The Sun. — London, England, 1844-06-26 00:00:00

et Erb Vattion SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. GLOBE.—" Thank God we have a Sir James Gra ham!"—may exclaim all determined admirers of the entente cordiale with all Powers, no matter by what sacri fice obtained. It might have happened, by an untoward chance, that there was a Tory honnete-homme at the Home-office. Dis aliter visuni—it is ordered provi dentially, for the views of all lovers of prostration before all Powers being, that there should not be an honest Tory, but a renegade Whig, at the head of our police. The corruption of an author, it has been said, is the generation of a critic ; and the corruption of a Whig, it should seem, is the making of a spy for Turin or Vienna. We give Sir Robert Peel credit for this last specimen of the cast of parts in his Ministry. It is pos sible that Sir James Graham in Ireland might not have matched the De Grey coup de theatre of the Clontarf proclamation, and its concomitants. It is tolerably cer tain that in India he would have stopped short of the glories of Scintle arid Gwalior, to say nothing of tilt Samson-like exploit of the gates of Som nauth. At the Foreign-office, we cannot quite think he would have preserved Aberdonian meekness ; and we should almost have trusted his complexional ill nature to save our diplomacy from that security of insult, which even President Tyler feels—that most offensive bull-frog that has yet leapt on the back of King Log. But at the Home Department !--ah, there indeed Sir J. Gra ham is in his element. There the entente cordiale is safe in his hands ; for it depends on good offices entirely in ac cordance and congeniality with his own nature. How fortunate ! France will be satisfied with running her rigs iu the Mediterranean and the Pacific. America with insulting our policy, and asserting her right to take Texas and the Oregon. Russia with undisturbed arma ments in the Baltic or Black Sea ; and condign ven• geance for insults in sartorial ears to imperial breeches. It is impossible for the entente cordiale to be preserved at a cheaper rate! But tastes vary. President Washington lost the entente cordiale with some Choctaw or Chickasaw chief or other, because he had not the hospitality to devote Mrs. Washington to his service. He would graciously have declined the courtesy—but not to have had it offered was unheard•of in Chickasaw comity— almost amcunting to a casus Belli. In like manner his Holiness the Pope, or his Silliness the King of Sar dinia, or some other relic of savage times still unac countably not " improved" out of Europe, comes with a civil request to our Home Secretary to act as his tool and spy in the British Post-office !—to teach his subordinates in that department the knack of un sealing and re-sealing letters, without leaving traces of the felony ! All in the interest of his Holiness, or his Sillines ! Are these the sort of favours Lord John Manners wants reciprocity for by an embassy at Rome ? Suppose an aati-Puseyite minister, having scent of an alarming progress of the Oxford conspiracy , against the obedience of the Church to the State, and accrediting an Ambassador to Rome for the useful purpose of demanding inspection of all the letters from Oxford Fellows to Burnish Cardinals. We believe he would find an abundant harvest of " conspiracy." But is such a harvest worth reaping ? And are we, who have no such harvests to reap in any foreign bureau of espionnage—who don't care a straw how many block heads conspire with pen, ink, and paper—who laugh at all metaphysically explosive missives sent through the Post-office—are we, who have no recipro city to ask for in this dirty trade—are we to con taminate our public service gratuitously with this Ibreign virus ?—to teach our functionaries lessons by warrant, which afterwards they may repeat without warrant ? It appears to us that when Government opens letters, it should do what every individual does when he opens letters—namely, avow having opened them. We cannot conceive that the power representing the nation can be entitled to practise forgery of men's seals to conceal inspection of their letters ! Is it pos sible that this can be a question amongst freemen and men of honour? STANDARD.—The Mazzini Correspondence Ques tion occupied the House of Lords fur a considerable portion of its sitting last night, but without leading to any practical result. The subject is one which presents remarkable attractions for grievance-mongers, like Lord Radnor, who introduced it to the House of Lords ; it is, as the fashionable phrase goes, excep tional—that is, it is not governed properly by the ordi nary rules, and it seems to inflict a hardship, while, from the nature of the case, the details of any particular instance cannot be conveniently explained ; in short, it deals with matter, to make accusations in n hich is the easiest thing in the world, and in which the best de fence is odious. That the Government ought to have the power of detaining and opening letters seems to be pretty generally conceded ; but many who concede this, qualify the concession with an opinion that the power ought to be exercised with great caution, which opinion is no doubt well founded ; but all this leaves the matter just where it was before, for who shall determine what. is a cautious exercise of the power ? Mazzini's case, the case which has been brought forward as a matter of complaint, the power appears to have been exercised most cautiously, for it is not pretended that Mazzini himself, or any of his correspondents, has suffered any thing by the opening of his letters, if it be not the cloud thrown over their political intrigues, by the consciousness that the British Government is acquainted with them. The more we consider the subject, the more convinced we are that the sacredness of post-letters is a very much exaggerated notion. We ought, perhaps, to acknowledge ourselves incompetent judges, because we certainly differ from many whose authority we re spect upon the question of secresy. We h'ave no love or sympathy for those who love a secret. In the affair in hand, however, we need not trust to our own impressions; for the law of the country, which is the embodied wisdom of the country, has as little respect for secrets as we have. If the law enables a Secretary of State to read a man's letter, the law no less enables a magistrate to place the writer of that letter in a witness-box, and compel him to tell, upon his oath, every word written in that letter, if there is a prima facie ground for supposing that the letter can reflect an important light upon a question of a trumpery assault or a debt of 40s. He must be a subtle casuist who can distinguish between the inva sions of secresy, in the two cases ; but every one can appreciate the greater hardship of being obliged to punish on oath a man's secrets in a Court of Justice, than having them read in a closet by a Minister of the Crown, bound by honour, and responsible in character, not to make an ill use of the information thus obtained. There is one point raised in Lord Denman's excellent speech (and excellent in spirit, in matter, and in style his Lordship's speeches always are)—a point which we own caused us some difficulty ; we allude to the near proximity of the practice of re-sealing the letters to the crime of forgery. We think that there is no good reason for this re-sealing. The person whose letters have been opened ought to know that they have been opened. The practice of this quasi forgery most probably arose in bad times, not remote from those in which spies were employed, and from the zeal of subor dinates, always disgracing and sometimes seriously embarrassing their principals, by pushing vigilance and caution into downright fraud. Lord Denman knows that all the processes of his Court were, while imprisonment for debt before judgment was permitted, executed by the most villainous frauds hardly a writ was served or a debtor arrested without the agency of some vile lie. Most persons, probably, recollect the story of a father stolen by a bailiff from his sta rv i ng c hil dren, under pretext of briuging him a present of meat for his Christmas dinner, and the further prosecution, by t h e b ailiff, of the hungry children at a police office for detaining the meat. Well, if the processes of the courts of justice have been so abominably dishonoured, how can we wonder that something of the same kind may happen in th e Post-office, by converting an act of strict justice into an aet of fraud. We are quite sure that since the attention of Sir James Graham has been called to it, the practice of resealing must be discontinued. STATE OF TRADE. (From the Manchester Guardian.) There continues to be a good and extensive demand for yarn, especially for the better qualities, suitable for the Russian market, and prices are generally firm and rather buoyant. In the goods market there is little change from last week ; 40-inch shirtings and 9-Bth printing cloth are in limited demand, and rather lower in price, whilst 27-inch printing cloth sells readily, and at rather better prices. Domestics also are rather easier of sale, but without change in prices. ROCHDALE FLANNEL MARKET, MONDAY, JUNE 24. There has bin a very fair business doing in flannel to (lay, at former prices. The good demand for goods at the present season of the year is supposed to proceed from a spirit of speculation, as many are o f o pi n i on t h at wool wilt keep its present upward tendency. -- - ---- QUEEN-SQUARE.—.-(THIS DAY.) ATTEMPT TO EXTORT MONEY.— William Burns, a man about thirty years of age, having the appearance of a cabman, was plac e d at the bar, be f ore Mr. Bond, . charged by Mr. liym us Hurst, a gen tl eman , h o ldi ng an 3 ,11 Hospit a l Chelsea, and a ppointment in the al who . e endeavour . resides in Priory - place , Valworth-r oa d, w i t h - : ing to extort money from him. The complainant, when he entered the witness box , was seized w i t h f ai ntness, and was removedfromtitihae: Court into the air. On his retur n , he stated ' about one o'clock this morning, as he was crossing %Vest minster-bridge,towards the Surrey side, on his w a y h ome, the prisoner, who was accompanied by two wom en , came up to him and said in a determined tone, " I want som e money." He asked him what he meant by such a de. wand, and feeling alarmed at his conduct which was unlike that of a beggar, or of a person in distress, and fearing that it was his intention to rob him, he told him that he bad no money and went on. The prisoner, however, Followed and pushed against him repeatedly. A police man, who appeared to have been watching the , prisoner, came up, and he gave him into custody, when the two women who were with him absconded. The complainant further said that he had taken some whiskey-and -water during the , evening, but was perfectly conscious of all that occurred. Policeman, 53 B, corroborated the preceding evidence. IVhen the prisoner was taken to the station-house and searched, four sixpences were found on him which he attempted to swallow, but was prevented from doing so. lie was quite sober. . ' Policeman, 25 B, said be had known the prisoner for et me time, and had frequently seen him in the society of FinkvNtgid thieves.• He had been a cabm an . H e did not Mum' bo•Or he obtained Lis living. . The prisoner _ said he bad been to the Bower Saloon - with the "men, that he was drunk at th e ti me o f t h e aincurrnnia , and pished against the complainant by - -incident. )3e did übt dead money of him. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour (Four o'Clock), at which time there were exactly forty Members present. The Lords' Amendments to the Manchester Police Bill were read and agreed to. Marianski's Naturalisation Bill was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Lord INGESTRE, the Gasp 6 Fishery and Coal Mining Company Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed, after a few observations from Mr. ROEBUCK and Mr. GLADSTONE. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Rochdale, signed by 6,000 persons, against the formation of a troop of yeomanry in that town and district. The Hon. Member gave notice that, on reading the Orders of the Day to-morrow, he should call the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the subject. Mr. B. DENNISON presented a petition against the union of the sees of Bangor and St. Asaph. Mr. RUTHERFORD presented a petition from the coopers of Leith, praying for the repeal of the duty on foreign staves. Mr. W. MILES presented petitions from Somerset setshire against the agitation carried on by the Anti- Corn-law League, and in favour of protection. On the motion of Mr. WYSE the following resolution was agreed to :—That the Second Report from the Com missioners appointed by his late Majesty King William the Fourth, and re-appointed by her Majesty the Queen, to inquire into the manner in which railway communi cations can be most advantageously promoted in Ire land, signed by T. Drummond, T. F. Burgoyne, Peter Barlow, and Richard Griffith, dated the 13th day of July, 1838, and the appendixes annexed thereon, and presented to both Houses of Parliament by order of her Majesty, be referred to the Committee on the Great Southern and Western Railway (Ireland) Bill. Dr. NICHOLL presented several petitions against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. Lord INGESTRE presented petitions from Wolver hampton, Milton, Brough, and other places, again s t th e repeal of the corn-laws. APPEAL IN CRIMINAL CASES. Mr. GODSON, for Mr. Kelly, moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Appeal in Crimi nal Cases Bill, for the purpose of postponing it until next Wednesday, when Mr. Kelly would take the sense of the House upon it. COURT OF ARCHES BILL. Mr. 11. ELPHINTONE moved that the Order of the Day, for the adjourned debate on the second reading of the Court of Arches Bill, be postponed until this day fortnight.—Agreed to. NOTICES OF MOTIONS.—SECRET DEPART MENT OF THE POST-OFFICE. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice that he would, on Tuesday next, move for a Select Committee to inquire into the Department of the General Post-office, com monly called the Secret-office, the duties of the persons engaged therein, and the authority under which the functions of the said office are discharged.—(Hear.) IRISH AND SCOTCH BANKS. Mr. WODEHOUSE gave notice that on the motion for going into Committee on the Bank Charter Bill, he would ask a question of the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, whether it was the intention of the Government either this session or next to extend the provisions of the Bank Charter Bill to the banks of Ireland and Scotland. CORONERS (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of Mr. GROGAN, the Coroners (Ire land) Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Wednesday week. The Appeals in Criminal Cases Bill, the Lime Toll Exemption (Wales) Bill, and the Juvenile Offenders Bill, were postponed. CORN-LAWS.—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned debate on the corn-laws was then read. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said, the Noble Lord who had occupied the last hour of last night, and the first hour of the morning, had alluded to the agricultural labourers of Dorsetshire, but he should leave the Hon ourable Member for that county to reply to his state ments. There was much, however, in the Noble Lord's statement, in which they must all agree. There was an acknowledgment of the extreme difficulty and importance of the subject under consideration, and there was an admission of the duty they owed to the poor ; and there was a very feeling allusion to the great interval which now separated the poor from the rich. Hon. Members opposite often alluded to the extreme import ance of providing a sufficient supply of necessaries for the people. The question was one of great importance, as it included the question of cheap provisions.—(Hear.) It was part of the tactics of the members of the Anti- Corn-law League, when they met with an argument that they could not answer, to call it an exploded thllacy, and to talk about old ladies and country squires, and when they had raised a laugh under cover of that, to fall back upon some argument more easily manageable, and to call that returning to the original question. The League had a great advantage in haranguing multi tudes on account of their violence and their extreme princi ples. They contended for total and immediate repeal, and this gave them a great present advantage over more moderate men ; but when the . r came to put their theo ries in practice, they would discover that they were im practicable. One of their principles was to buy in the cheapest, and to sell in the dearest market. Now, he had never heard of any one that would object to that as an abstract proposition. But were Hon. Gentlemen op posite prepared to carry out that proposition without compromise?— (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Were they prepared to carry it out in private life ? Would they dismiss an old man, whom they had long employed at 12s. a week, because they could get a younger man to undertake the same work for 10s. a week ? If they car ried out that principle strictly, there would be an end to all neighbourly feeling and domestic charity, and if it were to be carried out without compromise in public life, it would destroy our honour, our defences, and our national character. If any foreigner, acquainted with our social state, were to be told that there were a set of men who were in favour of a total and immediate repeal of the corn-laws, he would say that they must be either too visionary to be listened to, or too dangerous to be trusted. The Pro tectionists might as well raise a cry for a return to the war prices, as the Anti-Corn-law League for total and immediate repeal. The League had done themselves injury by their violence. For one recruit that joined them, many left them ; and those who were leaving them were the parties who supplied the sinews of war. Did the League consider because of the violence of their exertions, that the Right Hon. Baronet was induced to make the declarations he had done. The attempts of the League had been unworthy of them. Whatever the conduct of the landowners had been it was very different from that of the League. He would now go into the history of the League, and in doing so he must ask for some consider able patience from the House ; but before doing so he would advert to some of the statements of the members of the League. The lion. Member then referred to a speech of Mr. Cobden's, and also to one made by the Hon. Member for Bolton. He also read several extracts from speeches delivered by Mr. Ward and Mr. Bright. The Hon. Member for Durham spoke of the aristocracy as the enemies of the human race —as locusts preying on the community, and said that the distresses of the people were laughed to scorn in the halls of the aristocracy. The Hon. Member for Stockport did not entirely confine his censure to the landed aristocracy. He said much greater scorn was due to those mercantile men who be came allies of the aristocracy. He must now beg the patience of all the House, except the Members of the Anti-Corn-law League. (The Honourable Member here untied a large bundle of quotations from speeches, &c., made by these gentlemen ; the ap pearance of it excited a general cry of " Oh, oh," from , the House.) The first quotation read by the Hon. Mem ber was one from a speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bolton, at a dinner at that town in 1838, in which he called on merchants and tradesmen to _,join the League. In anoth er p ar t o f t h e speec h t h e H on. and Learned Member (Dr. Bowring) said that the " Anti-Corn-law League would be the arbiter of political power."—(A laugh and ironical cries of "Hear" upon the Opposition side.) The next quotations read by the Honourable Gentleman were from the "Anti-Corn-law League," the "Circular," and other publications of the League, which gave instructions to travellers and others as to the mode in which they were to distribute the papers, and disseminate the doctrines of free-trade, and inculcate a I hatred of the " most infamous of human laws." —(Laugh ter on the Tory benches.) One of these instructions was to cause copies of the " League Almanac" to be hung up in club-rooms, public-houses, reading-rooms, black smiths' shops, &c.—(Great laughter.) The Hon. Mem ber then exhibited to the House a copy of the Almanac, amidst renewed laughter. This Almanac gave the names of all the anti-corn-law saints— (Laugter)--the first of whom was the Hon. C. P. Villiers, M.P. for Wolverhampton, who was born in the year 1802— (Great laughter)—John Bright first saw the light in 1811 (Renewed laughter) and though great obscurity existed with regard to Homer and Shakespeare, they had great pleasure in stating that Dr. Bowring was born on the 17th of October, 1792.—(Great laughter.) He now came to another part of the proceedings of the League, called the pulpit agitation. The Hon. Gentleman here read ex tracts from the Anti- Corn-law Circular recommending a System of pulpit lectures on the subject of the corn-laws. The Hon. Member, also, read extracts from the speeches of the Dissenting ministers asssmbled in the Manchester conference. The Hon. Member for Stock port had stated at the conference, that this was a middle c l ass agitation, an d that they had had recourse to the us ual methods adopted in Carryi ng on m iddl e c l ass agitation, they had procured the co-operation of Dis senting ministers, of ladies, and they had organised tea parties. So that it appeared that the characteris tics of a middle class agitation were Dissentingaugmhitneirs.-) ters, ladies, and tea parties. — (Hear, hear, the Ministerial benches.) He was sorry not to see the Right Hon. Member for the city of Perth in his place, in order to congratulate him on the most remarkable in cident of modern times; for according to the opinions of the League, the most remarkable incident of modern times was his declaring himself in favour of total and immediate repeal. That declaration had been looked upon as the precursor to a similar declaration from all the wembera of the late Whig Cabinet. The Noble Lord the Mr. WYSE wished to know whether it was the in tention of the Government to continue the Orange Pro cessions Bill, which was about to expire on the Ist day of August. If the Right Hon. Baronet did not wish now to answer the question, he would give a regular notice on the subject. Sir J. GRAHAM said, if the Right Hon. Gentleman would give notice either for to-morrow or Friday, he would then answer the question. Mr. WYSE said, as we understood, that he would give notice for to-morrow. IRISH STATE TRIALS. 'Sir R. PEEL said that the Right Hon. Gentleman had given notice of a motion with respect to the Irish State trials for the 2d of July. Now the hearing of the writ of error, as he understood, was fixed for the 4th of that month ; and he would put it to the Right Hon. Gentleman whether he would bring forward the motion when the Attorney-General for Ireland, and also the Attorney-General for England could not be in their places? He trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman would feel it but just that he should bring it in on some other day. Mr. WYSE said in answering the Right Hon. Baronet he must claim the indulgence of the House. He had already deferred his notice on account of the discussions which were going on in the Court of Queen's Bench ; but it must be recollected that the subject of his motion had relation to facts rather than to law. It should also be remembered that there was a very strong opinion among Hon. Members, that upon the occasion alluded to the trial had been an unfair one,—(Loud cries of hear, hear)—and the conviction was not justified by the cir cumstances.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Wyse) did not feel justified in putting off his motion, unless some specific day was fixed for it.—(Hear, hear.) Sir ROBERT PEEL was of opinion that in common justice to the Attorney-General for Ireland, the motion should be postponed until he was at liberty fully to be prepared for it, and to give his undivided attention to it. So strong was his opinion of the injustice that would be done if the motion was not postponed, that he should be ready to use the power of Government to as sign some other day for its discussion.—(Hear.) Mr. WYSE said as the Right Hon. Baronet was wil ling to assist in ~e- i ving another day for the di scuss i on o f the motio n , h e should be disposed to consult his conve nience as far as he could safely do so ; but he could give no specific undertaking upon the subject, until he had conferred with Hon. Members of the House, who were deeply interested in the matter.—The conversation then dropped. COL. STODDART AND CAPTAIN CONOLLY. Mr. B. COCHRANE asked the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government had received any communication from Dr. Wolff, since his departure on his mission to the Khan of Bokhara? Sir R. PEEL said the question was one involving considerations so important to the feelings of individuals, that he would rather not answer it at that moment, with out having had notice of it. If the Hon. Member would put it to him on Thursday or Friday next, he would give him the best and latest information in possession of the Government. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, seeing the Right Hon. the Secretary of State in his place, wished to put a question to him as to a Bill that was in circulation, entitled " A Bill for the better administration of justice in the county of Middlesex," and purporting to be printed by order of the House of Commons. He begged to know whether Right Hon. Baronet intended to bring in such a Bill ; and if so, when ? Sir J. GRAHAM was not aware that any such Bill was in circulation ; a Bill had been printed for the pur pose of being shown to a few persons in confidence, and of obtaining information. Mr. DUNCOMBE said he had not seen the Bill him self, but it had been ;shown to some members of the Marylebone Vestry, and it appeared on the face of it, " Printed by &rat of the House of Commons." Sir J. GRAHAM said there must be some error in that designation. A Bill on the subject had been printed, and shown in confidence to a few persons, as the most convenient mode of obtaining information on the ques tion involved, and ascertaining their opinions ; but he had not yet decided on what shape the Bill was to as sume, or the provisions it was to contain. SEES QF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR. Mr. W. 0. STANLEY, in withdrawing his motion for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Act 6 and 7 Will. IV, c. 77, as relates to the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor, said, he must ask the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) to state more explicitly than he had yet done what his intentions were with regard to this measure. On the present occasion, he did not intend to go into the question ; but as there was an opinion out of doors that the consent of her Majesty would be required be fore any further progress could be made, he begged to ask whether, if that consent should be required, it would be withheld by the Government. Sir R. PEEL said, that if the Hon. Gentleman had brought forward his motion, he would have felt it his duty to oppose it. The question, whether or not the consent of the Crown was necessary, was one involving many complicated considerations; and he did not under take to say whether, if it were declared to be necessary in the present instance, it would be given by the Government. Mr. W. 0. STANLEY said that, though it might be necessary to renew the motion at a future period, he should, for the present, withdraw it. CORN LAWS. Mr. C. VILLIERS then rose to move that this House do resolve itself into a Committee, for the purpose of considering the following resolutions:—"That it appears by a recent census that the people of this country are rapidly increasing in number. That it is in evidence before this House that a large proportion of her Majesty's subjects are insufficiently provided with the first neces saries of life. That, nevertheless, a corn-law is in force, which restricts the supply of food, and thereby lessens its abundance. That any restriction, having for its object to impede the free purchase of an article upon which depends the subsistence of the community, is in defensible in principle, injurious in operation, and ought to be abolished. That it is therefore expedient that the Act 5 and 6 Victoria c. 14, shall be repealed forthwith." The Honourable Member said the purpose of the motion of which he had given notice was, that of once again bringing under the consideration of that House the claim, so just, so important in itself, made on the part of the community at large, that the trade in the first necessary of life, now restricted by the Act of that House, should be in future unfettered and wholly free. He could most truly say that such was the importance which he attached to this claim, that if he for one moment imagined that the power with which it was presented to the House could in any way affect its success, nothing would have induced him again to become the instrument of making the motion on this occasion. However, this was notoriously not the case. He had upon two occasions brought this matter before the House, and be had been supported by Members of the greatest ability, who had left nothing unsaid that could be urged in its favour, and yet this had been done in vain. It might, perhaps, be asked, upon what grounds, therefore, he now proceeded to renew this appeal. He thought he might take credit for not having adopted this course without due consideration. If those who were united with him in opinion on that subject, had been silent upon; it during this session, their opponents would not have been s l ow to infer that either by their overwhelming influence, or their persuasive eloquence, they bad been induced to fly fr6m the field—that they were satisfied with the former decision of that House. A notion more foreign to the truth could not be imagined by anybody. But he thought the public were likely also to have concurred in this view if they had remained silent, con sidering the novel attitude which country gentleman had assumed on this question during the past year. Those gentlemen had considered it expedient, for the purpose of maintaining this law, or of conciliating public opinion, to descend into the field of public agitation, and they bad followed closely . in the track of that body who were leagued together in opposition to them. It would have appeared somewhat remarkable, considering the appeal which had been made, if there had been no dis cussion in that House. Their meetings appeared to have been somewhat select, and they seemed rather to have agitated themselves than to have succeeded in awakening much sympathy for their cause. But inasmuch as their professions appeared so large in print, and as there had been no lack of confidence on the other side, it would have been somewhat curious if, when the parties had met on common ground, there had been no opportunity of fair argument in that House. The public expected an opportunity of judging fairly between the contending parties. He saw little reason for despair, and some for hope, in this continued discussion on this question. He was unable to explain, unless from a conviction of the substantial justice of the anti-corn-law caue, wh the Government had not allowed any month s of las t THE SUN, :LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENiI4'6, JUNE 26, 1644. Mr. BOND said he had no doubt but that it was his in tention to commit a felony; and he must have le3n suc cessful had the complainant been a person easily inti midated. He should commit him to the House of Cor rection for six weeks, with hard labour. Member for Sunderland was on the same side as the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Perth, but the Noble -Lord the Member for the City of London had, by his speech last night, injured the cause of repeal. The League ,had not been neglectful of the sinews of -ss ar, and this was the manner in which they provided them. (The lion. Gentleman then read several extracts from the addresses of the League, and from the speeches of its leading- members, inculcating the necessity of providing sufficient funds to carry on the agitation.) k LEFT We have reason to believe that the appointment of Lord Heytesbury as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland has been all but definitively settled. —Evening Paper. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) POACHING EXTRAORDINARY. -We have often heard of the ravages committed by the hooded crow on the eggs of I ame during the breeding season, but we were scarcely prepared for such a proof of wholesale destruction as the following fact discloses. A few days ago, Mr. Purves, tenant of Linton Burnfoot, ascertaining that there was a hooded crow's nest in a certain tree on his farm, proceeded to the spot with his gun with the intention of destroying the brood of young, before they took their departure from the parent nest. On arriving at the place, however, Mr. Purves was much disappointed at discovering that the whole brood had flown. Knowing the destructive propensities of this vermin, he had the curiosity to examine the ground around the foot of the tree, and was so astounded at the number ( f partridge egg-shells which he found strewed about, that, lest he should be accused of exaggeration, he took the precaution of requesting two gentlemen, his neighbours, to assist him in counting the shells, when, to their astonishment, they picked up the enormous number of one hundred and ninety-six shells of partridge eggQ, within a few yards of the tree I The whole of these eggs were evidently consumed in feeding the young birds.; but how many the old lady and gentleman had themselves gobbled up without ever bringing them near the family domicile, it would be difficult to estimate.—Kelso Mail. HOUSE OF COMMONS. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 25. FRAME-WORK KNITTERS. Mr. FERRAND wished to know why no Commis sioner had visited Nottingham, to inquire into the truth of the allegations in the petition of the frame-work knitters, which he had presented some time since. Sir J. GRAHAM said that Commissioners had been appointed to inquire into the state of the hand-loom weavers and the frame-work knitters, and he had no doubt they would soon visit the county of Nottingham. ORANGE PROCESSIONS. session to pass without abandoning some portion of the ground on which the opposite system was based.— (Hear, hear, and cheers.) He did not say this from any idle wish to make mischief between the two sections of the opposite party. It seemed to him that they were deriving all the advantage from discussion which, with a cause based on truth and justice, they were likely to do. They were gradually gaining ground, whilst those who were opposed to them were gradually losing ground.—(Hear, hear.) Public opinion had fortunately great influence with this country ; and it was on this ground, that that important body which was opposed to monopoly were entitled to the gratitude of mankind. Hon. Gentlemen opposite were now unable to defend this law on its real merits ' • they assigned any ground but the true one. Such deference was now necessary to be paid to public opinion, that any law or insti tution which was assailed, must be defended on public grounds. It was the difficulty of the opposite party that they could not defend the common law upon any material, general, or public grounds, and that the people felt themselves aggrieved by it. It was opposed by a vigilant, active, and intelligent body. who had, in every way, examined, criticised, and tested every ground on which the law was maintained, and they found that every ground on which it now stood was un tenable. He asked them on what ground the suppor ters of the law now rested their defence ? There was no one ground which he had heard, since he came into that House, that had not been thoroughly examined, and completely exposed. —(Hear, hear.) He was anxious, therefore, to hear what fresh ground was to be assumed. The ground aeon which it was placed when first introduced was the most plausi ble, before it was tested by experience, when it proved to be the most foolish on which it could stand—that was, that it was dangerous for this country to be dependent for its supply of food on other countries, and that there fore every thing should be done to encourage and pro tect English agriculture. Plausible as it seemed at first, experience proved that argument to be most foolish. It was assumed that we might depend upon other countries for our revenue, and for the means of employ ment to millions of our people, whereby they should obtain bread, but not dependent for the bread itself.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") That was the plan for the first enactment of the law—a plan which at the time all thinking men derided, and now all dis interested men denounced and ridiculed. The returns laid before the House during the last twenty years showed that since the law was passed we had been dependent on other countries for large supplies of corn, and in the last five years to the amount of 17,000,000 quarters of corn —(Hear, hear.)—and that, too, a supply not raised with a view to this country, but obtained under circum stances the most disadvantageous to us.—(Hear, hear.) During the thirteen years of the duration of the law passed in 1815, there was actually imported from foreign countries no less than thirty millions' worth of corn for the consumption of the people of this country. Therefore - he did not expect that the advocates for monopoly in the home market, would allege a sufficiency of home supply as an excuse—at least, he would not expect such an excuse from any man having a re gard for truth and reputation. Whether this soil could or could not produce enough to support the peo ple of Great Britain, he could not pretend to say ; but the fact stood upon record, that it bad not produced enough, and that they had been obliged to import more corn from foreign countries during the last thirty years than they had ever done before. He had considered what were the other excuses urged in support of this law, and having listened with attention to them all, he must say that they had been every one shown to be futile and totally insufficient. He had heard from Honourable Gentlemen oppposite, on pre vious occasions, when this subject was discussed, that those connected with the ownership of lands had no interest in their continuance, but they supported the corn-laws because those dependent on them (the landowners) had a direct interest in their maintenance. It was now, however, ascertained beyond a doubt, that neither the farmer, nor the farmer's labourer, nor any other class in the community, derived any benefit from these laws, except the landowners them selves.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) No Member of any agricultural county would now, he thought, ven ture for a moment to urge this flimsy pretext, so pal pably absurd, as any reason for the continuance of the corn-laws ; no Hon. Member would now stand up and say the farmers or their labourers had any in terest whatever in it.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The interest of these classes in these laws, had been fully and fairly inquired into by an active body, and it was ascertained upon the most searching investigation that so far from the corn-laws being of any service to them, there was no thing would benefit the farmer and the agricultural labourer more than their total and immediate repeal. The claims of no class had been more prominently or more frequently protruded upon the public than those of the farmers. But if there was any doubt that corn-laws were injurious to the farmer he (Mr. Villiers) would undertake to bring before the bar of that House, or before a Committee, such a body of evidence as would leave no doubt on the subject. For the last 30 years the farmers had boon, of all men, the most embarrassed. But what had these corn-laws given to these classes ? Why it was notorious that they had derived no benefit from it.—(Hear, hear.) There was such competition that it excluded the farmer from the slightest advan tage from the cora-laws. The farmer had been duped and deceived by the promises of the corn laws.—(Hear, hear.) The landlords had told them that they would insure him a certain price for his corn; and what had been the result ? Why, that he had been deluded and deceived. As to the exemptions that had been procured for the farmer in the payment of taxes, there was not a land lord in the House who did not know that they contributed to swell the rent of the land owner.—(Hear, hear.) The Members of that House dare not .call a single farmer before them and ask him whether what they had done in that House as they said for him had been at all to his benefit. Whatever relief they had procured for the farmer through Parliament, only swelled the rent of the landowner.—(Hear, hear.) The farmers held their land not for the in terest of themselves or the community but the landlords. He would venture to say, from the informa tion he had received, that net a Member in that House would dare to get up and say the corn-law was for the benefit of the farmers, and that it existed for their interests. He defied Honourable Members to say that the law was conti nued for such purposes. But then it was said it was for the labourer's interests that the price of food should be high. There was a volume before them _produced by the la bours of a Committee of that House, which effec tually disproved that assertion. No man in the face of that volume could dare to rise and say that these laws were for the advantage of the labourer. Their mouths were all stopped—they were closed by the evidence of their own Committee. This was an authority which they did not dare dispute. That evidence proved that no one could be lower in the scale ofcivilisation than the agricultural labourer; so much so indeed that he had become so depraved as to be almost placed out of the pale of civilization. Scarcely a day passed that they did not read in the leading journals of the country discussions as to the cause of their dis affection. The "papers were full of what were called their crimes, but which, in reality, were caused by their distresses.:He said:again, that no man would dare to rise and plead the advantage of the labourer as the excuse of the corn-laws. His Hon. Friend the Member for Stock port, by his motion at the beginning of the session, had prevented them from using that argument. Did they dare assent to that motion; did they dare run the risk of calling a single farmer or labourer to support what they asserted? That motion was a fair one, and to the point, and they were afraid to call their own tenants before them to meet it. Was there ever such an instance of men shrinking from inquiry, simply because they dared not meet it? He did not expect then that either the farmer or the labourer would be brought forward again as the- ground of maintaining the corn-laws. They bad read to-day in the- leading journal of the country a statement, that wherever the old practice of allowing the peasant to buy his corn cheap was pursued in Suffolk, there property was safe; wherever, in fact; the corn-law was virtually repealed, there property was safe. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ferrand) who, he un derstood was going to move an amendment to his resblu tion, meant to prove, probably, that the high price of food was a benefit to the people. lie would ask the Honourable Gentleman how it was that the agricultural labourer was always contented when food was low, and discontented when corn was dear. There was no an swer to that.—(Hear.) He defied them to answer. He said that when the price of food was low the agricultural labourers were contented—when the price was high they were discontented, and the peace of the country was en dangered.— (Cheers.) He asked the gentleman who had thought it decent to give notice of an amendment upon his (Mr. V.'s) motion—(Oh, oh, and Hear, hear)—to re ply to that statement.—(Cheers.) He would read the Hon. Gentleman a letter. Mr. FERRAND—And I will read you another. Mr. VILLIERS would read a letter from a magistrate of an agricultural county, Buckinghamshire, who was no supporter of his (Mr. Villiers') views, nor a member of the Anti-Corn-law League. What was tha account that magistrate, who was a C onserva ti ve , gave o f th e pea santry of his: county. His letter was addressed to the farmers of Buckinghamshire.—(The Hon. Gentleman read the letter, which was to the effect that he saw with pain the condition of the labourers, their damp, in wholesome, crowded cottages. He saw men who tra versed the whole day from farmer to farmer in search of employment, returned broken-hearted and desponding, without the means of procuring food for their famishing wives and children. It was only the charity , of the farmers and their wives, or of the poor who had but their last dish of potatoes to share, that such families were kept alive until they could obtain a ticket of ad mission to the workhouse.) Mr. FERRAND—What does he say of the poor-law? Mr. VILLIERS—That was the letter of a magis trate of Buckinghamshire, a purely agricultural county ; that was the state of the peasantry after thirty years of protection.—(Cheers.) Did they think that there was no other county in the same state ? He had a letter from a farmer in another county, who said that he could bear testimony to the wretched condition of the labourers, but the farmers could pay no more wages ; and in his own parish there were hundreds of labourers with families, who received only 7s. a week. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ferrand) had put a question to him respecting the poor-law, but did he know that the cost of supporting a man and woman, with a family of three children, cost 17s. a week in the workhouse. The farmer proceeded to state that the labourers were far worse off than the people in the workhouse, but the farmers could give them no higher wages, owing to the high rents. All the exemptions that the farmers enjoyed were only intended to benefit the landlords.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Villiers) would ask the gentleman who was to move the amendment (Mr. Ferrand) to avow himself at once as the friend of the landlord, not of the labourer, and as a truckler to the dominant party in the country. —(Cheers.) The Right Honourable Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade did not like the arguments which were used by his supporters. The Right Hon. Gentleman had thrown out doubts as to whether the importation of foreign corn would not dis place a portion of the agricultural labour of the country. But the Right Hon. Gentleman had never told them in what manner that displacement was to take place. Had he done so, that would have implied some knowledge of agri cultural subjects ; and, as well as he recollected, the agri tural knowledge of the Right Hon. Gentleman was not held in very high esteem by the agriculturists of the country. The Hon. Member for Sussex had imputed to the Right Hon. Gentleman such a want of knowledge in agricultu ral matters, that he said the Right lion. Gentleman could not distinguish an ox from a plough.—(Loud laughter, and cries of " No," from the Ministerial benches.) He stood corrected. The expression was, " that the Right Hon. Gentleman could not distinguish an ox from a donkey."--(Renewed laughter, and Opposi tion cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had assumed that there would be a displacement of agricultural pro duce consequent upon th e i m p or t a ti on of foreign corn, which would lead to a displacement of agricultural labour, but the Right Hon. Gentleman had given no data—he had merely jumped to a conclusion—but in order to some to that conclusion, it was necessary to go through a certain series of operations. He did not tell them the price at which labour would be displaced. He supposed that labour could only be displaced by land being thrown out of cultivation. He had not stated the price which would render cultivation so unprofitable as to throw land out of cultivation. He had given them no data whatever on the subject. He could not understand by what means laud was to be thrown out of cultivation. It was a delusion to suppose that if a little spirit, a little science, and a little economy, were exhibited in the cultivation of the land, that cultivation could not be made profitable. If the Right Hon. Gentleman had paid a little attention to the experiments of Earl Ducie on the subject, he would have seen his error. That Noble Lord had stated it as the result of his experiments that the apprehension that the importation of corn from foreign countries would throw land out of cultivation, was unfounded, because he found that by carefully cultivating land himself without paying rent, he could produce corn at a lower price than it could be produced in foreign countries. Of course rent made a difference.—(Derisive laughter from the Ministerial benches, met by cheers from the Opposition.) Gentlemen opposite were amused, and he had no doubt every one of them would make a speech on the subject, but they should recollect that his argument was now merely directed to the assertion of the Right Hon. Gen tleman, that the importation of foreign corn would throw land out of cultivation. Now before land was thrown out of cultivation, they would have no rent, and before they could assume that it would displace labour, they must show that land could not be cultivated profitably by allotments to the labourer. Now there were many instances in which land had been profitably occupied in allotments, which could not be profitably occupied in any other manner. He did not expect that the Right Hon. Gentleman would repeat that argument • but a more wonderful argu men t s till h a d b een shadowed forth by the Right Hun. Gentleman about the beginning of the session. He said they should be careful how they meddled in this matter, lest the owners of land should become the occupiers. He was actually alarmed lest the landowners of the country should oust the farmers, and take upon themselves to become industrious.— (Cheers and laughter.) Ile did not think there was much fear of the owners of the land becoming industrious. The farmer's life was a hard one. He had to be up early in the morning. Now there was no fear that the landowners would cease to lead a life of idleness, but none of these were arguments to show that labour would be displaced by a repeal of the corn-laws. On the contrary, he believed that by a repeal of the corn laws manufactures would be en couraged, and the demand for labour increased. The agricultural labourer, even now, went to the manufac turing districts for employment. Mr. Porter stated that upwards of three hundred and sixty thousand labourers had gone from the agricultural to the manu facturing districts, and if it had not been for manufac tures, every one of these labourers would have been com peting with the agricultural labourers in the rural districts. Did not the Right Hon. Gentleman think that if those improvements in agriculture were to take place, of which so much had been said, they would not have the same effect as the importation of foreign corn ? It was now said that the time had come when the greatest quantity should be obtained for the lowest prices. In his (Mr. Villiers's) opinion, the Right Hon. Gentleman should argue as much against improvements as importation. Another curious document had appeared—it had been said the agricultural classes bore a greater proportion to the population than any other classes. Now, what was the fact ? Why, that this class was only one seventh of the population, according to the publications that had taken place. The fact was that these pretences could no longer exist. and then they were brought back to the question in volved in this law, and that was, whether the community were to have a full supply of food at the cheapest rate or not ?—(Hear, hear.) Did not this law. he would ask, tend to produce the defective supply that existed at present. He stood there to assert the rights of the people to have as much food as possible at the cheapest rate. That was the right of the people. He threw upon the supporters of the corn-laws the onus of proving that the present corn-laws admitted of an abundant and steady supply of corn in the home market, that they made food more accessible to the poor man. That was the point they were called upon to discuss—(Hear)—that was what they had to prove ; they must convince the House that there was no injustice in the present system before they could eall upon the House to sup port it. He agreed with Lord G renv ill e , w h o, when this law was about being imposed, declared in his place in the House of Lords that nothing could justify them in tampering with the subsistence of the people but the most imperative necessity. He maintained that the present law forbade an abundant supply of food when most needed, and thwarted the designs of Divine Provi dence, who made different seasons and different climates, and so ordered that no nation might be wholly de pendent on itself.—(Hear, hear.) Food was power, and those who supplied the food might be said; to a great ex tent, to make the people dependent on them, and have them under their control. Why should any body of men be permitted to have control over any other class in this country? but so it was. Those who supported the present corn-laws should at all events show some great and solid advantages from them to counter-balance the numerous evils which they entailed. This was just the time for the House to enter into the consideration of this all-impor tant question. Some time ago great sympathy had been manifested for the condition•of the working classes; and Hon. Members affectea the greatest horror at the means which many of them were obliged to resort to for the means of obtaining a livelihood. Now, he invited those Hon. Members to investigate into the causes of this distress. Hon. Members, on the occasion referred to, complained that the people were obliged to work too long and too hard—that they were without the means of educating their children—that they were compelled to neglect the domestic duties of life, and that they had sunk lower in the scale of civilisation than the inhabi tants of other countries. He (Mr. Villiers) now asked them to enter into the inquiry whether this excessive competition had not been induced by the want of food? —(Hear, hear.) How earnestly and how heartily the landowners wished for a plentiful harvest. Well, in that wish the whole community concurred with them; but he believed that the wish on the part of the agricultu rists was not unaccompanied with other associations-- such, for instance, as that in a cheap year there would be plenty of work—that the necessities of the labouring classes would not be so pressing, whilst in bad years there were associations of an opposite character. An inquiry into the physical condition of the people had been proposed. He admitted that the destitution was great and extensive, but thought it could be in a great measure traced to the corn-laws. Suppose London were barricaded with a sliding scale, and that no more corn would be allowed for the consumption of the citizens but that which was grown within its precincts—that Gros venor-square and all the other squares were turned into cultivation—as a consequence of this state of things the condition of the poor would be daily growing worse— competition for employment would be increasing, and wages decreasing. Now, in such a condition, would it not be accounted the greatest hypocrisy if the proprietors of these squares—the advocates of protection and exclusion—complained of the destitute state of the poor, and yet refused to re move the barricade of the scliding-scale, the main cause of that distress ?—(Hoar, hear.) The question of the repeal of the corn-laws did not merely affect the mill owners, or the manufacturers, but the whole com munity. He said before that they had had all the ad vantages that experience could give them. It was so ; they had within the last ten years four years of scarcity and four of plenty. From 1832 to 1836 corn was abundant. From 1831 to 1842 corn was scarce and dear. During the four years of plenty the average cost of wheat was 465. a quarter; during the four years of scarcity the average price was 665. a quarter. It ap peared from the calculations of Mr. M'Cullcch that during the cheap years the people consumed more and paid less by one-tenth than during the dear years. It was found that, during the cheap years, the people consumed seventeen millions of quarters, and, during the dear- years, fourteen millions. In the cheap years, the people paid 164,000,000 h for 1 7,000,000 of quarters ; in the dear years, 194,000,0001. for 14,000,000 of quarters. Mr. M'Culloch calculated the agricultural produce of this country at 194,000,000/. a year. Thus, it should be recollected th a t great sacri fices w ere made in sending the bullion out of the country to purchase foreign corn, a practice which had seriously endangered public credit, disarranged the monetary affairs of this country, and the ultimate effect of these embarrassments was increase of poor-rates, increase of taxes, increase of crime, and increase of destitution. In 1840, the Queen, in her speech from the Throne,deplored the miseries of the people and the distress so great and prevalent in 1841 ; the Minister of the day came down to that House declaring that he saw no other remedy for the alleviation of this distress than the re mission of the taxes upon food, and on the prime neces saries of life. For this declaration the Whigs were turned out of office by those who had an interest in mo nopoly. The Archbishop of Canterbury, through his clergy, solicited alms for the relief of this distress, and finally Sir Robert Peel came down to the House with his Bill for the amendment of the corn-laws and of the tariff; and declared that the taxes upon the necessaries of life had reached the maximum, and that if they would main tain public credit they must reduce the price of food. The harvest of 1842 proved to be good. The supply from abroad was abundant, and the people had enough of bread. Under the existing system pauperism must in crease. In the year 1837 the amount expended for the relief of the poor was four millions. In 1843 the amount was 5,200,000 L The number of paupers in the country when the distress commenced was one million. At the commencementof the present year the number amounted to 1,500,000. What was the amount of albs-bodied paupers who were unable to find employment in come- elli ° quence of the distress arising from bad harvests ? In t great improvement, and that the circumstance s , isr 1842 the numb er was 407 .570, while in 1836 the number which land was now h e ld was not' avourable ton,of was only 300,000. In the large towns during the years of overeent. He had particularly referred to thisr dy of dear prices the increase in the amount of poor rates was the subject, because he had anticipated that the 51 e4 ;ote very great. In four years the increase was 134 per cent. organic chemistry, and the lectures now bsing s b' ill in Manchester, 52 per cent. in Bolton, 30 per cent. in ; were likely to supply the deficiency of past tit: e er l e et Oldham, and 159 per cent. in Sheffield. Ho n . Gentlemen had pointed to those necessities simply for th .P,.".",tet might attribute this distress to over-speculation or over- of shoeing that great seeritices were required U . " . ,011 production, but, unfortunately, that distress was uni- part of the landlords, in order to :II versal. The increase in the amount of pauperism ass the tenant to effect the necessary iinproverae.n e w i o le hardly less in the agricultural districts than it was in the feared that those sacrifices were not likely to b . , sf , r manufacturing. He held in his hand returns of the in- If the repeal of these laws took place, instea d `, l , t ee crease of the pauperism in the agricultural districts, and peering at the hustings as the serf of the landl 1 74 it would be found that in fifteen of the chief agricultural tenant wnuld appear there to exercise his inde e d counties the increase of pauperism had been 21 per cent. judgment in the choice of a representative. He D ce tbe Such a state of things must necessarily affect the revenue. the custom of granting leases had diminished 1 . 1 "_ lo st It would appear, from the Parliamentary returns made passing of the Reform Bill, and there was not t co r in 1842, that one of the Excise taxes, which was ex- likelihood o: the custom increasing. Such was theftoed, petted to yield 78,400/., only yielded 58,000/. In Oc- petition for land that the landlord was eomP a ss ible tuber, 1842, th e revenue o b tained from the Excise was safe. He was sure of o bt a i n i ng t h e highest P e e t el d 0 733,4001. less tha n i n 1841. There was no part of this price for his land, and his rent was safe, because I! _ hi d. , subject which deserved more of the attention of that' priority orclaim over other creditors. Further, t . n t e eoe o House than the effect which these taxes on food had lords of this country were, generally speaking, onl) hi e ells upon crime. In 1836 the committals had fallen to 20,000, for life, and they had but little motive therefore tobedeoj having been 22,000 in 1834. What had been the increase capital in the improvement of their land. He cr ifieet in those years which had been under the influence of dear that landlords would never make the necessary sa h i ed prices ? In 1836 the c o mm i tta l s were 20,000, while in until they saw that their i n t erest cons i s t e d in their low° 1842 they had risen to 31,00 0. Actually an increase of raising the greatest amount o f produce at the o ld 11,000 in the dear y ears over the cheap ones. Then, price. If protection l a w s were revealed, the!teiel of with respect to emigr a ti on . Th e average amount of have the landlords competing for tenants, iel. i i i eo emigration during the c h ea p years was 70,000, but in tenants competing for landlords ; they would s " t heir 1841 it was 116,000, an d i n 18 42 i t h ad reached 128,000. lookin g f or men o f s kil l and capital to cultivate aioni He said there was no i ns t ance i n w hi ch it could be shown land. Ile was bound to admit that the farniersf ore pi that the worki ng c l asses were not well off during the parts of the country were no less reluctant t scelf continuance of che a p p r i ces o f f oo d . He would refer leases than landlords were to grant them, but it Weetest the House t o th e o pi n i on o f t h e l ate Lord Liverpool, because there was such uncertainty in the Pi bat expressed in th e y ear 1822 , w h en t h e agricultural body system.—(Hear, hear.) lie ventured to "I' l ' 4 complained to Parliament of the existence of great there was no intelligent farmer in the 't ool * distress amongst them. Lord Liverpool onthat occasion, who would not sooner take free trade, al b pro. in the House of Lords, said that lowness of price was nied by a lease, than continue a tenant at will with sure to benefit the working classes. The existing low raises of protection which were never realised. -- ,.' ee hed prices, he said, had produced great benefit in the large They were now, therefore, in this position. T u 'for . towns, by causing a fall in the poor-rates. That opinion started with a promise to depend on this countri, t he,. was expressed in the year 1822, at a time when it was supply of food, and they were bound to admit tba t w iel said that unparalleled distress, existed in the agricultural had not succeeded. He wanted to know thee h t ioh be districts. He (Mr. Villiers) would ask then the Hon. ground there was for mistrusting the system, * „ i deal Member for Knaresborough how he could hope to advocated—the system of having the supply a_eP o j o blo benefit the working classes by increasing the price of upon competition ? Why the Right H un o we' food? He (Mr.Villiers)would refer the House to a report Gentleman at the head of the Government how which had been made by a Committee of that House, times went out of his way to prove lei it appointed to inquir e i n t o t h e state of the agricultural entirely they might rely upon that pl , in' f t had districts. It was a report which the Right Honourable every case except that of the issue of money o tieb Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, had been said, indeed, that the effect of the s y stelli trf °f himself drawn up. In that report it was stated that the he proposed would be to drain the coati,. w oe evidence which had been adduced before the Committee all its bullion, but the experience of the last fice o oll established beyond doubt the fact that great improve- showed that the exports of manufactures to c onti . a rts 0 meat had taken place in the condition of the agricul- corn-growing countries had increased, whilst exr oid tr tural labourer. This was in the year of low prices. other countries had diminished. He could not sv i n ieo He (Mr. Villiers) was ready to take the authorities ferring to the objection that his measure was ton n v id eol which had been so often quoted by Hon. Gentlemen op- He wanted to know who it was that said so. P stic k bf posite in the discussions on the Factory Bill. He was the majority in that House say that they woul d bad ready to take those authorities to show how beneficial the law as it at present stood ? Would he then Ka ye so oll. low prices were to the health and morals of the working any chance of conciliating them by proposing a ot the population. The Noble Lord (Ashley) in his speeches moderate fixed duty?—(Hear, hear.) Would n vete on the Factory Bill had frequently referred to the same objections be made to both proposals ? at writings of Dr. Hawkins, and Monsieur Bellamie, and he were many gentlemen in that House who said tin; if i tss (Mr. Villiers) was ready to quote from those authorities they objected to was a regular trade in corn ;an ing to show how detrimental scarcity and dearness were to were the case there could be no hope Of in d u if• the physical and moral condition of the people. Both them to agree to a moderate file d adlai s s these authorities declared it to be their opinion, that Whenever they could bring themselves t ° ,oo' wherever scarcity of food existed, there also would be a that tl-ey were not justified in restricting the su o l. fre prevalence of typhus fever. In fact, this was the opinion food, they might be expected to he as anxious r e R i g ht of almost every person who had written on the subject, trade in corn as any other class of society. 11 ) 1. VP° who was capable of judging. In the Manchester In- Hon, Gentleman the President of the Board ( to e ffect firmary, during the dear years, 196 more inmates died had observed, the other day, that if they wished than in the cheap years. From returns which he had any change in commerce they should do it e"`',, to '" obtained from sick clubs, it appeared that 25 per cent. and he agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman P - . Ger more died during dear years than cheap ones.—(The evils arising from uncertainty. The Right 1.1 °,', 1 0 the Hon. Gentleman then read from pamphlets, which had tleman had triumphantly referred to the fact t t u eco ee been published by Dr. Allison, of Edinburgh, and Dr. consequence of repealing the duty on wool had oin eed i Fitzgerald, of Clonmel, to show the . pernicious improved price in the market ; yet all the a r g e , bs° effects of scarcity and dearness of price. In which were used against free trade in et gal the opinion of these writers, years of scarcity been urged against free trade in wool- . a , di were always accompanied by a corresponding amount other measures exhibited a similar result. , ` i i WI of typhus fever. He had written to Dr. Hun- not know any instance in which more capital i ..'„ e t hat ° ter, of Bloomsbury, for his opinion on the subject, invested, on the faith of an existing law. than I ". ,hoaa and he stated that he had had an extensive practice for the beer duties. No consideration whatever iv a ' re ssoe nearly twenty years, and had seen the disease of typhus for those vested interests. Nor did he see onYes now fever in all its degre es of malignity. There were iiume- why all should nut be prepared to make sacrifices keel! rous predisposing causes, such as want of cleanliness the great public welfare required it. He did no t wita i and pure air, but nothing could equal that great predis- that the change in that case had been attendedr Oa posing agent—a scarcity of nutritious food. This alone evil, although, perhaps, at first some tiers° ; s va carried off tens of' thousands in a year. 1\ henever food suffered from it. Again, in respect to the esin i , le! was scarce there typhus fever prevailed. Dr. Hunter of machinery. When it was proposed to repeal 4 eel went on to say that he had known a family of nine per- for preventing that exportation, many sons who resided in a pure country district, and these engaged in manufactures opposed the repel"! n islity persons were all attacked with typhus fever, which ground that they had invested their capital I n .. c beelt of those repeat th arose entirely from a want of proper nutritious food. factures in the faith of the law, and that, if , m %edfu' This was the opinion of Dr. Hunter. It might be asked, were exported, they would lose the foreign li e "' what had that to do with th e quest i on, as it was not the their manufactures. bad bee n object of the corn-la w t o pro d uce th i s scarcity. He Mr. BORTHWICK—But that measure ~, wanted, then, to knew what was the object of the corn- eighteen years in progress.—(Hear, and a laugn . .! t hief law.—(Hear, hear.) If it was not intended to Mr. VILLIERS—But the corn.law had he e : r disi produce scarcity, he wished to know why the years in progress.—(Hear, hear.) The people ° I.tice of opposite intention had never been avowed ? It contented with the law for permitting the exP n4 „gaie t ' s was precisely at the moment when the people were machinery, and there had been great complaintso. lie well fed by the abundant home supply, that the agricul- it, but he did not think that it had done anYZ ecc isial '', turists always beset that House with their complaints. thought thrt everything which promoted the ' 1 1 , , eitt 4 How was it that in all their inquiries the question wae, exchange of products must be beneficial.---We a dee cos; how can we raise the price ? They were frequently When the abolition of the turnpike trusts was Un err so,l found attempting to diminish the quantity by lessening sideration, it was alleged that a great number of e faith the breadth of land sown ; and in 1836, when corn was had invested their property in these trusts unto' ~ ons; cheap, the people well fed and contented, the rates di- of the Acts of Parliament. But the change wa,' it tv , minishing, and employment abundant, the agriculturists dered necessary for the public advantage, ° i n t, cid! . were complaining, and asking how they were to remedy made. There was another change to which " ..or .lat . this state of things.—(Hear, hear.) He said then the attention of the House. That was the old nu, ete, that the tendency, of the corn-laws was to produce —(Hear, hear, from Mr. Ferrand and otherse/„. o ld scarcity, and scarcity was the cause, as he had shown, of thought that was a case in point. He believed s i . " pa' want, disease, death, and crime.—(llear, hear.) How poor-law was prejudicial to the people themsell' e ene cty was it that the most distinguished of the persons who they did not think so.—(Hear, hear.) Their e: s rwer.; opposed the law when it was passed, charged it on the dons rested upon it—their habits and characte rs their advocates of the law that they wanted to produce scar- formed by it. But the change was made aga,_" t s litr e city ? How was it that Lord Grenville, whose language feelings—alear, hear)—a sudden and soniewu7 of th e lie had used in his resolutions, said that such was the gent change, utterly disregarding the feelitigs hea r.) purpose of the law, and that he therefore opposed it ? people who were the most concerned in it.—(Hea r, es ,, pee, r . It was denounced on the same grounds by others. The The House ought never to have passed the "% h ove_ respected father of the present Prime Minister denounced law without having first repealed the corn_ ool d be the law as oppressive on the people, and declared his be- (Cheers.) But in respect to this motion, be which aill', lief that it was only enacted in order to keep up the told again that there were vested interests 111 " 1 „t e corl , prices that prevailed during the war—that it was, in fact, be respected. Had they respected what the P s .evr . itie!t, a law for perpetuating what was in itself a great misfor- sidered their vested rights in the poor-law. fs---(`if the tu ne. He foretold that the agriculturists would even- hear.) Had they regarded the vested rights the tually suffer the most from it, and he verily believed that people when they passed the corn-law to ~h e r iot. the late Sir Robert Peel's prediction had been amply ful- price of bread in order to raise the fortunes nt,!„ no r filled. What were the riots ?—and at the time it was (Cheers.) Had they done anything to enable th e ; passed, did the working people believe then that the to meet the change in the poor-law?—(Hear , he ar) t. law was passed for their benefit ? Why did not the said the Hon. Gentleman, " but you " Government meet them with arguments instead of artil- Ferrand) " are going to conciliate the ri a e d h dli). .y_ r sitiu w Pb s P ; :l . "a , lery ?—(Hear.) Instead of doing so, they bore down ing the present corn-laws, for there is no otnr ciig t ,... 1 upon them with cannon. Was the state of opinion which you can gain their favour then by ePn u es o it. , 4 better now ? Only two years ago, the Hon. Member for law and assailing those who propose to rep t a d t w o, Somereetshire objected to the Right Hon. Gentleman's (Hear, hear.) There was another law, the made ' tariff, which was brought ill in the midst of great dis- against the abolition of which the same OPP e no w 0 tress, anti with the intention of relieving it. That Hon. made and upon the same grounds as wo o . o d t o . Member objected to the tariff, on the ground that it against the abolition of the corn-law. lie l ' o f e ftt` h y would diminish the price of food from the increased sup- he was able in this case to cite the authority ie ctett h o ply it would admit frotn the United States and else- man whose political conduct was not often rest mo p 4 Bon. • 0 where. He had read all the speeches at the meetings of c nsiderations of mere humanity. (The,,, r Pitt n i ,, i h the protection societies that had been lately held, and he then read an extract from a speech of -eu i i e. 141 " t e ee could not discover that they had any other object than debate upon the abolition of the slave tra an d rstae oe d that of increasing the price of food. Indeed, at a meeting Mr. Pitt declared that he "could not m ie b e all e i os held in the county of Surrey, one gentleman, of greater principle on which a few individuals should thei r courage than the rest, stated distinctly what all the to set up their interests against the rights andrieiP e a others meant. He said they were assembled there for of millions. He did not understand such a P s ,,,teln; be the purpose of advancing their own interest ; it was a plea for upholding so wicked so infamousl, -I ,houl u ith s their interest to make rood dear and scarce, and they why, for the sake of a few planters, thousand: Ile to e wore met there for that purpose. What other object doomed to perpe:ual and intolerable Mi se u r i t he O'lle could these laws have, when they were told of settlements barred the odious system, and he called 11 PL' o h t ion• o od and mortgages, and capital that had been invested in to rise with one voice and demand its au if he ; err land, as reasons for preserving them, except for the pur- admitted that he spoke with warmth, and h i e o°ol pose of obtaining a price for the produce that should speak otherwise he eould detest himself fu h r t be Woe enable the landlord to meet these obligations ? This was tion.") That declaration of Mr. Pitt ri , , f, len one th e o u what he wanted to prove to the House and to the to the present case.—(Hear, hear.) c i re d s of 6to o, • country. Yet, with all this protection, the state of agri- sidered the enormous mischief done to hundred . h sy tog culture was but a low one ; in what condition was it after sands, aye of millions, by the operation of a l f c oasr: s o f thirty years of protection ? They had it on the autho- he asked the House would it, for the sake o rmniP * test rity of more than one Member of that House, that the the interests of a few great men, abandon the gr e at state of agriculture was shamefully low. Then there the greatest advantage and refuse to redeem were the two Right Hon. Gentlemen, the head of her wrong?—(Cheers.) Majesty's G overnment, an d the Noble Lord the Secre- Mr. HAWES seconded the resolution- er o s ient et or tary of the Colonies, they had both read a sort of lecture Mr. FERRAND rose to move the el! id be ita tike on agriculture to the persons in their neighbourhood. which he had given notice. He said it wr i . s ) to l a ts el The Right Hon. Baronet said at the dinner at Tamworth sible for the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. V il ! e r inter ° the that they had met not for the protection, but the promo- the working classes think that he had th,el ir e yes ° bo dy tion of agriculture—that was the distinction—(Hear, view. The working classes had opened Or d that t b oo hear, and a laugh)---and that he regretted the practice projects of the Anti. Corn-law League , a t l ;, r ed 0° The of the country was not that of granting leases ; he said was so despised and detested, that they i . str icts• ee sed at:the same time that if any tenant of his should call on one public meeting in the manufacturing gist oll;gue him to grant one, he should hesitate a long time before working classes themselves were diametntoet"' 1 the ; 14 and he refused his request.---(Laughter.) lie also alluded to to a repeal of the corn-laws. Why did to boldaY inig ht another source of mischief to the farmer that arising go into the manufacturing districts, ~,a so, they 10 from the extensive preservation of game, and stated that broadly put the question ? If they d!" l ",,yertiu' e ,i n ion he had no hesitation in saying, if any tenant complained call upon the House to listen to thei r l sri tbeir7 e f e lly on this ground, he would give directions for the destruc- Manchester those who attempted to eXPr_7 os e sha,7, o had tion of hares and rabbits to the extent that should pre-. in the presence of the League were tv w er baeart o f the venthis experiencing any loss. All this was very laudable; treated. The Hon. Member for W ° '._ t he stat e ra a he read it for the purpose of showing the admission it read a letter from a landed proprietor ot, wou ld . wh i c h contained ; but, he would ask, had this example been agricultural poor, but he (Mr. Ferrana t i reatn eent wh ich followed in any one instance throughout Staffordshire ? letter from a working man, stating t he w Leagn e ',,t• that He had very great doubts of it. At the same dinner at he had received from the Anti-Corn - l a • stra ts Jae( magi • corn . which this was stated by the Right Hon. Baronet, Pro- was disgraceful to them and to the ,_.. A rl o- ~, gas fessor Buckland was present, and he declared that the town. On the 14th of Februaryt" l ` ra d e Ha% and agriculture of that district was very bad; that he had League held a meeting in the Free for stockrL o pen seen more thistles in a single field there than were to be chester, which the Hon. Member speech to `.'. get and in all Lincolnshire, and advised them to run down Colonel Thompson declared in their r ., he (31! • l i n g and have a look at the model farm of Earl Ducie, near to the public. On the 20th of Febru a ry an ti_n u ti th , Bristol. At another dinner the Noble Lord (Stanley) rand received a letter from a for the g n ot said that the farmers were only beginning to bestir made every inquiry he could vouch„ch could mid themselves, and mentioned the advantages to be derived (A laugh) --of the statements, which then eet w ezeher ° pea l° from tile draining, but said he should probably be told be denied. The Honourable as, whose .„ er elY that this was an expensive operation, and that a tenant a letter signed by six Pe r l icans anwhr eh could not undertake it. To this the meeting was said to he did not give affirming that a wor , es tion to th e by til, have vociferously responded with "Hear, hear."— rose in the meeting and put the __ as o iseu hoar , working Ij4.'''' (Laughter.) He alluded to long leases, and the passage man—" Is this a public meeting ', ik w e d og s at : 1 ; 0 the was received with marked applause, the meeting being policemen, who " rushed upon ' in hopes to get something more out of the Noble Lord —(Laughter)—dragged him rov h e i r m t t ie b n e .h f o e l n e s , j of, w he it r h e ou h t e on the subject of leases. But the Noble Lord floor and conveyed him to the said there were many other topics—(A laugh) was ' detained four hours, and thens , iO3. At 'to he sta discalpisprlgiedeuheb's:t A t i : e —on which he had to address them.—Laughter.) any accusation being made again n t ia u n At these meetings there always seemed to be ( some prac- Ferrand's) recommendation he man told him duct be' tical man present who generally commented on these Moore, a stipendiary was that e „ c f i d by L b° , speeches from Noble Lords and Hon. Gentlemen. On police had acted quite rightly. Was who wa s r - Mont" - this occasion a practical agriculturist named Neilson was coming a stipendiary magistrate , ,,, e Ron. . , _bou present, and he spoke strongly in favour of leases, and üblic money for public services?c t e i" h agricultqatitri: by it, against the conditions to which tenants were generally for Wolverhampton said that , f ment in agriculta thig ber magistrate, bound with respect to cultivating the estates. On the rers were derived of ern P l?find emploYm ent ro de il same subject they had also the authority of Sir H. free-trade ing orn, they V that he (Mr' For h t WA ° 1836 and 1837, and since ill the a t state in , ill Varney, and the Hon. Member for Bridgewater. These wages in manufactures."'uThe experiment w r e a s no hea rd speakers at agricultural dinners seemed all to agree in ereons and one particular, namely, that there were certain circum. the Hon. Member forSteocf t k h p e o u r week, b stances which utterly precluded improvement. The that there were hundreds a es which at niott but the clothe state - lion. Member then read an extract from a speech of manufacturing districts living on l Vs . Colonel Powell, stating that one thing alone was notes- having no other covering ea,, was that the haPP d i . . (gea r ; sary for agriculture, namely, fresh rents, corn rents, and they wore in . th , d , had been be l t' veer° speech of Sir Robe r t Pigott, President of the Worcester.. hear.) The ! manufacturers emany, and " h t t °r i lls° _ d t : long leases. He also read an extract from the which the agricultural were invite r , in tes t shire Agricultural Society, to the effect that if:the tenant Ytouse, for they sands of p h wer working•men ong — LetlV" had a fixed tenure in land it would be an advert:4 ;e both wealthy, but heard.—(Hear.) and whom they treated. , he truth' to tenant and landlord. There were :le, accounting for the . prosnenty or the Scotch farmer. He would not dare to other means of be t e Those men whom the w i t h boy would not wee ee .... e y Tn e Ilouse with any further extracts. talityw m h en en h th ad ey , It - 7roUld not be disputed, that agriculture was copal* of These foopreyneeadrsthpeeitir tmio=schteorognoxe v ia oh•