The Sun. — London, England, 1839-02-20 00:00:00

Kingst n-upon- Hull, and several place?. in Lincolnshire, against any alteration is the c,is'ing Corn-laws. Sir J TYRRELL presented a great number of petitions from Chelmsford, Saffron Walden, and various parishes in Essex, against any alteration in the Corn-laws ; also a petition from a gentleman who had been a Member of that House, praying for a fixcd duty on the importation of corn. The lion. Bart. was abiut to read the latter petition when he was inter rupted by The SPEAKER stating that he was out of order. SirJ. TYRRELL said if that %ia.4 the ease he would only ask for leave to bring up the petition. Mr. THORNILY presented a petition from some place in the county of Chester, .signed by one thousand eight hundred Persons, praying for an abolition of the duty on the importation of Corn. Mr. BROTHERTON, on presenting petitions from Chaw ley, and a variety of other places in Lancashire, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws, was about to commence a state ment relative te the contents of the petition, when he was inter rupted by Sir J. TYRRELL, who rose to order, and objected to these Statements being entered into by the Hon. Member for .;al - as he (Sir J. Tyrrell), had not been suffered to read the petition which he had presented. The SPEAKER said that if he had collected from what fell from the Honourable Member for Salford, that he was about to make any statements which were not strictly explanatory of the prayer of the petition, he should have in terfered. When he called the Hon. Member ( Sir J. Tyrrell) to order, that Hon. Member was about to read the petition. Nuw it was one of the oldest rules of the House, that Hon. Members should not read petitions presented by them ; if they were desirous of having them read, the proper course was to move that the Clerk do read them. Mr. BROTHERTON would never designedly depart from the rub of the House. The Hon. Member then stated the prayer of the petition, which was for the abolition of the Corn laws, which the petitioners stated were at variance with Christian principles and justice, and prayed for their repeal. Petitions against any alteration in the Corn-laws were then presented by Sir Eardley Wilmot, from 27 places in War wickshire; and by Mr. Bethel, from 22 places in the East Riding of Yorkshire. Petitions praying for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws were presented by Sir George Strickland from va rious places in the West Riding of Yorkshire ; and by Mr. El liott from Hawiek, from lioy, in the county of Roxburgh and from some other place, the name of which we could not catch. Mr. ROUND presented petitions from parishes in Essex against any alteration in the existing Corn-laws. Mr. SCHO L EF I ELD presented a petition from Birmingham, signed by 14,000 persons, praying to be heard at the Bar of the liet.se in support of the allegations in the petition, and a simi lar petition from Stourbridge. Mr. ROWLAND HILL presented 22 petitions from pa rishes in the county of Salop, against any alteration. • Similar petitions were presented by Mr. Forrester, from Ross, in the county of Hereford; by Mr. D'lsraeli, from Maidstone : Mr. Blackburn, from Warrington : Mr. Gaskel, from Wenlock - ; Sir C. Burrell, from Shipley, West Grinstead, and several other places in the county of Sussex. IRISH MUNICIPAL BILL. Mr. - LYTTON presented a petition from Coleraine (as we understood), against the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill. LICENSED VICTUALLERS. Mr. C. BURRELL presented another petition from certain Lizensed Victuallers, complaining of the losses sustained by their being answerable for the goods left at their houses by their customers. DUTY ON FRUITS. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from certain in hab:tards of liramber in Sussex, complaining that the duties on foreip fruits Nv ere sa low that their trade must be given up, and praying the Mousse to restore the former duties. ANTI-CORN-LAW PETITIONS. Mr. ORD presented a petition praying for modification or total repeal of the Corn-laws, from the district he represented. - PRO-CORN-LAW PETITIONS. Lord ARLINGTON presented petitions from parishes in the county of Salop, against a re p ea l o f t h e C orn -l aws . Sir C. B. VERE presented 55 petitions most respectably igned in support of the present Corn-laws. Mr. 'DIJC DALE presented 34 petitions from parishes in Warwickshi-e, in favour of the present Corn-law. Lord .NORIZES presented petitions from parishes in North amptonshire., Warwickshire, and Oxfordshire, against any altera tion in the Corn-laws. Petitions against any alteration of the Corn-ltws were pre sented by Mr. Hanley, from Boston and 103 other pari,hcs in Lincoln ; by Mr. Plumiree, from IS parishes in Kent ; by Sir Win• Young, from Buckingham ; by Mr. Hodges, from four parishes in Kent ; and by Mr. G. Palmer, - from Essex : anti praying fur a total repeal of the Corn-laws, by Mr. Philipotis, from the Mayor and Corporation of Gloucester; by Mr. Wilshire, from Yarmouth ; by Mr. Finch, from West Bro.nwich and 'Walsall ; by Mr. Mark Phillips, from 4,330 bandloom weavers of Manchester, who coniolained they were compelled to work 13 hours a day without being able- to procure the necessaries of life, in consequence of the high price of bread—by the same Hon. Member 23 petitions from the difrersnt trades of Manchester and Salford, signed by seventeen thousand three hundred and sixty-six persons ; by Mr. WarbartAm,- signed by 13,000 inhabitants of Bridport ; by'Air Alderman Cop , land, from a place in Stafford, in the prayer of which he could not concur ; and by Mr. Hawes, from Caoil:el-w e ll. • Petitions aqainst any alterations in the C orn -l aws were pre s',ate•d by Mr. 'Thornhill, from Huntingdon ; by Mr. W. Denison, from Farnham,-in Surrey, stating that any change in the Corn laws would by :tie ruin of the agriculturists, in which sentiment her cot:curt-cc; ; by Lord G. Somerset; by Colonel Itolleston, frwai the natttv of _Nottingham, and also from the manufac bras end .•,:toplzcepers of the town of Nottingham ; which lag petition stated that the only effect of withdrawing the prot:ctiati . feoia the agriculturists would be to lower wages ; ‘ , tat l by i‘lr. iiellowes from 25 parishes in the county o f H un • tingdon, 6 :l' H. FLEETWOOD presented a petition from. Preston, s!gn2tl by 10,000 inhabitants, and praying to be heard by Counsel at. the Bar. The Hon. Baronet stated that the petition et:attained some statements relative to obiervations made a few days :12,-o by the Noble Lord the .Member for North Lanca shire, but as that Noble Lord was not in his place, be would Anhear further allusion to them. rotitions were also presented by Mr. Fielden, from Oldham ;. and by Sir B. Hall, from Trowbridge: from St.. Pancras, signed by 4,000 persons ; and also from Greenwich. Petitions auainst any alteration in the present Corn-laws were presented by Mr. Derby, from Hastings, and parishes in Finning, from Portsea ; by Mr. Ackland, f. - oat eighteen parishes in Somerset; by Mr. Sergeant Jack son. from Carlin , and Tipperary ; and by Colonel Sibthorp, from different parishes in Lincoln. • Lord SANDON presented a petition from the merchants of Liverpool, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Petitions to.the same effect were presented br Mr. Bennett from several pari , thes in Wiltshire; by Mr. W. Duncombe, from fifteen -parishes in the North Riding, and four parishes in the West Riding, of Yorkshire ; and by Mr. Eaton, from eight parishes in. the county of Cambridge. Mr. F.- HOWARD presented a petition from Carlisle, signed by 1,300 persons, praying to he heard at the bar of the House. The LORD ADVOCATE presented a petition from Leith, for the total repeal. Similar petitions were presented by Mr. Kinnaird, from Perth ; by Mr. Hindley, from Warri ng t on , sigued by four thousand seven hundred persons ; by Mr. Smith, from Norwich ; by Mr. J. Duncombe, from Clerkenwell, with 2,000 signatures, and by Sir C. Lemon, from Truro. Mr. CRESSW ELL presented a petition from Liverpool, signed by 25,000 persons, praying for the repeal of the Corn laws. The petitioners stated that they had been converted by the arguments of the manufacturers of Manchester. Petitions in favour of the present system of Corn-laws were presented by Lord A. Paget ; by Mr. Heatheote, principally signed •by labouring men, and particularly against the fixed duty ; by Mr. Hogg, from seven pa rishes in Yorkshire ; by Captain Alsager, from Croydon ; by Mr. Grote, one from Epsom, signed by 350 persons, and another from Chipping Barnett; by L or d W ors l ey . f rom places in Lincolnshire : by Sir James Graham, from two divi sions of the county of Cumberland, signed by 200 landholders; by Mr. Cayley, from places in Yorkshire ; petitions in favour of the present Corn-laws were also presented from several pa rishes in Cambridgeshire ; and by Lord Hoth am , f rom Y or k . Petitions for the repeal of the Corn-laws were presented by Mr. Clay, from the 'lower Hamlets, emanating from a public meeting, and signed by 26,286 persons (Dr. Lushington sup ported the prayer of this petition) ; by Mr. Ellis, from the city of Coventry, agreed to at the Coacty Hall, and signed by the Mayor on behalf of the meeting; by Mr. Tancrcd, from Banbury, praying the House to make full inquiry, and receive evidence with a view to the alteration in the Corn-laws. WINDOW TAX. Mr. CLAY presented a petition from Spitalficlds, nume rously signed by householders, principally weavers, complain ing that the Window Tax pressed severely upon them in their humble circumstances, although scarcely felt by the rich. Mr. R. PERGUSSON obtained leave to bring in a Bill connected with general improvement. Petitions ;;ere presented for a repeal of the Core-laws, by the A ttorney-General, from the Chamber of Commerce of Edinburgh ; by the Earl of Surrey, from several places in Sussex; by Mr. Hume, from a parish in Ayrshire; Stone ' haven, in Kinearoinshire ; and Langfold, in Dumfriesshire ; by Mr. C. Wood, from Halifax, signed by 5,000 inhabitants ; by Lord Morpeth from Burleieh, Hetherden, Bean Park, and s( coral other places in the WeSt Riding of Yorkshire ; and aga:ust any alteration in the present system by Lord Ashley, from several places in Surrey; by Sir C. Knightly from three pa rishes in Northamptonshire; by Lord Mahon and Viscount Inge;:ie from Hertford; and by Lord Stanley from Lancashire. CANTERBURY GAOL. Mr. CHARLES LUSHINGTON begged to call the atten tion of the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department to the following passage, at page 17 of the second report of the Inspectors of Prisons, which was as follows :—" Canterbury City Gaol and House of Correc tion. It is discreditable to the Corporation of Canterbury that no prayers are read, or religious service performed, in this prison, in which there have been in the course of one year no less than eighty-six prisoners confined, and twenty-nine were in custody at onetime. A clergyman residing in Canterbury used formerly to give his gratuitous attendance on Sundays, to read prayers, but his benevolent visits have for some time been dis continued." Ile wished to ask the Noble Lord if he had adopted, or meant to adopt, any measures by which to remedy this neglect on the part of the Corporation of Canter bury, and the indifference manifested by the Clergy of the Cathedral City of Canterbury, to the spiritual destitution of the prisoners in 91103t1 - 011.-( Hear, hear. ) Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I have not taken any measures, nor am I aware that I could take any meaures effectual as to the evil which he has pointed out. I certainly agree with the report of the inspectors that it is discreditab! e t o the Cor poration of Canterbury that there should be no religious instruc tions to these prisoners ; but I am not prepared to say it is cre ditable to the Clergy of that city. THE NAVY. Sir EDWARD CODRINGTOI gave notice of a motion for Tuesday, the 12th of March, relating, we believe, to a sub ject connected with the Navy. TURNPIKE TRUSTS. Mr. MACKINNON gave notice of a motion for Tuesday, the sth of March, for a Select Committee to consider the most eff4etttal means of securing the investments of Turnpike Trusts. FIRE INSURANCE DUTY. Colonel SIBTIIORP gave notice that on Tuesday the sth of March, he would call the attention of the House to the propriety of the immediate reduction of the odious duty upon fire insurances. CANADA. tlr. HUME renewed the notice he had given to move for copies of correspondence relatinf to Nova S co ti a , and other North Ameri can C o l on i es • and he also gave no ti ce that, to morrow, he would move lor a return of the public revenue of Upper C ana d a during the same period as th e returns he had already moved for of the same nature respecting Lower Ca nadt; also for a return of the expenditure during the earn period ; also for a return of the number of persona re cently also f or treasonable offences, and now dis posed of ; also for copies of the ordinances made by the Governor of Lower Canada since the 24th of November, 1 83 3; also for copies of is letter addressed bY Lord Aber deenchille to Lord Hill, on th e I st o f August, 1835", respecting t ge to fight a duel, sent b y a M r. S:ewart, seere fry to Lord Aylmer: and for a copy of that gentleman's appointment to the office of Chief Justice of Quebec, and he be gged to ask Vie Noble Lord t h e Se Deplrt ment, when th Secretory for the Home correspo n betwe e c dence which had taken place the Government and Sir Francis Head would be laid oa t h e table of the House. TAI Lord JOHN RUSSELL was understood to say that those papers would be produced very shortly. Mr. BARRON wished to ask the Secretary •f the Admi••alty whether there was any intention of doing away with the packets on the Waterford station? Mr. C. WOOD had not heard of any intention of that sort. CORN LAWS. Mr. VIL LIERS presented several petitions, without naming the places from whence they came, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws. The Hon. Member then resumed his seat, but was immediately called upon by the Speaker. and rose and spoke as follows : Mr. Speaker—ln rising, Sir, to move the question of which I have given notice, I do not apologise to this House for my total incompetency for this task which has devolved upon me. I hope the House will consider that it is rather from a regard fir their ti.ne than from any con fidence in myself, or any want of respect to them—( Hear) —for I can unaffectedly assure the House nothing could have induced me to engage in this task, had I not been assured by those whose interests are involved in the question, that their case depended upon the simple statement of its me rits, and not upon the ability or talent of any advocate. Sir, they have approached this House in the spirit of men of busi ness, and I do trust that this discussion may be conducted in the spirit in which the petitioners have come before the Houae,:certainly nothing that I shall say, nothing that I shall address to the House will afford any example of a devia tion from this course.—( Hear, hear.) In accordance with the notice I have given, it is my duty to move that certain persons who have presented a Petition to this House be allowed to establish the allegations of that Peti tion at the Bar of this House. Sir, who those petitioners arc, what it is they allege, and are prepared to prove, and the grounds upon which they have been in duced to make this application, I will as briefly and as concisely as it is in my power to do, proceed to state to t is House. Sir, the pe'itionera are persons who are deeply interested in the subject-matter of their petition, they are persons who have been selected by their fellow citizens and by their fellow sufferers at large, and open meetings assembled for the purpose, to make known, by all legitimate means in their power, the nature and the extent of the specific grievance of which they complain. And, Sir, they bring this complaint from those great districts of industry in this country, where the mass of the ikhabitants depend for existence upon the employment of their industry ; that they ex pect that employment as much from people of other countries as they do from their countrymen around. Sir, if I nime some of those places from which the petitions come their interests will be known. They come from Glasgow— from Leeds —from Nottingham--from Manchester—from Liverpool, from Birmingham, from Wolverhampton, from Derby, and from Kendal. The places within the circle to which I have alluded, exceed, in popu lation, two millions in number ; and these places will be recognised at once as the seats of the great staple manufactures of the country.--( Hear, hear, hear.) And, Sir, I run sure the House will not think it out of place if I do here for one moment take a glance at the interests which these people represent and their im portance to the community at large ; and I will only refer to those four branches of trade which have the chief reason to apprehend alarm from those grievances of which they complain I allude to the cotton trade the woollen trade. the linen trade, and the hardware trade— ( Hear, hear)—and, Sir, in referring to the most authentic estimates of their importance to this country, I find that there are employed in the corn trade of this country no less than 1,500,0001. dependent on it for their main tenance and support; that the value of that trade to this country is 31,000,0001 sterling ; that of the capital employed in that trade there is fixed and fluting 20,000.0001. sterling—that nearly 17,000 000/. sterling are employed in wages, and that two thirds of that manu facture in value, and three- fourths in quantity, is exported from this country. Sir, the next trade is that of the woollen trade, and I find that the annual value of thas trade is 27 reiliions sterling a year—that one-fourth of that is exported to other countries—that the number of persons employed is upwards of 400,000, and that that manufacture consumes of English wool upwards of 103 millions of pounds annually.—( Hear, hear.) find that the annual value of the linen manufacture it eight millions sterling, and that there is spent in. wages in it 3,500,0001. In the hardware trade I find the trade is uawards of 17 Inillions_sterling. Mr. HUME- Is it in one year? _ _ _ _ Mr. VILL IE RS—The value of the raw material, cap . tal, wage:', and every thing that constitutes it is in cluded.—( Lou I cries of " Hear.") The hardware trade is seventeen millions sterling, that is the e,timeted value. There are employed in it upwards of 300.000 persons, and thousands of these persons depend for employ ment and subsistence, entirely on our foreign trade. In each and all of these places, where these great branches of industry are conducted, there have been lerge'and public meetinp assembled for the purpose of affirming and proving the allegations in this petition, and hardly without exception a most decidod desire has been manifested and expressed that more attention should be paid by the Legislature to the allegations of these petitions than have been usually awarded.—( Cries of " Hear.") Sir, I have thought it right to alitt le to the importance of these interests, min order to show the House that no insignificant or incon siderable class are seeking for their attention.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I shall now proceed to re'er to what it is that these parties allege and ask you to allow them to prove; and, Sir, I hope the House will dis criminate well between what it is they do allege, and what it is said they have alleged. These parties say they have been obliged to observe and to experience adecided change in the character of their dealings with these nations on whomthey were accustomed to depend fer custom. They further state, Sir, that thoee who were once our valuable friends, they now find alarming rivals ; and that :mete a change will have a very detrimental effect upon the industry of this country ; —and they further state, which reason they think gives them a claim upon your attention, that you have done this. They say that the Legislature, by denying them the liberty of taking that which foreign countries have alone to exchange, you have compelled those foreign countries to find means for supplying their own markets—you have forced them to become manufacturers thems& yes. This is the charge which they bring against the Corn-laws—they say that these laws have not only turned away our customers, but that they have actually turned war former friends and customers into competitors.—( Hear, hear.) The parties who arc now before this House as petitioners are prepared to prove to the House that they meet with this active competition in foreign countries, and that it now assumes a very alarming aspect, and that it this competi tion should extend in such a ratio as it had within the last few years, it must be extremely prejudicial to the com munity at large, but more particularly to the industrious working classes—( Hear, hear)—that class which is most unable to bear it. Now, Sir, in this stage of the pro ceedings the petitioners do not ask you at once to repeal these laws, which they say have operated so fatally to the commerce of the country, but they say that the important consequence of these laws ve r y deeply affect their interests, and as they did not fall neces sarily or naturally under the notice of a majority of the House, and as the truth of their allegations is not admitted, they ask from this House that they may be allowed to place the facts stated in their petition beyond question, and having proved them, they beg leave to submit them to the House, in order to assist them in legislating upon the subject. There i; nothing, Sir, stated in their petition but what falls within the range of distinct and positive proof—they say that there is nothing in their case that will require any thing but a limited period of time—they have only to repeat to you that experience which had been forced upon them, and they hoped that having laid the results of that experience before you, it will assist you in your deliberations relative to the com merce of the country. They do not come here, Sir, to detail to you that there is now existing any general distress— they do not come here to excite any pity for their losses, or to claim compassion from the House—they merely come before you endeavouring to press upon your minds the ne cessity of providing for coming evils--( Hear, hear)—of evils which must be shared as well by you as by mil lions of your fellow subjects. Sir, I will now proceed to state what I believe to be within the spirit of dis tinct proof on this subject. I believe that it cannot be disputed that those tariffs and duties imposed upon our goods in foreign countries, have only been so im posed after repeated remonstances by those Governments at our restrictive system, that those duties have been re strictions on commerce for human food, which is that which they offer for our manufactures. That has been a constant theme of complaint for the lhst twenty years in the North of Europe, and before the year 1804 in the United States.—( Hear, hear.) That they have always said take our corn, and we will take your manufactures, as the basis upon which they were always anxious to desire to negotiate, but in consequence of our resist ance they have imposed these retaliating duties, and notwithstanding the Governments of those countries have only been enabled to impose those retaliatory duties by representing to the people at large what they have termed the selfish and ar bitrary character of our policy—such is the prejudice of the people in all those countries in favour of our manufactures, and such was the discouragement to support other manufactures p resen t e d to th orn , t h a t they were entirely averse to the establishment of those restrictions, and if any person chooses to refer to the official journals of the United States, or to the journals of the principal countries of the north of Europe, they will find that when those duties were imposed, they teemed with abuse of us for what they termed our despotic system—attempting to enforce upon them our manufactures, and refusing to take their corn in return. Now, Sir, I think it will be in the power of the petitioners, if they are allowed to adduce evidence, t? prove that whatever has resulted from the commer cial hostility th a t ex i sts, w h atever l oss of profit or good will we have experienced from the system now esta blished, they must be placed at the door of the Corn laws, and the first great step th ose countr i es h ave taken in making themselves a manu f actur i ng peop l e, notwithstanding all the obstacles opposed to them by our great spirit, and our great i n d ustry , t h at t h at great step is entirely attributable to the present Corn-laws. But, Sir, it is not in the nature of these laws to be limited in the mischief they produce—( Hear)—and they have not only converted our customers into competitors, but they have given these parties great advantage in the eampetition ; and they have not only placed us in the ei;aivanta g eous position of the price on our manufactures being enhanced by the amount of these duties; but they have g i ven th em the advantage of producing every article into which manual labour enters, at double the cost at which they are able to produce them ; and what your petitioners propose to show you is, that these countries hare seized the advantages that we have conferred upon them. and that in all the ertieles of which the cost of living may be supposed to have enhanced the cost of production, that they have already not only sup plied themselves, but they have also entered into competition with us in other countries, and the facts they wish to lay before you are these : that our wares of that kind arc gradually declieing in other countries, and that they have already obtained an advan tage in their production for other countries. Now, Sir, this brings us to maters of feet, and this it is that the petitioners moat desire, because it is not difficult to hear persons prejudging this case with out t h at com placency and conceit which 13 so cornmen ia this country, II SUN, LONDON, WED when we enter into any comparison with other countries, and we constantly hear these persons talking of the necessary excellen ce o f B r itish skill and British productiveness as to utterly put out of question any competi tion of foreign producers. But to all these speculations the petitioners wish to oppose their facts, and it is that upon which they ground their case. That we are supposed to be beyond the reach of our foreign competitors, the first fact that may be stated in opposition to these views is, that al though we have had all the advantages which we possessed at the close of the war, and these ad vantages have been extended, that our exports have declined twenty per cent. when compared with the five sears subsequent to the peace, and the five last years.—( Hear, hear.) And, Sir, I do not doubt but some quibble may be made with respect to the currency at that time and at the present. I say, supposing the exports have not declined, as we say, 50 per cent., which they appear to have done when vou compare their clear value— yet if they only remain stationary it seems to me as much to establish the case which I stated as if they had declined. For why have we not increased ?—( Hear, hear.) That is the question. But when I refer to the authentic accounts which we possess of the increase of the foreign trade of other countries, I find that whereas we have not increased, the export trade in other countries has increased—in France, to the amount of 50 per cent., and in the United States to the amount of 75 per cent. But to de scend from generalities to particulars, let us take any trade to illustrate the position, that whereas other countries have engaged in trades of which we formerly had the monopoly, and have suc cessfully entered into competition with us, that they are increasing their trade in a greater ratio than we are ours. Take the instance of the cotton trade : when we consider what hangs upon that gi gantic business in this country—everything con nected with it, everything calculated to alarm us in its danger and deterioration, must be of the der pest im portance. Now, Sir, we had a morteriuly of this trade from 1770 to 1914, and up to that year we had no thing to apprehend from the competition of any country. in that branch of our commerce. The only country which had ever made any advance in that trade was the United States, and that was to be ascribed to another erroneous part of our policy, the Orders in Council. _(lean hear.) In 1814 America imported only one hundred bales of the raw material and that was the great est quantity then consumed by any nation. Now we find that in America, there is a consumption of 320,000 bales of the raw cotton—in France, 350,000—in Switzerland, 30,000—and other countries 150,000. making altogether 870,000, and 370,000 is about the consumption of this country, so that we have no longer a monopoly of the trade. Other countries have entered into competition with us, and we have now to start in an equal race. Now, those who assume that we must always excel in those branches of trade in which we have engaged are bound to show why it is that other countries have made such great progress in this trade, of which wa formerly had the monopoly, and why we have not kept pace with them, and I think those who expect that we are to maintain the present state of our ma nufactures avid trade, must show that we arc not labouring under the same disadvantages which have already led to a more rapid increase in those of other countries. It is for us to institute a comparison of the advantages under which these trades are carried on in different countries, in order to ac count for what has been done in past times, and what we have to expect. Now, as regards the United States, we have to observe, that they have two great advantages iu the cotton manufactory--; Cries of " Hear, hear") proximity to the raw material, and cheapness of the power by which it is manufactured. Now, the value of these two advantages has been distinctly ascertained, and in every pound of cotton it amounts to about a halfpenny, that is, 7 per cent. advantage to the producers in the United States. The difference between the water power, of which they have the greatest advantage, and the steam power in this country, is 31. 104., and 121. 104. per horse (as we understood), and this would lead us to expect that in all those articles into which the raw material chiefly enters America would have the advantage. But arc we on an equal footing with America, even supposing she has these natural advantages. What do we find in our own country ? We ere at a dis tance from the raw material, and as soon as it ar rives at our shores, it is taxed—the price of corn, one important element in the cost of our ma nufactures" is greatly e n h ene , d, an d l abour is dearer in this country than in any other. No w , un d er these circumstances, w e should.sey that in all those articles into which the raw material chiefly enters, America would have the advantage; and I say that all the elements that we have to offer in this respect strictly corre spond with our exportations, and shows that the Americana are making very great advances, and are excelling us in a very large class of m inufactures. I hold in my hand a work published under the autho rity of all the leading persons engaged in the cotton trade, and not finding- that its authority has been shaken by any statements worthy of credit, I venture to state from it what we could prove relative to the American manufactures. Th e evidence that I will first allude to is that of a manufacturer in Massachusetts, and he is asked whether the export trade of America is un derstood to ba profitable. His answer is Yes, and on the increase. I should mention that this evidence was given before the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the factory system. He is asked whether the American goods could be had at a lower price than the English goods ; his answer to which was, that their house had sent goods to India, where they undersold the English. He also Stated that they could compete successfully with British manufactures of a similar kind in the same markets. • The next gentleman was Mr. Wiggins, who stated that the cotton manufactures of the United States were pros perous, and that themanufacturcrs found a demand for certain Boods in South America, Smyr n a, an d C onstant i nop l e. Mr. ates, who was a partner with Messrs. Baring, stated that the exportation of manufactured cotton goods from America was very considerable. Mr. Graham from Glasgow, a British manufacturer, stated that he found competition in trade in all foreign markets with . American manufac turers. The next gentleman was a manufacturer who had a house at Glasgow and also in America, who stated that he had been in the habit of manufacturing cotton goods, but had met with a great competition -at Chili, and had latterly been obliged to abandon the manufacture of such goods, after having persevered for some' time unsuccessfully with the manufacturers of th , r United States, although he comprised in his works the operations both of spinning and weaving, by which he was able to ship his goods at the lowest prices. This work, Sir, was published under the advice of all the principal manufacturers in Glasgow, and abounds with statements to the same effect taken on oath. I will not weary the House with reading more than necessary, but the work is published for the purpose of showing the ire policy of taxing the raw material. It is full of the most striking statements of the advance of cotton manufactures in America. I will, with the permission of the House, refer to one statement made by a Glasgow manufacturer, who has also a house in America. He stated there was ano ther direct duty which, came heavy on them--the duty on foreign wheat and flour used in their manufactories. " What do you suppose is the increased cost to your ma nufactures arising from the duty on corn ?—I think we pay in duty fully six or 7001. a year." Then there is ap pended to this a note, to the effect that during the ten years prior to 1802, the cost of manufacturing cotton in this country above what it cost in the United States or the Continent of Europe, estimated ac cording to the difference in price betweee the seve ral countries, amounts to 175,000/. per annum. Sir, I have referred to this document merely to show that every thing which we might expect from the advantages which we enjoy from the superiority and skill of our workmen is more than counterbalanced by those dis advantages which the Corn-laws impose upon us. It appears that they ha ve certa i n a d vantages , while we are labouring under great disadvantages, and that they are progressing in a much greater ratio than we could possibly expect, and that although those manufactures are still in an infant state, they are not only supplying themselves, but beating us in the foreign market.—( Hear.) There is no reason whatever to suppose that if they can manufacture these articles, they should not in time be able to manufac ture the other articles by availing themselves of the diced. vantages und e r w hi c h we l a b our. B ut to return from the United States to the Continent of Europe. I shall now refer to those States, which labour under even greater disadvantages than we could, b u t not un d er t h at peculiar one by which we are oppressed, and first, with regard to Swit zerland, which is wanting in that great advantage of locality by being placed 800 miles from the coast-800 miles from the raw material which must reach her factories. It is within 20 years that we exported to Switzerland both the raw material, and its first process in being o nxinaenputftahce tured. Switzerland was a go o d cus t omer o f ours. W hat is the ease now? W e h ar dly ex p or t anything now, result of the most refined processes of our manufactures, and not only does Switzerland supply herself, but site exports show this three-fourths of the whole of' the manufa c t ures s h e pro inquiry, what duces.—(Hear, petitioners s —I ea r hear) to i 3 to )If you want you that this country, which was among our best customers, is now meeting us in the markets of Italy, the Levant, and North America, and meeting us successfully._( Let us now look to those countries from which we will not take the products they offer to send us in exchang e for our manufactures. And first, look at Russia. N ow Russia is inclined to send us her corn and timber, and w e refuse both on the terms on which they would produce u s a fair remuneration. In 1820 we exported to R uss i a 13 000,000 yards of cotton manufactures, and in 1 87 we exported only 850,000 yards. There is the result of our restrictive system. 13 000,000 yards were exported to Russia in 1820, but we refused her corn and timber in exchange, and in 1837 we exported only 850,000 yards.-- ( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Hence, I say, that such a case as that offers matter of serious reflection to persons who have considered how much e , , e have suffered since that period, either from want of em. ployment of our labour and capital ; and how much al arm we have experienced from the political hostility of that country.—( Hear, and cheers.) id . we been en gage d with that country in free cemmercial intercourse, whet would have been the employment we should h ave expected to have gained for our artisans and capita. lists in that country, in order to have kept p ace with the increase of our population, and how m uc h greater our interest would have been in continuing to supply that country with the produce of our manufac tures, must be obvious to any one, and she would hav e been bound to us by th e ti e s of mutual obligation, and by her receiving those articles which she is now manufactur ing. I sh a ll n ow re f er to th e case of Germany, which is, perhaps, the country of all others which we ought to have supplied, instead of her now manufacturing for herself, and from whom we h ave moat p er ti n aciously refused to receive its produce. We fi n d th a t there has been It gradual dimi nution in all those articles in which the cost of living enters into the cost of production. In 1833, we ex ported to that country 29,500,000/. worth of manufac tures. In 1834, 11,000,0001. ; in 1835, 10,000,0001.'; in 1836, 7,000,000/. ; in 1837, 5,800,0001 , ; and in 1838, 5.500,0001.—( Hear, hear.) Why, Sir, it is no consolation to hear that official documents have beet; re ferred to prove that the whole amount of our exports has increased when we fied that these exports are only swelled ESDA Y ,-EVENING E ITION,-FEBRUARY 20, Iti39 by furnishing to these countries the materials for being our j dom, with policy, or even with safety, refuse to the peti rivals. But I find that in all those articles which employ tioners that full and fair enquiry which they ask you to the industry of this country, and without a demand for grant them. ---( Hear.) I come now to the last topic, which our industrial population is not employed, that a with which I presume to trouble you—namely, the gradual and progressive decrease has taken place, and we grounds on which the petitioners have been induced to cannot console ourselves by the reflection that if we export make this peculiar application to your House. In the to these people the means of manufacturing for themselves, words of the petition read At your *le i the petitioners we can continue our commercial relations with them, say—" if yore institute an inquiry into these important for if we suppose what is the course of countries matters, we trust it will not be in the seclusion of a Sc commencing to engage in manufactures, it would lea Committee, but in the face of all the Representatives be precisely the course pursued by these countries. of the United Kingdom."—(Hear, hear.) I believe the They first begin to manufacture those articles on which application of your petitioners is a wise and just one. I the cost of labour is less with them than with our- hope to show you that it is reasonable, and I trust you selves, and then they go from one thing to another, will deal with it in the same spirit. I believe them to he until they find that they can do without us 41t0- anxious for a full and fair inquiry, from a conviction that 1 gether.—( Hear.) We have evidence, Sir, to show the subject of the petition is moat deeply im that those Committes are now un d er mos t favourable portant to every class of the community...—( Hear, hear.) circumstances, in order to their becoming manufacturers, aid from a persuasion that the difference between the two and that we now only export those articles to them upon modes -of deciding which this House has the power to which the least labour has been bestowed, and that in a institute, namely a Select Committee, or a Committee of very short time it is more than probable that they the whole House—is the difference calculated to maintain will become manufacturers of even that themselves. I'er- the public interest, and attract the public attention, and hap, in answer to those persons who still speculate on the one the tendency of which is to allay that interest and divert strength of the English back, who thick we may impose that attention—( Hear, hear)—the difference betwean a tri whatever burdens we please ; who think that the produc. burial, the judgment of which must be binding and satisfac tiveness of the English artisan will carry us en as it has tory to those who appeal to it, and one, the result of which hitherto done : in answer to such arguments I will will not be satisfactory to any party, because each will ac refer the house to one branch of the cotton trade, count for the decision by referring to the constitution of which shows that there is no reason why foreign the Committee—between a tribunal the fullest and the countries should not enter most successfully into corn- fairest that the Constitution of this country affords, and one petition with us in any branch—l mean that which is obnoxious to evert degree of suspicion.—( Hear, branch of the cotton trade, the production of Notting- hear.) I say, therefore, that the people come with a good ham—hosiery. In 1815, it might. be said that we had a grace before what has been impressively designated " the monopoly of the whole world in that trade. Our compe- great inquest of the country," requesting you to examine, titers in Saxony have engaged deeply in that trade, and compare, and consider the extent of the interest involved while we have increased our frames only 10 per cent. in in this perawmuirt question, and the duration and the 16 years, they have doubled their numbers every six years. degree to which they have suffered.—( Hear, hear. ) In the year to which I have already alluded, the trade was Tne petitioners cannot now be met with the answer almost, entirely confined to ourse l ves , b ut i n 1838 teat i t wou ld b e i nconven i en t or d angerous to conce d e while we exported 47,391 dozens, our competitors what might be hereafter regarded as a dangerous prece of Saxony exported no less than one and a half millions of dent. This case on its own merits stands above and befhre dozens. In referring to their exports from the flange all others. They do not call upon you to reverse laws Towns, we find that there has been a gradual and steady which you have enacted before you have had ample expe i crease in their exports. In 1827 their exports to the rience to direct you—not laws which they at first caprici- Ueited States amounted to 96,821 dollars, but in 1835 it ously acceded to and are now discontented with—but laws had risen to 414,718 dollars, being more than an increase which they objected to in the beginning, and regerdiug of 300 per cent. within nine years. The British exhorts e Lich every one of their predictions has been fully verified. bad greatly fallen off. The exports from Saxony to Cuba They come before you now, because they are convinced, alone in one year amounted to 69,0001; while those of after all their former opinions, after the petitions they Great Britain to Cuba and all our West India Isles, did have repeatedly addressed to you, after the statements upon not amount to more than 21,2701.—(11ear, hear.) This statements which they have detailed to you, that they is entirely caused by their being able to produce at much are n o w able to prove incontrovertibly that the grounds lower prices than ourselves. Io former periods we had the upon which they found their prayer for relief from the conenaed of the markets of Peru, but in these there had been present deteriorating system, have but too much reality to a gradual decrease within the last few years. In 1827 our support them. Sir, this is no trifling matter. I hope it exports to those markets amounted to 29.0001. In 1831 they as ill not he summarily disposed of.—' Hear, hear.) The had fallen to 19,000/. ; in 1832, to 16,0001. ; in 1333, to great middle classes, and all the labouring community, are 12 0001, and in 1834 to 8,0001. This is the result of the corn- the p trties who now approach you. They do not come petition, and we not only find they have beat us in neutral with the language of violence, or with the purpose of in mar kets,but I shall be able to prove that they have exported timidating, you--( Hear, hear, hear)--but they conic re more to the United States alone than all the exports of spectfully deferring to your opinion. They came before England : lam re any to produce witnesses at the Bar to you last year, and you refused to change the law that op show that in this article, in which we had at one time the pressed them. Still, even now, they do not hastily call command of the trade, they are now sending into this coon- u p o n y o u for redress—they only entreat you to hear try and underselling our producers, though at a disadvan- evidence, to show, as they think, you ought to tape of 25 per cent. Now I wish to know what answer make a change. Let any reflecting man say can be made to that fact. Hare we have countries w h a t c onc e ssions ought to be apprehended, if you refuse Producing these articles, which we have within twenty t h e i nqu i r y th e y now solicit.—( Order, order.) Did they years h a d th e exc l us i ve ad van t age in over every think that the men wire had left their business, and had other country.—( Hear, bear.) In producing we find sacrificed so much time from their ordinary occupations to they have rapidly increased in their trade. This is - only in express their strong opinions on this great question, being one branch of tea-le which [adverted to when I commenced refused the inquiry into the facts, which you deny, a favour my address. Why, I would ask, shoul'l they excel us in a bl e impressions of you would be formed in their minds, or this? How is it that we obtained the monopoly we had upon the minds of those, who, already despairing of juw:ce, at first in the cotton trade, in which we have been have announced that they had almost abandoned any idea engaged for fifty years? Simply by produ c ing economy of approaching your House for redress? Do you suppose in the production of the article. If we do not still that a refusal of the petition would make the others exercise that economy, is it any thing extraordinary less inclined to persevere in their project? No, the that the Saxons and Prussians, and other countries tendency of a refusal to hear the evidence now should monopolise the trade of the world? This is eff..real by the petitioners must naturally be to to be held in view in all our reasoning on this epics- unite those who upheld the opinion that under the Lion, that nothing determines our prosperity so much present constitution of the country, and under our present as the cheapness at whi c h we can produce our articles. We political institutions, our fellow countrymen may hope for have established active competition in this article, and I redress with those who insist upon another reform of this say/that I can show that they can produce them cheaper than we do. That, in my opinion affords a subject of great 11,ekeunsest•—ate(dlinthteIpetltriit?oknieenrsoudgernh demand reflection to parsons in the cotton trade. Whet are you to from this House, which has so often stated that it takes do with the population who are prevented, by the high to ear' procure hear.) the At inquirypre se under it special care the operation of the laws, and the price of the article, f rom o btai n i ng any employment ? Go welfare of our commerce and manufactures. But a con to Nottingham —go to Derby —go to Leicester, cesa i on of the kind demanded now has been made before. and ask what has been the result there? Say what you When the Order in Council was in force, the predominant will—do what you will—speculate as you will—the result part y urged every argument against this mode of inquiry. It will be, sinless these laws are repealed, the other branches eas started that a Lumber of merchants and mainline of the same trade will be taken from us. But, Sir, it is tuners were ready to prove that they were not not confined t o thi s t ra d e . Th ere i s no tra d e i n which We injured, and that this mode of inquiry was not have had hitherto superiority or excellence in which we do n ec e ssary, But I have never had it from those not fled that competition abroad is engaged. I alluded as ec h o t h en gave evidence that Me.nber after Member of well to the woollen manufacture as I did to the cotton trade Parliament, who was prejudiced before, came in the sequel reel in order to show this House what they may expect if and confessed that they were misinformed at first, send they institute a fair inquiry in the evidence which they determined to be inflexible, but that the evidence produced would receiv e of th e com p e titi on w hi c h i s now go ing on in at the bar had induced them to agree to a change.—( Hear, foreign countries in this valuable branch of our trade, Twill hear.) Now, how can you, having acceded to the mere read a statement drawn out by a person who is ready chants and manufacturers on that occasion, refuse them on to give his evidence at the bar, and perhaps who is more tnis?- Do you deny the facts ? Do you admit them to extensively engaged in that trade than any ether person. be true, or do you dispute them ? On one of these He says— grounds you are bound to hear their evidence—on the " The woollen manufacture of England bad already suffered other, there is no reason why you should object to hear materially, and is threatened with still more serious injury, them. You cannot object on the ground of being over from the competition of Continental rivals. In proof of which careful of the time of the public. ---( Hear, hear.) In the following facts were offered : " Ist. Until a few years ago, the English wool-buyers at the looking through the precedents I find that thirteen days of ;great German wool-fai rs predominated so much in Limber, and the time of this H ouse were devoted to an inquiry into the in the extent o f th e i r purc h ases, over t h e b uyers o f ot h er corm- conduct and practices of the kept mistress of a Prime tries; a s t o ru l e o re pri ces; but within the last few years the Minister, and ten days more were snent in discussing the German a n d w e n s i era buyers have ex ce ed e d them in their put-- detalla of hercorruption and debauchery.—(Hear, hear.) chases, and the English buyers;, are now ,regarded as of small 'G ra nt b u tehe petitioners now but two or three, and und,r comparative importance. . take to say that those who now are opposed to the appli- I 64 0. _el. The exceedingly rapid growth of the woollens manufac- cation must acknowledge they are no longer able to resist it. turn in Prussia, and the other countries of the German coati- gar, I can hardly expect this question to be taken on any nental league, i s s h own by th e f ac t, th a t fi ve or s i x y ears s i nce , . of this the quantity of German woollen cloths exhibited for sale at the point of form ; but, upon looking over the Reports Leipsie Easter fair was only 50,009 ends (an end being half a House, I fund ample precedents for such an application as piece), whereas last year the quantity exhibited was 350,000 this, where there was no hope of justice being done by ends,—being an increase of 600 p e r cen t. any other mode; On the 16th of March, 1785, a petition "3d. That, independent of the duty laid on English cloths in was presented to the House of Commons from the Germany, Prusaian cloths are sold much cheaper than English. merchants cud manufacturers interested in the fustian a. A large wholesale buyer from London states that a Prussian tra d e , aga i n st the duties imposed upon cotton stuffs, cloth at Ifis. per yard is equal in quality to an English cloth at 225. per yard. This difference in favour of Prussia has now' threatened their trade with inevitable ruin, and these alle been discovered by the Americans. English fine woollens are, statin that they involved the petitioners in distress and gations were considered so important, that the petitioners already excluded from Germany, and from several neutral mar kets ; and as soon as the Prussians can sufficiently extend their bar; and will any one say that the interests ' of the whole manufacture, which they are doing with astonishing rapidity, they will beat the English in all neutral markets, and probably were allowed to be heard by Counsel and witnesses at the manufacturers of this country are less important than the even in the home market of E ng l an d itself, notwith s t an di ng th e interests of the fustian manufacturers were considered ferty import duty on foreign woollens in this country. years ago ?—( Hear, hear.) I cannot conceive how you " 4th. That the increase in the Continental manufacture of can refuse the inquiry, unless you admit the facts state , ' by wool is shown by the fact, that foreigners purchase a very in- those petitioners.—( Hear, hear.) I cannot conceive any creasing quantity of the wools of England and Ireland, of which other impression will be produced upon the country by formerly the home manufacture had the exclusive use. The that refusal, than that, for some reason, you are unwilling export of Britiih wo o l i n 1838 was o f th e d ec l are d value of to have the facts published to the country—( Hear, hear) 432,000/., whereas the average of the four years preceding that you arc unwilling to . the was only 274,000/. This, th ere f or e, shows an increase of 57 per cent. in the exportation f rom Great Britain of the raw ma- fore, you will riot receive eviderce, which might influence terial in the woollen manufacture. The quantities of wool and your judgment, to change it.—( Hear, hear.) But I will woollen yarn, forming the raw materials of manufacturers, ex- not anticipate that this inquiry will be refused. I have ported from the United Kingdom, gave an annual average for abstained from entering into the general question, and all the years 1825, 1826, and 1827 of 178,035 ; and for the years I have said has been confined to the particular prayer of 18:35, 1836, and 1837 an annual average of 3,744,295. These these petitioners who ask to be heard, who state the rea facts not only prove an increase in the manufacture abroad, but sons w hy a Select Committee would not be satisfactory, the competition for the article raises the price to the home ma- and who ask you to devote a short time to satisfy your nufacturer. It is beli eve d th a t th e F renc h w ill s h ort l y take I by evidence, of the effects of the Corn-la ws .— nearly all the Irish wool s . Th e rap idl y i ncreas i ng export of ( Cries o se "s' " H ear , hear.") ,The Hon. Member con c l u d e d worsted yarn for the use of the foreign manufacturer, also amidst loud cheers, by moving that the petitioners, R. H. proves the increase of the manufacture on the Continent. " sth. The policy tof foreign Governments in imposing Greg and J. B. Smith, be heard by themselves, their coun merely a nominal duty on the import of yarns, tends to raise sel, and agents, at the Bar of this House in support of the price of the raw material to the British manufacturers, and the allegations of this petition. consequently to m a k e th e i r compet i t i on w i th foreigners in the Mr. STR UTT , i n secon di ng th e mot i on, sa id t h e very finished goods more difficult. The new Austrian Tariff will full statements of his Hon. Friend who had just sat down still further increase this effect. rendered it unnecessary for him to trespass long upon the " tith. The decline of the British woollen manufacture is proved by the exports of la s t y ear , com p are d w ith t h e average El a but he could not, on a subject of such importance, ou..e, of the four preceding years. Export o f B r iti s h woo ll ens i n 1838-6,157,000/. Average of four years, from 1834 to 1837 be altogether silent. Ile believed this to be the commence ent of a g reat struggle—of vast importance to the people 6,542,000/. Decrease-3e5000/." of a this country, which might be protracted in its duration, The Hoe. MEMBER then read a short extract from a and of which there was great reason to doubt that it would person engaged in this manufacture at St rou d, w hi c h s t a t e d be brought to a satisfactory conclusion but by repeated weelamen had left f or t h e con ti nent; an d t h en procee d e d . P discussion.—( Hear, hear.) My Hon. Friend has antici that in th e l ast twe l ve mon th s many h un d re d s o f t h e b est un- Sir, there i s th e same ill ustrat i on i n the returns of the Precedented, but to that it is to be replied that this is an ated that it Inv be objected to his motion that it is un exports of linen. We find that in the export of linen goods usually important subject. He ( Mr. S.) would not now enter in 1833 there was 2,992,1431. declared value. In 1838 into general questions, nor attempt to show how important 2,919.719/. In the case of linen yarn, we find in 1835 it was as to the prices of food and the principal neces -216,6351., and in 1838625,6191. Th ere i s h ar dl y one s i n- series of life—though he should be prepared to show gle great branch of our trade that we do not find we are that the Corn-laws were unjust and impolitic, and he exporting to them raw m aerials ; and if we are not allowed would confine himself to the particular prayer of these were the of the principal any longer the advantage of clothing people at a cheaper p towns etitioners, who in thisrepresentatives manufacturinginjurious . . and lower rate than any other country I am afraid there is no the Corn-laws were to their i nterests, and reason to suppose that we have retained the advantages that we formerly possessed in that most valuable branch of through them to the public at large, and that they were manufactures which consists in hardware and in cutlery. prepared to show the tendency of these laws was to de- We find there that we are perhaps more met by the corn- stroy the manufacturers, and he knew not on what prin. petition of foreigners than almost in any other branch ; and ciple their application for inquiry was to be refused.— though it is difficult to get people to come forward a r id (Hear, hear.) If he were told that these statements . make these statements, because they feel they will be pro-- were exaggerated he would reply, how was this to be as claiming to the world their misfortune that they are not certaimed without inquiry ?—( Hear, hear.) Was there able to cope with their rivals ; yet if you allow the inquiry not amply sufficient justification f or the i nq uir y i n th ose facts to ha conduotod in this liquse, there is nothing that will which were not disputed e—( Hear.) Was it not stated dis startle those who will attend to it more than the facts to tinetly that in those branches of trade in which human l a b our be elicited on this subject. —(lean ) Now, Sir, I have was a principal ingredient they had been already driven !Tear, obtained a letter from a person' who is fully competent to from Foreign markets—( Hear, hear)—and, that although Now, it might be said that these pititioners asked rnaehinei y itself is . beginning to be exported ?_( manufactured .. livelytlei depose e t n e ga t g h e e d fac in ts s l u re pp s l t y a i t n e g s, b a a i r i d d w t a h r i e s g is oo a ds fac in tor di e fr x e t ree n ,, .. t our exportshay sv e bo in li e y rea o s r ed i , n t p h a e r y t a b r y e m m a a c d b e in u e p ry o! a lth rt d icl t e b s e , b p a a r r , ts v o er f i t f h y t h o e o ar m .) uch ire demanding a total repeal of the Corn-laws, i e ng w° th ri e d. natu li r e e The Hoe. Memnea here read two letters, dated the 15th and 17th Feb., in illustration of his argument. when the manufacturers themselves had their protecting is s f his rea'i y statements. togiv ee v ildleenscaeysa_t tic e I trust that I have now stated enough to show to the 1 duties. e. 11 ut then tee petition contained this passage— House, and to the country, the injurious results of the corn- "That all restrictions on trade and commerce, are abjured petition of our Manufactures with those of the Continent. by your petitioners as injurious to the increase of wealth But I apprehend that the House is already beginning to in this, and all other countries."—( Hear, hear.) He him be weary of my details—l shall not, therefore, persevere.— self stood in that House as the Representative of a town ( [lsa r .) B u t i t i s indeed impossible for any man, within the (Derby) in which the silk m inufacturo was first establish. limits of the address which I venture to think myself entitled ed in this country, and yet from that town petitions have to speak iii this House, to lay before you all the inforrna- been presented, giving up all exclusive protections for tion which it is necessary you should have received and have their own benefit, and only requiring in return the total abe considered before you proceed to form your judgments on lition of the Corn-laws—( flear,hear)—and this was the case this momentous question.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I have With all our manufacturers.—( Hear, hear.) This must be merely give this house an outline of that evidence which I conceded to the petitioners, that there was nothing selfish know ought to be, and which lam certain would be offered or p ar t i al in their prayer, and that it was well worthy of to you if you would permit the witnesses to approach your the consideration of that House.—( Hear, hoar.) Was it bar._( Hear, hear, hear.) lam convinced, from all my wise to shut the doors of the Howe against inquiry, till own observations—from all 1 have heard, and from all I apprehension became reality, till the evil had become in have endeavoured to ascertain—that there is a preponde. tolerable, and the remedy impossible, and then perhaps ranee of evidence, illustrative of the deep degree in which Hon. and Right Hon. Gentlemen might come down to the every trade is affected by the present depressive system, House and say, as they had done on former occasions, that and which will be produced, if you permit it, to convince they were- at last convinced of the impolicy of such restric every re asona bl e and impartial man that there is a most ac- Lions.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to the topic of " in tire a n d alarmi n g competition being organized by foreign convenience," he thought that the time of the House could manufacturers against Un, which threatens to affect the vital not be better occupied than in hearing evidence on this interests of this country, unless we place our industrious subject, whether the result was that the petitioners' state and labouring classes under equal circumstances, and in the ments were well founded, and that therefore their alleged enjoyment of the same advantages.—( Hear, hear, hear). grievances ought to be remedied—or that their states I have purposely avoided any consideration in the state- ' , lents were not correct, and that therefore there was no ments I hav e ventured to lay before the House of the: ge _ lest ground of complaint?—( Hear, hear ) There was ono neral questions of the Corn Laws. All I attempted other point on which he would remark—the peculiar position was to show the House their injurious operation upon our 'if the m rjority in that House, who being landowners, or manufacturing interests. Ido not think it naturally fol. , deriving their incomes from land, might be supposed to lows, as stated in the view the Right Hon. Bart., th e have, if not a sinister, at least a partial interest in this Member for Tamwottli, has taken of the subject, th a t question—( Hear, hear)—and he would ask any Hon. these laws, if regarded in their social and political opera- • tlember who had not made up his mind on that subject, to tions or, the country, will be found to counteract the evils hear this fact in mind, and not to allow himself to be in they may otherwise produre. But all I have been de- 'laced by his feelings, upon the question in which he was sirous to show is, that the Corn-laws are most injurious in Personally interestn, to refuse all inquiry.--( Hear. hear.) their effects upon those great manufacturing interests with SW F. BURDETT—Sir, I think the Hon. Member which are identified the well being of this community.— has given a very cogent reason for the House not wasting ( Hoar, hear.) Ido not conceive how you can wi t h wis- es time in hearing evidence at the bar. The faces stated by him With ettent ability had a considerable effect upon my mind. But supposing the House chooses to take there facts for granted, as I am wiliin: to do, I do not see why we should undergo the fatigue and loss or time in hearing evidence which would be unnecessary, seeing the Bets are admitted upon which I think the question ought to be argued. Whenever the question comes before the House, I shall be ready to give it my best at tention. At the same time I have not the slightest hesi tation in stating my donyletion that the landed interests— in which I am principally concerned—ere under very erro neous impressions or, the subject.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") On a subject of this description, the facts being, .is I think, undeniable—l think it more convenient that the discussion should take place upon the merits. Mr. MARK PHILLIPS said he regretted that any Member should talk of wasting the time of the House on subject affecting the interests of every inhabitant of the United Kingdom.---( Hear, bear.) As to the evidence offered by the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, it could only be refused on this ground, that it would make unwel come disclosures.—( Hear ) With respect to the operation of the Corn laws upon the manufacturing interests of that country, they bad been developed in an able and masterly manner by his Hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhemp ton, and lie felt great reluctance in following him upon such a subject. Still, however, he felt it his duty to point out to the 'House (following the course of his Honourable Friend's arguments) what was the increas ing importance of the foreign competition to which their manufacturers were now subjected.—( Hear.) He believed that in 1794 that branch of manufacture with which his own constituents were more peculiarly con nected—he meant the spinning of cotton and cotton twist —was then almost unknown on the Continent of Europe. But they had lived to see not merely in Europe, but in the United States of America, a most important competition springing up against them in that very article. The quantity of cotton twist now manufac tured in the United States was equal to the whole of that manufactured in England at so late a period as 1816 ; and he would call the attention of Hon. Members who were acquainted with the subject, and he would direct the attention of others who were not aware of it, to the circumstance that at the present moment, in the State of M sssachusetts, 25 miles from the city of B iston, in the midst of the manufacturing district, the most extensive of which the Americans could boast, in the town of Lowell, there was a stream of five thousand horse power, the larger portion of which had been already absorbed, and from this district they were not merely supplying the American markets, but he regretted to say beating them in the foreign markets, and that was in a place where fourteen or fifteen years ago, not a single soul was to be found. Now they had a manufacturing district springing up in the midst of the desert, and en tering into active competition with the British manufac turers, fast supplying the American market with the articles they had previously supplied, and then successfully competing with them in all the foreign markets. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Wolverhampton, had stated, mid correctly stated, that the Americans were not only supply ing their home 'markets, but that in the markets of Mexico, South America, and along its eastern coasts, and round Cape Horn, they were entering into competition with the British artizans. Ile would sate further in connection with the town of Lowell, that there were not less than forty thousand bags of cotton spun into cotton twist, in that dietrict, but they were not limited in their operation to the markets near their own country, but they met the British manufacturer in the markets the most distant they had—in China—they met them in Canton, and in 1834 there were one hundred and sixty-six thousand yards of different descriptions of cotton manufactured goods brought by the Americans to that market.—( Hear, hear, hear) —and they met them so successfully as rivals there, that the British had not been able to dispose of more than 70,000 yards against them. They were not, even in their own Colonial markets, protected against them, and in Calcutta, notwithstanding there was a duty of 10 per cent. upon foreign manufactured goods, their A rnerican rivals had successfully competed with them. Another important fact connected with the United States was that many of the most recent improvements in cotton spinning were of American invention. Ile believed that the patent rights of these improvements were held by Americans, and they were not in connection with America only, but were dis posed of on the Continent to large establishments which had been formed in various parts of Zurich, the Tyrol, and other parts of Switzerland ; and three years since he ( Mr. P.) had ascertained from active intelligent men who knew well what the nature of the inquiry was, that there were in these different establishments in 1834, orders for the construction of machinery to the amount of 500,000/. sterling, for the purpose of bringing other manufacturing establishments into operation. He could go still further with respect to foreign competition. The Hon. Member for Woolverhampton hail stated the rapid increase of manufactures in Swi!zerland, and he (Mr. P.) believed that Switzerland at that moment was consuming 50,000 or 60,000 bags of cotton annually, and was meeting them successfully, notwithstanding their distance from any port; notwithstanding, as was stated by his honourable friend, their being 700 or 800 miles from the sea-board. They were competing with them in the American markets, sod they knew full well, and understood their interest so com pletely at the present moment, that in Switzerland they still left some of the higher numbers of the cotton twist (he meant the fair descriptions) almost without any duty whatever, because they found that a greater profit was made by spinning the coarser numbers themselves. If he travelled from Switzrland into Germany he would come to the same conclusion, that competition met them everywhere ; and with regard to Russia there was this most extraordinary fact, that last year the quantity of cotton wool imported into Russia for the purpose of being manufac tured into twist, amounted to as much as the cotton twist that was actually imported from Great Britaim—( Hear, hear. ) It was stated to him only a few weeks ago, by an intelligent friend, who bad been lately making the tour of the Continent, that he had visited some of the spinning manufactories established in the Tyrol, and he (Mr. P.) should like to describe to the House in what manner that had been effected. By British enterprise and British capital, derived from men who if they had remained at home, would have formed a portion of his constituents.-- ( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") When the House had been debating, two years ago, the question of factory labour, and the restriction to certain hours, the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, whom he did not then see in his place, was pleased rather to smile at some allusions made by him (Mr. P ) to capital travelling from that and locating itself in other count.-iee. Ile could only state that had already taken place, and to a considerable extent ; and as well expressed in a petition which he had had the honor of presenting from the Man chester Chamber of Commerce, capital owed no allegiance to the soil, but could transport itself wherever it could more profitably be invested.—( Cheers from the Tory Benches.) That he looked upon as an incontro vertible fact, and he was sorry to say that they were begin ning, to experience the effects of this withdrawal of capital upon the operations of British industry. In some of the great machine manufactories in the borough Which he had the ho nour to represent, the parties directing those establishments bid found great difficulty in retaining in their employment some of their best mechanics who had worked for them for many years—notwithstanding the enormous sums paid to those men to retain their services as skilful workmen, amounting to as much as 5/ per head per week. These parties were solicited by foreigners, and taken abroad for the purpose of facilitating the manufacture of machinery, to be afterwards brcught into competition with them. H e (Mr. P.) had taken occasion to allude, on a former even ing, to an exceedingly injurious system, viz., the exportation of cotton twist; and he regretted to say that they were merely permitted to manufacture that upon sufferance; for as soon as the parties abroad found that they were able to obtain proper remuneration for their capital by employing it in that business, he knew not what means there would he of rct aining even that important branch of their manufactures within the shores of that country.— ( Hear, hear.) The question required the most serious attention of that House. When the time would arrive, and it was pressing on them when they should lose even that, and though he had deplored, and frequently deplored in that House the condition of the hand-loom weavers, if their condition were now bad, he appreheneed that it would become still worse ; and that that expression which had been made use of by the manufacturers connected with the hardware trade, viz , that in order to retain their competition with foreigners, they must work out the very sinews of their artisans before it would come to pass.. Ile had presented on that day a petition from 4,000 hand-loom weavers of Manchester. These petitioners stated that they found it impossible to obtain sufficient remuneration to procure the common ne cessaries of life—that many of them were without clothing or food—that they had not the means of instructing their chir deen,much less of sending them to places of worship or Sun day schools, and that so long as they were subjected to this competition with the foreign manufacturers in consequence of the operation of the Corn-laws they despaired of any re muneration for their labour. They stated that they had to work fifteen hours a day, and that the price of provisions at the present moment was newly double what it was lest year, while many of them regretted to say that instead of its being in the power of the masters to give them better wages they were new receiving inferior wages to what they had twelve months ago when provisions were half the pre sent price. He Would not occupy the time of the House by reading letters upon the subject, but he was exceedingly anxious that that and a variety of interesting subjects would be made the subject of investigation at the bar of the House. He would not now touch upon the general question of the Corn-laws, but would merely support the proposition which had been made by the Hon. Member for IVolverhampton, that evidence be taken at the bar to prove what were the effects of the existing Corn.laws upon the general system of manufactures in that country. He would call upon the landlords to recollect that the manufacturers had drawn largely upon their population, and had found them with active and remunerative employ ment. But if that state of things was about to arrive which he had predicted—if the time would come when foreigners would be able to compete with them, not merely upon neutral ground, but in every market abroad—he must say, that with every wish and every inclination not to give way to exaggerated feelings or apprehensions, he would entertain the most serious fears as to what would become of the industry of that country. Would they be prepared, in the case of a suspension of trade, to take back that population which the manufae turers had taken from them ? He apprehended they How then 1 ura class cu l t r y t o , r u e l sayd ot ey t they w s were p or not t e a d b e to w i s o u o p Ledo the b t them. e agr propose that they should be supported rate le b v y ied a o ra p t o e o lev ti te a d t upon manufacturing in dustr y —a rendered.eunder theoneearl yuse machinery It the li t c o h an by o f t a l e i e t laws was districts were ne cessity, which there w as but little doubt t hey would be in a few years—if they were under the necessity of supporting an idle population, it would operate as an export duty upon every ounce of goods sent to a foreign market. What was to be done with so large a population, which in a few years must be thrown out of employment ? They would in great numbers be in want of work, which they could not get, and of bread, which they would find it im possible to get. He had often heard emigration suggested as a means of reducing the superabundant population, but., if it was an emigration forced upon them by the want of work, by a failure in our manufactures, the word would sound to his cars very much like transportation. He thought the prayer of the petition was so reasonable, that the HouaP aqua find itself compelled to accede to it—he hop :es ed that e ta Would be taken at the bar, in order to sec if the allegation the petition were true, and if so, whether the .renledY. grated was the proSsto• one. Other opportunities avolltt _tt themselves for a discussion of the whole question, he w'rla ld _ n e ° 4 therefore, detain the House further than by making a St ' p ia& til t .. a , appeal to the agricultural Members. Let them not selves in a position in which their fellow they were afraid of hearing the truth. The question:l9s,h, party one—hunger was no party question, neither coultinsT, question of the means of providing provisions for milli() "" made one. Lord HOWICK—Sir, in consequence of what has fan n en d subjects might•say by; from the lion. Members fur Wolverhampton, Derby, 3 of Manchester, I am anxious to take the earliest opportunitY to stating - the reasons which induce me to give my 01) , ° s iti°9 an the motion. I, Sir, oppose the motion not because I advocats for the exist.rs system of Corn-laws, on t he contras' from the first moment 1 had the honour of a seat in this flolusr:: I hive entertained a strong opinion of the impolicy and the ' one es justice of the existing Corn-laws. In the year 1823 I formed a very small minority who joined the Hon. Member for _N s ' n ' s ;tinny in voting against the principle of the present tie's), laws. The experience I have gained since that time has o b l' o J t strengthened my conviction that the existing laws cannot .ty, be prejudicial to the interests of all classes o f the co almen ss and my experience goes to show me that they are re tir e e Ig_u ss. titularly prejudicial to the interests of the agricultural nig —( Cheers. ) Hon. Gentlemen opposite may consider the a paradox, but. when the question comes regularly before i e House I will be prepared to state my reasons for ectn ia g t such a conclusion. In the mean time, I will sfy this, tht asi will oppose the motion nowbefore the House, not because I a'" . „. advocate for the present system of Corn-laws , b ut on the.7sot trary, because that I am an opponent , a firm and consit:s'ir, opponent of the present fluctuating scale of duties. I do °li o ns oppose the motion on the ground of form. The lion. 11 O f ber for Wolverhampton has quoted many precedents, lob. - which I am prepared to admit were most pertin ent to tO the take ject. In my opinion, it is perfectly fit for the House the course prayed for by the petitioners. I can see 1 10 be f o re larity—no impropriety, in adopting that course---.bt, be doing so, we have most seriously to consider whether it " 0 ' 0 ,4 advantageous or disadvantageous to us in arriving at a ! t u a ill view of this very important topic. In my oOsion,• Sir , o il not have au advantageous tendency ; on the eontrarYlost opinion is, that by hearing evidence at the bar w e will ° l l, t he instead of promote the desire which we all ha ve to ettloog question. I oppose the motion, Sir, that by t° to we would cause great delay in arriving at any conclusionb.ire, my opinion we are 1161 V ripe for discussion upon the e a o ,J,,, of Both parties--the opponents equally with those who ar s ' r es siss the present laws, are in possession of the means of / s ett the question. It is not, Sir, so much with respect to th: oo in themselves that there exists any difference of opinion , substantial facts are matters of certainty, and arc acknoo7o°,re to be authentic on all sides. They do not rest upon the sts e statement of witneses either at the bar or before a CAv a o l leisi up stairs, the greater part of them rest upon returns• nit n i n seu se-' documents which have been laid upon the table of this _ s ide they rest upon information which it is impossible for either f the to dispute. From those documents we are made awar e lo ots prices of corn in each year. We are also made aware of the e t 5 10, and imports of every article, and if the information is °°, eient, we can call for snore details—we can call for an i c a ha tsfe mation as must make us masters of the question. All t iron' wish to arrive at. is as to the conclusion we are to dra w s ( s e. these facts, which may be taken as authentic—the nind,ce"„oints, counting for the existence of those facts —these arc te. s ii ba d upon which any real difference of opinion exists. Sir, " o at/ wanted anything to convince me that all the materialsriFtcoolfl for the discussion of this question arc already prepared , 'S s alt have been furnished to me by the elaborate an"etsto• speech of the lion. Gentleman who proposed the r° , ,tli, Every Hon. Member who listened to the speech of th t s a lts Member for Wolverhampton must have perceivoi t•'' fifths of the speech was not. i • favour of any inqury' h ut s s e have formed a i dmirabie speech in favour of an alter!' sin the present laws.— ( Hear, hear.) Taking it in that sen . ls ' io sst I admit the facts and reasoning of the Honourable Gen t 'Ger but that being so, on what ground does the Honourablebe port tleman call upon us to hear evidence at the bar ? Dtd know the nature of the alteration which had taken ow t ete ferent countries? Every Hon. Member cannot fail wiesSer lect that was one of the documents on which the iron. . I% '' cio sel enlarged with the utmost force, and with the greatest Be t ar e of reasoning. But,r,Sir, what more is there to be stated Ocoee points ? We know the facts, and what is desirabl e is toe 001 these fact; with the operation of the Corn-laws ;it sting° Iso how these facts arise from th • operation of the exi f or relative to the importation of corn. Sir, I 1: elieve t oe: sible to connect the tax s hich the Hon. Member ha s ; o tioned with that state of the law. I believe the csnellbli 9 which he arrived is a just one ; but I say, if you can the Pry that:conclusion, you cal rerceive that conaection only by soot( cess of argument and of reasoning ; and to arrive at that, pets no more inconvenient course than the examination of ‘r t tste es Gentlemen who are in the habit of attending Como' t ba this House will concur with me in the opinion I Cl there can be nothing so entirely unsatisfactory, so ell"' s s c in as the examination of witnesses on questionle-bate/ Mon. Questions of opinion require to be discussed in " o f co; argument requires to be continuous—the several stets übe., soiling require to be made one after another—(llear) . iolt you attempt to do this by question and answer, the re; ii sell that you come to conclusions that arc illogical, 0- 0 r ` c t 1 - 1° 11 ( to work conviction upon any mind. I am sure that Gentlemen who are frequently in attendance on coffin ° ;p i, this House can hardly fail to have arrived at a different lies' What is really valuable in the Reports of our O ar :: aitu td e f what is really of intrinsic value and service—is, f t „ - ,,e1 0 , 1 t discussions on the statements of fact—the various staS -- c i sr:j fast which ill the course of such examination are (die ° i • ti upon this subject of the Corn-laws we have those s t s ' s :rre'' facts which enable us to form a judgment in tho ebt e t manner. I quite agree with the Hon. Member Jar be fl r' ter, who spoke in reply to the lion. Baronet. the A s i c° '„resc fi d Wiltshire, in saying that there is no subject at ta e ri r t iolts moment more deserving of occupying the time and the House—there is none to which we can more Kofita sor ba a large share of our consideration.—(Cheers.) a t , t be sideiation, to be valuable—that consideration , t ° ao t ,j otte o , portant—should be given in discussion and debates and es:; the form of a desultory and inconclusive' examination 0 tb' nesses at the bar. But, if I vhsre convinced that o° o o s nether information was beceSSary, and infoirnation ° sta tic s ' description that it could only be obtained by the ex a s tn o - ld''''f of witnesses—if I were satisfied upon this pOint, I su ° ; ns t , that it was worse than idle to conduct. the inquiry by la- ol ' ial / a Committee of the whole House. Have not Select Co 0 for tees been often found the most inconvenient iiistrigaesit conducting an inquiry? It is found that Hon. Mentbehrt'otstsi'' ing their own particular views, examined WittlesSeS V6t t .. i 5 different objects and intentions. The result is, that " o ne s ,' difficult indeed to follow anything like a regular and c ° is be" line of examination. That ;examination almost i s 5 0 comes desultory, irregular, and inconclusive, is afi ll o oe s ; rid of this inconvenience an arrangement that no Hon, Member who has commenced a I' s , S' line of examination, shall be interrupted to the C' ° i - n tel l . l l, The result of that arrangement is, that you hav delays' Ob'- nable and useless repetition of evidence, you have I, are almost endless, and a mass of evidence which. a ltbis s i :rs take the trouble to read.—(Hear, hear. ) Sir, ' s ' irar se , been practically found to be the result of conducting a ° o itt t into any complex subject by a very numerous Select Crace's, tat and this has been so universally acl;nowledged on al l rani t o within the last two or three years we have agreed t oo ° welt" number of Members who shall be put upon any t S it i t e ct except for some spe c ial reason, to fifteen names. 'us', S e e r this inconvenience is experienced even in a nurner °- i a tr s s Committee, just let me ask what would be the state; ho lie te t amination conducted before this House. Does anY be 0 0 1° 0 that a regular and connected examination could be c s od in this manlier, because Hon. Members who Prorojneoot mode of proceeding, must remember that if they be . g — s , clef it will not be i n their power to limit it. 00°, 4 0 confine the examination of witnesses to some tS":".ibeir s s o questions, prepared beforehand by a comm ittee; ° oat , to nuraber.—(Hear, hear). If we were to atiesnPtooriegse subject ourselves to the great reproach, by enticoassseflit'sti, stifle the truth. No sir, each witness must. bc .as ;to t cross-examined—he might be cross-exaniinecl V:bi s or one hundred members, each having their .own Ortood, to prove, and their own particular notion to rOkf'.g s ail° tal cross-examination. Nor is this all : if you es:atti ln ito ess e ' si ef t on one side, you cannot possibly refuse to hear w oo sactv b , another.—( Hear, hcar). You cannot hear the nai l es see adduce their evidence, to show that the Corn ` ,l ' 9 r t e , to worked injuriously to them, and afterr a ! o te A hearing witnesses no the part of the lande" ss t o " ld s f o cea give you their views of the injury which ",,:ea a. ste r from their repeal. And what would be the bagel stWattels'' you would have witnesses from E •gland, fin from Jr land to tell yo . what was the state os td ea s', i;. thes • different parts of the ountry—you s. ° Tee P r s ic a . o l l upon to go into the further question :f what Is S' - 0 which Corti could be grown, is Poland, in Rufs'as' in i d °, or even in India, according to the statement s 00° Member for Wolverhampton ; and you W0111(1 frO ° efurt'- le test the evidence you would hear - upon these poo t : e t, eo!, set of witnesses, by the examination of another beea ss tity should have the same questions raised which hay ° ri d ins son all Committees, on agricultural distress, viz. ho 5:01 it does not form an ess.enti.l part of such inguLrl:,, he, interminabl question of th • C u rrency--- - ( P is e- jildP" In for the Honourable Member for the Nor t "oiriPt li° ,. Yorkshire, and the Honourable Member for , would pronounce such an inquiry as this t o be 11.tee7....-.to sire, unless you went into that never-ending subi e be re Is hear. ) With such an inqoiry as this before us, tef ° t 'bat expect it will end? Will one Seision suffice airy salo three Sessions suffice to conclude such an i nc t s t l ao, / ; t i or r ' s Sir, I say they will not; and I say that those - s i o g sss i gess believe that a change in the Corn-laws is of pre' hott Offur ante—( Hear, hear )—that not only the prosperitY sos e co sts , , safety of the country, are hazarded by the continn; b o e rS I J present system.—(Cheers. ).—those Gentlemen o bar e n with me in that opinion will hesitate before t heY e tit c t ; this inquiry, because, if we embark uP ° o n 0 1,1 e ocean of inquiry at the instance of those Gentle: m oss' is IS O tend for a change in the law, it will .be le t I ofer resist it before it arrives at its close. It rem' sfie 117 0 0 , them, when they find themselves wearied,. by " a %. o „ic e which that inquiry proceeds, by the Volumes. a t :, e evidence which they have before them., it tql let fio u i t ar . them, in this state of things, to say, " Olt, n° l a te tia',"be done with the inquiry. Let us proceed to legiss'se ask t° ; subject—let us return to the track from which '..„ bat th'ota~ nately departed in the first instance; let 'iii, ss t s ti FS; GO t Di' o f discussion of the subject in the no.s6.''' o e s ssi t ts when they wish to retrace their steps; will be itl he rie e l r ef„(l remarks, " By your conduct you have 'sidrnite d i 'v e reci t ' A ol the inquiry—we hold you to your own admission. 'it pit' i o having commenced this investigation, not to t arc t s, incomplete. We call upon you to finish it, tom ie 0 1 ° pes r o t whole case, to know the real truth, and the ;,„g j fore you venture to legislate upon a s t d ` atre c he — pre t° ,, o r e so many important interests." This would t s “ b " e ; t' s . " l e in which the advocates of the change vena le ` o bje a h ' e°, o ` t s were the opponent of any change—if .11 'Y wh ic- are to stifle discussion, and prevent these debatc s t his ieb 'to lead to a reform and change in our policY --if ~re ` a c he object, I should recommend that precise Inea i s i - e d trP7of ` fo r lion. Member for Wolverhampton this night P ar ",el o , adopt. I have heard with great pleasure , (1• 0°- o co speech of my Hon. Friend, in which he stated ht t piste s f thinking a change in the Corn-laws necessary, b a st real i aol vain for anything like an intellitsent statement of so tto s adopting that particular course. 'When not if °lt ' er time g s ee' e s to that • art of his speech he seemed to hurry n'tigs h° weehs to touch the question lightly and gently, a , th . ° f hi , all Of conscious of the inherent weakness of that pars ° 00 01 1 , , t he and like a skilful advocate wished to divert the ° a l io b his at all like a valid reason for pursuing the " o i le at fr u i s c lec i House from the subject as speedily as possible. _ s i rs , %O e o Honourable Friend recommends, that I cot c d that e r es' i o t part of his speech, seemed to be that he intag' o , e , l , o r itt i ti an or' Produced at the bar would make a rots el' g tl 'atee. Or to than evidence produced before a Select Com ni ifie ieot t oe s , tance to induce to induce Hon. Members to pia cee es sace o , know what queetions would be considered of Ilk the tro d s s o ce s' peruse the immense folios which gene ra w hich . es ti' o f Select Committees. This is not the manner i°_sr either on t ken ibeforenor out of this House. Committees is brought isnot to jn h g n e t n . c ep r i s' t h a ° o 7 af j Members reading the evidence thus prOduc?'-; s ubj c t ' s persons who really felt an interest ita "' thos e oo r d es it ul i t n ing all fr i o t in s btehaerminssmsn. tshtaerings,pv_soeneateis,lo,ar_,efot)oreff:s. theyt whol . reasoning u w n e d r understood s h What would be the effect. of hearing the e",S ,bether t t-ought to bear on the House ru s4ls ,„ce lie' Committee of that House? I doubt nice" 1, 4;0 . tno 1 3/to 10 41 ;. - Kel it 'Mltir 3 441 v., ~ liix . t /T j '"t v ,„ 1•; ". , ,•/!, ~L ~n 4 )i) 14 - '? 'l4t '~i ~. ~~ ~ ~ LtA.