages to the consumer were so very trivial, that they must be totally lost in their minute ness. The Noble Lcrd, the Member for North Lancashire, had entered into a minute calculation of the price of sugar last Session, but he (Mr. Buller) would suggest to the Noble Lord now to calculate the precise difference to the poor man in the price of a 41b. loaf, if the proposed scheme of the Right Honourable Baronet was passed into a law.—(Hear, hear.) That would be a calculation worthy of the Noble Lord's great talents. The country was in a state of excitement upon that ques tion. Oxfordshire grumbled—Buckinghamshire growled —and Leicestershire was actually approaching to rebellion.—(L. ughter.) As sure as the germ was the earnest of the blossom, as sure as the blossom was the earnest of the tult, the embryo of the present measure would ripen into a fixed duty. He believed that a fixed duty of 6s. would eventually , be established.--(Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Dorchester had consulted the pamphlet of Mr. Hubbard, and that pamphlet had, strange to say, carried home to his mind a con viction of the impossibility or maintaining a fixed duty. Mr. Hubbard said that the failure of the harvest in 1818, not only in this country, but upon the Conti nent, the general scarcity which ensued, and the unusual precautions by which the continental Governments pro vided against that scarcity—these ciretiingtance3 would have required the suspension of the fixed duty, had one bes.n established ; but he asked if a quarter of a cen tury had elapsed without a recurrence of that scarcity, it would be wise to refuse to legislate upon an equitab!e system because it might possibly not recur. As well' might they abrogate the " Habeas Corpus Act, because circumstances might occur which would re quire its temporary suspension. —(Hear, hear, hear.) He trusted he had said quite enough to show he did not approve of the proposal of the Right Hon. Baronet. —(Laughter and hear.) But he (Mr. B.) thought it perfectly practicable to institute a compromise between the interest of the- grower and consumer, but retain ing the sliding scale so long as it was necessary for the protection of the farmer, and abandoning it when, without injury to them, the consumer would be bens . tited. Ho would reserve details for future dessussion, but would assure the House, that in coming forward, he had no other motive than the relief of the poor and the service of the country.—(Cheers.) Sir W. JAMES observed that when the Noble Lord at the head of the Opposition had denounced the Right Hon. Baronet's measure as an aggravation of former evils, the Hon. Gentleman who just spoke had performed a sort of scanty justice in calling the measure a mitigated mischief and a widow's mite. The speech of the Hon. Baronet--(A laugh)—was not different from the speeches of other Hon. Gentlemen on the same side of the House in representing the distress of the manufacturing districts in glowing, but, in his opinion, exaggerated terms. The Hon. Baronet—(A laugh)—(lt was here intimated to the Honotintble Baronet that the laSt speaker, Mr. Buller, was not a Baronet.) Oh, he begged pardon; he thought that the Hon. Gentleman had been made a Baronet by the late Government.—(Much late zhter.) The Hon. Gentlemen. had talked of Tam bott, and the exaggerated statements made by the Noble Lord, the Secretary of the Colonies, with respect to it ; but it must be conceded, from the fertility of the American States near the Ohio, which had been described in such glowing terms by the Noble Lord the Member for London, that the British farmers would have but little chance of competing with them if corn was admitted at the low duty advocated by Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—(Hear, hear.) He con ceived the real question to be, whether any protection should be afforded to agriculture, and if so, to what amount. They had• begun at the wrong end. They were now discussing what protection should be given to agriculture, and when it was decided that that protection would be best afforded . by a sliding scale, the Honourable Member for Wol verhampton would come and ask them to take away all protection whatever.—(Hear.) The consequence was, that confusion was introduced into their debates, and two questions mixed together which ought to be kept distinct.—(Hear, "hear, hear.) The error into which Hon. Gentlemen had fallen seemed to him almost inseparable from the' circumstances of the case. Th a t there should be protection to agriculture he thought the thinking part of the people of England, had decided. No one could have more respect than lie had for public opinion, but the difficulty was to know what the public opinion was; —(Hear, hear.) On the whole (and taking it with all its faults-he loved it still), lie did not know how any fairer representation of public opinion could be taken than the returns to that House. He thought it might be fairly argued that the sound, moderate, and enlightened part of the public opinion was in favour of protection to agriculture. Upon these grounds he should be most willing to leave the question, had not Gentletnen entered largely into it, who had preceded him. The Hon. Member for Coventry had interspersed his speech with abuse upon the landlords, and the Hon. Member for Sheffield had talked of their cobweb interests and their flimsey selfishness.—(A laugh.) Protection had been given to the landed interest for the last 500 years, and that that had been done with success he thought was plain from the statements of Mr. M‘Culloch himself. The value of agricultural produce since 1774 had increased in this country to a greater extent than her whole taxation. It was impossible to look at the state of the country, without seeing that there was no favoifr extended to any one class in preference to another, and that there was no favoured interest. " Land and trade," said Mr. Josiah Childe,. a high authority on such a subject, " Land and trade are twins, and must ever exist and fall together. Land cannot flourish but trade will feel it, and trade cannot fall but land Will fall,also," This had been quoted go often, that it had beCotile a truism ; but when he perceived that Hon. Gentlemen on both &des the (louse, and in each interest, had, during the course of the present de bate attempted to depreciate the importance of the interests to which they were opposed, he thought it was . a truism of which many Honourable Members ought to beremintled.--()alettr, hear.) There was another point to which 'he would allude, that of independence of foreign s „ pp ly. He would not deny that, to a cer tain extent, we were dependent - upon foreigners, but still lie contended that every endeavour should be made to avoid being dependent upon foreigners for the staple food of the country.—(l - lear.) Agri culture had tilways been considered infinitely preferable to trade or commerce. The Noble Lord had said that there was no authority but Malthus, who had . ad vocated an independence of foreign supply. Now, he (Sir W. James) contended that Adam Smith was also an authority in favour of that position. He said that trade Wile, iii Addition to the danger from the winds and the waves, exposed to danger from the. folly and in justice of absurd laws.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) He did not tiiiiiit it tvould be prudent of this country to give tip the itiee. of being in most years independent to a nertaiti bkfent of a foreign snppl Besides the land bore exclusive burdens,— (" No," "What?'') The land tali; the cotititpax; and the bulk of the 1 3 0 or-rates were borne by the latid.—tfittaf,) If that were not the case he would be prepared to go to a Conittllttee of Inquiry, in 3 pfOlidgOd by the Honourable Member for Sheffield.— (Hear.) COnsideflog also the various ways in which protection was afforded to the manufactures, he thOugilt, it ,bits thidetilalq do more than fair to give some _peoteetien to the agriculturists,—(Hear, hear, from the MutiSterial beheliee. The lion; Member then read from the returns a list of the Vtitsidild articles of manu facture which were protected by a duty, and alto of south aftieh3A idf tigrieultural and colonial produce which proteettal# tlittita.) ttb*MB the Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord the Treasury ; had saitl, If the duty on corn Were entirely Abolished, it Would be necessary to alter our fiscal system. If the protection were taken off corn, it could not be continued upon lilieiisi edtiditgi and the like.—(Hear, hear, hear.) die (it W. iiatnee) should like to know, if such were the ease, ho* they could raise the revenue, and pay the national debt ; he did not believe it would be possible. James D. Hume had said that if they relintiled .the duty on corn, they ought to felietti it Oil all iititer3 tiimtiltatteotisly.—(Bear, hear.) Ire had heard a great deal of talk about the distress In the country, and the effect of the Corn-laws on it ; be (Sir W. .Jltmes) did not deny that they aright haee had some effect on the distress of the country, but. that other concurrent and concomitant causes had a:much greater effect. There was Mit tans() theritiohed by the Right Hon. Baronet;evhich he helieVed had a great eMet, It Wits the treaty with Ghiita and America; the over-issue of paper currency, acid the over-trading and speculating which occurred in aild it appeared to him (Sir 1838 were other Cittlseg ; W, James) that the over , issue of paper money and de ettiigemeitt tit eiidy feetilted from there not being a sufficient regulation with regard to. country , bankers. The Honourable Gentleman opposite had represented this as the landlords' question, and not as the question of the farmers and labourers. That appeared to him (Sir W. James) to originate from the fallacy that rent did not enter into the cost of pro duction. That had been stated by - M'Ctilloch, Ricardo, and a barrister named West ; it was quite evident, however, that rent did enter into the cost of production. In the price of every article, there were three shares ; first, the labourer's share, then the capitalist's share, and the proprietor's share. Take cotton for example; there was the labourer's share, the manufacturer's share, and the grower's share, and so it might be argued with espect to land. There was the labourer's share, the share ef the farmer, and also the share of the landlord, who is the proprietor of the raw material. Rent (lid therefore enter just as much into the cost of 1 rAuction as other oti articles ; and he could not undeis'and the reasons hie alleged by those who argued on the other . r . l: This measure he thought, therefore, was calculate(' to • benefit not so much the landed proprietor as the farmer Oil and the labourer. Now, with regard to a sliding': scale as compared with a liked ditty, it wad ; 1 „t u ,,. ; _- possible for any person to look attentive l y the subj ec t, and not see the great advantage oaf of a sliding scale. To a certain extent he ad' 'pitted that there tuin;ht also be advantages in R fixed duty but he could ttbaridon qte-' ' sliding scale. ln the first place, when corn was low, a fixed duty gave no protection to the farmer ; for what protection could a fixed duty of 6s. or Bs..be to the ,1 , 1 , 5 , t1 s farmer, when the price of corn at Elsinore was 255. or • 305.? In framing a sliding scale, the best principle ar i peared to be, to make the duty as gradual as poble , e `" if there was any rest, to make it as near as possible to 01'1 centre. He had seen a project for a sliding scale, fremeu by a gentleman named Thorpe, which retained a fixed ant), between 50s. and 605., and a sliding scale at each end of it. -1.1 1 . He thought the idea was not a bad one, as it inade the level as large, and the ascent and deSee 11t re 8 gradual as possible, and would, perhaps, be nw r beneficial to the farmer, and still more to the importer than the plan of the Right Hon. Baronet ; still be accepted that plan as a great boon to the agriculture interest, and lie might state that he had from his li l t : stituents the most satisfactory and flattering accounts 0 The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from a letter approving particularly of the improved mode of kin g ta w the averages, and proceeded to say, that, the present system, it was only the strong in el " tile men of great capital, who made fortunes ; th small traders, and men of small capital, were frequent 11 ruined. He was, unfortunately , aware of m an y in: ,0 stances in the town he -had the .honour to r e p resem of persons who had declared themselves top e ll s 1 4. been ruined by the operation of the present scale duties, while others had made large an flourishing' fir, tunes. He stated facts that must be well knoWt l every Member of that House who had paid any alien tion to the subject ; but as he had said before , he wa s • sure that all moderate, and practical, and thinking men would consider the measure of the. Righ t Honourable Baronet as a great boon.—(Tory cheer s.) The Noble Lord on the opposite side of the House de-. scribed the proposed scheme as a measure which e' 9ll ; ceded without conciliating. He (Sir Walter Jame!! was very, glad of that, because it was too the fashion fOr the Conservatives to conciliate without justice.—("Hear, bear," from the Opposition benches.) Conservatives conceded sometimes for the sake of con; ciliation and justice too ; but he was convinc e " • that the proposed measure had been made not glen: for the love of conciliation, but that it e' made for the benefit of the public, and f°,l the pure love of justice - to all parties. He was &MOW", it would promote the interests of all classes of th f i country, and not of any particular class.--(Hear.) there was any proof of that wanted, it might 11„ had by looking at the extreme - views talt,e: up by those who were opposed to the present me asta" There were first the farmers of Boston, who say that the proposed rate of duty is a great deal too low ; and on the other hand, there . were the gentle:, men of the Anti-Corn-law Conference who thin!‘f that it is a great deal too . high. Now, le there was anything in the old maxim that virtar was a mean between good and evil, he (Sir Walt i,Je , James) unhesitatingly said that the scheme proposed ",, her Majesty's Ministers was the very best that could 11,3 devised; and as such it should have his most ea rns. and hearty support.—(Cheers.) Mr. BEItNAL rose principally to reply telit et had been advanced the evening before by the nourable and Gallant Gentleman the • Member 1,,°: Westminster (Captain Rous), who stated that a 11;i minution of the price of bread would lower wages was scarcely necessary to answer such a. faller In no cases whatever were the increase of wag es de. • pending upon the decrease of the price of bres He (Mr. Bernal) would first call the attention 4 3 , 0 ,- the House to the price of provisions. In 1 63 1 1 bread was only Id. a pound, and there was • 'no in wages. In 1840 bread was double that, and then ` • 1 . 1 was no corresponding increase in wages.—(Hear, h e !„ hear.) In 1835 the cost of wheat for the ent''i nation was 32,000,0001. ; in 1840 it was 54,000,° 0 which left 22,000,0001, in the former year, in the pou" 4 of the people, and was applied to the purchase o f cloth' and other articles of that sort.—(Hear, he In his opinion too much stress had been laid upo n . the f analogy between the comforts and habits of Jiving °I, the Englishman and the foreigner. Frost our g reat' degree of commerce, and our higher degree of civiliza t q; we had established a maximum degree of comfort. i t , :: well, then, might the foreign statesman endeavottro-, prove that because the foreigner used wine as ~e 0 prevalent beverage, he was happier and better t" i v the Englishman who drank beer. It was enel nr within the last eighty years that 'the lower classe s ii 0); this country had been wheat fed. At the close of t , 0 . 1 ? reign of George the Second, barley-bread, rye, and els:;,P oat-cakes were the staple food of the community. 0,04 was through the great improvements which had t n l e n s place in agriculture that the country wheat fed. The Honourable Gentleman had spokek , the unlimited invention of machinery Was he prelllll:4oiJA to say that the distress which existed was to be att ribu, be ~71 to the invention of machinery ?—(Hear, hear.) Hon. Member for Knaresborough, in a rather bolnr te eP'; mariner, had given a challenge to the gentlemen dor."-;•,011 , with the manufacturing interest, which h e wa s surt' - efik o ? had not been accepted on that side of the House ; Hon. Gentleman succeeded in establishing that pr0P0t,,,i.,, , he confessed that it would greatly influence his op itll '4:_:', The Hon. Gentleman designated the petitions presen44 • against the Corn-laws as forgeri,:s. Now there 11 9 • been presented 1,033 petitions, signed by 259,9*;,,,, persons. Was this an accusation that should made against such a body ? He also • ' l ' o o that the farmers were not opposed to a m odifiel of the Corn-laws ;if they were not, why, then, der. certain Noble Duke leave the Cabinet ? lie (Mr. P e e nal) hoped that some Member connected with Noble Duke, would give some explanation 011 this poi .Y Now the farmers were opposed to any modific tle' c o., , ,, and it was useless to expect anything from t h il e o.',.• until they had a higher rate of education amongst t i 8 The majority of the present House were in fact s eni 'd under false pretences to maintain the Corn-laws , - e) lay violent hands on the New Poor-law.—(Hear °l But he would not ' dwell farther on this 1 ) „ 0 0 Much had been said about the peculiar burthens te st land. Until it was shown to him in a proper witY. ei o ti those peculiar burthens really. were, he should susrliot his vote as to the amendment about to be moved. then lie could not think, without such a case being ';' 1 001 out, that the landed interest was burthened more . , `"iii s any other ;it was was not, therefore, entitled, tit opinion, to greater protection. If a case were niatt e e : o o of the landed interest being more burthened, ! d e any other he would vote for a greater amount 01 F. tection in order to repay it. ' Mr. SCOTT would not trespass on the indulgenc.-eir the House, if he did not feel that he was the r e P re ' tative of a constituency of much importance. Th e hos Gentleman who had just sat down had said that who had been returned as the representllliliere of an agricultural constituency were sent t'rj3' merely for the object of maintaining the law in 4 5 V i lis tine state. He (Mr. Scott) was sent there u s 0 01' representative not only of an agricultural, but of s or nufticturing constituency, and he would, therefore:ibirtf port the interests of both. The county (Roxburgh) he represented contained a constituency of bot 4 w o re, The Right Hon. Baronet, in introducing his `lente as stated that it was his wish to fix the price of nearly as possible at 565. a quarter. Now he Scott) thought that that was a reasonabl e r re' and he believed it would offer a sufficien t ,rie° muneration to the farmer. The great tin e- c ir at issue was whether we were to be dependent 1,60 11 selves for the subsistence of our increasing poPtrier'y or whether we were to be dependent upon fore l ii o wn whether we were to. receive our supplies from O r . 0 ..1 0 countrymen and friends, or from ourpresent rirai s, ,i, e l might be our future foes. Now, he thought that L ; ,;,,iorl' guments used on the other side were far from eolt v ,„ - It had been stated as an argument in favour of the Pri'pre' posed by the Noble Lord, that the importation of core sent caused the exportation in last year of seven raillionsLuroe!!, lion for 2,000,000 quarters of corn. ,But the Noble.Lordep said that the quantity of corn imported would be doe b , l a ri. tqc, plan were adopted. Surely, then, if 4,000,0(X) quarert imported, fourteen millions of bullion would be ell's exchange. The derangement of the .-curreneY easily accounted for by• the increased iss ues ' Jo iri ,c only of the Bank of .England, but of stock Banks. The currency used by had increased in the year 1834 up to 1838 from to 4,258,1901, When they considered that .thete tb c 4 displacement. of four millions from anoth e r cause, eur%itl)°`-t was enough to account for th e di s t ress w hi c h existe d, los e attributing it to the Corn-laws. It would be vertu' )` P r e, . that they should take mor e o f our goo d s; it would be 01 sant further, to attend to the c oncerns of the count r Y n ' i r Ow • their own. But they were not regulated by r„ principle they took what they wanted, and a" f a. b ye turns showed that foreign countries lookettwhe" ieebej gold, and not for our manufactures.—(Hear.) `„., e et, I'iscount, late at the head of her Majesty's Gover n 'id - , but e f.- , said that they might alter the Corn-laws as they *l n it iore t oe' believed the frreign Powers would not take one t hsn ( a the goods of this country ; but a greater au thorit y was no( Nobe Viscount, Mr. Burke, had said that I t eo ity le , the necessity- of the seller, but the nf . e . , sro c h ot the purchaser that raised the price of " igit How was, it to be expected, when this .7 to O fe beir placed itself in a dependent position with respee gir o t _ de Powers that they would deal with this country 4_ l , in W ee , own interests ? It had been said that embarrasgo?.Fibey had been occasioned by the Corn-laws, and thet , o ; t his: c!T_Ofe altered, it would give greater vent for the goods o tece o ,. try. There was no evidence of that. It had I?T' ac i, oat ,„ e y various persons, that if the Corn-laws were 1074 03 thet_a,• ports would be greatly increased. It appeared rta%itegttus of °tight to judge of the future by the past ; and if n_ .at i r eper ro , rept series of years first, when ihere was r! no 1105,,re itill fe te tee ° of foreign corn ; and, secondly, when there I P t tion ; end if they found that the exports werene_tintibe_oe it must be clear that there was little or no cop. _ c tn ot,freS o cl• the exports and the effect of the Corn-laws If year 1821, and divided it into periods of four y.7 the eXY j er froth the official returns , that, in the first pe i t t ; 3 7 , them' lose' amounted to 65,000,000/. ; in the Y ear t o ireV rt beer' ) 76,000,000/. ; and in . the one instance t ) 4100 , corn, and in the other a greater quent'V t • ha t t hear.) His argument went to no connexion whatever between their e'lxwiLto'rattid,trebeereFluilt: lion of corn. In the year 1837 their ex? , an d yet, o bi?, 85,000,0001., and in 1840 to 116 i C0 0 , 00° " t ire the latter year, they complained of 1i:7,.,0r. .. ta bie there was an abundance during , fat seri; not deny the existence of distress, but it a' .„.p to the Corn-law. The value of thel r ha ;Th e 200 00 ‘ bile 01 ' shown by Mr. Emery, who proved t_ y. was not attrindubsee cultural produce was two hundeedanat d o,o4,thirty joillelapte of manufactures was only one encourage it was active industry, r_ rnne t w ould v i c o ,onf 'ably y sti c r a e l c p u r l o at p e o d se f d or b destrY• . IP the forw • loch oe If there was one thing more thanireatheticvlehiethho u g h et2t:Ctell 3adt 0 1 1 1 h distress w - could regret more than he did rhethperoßreigobtitonHt °orefinai7ve i two PRESBYTERIAN MIXED MARRIAGES. Sir V. BLAKE presented a petition from the north of Ireland, praying for the legalising of the Presbyterian marriag(m. Mr. PARKER presented five petitions from Hudders field, and other places in the West Riding of Yorkshire, praying for a ,total repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented petitions from a Congre gation in Manchester, and from a Mr. R. Bagster, of the same place, praying for a total repeal of the laws re lating to corn. Colonel FOX presented petitions, signed by upwards of a 'hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants of the me tropolis, praying for an abolition of the Corn-laws. Sir . FREEMANTLE presented a petition, from the tradesmen of Holborn, praying for a measure for throwing open to the public, Vauxhall, Waterloo, and Southwark bridges, on which tolls are at present levied. A petition was presented from Donegal, in Ireland, praying for an act to legalise Catholic and Presbyterian marriages. CORN•LAW& Mr. RENNIE presented a petition from Kidder minster, agreed to at a public meeting, complaining of the distress prevailing in the Country, and praying for a re peal of the Corn-laws and Universal suffrage. Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from Yorkshire against the Corn-laws. The Hon. Member also presented a great number of pe,...itions to the same effect from a variety of places, :At he read the names of the places in so low a tone e 3; voice, and there was so much noise in . the House-, that they did not reach the gallery. Mr. TOWNLEY presented a petition against the Corn-laws, as we understood. Mi.. GdiSON CRAIG presented petitions from Man chester, and the Chamber of Commerce of Edinbur g h, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. .EWART presented' a petition against the Corn laws, but we were unable to learn from what place. Sir E. KNATCHBULL gave notice that to-morro w he would move f or l eave t o bring in a Bill to regulate the sale of property. - Sir C. NAPIER gave notice that to-morrow he would ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether it , was true, as he had read in the Morning Chronicle—(Groat laughter from the Ministerial Benches)—that the Etnir Bechir had arrived at Constantinople, and that' the Porte would not allow him to resume the government of his tribes. He was extremely sorry to be under the necessity of giving the Right Hon. B aronet so much trouble ; but having served in that country, hit con sidered it his duty to raise his voice on. - behalf of the unfortunate inhabitants of Syria. — (hear, hear.) t' The Hon. Member th en delivered some papers to th e ' Right Hon. B aronet , w h o i nt i mated his attention t o th e su bj ect. The CHANCEL LOR of 't6 .4at he would give notice that, being con venience, to have the gave resolutions on the Corn-laws de cidedEXCHEQUER anxiou.s for the sake ofpublic M° dOn Of which he had n . iniima g ive he would postpone that motion until I Tuesday , before a in e fin'his 1 . LOCAL COURTS. Mr. EVANS begged leave to ask the Right Hon. Baronet. the Secretary for the Home Department, whether it WAS the intention of the Government, during the pre sent session, to introduce a . Bill f or the establishment of Local Courts for the recovery of small debt. ? Sir J. GRAHAM said it was not the intention of her Majesty's Government to bring in a Bill for what, per haps, the Hon. Gentleman might term local Courts, but it was their intention to provide for the re covery of debts amounting to 151, by )ocal tribunals ; and la cases of small debts, to afford greater facilities for their recovery. As he was on his legs, he would take the opportunity of stating that a measure would bilialtroduced to continue the expiring Small Debts Act, by which the recovery of debts by local tri bunals would be rendered more easy. ABOLITION OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT is THE ARMY, An HON. MEMBER, on the Opposition side of th e House, b egge d to i nqu i re of the Clerk of the Ordnance whether it was his intention to bring in a Bill for the abolition of corporal punishment in her Majesty's army ? Captain I.3OLDERO said it was. not his intention to introduce any Bill on the subject, but if the Hon. Member . should bring forward any measure of his own on the subject, he (Captain Boldero) should vote as he had always done. EL ECTION PETITIONS. The following lion. Members were called upon by the Speaker to form a General Committee of selection, for the purpose of trying contested election petitions, 311 d were sworn in for the purpose :—Lord G. So)merlset, '