The Sun. — London, England, 1842-02-22 00:00:00

in fact a matter for discussion, and it was impossible to compile any official document of the nature required by the Hon. Gentleman, from the difference of opi nion as to what constituted a peculiar burden. Mr. COBDEN begged to explain that what he wished, was for a statement of the Right Hon. Baro- I net's own opinion on the subject. Sir R. PEEL thought that could best be gathered from his speeches:. , ---(Hear, hear.) It was rather un anal to call upon Members to lay statements of their pinions on the table.—(Cheers and laughter.) Mr. EIVARV asked if the Right. Honour able Baronet would have any objection to the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry as to the pe culiar burdens on land, before proceeding with his Corn Bill. - Sir 11, PEEL had proposed to reduce the duty on foreign corn from 225. to about 10s., and he hoped the Hon. Gentleman would support his measure, and enable him to carry it as speedily as possible. WEL:7 - iH CLERGY. Mr. W. 0. STANLEY wished to know if there was any intention on the part of the Go vernment of bringing in a Bill to regulate the chapters and sinecure rectories in North - Wales, and. if it was their intention to make any alteration in the recommendation of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners fin- the suppression,of one of the Bishoprics in North Wales. Sir R. PEEL believed that it had been the inten tion of the Noble LOrd opposite to introduce the zub ject to which the question rthrred in the Bill of last year, although it was not afterwards introduced in it. It was his own opinion that legislation on the sub ject would be necessary ; but there were such multifarious subjects 'at present under consideration, that he must postpone his own determination upon it until the end of the Session. ELECTION COMMITTEES. The SPEAKER then ordered the names of those Members whi, claimed to be exempted from serving on Election Committees, on the ground of their being more than sixty years of age, to he read by the clerk at the table. The list having been read, the Speaker asked if there were any other Member who wished to claim exemption for the same season ? Sir R. PEEL said he was very unwilling to claim exemption, but under present circumstances, he was compelled to ask the indulgence of the House, and to be excused from sitting on Committees. The SPEAKER then put the question, and the Right Hon. Baronet's claim was conceded unani mously. Lora Stanley, Sir James Graham, and the Chan cellor of the hxchequer, requested to be exempted from serving, on account of their official duties, and were exempted accordingly. Mr. Greene was excused from serving, on the ground of his office of Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means. COPYRIGIIT REGISTRATION BILL. Mr. GODSON, on proposing that this Bill be read a second time, said he had no intention to commit the Mouse in this stage to any of the prin ciples of the Bill. Ile had been told that the book sellers wished for time to consider the measure, and therefore he would propose such a postponment of the third reading as would enable all parties to determine what course they would pursue. Mr. JARVIS said, it should be understood that the House did not pledge itself to the principle of that Bill. Mr. GOD SON.—Certainly. The. Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to he read a third time on the .sth of April. CORN-LAWS—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The Order of the Day was then read for the House resuming the debate on the Corn-laws. Mr. HARDY said if he gave a silent vote, per haps it might be imputed to him that he embraced all the extreme opinions of those who sat on that side of the House, and he had no wish to incur such a responsibi lity. At the last election, when he offered himself as a candidate to his constituents, the question of a fixed duty, or a sliding scale, was a prominent one on the hust ings. Ile then expressed his opinion in favour of a sliding scale, though regulated somewhat differently from what it had been up to that time. He also ventured to state what he thought ought to be the maximum amount of duty imposed on foreign corn, and it so happened that he coincided with that which the Right Hon. Baronet had adopted, though the plan was then unknown to him. It happened that 20s. was the duty which he thought ought to he imposed, though he thought it should commence at a lower point, than it did in the proposed measure. He thought, too, that if corn were kept generally under 605., no one in the countrywould grumble. He advocated then, as he' adVocated now, a duty - upon foreign corn, not tow tir. ~fi any particular class, but fiir the benetit,:t of the . hole country-(Hear.) He felt no interest whatever in the question of of the Hon. Mernber for , Wolverhampton,. believing that it was fo'f . the benefit orthe country at large that a duty should 14 imposed. lie saw his lion. Friend the Member for Salford . smile at. his stating that the duty on the importation of foreign corn was imposed • for the • benefit of the country. Why he (Mt. 11.) (lid not, nor did the Hon. Member, mean to say that the duty on the manufactured goods was imposed for the benefit of the manufacturer. It was imposed for the benefit of the country in which the manufactures were carried on, in order to extend the benefit of industry and skill as far as possible throughout that country, and to enable that country to supply not only other coun tries, but its own population with her manu factured goods. Each kind of duty was imposed for the benefit of the whole, and on no other ground would it receive his support. It might possibly happen that the benefit would fall in one case upon one class, and in another upon the other. But such was not the intention of the Legislature who imposed the duty. The advantage to these towns was incidental, for the benefit was intended for the country gene rally. That benefit was rendering the nation independent of foreign supply for its daily food. If they were wholly or in part dependent on foreign supply, the consequences might be terrible, as in time of scarcity other countries would in all proba bility be in the same situation, and would prevent their grain leaving their shores, to relieve the necessities of this country. If these l aws were passed merely for the benefit of any one class, he should , be as ready to repeal them as the Ilonottrable Memb3r for Salford himself. But they were passed for the benefit of the whole country. They were no more to be objected to than the duties On 11.)reign manufactures. lie quoted the resolu tion of tbe Corn-law delegates at the Crown and Anchor, denouncing the Corn-laws, as a great national sin, and expressed his worder that if they were so injurious as this strong language stated, they had heard nothing about their repeal during the ten years of the Liberal Mi nistry. During the Administration of Earl Grey, during the Administration of Lord Melbourne, no step was taken/to repeal them ; and it was not till the light the late Ministry cast over the country was expiring in its socket, and it became necessary to draw public attention to the position of the Ministry, that any thing was done for the repeal of the laws that had been denounced in such strong language by the Neiv.." Parliament sitting at the Crown and Anchor: "Ite,repeated that they were for the benefit of the whole .country, and none reaped more of the benefit than the manufacturers. The mantifddetirers; 'Who advocated a total repeal of the Corn-la:WS,tad declared their willingness to aid in' the abolition, of all duties imposed for their own prO tection. Wow .that-was the first time ho had heard of such trwillingtitsg.--(" No, no," from the Oppo sition.) tie Saw no petitions presented by those par ties praying for a removal of their own protection, as well tui for •a repeal of the protection to agricul ture. But who was it passed the laws which protected manufactures ? Why, it was a Legislature which consisted of 'the landowners of the country. The landowners had an interest in getting manufactured articles as cheap as possible ; but notwithstanding that they passed those laws which, by protecting manufacturers, raised the price of manufactured ar ticles. The protection could not, in his opinion, be taketi away from agriculture, consistently with the? interests of the country ; and his belief was, that' a repeal of the Corn-laws would throw all poor e amid, completely out of cultivation. The Honourable Gentleman then entered into a state ment of figuresJo show, that under the proposal of Lord John d uty the average to be paid by the foreign-importer would am oun t to 13s ad while under that of Sir R. P eel it would be Only ss. The Bill of the Right Hon. Baronet also got rid of the disadvantages of the present mode of taking the averages. There would be a sliding scale throughout by th e Bill of the Right lion. Baronet, whereas now, instead of a sliding scale it wa s a jumping scale. The Hon. Member for Wolver hampton a ltogether 'disclaimed protection for agricul ture, but he (Mr. H.) did not call it protection to agriculture, but also to the labourers employed is agriculture. They m ust do one or t he other. 'They not only protect the manufacturer, hut all who w or k un d er him and are connected with him in trade. By protect in agriculturist, they likewise protect all un d er him ; they protect saddlers, blacksmiths, and othe rs who are connected with him, and they protect the la bourer also. lion. Gentlemen, therefore, must not say that protection did note tend to the labourer, but was confined only t,) the lan(!ed proprietor. Hon. Gentle men opposite could never have looked at the price of land in this country, and the return it makes to the owner. Where was the estate that paid more than two-and-a half or three per cent. for the money laid out on it ? That was not the case with manufactures.—(Hear , hear.) "Rat when they thought that 60,0001. or 80,000/. laid out 10a:um or th ree would only ensure ' two-and-a-half it was a Strang per • cent, he (Mr. Hardy) thought prolwtion in taoLv(l.:Eri that there was not much undue . The Non. Gentleman op polite had mentioned an ali o d p - u non of Mr. Huskisson's; he sentation v o e pi n n i i n on a o fe f w th vv it ,e t r g d e s n a t r kem pr a e n's in his h (M an r d . , ll in aw w e h s ich he w l - d as a g n i of the state in which the country would be placed if foreign corn were at all times allo fein ed r inf a re s e p .— ee ( e T h, h a e Hon. Gentleman then read an extract pamphlet of Mr. Huskisson s, the substance of which was, that a steady home supply was the only foundati on for safe and moderate prices. If foreign corn were f ree ly admitted, bread might be admitted a little, though a very little, cheaper than at present, for a year or two. But the small farmer would be ruined ; improvements would stand still, and impoverished land would return to a state of waste ; home consump tion, which conduced so much to the prosperity of our country, would necessarily decline. To protect the small farmer was to protect the people. The Hon. Gentleman opposite h a d g i ven t h em d eta il s o f t h e num ber of mills at present out of employ, but he had not stated when these mills had been built—whether before the existence of the Corn-laws, or after their enactment. —(An Hon. Member said " Before.") If that were the case, then he (Mr. Hardy) thought that was a strong proof that the Corn-laws had nothing to do with these mill s b e i ng unoccup i e d , f or th ese laws i were n existen ce w h en i mmense sums o f mone y were laid out on the erection. Yet the depression that had occurred the Hon. Gentleman was ready to impute to the Corn laws, when tinder them these erections had been made. — The Hon. Member for Knaresborough said that he had had enough for himself. He (Mr. II.) was really glad to hear that the honourable Member had gone Ti so well under a system which had been described in such dreadful terms a few days since at the Crown and Anchor. But so it was in all other instances. The country had advanced in general prosperity, as well as in manufactures, since the Corn-laws, as well as before and under that system; we had also been enabled to maintain in security that great empire, which was so extensive that the news of the happy event which we lately cele brated here, had probably not yet reached its confines. It was, in fact, the avarice of speculation that had glut ted the markets, and thrown the operatives into distress. The Hon. Member for Oldham told us that the produce of a certain cotton article had advanced so prodigiously, that the operative had now but 28s. for that labour which formerly produced 965., yet the former, as well as the latter price, was under the Corn-laws. That Hon. Gentleman had thought fit to accuse Mem bers on that side of the House with adopting a species of conduct at which he was very much surprised ; and the Hon. Member fur Sheffield had said that Members on that side of the House only came there to vote for their own interests.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman had stated that with the greatest earnestness, although he smiled at the time he stated it. For his own part, he had no interest in this question ; he had no interest in the high price of corn ; he had. never sold a quarter of corn in his life.—(Hear, hear.) He employed a large quantity of labourers, and nothing would affiwd him greater satisfaction than to see them happy and have plenty of bread, but he should not like to see that object attained at the expense of the country. The Hon. Member for Sheffield had asked how they liked the charge that had been made against manufacturers on that side of the House. He (Mr. Hardy) did not consider the charge was made against that side of the House. They had not sent out lecturers to every part of the country to agitate the question, they had not used the drum ecclesiastic for that purpose, he should have been ashamed if such means had been used by any persons on that side of the House. He was willing to admit that the number of petitions on the subject of the Corn-laws had increased—he admitted that those petitions contained upwards of four hundred thousand signa tures.—(Hear, hear.) Those signatures were entitled to the consideration of the House, but it could not be said that they represented the whole manufacturers ; he thought it would be apparent .o all that the Corn-laws were not for the protec tion of a class but for the benefit of the country generally. That was the way in which the question was considered by those with whom he had talked upon the subject. It was stated by the Reverend Delegates that the laws were intended only for the benefit of the landlords, and that assertion was made in a manner not very becoming.—( Hear.) It was true when they passed the resolution which he was about to read, it was past nine o'clock, and some allowance might be made for them. —( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The resolution was : that it is the opinion of this meeting, that the measure proposed by her Alajesty's Government, so far from holding out the slightest prospect of any relief of the distress of the country, is an insult to a patient and suffering people, and that the Deputies look upon the proposition as an insinuation that the landed aristoc racy are destitute of all sympathy with the poor, and must not longer be permitted by an outraged people to pursue a policy destructive to the country.—(Hear, hear.) He was sorry to hear Members of Parliament use in that House the same language as was indulged in at the Crown and Anchor.—( Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member for Shef field warned the landed proprietors of the consequences of maintaining the Corn-laws, and reminded them of the fate of the French nobility.—(Hear, hear.) And the Hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets, said if the Corn-laws were not re pealed there would be a rush upon the aristocracy, which would sweep away not only the Corn-laws, but many things besides.—( Hear, hear.) Was that the way in which the deli berations of Parliament were to be governed ?—Hear, hear.) Why, if he were to send out agents and lecturers to procure signatures to petitions for a minimum of wages and a maximum of labour, he would undertake to abtain, not 400,000 but 800,000.—( Hear, hear.) And would it be decent for. him to come into the House and threaten the aristocracy with revolu tionary consequences if they refused ,to accede to the demands of those petitioners?-7,(klear, hear, hear.) They had the language of .Gate' the spirit of Cataline in their hearts: Ale (Mr,,Telseitt) hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would go on.perseteriog in that policy and in those principles which he had stated early and fully to the whale country in his address to his constituents at.Tamworth, when he had been called by his late Majesty to the helm of affairs. If the Right Hon. Baronet did not receive all the gratitude of the country, he (Mr. Hardy) was sure he de• ,erved it. Let them burn the Right Hon. Barenet's effigy. ( Hear, and a laugh.) • They all knew that that amounted to little—that it was the mere vox popull,. which carried execra tion with it one day and applause the next. The Right Hon. Baronet would despise such demonstrations, and go on in his determination to do justice to the country. Colonel FOX had great hesitation in venturing to address the House on a subject such as the present, on Which conclu sions so opposite had been come to. However, he considered it his duty to his constituents to say a few words on the subject. His constituents perfectly concurred in the amendment of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers). He (Colonel Fox) was for total repeal, but not for immediate repeal. In that alone he differed from his Hon Friend. The measure which he (Colonel Fox) would support would be any thing short of repeal now—a measure enacting a fixed duty of Bs. now, and reducing every year that duty by 25., until the total repeal was effected. But immediate repeal he could not support. He should, therefore, not vote on the question. He considered there were occasions when opposing or voting for a motion was so contrary to one's feelings that one ought not to vote on either side. Mr. H. H. LINDSAY supported the proposal of Sir R. Peel. They heard much in that House of class legislation, but if ever there was anything that would lower its character, it would be this, that in dealing with the great interests of the country 1t descended to class legislation, by agreeing to the proposition of the Hon. Meinber for Wolverhampton. Its ob. ject was to inflict injury eu the agricultural interest.—(No, no.) No ! did they not hear of an aristocracy and a landed interest, who had been in the enjoyment of advantages for a long time, and of which they ought to be.deprived ? Did they not hear this out of the House, and occasionally echoed within its walls ? This would certainly be class legislation, and he doubted much if it would be a benefit to the manufacturers. On these grounds he himself, and those on his side of the House, looked on the proposition of the Honourable Member for Wolverhampton as injurious to agriculture, and not bene ficial to manufactures, and he therefore should give it his de cided negative. With res t ect to a fixed duty, its principle had been abandoned by the gentlemen who had advocated it. The Noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, had declared his intention of maintaining the principle of a fixed duty at all risks, and let corn be at 'what price it might ; yet he had de parted from that resnlution. One authority on the subject, however, had since that period proposed to give the Government power to relax the fixed duty whenever they might see occa sion, and the Noble Lord himself had proposed the other even ing to do away with the fixed duty, so soon as the price of corn should reach 745. He objected to both these plans. The first was calculated to held out an induce ment to popular clamour and agitation, and the second to foster gambling speculations ; therefore he was op. posed to the scheme of a fixed duty. lie approved of the plan of the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, be cause, in his opinion, it carried out the two objects which ought always to be kept in view in legislating on the subject. In the first place, it relieved the people from the pressure of a high price; and, in the second, it removed from the trade in foreign corn that gambling character by which it had hitherto been distinguished. It had been said that considerable time must elapse before a cargo of corn could be received from America to this country after having been ordered. He per fectly agreed with the Hon. Member, when he said that two months was as little time as could be expected. Now he (Mr. Lindsny) would take leave to make a suggestion to the House, that if worth anything., he was sure the Right Honourable laronet, the Member for Tamworth, would give it his consideration. An objection had been made in regard to corn from America, in consequence of the time elapsing before its arrival in this country. Now, would it not be better when a merchant sent his order, he should be allowed to enter the corn at the time of shipment, paying the duty payable in this country on the date of the shipment. In that case, if he found that corn had fallen in price during his voyage, a rise in the duty would not affect him, although in his case, it would affect the revenue; so on the other hand, if the price of corn had risen, and the duty fallen, his case whould bene fit the revenue, and a falling duty would not be injurious to the merchant. Therefore in either case it would not injure the revenue, nor the agricultural interest, and he thought it would be of some benefit to the merchant who was sending his manufactures to America, and wished to obtain a good and safe return. He (Sir. Lindsay) would venture to throw out the suggestion to the House, with all humility, confi dent that if it was worth anything, it would receive full feeling con- con sideration. He apoligised for intruding upon the House, but he thought it his duty to make this snggestion. He would say that he felt the greatest interest in the prosperity of British commerce and manufactures. All his live had been passed in commerce, and he owed all he possessed to British indust r y, an d all his future prospects were connected with the prosperity of the commerce of the country. On all objects which should extend commercial prosperity, he (Mr. Lindsay) should be happy to unite with gentlemen oppo site ; but he never could consent to allow the agricaurat in terest to be neglected.—( Hear.) Captain LAYARD solicited that that favour might be extended to him which the House had so unanimously shown to every new Member who had yet addressed them. Anxious as he felt for the relief of the sufferings of the people, he could not give his vote for the motion proposed by the Member for Wolverhampton, because, he did not think it would be for the interest of the people, or at all tend to alleviate their suffer ings, and as he could not vote for the motion of the Right Hon. Baronet, his intention was not to vote at all on this occasion, but he firmly believed that a fixed duty was the only measure suited to the present exigencies.—( Hear.) When he (Captain Layard) saw the Right Hon. Baronet advance to that box, it appeared to him like a Pandora's box, for, from it went forth ad kinds of evils, taxes, and such like, flew forth, but there it appeared to him (Captain Layard) the simile ceased, for the Right Hon. Baronet said there was no hope left. —( Cheers and laughter.) It had been stated by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, that the principal burdens on land were the land-tax, and the Poor-law, let them look for themselves, however. and see what these were Land-tax. Other taxes. In Engla n d ............ 1,183,55/. 51,977,000/. In Franc e ...... : .... :.. 23,250,000/. 17,500,0001. In Prussia ............ 3,994,000/. 3,667,0001. In Austria .......... 8,795,000/. 7, 700 , 0 00/. —(Cheers.) He (Captain Lavard) did not think, therefore, that the land-tax pressed heavier on the owners of land in Eng land than in other countries.—( Hear, hear.) Then came the f.oor-rates, they were heavy granted, but, in the year 1696, THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 22 1842. the rental of land amounted to 6,500,0001. ; in 1841, the rental was 200,000,0001.; he should think, therefore, that they might be prepared to pay something towards the poor-rates.—( Hear. ) From 1810 to 1830, there were upwards of 1,000 enclosure Acts passed, and no less than 6,840,540 acres of land had been enclosed; he thought, then, that whatever burdens the landed aristocracy might say they endured, they always took very good care of themselves.—(Cries of " Hear.") In a town in Derbyshire he remembered to have seen a sign, upon which was painted the king in his robes, with a scroll to this effect, " I govern all ;" near him was painted the Arch bishop of Canterbury, with the inscription, " I pray for all ;" next was a field-officer, with the inscription, " I fight for all ;" and then at the bottom was a person dressed in a smock frock, supported by a plough and a harrow, who was good enough to tell them he "paid for all."—(Laughter.) The landlords, he contended, did not bear more than their lair proportion of the burdens of the country; he should say on the contrary, that instead of paying all, all paid for them.—(Laughter.) He be lieved that the beggars in the street paid more than their pro portion of taxation, for the benefit of those who were placed by the bounty of Providence in the enviable situa tion of landed proprietors: By an Act of Parliament, passed in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, any soldier or marine who was found begging in the streets was liable to be punished by death ; that law had been repealed as a disgrace to our legis lation ; but he believed that a law which restricted the food of the people was no less cruel, unwise, and unjust. He was not disposed to tax the landed interest with selfish or avaricious mo tives—he thought that they were merely mistaken in their opi nions. He did not tax them with injustice, but he taxed them with ignorance. Blessed by Providence with all the comforts and luxuries of life, they were not aware of the many miseries and wants to which a large portion of their fellow-countrymen were subjected. He wished the Members of the Go"ernment had taken care to make themselves personally acquainted with the wants of the humbler classes. He wished they might visit Birmingham, Manchester, Paisley, Liverpool, and other towns; and that they might pass from Liverpool across the Channel to that country so important to us in every point of view, and which the Right Honourable Baronet had declared to be the chief difficulty of his Government. Now a difficulty it would continue to be to any Government which did not administer to its people full and impartial justice.—( Hear. ) He wished Hon. Gentlemen would visit Ireland, not to see Wicklow or Killarney, but to inquire into the misery and dis tiess which existed in that country to an amount of which he had no conception till he had been quartered there.—(Bear, hear.) They would also see that misery and distress borne with a fortitude and resignation, which, if it was ever equalled, was certainly never surpassed. —( Hear, hear.) And he thought if they had seen it they would soon come forward with a remedy to alleviate it.—( Hear, hear.) He might be told that any alteration of-the Corn-laws would he the ruin of Ire land. He (Captain Layard) entirely denied that statement. A sliding scale might ruin it, but a fixed duty would be a boon and a benefit.—( Hear, hear.) It was the gambling specula tor, and not the Irish agriculturist, who gained by the present system. He begged to say one word with respect to thellon. Member for North Lincolnshire, who seemed to him act to the part of the dog in the fable of the " Dog and the Shadow." —(Laughter.) He could assure them there was no fear to the people of this country from relaxing the present restrictive Corn-laws, but if they persevered in upholding them, he was certain that if there was truth in the opinion that " coming events cast their shadows before," the handwriting would be seen on the wall, and their kingdom would be taken from them.—(Hear, hear ) With regard to those who held the reins of Government, he could not help thinking that they lo,t, a golden opportunity of reaping a rich reward fur them selves by feeding the hungry and relieving the suffering people of the country ; but he believed the time was approaching when they should grant to the people what they unwisely de nied to their petitions.-,(Cheers.) Mr. SM Y THE said that he considered the Hon. and Gal lant Member who sat down, and the lion. and Gallant Mem ber who preceded him, acted wisely in rejecting all proposi tions and assenting to none, but he (Mr. Smythe) would en deavour to prove the inconsistency of such a line of conduct. the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton had told them that the effect of repealing the Corn-laws would be to throw a great deal of land out of cultivation, while the Hon. Member for Stockport had told them that, in his opinion, the value of land would be considerably diminished, and that there would be a restriction of capital to agricultural objects on the Continent. It such were the case, no one would pretend to tell him that the producers of this country would be able to compete with the producers of the Continent. There was a great discrepancy if opinion between those who told them that the agricultural interest was suffering under great and peculiar burdens and those who said that they had no such burdens to complain of. Mr. Ricardo, in his week on agriculture, in an argument in fa vour of a drawback, said, that in allowing this drawback they merely returned to the farmer a tax which was already p tid, and which he must have to place him in a situation to compete with the foreign producer. Not less inconsistent were those who denounced all protection, and who yet voted with the adVocates for a fixed protection. There was an other inconsistency between those who advocated a repeal of the Corn-laws, because they believed tisat it would extend the home market, and those who advocated it because they believed it would extend the foreign market. Now if the House would dispassionately consider the proposi tion of the Right H.n. Baronet, they would see that finding that the agricultural interest had been too much protected, he proposed to abate it, but gradually—a course that had been adopted in similar cases in foreign countries, and referred to, cot in reprobation, but as an example, by Mr. M'Gregor, in his evidence before the Import Duties' Committee. That Gentleman stated that Austria, considering that her manu factures were inordinately favoured, imposed a maximum duty of 20 per cent. on foreign manufactures. In like manner the Right Hon. Baronet proposed a maximum duty of 20s. per quarter on foreign corn. But, truly, the best praise of the Right lion. Baronet's measure was, that it had displeased the extreme men of both parties. However, as an argument for the justice of the Right Hon. Baronet's course, he (Mr. S. ) would remind the House, that in 1802, 1803, and 1804, which were marked by agricultural improvement and encourage ment, the average price of wheat was 61s. ; in 1823, by no means a bad year, it was 51s. 9d. Taking into consideration the cheapness of labour since that time, the improvements in agricultural science, and the reduction of taxation ' be ,wOuld n,w put it to those Honourable Members who feared tbat, the landed interest were hardly dealt with, whetber from the _ same soil, wheat could not now be raised at much less expense. But he would also put it on another and a kindlier ground. He would remind them of what they owed to the manufac tures--( Hear, hear)—to them they owed the splendour, the power, the prosperity of the country.—(Cheers.) And in reference to what had been said by the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, he must warn those to whom it appeared that it was the time for the agriculturists to indulge in Quixotic aggressions, which originated in spurious and hypocritical benevolence—(Hear, hear)—this was not the time to re ject God's gifts—(Cheers)—this was not the time to rojeet the blessings of machinery.—(Cheers.) But for it Birmingham and Manchester would be like Woodstock and Dunstable.— ( Hear, hear)—and Liverpool would still be a fishing village.— ( Hear, hear.) Look to the imperial Augsburg, of which it , vas said that it was more magnificent and great when the sound of the hammer and the mill-wheel was in a perpetual din, than when it was the seat of imperial grandeur. The rent of the adjacent land was ten times as high.—(Hear, hear.) For his own part, in looking to the working of this question, he had come to the conclusion that there had been but four Ministers who had dealt with this question in the spirit which the people had a right to expect. These were Lord North ; afterwards Mr. Canning, who was unsuccessful in the measure which he proposed iu lbw • and he thought the Noble Lord opposite ( Lord J. Russell) was entitled to a full meed of credit for the measure which he proposed last year.—( Hear, hear.) But he thought, however, that the Right Hon. Baronet had a still higher claim for the measure which had been laid before the Committee.—(Hear.) He was glad to see an end approach to the unjust system of protection—(Hear, hear)--by which so much bad land had been broken up—by which our commerce had been crippled, and so much wealth amassed with little labour and little merit.—( Hear, hear.) lie wns glad to see that this monopoly and another also—( Hear)—would be broken up and trampled in the dust.—( Hear, hear.) He h a d been sent to Parliament to represent, if not directly, at least indirectly, 16,000 consumers, and he could testify not only to the distress which prevailed amongst them, but to the grati tude with which they would receive any boon.—(Hear, hear.) The assertion of the people's rights is consistent and natural, whereas opposition to them is inconsistent and unnatural—the Hon. Membet for Bradford had, the other night, pronounced a well-merited panegyric upon this country—he described her as the mistress of one-sixth of the earth and the entire of the seas. low could it be said there that she was not able to protect the in ilustrfof her sons?—( Hear.) What could be more melancholy than that the distress which is now so general throughout the country was owing to the idleness of the people—not to their negligence or inactivity but to over-production—to over in dustry—to the over exercise of those arts and sciences, and of those talents, for which the people of England have long been celebrated— Lex est artificis, ante perire sua. (Hear, hear) It was melancholy that the industry of the people should be the cause of their distress ; but he hailed the measure now proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet as an in stalment.—(Cheers, and counter cheers.) Yes, he hailed that measure as an instalment of a wiser and a more thoughtful course of policy.—(Loud cheers and counter cheers. ) He entertained an anxious hope that that measure would serve the country, and he looked upon it as an earnest, that the pro portions of their monstrous tariff would be reduced to some thing of a seemly shape.—(Hear, and cheers.) He trusted that the Right Hon. Baronet would carry out his projects without inflicting a calamitous burthen of additional taxes upon the starving people of this country. If the measure proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet were carried into effect, it might save the people of England from destitution and misery. England was pre-eminent in power—pre-eminent for her arts and sciences, but those advantages would be scarcely a guarantee for the preservation of her interests. It was he believed Dryden, who said that he had heard of many virtuous per- VMS ending unfortunately, but he had never heard of a virtuous nation ending so. It was to be hoped that the calamities of misfortune would not weigh down this country; and if the g a t t to wouldthe passionspasse o u r n i t v h er sham p el reagernjrsuy.a)dt expressionsii t e u es de o o f f th a e r p eh e l e e f da , his na Right Hon. Baronet had acc om pli s h e d hi s o b jects w i thout C ad a b l e s re t a r n w free d m a A c c on A te u lte A d y peo sa p i l d e.— th ( aCt from the hw H t o h n e . y Member b who et ak e hadn by j t u h s s e s a w t idtohwwn whom m n d h h e e w c o o u n l d sdiiivleidreedotnhtehme t p h r e ese b n e t st oc p c a a r s t io s n o . of his For hspimeeseehlf—whehichandhneehvearrdonly any former occasion addressed the House on this subject; m a a n d d e the course he should think it his d u t y to take this night him very desirous that he should not b e m i su nderstood. He thought, also, that something was due on this occasion to the great constituent body he had the honour to represent, and and which on this subject entertained a feeling peculiarly in • tense. The House would permit him perhaps to say, that there was no constituent body more entitled on this subject to a favour able hearing, for there was, perhaps, no constituted body, nn city in the kingdom, containing ahundred and twenty thousand inha bitants, somuch in a situation to be an impartial judge of the question. He had heard with great pain the sarcasms that had been thrown out against the manufacturing interest—sar casms thrown out against great communities engaged in com merce. But against the people of Edinburgh such sarcasns would fall pointless, for Edinburgh was a capital city, a c ity having no manufaCtures, a city having no foreign trade, a city awdhmicihnis"tra a s t o s n u p of f o r thete d principallywh yits e b o y n n i e t e s t i c o o n n n w e i c th ti on the wui Univer sity, v the er_ gentry of a whole kingdom , who were fsitteyiiitbiyesiittshleiltderoantitirteo, theby its society, and the attractions and in the habit of repairing thither during a portion of every year, It would be difficultto mention any constituent body which, to an equal extent, could be so truly said to have no interest but that which it had in common with the whole empire. Its in terest was that which was common to all ; and he could truly say, that although the people of Edinburgh took an interest in this question as strong as his own, yet he expected rather their disapprobation than their approbation for the course which he should think it his duty to take on the present occasion. Should the great body of his constituents not feel satisfied with that conduct, yet he did not feel at liberty to support the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton. With that motion, nevertheless, he agreed in principle, and as he agreed in principle with a that motion, Right Hon. so B o a n ron p et r . incip H l i e s was he opposed to the po of the difference with the Right Hon. Baronet was fundamental. He understood the grounds of the measure to be principles on which he was sure, if the Right Hon. Baronet should feel him self to be in error, he would see it to be an error of the most fatal kind. He understood the grounds of the measure to be based on this principle, that the cheapness of the necessa , ies of life was not uniformly essential to the prosperity and well-being of a people. The Right Hon. Baronet, in the most distinct manner said that he should be deluding the people if he held , out from this, or from any similar change, a hope of relief. He said it was a mistake to suppose that cheap food necessarily had a tendency to promote the prosperity of the people. i Now, if on that point the Right Honourable Baronet was wrong, he must admit that he had founded his measure on false principles. The Right Honourable Baronet had distinctly disclaimed all intention of benefiting One class mere than others. They had heard no talk from him about the consti tutional grounds on which one class should be protected to enable them to support the dignity of their state. Such doctrines were not only not brought forward on the present occasion, but he (Mr. Macaulay) understood the Right Ho• nourable Baronet, disclaimed all such doctrines. He under stood that he considered this subject with a view to the general prosperity. If it. then were the fact that cheapness of food was always a blessing to the people who enjoyed it, he ( Mr. Macaulay) conceived the measure of the Bight Honourable Baronent not to be defensible. On that matter, certainly, the political economists had the advantage. For certainly the general opinion of mankind, from the earliest ages to the present time, decided that the cheapness of food was a blessing. That was the deeply-rooted conviction of all countries. Ile need not refer to the Hebrew Scriptures, as some had dune, for the purpose of deciding this question. The oldest documents and historical authorities contained the clearest proof of the feelings of mankind on this subject down to our own times. No person was better acquainted with the histories of Greece and Rome than the flight Hon. Baronet, nor could better fur nish proofs of the feelings of those nations on this subject. When one found a labouring man making 401. a-year for the support of himself, his wife, and family, would one say that a difference of 81. a-year, being I/. on each of the eight quarters required for the sus' enance of his family was not material ? That was only a prima fucic case; and how did the Right Hon. Baronet meet it? Why, the other night the Right Ho nourable Baronet came forward, after the sense of all ages and nations had been otherwise expressed, to show that cheapness of food was not necessarily a benefit to the people. The arguments of the Right Hon. Gentleman were simply these—that there were countries in which food was cheaper than in England, and yet the people were not so well off. The countries mentioned were Prussia and Belgium. If the Right Hon. Baronet used any other argument than that in opposition to the sense entertained and expressed by the world I during 4,000 or 5,000 years, with respect to the advantages of cheap food, such an argument would receive his (Mr. Ma caulay's) most particular attention. Nor was the argument ab solutely worth anything—was it even plausible ?—( Hear, hear.) The doctrine he (Mr. M.) affirmed was, that cheap food was a blessing to a nation, in the same way that health was a blessing to an individual. Of course a man might !be in the enjoyment of excellent health, and yet, from peculiar circum stances, such as family embarrassments or a stain upon his character, he might be worse off than another man who was ill. But that did not go to disprove the general position, that the man who was in the enjoyment of health was better off than the man who was labouring under disease, and that the invalid, who enjoyed other blessings, would cer tainly have those blessings greatly enhanced by the enjoyment of health.—( Hear, hear, and , cheers.) The Right Honourable Baronet's argument. went to destroy all belief in good and evil. It was the same thing as saying that fertility of soil was no good to a country. Suppose they possessed the power by legislative enactment, which they did not, of making the barren moors and mountain tops of Scotland as fertile as the vale of Taunton, the Right Hon. Baronet, upon his principle, would be bound to tell them it was their duty to abstain from doing so. He would tell them to look at the state of Scotland and of Bengal--:Bengal, a country so fertile, that they had regularly three harvests every year, and yet where the labourer could not enjoy from his earnings one half the luxuries and comforts that are enjoyed by the Scottish peasant. The Right Hon. Baronet, pointing to the fertility of Bengal, and the state of the labourer, then would say that it was their duty to abstain from the endeavours to make Scotland as fertile as Bengal. In considering this question the Right Hon. Baronet had kept out of view all those modifying circum stances to which he was bound to have paid attention before in stituting the comparison—circumstances all-important in the consideration of such a question. Apart from good. government, the security of property, internal order, the collection of im mense masses oft machinery, the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, the iminewe wealth of our mines— all these had been entirely left out of the question by the Right Hon. Baronet, and he had produced merely one single argument, which he had urged against the general sense of all ages, and of ail nations—( Cheers.) There was one single point in the comparison between England and Prussia which had been instituted by the Right Hon. Baronet, to which he (Mr. M.), would direct the attention of the Committee, wh:ch had been wholly passed over by the Right Hon. Baronet; that was our insular position, and our miri time supremacy, which was the consequence of that position. —( Hear, hear, and cheers.) We had never within the memory of any one living seen an enemy in this country. Our fathers had never seen such a thing. With the exception of the march of the Highland clans to Derby in the years 1745 and 1746, they must go back for centuries to find the time when Englishmen had seen a foreign enemy in this country.-- ( Cheers.) Could the like be said of Prussia ?—(Cheers. ) Why, in the memory of many now living 50 pitched battles had been fought in that country, and within the memory of many of those who now heard him, in one year, 13,000 houses in Prussia hail been reduced to ashes by a foreign inroad.—( Hear, hear.) But were they, therefore, in instituting a comparison between the people of l'russia and England, to say that cheap ness was no blessing?—(Cheers.) If the Right lion. Baronet had said that there was a necessary connection between cheap ness of bread and lowness of wages, he might have made some thing out of that. But he was not aware that the Right Hon. Baronet had made such an assertion, and he (Mr. Macaulay) was by no means disposed to admit the existence of any such connection, for he had seen within the last few months the price of bread much raised in this country, hut wages had not risen in proportion. Besides, every fact refuted an argument founded on the assumption of such a connection. It was true that in Prussia corn was cheaper than it was in England, and wages were lower ; but it was equally true that on the banks of the Ohio corn was much cheaper even than it was in Prussia, and wages were twice as high.—(Loud cheers.) It was therefore perfectly clear from experience that the mere cir cumstance of the price of provisions being low would not cause wages to descend. He (Mr. Macaulay) conceived that the Right Hon. Baronet had shown no reason against the principle that to the people it was a blessing to have cheap food, and, as he had founded his measure upon that principle, his measure was against hint. He (Mr. Macaulay) equally dissented from the other propositions on which the Right Hon. Baronet had raised his measure. He denied the doctrine the Right Hon. Baronet had laid down with respect to the importance of being independent of foreign countries. He would not argue the question whether they could be per fectly independent. That would be a good state of things. It was unnecessary to argue that question, because the Right Hon. Baronet. himself admitted that perfectly independent they could not be. It seemed to him that it could all hut be demonstrated that it was utterly impossible for a nation in which corn was grown to be per fectly independent. He would suppose that 25,000,000 quarters of corn was the supply required annually by the peo ple of this country ; such being the case, it was clear that, in y always a t comman d, i t quantity of corn, that in years they s hould h ave o vwe r o d au e rls r d thbaet certain wn ee l rc y ee sh t se o atrt yehra to oh e a ns t o l t i w a h that u q a cuvhea average gi e t a larger quantity. Such a circumstance must be taken into consideration when the nature of the product was considered, and also the nature of the season. Such a course must be adopted in order to have a certain supply to so great an extent. Corn was very different from manufactured commodities; they might order 25,000,000 pairs of stockings and be certain of having them ' • but such was not th e case w ith corn . If they wished to have 25,000,000 of quarters certainly, they must at times have an over quantity ; the only way, therefore, in which they could be certain of always having 25,000,000 quarters for consumption, must be ruinous to the farming in terest ; it therefore seemed to him to be clear to demonstra tion that when once in the country the price of corn was dearer than in others, independence was impossible, and experience confirmed it. Formerly England was an exporting country, but in later time, in spite of all improvements in agriculture, the progress of population had gone on to such an extent as to render it almost impossible for agriculture to supply the wants of the people.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The Right Honourable Baronet admitted that we were to be dependent, but he (Sir R. Peel) preferred casual dependence to constant dependence; he (Mr. Macaulay) would say that he preferred constant dependence.—( Hear, hear.) He pre ferred it partly for reasons which had been assigned by others more ably than he (Mr. Macaulay) could have done—he pre ferred it because constant dependence had a tendency to be • come mutual dependence—and he preferred it because it would lead to the exportation of manufactures.—( Hear, hear.) If we had casual dependence we must export the precious metals, and those consequences which had been depicted by Mr. Huskisson twenty years ago would result.—( Hear, h ear .) But he like wise preferred it on the Right Hon. Baronet's own ground. The Right Hon. Baronet and others had said that if we were not independent we should remember that the harvests in foreign countries were likely to be bad at the same sea son that they were bad hera.. They would find by experience that the probability was that if we de pended on them, when a bad harvest came, they would shut their ports ; but those were the very years when we must be dependent—the Right Hon. Baronet admitted there must be casual dependence, and that would be the time when we must be dependent. —( Hear, hear.) He believed the system which the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to dopt would have a tendency to produce those evils ; but though it happened that in countries situated near to each other the harvests were generally bad at the same time, it was by no means the case that when the harvests of England were bad the harvests on the banks of the Ohio would he bad too.—( Hear, hear. ) Could anything be more clear, than that next to independence —and, indeed, almost the same thing—was a very wide de pendence—a dependence on the whole world ?—( Hear, hear. ) The probability was against the • supply failing simul taneously in . all parts of the world. The • only way to have this wide dependence on the whole world was a constant dependence, for it was quite clear that under the Right 11On. Baronet's sliding scale, we could not have it—( Hear, hear) — and an Hon. Gentleman on the other side had said that we could not have it if the Right Hon. Baronet's measure were carried out as it at present stood, an d that we shouldlikely to have a supply from the United States. He confessed . that there might be a danger of being politically dependent n be ot n consequence of being commer c ially dependent, but but it was im possible Experience however, was quite clear on this point, and his Noble Friend the to show any ground for its real existence. Member for the City of London had mentioned might have made stronger. He (Mr. Macaulay) believed an instance he that the year in which the greatest import of corn was made p into England that had ever been made in an y year up to that time, was the y ial benches.)ear 1810.-4 Hear, hear, from an Hon. Member (Hear.) He was not so fortunate as t o catc h what the Hon. Gentleman said, but he believed these fac ts to be perfectly obvious—that in the year 1810 England imported about on the Minister Under the c ontinental s y stem.— 1,600,000 quarters of wheat ; that of those 1,600,000_ quarters h of wh ea t a b sut 800,000 came f rom France itself.—( Hear, ear. ) That the res t came from countries tha t were then provinces of France. For observe what the year 1610 was. It was the thevery That system was n height of the continental system. of Holland his own brother Loui for the beginning of 1810 that Bonap ar te deposed from the thrones, screwed up t o i ts very utm ost rigour. It was in not carrying that system knew, it wa s not from America that any part of that supply came which was desereing of attention. Now, were we ever likely to be pl ace d i n such a s i tuat i on again ? Was it probable that there w ou ld ever b e aga i n sec h a combination against us— the whole of Europe united against us under a chief of such , and distinguished above all extraordinary ability an d energ y, by his inten se h atre d id! this c ountry , tion to a tt ac k t h at country b y means . o f its trade and com in that ver yy ear we imported into E ng l an d , and his determin e _ com merce? And yet in such a Government , and in the very year when the severit of that Government was screwe d up to the very highest point, end from hi s own domionins, a grea ter quantity of corn th an l w with respect had ever be en i mported into Eng l an d before.—(Hear, h ear. ) That circumstance, until he heard some ex p lanatio n of it , which he had ne ver yet h eard, that circumstanc e seemed to hi m verycon s oing as a et a to the blessing; effect of he that fully agreed w i t h a ll that tcommercial dep en d ence. He thought t h at, i n a certain degree , the mutual d epen d ence of nations and was so eloquently and forcibly said the other night by his Noble Friend, the Member for Tiverton. He could not but consider it as one of the most consolatory facts, as one of those things which ought to lead them to entertain the best hopes fur their country, when he saw, in remote and fertile parts of the world, a peptilation whose most lucrative employment Was turning the wilderness into corn fields, multiplying at Such a rate that it doubled every two or three and twenty years. He did not know what limit they were to place to the prosperity of a country whose skill, whose machinery, whose vast accumulations of ca pital enabled it to supply the whole world with manufactured articles. Whatever the distress might be here, however unfa vourable the seasons, people were at work to save our population from starving. All along the banks of the Mississipi arid the Missouri ; all along the Euphrates, in those countries where coal ; perhaps did not exist, where there was scarely any capital, there were people looking forward to cutlery and clothing. and a thousand comforts of life coining from their skill ; and then stepped in the Legislature, and said, " No, you who ought to be manufacturers for the whole world, shall be turned into ploughmen ; and you, who ought to be producers of corn for the world, shall be turned, against your will, into manu facturers ; you shall not buy from them, you shall undersell th e m." In a time of distress they had at one end of the world artisans starving, in order that barren fields might be forced to yield a small return for an enormous outlay ; while at the other end of the world they had persons who could be most beneficially employed in sowing corn ; they had been making bad coats and bad knives , and all this that a particular class might be benefited at the expense of every other.—( Hear. ) This was a subject which they had been cautioned against en • tering upon by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Bradford; but he (Mr. Macaulay) could not refrain from touching it. although he hoped he should do so in such a mari ner that no woe could condemn the spirit in which he spoke. It was not possible for us to shut our eyes to the remote poli tical consequences of such a state of things. The people had borne their privations patiently—they had borne their disap pointments patiently, for with regard to those little exhibi tions of feeling to which allusion had been made, he thought as little of them as he dared say the Right Hon. Baronet himself thought of them. But it was their duty to look to the future ; and lie should say, that if there were to him any s gn that was ominous—any sign which every friend of law, of property, and of order, ought to contemplate with uneasiness, it was one which he saw so very generally hailed with acclamation by those gentlemen who professed the strongest attachment to the princi ples Conservative policy.—( Hear.) He knew of nothing that seemed to him more alarming than the obstinacy and the enthus'asm with which some persons, to whom he could give no better name than that of incendiaries—persons who professed doctrines subversive of all order and all property-- labour to prevent a settlement of the question of the Corn laws. Whenever he heard that by the advice of some noted dealers in sedition, numbers of people, who were all Chartists, had gone to break up meetings held for the purpose of peti tioning for a repeal of the Corn-laws, he looked upor. it as a sign, not of immediate danger, but still as a sign of serious danger. For what reason could it be imagined that those whom they (the Ministerial Members) agreed with on that sideof the Hoe-e, in designating as incendiaries and sowers of sedition were desirous of preventing an alteration in what they considered an abuse? Did that proceed from a love of the landed aristo cracy, or of any other interests connected with the aristocracy ? They all knew the aristocracy ; nay, they knew that the people in their own addresses talked most bitterly against those very Corn-laws. And yet if a meeting were called in almost any of the great towns in this country to petition against the Corn-laws, those men would move Heaven and earth to cause the meeting to fail; and for what purpose ? Evidently for this; they knew perfectly well that however much the people might complain of the effects of the present partition of power and of Government—however much they might feel about abuses merely political, there was very little danger that unless they had such a grievance as the Corn-law to work upon, they would never raise the people against the established order of things. They knew that the most formidable rebel lions were the rebellions of the belly.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. M.) firmly believed that it was not by chance but by deliberation, and with a serious purpose, that those parties wished to have the Corn-laws part of our in stitutions, in order that some (lay or another those Corn-laws might be the death of our institutions.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He believed that they wished this abuse to remain part of our laws, in order that some day or another—that day he prayed they might never see--this abuse and our laws might perish together.—( Cheers.) There was also another circumstance connected with the question, to which he wished to refer. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bradford had warned them not to draw any parallel from France and the French Revolution. The Hon. and Learned Member would ex cuse him if he alluded to the subject in a manner of which he could not complain. If they observed the history of the French Revolution, the first thing that would strike them was, that that revolution was not merely brought about. by the lower classes. It was not a mere movement of the Faubourg St. Antoine. If the labouring chsses, had not, in the first in stance, and a great part of the higher and aristocratic classes at their head, they could have done nothing. But the feuds en gendered by all sorts of vexatious distinctions between the landed aristocracy on the one hand, and the monied and commercial classes on the other, were those which enabled the first end of the wedge to enter. Whi e a whole empire like this was united, he could not fear the result of any insurrection ; but he could not but feel uneasy when he saw all those topics which, in other countries, and ages, had been confined to the lowest disturbers, now being agitated by men worth twenty thousand a year—(Cheers)—it was im possible for him not to fear, when he heard the manufacturers crying out that the landlords were grinding the faces of the poor, and, on the other hand, men of great landed property denouncing the manufacturers as they had been denounced in that House, ever since the present debate had commenced.— ( Oh, and No, no.) lie would venture to say that no expres sion could be more unjustifiable as used by a manufacturer against the landholders than what lion. Members had heard in the course of the present discussion, coming from the mouth of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough against the manu facturing body.—(Cheers, and No, no.) He (Mr. M.) was quite wiliing that the truth of this assertion should he left to the judgment of all those who heard and read that attack.—( Cheers.) Now, therefore, we had arrived at a most serious stage in the interests of this country. He did not ap prehend the dangerous issue that lie feared would occur to morrow, or next year, or five years hence ; hut he would say that it was impossible that this country could safely follow up a system which they saw had the effect of arousing and pro voking the violent passions of multitudes, while at the same time it promoted division, rivalry, and animosity amongst the two great classes of proprietors in the country. Therefore it was of the greatest importance that this question should be . satisfactorily settled. Yet that which was proposed as satis factory was not even contended to be so en the other side.— (Cheers.) Even the Right lion. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department abjured all notions of finality. —(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman now laid it down as a .vise system that we should legislate gradually, and in bit by bit reforms. The present measure he would take as an instalment; but if it were to be received as an instalment, he (Mr. Macaulay) should consider it as an instalment of little more than a farthing in the pound.— ( Laughter and cheers.) But was it to be understood, now that we were to have a Bill of this kind introduced as often as the Members of that House were summoned to assemble thither, Were we doomed every year, or every three years, to renew discussions of this sort? Was it to be expected, that the first Minister of the Crown would again .settle and again unfix this great question? 'the more he (Mr. Macaulay) thought on the Right Honourable Baronet's Bill, the less he (Mr. Ma caulay) confessed himself able to understand why the Right Hon. Gentleman introduced it.—(" Hear, " and cheers.) lie did not introduce it to please those who cried out for a change in the Corn-laws, for it was clear that they were not satisfied.—( Hear, hear.) It was equally clear that he could not have introduced it to please his own supporters, for, though they would vote for him and carry his Bill though, there could be no doubt that nine-tenths of them would vote for him with much greater pleasure if he refused all change.— (Cheers, and cries of " No, no.") On this point he (Mr. Ma caulay) was content to defer to the judgment of those who ob served the silence of some gentlemen opposite, and in the House— something very different from silence elsewhere.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Right Honourable Baronet himself had avowed that he knew he could not please both parties, and he complained of the peculiarities and difficulties of his position. Now he (Mr. Macaulay) could understand that an enlightened statesman might risk the displeasure of each party, while supported by the consciousness that he was introducing a measure that would relieve and prevent the distresses of the country. But did the Right Hon. Baronet say this of his own measure ? Why, he told us that he could hold out no hope of relief to the distress that pre vailed.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Did he then bring in his Bill to settle the question? Why, finality was disdained on his own benches. Why, then, did the Right Hon. Baronet introduce his measure? Why, he said he introduced it to prevent frauds in taking the averages, of the existence of which frauds he was not sure, and which he acknowledged must have been much exaggerated.—(Hear, hear.) He also in troduced it to fix the price of wheat between 545. and 5,55. a quarter. But he could give no reasons, except exceedingly vague ones indeed, to show why he was convinced that his plan would have this effect. Vague ! why to be sure it must be vague for any wise statesman to determine what the price shall be—(Cheers)—and that is the reason that all wise states men have agreed to leave the price to he settled between the buyer and seller.—(Loud cheers.) There was a measure— he took the Right lion. Baronet's own statement— which settled nothing, which pleased nobody, which nobody asked for, which nobody world thank him for, which would not extend trade, which would not relieve distress, and which offered provisions at a price of which the Right Hon. Baronet did not profess to know anything, and for wkich he could give no reason.—(Loud cheers.) principle he op posed the Bill of the Right Hon. Baronet, and on principle he approved of that of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton.— ( Loud cheers, answered by ironical cheers from the Ministe rial benches.) In the first place, he understood the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton was opposed to protection alto gether, and therefore opposed a fixed duty; but he (Mr. Ma caulay) desired to be understood as advocating a fixed duty, on the ground of protection alone. 'There were two reasons for imposing a duty for the purpose of protection, in one of which he entirely concurred; and there was only ono word in the motion of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton with which he could not entirely agree—that was the word " now."—(Hear hear.) He did not think it had been pro ve d satisfactorily to him that the price of corr. in England was in-. creased by the burthens which peculiarly affected agriculture . ; but he considered the English farmer entitled to protection to the extent of those burthens, reserving to himself, at the same time, the opinion that it would be touch more expedient to take into consideration a new distribution of them, than that which existed under the present system.—( Cheers.) The other ground for not removing protection altogether, seemed to him (Mr. Macaulay) to be unanswerable.—( Hear. ) He was not disposed to take all protection from the Eng lish farmer, and he thought that time should be allowed for the purpose of transferring capital from one employment to another. —( Hear, hear.) But though he differed from the resolution of the Hon. Member, he did not differ from him in principle.— (Cheers.) He (Mr. Villiers) had declared that the people were desirous of having an immediate repeal of the Corn-laws; but he (Mr. Macaulay) thought they would be satisfied if a certainty of repeal, at a certain distance of time, was given them. As the motion stood, it might be thought to be brought fors and in a fit of despair ; by men who, knowing they should get nothing, were determined to ask much more than they could expect.—( Hear, hear.) He understo o d th a t th e H on. Member for Wolverhampton had expressed a resolution, that if he saw any prospect of the question being brought to a settlement on what he thought sound principles, the word " now " should not stand in the way of such a settlement. But while the word " now" stood part of the proposition, while it remained such as it was, he could not give his vote for it. With regard to a fixed duty, as a permanent measure, he con sidered it in no other light than as a mitigation or a compro mise. Asa mitigation, and as a compromise, he was ready to support it, as a measure brought in distinctly for the purpose of giving relief to the people ; but he could not consider that a settlement of the question which left a distinct protecting duty, not intended for the purpose of a revenue, and any suppoit he might give to such a measure would only be such a support as he apprehended every person in that House had repeatedly given to measures which they thought imperfect, becanse, though imperfect, they also considered them decided improve ments.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He felt exceedingly indebted to the House for the patience with which it had listened to him on a question on which he had never before addressed it, but he considered that his vote on the question might have otherwise been misunderstood. His objection applied to the word " now," and on this ground he had thought it necessary to give the House the present explanation.—( Cheers. ) Mr. STUART WORTLEY said he should take the present opportunity of declaring his opposition to the proposal of the Member for Wolverhampton. He rose with some reluctance to speak on a question that had been so thoroughly debated by the House that it would he impossible for him, and difficult for many who were better qualified than him, to add anything new, either of fact or argument, to the subject the House bad to de bate. If there was one reason why he had taken the' liberty of addressing them, it was the speech of the Right Hon. Member ; for Edinburgh, because he must say that of all the speeches he ever heard, he had never listened to one that so little an swered the purpose its author intended, as one half of it com- I hated phantoms of his own raising, and the other half was formed of arguments tceally inconsistent with the course he had adopted. He had charged the Right Honour able Baronet with maintaining in general, abstract terms, that cheap food was no blessing to the people. The Right lion. Baronet never made use of any such expression—he never laid down any such maxim. —( Hear, hear.) 'I here was no doubt that if the question were asked, whether cheap. ness of food was a blesing to the population of the country, there could be ne other answer, than that, ag a matter of course, it would be of the utmost importance ; but notwith standing the truth of that maxim, it was very questionable whether the condition of the poorer classes of the country would be improved because food was made cheaper. The whole et the arguments of the Right. Hon. Gentleman Opposite (Mr. Macaulay)depended upon the fact, whether the population had the means of maintaining itself, and could, if provisions were cheaper, enjoy a larger portion of the necessaries of life. He talked of that as if the sole question to be consi dered was whether, if provisions were cheaper, the demands for labour would be such as would enable the labouring classes to obtain sufficient employment. If those commodities, which constitute the necessaries of life, were cheaper, no doubt they would be brought within the reach of the population, who could procure the means of purchasing them ; but it did not follow that they should be brought within the reach of the population generally, unless there was employment given to them. He ( Mr. W. ) was prepared to contend, and he believed it to be true, that if the price of food was reduced, the benefits would not go into the pockets of the poll., but the advantages would he conferred upon a totally different class of persons. There was much more labJur in th's country than the demand required. Wages were depressed, and the consequence was, that if the price of corn was reduced much lower than it was now, the poorer classes if the people would not obtain any advantages from that reduction.—(Hear, hear.) The feeling of the manufacturing labourer at the present moment he believed to be this—he felt a strong conviction that there were other questions affecting his moral and social condition, more bearing upon his int,rests, and more deserving of his anxiety and attention. It was to these lie looked. Mr. C. BULLEIL-What are they? Mr. S. WORTLEY.-The Hon. Member asked what they were, he would tell him. The regulation of labour-that which affected every act of their lives, and which pressed di rectly or indirectly upon their social existence. The atten tion of the manufacturing labourers was directed to these ques tions as more important to their interests than the question of the Corn-laws. He did not mean to say that the question of the Corn-laws• was not a most important one. He admitted its importance, but he did not think it excited so much inte rest among the manufacturing labourers as had been represented. -( Hear, hear.) If it could be shown that, by reducing the price of corn, they would give to the people a greater mass of the necessaries of life; if he could be convinced that it was for the advantage of the great mass of the labouring population, that the importation of foreign corn should be permitted without restriction, he would not be found to oppose it. He admitted that the first concern of a Legislature, was the happiness, welfare, and improvement of the condition of the great mass of the population ; and if it could be proved to him that that happiness might be secured by the course recommended by the other side of the House, he should be unwilling to place himself in opposition to it. It had frequently been asserted that the price of food had no connection with the rate of wages. He denied that proposi tion and could quote high authorities in support of his opinion : Adam Smith, the father of the science of Political Economy, said " the money price of labour is regulated by two circum stances ; the demand for labour, and the price of the neces saries of life." This opinion of Adam Smith was confirmed by Mr. 111'Culloch, and Mr. Ricardo had, in treating of wages, said "we must not forget that wages are also regulated by the prices of commodities." Mr. Huskisson who had been fre quently quoted as an authority by lion. Members opposite, had said that if they reduced the price of food in the manner proposed, he held it by no means clear that wages would not fall in a still mote rapid manner. ( The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from Mr. M'Cul loch's Dictionary of Commerce in proof of his argument. It was to the effect-that, in 1814, the price of wheat was'74s. per quarter ; and, in 1815, it had fallen to 645.; and, in con sequence of the tall, the price of wheat not indemnifying the occupier of poor lands, those lands became gradually out of tillage.) He said, therefore, that he was justified in concluding that the price of food and wages had a relation to each other. The competition amongst the labourers themselves, and the competition amongst the masters, in respect of the employed atone, would prevent the working classes being benefited by any reduction in the price of food. That this was the case among those who were practically conversant with the subject he thougnt there could be no doubt whatever. It was not very long s:nce,they had heard the evidence of a person of that class of whom they were then speaking, and who expressed the opinion of a great number of his companions upon this question. '1 he man's name was Brighton, and he was examined before a Committee of Inquiry of that House. He said " some people will say that if our provisions were cheaper we should be better off, but our masters would take advantage of these rates, and reduce the weavers a penny upon each quantity of work, which would amount to about 2s. or 2s 6d a week." He proved by this that the working people held the same opinion as that expressed by Hr. Huskisson, that a reduction in the price of food would not put the labourer in a much better position than at present. Now when they talked of repealing the Corn-laws, he thought there were full and sufficient grounds for decidedly opposing that measure. His opposition and objection to this measure was founded simply upon this reason, that he was not prepared to ask for relief of one portion of the population, and that the minority, by almost certain ruin to the other class.-( Cheers. ) Because, whatever lion. Gentlemen might say, there could be no question of this fact being proved beyond the possibility of a doubt, that, taking the two classes which inhabit the empire, those who were engaged in manufactures and those employed in agriculture, that the latter class and the former, compared with the numbers, would show a great ma erity of the agriculturists.-( Hear.) He thought be should be within the mark, when he stated what had been alleged during the course of the debate, that the manufacturing popu lation taken altogether, was as one to two compared with the. agriculturists. When they took these classes together, and they were asked to adopt a measure for the purpose of relief, and this a doubtful relief to the smaller body, but which in volved ruin to the other, he thought it was best to hold from such a proposition. Gentlemen opposite told them that the English farmer would not suffer. In the first place they told them that the importation of foreign corn would not be such as to reduce the price of corn in this country. It did not seem to him to be necessary to occupy the time of the House in entering into that question.-( Hear, hear.) It was in the power of the foreigner to transport corn to this country at 355. to 405., and if they had notsome protection the foreigner would be able to introduce corn into the country to the prejudice of the farmer, and so far the farmer would be injured. But Hon. Gentlemen turned round and said, supposing it were so, he need only turn his capital to other sources of industry and culti vate grass land, and he would make as much profit as he formerly did. In the first place, did those Hon. Gentlemen recollect the circumstance that all those lands which were first abandoned from cultivation, were those least capable and the worst of quality ? Therefore it was no answer whatever to tell him that he would do well by turning his land under cultivation into pasture or grazing land. But there was another circum stance attending this to which he would call the attention of Hon. Gentlemen. They must look to the population supported by the cultivated land. He (Mr. S. Wortley) had seen some thing of this, and he had no doubt he was within the mark when he said that the population supported by the labour in grazing land was not above one-half that supported by the other branches of agriculture. This land was, therefore, thrown out of cultivation, and the labourers were necessarily thrown upon other resources. This, then, it was that made the argument inefficacious which was brought forward, that the farmer could turn his capital to another channel. Ile would not detain them longer, as it was not his wish to occupy an unreasonable portion of the time of the House. The question had been so elaborately debated upon, that there was scarcely anything new to be added. His reason for opposing the proposal of the Hon. Member for Wolver hampton was, that he felt that it would not he advantageous to the whole community that the Corn-laws should be repealed. He thought it was fair there should be such a reduction made as the nature of the case called for. He wished for relaxation of the law, but he was not prepared to risk all the consequences of an entire repeal of the Corn-laws. With respect to the proposal of the Right Hon. Bart. at the head of her Majesty's Government, he believed it would be viewed by the people of this country as a measure of reasonable relaxation, and calcu- Ia ed as much to benefit one side as the other. Mr. MITCHELL said that a fixed duty was preferable to a sliding sale. He had taken the opportunity of consulting his friends in the City, both Whig and Tory; and he found that all, from the highest to the lowest, although many of them considered the measure of the Right Hon. Bart. did not go tar enough, yet the principal part of them considered that the measure was a great and valuable improvement en the late sliding scale.-( Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) Some three years ago, considering that the prices were low, he had himself speculated in corn.-(Laughter.) However, they condemned the present system, he condemned the former one more. So far he believed that it was a block to trade, and prevented fair s peculation.-( Laughter from the Ministerial benches.) He had purchased wheat at 30s. a quarter, and he might have purchased 20,000 quarters at the same Brice ; now, calculating the charges from the continental port of freight, sound dues, commis ion, &e., altogether they would not exceed 7s. a quarter - he knew that the average price of British wheat was 565. a quarter, and which was the average stated by the Right Hon. Baronet in his speech ; now, adding this 7s. 'to 305., the original price of the wheat would be 375., the duty when the price was 375. in this country Would be 165., and that brought the price of the article up to 531. Now, as the average price of wheat was 565., this would give him a profit of 2s. or 3s. a quarter. The, average price of wheat in London was generally a shilling or two higher than other parts of the kingdom ; therefore, the average price in London would be 575. or 58s. Now, Recording to' the pro posed measure, he had a fair prospect of from 4s. to, ss. a quarter, by importing wheat from the Continent when the price was at 565. in this country. Now, under the old sliding scale of duties, he found that the duty at 695. and 70s. would be 13s. Bd. Now, when the average price of wheat was at 69a. the duty was never paid, because those who held wheat would keep it back until the price was up to 715., 725., or 731. a quarter. The only time when a duty higher th an 6 s . ed . i s paid is when the price has been up to 735., and when the price is going down, cargoes of wheat came over, and the parties are anxious to pay the duty before it rises to 20s. The only time that 10s. Bd. or 13s. ed. duty has been paid, has been when large quantities have been imported at one shilling duty. Now the effect of the alteration as proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet will be this, that upon an average crop in this country, and when the average price of wheat is 565., wheat will be ordered from the foreign market with a view to its being brought over as a legitimate subject of speculation, and expecting a profit of 3s. or 4s. a quarter. that speculation not being founded upon the prospect of a sufficient harvest, but upon the certainty of a fair mercantile profit arising out of it. He therefore was of opinion, that the alteration of the duty will have the effect of causing an importation of foreign wheat in this country when the average price was 563. or 575. and lie was also of opinion that it would prevent persons hold ing back corn till the price was at 70s. or 713. He there fore considered that there was a productive and a real and bona fide improvement in the whole scale, by which the duty might be expected seldom to exceed 14s. or Iss. Now he considered that a great improvement upon the whole scale. Honourable Gentlemen might ask whether it was equal to a fixed duty? He said candidly he did not consider it was; but although he did not think no, yet he considered it to be his duty, sitting there as a Member of the House of Commons, and one sent there to do the best he could for his constituents, to take this measure when there was no chance of getting any better-( Cheers)-not only in that House but in the other House of Parliament. flaying no prospect, then, of a better measure, he thought it his duty not to reject the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet merely because he was of opinion that another measure might be brought forward. He did not consider it his duty to reject the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet on that ground. A great many Hon. Gentlemen might think he was acting contrary to party i n t hi s d ec l arat i on; b ecause a fixed duty was proposed by one party an d a sliding scale by another, he did not feel himself called upon to vote For a fixed duty when he saw no propect of its being carried, and therefore his was wil ling to accpt of the present instalment. - (Cheers from the Ministerial Benches.) He did not expect the mea sure would be a final settlement. Certainly not.-( Hear and cheers from the Opposition.) He was of quite a contrary opinion. Yet, at the same time, he considered that the Right lion. Baronet opposite had brought forth the most liberal treasure that he himself thought lie could carry, and as such he (Mr. Mitchell) accepted it.-( Cheers from the Minis. terial benches.) He would say more, he was grateful to hit* for, so far as he could judge for the sentiments of his constirre mats, and of the great body of merchants whom he represent ed, they were of opinion that the measure was a great im provement, and ought to be accepted and tried for a she& time, to see whether its working would not produce a steady . trade in corn. He was of opinion that it would.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial side of the House.) He had not yet alluded to the article of oats, and he thought with respect to that produce, the present measure was en exceeding liberal one. At this moment he had oats. weighing 421bs. to the bushel : the price in Denmark for these oats was Bs. a quarter. and the charges from Denmark independent of the duty would not exceed 65., thus bringing the price up to 14s. Now, at 20s , the duty was 6..., and thus they could bring oats into this country, paying a duty of 6s. when the price was at 20s. Now, under the old scale, 20s. was almost prohibitory, and, therefore, there was a great improvement, and riot only was it a great improvement, but it acted as a check upon the home market. On all these grounds, considering the measure to be one of great reform on the old stale, he did not, feel it to be his duty to refuse so valuable au improvement as that proposed by the flight lion. Baronet, on the ground that an abstract re solution had been proposed in the principle of which he agreed, but which he felt assured there was no chance of carrying.-- ( Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches. ) Mr. C. HULLER said, the Honourable Gentleman why had just addressed the House, seemed to differ much in the sentiments he entertained now, and those he entertained when lie addressed the electors of Bridport, in June last. lie called upon them then to sink all minor differences, in the great cause of free trade, when he said the question was, whether the people should suffer by the monopolists, whom he designated as living upon the fat of the land. Ile was proceeding—and he, (Mr. Buller) was delighted to perceive that those by whom the Right Hon. Baronet was rice casionally supported, supported him (Mr. Mitchell)—to prove to the Right Hon. Baronet that it was a benefit. to the country that wheat could he brought. frcm Denmark at 285., and oats at 203. There was only one other speech made that night upon which he felt inclined to remark, and upon only one pas sage in that speech. He was very' glad that a remark of his elicited from the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire, an explanation of what lie thought was a fair subject for agitating the minds of the people,* and what he thought was a fair subject of the people's wishes. They should all admit that the 'nice of food was naturally one of the everyday censiderations of the people of England, but although the people were agitated upon that question, it seemed to him to be one of the greatest advantages that could be, that there should be honest and enlightened Members who should tell their constituents when they were actuated by delu sions, that those delusions were mischievous and utterly useless. He appealed to lion. Members to say, whether it was not the duty of intelligent Members of that House to disabuse the 1 minds of their constituents upon these subjects? Me (Mr. Buller) had taken no part in debates upon this question before ; he knew the collision of interests which would pervade the country when it came to be discussed; but he was always of opinion that whenever it came to be settled—whenever the circumstances of the country were such as to require a settle ment of it—when the people came to demand an alteration of those laws which prevented the introduction of corn into this country, the question would be speedily settled. The one ereat argument which excited the feelings and biassed the judgment of the people against the Corn-laws was their manifest injure tice. If there was nothing else—no other consideration but that, it rendered the immediate settlement of them most essen tial. Hon. Gentlemen on the other side did not avow that they were personally interested in a settlement of the question—they stated that it ' was not for them selves they cared a bit, but they were anxious for the prosperity of the farmers, and were not indifferent to the manufacturers, who were the parties principally interested in this measure. Consistent with common sense, it was im peiative upon the Legislature to enact a measure with respect to the introduction of corn into this country, and it was equally imperative upon them to remove the fatal mistrust which ex isted with reference to the present law. Even if those laws were not so objectionable, it would be wise to remove those causes which bad the effect of rendering their legislation so much an object of suspicion.--( Hear, hear. ) It is an in variable rule that when the people of any country believe that laws are founded on unjust principles, that they always ex-' aggerate the evils which result from them—they are slow to sit down under the notion that those laws might have been originally founded in justice if they cannot impute the evils from which they suffer to any other cause. When complaints are made that the people attribute more evils to the existence of the Corn-laws than are due to them, it would be wise to consider them and to remove those causes. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite had stated that the present dis tress of the people of this country was not owing to the opera tion of the Corn-laws, but that it was caused by over-production. Sir R. PEEL—It very much leads to it. Mr. BULLER—The Right Hon. Baronet states that the present distress is the reaction consequent upon over-production and increase of machinery ; what consolation did that give the Right Hon. Baronet, what advantages were there from that, except the employment of capital ? but no proportionate advan tage accrued to the people. Last year he called the attention of the House to the increase of population, and the decrease of their means of employment. Between 1825 and 1831 more than two millions of people were added to the population of this country, and during that interval of time there was a pe sitive diminution in the number of families employed in agri culture. He would.ask the House to consider what the effect of that was upon the country. According to the last returns the population was increased 4,500,000, and although they , were not regularly classified, as far as could be judged front e. ~ other circumstances it might be fairly inferred that the entire . , 1 0 of that increased population found its support in manufactures , ' , 0 j and not in agriculture.--( Hear, hear.) 4,500,000 were added . • 1> to the population of this country since 1821 and it did not appear , - . e , that agriculture gave them any increased employment, but that ' ~.:.e.til than whole means of subsistence had been foun d in trade and selfeee attributable the ee d to the Corn-l aws or , uty of Parliament f el' ie, e,4 ' „ e manufactures alone. It was his (air. Buller's) firm belief, whe- 7,ei ii ji s li ri .i '' t they , the titiehaptresir was t clusiste osbvdist was to sear ch for some effectual means to relieve ~iif , , that distress, or at all ev ents to secure for the ..rinierj people some permanent means of employment. If agree,.e ° 1",1 distress culture geve no increased employment, but manufactures,did , "se ie g ee i t t be w e as , ' np tl l s o e y d m u e t h y t ofa the Par li i a )e m e e p n ie t , t a o nd do en al a l b t le he t y he c m ould to facilitate .. '., f` ej to acq uire the' ~r e to necessaries of life. If the town was made too large for the e ; / 1 , ;,i country, and the country could not feed the town, whatwas the eve'l l yes ed clear policy of a Government but to remove the restrictierlfX: 4 ,te l ;4 under which the town was in getting f00d..? They should ri t e % l el allowed, at all events, to obtain food for themselves, and if th e ' t - se' 4 A 1B elf ' could not get it from their own country, the people shoul-14s to ~, be prevented from getting it where they could at a reasons" s I ., ,,rtere price. He did say without hesitation that the present Corn-lawl ete s" 40 any laws like them, which prevented the people from getting t. " , b oq- ''' o 4, nece.saries of lies at a fair reasonable price, and did not fac!l, f f s , 1yi1 , ,,,' 41 tate their employment, if they did not directly take the brern,l o a fg‘i out of the people's mouths, effectually prevented the pr., i Pleli e ell"ie from getting it.—( Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding wheF, s -0 0 4. fit e Mr. Buller) then said, he felt himself constraieedee /4 0 efle 4 I express a very great discrepancy of opinion beeweereep i. iii i ,i j o and his Hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton. .. e f, ll ''eee 't i l, would wish to say one word with reference to the vote which; 7i ,i . Ne i 00, would be obliged to give that night ou the motion of his 119 1 b , i 5 ",,; 5 e5i , ,, Friend (Mr. Villiers). lie should say, in the first instal:WC' -: e ea`e, , i that he could not assent at all to a motion that all duty ue ,i„o 0 corn should cease.—(Cheers and Hear, hear, front th e ',itr Ministerial benches .) He (Mr. Buller) would WW I ' .:, 'e''i to the House, in a very few words, the grounds upon which b e ° . ..e' had come to that honest opinion.—(Laughter and cheers./ In altering the Corn-laws there ought to be a fixed &ail ' e and a due regard should at alt times be ob serve d f or vested ' r • ' interests. Nothing could be more fatal than th e . ' notion that vested interests should be i n t er f ere d w ith ; be the , laws bad, mischievous, or even founded on injustice, still va.e ° ' ' interests had grown up and had been recognised by the Constite- ' tion, nothing could be more fatal or prejudicial than to interfere . with these interests rashly or precipitately.—(Hear, hear.) I t . e was stated that this question was decidedly a landlords' question e e_; eee. He believed it was—( Hear, hear)—and that the effect .., _. the Ilight,Hon. Baronet's measure would be to raise the land - lords' rent and cheapen food by artificial means. The Or e vernment should look at the immense body of farmers and ago - , ~ . cultural labourer:, whose condition required improvetnente -7 . ( Hear, hear.) The laws might bee-altered, but if they wer e they should be so altered as to abolish all unjust restriction s, and allay those alarms which every class of the 0 00 7 manity must naturally feel.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Thor° . was as great a difference between these two principles t 5 it was possible could exist. The plan proposed by the nig° t. Hou. Baronet was one unheard of in the history of taxa tion. , . Ho had heard of prohibitory laws, and of protection, but la y "- ,:, ;• - s r so totally prohibitory as these, and protection so exclusive. ~e !: i this, had never before came under his notice. The Enghsf:.' Corn-law stood forth alone as the only instance of an attemp t ~.. ' on the part of the Legislature to regulate by laws the impart.% tion of any i articular article.—( An Hon., Member on T O e , , ~ Ministerial benches The French law.") What was w e French law but an imitation of ours? It was nothing lii° r i ...' ~ and it was one universally condemned. Whatever the price.°4 , corn might he, by this sliding scale, it was quite evident tila a. the consumer could not procure it at a reasonable price. T e b er t was a great difference between this system and the file duty. We say that in consideration of certain 'I l ; terests to be preserved we will give you a fixed protection to ri`" corn. He would ask on what principle the Right Hon. Ba rt ; could justify the sliding scale because of the peculiar burdens . s land. The burdens on land were fixed, and if corn were low, ta e s e ' s , did not get higher; indeed, the contrary was the fact, for wile corn was low, the taxes became lower too. Gentlemen o site, then, did away with the whole of their arguments for t s " ,', justice of the duty on corn, if they applied it in the shape ° c h ri'' el sliding scale. The Aiding scale raised the price of corn i n ; it efe t e , higher than was necessary, and than they who advocatee2d,s ~I ' t ), ' imagined. At 68s. the duty was 16s. Bd, which left 52s* hee e e 4 , i,es 4 0' price, and he (Mr. Buller) believed that no return had il fe ete„eli e 9 ,e ) made of corn coming in at a less price than 525. These 60 ,:,,,,0-„„,t , of this scale would be in the working, but the speculator in re e eSl ti fifiV would, always keep back the price of corn for the lowest shi c ti a ie.', 4 o, l ; o ,' formerly pose, for forexample, slti. a t n h rt igh e oseet i l i ilgsl s espa . rtetia d ihed,n u auuef t tiote y aire , tt tobsh a hr:e n ig d p. l hod, we n tii ern o o2eeg w i saoh. :tf f eh o sge r ecoeno t sttru h thntlo e ichi t l akg o ette w rhbaetae e ntcr r wdehk d ae.tv cs u hr t a6ei i iss e 2dt s a ti low: :la si .. p. j i lc i It_ ,:is .. iisi:, ii 1: 1 1: : :;;:iti), if el: i prospectptoltriii price rose a r fno o i e re e eai fn l s Sir R. PEEL.—Suppose it should fall? Mr. C. BULLER—The Right Hon. Baronet said, suP l s . C i seJ„„J;', it should fall ? The effect of the sliding scale was to To i t 4 ( 13 4 ' g , the price higher than it need be. Suppose, however, lh a e r ii.difNe* price should fall, there was no injury to the agrieul l 'o ori el ", They did not give the consumer the advantage of a fixed l e i h ear .e ttv e t o p but threw in parcels of foreign corn without giving any Arie tel es! j ,,fit pprice, and so it did no good to the consumer. He (Ai r ' esi 4ei,,e, P i e', er did not contend that we should have corn Is. a toile 0 .118 , t": lower now and then, but that we should have it at as low ; ,lit,,' e olt e e as the variations of the season would admit. There vT li le,h 6 e'tli d O one other argument of the supporters of this Bill to W, ha c t , eie . ' is le l/ would now advert. The Right Hon. Baronet sai‘ ait s Ole ° ls elc' . said our fixed duty would settle the question, but suc h_. W ardll:e l i cit la the case, for the moment we get the fixed duty agitaotion_ei., e tl 4 _, ), ~lig be started for the total repeal. It did not depend, h !W al let; e ri/50, what was said in that House, or what was said out of ifff * O . & l's sl ... ' e sd pended on the manner in which the question was settled, ' D eli' . : 1 ; 1 101 once the fixed duty were established there would h e e nt i eti otag e , B ° fe je! chief whatever to be apprehended in that way. Th eeeh o r lor. ~ ; es! of time fixed duty was, that whether the price was 'Te tle y evel: ,e , :f pi there could be no exaggeration as to it—if the fixed , , the (hal ,4 (11 ss. the price of corn would be augmented ss. ; 0 " oa. That e "' ee were es. the price would be increased es., and s , n u ll!r/ , (err. e t a ; would be the effect of the fixed duty, and he an ytn n o i m pute say would defy human imagination to that t. Bl ood to it. He (Mr. Bulle would not pretend!eoe. fiat orte,, good would' result from them easure of the Righ! it_ ;; sit id He admitted that it would do some good, ati!!,!" . B u ller? b i t somewhat lower the price of corn. All he (Mr the P e° P e' elee to say was that it did not de enough to satisfy . _ sw ede l a did not remove the real evil, it did not create.a e _ e woe _ , /t ome* rioe mend for corn from foreign eountrice, _ ital ic, __ h i e it ensure a steady supply from foreigre ,_ ..c" !eelsHonottie secure a moderate price. the li IF_ ; ea s liding di Baronet said that the usual price of corn un e de ( r il i i " n klu fle o e) ,. to would be from 545. to 58s. per quarter. 655. He believed it would do little good; 1 L w oo a UP t his not think that it would give us corn lower th . ,n ro f u l d ' n 0 6 0 t et r i e; assure the manufacturers, nor would it place co m et enawe o e n_ tiee sure foundation in this country. He should say .. ". t h o se g ‘ n tha t question •, but as he should give his vote ag n" e ht it right he he should say what was his ground for doieg re s , o e the men with whom he had so often voted, he thou,' 0, an d that cati , should state his opinion of the general i.7l l ( e'i c ar.), nt ie so laws, more especialSy under the sliding 1 s ehble in Lb rep ealed' low a tone of voice as to be wholly ina n-12,,s were eeeme a, We understood him to say, that if the C England Would b agriculture would be ruined, and g Mr. J. B. HOPE spoke at considerable length , ueliery. inufact urin :;I:4,,l4l,,,,, ; 7:wintetu N oacet,tru, l dua.n r issillnd . Tuee.esh ß nat l l.,t ( r(Hc . .3 l .-j e supp..es ' I._ ' the I-I ono° ~ had a scat ..,.' his vote.. .f ,I e prineipl ,r.. applied 1 n ',...,:;• ith the ge e e Corn -la: 4,,0 xamplo of ,I, ne, wh o, " ~4" ouneed his i, ' 1 ure int ~,i t iti ' 03 0 Party —..., ~.. •i' !tat it could vi,loi , oos eyed that etlld rep ea 040., sudden at fee olverhatn! I 111 r. 1110 kttention of Friend th Lilat evenien; Intends, ti Ir ene annoy in Ither s an 4 in. ) ii ° • ' L bringing teuld get - i / var I, le, in , k vain ai e e o nte e 4 lelvtT " : l a Hoe. :la Ho e. } 4 wo u l d ni !ere th e i •Iloth et. considered tat' and 11 1 ? i , /l ' Irle th et zt., 11 411; 1 7 , Akki tt i rte t ~ t hi t 1,... ,. °C at -.. .i 1 3 0144 ." I, tli cott„,e t i f eh n L" ,or t .;.i „: H i thi ct li ed . In s i tn , in has , t i lo :i greatest 4 fieet t the i im itself w 1 48 der •••.• la w ' ti rZ t‘l " s t , Lae .. "1, s !Red 01 k 144 t Nit,i l 111._ 6 Of ' ,, t . th t .7 lit: 4 If sh e a f e l li , 4ti ttio ll) tort i th ti lt ti, kg: , , 04 r lktik: 01 '4 lel% bsa be ret fee Ilt , k' 4 4 ' Its I ...eel w it i d Rho Is Is° 41 4 et th il ia th an gri t kits N I, "eel be, al e( Ile eth deo I ttl! lit, th t 4 01, et lei ett At Pb li si t o t 4 ki 1 i 1 ) 1 , :~~, r c .~~l :e