The Sun. — London, England, 1850-05-15 00:00:00

:t*IP 99 YY ~s ,al ~'~~P~ IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT• HOUSE OF LORDS, May 14. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock. THE HOLIDAYS. In answer to Lord STANLEY, The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that he should en Friday move the adjournment of the House to Mon shy se'rmight. PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENTS. Lord POSTMAN meted for the appointment of a Committee to consider the law relating to parochial assessments. This Committee was necessary to assist their Lordships in coming to a decision o n the subject-matter of certain Bills which might come up to them from the other House of Parliament. It was manifest that if a deteriora tion of rateable property took place there must be some alteration in the assessment of those rates—(Hear, hear)—and therefore it was necessary that they should go carefully into those matters. The heaviest burdens upon land arose out of the law of settlement, and it was impossible to legislate upon the subject without coining to some understanding upon the subject of rating. It was desirable that rating should take place equitably upon all species of property, and that there should be one uniform system of rating. At present, while some parishes paid 23 per cent. on their rental to the poor rates, others only paid 2 per cent. These circurn stancPs, he thought, justified him in calling their attention to the subject of parochial assess ment. Among other subjects which would come under the consideration of the Committee would be the raring of railways and the rating of stock in trade. Than they should endeavour to devise some method of altering the present system of constant cbango of the basis on which the rate is made; he thought no change should be made without cause shown for such change before some tribunal. He also thought they should consider how best they could get rid of mere forms by which rates were quashed on legal technicalities. Then there were the questions of the rating of small tenements, and of who was to make, to collect, or to alter the rate. 'He thought all the property of the country should contribute its fair proportion towards the maintenance of the poverty of the country. With regard to the county rate, that was in peint of feet a part of the poorfrate. The Noble Lord concluded by moving for a select Committee. The Bishop of LONDON supported the motion. The Ytarquis of LANSDOWNE was understood to say that he had no objecvion to the motion. Earl FIT ZWILLIAXL hoped the investigations before the Committee would not be conducted in such a manner as• to lead either to union or national rating.—(Hear, hear.) He wished to lead their Lordships to con sider whether it was desirable that there should be a poor rate at all, or a highway rate, or any separate rate, and whether it would not be better to re-organize the whole system of rating for local purposes. Be be lieved it would be better to have one parochial rate only, out of which certain sums should be awarded for the maintenance of the poor, of the highways, and of the Church. He thought it would be better to do away with all special rates, and to have one local treasury to defray all these charges. The Earl of MALMESBURY did not agree with the Nobly Lord as to the necessity of a Committee. They • were all too well informed on the subject to need an investigation. and he thought the Government should have brought in some measure on their own responsibility to relieve those who suffered from the present system of rating, which pressed most hardly upon certain interests. He thought the poor-rate should be levied by a poundage upon every description of property and income. He would recommend the Noble Lord, when he acted as chairman of this Committee, to avoid mixing up the question of poor-rate with that of any other rate. Lord HATIIERTON thought it sconld be desirable to institute this inquiry, in order to enable the House properly to deal with any rate Bill that might come be fore it. There could be no doubt but that any parish whielti.by mismanagement, had increased the'amount of its rates, would be exceedingly glad, by means of a national or general rate, to throw the burden on the shoulders of its neighbours. Let them look at Ireland; if they had not localised the rate then they would by this time have had a fearful battle between the property and the population of the country. He hoped his Noble Friend • would endeavour to increase the description of property at present liable to rating. The motion was then agreed to. PETITIONS. The Earl of M‘kLMESBURY presented a petition from Mr. George Hutchinson, the author of " A Plea for the Equalisation of the Poor-rates," praying the House to investigate the merits of his proposition. The Earl of WARWICK and BROOKE presented a petition from the agriculturists of Warwickshire, com plaining of distress, and praying for a re-enactment of protective duties on the importation of corn and other articles of agricultural produce. PARISH CONSTABLES BILL. On the motion of the Earl of ROMNEY, this Bill passed through Committee. Several verbal amendments were introduced into the Bill. SUNDAY TRADING BILL. On the motion of the Earl of HARROWBY, the House resolved itself into Committee on this Bill. Lord BE ,I,UMONT said that as several alterations had been introduced into the Bill, as, for instance, a clause had been introduced, inflicting a penalty of ss. per beard oa a barber for every beard he might shave on a Sunday, he thought the Bill ought to be recommitted in a Coin enittee of the whole House, so as to give the House an opportuuitv of deciding whether it would consent to such a tari . iF of beards. The sL then reported progress, the House resumed, and the Bill was ordered to be re-committed on Thursday. JUDGMENTS (IRELAND) BILL. The Marq'tis of LANSDOWNE, in moving the second reading of thin Bill, stated that its object was to facilitate the sales of land which were at present going on in Ireland with so much benefit, by attracting capital to that country. After referring to the serious evils which arose out of the existing law of judgments, the Noble Marquis briefly explained the remedies which the Bill proposed to apply to those grievances. The effect of the Bill, he said, would be greatly to increase the number and value of marketable titles in Ireland, and, in proportion as the number and value of market able titles were increased, in the same proportion would the proprietors of land in that country be benefited. AU he asked of their Lordships in now proposing the second reading of the Bill was that they would merely express their wish to apply a remedy to a great and crying evil which at this particular moment hung heavily upon a class whom it had always been the wish as well as the policy of their Lordships to conciliate. The - Earl of GLENGALL remarked, that it was no recommendation of the Bill in his eyes to be told that it would facilitate the working of the Encumbered Estates Act; for he believed that of all the Bills that had ever disgraced Parliament that was the worst. It was neither more nor less than an act of confiscation. By the operation of that measure, estates worth 25 or 30 years' purchase had been sold at from 11 to 14 years' purchase. He hoped to live to see the day when the people of Ireland would meet on College-green to wit ness the burnin; of the Parliamentary titles by the hands of the common hangman. The Noble Earl then euggested several amendments in the Bill before the House, and laid them on the table with the view of their being proposed in Committee. The Bill wet then read a second time; to be committed on Monday after Whitsun week. ESTATES LEASING (IRELAND) BILL. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the second reading a the Estates Leasing (Ireland) Bill, the object of which, he explained, was to increase the powers of persons having a limited interest in landed property to grant leases. Lord INIONTEAGLE intimated his intention to pro- pose amendments in Committee. Lord REDESDA LE objected t 3 certain provisions of the Bill, which would enable a person, at t he last hour of his life, to lease out a farm for ninety-nine years, __therebyt depriving his successor of the benefit of the evxruepeeeariynLak tw T e o nt p f Tn ea o r t s e w f a s. s r n m ,ce i ii m sa p r r j o ,. vements no term The T 1 of GI ENGALL also gave notice of amendments. Ho " show y -nine tenant who had the residue of a lease to nine demise t h a t y t ers o a another, who cou ld o b ta i n a l Ease for n afew wordsagai roui against the landlord. themer After 'pis of LANS DOWNE, The Bill was re a d a seconds ADVANCES BlLL.time. DISTRESSED UNIONS On the motion for goinginato Committee on th e Dis tressed Unions Advance s and (Ireland) Bill, Repayment of Adv ances Lord MONTEAGLE expressed his Bill r mu conviction t h at wis w h o e u d id b t w itlfnturconsidetahle amendme n t s t h e d uct ive'of evil rather than good. He I. 4t iy wremiutl their Lordships that the great Pae bulk of pro the debts to wh ich the measure related had not been eaared by the p ro p rietors of Ireland, but ha d under Labour -rate A ct been forced on the laud of Ireland blye the vice•gUardiallS selected by the Liovernmenr. tration he referred to the cases of Kilrush, and Listowell, whera the debt bad been greatly increased under the atlininistration of these officers. Then theleun traeti hail beets entered into at rates rising 10, 20, 30, and sometimes 40 per cent. above the market price. But on converting a bad into a good security, it was pre- But to pay at the r ate of a bad.seeurity. The Bill " l 'kave the Treasuty power to apportion the debt among the uni o n s , baronies, electoral divisions, and townlands subject to no responsibility or restraint, and it would require Mr. Babbsae's calculatinc, m achine to solve the complicated questions which might 6 be raised under the Bill. flow such a Bill should have received the assent of the representatives of the people he could not under stand; and he hoped a clause would be introduced allowing what might be done by the Treasury under the BilA to be brought under the review of Parliament here after. After a few word: from the Earls of GLENGALL and The Marquis of LA.NSDOWNE remarked that it ;was necessary to make a distinction between tho : ttissrEssed unions and those which were better 41 , 1,a to discharge their obligations, and no doubt ;rice I be entertained that the discretionary power ,nsted in the Treasury would be exercised with due regard to the equity of each case. When the Noble 'Lord referred to the manner in which money had been expended in Ireland under certain Acts of Parliament, he ()ugly, to have borne in mind the circumstances under which those Acts were passed. They were intended to meet a great calamity, and the Noble Lord himself sug gested no other mode of coping with that calamity. It was admitted at the thee that the machinery by which the Acts of the Legislature were to be put in motion was clogged by many un4void.thlo difficulties, but, after Ail ! it clq.l not appear that any serious abuses had oc curred. If the proprietors and the tsnantryof Ireland_had, in some been c4llO upp l i to contribute to an un. 1 THE SUN, LONDON, prosperity, rests on the reestablishment of a just sys tem of import duties.' Ido not deny, or wish in any way to shrink from the responsibility which rests upon her Majesty's Government for the line of policy they have adopted; but no such proposition has been made to the House of Commons, and the House of Commons has not rejected any such proposition." Now the proposition which he (Mr. G. Berkeley) had to bring before the House was one that could not be misunderstood by those out of doors, who were anxious to distinguish their friends from their foes. He asked the House why no such proposi tion had been made before? Were not the steps to such a proposition attempted by Hon. Gentlemen oppo site? Did they not approach the question when they asked for a fair consideration of the depression now existing in the agricultural districts? Did they not ap proach the question more than once by motions? And were not those steps met by the Government in every stage, and in every instance, almost with contempt, but certainly with decided opposition?—(Hear, hear.) The distress was asserted at the opening of Parliament. Was not the suffering of the agricultural interest alluded to in the Speech from the Throne? Was it not thereafter denied that distress did exist?—(Hear, hear.) He asked the House, did not the Government, and those Hon. Gentlemen who supported her Majesty's Government, assert that the landed proprietors—the Lords and Com mons of this country—made and kept up a vain and vexatious cry of distress for the sole and sordid and miserable purpose of maintaining their high rents? —(Hear, hear.) He asked the House was not the landed interest outrag ed and insulted by that as sertion?—(Hear, hear.) A more insulting or un worthy assertion had never emanated from the Go vernment benches.—(Hear, hear.) He asked, did not the Government close the door against any attempt at bringing the question forward?—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, in his reply, had gone on to say, " I think it would neither be desirable to go back from free trade to prohibition or restriction, nor advisable to dissolve Parliament in order to ask the opinion of the country upon the subject. That is the conclusion to which I have come. With respect to the suffering which has been stated to exist, it is neither inconsistent with my expeetations, nor inconsistent with what I have heard, that in various parts of the country deep suffering does exist, and that that suffering is partly—and I should say in part only—owing to recent changes in our commer cial laws." There, then, at last they had an admission from the Prime Minister that suffering did exist—an admission of a matter that had been frequently denied by him, and the landed proprietors were, by that ad mission in some respect relieved from the insult of being charged with striving merely to keep up the price of theit:' rents. Were It not that he felt the greatest re spect for the Noble' Lord's character, both in public and in private—a respect which he was proud to say he entertained—he should have been disposed to draw a peculiar inference from what followed in the Noble Lord's reply. It was this—" I believe that these changes were in their general aspect inevitable. I believe that ten years ago it might have been foreseen that this country, as it became more opulent and commercial, would require great changes in that direction, and my object was at that time to make the transition accom panied by as little suffering and distress as possible. But the advice I gave with that view was rejected, not only with contempt, but with indignation." Were it not that he knew the Noble Lord was iucapable of enter taining such a feeling, ho should have been led to sup pose that in that paragtiaph he had spoken with some feeling of bitterness towards those gentlemen who 130 foregone his advice.—(Hear, hear.) But there never was a time when the country required so much attention as it did at present. Agricultural distress was so general, so universal—they were trenching upon such immediate ruin, that there was no pos sibility of avoiding attending to their condition. The union workhouses were full to overflowing. The people were clamorous for a reduction of rents—the labourers were working at reduced wages. Wheat had become reduced in price so low that the farmers could no longer grow it with any profit. The average price was now about 101. a load, and the importation of foreign corn showed no probability of becoming less in amount. There was no prospect of any reward for agriculturists. What, then, were they to do? They locked for some notice from the Government, but they had it not. They looked for some alleviation from the Legislature, but they had it not. They then looked to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and hoped that in his budget they would find some boon for them, some alleviation of their con dition, But what did they find? What did the Free trade Government do for them, after all their promises of retrenchment and economy? Why they did nothing. They gave them bricks when they asked for breari.---- (Hear.) But in removing the brick duties they benefitted only some of the landed proprietors, not the tenant-farmers; but the great bulk of the benefit went to the manufacturers and the manufacturing towns. And having thus adverted to the conduct of the Government, he would allude to the course pursued in pretending to account for the prevailing distress. The landlords were first told that all they had to do to meet it was to reduce their rents. He maintained that no re duction of rent would have alleviated it; and that no Government and no Member of that House had any right to ask private individuals to meet difficulties which their public legislation had occasioned. It was not, and it could not be, a question of rent.—(Hear, hear.) And, moreover, had the rents been reduced to such an extent as that the landed proprietors would have been ruined, the agriculturists would not still have been benefitte 1 , and the manufacturers would soon find that the ruin which had affected the agriculturists must reach them in turn. They had been told that the expe riment would be finally successful. He denied that it was an experiment. But whatever it was, it had lasted three years, and it had been sufficiently tried and found unsuccessful. When was it to end?—(Hear) If they were not satisfied with the ruin which their hybrid mea sure bad already occasioned, when, he asked, would they be content? Why, there was not a single speck upon the political horiam which gave them hope that it would ever be successful. The distress having become at last too evident to be longer denied, it was admitted. It was admitted now, when farm sales were taking place every day, and the tenant-farmers could not pay any rents, and they were told for comfort that the present low prices of provisions would not last, and that high prices would shortly come again. Why, the free-traders had set out with stating that low prices were what they wished to maintain.—((:heers.) That was the boon which they promised to bestow upon the country. But now they turned round, and said, that things would be better, and prices would be higher soon.—(Hear.) Ac cording to that reasoning, the liovernment would allow that it was possible to buy gold too dear; and that pro visions might be so low as not to be remunerative to the producer in this country. But how wore they to abate the evil unless they gave their labourers sufficient protection? He, however, was not about to ask the House to _ reconsider their erroneous policy. He only asked that due considera tion might be given to it, and that a Committee might be appointed to advise some remedy for the great dis tress under which the agricultural interest was suffer ing. If a cheap loaf was not the object of free trade, he hoped that her Majesty's Government would explain chat its object was? One member of that Government had said that he did not expect that prices would fall so low as they had done, and on that ground alone he thought that they were entitled to demand a revision of he present law. If the present prices were to continue —if we were still to be dependent upon the foreigner— the farmers would soon be obliged to give up cultivation, and what would become of England then? They were told that a bread-tax could no longer be tolerated—that protection was dead and buried. How came it then that there were articles of food upon which a duty was .till levied? He held that the necessity of protection was acknowledged by the list of articles on which a duty was imposed—a list comprehending the names of thirty-six substances produced by manufacturing and thirty. five by agricultural industry. If it were to be said that they had no right to impose taxation upon the food of the people, what right had they to levy taxation upon the edible articles in question? If free trade therefore were an experiment, he asked why had they not tried that experiment in full? Why did they not allow the farmer to have the full benefit of what was fairly and really free trade, instead cf sup porting the present hybrid measure, which, if persisted in, would go far to ruin all the interests of the state. Not content, however, with this partial application of the free-trade system, they had run counter to every dictate of honour, justice, and religion, by admitting .lave-grown produce—thus erring upon moral as well as upon economical grounds. No doubt it would be said, so far as regarded the latter consideration, that the present low prices would not continue. The last re turns, however, showed them still to be in a declining condition, and although the markets at this moment ex hibited a tendency to look up, that fact was, in a great measure, to be attributed to the late remarkable preva lence of easterly winds preventing rapid importation. Prices might partially get up in this way, but they would and that after the next harvest they would fall lower than ever they had done. In America and other coun tries a greater breadth of ground was sown with wheat than during any past year; and he felt certain, from all he saw, that they had not as yet by any means seen the worst as regarded the prices of agricultural produce. N o w, what had been the predictions of the leading ad vocates of free trade as to the results of their doctrine? They had told the people that the land would be a land flowing with milk and honey—that there l was happi nessand prosperity in store for every one under a free trade regime. Was such the case ? No ; the Martinreality was as different from th e p romise as was the reality of the ob Mississippi estate tatee account trade c Ec Eden, nt p g r i describedovveen of it d yh the land speculator. Al " ti t its ad vocates ua zt, ze whatir been their wrong in premises—w rong i n from h All that Freetheir conclusions —thoroughly wrong, in fact, fr om fi rst to last.—(Hear, hear.) Let t he Howe rememb er the promises made to the farmers by the Honourable Gen tleman the Member for the West Riding. He pro ' rnised them a reign of happy abundance—he promised the labourers an increase of wages.—(Hear.) Had this promise come true ?—(Hear, hear.) Were not the labourers in some counties now reduced to six shillings a week?—a sum which gave them less money, in propor tion, to buy the cheap loaf than they had before to pur chase the dear one. As for the farmers, was it to be supposed that men would work with increased activity when the value of their produce was taken away—(Hear, hear)—or was it to be supposed that they would bear with patient passiveness any such proceeding on the part of the Legislature?—(llear, hear.) Yet, now let the House observe how every impatient word which fell from the farmers was marked and scrutiniserl.—(Hear, hear.) The lion. Gentleman the Member for the %Vest Riding had told the agriculturists that they were as dull as the oxen which they drove, and the Hon. Gentleman cthoewaMrdems;bye'rettonro A S l o a o n n c e h r e s t % e , e r r h e a dt the f stigmatisedarmer s f u t h e edmt o a b s e becoming restive in their turn, than their speeches were branded by the free - traders as containin g threats of a re volutionary character. As soon as the farmers, who, of all classes had the most reason to use blisty expressions, did hold language of the kind, the free:trade rs,who ought to be the last, were the first to take the matter up; and already he found that there was an intention announced of moving that the yeomanry forces should no longer be tolerated,—(Hear, hear.) Why, he asked, was a hasty expression or so to be so seriously visited, and that by men who had been such great sinners in the same way themselves ? What he wondered at was, that the yeo manry and farmers had been quite so long. Not that he advocated an appeal to violence, but he did believe that if farmers had bestirred themselves in time, they would not have found themselves in the position in which they now stood. The advice given to them to continue to agitate until they should find themselves properly and fairly represented in the House of Commons was good advice, and he hoped that it would be acted upon.— (Hear, hear.) He challenged, any free-trader to point to one instance of any of our institutions having been improved by free trade. The state of the country, par ticularly in the rural districts, told quite a different story from that of improvement. (The Honourable Gentleman then proceeded at considerable length to read long tabular statements of figures, purport ing to show the great depreciation in the value of landed property in the county of Suffolk since the ad vent of free trade, the general results being that the capital employed in agriculture in the county had been reduced in value from 6,418,0001. to 4,258,6671.) The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to quote various letters from different parts of the country, giving accounts of the depressed state of agriculture. A correspondent from Gloucestershire, a gentleman of high authority, had written, that unless some alteration were made in the existing laws, half of the farmers would be ruined in the course of the next t we l ve mont h s . M any h a d b een already obliged to sacrifice their little private property to pay their rents. How, indeed, could it be otherwise, when one corn-merchant in Bristol had imported great quantities of cora at as. a bushel. The next letter was from a farmer, near Ely, in Cambridgeshire. This gentleman wrote that that county was fast approaching ruin, and that the farmers could not go on with the pre sent low prices of agricultural produce. While the dif ference between a remunerating and an unduly low price was , hardly felt by the consumer, it was ruin to the farmer, the labourer, and to all trades depending upon agricul ture. He (Mr. G. Berkeley) therefore asked the House to take these represectations into consideration, and to deliberate as to whether it was not time for this experiment of free trade to be put an end to. It was time, in his opinion, that a line should be drawn limiting the distress of the country. If they could not economise, and reduce the burdens upon land so as to allow the home farmer to compete with the foreigner, he called upon them to give native industry sufficient protection. Let them not persist in refusing to confess that they had been in the wrong, and that they had been pursuing a course which was eminently qualified to prostrate the principal interest of the kingdom. At all events the House would not, he hoped, deceive themselves with the idea that the agitation now going on was about to be put an end to.—(Great Protectionist cheering.) He was aware that for the present they would be forced to allow the present hybrid measure to continue, because the Go vernment used unconstitutional means to force its ra tjorities.—(Hear, hear.) Those who were afraid of a dissolution were obliged to vote for Ministers.—(il ear , hear.) Why, was not there a letter rec en tly published from one of the Members for Westminster, stating that the Government had forced him to vote for them against his conscience?—(Hear, hear, oh, oh, and laughter.) For his own part, be would always rather yield his seat than vote against the dic tates of his opinions.—(Hear.) It was time, however, if Hon. Gentlemen were to be thus coerced into voting, that something should be done for the reform of the House itself. It was not without great pain that he now found himself imperatively obliged to sever—in one re spect at least—his political connexion with the Noble Lord at the head of the Government. Notwithstanding he brought forward this motion—still claiming to be a free-trader—(oh, oh, and cheers)—still advocating the cause of free trade, which the country did not yet possess, and upon which odium had been thrown, by the insufficient manner in which it had been carried out. At present the policy in operation gave a cheap loaf to one portion of the country at the expense of the other. In familiar language, they were robbing Peter to pay Paul—taking from one man the produce of his acres to enrich therewith his neighbour. The Govern ment, he believed, did not think they had the power to put their theory of free trade into practice, and under those circumstances they ought to retrace their steps, and give the sufferinginterest he• represented some chance of better days. By all that the Govern ment and the House held most dear, he implored them to re-consider the present measure of free trade, and show some sympathy for those who in times of war and trouble were England's best supporters. He repre sented an interest from whose ranks our armies and martial forces were supplied, but which was now fast sinking to decay and ruin. The industry of England was no longer flourishing, and foreigners w e r e r ea pi ng the benefits of our legislation, for which they thanked the Hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire. In conclusion, be trusted that his motion would at all events have the effect of showing the farmers out of doors, to whom they would have to look for assistance, and of exhibiting how gentlemen who bad come to that House pledged to protect native industry had for feited their pledges. Of this he felt assured, that if the Noble Lord at the head of the Government would retrace his policy in favour of that interest which had stood by so many Governments in times gone by—if he would give protection to all classes alike, and hold out some hope for the future, he could appeal with a clearer conscience for the blessing of Pro vidence on the councils over which he had so long pre sided.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member concluded by moving, " That this House will resolve itself into a Com mittee of the whole House, to take into consideration the Acts relating to the importation of foreign corn." Colonel DUNNE seconded the motion. Mr. HASTIE (Paisley) had heard no grounds laid by the lion. Member for West Gloucestershire which should justify the House in acceding to his proposal; on the newspapers admitted in theatc the country—broad contrary, he had only heard that which was going the assertionr und of w alli without o t u h t data. e pre sent moment, as for some six months past, the price of corn had been very low, but he denied that it had been lower than during a long period under protec tive laws. Until the price of corn should have been at a lower price under free trade than under the protective system, and for a longer period, he contended there was no grounds for the proposed inquiry. But whenever it should happen that for three consecutive years the price should be lower than under protection, and the farmers showed that they had been ruined in consequence— (Laughter)—ho should be willing to grant a Committee such as that now asked for. Now, with regard to the importation of f 'reign corn, he believed it would be found, that taking the ruling price of corn for the last half-century in those corn-growing countries which competed with us, it would he impossible for the ports of the Baltic or America to compete with us lower than at 455. per quarter fur wheat, and other grain in proportion. From America, in its present state, he did not think this country need fear the importation of corn at less than 455. Taking for the last twenty years the average price of wheat in New Orleans, the cheapest wheat port in America, it would be found to he not below 345. or 358. a quarter, and it could not be imported to this country under 455. In times of scarcity at home, no doubt, im portations must take place from abroad; but he felt satis fied that country gentlemen would not think of weighing the injury done to the farmers with the boon con ferred on the great bulk of the population in such periods of scarcity. The only difference between the manufac- turers and the agriculturists was, that the former adapted themselves more to the altered circumstances which might surround them, and employed superior skill. But whether there was protection or not, there would be complaints of agricultural distress. From 1832 to 1835 such complaints hal been rife. He denied the allegations of the Hon. Mover, that our agriculturists were competing with untaxed growers of corn; for France, from which our largest supplies came, was taxed very nearly as high as England. The large sup ply from that country last year might be accounted for partly on account of an abundant harvest, partly on ac count of the desire of the growers, in the present politi cal aspect of affairs, to realise capital. The real injury to the farmers was inflicted by the landlords themselves, who told them that they could not com pete with the foreigners, and were believed.—(Hear, hear.) When this idea had been forced into the minds of the farmers, it was not an easy matter to dispossess it. But believing that free-trade measures had not had the injurious effect attributed to them, but that at the present moment the poor were better clad and fed, and were more fully employed than at any former period; and, moreover, that the charges upon land were less than they had formerly been, be regarded the present motion as uncalled for and unnecessary. Colonel SIBTIIORP ridiculed the recommendation of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, that the farmers should wait until they were ruined before they preferred their complaint's and denied that free trade had produced the good effects claimed for it. With re gard to the present proposal, he thought you might as well attempt to get blood out of a mill-stone as justice out of a Committee of the House of Commons as at pre sent constituted.—(Laughter.) It would have been better if the Hon. Member for West Gloucestershire had recommended a dissolution of Parliament and a change of Ministry. Who were to take the place of the present Ministry he knew not. The Government had been bad enough before; it was not much bett er now. They were, in soot, a previous lot altogether. A dissolution would at all events preclude those who had broken their pledges to their constituents from again seeking the House of Commons as an asylum and place of refuge.—(Loud laughter.) He believed that the Noble Lord at the head of the Governmnet was not in disposed to assist the agricultural interest, but that he shrunk from porilling his administration by so doing. The advice he (Colonel Sibthorp) should give to the agriculturists was to agitate and to register, and if that insulted body adopted that advice he felt no doubt as to the result. Mr. PLUMPTRE confessed that he had failed to de rive one jot of consolation from the prophecy of the Honourable Member for Paisley (Mr. Ilastie) that corn from America could not be imported here under 455. a quarter. It was a downright delusion and fallacy to make such an assertion, for he (Mr. Plunaptre) had heard that there were illimitable tracts of land in America which would be made to supply corn at a much cheaper rate. The Honourable Member had also recommended that the language of encouragement and not of despair should be addressed to the agricultural interest, and had supposed a similarity between the conditions of agri culture and manufactures, when, in fact, there was dis similarity. He was sorry the Government had not held out to those who were confessedly now in great distress, and apprehending still more, any ground of hope for the future; and to tell them, although they had no prospect of encouragement, to use more energy, capital and skill, was only adding insult to injury. The maxim of the Government appeared to be, " Perish agriculture; necessary expenditure, it must not be forgotten that this part of the United Kingdom had been most liberal of its aid to the sister country. The Bill then passed through Committee, and was olitc , l to be read a third time.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 14. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and passed:— Bolton Improvement. Manchester Rectory Division. The following Bills were considered and agreed to:— Dublin and Drogheda Railway. London (City) Improvements. Reading Cattle Market. LONDON (WATFORD) SPRING WATER COM.; MANY BILL. On the motion that this Bill be read a second time, Mr. REPTON moved that it be read a second time that day six months. Mr. B. OSBORNE said he thought great public in terests were involved in the supply of water to the me tropolis, and in his opinion the House would be doing a fair thing if they sent this and all other water Bills relating to the metropolis to a Select Com mittee. He could not help expressing his astonishment that her Majesty's Ministers had not informed the House what their intentions were with respect to those water Bills for the metropolis. He must call on his Right Hon. Friend the Home Secretary to explain to the House what the intentions of the Go vernment were with regard to the supply of water to the metropolis. Sir G. GREY said that there was no foundation for the report which he had only just heard, that the treat ment which those water Bills would receive at the hands of the Government depended on the fate of the Extra mural Interment Act. The question of the supply of water to the metropolis had been referred to the consideration of the Board of Health, and he had every reason to suppose that that board had devoted its greatest consideration to that question. Previous to Easter the Board commu nicated that it had not as yet been able to make a report, and it suggested that it would be expedient for the House and the public at large if those Bills were not al lowed to proceed until the report were published. In accordance with that communication he had moved the postponement of those Bills until after Easter. The re port of the Board was not yet published, and though he did not think it justifiable to delay the Bill for the purpose of receiving the report, still, perhaps, the House would think it desirable to postpone the Bills al together until another session. Lord ASHLEY did not think it desirable that these Bills should be proceeded with before the report of the Board of Health was published, which he intimated would be ready by Whitsuntide. After a few words from Mr. BAILLIE, The House then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading 90 Against it ... 196 Majority ... —lO6 The Bill was consequently thrown out. METROPOLITAN WATERWORKS (HENLEY:. ON-THAMES AND LONDON ACQUEDUCT) BILL. Sir W. MOLESWORTH proposed the second read ing of this Bill. Mr. WILLYAMS opposed the Bill, and moved that it be read a second time that day six months. Mr. ROBERT PALMER seconded the amendment. After some observations from Sir DE LACY EVANS, Lord ASHLEY said that what London wanted was not quantity of water but quality, and a proper distribu tion; and when the report of the Sanitary Commissioners was laid on the table of the House, some useful suggestions on that subject would be laid before the public. He be lieved that, instead of 2,000,0001. being required for the supply of London with water, 300,000/. would be amply sufficient. He should, therefore, support the amendment that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. HUME was surprised at the opposition of the Noble Lord to the Bill. If there was anything objec tionable in the measure, let it go into Committee and be there rectified. Mr. MUNTZ could see no reason why the Bill should not go into Committee, as in that tribunal its provisions might be properly sif,ed, and any errors corrected. Colonel B. KNOX opposed the second reading of the Bill. Mr. MOWATT supported the second reading. All that the people of London wanted to do was to supply themselves with water out of the Thames, and they were opposed by some halt-doasn millowners. He contended that that oppositioa ought not to weigh one iota, for this reason, that that mill property could be properly compensatedforby a grant of money. —(Cheers and laughter.) He had nothing whatever to do with this Bill, except as an inhabitant of London, and he thought the House was bound to receive those Bills and send them before a Committee, which was the proper tribunal for testing them.—(Divide, divide.) He wished Hon. Gentlemen could only see one of the water systems in operation in his house.—(lronical laughter.) Lord R. GROSVENOR opposed the second reading. He thought the future supply of water to the metropo lis should not be left to a trading company. Mr. B. OSBORNE said there was no subject which could be discussed in this House, in which the inhabitants could take a greater interest than in this. No less than 1,800,000 persons assembled to discuss thissubject yester• day evening.—(Laughter.) He thought his Hon. Colleague (Lord Robert Grosvenor) had misrepresented the Hen ley Company in calling it a trading company. So far from that, it was ves'ei altogether in the hands of the ratepayers.—(" No, no.") At all events the ratepayers were interested in it. Why the inhabitants of London were being daily poisoned by the most nauseous streams that could be given to any animal.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Osborne) hal with him an account of a microsco pical examination of the water supplied by the three companies south of the Thames, with plates of the ani mals which Hon. Gentleman were in the habit of imbib ing—( A laugh)—it appeared that the nastiest animal was drunk by those who were supplied by the Lambeth Company .—(Laughter.) If Gentlemen would take the trouble to look through the book they would be per fectly astonished to see the animals they were in the habit of imbibing—at least those of them who drank water.—(Loud laughter.) Now, the question being whether the inhabitants of London should not be sup plied with a better article, at a cheaper rate, the House ought surely to send such Bills as this to a Committee to decide on them upon their merits.—(Hear, hear.) It was the best course to take, in order to secure immediate legislation .—(Hear.) Mr. WYLD represented the opinions of several thou sands on the subject, and they were decidedly opposed to any Government interference in the supply of water. The principle of centralization had been pushed far enough they thought, and they considered themselves quite able to manage their own affairs. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading ... 116 Against it ... ... 226 Majority —llO The Bill was consequently thrown out. MARTIAL LAW IN CEPHALONIA. Mr. HUME postponed his motion for a Commission to inquire into the causes of the late riots and procla mation of martial law in Cephalonia, and proceeding: thereupon; and into the grievances of the inhabitants of the lonian Islands. until the 4th of June. MILITARY KNIGIITS OF WINDSOR. Colonel SALW EY postponed his motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the case and claims of the Military Kuigh's of Windsor until the 4th of June. GROWTH OF COTTON IN INDIA. Mr. BRIGH F postponed until the 45h of June his motion to the effect that an humble address should be presented to her Majesty, praying her Majesty to ap point a Commission to proceed to India to inquire into the obstacles which prevented an increased growth of cotton in that country, and to report upon any cir cumstances which might injuriously affect the eco nomical and industrial condition of the native population, being cultivators of the soil within the presidencies ut Bombay and Madras. IRISH POOR-LAW. Mr. F. FRENCH gave notice that on an early dal after Whitsuntide he should call the attention of the House to the working of the Irish Poor-law. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. NEWDEGATE presented a petition from a place in Warwickshire complaining of agricultural dis tress, and praying for a return to protection. ADJOURNAIENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL it was agreed that the House at its rising should adjourn until Thursday next. MORNING SITTINGS. Mr. FREWEN thought it was only just that those Hon. Members who had notice of motion for tomorrow should have an opportunity of bringing them on as early as possible, and he should therefore move that the House meet at twelve o'clock on Thursday. Sir GEORGE GREY said the orders which stood for to - morrow few u)y words asked Government had already been postponed for days subse quent to Thursday, and, therefore, nothing would be , gained submitdbamyist za byjvitnhg Thursdays a morning sitting on that day. After , rrmil oNlverr.n HUMS, Yr. FlTextend the reso lution to o in t d b e e pe H n o d u e s n e t b M ey eni on b d ers W who hit had motions t o s . suntide. Lord J. RUSSELL se - lit of the whole could not do so without the house. con- The motion :as then withdrawn.PROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE. After the pr esentat i all ; forpray.ng . rn of a l argo num b er of pet i t i ons, Mr. G. protection ßEßKELE Y too agricultur e, House should resol ve itself n in r t i o si Com ng to move that the consideration the Acts relating to the import a ti on of mittee to t a k e i n t o fo reign corn, said that he felt it necessary on the kind indulgence of the Hesosu to cast him se lf aware of the difficult position w hi c h he occupied, se.lie was fully believed that the country needed more a n d h e information than it already had with regard to the intentio ns of her Ma jesty's Government towards the country, suffering wa s under the present extreme agricultural distress. nas it wou ld endeavour to show the agricultural inter Ile wou ld e t h e t e nant -farmers of t his countr y , the real position a ' wh i c h t h e y were placed, and what they had to expect from the great parties of the State; and in d o i ng so, be would beg to allude to the answers given to the addresses lately presented to the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, and' also to another Noble Lord holding contrary opinions, to the short and somewhat bitter refusal given by the Noble Lord at the bead of the Government, and to the different amount of attention paid, and the dignified mode in which Lord Stanley received the deputation that waited upon him. In reply to the address presented to Lord Jetin Hassell on Saturday, his Lordship said, " You also say here, 6 that the only hope of replacing the agricul tural and other native and c 0102141 iaterelts in a state of WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 15, flourish Manchester!" An immense mass of the rural population were suffering acutely; and, therefore, he was not surprisei that they sometimes gave vent to strong language. These people were not naturally disloyal or impatient of control; but they could not understand, in the midst of their anxiety ani inability to obtain employment, why the foreigner should be fa voured whilst the loyal and industrious labourer was neglected at home. These very natural feelings of the rural population ought net to be overlooked by her Majesty's Ministers; and he could state, as a practical farmer, that the continuance of the free-trade system must prove most injurious, if not ruinous, to the agri cultural interests of the country. Mr. SLANEY held views rather differieg from those entertained by gentlemen on both sides of the House. He thought it would have bean better if a moderate fixed duty on corn had been maintained, as an equivalent for the undue burdens of local and general taxation borne by agriculture. That would also have been a convenient mode of raising a part of the revenue. But after the long struggle and the ultimate settlement of the corn-law that had taken place, he held that the present experi ment ought to be tried for some time longer. He attri buted the present depression of agriculture to extraordi• nary and transitory causes, such as a season of unpa ralleled productiveness throughout all the corn-growing countries of Europe, which was not likely soon to occur again. He was not over sanguine in his anticip a - dons; he believed there would yet be very great distress throughout tho country, and whether or not the energies of the British people would carry them over their difficulties without a return t a protective policy, he was not able to predict. Yet he advised the agricultural interest to lay aside their agitation for protection, and endeavour to remove the shackles and impediments to the success of their industry and enterprise arising from the complexity of title and the costliness of conveyance; and he was sure if they looked to the amelioration of the social condition of the mass of the people, they would find that if the great cities of the country prospered, it was impossible for the landed interest not to flourish also. He admitted the prevalence of distress in some of the rural districts, but thought very little of it extended to the peasantry. —(Hear, hear.) Certainly, in some of the southern counties where abuses of the poor-law used to obtain, the distress had reached the labouring classes; but in the northern counties wages had not been reduced in proportion to the reduction in the price of the necessaries of life, and he understood the peasantry were as well, it not better off now than they used to be.—(Divide.) For the reasons he had stated, in all sincerity, he did not be lieve the present causes of agrieultural distress were of a permanent character; but if that distress continued un abated until the next session, he for nue should be pre pared to reconsider the present system of commercial policy, with the view to establishing a fixed duty on corn as an equivalent, but no more than an equivalent, for what might be found, on inquiry, to be the peculiar burdens on land. The Marquis of GRANBY said he was not surprised at the present motion, because there wt.s a reaction of feeling against free trade amongst persons of all classes and professions in the country.—(Hear, hear.) The tenantry of the country, one and all, declared that it was impossible to cultivate the land under tke present prices for agricultural produce. But if the case of the farmers of England was bad that of the same class in the sister island was still worse—(Hear, hear)—and it would have been much better if the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, instead of lowering the franchise to the level of the distressed condition of the people, had endeavoured to raise the people to the level of the franchise.---(Hear, hear.) But the evil was not confined to the tenant-farmers. The agricultural labourers came in for their share. It was no wonder, then, that the labouring classes were beginning to feel the effect of their free-trade measures, and to perceive that cheap ness did not always mean plenty, and that competition did not mean prosperity.—(Hear.) He believed that the labourers in the manufacturing districts were coming round to the same opinion. The Hon. Gentleman who last addressed the House said that the prosperity of the landed interest depended on the prosperity of manufac tures. He (the Marquis of Granby) admitted that, but he maintained that the converse of that proposition was equally true, that the prosperity of manufactures depended on the prosperity of agriculture. The manufacturers were beginning to find that the home market was not only the largest, but the most important and secure. It was said that the price of corn was rising, and that a better state of things might be expected. Why, it was only in the Timis of that day he read that the average price of wheat for the week ending May the 4th was only 365. 6d. throughout the country.—(Hear.) Under such a state of things, of what advantage was it to the farmers of the country that the price rose sixpence one week, and a shilling another?—(Hear.) But was it not the object of free trade to make provisions as cheap as possible?—(Hear.) The Noble Lord admitted the fact of distress, but he led them to hope that at some distant and imaginary period prices would rise; so that the defence of tree trade now set up by the Government was that at some future day it would be inoperative.—(Hear, heat.) His Hon. Friend had been taunted for not bring ing forward this question himself; but from the present spirit of the House of Commons, and from the tone and temper of the Government since the commencement of the session, when the first insult had been offered to the agricultural interest to the moment when the Noble Lord gave his answer to the deputation which recently waited upon him, his Hon. Friend had no right to suppose that !tat House would sanction any alteration of the present system, more especially when it was remembered how the moderate proposition of his Hon. Friend for charg ing the consolidated fund with a portion of the poor rate, and that of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) had been received.—(Hear, hear.) He rested his reliance fur the reversal of their present policy not on the decision of that House, but on the force of public opinion out of doors'.—(Hear.) Sir B. HALL said, if it were possible to suppose that a person, not a isiember of that House, could come there that evening and ask what the subject under diecussiou was, and be told it was the great and important question of the corn-laws, about which so much had been heard and said outside that House, be (Sir B. Hall) thought that individual would be very much astonished at the little interest manifested within these walls on the subject; and probably if that same stranger—whom it was impos sible to suppose present—should be asked on which side the Protectionist Members sat, he might, drawing his own conclusions, reply that they sat on the right of the chair and not on the left.—(Laughter.) The majority in the House that evening sat on the right of the chair; and therefore it might be supposed that those who took an interest in the matter had come down in large numbers to support the agricultural in terest, then more or less involved in the motion before them, and which emanated from that side of the House also.—(Hear, hear.) But let them go further. He (Sir B. Hall) had sat there during the whole of the debate, and observed that during the addresses of the three last speakers—particularly that of the Noble Marquis who represented to a great extent the agricultural interest in the midland counties—the largest number at the oppo sition side of the House amounted to 27, and fluctuated between that and 17.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore was it not a perfect farce for these Hon. Gentlemen during the recess to go amongst their constituents, stimulating them to opposition, and styling themselves "the farmers' friends," yet, when the question came to be decided within the walls of Parliament, out of a body of be tween 200 and 300 Protectionist Members who affected to advocate the interests of their deluded followers—(Hear, hear)—not more than from 17 to 27 Hon. Gentlemen were found in their places.—(Hear, hear.) If the Members of the Manchester school had adopted that course out of the House, and had not the moral courage to bring forward their propositions and take the sense of Parliament on them; they (the Pro tectionist Members) would have lavished their censure on them, and demanded of them why they went abroad stimulating the minds of the public, making them dis satisfied, and yet, though affecting to be the friends of the people, fearing to bring the question at issue before the sense of Parliament.—(Hear.) The Noble Marquis who had just addressed the House expressed his gratifi cation at the fact that the first political wave broke from the Ministerial aide of the House. Well, the farmers out of doors had long been looking for the bursting of a wave from the opposite side, but could never succeed in seeing even a ripple, so that they should hold themselves indebted to an Hon. Member on the Ministerial side for affording an opportunity to bring forward the question.—(Hear, hear.) What he (Sir B. Hall) then said he spoke not alone for the House, but also for , those outside its walls; because he considered it a farce and a mummery for Hon. Gentlemen to go amongst their constituents and get up a clamour, and then allow three years of a Parliament to pass over without ever endeavouring to bring forward the ques tion.--(Hear, hear.) He thought a man making an as sertion outside that House should at least have the moral conrage to fulfil his word.—(Hear, hear.) Now, let them look at the position of the metropolitan Mem bers, who, being anxious to repeal the window-tax, con sequently brought forward a motion to that effect every session. —(Hear.) The Protectionist Members, on the contrary, went amongst their friends and supporters as suring them they would advocate the renewal of the corn laws. Yet session after session went over, and the quest tion was never brought forward. The case of the Hon. Gentleman was somewhat similar to that of the re peaters of the legislative union, in fact, pari passu. The repeaters of the legislative union professed that repeal was everything with them; but yet, strange to say, they never brought it forward.—(Hear. hear.) In 1833 it certainly had been brought forward; but, between that period and 1848, there was a single Conciliation Hall Member found to bring it forward ?—(Hear, hear.) In •1848 the question of repeal was brought on by a gen tleman representing an English borough, and who was at perfect variance with the repeaters. The case of the Protectionist gentleman was precisely similar.—(" No, no," from the Opposition benches.) Well, what had they done? Would they rouse the people without an object, a definite object?—(Hear, hear.) What was that object but to amend the laws?—(Hear, hear.) Where could they be amended unless on the floor of that House by argument and plain speaking; and if they intended to amend them otherwise why not say so? 'That House was the proper place for discussion; and the question was then brought on for discussion, not by the consent of Hon. Gentlemen opposite, but because it was forced upon them from the Ministerial side of the House.— (Hear, hear, and No, no.) Now they could not deny this fact, that when the question was brought for ward that evening they could not muster more than twenty-seven Members; and if Hon. Members on his (Sir B. Hall's) side of the House chose to walk out, Hon. Members opposite would have the House counted, so that they should be thankful to gentlemen sitting on the Ministerial benches for keeping a House for them.— (Laughter, and " Hear, hear.") He would not then enter into the question beyond saying that they would have an opportunity of testing the votes of Hon. Gentle men opposite; and he hoped when these gentlemen would tell their constituents in future that they were prepared to bring forward this great and insertant 1850. question they would do so in reality, and not leave to an Hon. Member on the Ministerial benches the perform ance of so important a duty.-(llser, hies.) Mr. MILES said the Hon. Baronet who bad just sat down assumed much t himself, and pleased to draw a comparison between lion. Members wno advecated pro tection and those who supported a repeal of the legisla tive union. Now, he wished to know why the Hon, Dl ronet had never attacked the repeal question until after the originator of that question had been removed f;etn the House of Commons?-(" Hear, hear," from tile 0 , position benche s .) N o , th e li on . Baronet preferred wait ing; until the originat o r of t hat q ues tion had succumbed to disease and ceased to be a lember of thet House; and then it was that he stepped in and derided Hon. Members for Ireland for not having brought forward the question.-(Hear, hear.) The quesqon of the corn-laws was argued in 1846, since a hen a new Par liament had been returned in favour, he would admit, of free-trade principles.-(" Hear, hear," from the Mi nisterial benches.) There was no doubt that the decision of the country `A as in favour of free trade (Hear, hear)- but they should wait for a re-action, and it was quickly coming.-(011 oh, and elear, hear.) The Hon. Baronet had taueted the opposite side of the House because no proposition had istnenaa d from it for a restoration of protection to agriculture; hut he could tell him that wnenever a motion should emanate tram that side of the House it w;;uld include a recurrence to the full and entire system of protective duties, which he and Hon. Gentleniec on his side believed to be not alone advantageous, but absolutely necessity to the wel fare of the British people.-(Hear, hear.) The time was not distant when the watchword would bp, " Bide your time, and trust in us"-(Laughter)-and he doubted not that in the next Parliament they would come forward with an amended constituency as well as a large majority in that House to re-adjust the dis organised and disrupted interests of the country. Mr. MITCHELL said the hest proof that could be given of the well working of the corn-law repeal was the benefit that the operative classes experienced by the change.-(Hear, hear.) The consumption of bread stuffs had increased one•third; and if wages fell in pro portion to the price of food, who consumed the increase? By the repeal of the corn laws they had enabled the working people to consume one•third more bread than heretofore, and so far the working cl isses were per manently benefited.-(Hear, hear.) Now ho thought that was the very highest tribute that could be paid to free trade; and he believed it was one of the causes that kept England tranquil during the late continental out breaks.-(Hear, hear.) In the corn trade he had head of attempts made to induce the farmers to sacrifice their property: and in several cases they had submitted to low prices, for which they might thank the langu ge employed by their organ (the Mark-lane Express) and the harangues and incentives of the leaders of there party.-(Hear, hear.) He was certain that these gentlemen bad induced the farmers to part with their grain some 3s. or 4s. a quarter lees than it would bring within the last fortnight, in which time he had observed an increase of some ss. per quarter had taken place. His own impression was, that instead of a re-action taking place, the prices, as the weather improved, would ad• vance to 455. a quarter for wheat, which was an excol lent price for farmers to sell at.-(Hear, hear, and No, no.) Indeed, he had no doubt that 455. per quarter were equal to 60s. per quarter in former days, considering the altered prices in other articles of con sumption-meat, sugar, and so forth.-(Hear, hear.) He was-glad to see the Hon. Member for Wakefield in his place, as he wished to allude to a matter that had reference to him. He understood that Hon. Gentleman had purchased 1,000 quarters of wheat, which he said was Stettin, at a certain price which appeared to be ex ceedingly low for such an article. Now - he (Mr. Mitchell) understood that it was not Stettin wheat but Pomeranian or Sicilian, which accounted for the low cost of the arti cle, including shipment to this country.-(Laughter.) Mr. G. SANDARS, who rose amid renevved laughter, said the Hon. Gentleman opposite had charged him with having by his statements caused an undue depreciation in the prices of corn in the agricultural dietricts of the country. He said then as he said formerly-, that his only object was to give information to that House, and to lay a true statement of the facts before the House and the country. The Hon. Gentleman had referred to a pur chase of Stettin wheat, and alluded to it as though it were a single and solitary transaction. But if he looked to the correspondence in the various newspapers of the period he would find not only was it not a solitary trap- section, but that several merchants ef Mark-lane bought at the same and even at lower prices than he did.- (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman had also referred to the grain as being of inferior quality. He believed the Hon. Gentleman did not deal extensively in corn, or that he could tell the difference between Silesian and Pomeranian wheat if placed before him.- (Laughter, and Oh, oh.) The order which he (Mr. Sanders) sent out, was for the best Stettin wheat, of 61 to 621bs. to the bushel, and he would leave it to Honourable Gentlemen to say if that description should not be regarded as the very best. The order was ex ecuted with great satisfaction, and the prices at Wake field market, about the period of the arrival of that corn, were from 375. to 38s. But the Hun. Gentleman had said that in consequence of the policy of free trade being carried out consumption had increased by one-third. Never was there a more preposterous statement made. He should like to ask the Hon. Gentleman from whenc , , this extra one-third had come? It was true that in 1849 we imported largely-we imported 5,600,000 quar ters of wheat; but the Hon. Gentleman forgot tha the harvest of 1848 was unusually defective, and it would require two or three millions of quarters tat least to make up the deficiency; and if they took into conside ration the large quantity exported to Ireland that year, instead of our importing from that country as usual, another million of quarters might be accounted for; and to this the wheat brought into consumption in conse quence of the failure of the potato crop, and the whole five or six millions was made up.- (Cheers from the Free-trade party.) We imported this large amount of wheat not to supply extra consumption, but to make up the deficiency whics had arisen from these causes.-(" Hear, hear," from the same party.) The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to quote returns e.l the price of who at at the various European arid Ameri can corn exporting ports, to snow that the average price at which corn could be shipped abroad was much lower than had been stated by the previous speaker (Mr. Mit chell). An authority which was regarded as a text book by the Free-traders, had stated that 52e. 2d. was the just average price of wheat, and what the farmer got more than that was so much gain to him, and what he got less so much loss.-(He ar,hear.) The Hon. Gentleman to whom he alluded (Mr. Wilson) also said that it was quite erroneous to suppose that free trade would reduce the price of food, but, on tile contrary, would tend rather to increase it by raising the prosperity of the country and increasing the demand; but there wits no symptom of that prediction being verified. With re spect to the motion before the House, he was in some difficulty what course to Like. He could not agree that it was wisw to bring on the question at this time for dii cussion.-(Hear.) He understood the Hon. Mover (Mr. G. Berkeley) to say that free trade had now been tried three years, and that that was sufficient .to test its suc cess or failure. The Hon. Gentleman mast, however, remember that although the Act passed in 1846 it did not come into operation until 1849.-(Hear.) Up to that time the law was a sliding scale, ranging fermi 10ss downwards; so that instead of three years, the present law had only been in operation titteen months. lie ad mitted that he had promised at the hustings to give free trade a fair trial, and as he could not consider that such fair trial hal yet born allowed, he did not see how he could vote for this motion. Much had been said in the course of the debate of the low prices of 1835; but there was this great and wide difference between that year and the present-it was true the price of wheat did not vary much in the two years, hut in all other agri cultural produce there was a wide difference in favour of the ) ear 1.35. The average price e f wheat in 1835 was 395. 4d. The present average-that was the average of the last six weeks-was 375. Bd.; but of barley the aver age in 1835 was 295. 1 Id. against 225. 9d. now.-(" Hear" from the agriculturists.) The price of oars in 1835 was 225. ld.; it was now 15s. In rye, peas, beans, and other produce, there was a similar falling off in the present prices as compared with those of 1835. Again, it muss be recollected that the year preceding 1835 had been one of general abundance, and the low prices were conse quent on that abundance-but now we had low prices following deficient harvests. With regard to the price of Stettin wheat, he could tell the Hon. Member for Brut port that purchases had been made at a lower rate than that which had been quoted. The Hun. Gentleinau then quoted a letter from a Free-trader, stating that a ss, fixed duty would be fair to the farmer, and would not press more heavily on the consumer than the present nominal duty of is. He was anxious the House should consider what might be the result of tree trade with a deficient harvest, when we might have to kok to foreign countries for, perhaps, one-third of our whole supplie-. Four-fifths of all our imports last year came fsom Euro pean ports, and let it once be knovvnthet we were wholly dependent upon them for so large a proportion of the food of our people, and they would take care that we paid high enough for it.-(Hear, hear.) He would sug gest that some alteration should be made in the mode of , taking the averages. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by quoting a return, showing that under the sth aid 6th of Tictoria, we imported in two years 400,000 quarters of wheat which paid 20s. duty. and that the average price must then have been about 50s. per quarter. Mr. WILSON remarked that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had done him the honour to refer to the opinion he had expressed in 1840 with respect to a 525, average as the average price for seven years pre ceding. Now, it would nit have been fair in 1835 to have quoted the price of that year as an average. In the year 1835, the price of wheat was under 40s. for 36 weeks, and the average price of wheat under 40s in 1849, was but for 16 weeks. The present time must, however, be considered an exceptional period, and the price of corn for toe last few months could riot be, there fore, taken as the probable average price for any length ened space. The Hon. Gentleman la i quoted fsous several letters to prove that the price i f corn rungs d lower now than at any period preceding; but he (Mr. Wilson) had also letters in his possession which showed that in every great market nu the continent of Europe the price of wheat had risen within the lest I night from Is. to 2s. 6d. Is was, however, a remarkable circum stance that the Honourable, Gentlemen had quoted prin cipally faint letters dated the 9th of April-from none 'stnr than the 15th. Then, with respect to home prices, the authorities and quotations of the Hon. Gentleman were at least three weeks old. He (Mr. Wilson) held in his hand a return received that day from some of the largest markets in the kingdom tor the last four weeks, and they showed a different result. At Canterbury, for instance, tour weeks since wheat was 38s. 7d.:. last week, hawriser, it was 40s the quarter. At Lincoln, four weeks ago, it was 375., while last week it was 391. Bd.; and he had in his possession a letter from a large grower in Berkshire, in which it was stated that fortnighta previously the writer could g et n o more than 401. f 9r bill Peat ORA whereas last week b e easily bb. twined 44e. The Hon. Gentleman had alluded to ore important of ,ti t t t e o lt e ir c f n,i t i h e i r 3 t e h es e er g a: a s t . qu l e t st w i - o a i s i iu its generel IL wirings than to coneider it in its in duel action; and therefore he should confine Ilios . e d ir te l e that form of discussing it. Ho was ready to tin with the Hon. Cientisnian opposite that there was n 0 the country at this moment that universal prosper"; which every Hon, Member on either side of the use eeuld wish ; but then thsre was this wonderful:l)l,st under i'o we d v e i a r c ' u tinction between the suffering undergone new an d i the underwent in former times—that whereas formerly.. t , _ , suff ring was all confimel to the working population, the poor, at present it was felt solelg, the higher and middle classes.—(Loud cries J.' the no," and "Hear, hear.") An Hon. Gentleman 0 alter other side of the House said that the etiesti"a Isle, all, would have to be settled on the ground of e (mr. rests of the working classes ; on that ground be the Wilson) was willing to meet it, and to APPJ lu test of the condition of that class to its settlem:ote4,, January last, long before the Hon. Member f r portion 0 . 1 .°° shire had made his motion on the subject, the G o ' ll6 merit had Lid upon the table of the House certain retm„ showing the state of pauperism in the whole country;l tle first week of the present year, in y ear •,,. 111 he similar period in the three preceding Noble Lord in the other House suspecting, howeven_ttpbe tbese returns were of a nature too favourable ° i f the middle obe of Government, moved for returns for the past quarter. These returns showed the reliefnua' Oaupi rs receivin.. out-door relief and in-door d thse is England and \\Ta b les in the middle of Februarb was the result. In the corresponding week °f years there were:— Out•door Paupers. In-door Paupers. gO B. OOO 1847 1847 729,000 ~. 179,000 ••• a " 0 - 3 - 000 1848 ... 824,000 ... 169.000 ••• 0 "," 3 -1 000 1849 ... 784,000 ... 159,000 ..• 1850 ... 748,000 ... 142,000 ' h ""' t eise comparisons tikia So that in the vaunted year of 1848, when vv :,, e6 ber 01 100 s. per quarter, there were a far greater e" - ress ioa paupers than in the present year of alleged deP bad and distress, and the total pauperism of the aotentricoulti been reduced from 993,000 to 890,000. 1 4 ? °eat this deny, therefore, that whoever were suffering at the moment from the change that had takeu 00°5olessee were Hono u n r o a t v e t ho t. s e e m p b e e r r s c o 3, n i s r .. commercial policy of this country, t h e poOre r i by se was di,appointed of that immediate prosperitY P - er sbis by the Free-traders.—(Hear.) Could 1: 0° , ° ,0 at G. ey pot td Di h l .i e s m m b o er m s e o n v t e a r ff lo e i c .k ted on th e e o m t id t d h l e e c g i r e e s a se t s? cau ses wu : Theyli Berkeley) k had eley ) been tbet et t ut h re a s. t ° ,l l‘ u . i t e u bo t t e e r t i iscover one great cause in the years 1 c :4 451-a ' Ibf o t b: : existing mischief. He had been told that in 80 0 0 016 ties, and among the rest Lincolnshire, that 1 °11 „001 not name a person who had not suffered from not speculations.—(Oh, oh; no, no.) Mind be d idli e ts - ted ia charge the agricultural classes with having sPet e ter,i s railways ; he was aware that Liverpool, A l lt lec- „uchi r short all the great towns in the north were 55 'i n SO more, engaged in the same kind of speoniet'°-, tbis were those in agricultural counties ,• but thel l g to tbs fi r_n : i g g t h wt t hh b iac e th s thh o lasd it was impossible to blind theln elles olg er ' had been furnished wbac,seno übwhollythe es g be a r c e rr g e e tte Secretary causestof t h e tkilsittdo.ee we 80 change with this statement :—ln 184f8re 147,000 men employed on railroads. At Pr eae ,„ie were only 45,000 men—so they had 100,000 'otelet' employed now than before, owing to the disettrel of the construction of railways. In 1846 there 115; nine main lines, which had expended 51,00°e'7h sue which had sin income of 2,700,000/. In 1 85 °; t e ee t y l e lines had expended 102,000,000/., and their ruch e d Pu t 2,200,0001, being 500.0001. less than when they sa id d is i expended 51,000,000/. Therefore it might . be • me itiee 51,000,000/. had been recently expended Wh ch r e e ac °a ; absolutely unproductive. This alone ought to 0 . 0 0. elusive reason for a great portion of that sin e The goo. which the country was now labouring. rhedi tie Gentleman (Mr. Sanders) alluded to the lastditoio's portation of grain in this compared Witb eef t ied Nothing could more strikingly show the benefit. h a). trade. The Hon. Member told the House 111 ‘ , 8 0 0, A c' e harvest was defective in 1838, and in conseg g a- eirsiv h co a r d n. an free Vs' 3 00 wrimh3p,orwnhitaiotnotohfers,soobio.e.OcOtObaqduarters tbsl this ? Then the Hon. Gentleman said the hadreerlA; year had been larger, and the importations quently fallen off. This was the very object freeif fr: sought to accomplish—to equalise the seasons:l.o !lei trade did that it attained the object it ha- ' i te° They had been asked what evidence e ll : ye- 1 1 increased consumption durin the last thre`teoog" Ho found during the last sixmonths tbatee" th 1,000,000 more quarters had been iMP °ll ettst i l in the corresponding period last year, h o e td "" o o , l3 .o of home-grown wheat taken into consintihrorea increased. The calculations in his posselPeie nsm e a' ore ..s0" during the last six months 1,269,000 quarters - e or been taken into consumption than during ti t he ' ge 4 "; pending six months of the previous year. ' a je . bee : r a - el hers and other parties, from their own persOue' er ee, h 'ij Lions, and from inquiries of bakers, have n e w l- le that a larger consumption of bread had taken r year compared with former times. The flel h e fer° t l man (Mr. Berkeley) had stated that the BOOEl'lOlO would be undermined by the United States• l' e n fisb e , e his hand an account of the sale of four cargoes b n cep from ( o ue t rsthgoeufl A sab m rertai e een r rt c ti;on a t . bringing hypothetical theTet calculations. ocezalulhocil were anecnatogittuth)pnhnertseis.vreoeey. The e cargoes L i r w s ti ch s resi 9 4 . 4 4 :1 a ti n' -g T d e h t w h e e a r s l: 3 s s u s s 7 l e t d b o dli f e7 tb ec i : o °s : i tb : e i ' o the e w U r-s ui neatly States, the so thesaa ddingm price tr a o r m g good whits wheat. loss, it could not be sold at te profit here for 1 5 ,tei n s 565. per quarter. The circumstances be b a te ois e er e fl en. account for the fact that at the preseetseeed en. was no less than 3s. per barrel dearer iL e stsi d ij o e leans than at Liverpool. The four cargoes al a n 'aess;'el e Now,:htcost o y ws ty t h oo e fr c a it75.5,104i4e90, _2,1004 I , !si. One cargo the cost was 9351.; the P r a yko d n - 0. 714/ ; so the loss was 2212. The second eVel"e - e 455/.; the third 237/.; and the fourth 28 04 , ,i - eiet e 'et Members must furteier bear in mind in n•-" ° : s e 1° ,;00 wheat was bought in America when prices ws - n sise • it than now, and sold here at a time when th e talO r ti 'l 4s. higher. If then, the present prices did ii , °- els a "0 1 was his belief that we should see a considerable eajos of wheat- shipped from England for the constifirjghlerms the people of the United States.—(Roars ° A le! tie [lon. Members laughed; buthad done s° though Hon. Members did not we seem to be teg ro e bi - 10 nice The Hon. MeMber (Mr. Sainaders).wheerve , 1:04 to taking the averages of the last ten or back 111. He could not understand why this objections":„elt tare yearat l el why tlhB2 cs t o. h n e dT l i t i hi t: ei n a . ua il, o, l ,nd e . m .rve b ih e ea r mr s ab h ce o tre u rw l daowsi peeshthto se g po : o 4 oe : 3 o ei tt eri s ro a: very much changed of late years. In the g - t i ll rP ll ,l"e vincos, for instance, which once produced ss"•o' corn, there was now no surplus, owing to °sie. " pep' pals ion and increased manufactures. The, "' a l o ft , 4. 0 0 1 tleman saint, under free trade we should st iai elie s ii, duetion, and so we should have increased u e ,P e ela yes, abroad. If they gave higher prices tbeer;"•olisripi increased foreign cultivation; but this Wout u ° if higher prices were not given. If so, then the fortify the data on which he had based his caleniati°refse'er il last ten or twelve years were correct; and t b e e iihtfo less you increased your prices, you had 0° right Or" pect increased importations. All he would say was a most unfair, a most unwise thing for 0 : 0 1 °:eoit' :attempt to say that the experience we ba d e ", get" 0, trade presented a satisfactory solution of she teeee. He denied this was so. He was not contel' t : e oo rl oq years 1848-49 as a lair criterion of the sve r 7 s tie s re' wheat in tuture, when they saw, whatever P; bell/ in distress, that the working classes were that they were a few years ago.—(No.) o f p° Th e bers did not pay regard to returns, he knet a - g te o ' criterion by which the question could be l' e seot ' a t ari f i returns from the poor-law unions, which Yif2 io r 3 control or influence of Government, and t r- reli e ,e thorities, were the authorities on which Ijo eel haPriser, any better could be produced, be would u „)s. os ,dr e adopt them; but till that was done he otst a r e - r ag Viet°, we had. Whatever might be the defects o Vi r otO'f whatever the consequenees which had flowc„- c opi e d ° kPiniegedso—mstwilelirehehetmaintained every the rwesoprkecintgarow.oa,.or Mr. HERRIES said that the debate would - o b e fe t ° e l o, ,, D e r f l tile in admissions, he hoped they wom- 0. common agreement on the subject. Tb e `",:e (Mr. Haste) said that if the present s' e ; t o continued for three years he would b,e" - sll3 o9 .'Co A tiii ii tiouist, while another Hon. Member ( IY , lr. o f 0 8 ,010:41 ilt) would have obketal to the repeal - , e as r'',"fev's laws,for the on the ground that a protective ChltY 0f O; R e` l the agricultural interest, by reason, that,,o el burdens to which it was subjected. t very essence of protection.—(Cheers.) Tha t it they claimed, namely an indemnification 0 ' 1 0% 0 4 burdens. The Hon. Gentleman who sr dc ,h e ate sl ee ; " 4 - PI ; into a very el iborate statement to show 11°' woOl e ees t es 4 the times were now depressed, they. e s IT Ade bAtsr, by which he meaut better P 6 e - 'yolve e - 00 1 "01 ever such inconsistency, seeing that the g r, o o r t ,po!:,o of those who advocated a free trade in - Gove' e siP," prices and abundance of food. That th e ad -10 t° 'O O 0,1 should withhold their consent et e before the House, he confessed b ° coo li s ne prised, recollecting as he did that 00 a t tb a 7 ' 4 'o morable occasion the Noble Lord a of 13° ,i r t• of the Government proposed a fixed dut6llol Jo e fs (st r,i answer given upon the subject by the g ., I ll e r delegates who recently waited on him The Dl °. • 0, P r e /terries 's) opinion, wholly inconclusive. -t eer atio a ed 0 , e onslu t o 0 1 ,0 4 '0 said teat without going into other posing the price of corn to be 585., 5 111 , W , u it; 11 3 0,, ° ,1 duce the average to 50s. would be wel l r e s ise . . o ' ;•,e if the price were 42e., the law which wel l a ine rab%ti . e . 425. to 50s. would be ill taken. But he r i ° gs• the Noble Lord at the time he proposes' n ool y e Wed mitted his opinion to be thatwitiseeests tleec ti e te muaeratieg price for corn. Thes4 6 "` - he so ° •"oreo demanded 50s. Why then should there at elit e o t to relieve the agricultural interest to t b " elo w e i bef ir el raise !he price of corn to 500., being 6s. As for;o0e 5 ,0 0 Nuide Lord admitted was a lair price. tota lly " l e o ' o i sect law being only an experiment, he , so o lo b ess,es v A is e i t ble cs u m p e on in t r e ag force i,c from the proposition. Almost from t" a tfo ts 0 0 1 0 s to I° , 0° All that was new done was ititury to confide in the prophecies of to clo otis he e but he, :or one, wes certainly i n dispo• o° .. t ,, hods cause the vast prophecies of the sieue PT 0 00% 0 0 oe fulfilled. He believed there were n °o c orn ) ultiutsralckiPult°err3esbtise n e t . th i , e ite e° : c e be; Pointed with the results of free trade in....A(00'000 office who, if he could have foreseen tb or t he s ie b at e i l v i o e e v a erals ( that there thmeraesuLess ntobtenlasePlevr•ess°?-ffienet:tel°llll;l measure, would have had the courage; % or ; r e ' floss, to have supported it. Wit hin rtt i prole, its operation the prices of agricu tu 0 . Wien 20, 25, aye, 30 per cerit. gyre " ~,. .