The Sun. — London, England, 1842-03-10 00:00:00

tion had already been protracted to a great length, he was anx ious t o avoid going over ground which had been already gone over. But the fact of the diminution of the stock in hand at harvest rested upon very high authority, and was very material, be cause if the trade were left to itself, and were not, through the fluctuations of a sliding scale, turned into a gambling and un certain speculation; that drove all sober and steady men out of the market, and left it in the hands of a few adventurous spe culators ; if this were not done, and if the consequence was that a considerable reserve of corn was habitually in the hands of the dealers, so that at each year there should be a stock of four or five months on hand before us—under those circum stances it was obvious how trifling the effect would be in com parison to the deficiency that now generally occurred at har vest time? Under these circumstances a deficiency in -the harvest, equal to a fortnight's supply, or one twenty-sixth of the crop, would be scercely felt; but now a deficiency to this small extent was felt as a very severe grievance. He had very high authority for this statement. He could show what was the effect of the existing law, on the authority of a Commit tee of the House, and of a Report, certainly not drawn up by an advocate of a change in the Corn laws, but by the Right Honourable Baronet opposite, the Secretary of Sta'e for the Home Department. In the report of the Agricultural Committee of 1833 he (Lord Howick) found the following very remarkable passage, to which he entreated the attention of the House :—.‘ The di minished annual growth of wheat was apparent from the amount of stock in hand, and the evidence of Mr. Jacob was no less striking than important, since his general views a .e confirmed by the local experience of occupying farmers." This statement the Committee had adopted and sanctioned, and the Right Hon. Baronet also gave his sanction to the evidence of Mr Jacob. But what did Mr. Jacob say ? His evidence was very long, but he (Lord Howick) would state the purport of it. It was that before the Act of 1815, and a short time after it, it was an habitual state of things in this country that between the farmers and the traders at the time of the harvest there was usually six months supply before-hand on hand, but that since we adopted the present system which made trade so uncertain, particularly since 1829, we had seldom two months consump tion in the country at the time of harvest. This was Mr. Jacob's evidence, sanctioned by a Committee of the House,and it ;explained to the House why the reduction of duty when prices rose, while pretended to be a compensation to the consumer for the high duties of other times, was of a nugatory and delusive character considered as a compensation to the consumer. The evidence of the present year confirmed the evidence he read and the argument he wished to impress on the House. In the Autumn of this year the House was perhaps not aware that in many parts of England the price of corn was frightfully high. He had certain authority for stating the prices actually paid for corn for immediate consumption in some of the markets of the North of England immediately before the last harvest. The last harvest in the North of England was late, not an excessively late harvest, but it was decidedly a late harvest, and so limited was the stock in hand, that it was with the greatest difficulty that the demands were met. The House could form but a very inadequate idea of the state of the market by looking at the averages in the Gazette, for at that time there was a very bad description of corn in the market, and consequently the prices were not so high as they otherwise would be. However the corn did rise to a height which was truly frightful. He ( Lord H.) had a me morandum furnished to him of the prices of corn at that period, and he had not the slightest hesitation in placing the most implicit reliance on the authority from whom he had ob tained that memorandum. In Richmond market in Yorkshire, the price of wheat was 12s. a bushel, or 965. a quarter. In Darlington and Newcastle-on-Tyne, wheat was 84s. a quarter. However, he was not informed as to the precise date those prices were obtained, but it was about the same time as he had already alluded to, and it should be remembered that these were not fancy parcels or used for seed, which often a ccoun t e d f or t h e hi gh prices paid for wheat. In the instances to which he alluded ; the wheat was bought bona fide by the miller for immediate grinding and consumption. He knew from farmers who resided in his own neighbourhood, near Northumberland, the wheat rose there too about that time to an unexampled price, and that it was so high, that the consumption of bread by the labouring classes w..s utterly impossible. It was totally impossible that the working man could have bread at the prices at which wheat was then sold in Northumberland and Durham, and the result was that the labouring classes were driven to the use of potatoes, barley, and other articles of that desctiption, for their support. lie adverted to those things to show the effect of the sliding scale, and he might add, that at that time —when that severe pressure was upon the people; when those difficulties were experienced in the North of England and ether parts of the country, that there was a quantity of no less than two millions of quarters of corn under lock in the public stores, and which in some tame afterwards was suffered to ke brought out. He contended, from looking at all these facts, that if there was a moderate duty upon foreign corn it was utterly impossible that degree of embarrassment could occur The operation of trade, if left to itself, would be a guarantee eo the country that no such danger could exist. In 1800, or 1801, Parliament thought it necessary to offer a bounty for foreign corn. He did not wish to limit the power of Parlia ment, but would any Gentleman have said, that because Par liament, under extraordinary circumstances, considered this necessary, it would be as ise for the legislature to pass a perma nent law, and say that when wheat rose to 120 s. there should be a bounty on exportation. That would be a premium to every speculator and dealer in corn to run the pi ices up to that amount, and, if they came near to that, to hold back the supply until the extravagant prices were attained. Was it not exactly the same thing with respect to the fall of the duties ? Was not the effect of the less destroyed by providing for it beforehand? Was it not true that it stood as part of the Act of Parliament that the duty at a certain price was to be diminished, and did not that have the effect of raising the prices up and interfering with trade. He contended, therefore, that under the shifting scale, as it was called, the remission of duties at a particular price was altogether nugatory as a means of relief to the consumer, and it was deeply injurious to the farmer, not because it pre vented them from obtaining as high a price as he would have in dear years, but it was most injurious to him in this way, that in plentiful years it kept the trader out of the market, and-pre vented him from stepping in to the relief of the British grower, because he knew that, in the event of a deficient supply in future years, a much larger profit was to be obtained by specu lating in foreign than in British wheat. He begged to call the Gentlemen belonging to the landed interest to this fact: in the Committee of 1836, it was proved by the testimony of farmers, corn me chants, men opposed to the - Corn-laws, and those favourable to it. It was proved by them that, under the existing system, there was a tendency in persons trading in corn, rather to investigate their capital in foreign than British corn. —( Hear.) He contended, therefore, that the re miss:on of duty, as prices rose was extremely prejudicial to the British grower, and in the same manner he contended, that an increase of the duties as the prices rose, was useless to the farmer and deeply injurious to the consumer. It did not gu.tid the farmer from low prices, and if he was not mistaken, the Right Hon. Baronet himself said that it was not possible to guarantee prices to the farmer in cheap years Ile had ac kr owledged that the farmer must be prepared for low prices in abundant years, when there was a succession of good harvests ; that any restrictions we could place upon foreign corn would be altogether nugatory as far a s aff or di ng pro t ect i on to t h e farmer was concerne. But the restrictions were nurgatory in that respect, and happily they were not nugatory in depriving the consumer of that resource, because they pre vented provisions being made beforehand to meet an exigency when it arrived, by limiting our supply on those occasions to the nearest markets, and by depriving us of having recourse to the more distant regions of the globe, because from those regions the corn which was sent to this country, when theihar vests were abundant, would become a perfect drug. The losses which had occurred in the corn trade ' between the years 1832 and 183 e had had an effect which he (Lord Howick) thought would not speedily be forgotten by the dealers in corn. He should not press further on the House his reasons for the opinions he entertained, and which he had expressed, though he feared somewhat imperfectly, to the House. He contended that the variation in duty was a very much greater practical burden on the consumer than even a very heavy duty, whe h did not interfere with the regular operations; and he would say, that if they adopted a fixed duty, whether of ss. or Bs., or 10s., it was practically liable to the objections which he had laid down, that. was to say, it was not an ad valorem duty, but one which became heavier as the price rose ; so that when the price was 505., and the harvest was plentiful, the duty was m ich felt, but when the price reached 70e and the harvest was scarce, the duty was little felt.. He thought the House would act wiser, and far more for the benefit of the agriculturist and the consumer, if, whatever duty they imposed on corn, they would take the average of that duty, be it high or be it low ; and he proposed that duty, whatever the prices, instead of adopting the shifting scale which the Right Hon. Baronet had proposed. He wished, to express the great regret that he felt that the present session of Parliament should pass over without the enactment of any efficient measure, because the more he considered the circumstances of the country,the more he was convinced of the importance of time, and that delay in settling this question on reasonabtc principles was pregnant with the greatest danger to the best interests of the country. Among the many reasons which rendered it expedient that no delay should be allowed to take place, he would advert first to the great distress which at present prevailed in the country. The severity of that distress had been adverted to on both sides of,the lieu e. They all agreed that it existed. They all agreed in deploring it, and he believed they all also agreed in admiring the patience with which the people bad borne their sufferings, and that patience, if possible, added a stronger claim to relief from that House. The Right Hon. Baronet had stated that he did not propose the measure which he had recommended with any expectation of its relieving the distress at present existing. Sir R. PEEL—lmmediate relief. Lord HOWlCK—lmmediate relief, and he did not believe that that distress aroie from the Corn-laws, and he believed that no alteration in the Corn-laws would prevent the recur rence of distress. He ( Lord Howick) (lid not wish to over state the arguments on this question, and he should be ashamed of himself if he used the slightest exaggeration. It was his bounden duty to say he so far agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he greatly doubted whether any measure which it was in the power of the Eiouse to adopt would operate to the immediate cure of the distress which now exists. He also agreed in thinking that with respeet to the distress, the Corn laws were certainly not the only, perhaps not the principal cause. So far he would at once concur with the Right Hon. Baronet. But he must add, in the same spirit and temper, that it did appear to him that the distress which was now felt areiti- in' part from that cause, and had been considerably aggravated by the existing Corn-laws.—( Hear, hear.) He must also say. that of all measures which it was in the power of the House to adopt to prevent the recurrence of that distress, and promote the return of that pro•perity of which the Right Hon, Baronet by no means despaired—to promote that happy return of all means which that House cou d adopt he believed there were none so likely to be efficacious as a complete reform tf the Corn-laws.--( Cheers. ) He thought this was a reasonable in ference following those admissions which had been made by the Ri let Hon. Baronet himself and others on the same side of the question. He said it was an inference fairly to be drawn from those admissions, because, if he was not mistaken, the causes of the distress enumerated by the Hon. Gentlemen op posite were bad harvests, an alteration in the currency, over speculation, and over production. He thought he was right in placing these amon g th e causes w hi c h on t h e other side of the House had been assigned for the distress which now exited. He (Lord Howick) admitted that all those three causes had con= tributed materially to this distress. As to bad harvests, it was impossible that they should .fail to produce more or less of suffering to the people. That suffering did not arise in a form so pe i t and so clearly traceable in a country which had risen to the highest pitch of wealth and civilisation, and iii which the several classes of the community had become greatly complicated, as in a ruder or earlier state of society, and a 'es, civilised country. But, at the ssme time, it was impos sible that there could be a diminution in the labour and capital of a nation employed in agriculture, with out in som9 shape an increased amount of sacrifice being imposed on the people.—( Hear.) There w as l eis of produce divided amongst them, and. souse way or other, greater exertion should be made to obtain the supplies which they wanted. But if the argument which he (Lord Howick) ' had addressed to the House upon the effect of the Corn-law upon trade was true, if there was the slightest truth in it, it was clear that the suffering caused by a bad harvest was greatly aggravated by the existing Corn-laws. In the same manner with regard to the currency; if the alterations in it were one cause of distress, as no doubt they were, surely that distress by such a state of the Corn-laws as interfered materially with the operations of trade must have been increased. 'I hey were known to cause . great difficulty and danger to the Bank of England, the principal regulator of the currency. Now came the last cause, and it appeared to him that in tl't acct to el. he on the part of Parliament to interfere with this natural process must fail ; that the only way in which the fluc tuations of price arising from the variety of the seasons ould be advantageously diminished, was by the un checked operation of trade. The trader, if left to him self, purchased in dear years, and his stock is brought into the market with great advantage to all, when there was a less abundant supply, and imported a greater or less quantity according to what he believed could be the de wand of the country in which he lived. This was the natural state of things, and, if by law, they did not interfere with it, experience showed that it worked with a regularity and beauty which it was impossible sufficiently to admire. In fact, in the whole order of creation, he . ' did not know anything more marvellous, and at the same time more striking, than the manner in which, by the combined operation of a number of individuals, none of them thinkingat all of the public interest, but each seek ing only his private and individual interest, a supply of food to great communities was regulated—how, without waste, without irregularity, and without interruption , each individual of a large nation was supplied with his • proportion of food, in proportion to the whole supply, the price varying in such a manner as to enable production to be continued, at the same time avoiding an undue pressure on the consumer. The -manner in which all this took place, without any interference on the part of any public au thority, by the agency of men as unconscious as the wheels of some great machine, of the combined result of their operations, the more they considered this beautiful mechanism of society, the more one must admire it, and the more they must be convinced that it was an appoint ment of unerring wisdom and infinite benevolence. But it was with this that men, with their clumsy contrivances, presumed to interfere. They were not satisfied with the order of society appointed by Providence, and the means Providence had established for the regulation of that supply, but they must attempt to correct and improve, what was established ; and it was really extraordinary how slow men were to learn the folly of such interference. In the memory of many men now alive, the laws passed by their ancestors against forestalling and regrating were enforced ; the practice was denounced from the seat of Justice as mischievous and injurious, while every man of ordinary education was now aware that it was not merely harmless and innocent, but of great benefit and service to society.—(Hear, hear.) But they had . made some progress in understanding the folly of such interference, as far as their internal trade was concerned —in that, perfect freedom was established, and they had felt the benefit of the alteration. But they still obstinately clung, with respect to their foreign trade, to restrictions and contrivances, con ceived in the very self-same spirit, and he thought with equal blindness and equal presumption. The natural inducement to persons to increase their im portations when the supply at home was deficient, and to diminish it when the supply was abundant, was in itself perfectly sufficient. If there were a fixed duty, or no duty at all, the self-interest of the merchants would in duce them to diminish their imports when the low price of corn afford them no profit, and, on the other hand, to increase them when the rise in price at once indicated the want that was felt in this country, and the certainty of profit. But the presumption on which the Act of 1828 was founded, and which presumption was continued in the present Bill, was, that this natural inducement was not sufficient, and that it was necessary for Parliament to do something more—to give the merchant a benefit of 4s. in the quarter more than the natural course of trade would yield him. What had been the result to all parties ? That in seeking to increase the inducement which they held out to the trader to increase or diminish his supplies according to circumstances and the wants of the country, they had so thoroughly deranged the whole system of the trade in corn, as to deprive the country of the great benefits which the trade, if left to itself, would have afforded.--(llear, hear.) Such would be the consequences of the measure now in force, and it had been stated, that upon that fact the present mea sure was founded. The reason which the Right Hon. Baronet had stated for the measure before the House, and the nature of the measure itself, did, in effect, in volve the admission that such as he (Lord Howick) had described had been the effects of the law. What else could be the reason for diminishing the duty, and what else could be the meaning of those very significant rests ?—(liear, hear.) What (lid the Right Hon. Ba ronet say of those rests himself, but that they were in tended to prevent the importer from looking to a great rise of price and fall of duty, when prices were already ! high ? They were intended to induce him to bring his corn into the market when the duty was sufficiently low to allow him to sell with a remunerating profit. The Right Hon. Baronet proposed that, between 525. and 555., the duty should he 18s., in order, he believed, that when the price nose to 525. the importer might not wait for a further rise, but might at once introduce the supply which was needed at a duty of 18s. That was a per fectly valid argument ; he entirely concurred with the Right Hon. Baronet as to the advantages of that arrange ment. But if it were good when the price was between 525. and 555. he wanted to know why it was not equally good between 525. and 60s.—(11ear, hear.) If the Right lion. Baronet made these rests to avoid holding out the importers of corn an inducement to keep back the supply of corn when it was wanted—if these rests were made to restore trade to its natural state, and to supply the importer with those motives, which would operate if Pitrli iment (lid not interfere—he wanted to know why the principle was not good to a still greater extent.—(Hear,) Unfortunately it was not in his power to be present during the previous debates un that sub ject ; but, as far as he could collect from reading those debates in the papers, it did not appear to him that it had yet been explained why, after going on so far towards adopting a sounder and wise: system, they should pre cisely stop at that particular point? Why, if the argu ment were good, was it not followed out to its just and legitimate extent ?—(llenr, hear.) He believed the chief reason assigned for not carrying the principle farther was this. The Right lion. Baronet said that agriculturo required protection, but that it was impossible to afford protection when the duties rose to a certain amount, he therefore proposed to raise the duties at the lower points of the settle of averages. Now in considering that ar gument, he begged, in the first place, to protest against such a use of the word protection.—(Hear, hear.) He maintained that it was an absurdity not suited to this age of this world. The only protection to agriculture, or to any other branch of industry, to which, in his opinion, it was entitled, was that protection which secured to every man the enjoyment of the fruits of his own honest labour ; which prevented him from being either directly, or indirectly, deprived of the fair rewards of his own exertions. That was the only protec tion which he would acknowledge to.beeue either to agri culture or any other branch of national industry. Was it not an abuse of language when, under the name of protection, they gave to one particular class of the com munity the power of saying to their fellow-subjects and fellow-citizens, " You shall take those things which we produce though they may be dearer than similar articles which you could obtain elsewhere. You shall not ex change that which you have produced in the manner which would be most advantageous to you ; but first 1 ngula • Lions shall be adopted, with the intention and design of compelling you to pLy more for articles of domestic use than you would pay tor the sam.! articles if you pur chased them elsewhere."—(Hear, hear, hear.) The House had been long in the habit of making ad, antes in the right direction, but it seemed to be afraid to bring forward principles' boldly and distinctly.—(Hear, hear.) But the time was cow come- •and he was glad to see that in the late eebittes it seemed to las the opinions of others, and particularly of the Na,lole Lor,i, the Member fa- Tiverton—wh en they should bold!) , and ex licitly declare thems e l ves . —(h ear. / l i e could state, that as long as he had had the honour of a seat in that Howe he never held language inconsittent with what he now stated—that the time was come when it must tie admitted as a principle of their legislati , n that the only protection to which British industry was entitled, was that which he had already described ; and that it was not necessary, in order to support one class, that the other cla-sea of their fellow subjects shou d be taxed.— ( Cheers). But when he said that he thought it right to guard himielf from being misunderstood, as Gentleme t may infer that he was an advocate for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn Laws, that was not his opinion, and that was not the opinion he was venturing now to endeavour to support in that House. He was an advocate for the principles of perfect commercial freedom, but in adopting that principle some cau tion was absolutely necessary.—( Hear.) And looking to all the circumstances of the country—looking r articularly to the neee:sity of raising a revenue—( Hear, hear)—lool.ing to the burdens im; ocedi on land—booking to all these circum stances, he thought it wise policy to impure a moderate duty on corn, but in saying that, he only expressed the opinion on the supposition that the duty was indeed a moderate one, and he mutt further add that if the alternative were proposed of main taining the existing system as modified by the Right Hon. Baronet, or of the total repeal on corn, and he was driven to choose between the two coin sea—at the same time considering both objectionable—the interests cf laud must in that case lield to the principle of total repeal.—(Cheers.) But he was willing that some amount of that which was called protection, that a certain extent of restriction should he imposed on the importaion of foreign corn. But if protection is necessary, he wanted to know why that protection is not equally due to the farmer whether he had a large or a small crop ? WI y was he entitled to less protection when there was a partial failure of the produce of the land,?—( Hear, hear.) If thirteen shillings were a sufficient protection when the price of corn was 605., on what principle of justice or of fairness could they prc po•e to impose a duty of 20s. when the price of wheat shou'd • fall to Lf s. ? -He was totally at a loss to understand on what plea this could be contended for.—( Hear, hear.) He knew, as regarded the dimieution of the duty in proportion to the rise in the averages, that it was a favourite argument with the other side of the House, and an argument which he was sorry to see had received more attention from his Noble Friend near him (Lord John Russel) than in his (Lord How.ck's) opinion it de,erved, that it would be utterly impossible when prices should rise beyond a certain amount to maintain a duty, and that therefore it was more advisable to pros ide for the doing away with all duty at a ccrta'n point than to leave it to the Executive Government to rep ix the duty, subject to a Bill of Indemnity, or to make it a matter for the special interference of Parlii trent. But before he admitted that argument, he must be shown that a reduction of the duty on the rise of the averages did really produce a benefit to the consumer.—(Cheers.) Yie had always argued that experience had shown that any benefit supposed to be de, ived by the consumer, on the reduction of dii. y consequent upon a rise in the averages, was nugatory and ch lasive—(Cheers) — and that ' - er the following simple reason— be money might not be raised as a tax, but the b ur d en st ill Continued. —( Cheers. ) Now he had always understood that the objection to any tax was not what it produced to the Exchequer , b ut the b u rden i t was on the - consumer; and if that burden here still continued, he (Lo r d Howick ) thought it wis much be tter that the E xchequer s h ou ld h ave the benefit of it. It they hail the burden, it would be bet er that they • should have the he incomeeould notalso; baendsorhrye thought that the Right lion. Baronet to have some of the produce of that bit den in the Exchequer at hear.) He (Lord Howick) con the present moments. —( Hear, tended that the reduction of the duty in the . manner preposed was of no benefit whatever to the consumer-71t was entirely ab • sorbed in. meeting the increased charges oniml•ortation tense.Tient upon the narrowing the circle front which the supply could . be obtained, and the raising of the prices in all the nearest mar kets. That manner of regulating the duty prevented t.hemn:r dmit kw:l:performing his proper office, byaccumulati , a era , . 0 o b: _ ti b t anLto ;r m , e u e m t e those b deficiencies. avi bg o a % el or m li e e r o w c o c u as ld ion no g t on g e o :':., - , -F4.:-Aka sisabiect, and as the debate on this ques - .. ....'' . : - -c . ' , , ~- ~.-: *~~ who had any experience ,f Ire system pursued in the country knew that the practice of granting leases of land had materially declined since 1815. Land was now too frequently let from year to year, and leases were general in but comparatitivcly few districts. This was a change which he considered most injurious. Thine valuable papers published in the useful journals of the Agricultural Society of England, and the High land Society of Scotland, which appeared in them a few years ago, describing the great improvements that had taken place in the course of half a century, in Scotland, Northumberland,and the North of England traced the superiority, as he believed cor rectly, to the practice of granting leases in those parts. How indeed was it possible that could be improved by the oc cupiers, unless those who laboured had the stimulus of their own interest to actuate and encourage their enterprise and energy and capital by having security for their reward in leases from their landlords ?—( Hear, hear.) He appealed to those who were in the habit of t rav elling about the country, whether they could not, by the state of agriculture in particu lar districts, distinguish those where the practice of granting leases was common from those where it was not?—( Hear. ) He now would say, as one interested in land, it was of most essential advantage that they should come to a speedy settle ment of the law on the importation of foreign corn, for this question should no longer be left in doubt and agitation. He felt that he had perhaps exceeded the limits of the observations which he him intened to address to the House.—( Hear, hear,) He meant to add one or two other points which he should not now touch upon. He would therefore conclude by simply en treating Hon. Gentlemen opposite, more especially those inte rested in land, to believe him when he asserted most unfeign edly, that in advocating his present views he was actuated by no motive whatever except a desire to promote what he be lieved was the best interest of the land, and of every other department in this kingdom.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In corroboration of this assertion, and to show that he was actuated by no party motive, he need only refer to his conduct since he had had the honour of a seat in Parlia ment. When he first came into the House, the Corn-law question took up much of their time, and was a great topic of debate amongst them. In 1827 and 1828 Hon. Gentlemen would recollect that measures were proposed by the Govern ment of the Duke of Wellington and the Earl of Liverpool; that one of th ose years h e t h ought they were 16, and i n t h e other year of 26. These both lianwaemf t those measures atyntof f In passed, a n d t h at one of them was now the only were the small minorities by which the principle was then sup ported ; from that time to the present, in office and out of office, he had invariably supported the same policy. He had invariably, both by his votes and his arguments, supported the policy of giving greater freedom to the trace in corn, and 'of abolishing those restrictions which were imposed by an existing law. So much for the motives which had actuated Lim. Now he only had to say, with reference to the vote which he was ibis evening about to give, that if he conceived that, by the vote which he was going to give in f avour o f th e amen d ment o f hi s Noble Frit nd, h e shoulcf be understood as voting in favour of the existing Corn-laws, in preference to the plan which had been proposed by her Majesty's Government, most undoubtedly he should not vote for the amendment ( Hear, hear) —he should, on the contrary, support the measure proposed by her Majesty's Govern ment, because, as he had already said, he considered it a mitigation, and an important mitigation, of the restriction now in force on the tratle in corn. But he conceived that the House, by its proceedings, had already pledged itself to make some change in the law, and he, theretore, believed that the effect of the vote he was about to give would merely he to de clare that the principle on which her Majesty's Government had proceeded to amend the existing law was not, in his (Lord Howick's) opinion, satisfactory. He by no means thought that the form in which this question had been brought to issue was on the whole by any means the best that could have been adopted. If he (Lord H.) had had any voice in the matter he should have preferred that the House should have agreed, without a division, to the second reading of this Bill, and that in Committee an amendment should have been moved, embodying, as far as the rules of the House would admit, such clauses as should bring the Bill to that shape in which it ought to stand. He thought that would have been the best course. But as the proceedings had been drawn out to such a length, and that as there was now to be a discussion, it would be highly inexpedient that he should propose another plan and another division in this stage ; he wished to avoid giving this trouble, and exposing the public business to unnecessary de lay.—( Hear, hear.) As he was unavoidably absent in the preliminary discussion on the subject, and as this was the first opportunity which had been afforded him of expressing by speech, and recording by vote, the opinions he had so lone entertained, he had no course but to vote for the amendment of his Noble Friend, and he had the consolation of knowing that the number of those who would follow the course of the Hon. Member for Wallingford was so small, that there would not be much danger of the mea sure being lost in consequence of an alliance of parties enter taining conflicting opinions. He could assure the Right Hon. Baronet that if he saw the remotest danger of such a contin gency, he should not be found in the minority.--( Hear, hear.) With this explanation, and thanking the House for the atten tion it had given him, he begged to conclude by stating it to be his intention to support the amendment of his Noble Friend. Mr. PACKINGTON supported the second reading of the Bill. He hopes that the discussion would not be further pro tracted; the House had already decided by an overwhelming majority that British agriculture was entitled to protection, and it had also decided that that protection should not be given by a fixed duty. For his own part, he was decidedly averse to a fixed duty. Mr. Huskisson was against it, Mr. Canning was, against it, and the arguments even of the Noble Lord the Member for London were decidedly against it. After the t iumphant manner in which the argument that the manufacturers were ruined by the Corn-laws had been dis posed of by the Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, he would not presume to occupy the House by again going over the same ground, but he would just advert to the most important branch of our manufactures, and he would show that this had made the most rapid strides in prosperity during the operation of those most abused laws. In 1820, the declared value in the exports in cot' on was 16,000,000/. ; ire 1828, the t ear when the laws were passed, it was 17,000,000/., but, in 18 3 9, it had reached to the extraordinary amount of 24,500,000/. Similar prosperity could be shown in other branches.—( Tory cheers.) The House had decided against the fixed duty, and that agriculture should have pro tection. The only question, therefore, was, what should be the rate of the sliding scale',? Fur his part, he would give his decided support to the measure of the Go vernment, in which he placed the most unlimited confidence. When the Government dealt with a subject of such magnitude, he thought it should be approached by all, and by its friends especially, with a spirit of conciliation. He supported it be cause he believed it calculated to promote the interests of all classes, and the Conservative party were content to accept it as a just and fair settlement of the question. The Conservative party, as a body, had not declared for a perfect adherence to the existing laws, though there might be individual instanc-s of it. On the contrary, many of the warmest Conservatives had de clared their disapprobation of them. In alluding to the contro versy het teen the manufacturers and the agriculturists, he ad mitted that the speech of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough was quite peculiar ; hut whatever might be said of wh a t h e had told them, it seemed to have burst like a rocket among Hon. Gentlemen opposite. If the sufferings he had detailed were true, they ought to rejoice in having them exposed. He did not refer to this speech for any recrimination, but the feelings and sentiments which had been uttered were totally unworthy of that House, and were not calculated to pro mote the interest of either party. He thought the prosperity of the two great parties were indissoluble. When manufactures flourished, agriculture would flourish ; and when agriculture was prosperous, the manufacturers found their principal market. Such we re hi s f ee li ngs, and he hoped that hereafter they would dispens e w i t h t h ose d i scussions which "'ere'inhisopinion unworthy of b o th. H e t h ought the agri culturists would benefit by the change made in the mode of taking the averages. Under the whole system great scope was given to fraud. But while he confessed that the agriculturists would derive advantage from the change, he believed that the commercial interest and the consumer would derive benefit. The Noble Lord who had spoken last had complained of the great fluctuations under the old law. Undoubtedly those fluc tuations were great objections to the old law, but Hon. Gentle men must recollect that the fluctuations during the same period were less in England than in the other countries of Europe. It was upon these grounds that he should give his humble but earnest support to the measure brought forward by her Ma jesty's Government. But he could not sit down without con gratulating her Majesty's Government upon the triumphant manner in which those measures had been introduced. They could not have forgotten the manner in which this question had originated. The House and th e country could not have forgotten that this was not a qu es ti on sought for by her Ma jeusttyit was sGo a question vernmen( Loud laug hter from the O ppos i t i on ) — hbrought forward by a hostile party, and for hostile parties the gauntlet was thrown down in May last by the Government of that day for the purpose of throwing discord amongst the people, in the hope that the Government would, in a moment of passion and excitement, meet with that support which the calm judgment of the country had withheld from them. Bet the good sense of the people prevailed, arid the consequence was that the miserable and inefficient Government became a feeble and contemptible Opposition. Mr. C. BULLEtt then rose to address the House, and ad vancing to the table, pointed with his finger to the Ministerial benches, and said—" Do you talk of consistency ? You taunt us and the Gentlemen behind me for voting against this Bill on different grounds ? You, who even maintain that inconsistency which you complain of in us? You, who get up to prove that the late Corn-law is best and ought to be retained ; who prove that when agricu:ture is prosperous, manufactures will also be so, and then, for no earthly reason, except mere party pur poses, and for supporting inconsistency, you come forward and say, we will vote through thick anti thin for this measure ?" ( Loud cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman continued to say that he should vote against this Bill uron plain and straightforward grounds, such as any man would vote , against a Bill on the se cond reading, namely, that he did not think that the prin ciple was good. (Hear.) The Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down had complained almoss of every Member introducing subjects not calculated to benefit any interest, but only to excite angry feelings, and his only exception was the Hon. Member for Knaresborough. — ( Laughter and cheers.) lie (Mr. C. Buller) did not intend, at that late period of the debate, to increase discussion, hut at the same time he wished to call the attention of the house to one or two facts. Th e p r i nc ipal arg ume nts used against the againstq the present Corn-law wa s , th a t i t preven t e d our trading present Bill. The ; ; 1 pra. aigumen with those coun triesn exchange for our present Corn-la w h e th oug ht appliedw - i t the e qual force to the having nothi ng b u t cor n to give manufactures. It was a p ro hibition to foreign trade , and con sequently a prohibiti on u p o n the exp ortation of many of our manufactures, and this was aggravated by the fact that many of those countries ref use d t o take the g oods they had been in the habit of doing. N ow h e did not see how would remedy that evil. On that ground, therefore, it were the ap peared to him that the present Bill, whatever modi fications of the old pl an, did no t overcome a single objection. Another argument wbro ught _ forward to the the present Bill hich had been_rst mentioned in that every friend to free country wa s ose w hi c h h e t h oug ht was ti House by a G ent l eman whose absence he mentioned th e trade w ou ld l ament, and w hen opposit e name of M. G rote, H onou rable Gentlemen would willing y acknowledge the to bear on these industry, and the great knowledge, brou g htt. übjects. He remarked, in 1839, o , attention to the greattegrity, the great mindwith bite great alarm which had occur ed in the su _ happened in the previous to the monetary crisis that had e the effect the Corn autumn, and he pointed out to the Ho us e _ He contended, then, Corn laws had had with respect to this crisis . the demand for corn would that under the present Corn-laws,. n and sudden. When always, in a certain degree, be uncerta in countries for corn, a 3 a sudden demand was made on foreig n pay for it in gold, that such, to a state, that, to , the consequence - that it brought the Bank of England to gold drained the Bank of En,gland, an was the case when they were obliged dir ec ting was pressedbecaus because n t h a e l 1 f c a l r a m s classes, on save itself from bankruptcy, they were oblige d have recourse on every much outchhe asß a o n n k t o h f Franc e. farmer,, olf'htish,isofccoouunrtsreyr, e England was in this state, it will keep up the t h e y withdrew their advances unhappily were very large borrowers. When the Bank of man who gave or wanted credit, and on no class so to country banks. Now the present Bill being founded on the principle of the sliding . scale, necessity of having the recourse to gold to pay for a sud den demand for corn, therefore they could only say it was bad in principle; but he wished to direct the attention of the House more particularly to the mischievous operation of the Corn-laws, and which had beeu more particularly pressed on his mind by a document received in that House, and which showed the effect the Corn-laws had on the employment of human labour. The document to which he referred was the late debates on the subject there had been most stress laid on this cause by Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House. He referred to over-speculation and over-production. He pre- I sumed when Hon. Gentlemen at the other side talked of over speculation and over-production that all they meant to say was there.had been over-production in a particular branch of our trade or manufactures. It certainly never would be contended that we suffered distress because generally the country had been too industrious—because too much labour and capital had been practically employed—that because there had - been too great an amount of all commodities required, therefore distress arese.Lln short, that distress was the consequence of our being too rich. That was' a contradiction in terms which he (Lord Howick) did the Right Hon. Baronet justice in saying never had been his intention to make use of, and therefore he (Lord H.) was putting the right interpreta tion upon the Right Hon. Baronet's argument, when he said that the Right Hen. Gentleman, in speaking of over-produc tion and over-speculation, meant that there had been a mis direction of the productive energies of the country. The Right Hon. Baronet might correct him (Lord H.) if he was wrong ; but he thought he was right in saying that such must be the meaning of the Right Hon. Gentleman. If that was the Right Hon. Baronet's argument, he would no doubt concur with him that over-production was the cause of the existing distress, as it produced a reaction in some branch of our manu facture by the misdirection of capital and labour. But if it was true, as it undoubtedly was, that this was one cause of our distress, the best cure, and, in deed, the only one in the power of the House to apply, was to remove those restrictions, in the first place, upon the trade in corn, which forced the capital and industry out of their natural, and as their natural, their most productive channels. If misdirections and mistakes ;ia the employmentof capital and labour were the causes of the distress, he would say, guard against it in future by abrogating those bad laws which pre vented trade from falling into its natural channels, and which prevented the industry and capital of the country from being applied in the manner which would be most productive. This, he would say was the legitimate inference to be drawn from the statement and from the argument of the Right Hon. Ba ronet. But on this point there was another observation to which it recurred to him very material to call the attention of the House. He had already admitted that there had been, as the Right Honourable Baronet had argued, some over speculation, over-production, and misdirection in their productive powers. But he wished to ask any gen tleman acquainted with the actual state of the nation, whether that misdirection and error was not in a great measure accounted for by the great difficulty ex isting at this moment in finding any profitable fields for the employment of labour and capital. Was it not notorious that in every branch of trade there was the most intense competition, almost every employment was overstocked, and throughout the whole circle of industry, every occupation, either for the em ployment of capital or labour was occupied, and they found a race of the severest kind, both between capitalist and labourers going on. How was it shown ? It was shown most strikingly by the extraordinary tide of emigration that had been setting out from this country during the last few years. This ten dency to emigration proved the existence of that state of things, a difficulty in finding fields for the employment of both capital and labour. He did not find fault with emigration; he thought that every encourgement that could consistently be given, ought to be extended to it, but he thought the extent of it did prove what he had adverted to ; and it was an emigration not confined to labour alone, but consisting both of labour and capital. It was very instructive to observe what took place when an extensive emigration occurred. Let them look at their newest colony—that of New Zealand. A great amount of capital, and a large number of labourers, had proceeded to that colony ; and it was a fair inference to sup pose that, in consequence of the over-crowded state of this country, they had found it impossible to obtain any profitable means of employment at home. When they went to New Zealand part found employment in raising food for the whole, and the others, in various ways, in providing for their wants. The consequence was that want of employment was no longer heard of, and the only complaint was, that they wanted more capitalists and more labourers. New, what was the cause of all this activity, but the increased means given them of procuring food ?—( Hear, hear.) For it was not agricultural labourers alone that were employed and sought after; but carpenters, masons, and the makers of and dealers in articles of clothing.—(H ear , hear.) Did it not, therefore, deserve the consideration of the House whether it would not answer their purpose just as well—instead of forcing the manufacturers of this country to go to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, er else where, to engage in agricultural pursuits which they did not understand—to allow them to stay. at home and continue employed in the trades to which they were brougl.t up, exchanging the products of their labour and ingenuity for food wherever it could be found ?—(Hear, hear.) Would any man tell him, that in a short time supplies would not be offered in exchange for the manufactures of this country from every corner of Europe, if only we would give them a reasonable as surance of a steady market ?--( Hear, hear.) This would not have the effect of displeasing a single man now employed in agriculture, in any department, as iandlord, farmer, or labourer. —( Hear.) The landowner would participate directly in • the general advantage resulting to the country.—( Hear, hear. ) hose producers being enabled to remain at home, their con sumption of meat. would be a benefit to the landlords, and their comsumption of excisable articles would go to increase the re venue of the United Kingdom. Having concluded what he had to say in favour of such a change as would promote the general interests of the community, he would beg to address a few words, and they would be only a very few, to the owners and occupiers of land, as one having a common interest with them, an interest to which he assured them he was not philo sophical enough to be by any means indifferent, for though they might, perhaps, think so, he assured them that he had nu desire to see the ruin of himself, and of all who were con nected with him.—( A laugh.) As having a common interest with them he was anxious to address a few words to the owners and occupiers of land, and to point out to them the extreme, the overwhelming importance to them of an early and sat isfae tory settlement of this question. In the first place he would ask them whether it was not perfectly clear that the Bill which was then about to pass was but the precursor of further altera tions?—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet, the Mem ber for Pembroke, had gone out of his way to disclaim its being a final measure ; lie had told them as plainly as a gentleman in his situation could tell them that it was merely introductory to a further alteration. The same inference might be drawn from the who'.e conduct of the Government. The agr.cultural party had been completely triumphant at the late elections ; the Government was one in which as they were told by the Honourable Member • for Devon, that party had the greatest confidence, and it was cer tainly the most powerful Government which had existed for many years ; )et, with all these advantages, they had actually, befors they were attacked, struck the flag which thsy had so long nailed to the mast in favour of the existing Corn-laws. Why had they made that surrender ? Obviously because they felt that public opinion had been pronounced 30 decided y against the existing Corn-laws, that it was impossible to main tain them. The Hon. and Gallant Member for Middlesex had candidly told them that was the case; and there was a statement in the introductory speech of the Right Hon. Ba ronet ( Sir R. Peel) which amounted to the same thing. The Right Hon. Baronet told them that the communications which he had had with the agricultural interest convinced him that they were generally satisfied of the necessity for a change in the Corn-laws. But could the change which they were about to make be satisfactory to the agrieu'turists themselves?— (Hear, hear.) Would it be satisfactory to any one class of per sons in the country?—( Hear, hear.) Was it founded upon principles so just in themselves, so consistent with truth and sound reason, that the practical working of the measure was likely to be beneficial to the country ? He contended that it was not. He con tended that a continuance of the same policy heretofore adopted would be attended with the same disappointment ; and in a few years' time they would have the Right Hon. Baronet, if he then happened to be at the head of the Government, again coming forward and saying, " These Corn-laws cannot be maintained; 1 find that, though I have a majority in the House of Commons and in the House of Lords, common sense, and reason and experience, are too strong for me ; the law has practically worked ill, and it must be altered." Such was the language which the Right Hon. Baronet must employ, but it was not wise to delay the settlement of such a question, be cause the longer the compromise was withheld, the worse would be the terms they could obtain. —( Hear.) Hon. Gentlemen opposite say that even a fixed duty would not now give satis faction. He (Lord Howick) admitted it; he admitted there were a large number whom it would not satisfy; but his belief was, that if a sufficiently moderate duty were imposed, all agi tation would subside, ar,d the country would acquiesce. But if such a state of things was to continue, and if the battle was to be fought as heretofore, and if the practical working of the Corn-law was to be what he anticipated it would under the measure now before the House, he was persuaded the country would not acquiesce.—( Hear, hear.) By deferring a final settlement of the querti ro, they saw already how much worse were the terms now than what they might have been a short time ago. —(Hear, hear.) In the year 1828 there were few Gentlemen, he apprehended, in that House, or in the country, who would have objected to grant to the agriculturists a fixed duty of considerable amount.—( Hear, hear.) When he voted formerly for a moderate fixed duty he found himself in a considerab!e minority, and believed that at that time the country would be perfectly satisfied with a fixed duty as high as 20s. ,or at least as high as 15s. But what was the state of things now ? Only three or tour months ago, a proposition of an Bs. fixed duty was made, but that duty would not now answer.—( Hear.) He believed they should now fall to a ss. duty to satisfy the people; and every day they deferred putting off the settlement of the question, every day would the terms become worse ; and he believed that the interva during which they could obtain terms at all was now very short.—( Hear, hear.) In his opinion that was not very material, for although he was in favour of a fixed duty for the Like of the owners of land, he was only so that the first dis turbance of agriculture may be avoided. He had no fears ulti- mately for the agriculturists.—( Hear.) He was not afraid that the British farmer was infer for to the Continental farmer in skill, industry, or the possession of capital—that he was so inferior as not to be able to enter with the farmer of the Conti- nent in the race of competition ; and he believed this the more especially because he saw the manufacturers of England was not afraid to contend with his continental competitor. He believed the Englishman could compete as suc cessfully with the foreigner in agricultural as in any other branches of manufactures or trade.—( Loud Cheers. ) That opinion he knew prevailed very extensively amongst the better informed of those engaged in the cultivation of land in the country which he (Lord Howick) lately represented. He (Lord Howick) had certainlybeen defeated at the last election, but he was able to say from what he had seen during that elec tion that the opinion of the best agriculturists in that country was strongly in favour of some further change. All the better farmers were in favour even of a greater change than that which had been proposed last year. It was notorious that in Scotland and the North of England, where the land was the best culti vated, the farmers were in favour of a great change in those laws. Devonshire was no exception to the rule, unless the county had been greatly changed since he (Lord H.) had last had the pleasure of visiting it. It was only in those parts of the country where a barbarous and neglected system of agricul ture prevailed—( Cheers and laughter)—that any apprehensions were entertained of the results of a change in these laws. But the fear of obtaining worse terms hereafter, was one of theleasi arguments which he would address to the HuttFe when urging them not to lose lime in settling this question.—( Hear, hear.) He would urge them to consider the effect which must be produced upon agriculture while the question continues undecided; how could they hope that any improvement could take place in agriculture under such cir cumstances ? No plan could be adopted more effectual for delaying every species of agricultural improvement, and for the accomplishment of its ultimate ruin, so effectual as the keeping the laws relating to the importatie i of corn in a state of doubt and suspense. In spite of the majority by which he had no doubt that Bill would be carried into a law, in spite of the arguments of those who gave this system of restriction their support, in spite of their assertions that no further alteration in the law w,,s .. ........... ...-. .. no declar a ti ons t h at t h ey . hey could do, that 't intended, the publi c m i n d w ould not look upon this law as any thing h u t a t emporary measure. N o thi n g might make, no majority by which they might be sustai n ed, cou ld sa ti s fy the public mind that that Bill would continue.—( Che ers .) But while further changes were Langing over the head of the farmer, how could they possibly imagine that the relation of landlord and tenant would continue in a satisfactory state ? What farmer would venture to 'take a long lease whilst he dreaded what might be the future changes in the laws regulating the imp eation of corn? —(Hear, hear.) Who could venture to make any permanent improvements in his lands in such a state of uncertainty? and when he spoke of permanent improvements, he con sidered it an important point to consider in what manner the present state of the law had tended to discourage the system of granting leases. Every man ITTIE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, MARCH 10, 1842 there in t h were i s d h d i i p e s f a d t h e n e w m i o t u h t i c , o o r n f l A ay u i g n u g . ti and r n i o ve c r o : rn T ea h m at e w in as , the average price of corn was comparatively low. yet the corn was kept back till the average reached 735. It was then time.—( ad mitted, as within a month of the tae.—( Hear.) He 1 acknowledge that there were two merits in the Bill of the a thewui Right t i e Hon. Baronet—the first was, that we shoul 1 get the first brick out of the old system ; it shook t more revenue by it; but the great advantage was, h tl e m o t ld it c r o d r l n ed . law—the poor old Corn-law—after they had ridden it so much, and it must come down. At any rate, whatever arguments Gentlemen opposite might employ when they went to the hustings, they would not go on the tried merits of the good old Corn-law.—(Cheers and laughter.) He remembered at the last election for Liskeard, thinking that. he had established the most undoubted claims on the agriculturists, how annoyed he was to see his adversaries flig flipping in his face, ceiling him self " the farmer's friend," with mottoes of " rpeed the plough," and so forth.—( Hear and laughter.) At any rate, this kind of argument would not go on.—(Cheers.) At any rate, they would not tell the electors not to listen to those who proposed any change in the Corn-law.; they would not do as was done by the Hon. and consistent Member for Lic lnshire, first say, " stand by the Corn-laws," then voie for the amendment, then propose another amendment, and wind up by voting against his own amendment.—( Cheers and laughter.) They would not be able to say this, bat he (Mr. C. Buller) would be bound that they would have some cry just as unfair, and if they could not appeal to the old Corn law, they would to the new.— (Cheers and hear. ) That they would do he had no doubt. The Right Hon. Baronet the other day made them alt feel—he touched them quite—with the way in which he told us of the difficulties he had to encounter in thislaw—( Hear)—when he asked Hon. Gentlemen on his (Mr. C. Buller's) side of the House to support him, he did not say the words against those unreasonable friends of his.—( Cheers and laughter.) When • ever those friends had ventured to came to a division against the Right lion. Baronet, and, on the last two occasions, when they had screwed up their courage. they, on the Opposition Benches, had supported the Right Hon. Baronet.--( Hear. ) At present, he should vote against the Bill of the Right lion. Baronet, but whenever the Right Hon. Baronet's Friends should give him an opportunity of voting for the Right Hon. Baronet's modified plan or their propositions, he (Mr. C. Buller) should vote fur the Right Hon. Baronet. If he might ask the Right lion. Baronet to take a retrospective glance at a time when he was so hampered with the agricultural gentlemen in this House, he would ask him if he ever thought what would have been the result if the Right lien. Baronet had conceded what must he conceded sooner or later, at the time when his (Mr. C. Buller's) Noble Friend brought forward the motion last se•sion.—( Hear.) If the Right lion. Baronet had come forward then, and had told the agriculturists that he would make good terms for them, and if he had told them to be calm, and not to insist on too much, instead of using all the argu ments he could on behalf of the old law, if he had held the same language and molera.ion which he wanted Gentle men on his (Mr. C. Buller's) side of the House to hold now, he believed that there would have been little difficulty in putting the trade in corn on the fo o ti ng o f a s lidi ng sca l e. Sir E. KNATCH BULL said, that whatever might be the opinions of the Hon. Member who had just sat down, or whatever might be the opinions of the House, he believed that no plan had ever been proposed by aay Minister which met with the more unanimous concurrent of the agriculturists, than the measure now proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet. —(Oh, oh, and laughter.) He repeated it—(Oh, oh)—and he would make his observation general—that that was the opi nion entertained by persons in the House and out of the House. There was one exception to be made to it, and that was the body of men engaged in the Anti-Corn law League ( Hear, hear ) With reference to the petitions presented to the House he was aware that there were a great many more presented against this law than there were in favour of it.— ( Hear, hear.) But how stood the fact ? Had they employed any means whatever during the last few months similar to those which had been taken by the Opposition ? No, they rested their case upon its own merits; and instead of expend ing their means in getting up petitions, they had expend, d them in al'eviaeing the distress in the country—(oh, oh, and hear)—and h e t h ought if G ent l emen opposite had adopted the same course they would have done much more to relieve the people than they wreed ever do by getting them to sign peti tions. —( Hear, hear.) The Hon Gentleman opposite, who had just sat down, admitted that there were two ur three points of merit in this Bill ; the first had been removed, and he was glad of that, because the whole system of Corn-law must fall with it. The Noble Lord had told them that " no surrender' was no longer to be the cry, that the flag had been struck, and that the ) must accede to a compromise. lie ( Sir E. Knatchbull) thought those were not the words that should have been employed. On the other hand, •‘ no surrender" was still to be the cry, the flag had not been struck, and they were, not compelled to accede to a compromise. If they sur rendered at all they would at least surrender at discretion. (The Right Hon. Baronet here spoke in so low a tone, an. 4 turned his back so frequently on the reporters, that it was wi'h the greatest difficulty we. could catch his remarks, indeed, in many parts he was quite inaudible.) He was understood to say, that the Noble Lord the Member for Sun 'erland, had explained that hs would have no duty whatever. He (Sir Edward Knatchbull) understood the Noble Lord to say so most distinctly, and he went further than that, fur he said that he thought that when he said so he was express ing the opinions of the farmers of Northumberland. (" No," from Lord Heavick. ) If he had misunderstood the Noble Lord he was very sorry, but his impression certainly was that those were the expressions he made use of. In the course of this debate three propositions had been made—onte was for the abolition of all duty whatsoever, one for a fixed duty, and one for preserving the law as it was. He (S;r E. Knatchbull) thought that it was necessary that there should be some altera tion in the Corn-laws, and he though the plan propoaed by the Right Hon. Baronet was the one best sailed to meet the views of reasonable men of all parties.—( Hear.)—( The Right Hon. Baronet stag then understood to allude to some remarks which had fallen from Mr. C. Buller, but he spoke so low that we were unable to catch the purport of his observations.) The means of purchasing food was the matter of most conse quence to the poor man, and not the mere price. It was im material what the price of food might be if the labourer had not the money to purchase it. He remembered the story of a man in Londen who went to purchase a few eggs. On inquiring what the price was, he was told he could have 6 eggs for a shilling. " Six eggs for a shilling," said he, " Oh, in Ireland I could get thirteen for a shilling." " Well, then," rejoined the other, " why do you not go back to Ireland ?" " Because T could not," replied the first, "obtain the money there wherewith ta purchase them." Such was the case in the present instance. An Hon. Member had complained of the rise in the price of corn in his neighbourhood, but if that were so, wages must have been raieed, and the sufferings of the poor diminished. He ( Sir E. Knateli bull had given his assent to the Bill now before the House, which, he trusted, would soon be passed into a law. He had given his assent to it under the firm convietion that it was a measure that would operate for the benefit of the coun try at large. He did not think that her Majesty's Govern ment could be justly charged wi:h seeking exclusively to uphold the interest of any particular class. They had pro posed this measure under the impression that in 30 doing they were legislating for the advantage of all classes of the community. Much had been said in the couse of those dis cussions of the tone and temper of the debates on this sub ject. He thought that everything like violence should be avoided in all diseussions in that House. He had endeavoured in the course of his observations to take that course himself, and he hoped that nothing had fallen from him which might be considered inconsistent with such a course. The Right Hon. Baronet made some observations in conclusion, which, as well as many passages in the course of his speech, were spoken in so low a tone as to be quite inaudible in the gallery. Lord HOWICK wished to make an observation in explana tion of what had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet, who had just sat down, in reference to him (Lord Howick.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that he (Lord Howick) had expressed himself as opposed to any duty whatever on corn ; and, further, that he ( Lord Ho wick) had stated such to be the opinions of the persons whom he represented in that House. What he ( Lord Howick) had said was precisely the opposite. His t Lord Howick's) argumsnt was, that the present Corn law was so injurious to the agriculturists, that it would be much better for them if they were totally resealed; but that his own view was that the best course for all interests of the country would he to impose a onoderate fixed duty. To preve that such ha I been his argument, he ( Lord Howick) had ;;one on further to state the inducements which the landed inter e.t hid to such au arrangement. He had expressed• his opi nion that in a short time suet' an arrangement would be no longer practicable, .but that a total repeal would be required. Among the farmers of the north of Eng land that was a growing opinion —a race of men who far ex ceeded in intelligence and shrewdness the farmers of the south of England. Sir E. KNATCHBULL had certainly thought the Noble Lord had used the words alluded to, otherwise he (Sir E. Kna,chbull) would not have attributed them to him. Mr. SHIEL was certainly much surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, remarkable is he was for his perspicuity, had mistaken the Noble Lord, who was also remarkable for his perspicuity. The Right Hon. Baronet had misconceived the matter to which he had adverted, and which appeared to him most deserving of attention. Among the many observations made by the Noble Lord, it struck him (Mr. Shiel) that there was one particularly worthy c f notice, and that was his designation of the measure of the Right Hon. Ba ronet, as the precursor of an ulterior measure. The Noble Lord had stated that it was obvious the Right Hon. Baronet could not stop there, and that either he or some other Minister would be compelled ultimately to abandon the project which was no introduced. Upon that observation no remark had been made by the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. Whether he had assented to it or not, had not ape peered. lie ( Mr. Shiel) thought that the objection made by the Noble Lord was one deserving the most serious considera tion. To tamper with the laws that regulate the price of pro visions, had been said by Edmund Burke to be at all times dan gerous. But when they did tamper with them—when yielding to the force of public opinion to a certain extent, they took the first step (and the first step was the most important)—when they made a change which was most satisfactory, as the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir E. Knatchbull) had just observed, but to which the Duke of Buckingham at least felt the strongest objection—when they made such a change as was objected to by a distinguished Nobleman who had not been a member of the Cabinet in 1829, and who had ceased to be a member of the Cabinet in 1842—0 f whose secession from that' Cabinet all he (Mr. S.) would say was, honi soit qu i ma l y pens* (Hear, hear and laughter.) When he said they ventured to make such a change, it was a matter of much regret and some surprise to him, that they should not do at oance what he thought, either they or some one else must do it last—that they should still adhere to the vicious principle of the present system, of which perpetual vicissitude constituted the essence, a principle which afforded incentives to fraudulent combina tions, and substituted the spirit of rash adventure for that of legitimate commerce.—( Hear. ) They applied the sliding scale to corn, but to no other article of human food. C lonial coffee and colonial sugar were protected bylfixed duties. It was said that in those duties they were to make a change It was rumoured that the apprehensions which were entertained of giving an undue stimulant to the slave-trade hail begun to subside. But did they mean to supply a sliding scale to coffee and to sugar? If they did so, if they passed a law by which it would be enacted that the duty upon Brazilian sugar and (mon Havannah sugar should depend upon the average price of East and West India sugar, he asked the Vice President of the Board of Trade whether a most material injury would not be done to the growers of sugars and coffee by that law? He was not surprised, for his part, that the agriculturists of this country did not readily admit the opinions, regarded by many as extreme opinions of Adam Smith anti Mr. Huskisson, the latter of whom, at least in the later period of his life, held that measures intended for the proteatien of agriculture were in reality detrimental to its interests. But it appeared t o him (Mr. thiel) that, the opi nions of a political economist, who was himself a most dee'ded advocate for protection, were worthy of their attention—he re referred now to Mr. APCulloch.—( Hear, heir. ) Mr. 111'01'- 1 said—" A fluctuating duty superinduces an artificial variation in the natural and inevitable variation of the seasons, and is thus of as much injury to the farmer as it is to trade." ( Hear, hear.) Was that true? Let them see how the sliding scale had worked in order that they might ascertain how far anything analogous to it, anything founded upon the pre sent system was likely to be beneficial. The sliding scale- in 0 1 11 83 t 8 h , e h i a 3 d th sh o if f te s d ep th te i m rt h y- e fi r v i e t t w im as es is. t ; en a wa s s in 2 g , l 3 e s.B year, d. July 19 , it o n the 11th of October it• was aga in 2 0s. &I.; before the middle o f Deeern ber it had a ga i n d escended to ha. In 1840 the lowest duty was weeks 2a. Bd.; it conti nue d at that rate for one week, an d five Report of the Inspector of Factories in Lancashire (Mr. Hor ner). This document, he believed, had been referred to the' Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Ja nes Graham), but un luckily before the document was published. He sU. C. Buller) must say that great credit was due to Mr. Horner for having taken the trouble of this, examination in towns and dis tricts, which it was his duty to inspect, and which had thrown so much light on the state of the factories, and showed what really was the state of employment in the manufacturing coun- Ities; and he (Mr. C. Buller) must say that the cenclusion drawn from the reading of that document appeared to him per fectly appalling, when they considered it with refe • rence to the condition of the people. In the first place he (Mr. Horner) had put the distress of the manufacturing districts a very clear and statistical light. He had give.. three different factories. He had calculated the power in each manufactory, and he calculated the amount of persons the fac tory could employ if in full work, and he gave the result in one table. In another table he gave the actual result. He showed what amount of power was worked, and what amount of human labour was employed; Mr. Horner's district only compre• hended Lanc .shire, and his remarks applied not to the cotton trade merely—it applied to all trades more or less. It applied to silks less than to cotton, but it applied to woollens and flax more than to cotton. Tae amount of persons who could be employed, and were not emploed was not less than '29,800 ; who were working short time, and consequently diminished wages, was not less than 32,000. Now taking the two, those working on short employment, and those not employed at all, and putting them together, the people who were suffering from distress in the manufacturing districts, could not rate at less than 61,000. Now the whole employ. ment of the people in the manufacturing districts was about '233,000 persons, sn that nearly one-third of the manufacturing population was out of employment. Now he was aware that there was one objection to be raised to this. He was aware that the employment of steam power had partly caused this want of employment (as we understood.) The Right Hon. Baronet had stated that, since the year 1839, not less than ninety-one new ccotton mills alone had been established. He (Mr. C. Buller) was aware that when the Right Hon. Baronet alluded to that document it had not been made public, but he believed that he (the Right Hon. Baronet did not intend to deal unfairly with that House. The Right lion. Baronet bad mentioned 21 mills, which em ployed 3,350 horse-power. He ( Mr. C. Buller) thought it was proper to mention that 3,*50 fresh horse-power called into Vaistenee caused 6,783 persons to be thrown out of employ ment. Was it not appalling to that House and to the country, that nearly 50,000 persons were totally dest'tute of emp!oy ment, and taking those that were working short time no less than 32,000 ? Was this not horrible ? He must say that this Report of Mr. Horner was a moat valuable one, and but for that document he should not have been able to go into this subject. But it was not necessary for him to dwell on the sub ject, to harrow up the feelings of that House by a description of the details of the distress which existed, and which he (Mr. C. Buller) attributed principally to the present Corn-laws. Mr. Horner stated that the principal way in which dis tress was caused, was by the sub , titution of machinery for manual labour; if that was the case, the consideration was terrible, because it was manifest if that was the principal cause it was not a temporary distress. He would not abandon his opinions for the sake of his argument, and he should say that he believed that improvements in machinery would be of ser vice to the country in the long run, but then it should be with free trade.—(Hear, and cheers from the Opposition.) No doubt improvements in machinery would tend to the benefit of the country, but if the application of that machinery caused such general distress, come what prosperous times there might, so much injury had been done to the manufacturing people who had been thrown out a employment by those improvements in machinery, and by the application of that machinery—many of those persons who had been working at high wages were in consequence of the increased power of machinery, working at extremely low wages—so low that they were called " Cy. phers" by their fellow labourers. By Mr. Horner's Statistical Reports it appeared where machinery was employed in various manufacturing towns that one man was now doing the work which it required four men to do some few years ago. In Manchester the work which formerly required upwards of a hundred men to do, was now done by thirty-three men. In one instance, which Mr. Horner stated, it appeared that by the improvement in machinery the labourers, in a Particular establishment which he named, were reduced from 330 to 258 men ! It was quite true that some of those workmen who were retained had increased wages; but, in that particular establishmen to which Mr. Horner alluded, there were 72 men thrown out of employment; and what comparative advantage could there be from the increase of wages given to one or two persons, while such a vast numbes as 72 out of 300 men were thrown out of employment.—( Hear.) He did not dwell upon those facts merely because they were statistical rel urns, but be cause it appeared to him that the change which was being can-ed by the increase of machinery was a fatal change.— ( Hear.) He would not say that the increase of machinery was a fatal change in a sound state of trade ; but he said that it was fatal if the people of the country did not get employment.— ( Cheers.) One very bad effect of substituting machinery for manual labour, was the tendency to create an over-supply. It was said that it was more advisable to work by machinery for some time even at a loss, than to let the progress of machinery stand. In Lancashire the manufacturers found it better to work their mills even at a loss, than not work them at all by machinery ; and Mr Horner said that the use of cotton in these manufactures had gone on increasing to such an ex tent th it the manufacturers were enabled to pay themselves by increasing the quantity of goods in the market. [ Sir R. Peel here made some observations across the table. fhe Right Hon. Baronet asked what had the statements he (Mr. Buller) was then making to do with the Corn-laws ? (" Hear, hear," forom the Ministerial benches. )I—Undoubt edly they had everything to do with the distress which prevailed in the country. He did not • pretend to say that the Corn laws caused all that distress ; he did tof mean to say there were not other causes for it ; but he thought there was a fatal tendency in the state of society if the employment of capital was not attended with remuneration. Then, he asked, were the Legislature wise in increasing the d3ficulties of trade, and diminishing the profits of the manufacturers of the country ? The Right Hon. Baronet said very distinctly that his object in introducing that Bill was not to diminish the price of corn for the manufacturer; but the Right Honourable Baronet said his object was to keep up the price of corn between 545. to 58s. a quarter. Sir 11. PEEL, in a very inaudible tone, made some obsesva • twos across the table - he was und ers t oo d t o di ssent f rom t l e statement made by the Hon. Gentleman opposite. Mr. C. BULLER wished the Right Hon. Baronet would explain to the House what he really did say.—( Hear. ) Sir R. PEEL-_I wish you would state accurately what I did say. —( Hear, hear.) Mr. C. BULLEtt—He did not take down the Right Hon. Baronet's words, but he understood that his proposition was that the price of corn should be kept up between 54s and 58s. a quarter. It was not possible to mistake the Right Hon • Ba ronet, for he stated over and over again that his plan would have the effect or tendency of keeping corn at that price, and the Ri ;ht Hon. Baronet distinctly said that he had brought in that Bill for the purpose of giving effect to his plan. The Right Hon. Baronet might object to the articular mode of stating the expressions he used, but he (Mr.C. Buller) would ask (he Right Hon. Baronet what was the avowed ob • ject and manifest and unavoidab'e tendency of a sliding scale, ex cept to keep up corn always at a particular and fixed price.— ( Hear, hear, from Lord Stanley, and cheers from the Opposi thee.) He (Mr. Buller) was glad that the Noble Lord ( Szan ley), a member of her Majesty's Government, had cheerel at that observation ; he was at liberty to believe from that that the Noble Lord concurred in it.—(Cheers.) How could it be just to secure to the farmer advantages which no other class of men possessed, namely, ;high prices for their corn, under all variations of circumstances—( Hear, hear) — that advantage applied to sugar, to coffee, to cotton, and every other article which could be raised from the earth. Certainly the agriculturists were to have all those ad vantages without counter-ballancing disadvantages. As long as laws were passed in favour of one particular class—as long as the Legislature, who are interested, state to the world that they would make a law in favour of the agricultural interest, they held out to the whole world the spectacle of a Legislature making laws for their own advan.age.—(Cheers. ) He believed it would be admitted that he never willingly indulged in per , sotaalities—( Hear, hear)—he would be the last person to attri bute to lion. Gentlemen opposite any sordid private motives in bringing forward the measure proposed by the Right lion. Baronet, but he attributed that measure to those motives of interest, or to a bias which inserbib'y operated upon the minds of men wh n their own immediate i oerests were concerned. Yet he said that as long as the legislation of that House ap peared to he carried on under the influence of that bias, so long will it give the people thoroughout the country reas,n to com plain of class legislation.—( Hear, hear.) There was one argu ment in favour of the present Corn-laws, which had been adverted to during the debate, to which he would allude before he sat down. That was the argument against a fixed duty, he though it more advisable to reply to those arguments by statis tical returns than by general answers. '1 he only thing of advantage to the consumer was, that the price of corn should he moderate. Now the proposed measure conferred all the advantages on the foreigner. Just as fast as the prices of corn in this country are raised, so, according to the proposed mea- sure, must they be likewise increased on the continent. They raise the price of corn upon the continent, and they have the advantage of the duty ; but what would be the result if there was an Bs. fixed duty, then you would h sve the corn without any loss to the consumer. Suppose the Bs. duty was esta blished loot July, would not that be singly beneficial to the consumer, compared with the present sliding -scale ?No doubt it would ; and he ( Mr. Buller) was prepared to !move from calculations he had made, that it would be a benefit, not only to the consumer, but to the revenue of England also.--( Hear, hear.) He thought these calculations were worth entering into, and therefore he would trouble the House with a few of them ; at the same time he would not go into detail. The average price of corn, at the end of July last, was 68s. 3d. a quarter. It was perfectly plain that if there was an Bs. fixed duty in July last, that corn would be admitted here from Dantzic at 655. 3d. a quarter, paying Bs. duty, It could not be brought from Dantzic unless there was a certain quan tity required. Now, assuming that 2,000,000 quarters of corn were imported that would reducs the price by 4s. a quarter ; then, uasuming the' corn was imported at 645. 3d. a quarter, the amount of the quantity sold would, he supposed, be 563,837 quarters ; taking that at the difference of price he had tta.teo, the loss, in consequence of their not being an Bs. duty, would be 136,138/. on the first scale of prices and 237,3461. on the second. That quantity of corn which he had mentioned bore a very small proportion to the quntity consumed ; he believed the total amount of the corn consumed was u , t 1 Si than 4,000,000, whereas the consumption of the United Kingdom was 16,000,000 of quarters. Now, in order to calculate the losses sus tained by the revenue and the consumer, which was 544,752/. upon the first, and 949,344/. upon the second rate of prices, in making a calculation of that sort, he thought he was justified in taking even the highest calculations in which wheat could have been imported from Dantzic. He was sure none of the Honourable Gentlemen opposite would say it could be imported at less than 524. a quarter; consequently, if they had a fixed Bs. duty, it could be brought to this market from Dantzic at 625. a. quarter. Then the amount 'of loss to this country upon that would be 1,488.8784 Instead of gaining anything by this sliding down to the Is duty, the loss to the people was very great. During the time of its sliding down from 16s. Bd. to 2s. the loss to the e p ople of England had b een certa i nly at least half a million, -probably one million, and it was not impossible a million and a half of money: but this was not the total loss, there was also a loss of revenue—(hear, hear )—bei aose all the corn which came in at the Is. duty would pay Bs. duty, instead of Is. —( Hear, hear. ) In September last, 2,178.371 quarters of wheat and corn were entered for home consumption at a duty of Is. ; the amount of revenue received from this was 135,882/. ; but if the du'y ha-i been is., it wou ld h ave amounted to 87,346/., which showed a loss to the revenue of upwards of 730,0001. From these impositions the people had lost certainly not less than 1,200,0001., probably 2,000,00(,/. He was sorry to have tres passed so long upon the House, but he thought it worth while to work out these arguments.—( Hear, hear.) He conceived the worst part of the sl.ding scale was the low duty.—(Hear. ) If they looked at the effect of the sliding scale for the last 14 years, who could doubt what would be the effect of the proposed scale? It would be that corn would never be introduced at at the time that it was wanted ; it would always be kept back till the duty got lower.—(Hear, hear.) He was glad that the Hon. Member for Stafford had withdrawn his motion, because it would have given those who voted for it the air of voting for a paradox; but he (Mr. C. Buller) would say that it would be better for the consumer to have stopped the fall in the sliding scale at 6s. or Bs., than to have brought it down to Is. He believed the sting of the scale was in the sliding scale.—( Hear, hear.) What was the history of this low scale ? When the people in England actually wanted food, and afterwards it was 20s. Bd. In 1841 the dut y was lOs week only; in the following ste•cessive weeks it was 10s. ed., 16s. sd., and dti the 2 0 th of O ctober it was 2W -t It appeared to him that that system, or an, thing like' ; Ir e be productive of injury to agriculturl%'s themselves.; usirchein thought that the simplicity of the Griner seal egregious he conceived that in such a system he would find .0 1sieg n for his interests. But it was said that the proposition ot s „ 1, Right Hon. Baronet would obviate many of the o bjections .fi ntur i attached to the present system. He introduced the rest: i r scase for the purpose of baffling fraud ; but where was ter'i; were not introduced fraud would net be baffled. that he lowered 20s. to Is., and thus aff (rdod to the trafficker in grain when ducement to hoard up corn, and then glut the market. , u_', A the duties ; but he left them to the opportunity, to the creation of which they themselce. so essentially contribute, should have arrived.—( Hear, a b It was urged that in times of scarcity there would be . e culty in maintaining a fixed duty. He met that obje..tinlr an appeal to the authority which he had already qutte u u __, 411'Culloch said that if there were a regular trade i nt r._ means of a fixed duty, the supply would be proportio• tit the fixedness of the duty would take away fromt ho te Irtangraefro_al bility of the price. He (Mr. Stile') though that whe e 0 1, „°; 1 ; must be a choice of evils, it would be better to t o t tb en __ tion fi to xed sur d re u n t ( y ler set.- market.—( Hear, hear, hear. ) But whateverd ( I°' tothetheaverdaigscersetiotne theof Parliament might be raised with respect to the effect of the sh upon agriculture, he thought that with respect to its nP e _ doub t upon the commerce and manufactures of t he countryfalle.r7i earl could be reasonably entertained. During the lastd we had imported millions of quarters of corn, but we r e ., trade in corn ; trade was barter ; trade consi sted in the if one set of commodities for another. Wh ere our deo r i T er :;, u id corn was but desultory, the demand for our manufacturea ;ley-guise not be permanent.—( Hear, hear.) If there were e t ll ° trade in corn, it seemed to him quite obvious _ode merchants would not lee interested in excluding our 5 __,, 0 of tures, which they now endeavoured to exclude byo.lo"neage. retaliatory tar'ffs, for the purpose of giving pro ment to their own domestic industry. Corn . 1 7'1 e his tested, but not for the benefit of the agrieulturist:„‘et; country. It was to our competitors in the foreign °f the it was to those whom we could not deprive r i mo . benefit of our machinery; it was to those who had g. ° 4 — Siloo sion of the secrets of our mechanism—it was to tnr_ as emulated us in industry, and who rivalled us in skill---,00,51 them that the ass - gave a protection the most efficacuitioffies (Chews.) It would hardly be contended that the ° _,,,,lie. from which we had for the last five years derived ou of corn had taken a fair proportion of our manufac_tu_te7reh ( Hear, hear.) Let any man look at the number or , Y in. t he which hid entered the Baltic, and he would firm that, h oot. year 1839, 1,000 English ships entered the Baltic in n u tnic in I i 1838 413 English ships entered the port of DJ ic l i deo b dlast, and in the same year 417 left the port of Dantz...,tba with corn. New what was the effect of that systm:l'M-sere currency of the country ? What was the effect of th hie upon the metallic curreney which the Right p ie r w hich Baronet had the merit of establishing, and o ' or d-- therefore he ought to watch with peculiar _ (Hear. ) It seemed to him to be inconsistent to estab b il: w hieb metallic currency and yet to persevere in a system must h e the country was deprived of its corn. Foreign corn _ intt .tbe paid for in bullion; th e exc h anges were turned *g ee d- and country, the circulation was contracted, a panic l e ould distress to a great extent was the co nsequence,' Ne. call the attention of the Hou se t o the language The w ords w er n i son, with respect to that view of the subject. lu e laps used in 1821, and though applied by him to t he Cora' 1815, they were equally applicable to the system ot a P re ad se by the Right Hon. Baronet. Th e Hon. Itlember tued direenl extract, to the effect that the Corn-laws of 18 15 tondo sa d to is contract our commercial dealings with other Stateatexciade excite in the rulers of those States a determination te t oi l ! the producti o ns an d manu f ac t ure s of this for oc° cor • to de , Is bic and when it wa s necessary to se nd must be paid for in bu Lon, the effect w_e s o we: r inge for a time the monetary system o f the site th- Such was the language of Mr. Huskisson two Year s He lit: Bill of the Right Hon. Baronet passed into a lad' net for not one of those who condemned the Right Bon. r.,e . I l i SI proposing that Bill ; but he thought that the rtig,.. s q; I Baronet evinced far greater moral courage in P r llbs° le" than he would have done by introducing a Pleasure 0 jot so free trade.—( Hear, hear.) They were entreat ed , : bing the _s change the relati ons o f l an dl or d an d t en ant by *boos, ores' Corn-laws ; bu t the Right Hon. Baronet, in 1819, inmereditort those relations, as well a. the relations of debtor 0 3 _ tho ser and to every incumbrance in the country had Ma a n ,. of „ A t be mention which the eloquent and distinguished au7eseritf: pamplile os Corn rn I Currency had so powerfullY a —( A laugh.) The Right Hon. Baronet was not the, of go nister of the Crown. His solicitude for the interel et . . tai country was then unbiassed by any auz ie ,, t a r ) maintenance of his p ar ty. —( H ear , hear, hear,) - (Mr. Shell) wished that he would now a ct threa stai the same moral intrepidity ; that in spite of those b e e. big intimations which had been given in another 44 fr"," o in a spirit worthy of the emeency he would al it oss to the distresses of the countryeffectual table reel' more o r be found in effusions, because eloquent, or unpro. we re ° misseration. It had been said that the CornelaW, r ,, s „ 00, 4 ' connected with the distresses of the country. at of that distress had formerly been denied; th y ° e lis °- proved, but there was a denial of the cause. e l the tee part, when he found that the Corn-laws injure. d e qok and commerce of the country, he found in theta ant legiftv, e (use of the distress, and to that ad• nate cause , t, l , o ibos mute effect was, he thought, fairly 4 ascribed. t n aed.i e t : effectual were done in a Parliament - in which 1107-,000015' terest predominated, he was afraid tha the people of I RL e ser el i would be disposed to turn with reseutment from the OtSh - to sions of a barren sympathy ; and, as they had been for . ir-d the Poor-laws were n o t di c t a t e d byany very re P 0 Ohl err tude for the interest of th e poor, the would be led t ° ;rd the Corn-laws were maintained from an exclusive e c e i gi o dre cit the higher classes of the community. It would be h : s „, r t iseP egir ; to force the distressed operatives to seek an asylum t",„ a , house. If charity was proscribed under that aY, 4e ,,Vebat i ' work be refused. The people of England did not so "'"" they did not go upon their k nees to so li c i t an y I nercee for tribution they asked for trade that produced wo r fo r et de g that produced brend They did sit not f I ma n den i m bread as for the means of earning it, whether it Iser e off off „j` , costly.—( Cheers.) They called upon them to Al . " - sr; e's restrictions which cramped the industry of the couotrrioet' in calling upon . them to do that, they wanted then' t° ,,free d ,,,, ie not only their interests, but their own, 11 entirely is the sentiment which he had heard e d by tb d t " . expressean d ~„ Member for Dorchester, that the agricultural intereostegrel-e commercial interest were not distin g et. So far fronl be r i a - th/ 11 11 Beret, they depended upon rash other, and were in t der esT, same. Trade de l ended upon agr culture, agricultur, Stout upon trade. He was sure t h at t h e H on. M e mber 05ref, re port, when he look e d u p on t h e sp l en did spec tacle Is port, scenery presented, mu st d raw f rom it the high est p ose _ h er and desired to see th e agr i cu l tura l i nterest co ntinue 1° SelP s and he was equally sure that the Hon. Baronet, the, eiti° for Kent, must see, in the very smoke in which our larr o tel es id towns were enveloped, indications of the grea t Lek; 2l' l which a vast proportion of our population were nta in iettl',e the greatness of th e country achieved. No, the sgrhors•-', and commercial i n t eres t s were not di st i nc t ; but if -' Is e b e and if in place of giving a just sustainment to bs the° ccssary to make a sacrifice of one of those interests' be etfi would be disposed to say that the maintenance 01, nalis bo merce of England should, w i t h e very rtse deserv:n r th e y i ssiV g the name, be the object of pre-emineu - .O It was not to their agriculture —to the fertility of co s i to the peculiar happiness of their climate—to their'e.sontl rearing the seed from the earth—it was not Monn to per c ' et causes, but it was owing to the strength a their co enterprise, that England was distinguished beyond e , / ft d , nation in the circle of the civilised world.—(cheeroisboopc owing to her indomitable perseverance 'the u rsuit urrg.' in p . 0 • t he less traffic, to her untiring iniktstry in manufacturti, s vitb, s di to the wonderful skill with which she filled the eart ree " so l a s produce of her labour and her genius, Dne to her co rid her she extended to the uttermost boundaries of the wo e for ' to these glorious causes that England was lacier glob e :e high pre-eminence among the nations of th e iv 0 1 1,, (Cheers.) Against her trade the mig hty fa ik- P sary of England directed his blow---" Table etear, but let them take care that what Napoleon was o° ' $ ct they may accomplish by the r impolicy• _ ne ' e to_ A hear.) Let them beware, lest, by an obstinate atibeturroos 07 e system repugnant to all the maxims of sound ee ° sound policy—let them take care, lest by a a ysten: i th e • oh many enlightened men—men not more enlighteoe f Pl o t partial, had concurred in condemning as a s ource e nt isieor t ? mischief, which ha I already produced such great o° 4 bt teemed with still greater injury—let them beware , le the Co w a system, they may cramp the industry °f e tarY try, diminish its commerce, expose the raw l ve turn to perpetual disturbance, reduce the oPel e ntie l e V to a state of destitution; and (said the Right Hon- to so 4 ,0 turning to Sir R. Peel) beware lest by adhering t tbe Br et system, though you were the first in talents attout, - .....the h sla talented—the first in wisdom among the most "-,, to t e- n et in virtue among the most high-minded of statestuen-; may fortunes of a country were ever committed--,YaieetPi 6r t.lseeli for the evil consequences be able to find a cure. - -- t o n Mr. GLADSTONE said that he believed tbeßight t ot which were heard to issue from the lips of t he the P r--` ty' ° Gentleman were an exclamation f surprise that a r os ies ro , period, and after the experience they had had, her the,P„ did Government should, in attempting a settement ip, oot laws, adhere to the principles of a graduated sel c i io did not mean to say that there were not Gentlemen „ feelOr t ie• utter such language without r a i s ing in h s min d any t of 5 a n surprise—( Hear, hear)—b u t h e did entertain f eeling b en tlel o j prise when he heard it uttered by the Right 11 ' 4 '1 Itb e —( Hear) It was possible that he (Mr. Glads_ o e _ e art% at might be labouring under some hallucination, that tbt t here l e s some errors in the proceedings of the House, hu dea t !O v en not very antiquated torn -l aw f oun d e d on a k ee ,„h 144, a ll founded even on th e o ld graduated scale — sew", snov ie - brought forwa r d i n the House on several oecalliuu ' o , lo tiot o i these occasions he found the Right Hon. Gentl efu n a t tente ds tf favour of it.—( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Ge fiseu fiy selected the year 1838, and he The Right that the .hs, less L" I th e under tho law of that year, had produced no o change; To mo r t buts proposition had been made for the „ wit eo law of 1638, and the Right Hon. Gentleman ' et OW; —( Loud cheers.) But in the year 1838, he o° 4') any of those 35 changes, and the effect of 'h ose „ toe , beef s ', could not be perceived until the year 1839.-4 j ' el .iptic° o ` st In that year a motion of the most unqualified de: v. ,_ ~ brought forward, for the correction of those_ _ ls . s i geten which he now raises all his eloquence, by the 110 ", b e heic e for Wolverhampton, who moved that certain persP l L e d of else by co'ansel at the bar of the House, who comer t no dersi s operation of the Corn-laws, and even to that rn to gilt .) demand the Right Hon. entleman was prep ar ed oft."i s t total and absolute denial.—(Loud cheers ) "` a the 'tab would not complain of any chance in the opinion ! .. sn o t Hon. Gentleman with regard to any question fix!, Y e i nott o _er r! less with regard to questions relating to tradeau tl u enhe r l e u e, —subjects which were so intricate and involved— ent, vi h he question his motives or impeach his judgm a. the t ssu (luring the two last years, he was found a mon ge .0 the supporters of this law, thouth now unvvil! g r e or 1 , .641 at the conduct e 0, 1 compromise, and full of swig., excite on " s. 1 Government. Such a change might well exc .s _ ...... cheer_ aii the House a corresponding feel i ng of ourpri, L . ` nt i g ht But let him look to the arguments, if arguments „ tig hte b r u i, them, of the Right Honourable Gentlernan.r-1'.1.41, ca He quoted the words of Mr I Juskisson _ „n 'illaitess of Me ....mil ae was it fair to quote the woe s every i „matt in that year? Was it fair to quote him against on. Gelb.. an act of his subsequent life? The Right reeent s 0 knew that Mr. Huskisson supported the whic h 00,.. was almo,t the author of the system of IS:" He quo ted Air' sea more stringent than the law of 1827. sse, r t , l , B, ~.hen be. ne . ktsson in 1821 against Mr. Hu-kisson in to , nd gave the Oeo. the advocate of the p , esent stringent law, a oteetive sYst tbo Hon of his high authority in favour of a higi ,U F en th e° Ps ook The R ght Hon. Gentleman had retr wh i c h t s d here which were already beaten in the long d imes _ had a „ place on the subject, and after the many t Vou n s:r h e i .l3l ao " tofore trespassed on the indulgence of that Gent-e ° , Geo be excused if he did not follow the Right Hoint h Hon. by into all the top cs he touched upon. The Rig on the retie tleman had expended a great deal of eloquence_ u , w hile ,„ mice advantages of agriculture and commerce, 4 trr; was anxious to exhibit the great advantagea_o; and commerce to the country, he was , 5 f: he rated somewhat lower the agricultu ra l ' felt eo:e the country.—( Hear, hear.) He industry G. ' w hich d vinced that the same skill and valsO • ea t u ess of so conspicuous in the manufacturing gr ~ T 1 44 • . !{; low It * trid • itta