The Sun. — London, England, 1850-02-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 1. The SPEAKER. took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock. NEW WRITS. On the motion of Sir W. FIAYTER, new writs for the borough of Windsor, in the room of Lord John Hay, who has accepted the Chiltern Hundreds, and for the borough of Colchester, in the room of Mr. Smith, who has also accepted the Chiltern _Hundreds, were ordered. PETITIONS. Sir IL 11. INGLIS presented a petition from Barba does praying the Howe to Like measure fa. the sup wession of the slave-trade. M r . EVANS presented a petition from Worthing -aying the House to take steps to put a stop to Post ( ((Sunday labour throughout the country. An HON. MEMBER presented; a petition from the zueevs's County, praying for protection to agriculture. Mr. CHRISTOPHER, pursuant to notice, presented petition, agreed to at a public meeting, held in the Castle yard of the city of Lincoln, at which it was computed that between 15,000 and 20,000 persons were present. The petition ers stated that they were materially concerned in the good cultivation of the land ; that the importation of corn and agricultural produce in a season of unusu abundance had compelled them to be undersold in the markets of the United KiLgdom to a vary - uinons extent, and the consequence, had been that the demand for and the wages ( f labour hroughout the country had undergone a very serious diminution. They stated, also, that in consequence of the restrictions imposed upon them they were prevented from growing tobacco and otherwise cultivating the soil, to the greatest profit for themselves, while, as the owners and occupiers of land, they were unfairly dealt with by the Legislature in consequence of the additional burdens imposed on them by having to contri bute almost exclusively to the local taxation of the country. They stated also that whilst they were exposed to free traee in corn the manufacturers of this country were protected to a considerable extent by Customs' duties, and they therefore prayed the House to take their cam into con sideration, and relieve them from some of their local taxation, and also to impose such a just and reasonable duty on foreign agricaltural pro duce as should enable them to compete with the foreigner is British markets. The Honourable Gen tleman also presented two petitions from places in the county of Lincoln, one praying for the' suppression of Sunday labour in the Post-office, and the other praying the House to take measures to prevent the sale of spiri .tuous liquors on the Sabbath. Lord G. MANNERS presented a petition from a place in Leicestershire praying for the suppression of Sunday labour in the Post-office. Lord HOTHAM presented a petition to the same effect from a place in the East Riding. Mr. COWAN presented a petition from the Free Church of Kilcoutrir, and other places, praying for the discontinuance of Sunday lab our in the Post-office. Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY presented a petition from Southwark to the same effect. lir. MARTIN presented a petition from Pontefract to the same effect. An [ION. MEMBER presented a petition from Bottes ford, to the same effect. Mr. FREWEN preseLtecl a petitioa,from Leicester -shire to the same effect. Mr. ADDERLEY presented a petition signed at a public meeting by 4,271 of the inhabitants of Cape Town, in South Africa, setting forth that they felt deeply aggrieved by certain Orders in Council, dated in September, 1848, by which that colony was 'made a penal settlement for convicts under sentence of trans portation from this country; also petitions, very much to the same effect, from the inhabitants of Port Eliza beth, in the eastern province of the Cape of Good Hope, and from the commissioners and ward masters of Cape Town. The Hon. Member gave notice that on Monday next he should move that those petitions be printed with the Votes. SUNDAY POSTAGE. Petitions against the delivery of letters and transmis sion of the post on Sundays were presented by Mr. Packs from Leicester, Mr. Plampti e from Sheerness, by Mr. Heywood and several other Members from Pontypool and other placer. SLAVE-GROWN SUGAR. Sir E. N. BUXTON presented a petition from the Inhabitants of Kingston, Jamaica, signed by several thousand persons, stating that they were unable to compete with the proprietors of estates in slave grow ing countries, and praying that the treaties which had been entered into with the Brazils and other countries for the suppression of the slave trade might be enforced. Mr. DALRYMPLE presented a petition praying for the discontinuance of the transmission of letters on Sunday. SUPPRESSION OF THE SLAVE-TRADE. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the congre gation of St. Mary's, Jamaica, praying fyr the enforce ment of certain treaties existing between this country and Cuba. PROTECTION ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition from Ole county of Dublin complaining of the ill-effects of the late free-trade legislation in Ireland, and praying for the imposition of a protective duty on agriculturo. CATTLE MARKET AT READING. Mr. R. PALMER, presented a petition from Roading, praying tor the establishment of a cattle mark t. PUBLIC PETITIONS. Mr. TIIORNELY gave notice that on Tuesday next he shoalcl move the appointment ( f the Committee. upon Public Petitions. SLAVE•TRADE. Mr. M. GIBSON gave notice, f)r Mr. Hutt, that on Thursday weric he should submit a motion to the Hou6e wish respect to the slavo trade, founded on the repot t 3 of the Committers of 1848 and 1849. SAVINGS' BANKS. Mr. HUME ,;ave notice that on Monday he should move the co - mtinuation of the return he had moved fir for some years with respect to the accounts of savings' ba TIIE I CALIAN REFUGEES. -TilE MASSACRE OFF BORN EO. The HON. MEMBER also gave notice that on Monday he should ask.her Majesty's Ministers if they would have any objection to produce the papers with respect to the re fusal of the British authorities at Malta to receive cer tain Italian refugees, and also copies of the communica tions they had had with the Raja of Sarawak, respecting the massacre off Borneo. THE BALLOT. Mr. 11. BERKELEY said that he shoal take an early opportunity of bringing before the Home the im portant question of the Ballot.—(Haar, hear.) REGISTRATION OF CONVEYANCES. In reply to an Hon. Member, Sir GEORGE GREY intimated that he had hoped the report of the Commission upon this subject would hate been ready ere this. It was, however, in actual preparation, but he could not undertake to say when it would be ready. THE CONSTABULARY. On the motion of Mr. FREWEN, the following re turn was agreed to :—" The number of police consta bles in each county, or division of a county, in Eng land and I .Valea, under the Act 2 and 3 Vic., c. 93, distinguishing each class or denominatioc, and the rate of payment made to each constable ; in cluding also a return of the number of police con stables stationed in each petty sessions division in said counties, with the name and population of said division, and the amount paid to the county police rate by each divlsion; together with an account, in detail, of the several items of expenditure for the years 1848 and 1849." THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE. In reply to bli, ADDERLEY, Mr. HAWES stated that the Order in Council making the Cape a penal settlement had been re voked ; that instructions had been sent out for the transport ship Neptune to proceed to Van Die men's Land; anti that there was no foundation what 3ver in the reports or rumours which had got ►broad respecting the dismissal of Sir Harry Smith from the Governorship of the Cape. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL it was ordered that the House at its rising should adjourn until Monday next. SESSIONAL ORDERS. The sessional orders were then put seriatim from the Chair, and agreed to with the exception of that resolu tion which prevented Members from moving an amend ment on the order of the day, which was postponed for future consideration at the suggestion of Mr. Hume. On the question that the postponed order be agreed to, Mr. HUME observed, that although he originally prepared the order, it was under the impteassion that it would operate for the public good. It had, however, had a different effect ; it had tended rather to impede than to promote the progress of measures or the convenience of Honourable Members, and ho would therefore suggest, now that they had had two years' experience of its inoperativeness, tkat they should return to the old plan and amend this order ac cordingly. Mr. E. DENISON did not agree with the Hon. M. bar for Montrose that the order had proved, inoperative or inconvenient; on the contrary, he thought the experience of the two years had proved . it to be a most meful rule. Could anything be more ineor.venient or calculated more t obstruct the business of th e H ouse t h an that i t shou ld b e impossible for in lividual Members to know beforehand what the subject of discussion was to be?—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, this order altogether obviated that inconvenience, and he did trust that the House would persevere in supporting this order, which, there could be no doubt, had generally worked well for the advantage of public business. Mr. HENLEY thought the House was yet scarcely in a fit state to discuss this question, coming as it did so suddenly upon it. Mr. HUMS said it was the object of his motion to d. fir the discussion of it. Lord J. 7:4ISSSELL thought this ru'e, as it at present stood, productise of great incunvenienoe. It was the forme r practice of the House, when there was an order of the day to be considered, for the order of the day to be read, and although the Speaker put it formally from The chair, it was not supposed that it was advisable to interpose any motion re!ating to any other subject; but, an abuse of that kind had crept into the practice, 0/diens emanating from the Hon. Member for Mon trose-himself.—(Laughter). That practice was at last found so inconvenient, that the Hon. Gentleman, who was the author of the abuse, proposed the resolution which was now the subject of discussion. He (Lord J. Russell) submitted that the House had better continue the present arrangement,—(Cheers.) Mr. upatmEs was understood to express himself in favour of the Hon. Member for Montrose's motion. Sir R. H. INGLIS thought that though it was some what early for that House to take into consideration the benefits or the disadvantages of a sessional order, he yet deemed it advisable to entertain the motion as speedily as possible, for it appeared very evident that the order had worked satisfactorily for the dispatch of business in former years. That was the real question which the House was now called upon to dispose of, and he believed that nine-tenths of the Members would agree with him, that the more time was economised the better would it be for them and the country.—(Loud cheer.) He did, therefore, hope that this question would be dis posed of before another year was wasted.—(Hear.) Mr. lIORSMAN said that the question was not whether the motion of the Hun. Member for Montrose (11r. Hume) should 1)9 disposed of, but whether it should be adjourned for consideration. The fact was, that in stead of one motion or one resolution, the Hon. Member had proposed a series of resolutions, and it was almost impossible to say what effect the adoption of his motion would have upon the others, which were not named. The Howe wax, in fact, taken by surprise. Tho Honourable Member for Montrose had dis tinctly stated that this resolution was only on experiment, and he thought that the effect of that expe riment ought to be ascertained before they took any step further.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BRO rHERToN had always been anxious, as the House well knew, to forward the public business. — (Cries of " Divide, divide.") Hr. HUME would only say a few words before the House divided. His only object was to forward the dis patch of the public business of the country—(Hear, hear) but session after session had passed without any step iu advance being made. He should be prepared to make a proposition, that when any Member thought fit to move an amendment he should be required to give previous notice of it, that the House might know the business before it, and the time which ought to be devoted to the interests of the r eople should not be wasted. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The 110114 e then divided, when the numbers were— For the adjournment .. 81 Against it ... ... 151 Majority ...---70 Mr. HUMEsaidhe was the individual who submitted the proposition to the House for adoption, not as a per manent measure but as an experiment, in order to see in what manner every possible facility for the complaints of the people being la,id before the House could be afforded, and in his conscience he believed it had had that effect. If they went on as they did at present, the time would come when the Ministers would be the only parties who would be enabled to speak. They had an opportunity of making a House whenever they liked, and when any unpleasant or disagreeable motion waiVfought on, in nine cases out of ten they could either prevent the House being formed, or clear the House, and then have a " count out." The resolution was then agreed to. The remaining tesolutions were then agreed to. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS. On the order of the day being read for resuming the adjourned debate on the Address, The Marquis of GRANBY said, in the observati?Aa , which he should feel it his duty to make on the moteA and amendment before the House he should confine himj self entirely to that paragraph in her Majesty's graciou Speech to which the amendment was directed. He thought it would be generally admitted by the House that it would not be possible for his Hoc. Friend - this Member for" Lir:toile, and those who entertained similar view, to agree to that paragragh in the Speech ot' her Majesty without moving an amendment to it. That paragraph stated that her Majesty had great satisfaction in congratulating the House on the improved condition of commerce and manufac tures; and it went on to say that her Majesty regretted that some distress prevailed among the owners and occu piers of land. Now, when it was remembered that these complaints did not proceed solely from the occupiers and owners of land,it did seem to him'that there was an in tention on the part of her Majesty's Government to insult and annoy an important part of her Majesty's subjects. He did think the mover of the Address would have assured the House that that language was not intentional, and that it was an oversight on the part of her Majesty's Govern ment, at least, though there might not be an intention among them to extend any measure of relief to the agricultural interest. Bat what did they hear from the Honourable Gentleman opposite (Mr. Villiers) when he came to this feet? The Noble Lord then read the passage, saying that the Honourable Member had repeated with a sneer that passage of the Royal Speech. He believed, however, that the distress of the owners and occupiers of land would receive not only the sympathy of the members of this House, but of the country at large, not only for themselves but because every thinking man must know that they could not be destroyed without their labourers.—(Protectionist cheers) And the Chancellor of the Exchequer had admitted that the agricultural labourers participated in that distress. He admitted also that the distress fell more heavily upon the small tenant-fa,rmere, and he believed he was correct—(Hear, hear, and cheers)—and allow him to remind the House of the large number of tenant-farmers According to Mr. Spackman's tables the number of tenant-farmers of England, including those of Ireland, was equal to every male above twenty years of age employed in every species of manufacture in this country.—(Protectionist cheers.) They were also a class which had over proved loyal to the Sove reign (Loud cheers) and ever ready and foremost to defend the constitution of the country. It bat been said that the great distress which now ex isted was to be attributed mainly to an over-abundant harvest ; :but could it be denied that the importation of ten millions and a half of grain had forced down prices t) the extent to which they had fallen? Last year the harvest was not an over good one, and then they were told that tl.e distress which unfortunately existed was the result cf a deficient Larvest.—(flea:, hear.) Nuw he wished to know under what circumstances the agricultural interest was t be prosperous ?—(Hear.) Large meetings had lately been held throughout the country, in the north, south, east, and west, at •r, hich a,grieul wrists and farmers attended, and, though no doubt there was a great variety of opinion, it was the consequence of the different posi tions which they occupied in the country; but at all these meetings there were present man who said, that under the present system the cultivation of the land must ever prove an unremunerative occupation. —(Hear, hear.) They distinctly told them that no reduction of rent, no partial remedial measures, how ever beneficial, could possibly save them from the effect of the disadvantages which were now weigh ing them down. He, therefore, did ask them to listen to the complaints of these men ; and he did hope that those complaints would not all be made in vair.—(Hear, hoer.) He had observed that a passage in her Majesty's Speech stated that great advent ego had accrued to the labouring classes through the re duction of the prices of food and clothing, and the other necessaries of life. That passage he would read. The Noble Marquis having read the passage, proceeded to say that without attempt ing for a moment to question the value of such a principle, a great, and very possibly a fatal mistake, would be made in estimating the labourer's condition if they did not take into consider ation the amount of wages which he received; and looking at that condition he did not hesitate to say that the la bourer's condition Ras worse now than it had been before; for those who are employed at reduced wages aro worse off than ever they were. But that is not all; it is not only those who are thus employed who are worse off, but it is those who are unem ployed. Whoa I heard the Right Honourable Gentleman last night reading extracts from the report of the poor-law guardians, I could not but remember that at a meeting at Walt. ham, which I attended the other day, I heard far mers get up one after another and say they had done all they could to keep their labourers in employ, but they could do, it no longer, and even if they could employ them they had no money to pay them with. What was the use Of comparing the last year with 1848? that had been a season of distress in the manufacturing as well as in the agricultural districts. They should have com pared it with 1845, and again, accurately to calculate the amount of distress, they should take into account those who were employed upon the roads in the country, for he perceived that it was a growing practice among farmers to send their labourers on the roads instead of sending them to the workhouse. The Noble Marquis then proceeded to read an extract from the letters which have lately appeared in the Morning Chronicle, in which it was stated that it was no uncom mon practice for vagrants to commit petty thefts in order to get a week's safe lodging.—(Hear.) They were willing to work hard. but work could not be had,, and food, covering and firing could not be obtained without labour. It was an un healthy state of things that could not exist. He (the Marquis of Granby) agreed with every word of that statement, and asserted that the great de sideratum cf the age was to employ the people.— ' (Hear, hear.) If they turned to Ireland, the same state of things would be found to exist. The number of deaths that had taken place in that county from star vation was frightful in the extreme, but it was the effect of bad legislation, and nothing else Ile admittel the prosperity of manufacture', and he was sure every Member of the House would rejoice at it; but it was necessary t look into the origin and springs of that prosperity. He doubted much whether it would be of a permanent character. Foreign trado had largely increased, but the home trade was in a state of complete stagnation . It should be remembered that before this prosperity they had had a long depres sion and continued convulsions on the Continent, and to the removal of these causes and the prosperity. • of California he attributed our existing anu. The Noble Marquis real a letter from a large m facturer in Sheffield, stating that at present many trades men in that town were unable to meet their bills from the existing del)) ession in their trade. He thought then there was no such great prosperity in the home trade of this country as had been been represented; and he feared that the agricultural interest in this country, on which that home trade mainly depended, would, under the existing laws, go on from time to time declining, until both the manufacturing and agricultural interests were eventually ruined the home markee was the great mart upon which they should depend. In a series of years, from 1820 to 1819, it appeared that the value of cotton consumed in the home market was 257,531,9591., and in the home and colonial 442,330,3255 They spoke much of the prosperous state of various branches of manufactures, and referred to articles such as gloves, but these had a protective duty of ten per cent, in their favour. He had shown the value of the home market; he would now draw attention to the foreign trade. Now, it appeared that the value of the entire exports to the continent of Europe was but 22 ,845,6241., and to the United States 10,974,151/, making a total of 33,819,7741. Suppose the United States should impose a restrictive duty either on the ; manufactured article or on the raw material, or sup pose they should refuse to supply it at all, what then would become of their foreign exports? These were most important questions, not only to the agricultural body, but to every man in the country. He bad said there was great pressure upon the agricultural interest, and that it was owing to legislation. That it was not temporary, but permanent, and would reach other classes. They said if free trade is to be the order of the day let it be carried out fairly, and let the manufacturers be placed on the same footing as themselves. They com plain that they are not allowed to grow tobacco, beet root for sugar, and barley for malt liquors. He should, for all these reasons, give a hearty vote for the amend• men t. Mr. E. DENISON said he had been long connected with laud, and depended upon it for support. The question was not whether the corn-laws w ere to be re pealed, but whether certain words were to be added to the Address. Now, he would ask what use there would be in introducing these words, unless it was meant that they w, re to be followed up by practical results? Such must be the intention of those who proposed and sup ported their introduction. The meaning then was, that they should return to the policy which they had lately abandoned. A petition had been present :d that evening from Lincolnshire. At the meeting at hich the petition was agreed to they were invited to consider not only the agricultural, but all other interests. The colleague of the Hon. Member who presented that petition had con gratulet d the House upon the prosperity of the commer cial and manufacturing interests. There could, in fact, be no doubt thet the general interests of the country were in a prosperous condition. It bad been further proved that the repeal of the navigef on-laws did not cause the ruin that was anticipated. There could bo no doubt that the relation between landlord and tenant was one of pressure. To adjust this matter how did they employ themselves? Ile lived on the confines of the counties of Lincoln and Gloucester, and must have been deaf if he ha I not known or heard how they employed themselves. They held meetings, where they discussed the pressure on agriculture with political acerbity, and sometimes with personal invectives. He lived near the Noble Marquis (the Marquis of Granby), for whom he entertained the highest respect. His personal character was worthy of respect, but ho thought he was not judi cious in the course he pursued when he addressed the tenant-farmers. He told them they could not pay rent, and should not hold their farms. At these meetings they were fond c f the simile with regard to landlords and tenants—" that they sailed in the same boat;" but, notwithstanding, they could not row the boat—they would not even take an oar themselves or suffer the crew to do so. They considered the current too strong for ' them. It was a cataract which it was impossible to row over. They declared it was no use to struggle against the stream, for ruin was certain.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord and others said that the only safety, and security was the return of protection. The Noble Lord should return to his constituents and say the battle of protection had been fought and lost. What,:then, was to be done? Himself (Mr. Denison) and others were suffer ing—for he spoke as an owner c f land, and of rather bad land, and that certainly would suffer most—and he would make another confession, that he had a farm witnout an occupant, and he was told by a tenant-farmer, who came to look at it, that he could not think of taking it until something was settled.—(Cheers from the Ministerial •nclies.) He hoped to be excused by the Noble Lord Or having brought these matters under his attention. Now, one part of his speech had reference to local bur dens. The Noble Lord should know that in their capacity .as magistrates many of these local burdens were under their control. To them;as magistrates,were committed the administration of local affairs. By attend ing to those matters they would perform a most impor tant duty. Some years ago, when he first interested himself in local affairs, he found that out of 157 items of taxation in his own country, ninety-seven were founded upon no known law, and were of an ille gal nature. It was their boundee duty, without delay, to make arrangements to meet the state of things created by the recent alteration of the law. It was their improving wealth and growing commerce that they must look to, as a compensation for their loss.—(Loud cheers.) For himself he could sincerely say, that he would give his vote against the amendment with confidence, upon the ground of right, justice, and ne cessity.—(Cheer'.) Lord NORREYS thought that the amendment, if carried, would give an indirect encouragement to that agitation which was now going on to the injury of the country. He saw no other prospect for the relief of agriculture than in a wise and judicious diminution of taxation pressing most heavily upon their interest. Captain PELHAM said that the amendment which had been proposed placed him in some little difficulty as to the vote he should give, for the first time in that House, as he came from an agricultural county, but pro fessed free-trade principles. He was not disposed that the Gentlemen on the opposite aid e of the House (Pro tectionists) should arrogate to themselves the peculiar title of the farmers' friends. If ho supposed that any measure of the Government would be incurious to that interest, he should give his vote against it. Those who sat on the oppisite side of the House went about the country persuading the people that it was possible to return to protection, which had been abandoned by the general consent of the country. The corn-law repeal was not carried by stealth. Since they were repealed there had been a general election, and that alteration in the law had been deliberately ra tified by the country. He believed that in th© legislation of that House, from 1815 to 1845, for agri cultural protection, the prosperity of the country was not to to looked for, but it was to be found in the legis lation since the latter year for the general interest. He concurred in a good deal that had fallen from Hon. Members on the other side of the House; but he thought at the same time that they had aggravated their difficul ties. There was one measure, an alteration c f the law of settlement, that would be of great benefit to the agri culturist. The time had arrived for a tot it abolition of the law of settlement. That he was prepared to show at the proper time. He believed, in a minor degree, that measures to facilitate the transfer of property similar to that in operation in Ireland would be needed. Although prepared to vet: for the iht :rest of agriculture, he was toot prepared to uphold that interest without any rela tion to the general welfare. It was upon that ground that he had been favourable to a repeal of the corn-laws, and he would be no party to any amendment that would have the effect indirectly of sanctioning measures for a return to protection. Mr. CHRISTOPHER observed that it was a most grievous mistake to suppose that this question could be brought to a final settlement by the vote cf that night. —(Hear, from the Protectionists.) It was supposed from the Speech that her M a j esty ' s Ministers sym pathised with the distress of the agriculturists. But so far from sympathising with the distress existing, they did not even acknowledge it. They coolly ref rred to their complaints, and that was all.—(Hear from the Op position.) The pauperism of the county of Lincoln had increased during the past year to a frightful extent. Oh, they were told, if you will only embark capital in land (but where the capital was to come from they did not say) it would yield a remunerative return. But it was those districts which had been most improved by their skill and industry that would suffer most. He should also say that, with respect to rents, the same system should be introduced as that carried on in the mercantile concerns of this country—that is, to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest one.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish to take on himself the character of a prophet, but at the same time he should say that the parishes of England would soon be reduced to a worse state than the parish of ICilrush, in Ireland, and therefore hoped that the House would duly weigh the great benefit likely to arise from the amendment, which he felt it to be his honest and honourable duty t. support, because the foreigner was, by free-trade measures, afforded advantages which have been denied to the English farmer. He next re gretted to state that the advocates of free trade did not carry out their principles as they would wish to be thought to do; for when ho turned his attention to the growth of tobacco, he should ask, why not extend free trade to this in a country that is well known to be ca pable of producing it, if free trade were properly car ried out?—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MeCULLAGII said that he would wish that the Protectionists would extend the same care and concern to the Irish farmer as they had evinced for the English farmer, and therefore begged to call the attention of the House to the misery and wretchedness prevalent in Gal way and several other counties in Ireland. He did not think that the amendment proposed would gratify any sect in Ireland, no matter whether Protestant, Catholio, or Presbyterian, and hoped that it would not be pressed, as it could confer no benefit on any class or sect of her Majesty's subjects. Mr. IL PALMER said that the condition of Ireland was not at all improved by the corn-laws of 184 G. There was no one who could not agree in the reference to, and regret for, the language in her Majesty's Speech in re ference to the distress; but he thought the paragraph ought not to be allowed to pass with simple notice, with regard to the extent of that distress. The para• graph went on to say, after alluding to the distress, that allowance must be made fir recent legislative 1 changes. Now that was precisely the branch of the pa ragraph in which he, and those who agreed with him, concurred; for there could be no doubt that much of the distress which now pressed upon many parts of England, and in an especial manner on Ire land, was not only produced but greatly aggravated by the measure called " free trade." He believed it was indisputable that to that measure the agricultural dis tress was to be attributed.—(Hear, hear.) It had been said, but very erroneously, that this was a landlords' question; but such was not the case, it was more of a tenant-farmers' question, and it was a fact that, so op pressed were those tenants by the operation cf the change, that they were actually at that moment paying their rent out of their capital. There was not a doubt, and he was prepared to prove it, that the distress was produced by the Act cf IS46—the repeal of the corn laws. Ho could show, from the Mark-lane Express, that there had been imported into this country, very re chyd fia e enon n rwddy tl_ dt ) n. - hnt , edaoa 2 ttr U thli l,63s quarters of grain, which amounted to yp e o - oot operated e r t tuo h hpne o omt f nh their :tht bae nut tea tenant - :armors? classtt r ri tet with rt hperesr:ruel great consumption. Tatrh te.aey and wedr Now, utiyal nearly a o t o n o i 1 1 ith ity en te T a a r i d i t d o e d a experience . teesetever e l e a r l s -i; s who lie could ere ed free-traders, speak ree-t ra d fr e o r m s and strenuous advocates fur the adoption of the measure, that they had tried the experiment, and found it sadly deficient of t'Je advantages promised to result from it by those who advocated it when the question was Le:ng agi tated. With regard to cheap bread, about which so much had been said, he thought it was quite idle to say that it was sufficient to put the labourer in a state of comfort and of elevated condition. Ile was enabled to speak to the contrary, and to show that cheap bread— the result of the change which had taken place—had the effect, not of making the condition of the labourer better, but, by its operation, of reducing the scale of wages, and rendering their condition much worse. It threw men out of employment, created competition, and much conse quent. distress, The Chancellor of the Exchequer, his speech of last evening, gave a very flattering account ' of the state of things in the country now to that which prevailed prior to the repeal of the corn laws; but concurrently with the state of prosperity to which the Right lion. Baronet referred, and of which he so much boasted, there was a great deal cf distress. The Right Hon. Baronet, to illustrate that statement, referred to the amount of relief given to the poor in 1848, and that given in 1819, and argued that the diminutien exhibited in the last over the preceding yi:er showed that the measure of free trade was producing the eWects which its advocates anicipated from it, in reducing the poor-rates. But although the poor-law returns were, to a certain extent, a criterion to go by, still, in his (Mr. Palmer's) opinion, they were by no means to leo relied on as correct, for it was an indisputahle !act, that much cf the amount of distress which prevailed iu the country was hidden from the guardians, under whose notice it never came at all. He could show to the satisfaction of the House that the special burdens of which so much had been said by some Hon. Gentlemen, and which was denied by others, pressed not merely on the agricultural classes, but bore, also, on the poorer branches of the manufacturing claisee. A great experiment had certainly been tried in the commercial p Slicy of this country, and he was prepared to admit that it had, to a certain extant, and on one side, proved a la: tactic' :I one, but on the other side of the picture—the landed inte rest side—there was a dark shade, which exhibited not only a burtheusame but a most discouraging complexion. They should restore protk cive duties—the question of ai:ount he left to the consideration of another day—or they must considerably lessen the burthens on lend. It was useless to press those views on the present Govera.- ment, or the present Parliament; but Governments were not permanent bodies, nor were Paeliamente per • petual, and for this reason he thought the agricultural interea was bound to persevere in their demand for re • dress—(Hoar, hear)—a demand which he hoped would eventually prove successful.— (Hear, hear.) Mr. MUNTZ could not understand the use of a de bate, the subject of which appeared admitted on all hands. He regretted that distress prevailed among cer tain classes of the community, but that was no reason why Government should retrace its steps; and, even if it were willing, it could not do so. Indeed, he defied them to do so. If there were any retracing of steps it should be on another principle, and in another quarter. He had heard it stated that agricultural produce had advanced in price, but he was not informed of the cause cf that advance. He was of opinion that the price would be still lower, and that was the reason why in 1846 he had voted for the repeal of the corn-hews. At that period he stated that if he did not consider such a result would follow he should not vote for the mea sure. Low prices followed free-trade policy, and for that reason some interests necessarily suf fered. He admitted that there was, under the existing laws, a certain extent of prosperity, but then it was a one-sided prosperity. Had that prosperity arisen from an advance of wages ? No such thing. The increased demand for manufactures had not produced one iota of an advance in prices. —(Hear, hear.) The condition of the working classes was improved, but the condition of the masters had not been permanently benefited.— (Hear, hear.) He wishei to ask, moreover, bad not this improvement brought about by the ruin of the West India interest, by destroying the condition of Ireland? And were they not now, as it was alleged, going to de stroy the agricultural interest of England ?—(Hear.) The lion. Member for the West Riding in the course of last session prophesied that the price of wheat would average 465. Some few days ago at Leeds he told the farmers that it would not exceed 405., and he told them they should be satisfied with that sum. How did the Honourable Member aecount for the wide difference in those statements? Suppose they had pro taction again, how could any man exist who manufac tured for the export trade? but they could not restore protection unless it were throng's a sea of blood, thst all would doaply regret. The question, as had been urged, was a landlord question at the end, but it was a tenant question in the beginning. High prices for corn must decrease the rate of wages and the prices of manufac tures. With regard to the navigation-laws, as they affected the price of food, there was this much to be said. The repeal of those laws made this difference, that whereas firmerly the foreign grower ha I not ac oppor tunity more frequently than once in seven years e f sending his produce to this country, he coult now calculate exactly upon reaching our market, and he could, without difficulty, ascertain the precise sum per quarter at which ho could land his corn here. The Hon. Gentleman who moved the Address dwelt a great deal on the importance of the national saving which had been effected ; but who had paid for that saving? If ninety or one hundred millions were taken out of the pocket of one interest and put into the pocket of another interest, in what respect was the nation ad vantaged? It was useless for the Protectionist to expect a continuance of their long-cherished boon, and let them remember that while they were protected they never expressed the least solicitude for any other interest. In conclusion, the Hon. Gentleman declared his determi nation of supporting her Majesty's Ministers, by his vote on the Address they had prepared far adoption by the Legislature. Mr. HERRIES declared that those who co-operated with him would have been unworthy the high position they filled, if they had not taken the first opportunity cf placing on record tbeir opinion of the prevailing agricultural distress, and of the causes which immedi ately produced that distress. To the amendment he gave his cordial assent, and he then proceeded to take exceptions to some portions of the Address, especially to that paragraph which ascribed great beneficial results to have already proceeded from the repeal of the navi gation-laws. He also considered that the inferences drawn by the Chancellor c f the Exchequer as to the state of the country were not juttitied by the facts of the case. The Right Hon. Gentleman had told the house, that their exports during the year 1849 had exceeded to a very large extent the expoiti ;luring the year 1848 ; but that WAS no evidence that the trade of the country had be en benefited in the least de gree by this free-trade system. Why, 1848 was, it was well known, a miserably bad year.—(H , a-, hear.) There was great depression in trade—there were di,- turbances abrea 1 and discontent at home; arid with what justice or propriety, then, could a comparison be ma le between it and the last year to prove the benefit free trade had conferred? But, more than the, in order fully t ) establish , his case, it was nece3sary that the Right lion. Gentleman should have told the House what was tho nature of those exports, and where they were sent to. A considerable portion of their exports went t) China and the East Indies; but as it was well known that the only article they imported from China was tea, and that they loaded that with a duty of 100 per cent.; it could not be said that tee trade had any effect in in creasing their exports with that country. But still far ther, and in order to show that the exports of 1849 being larger than those of 1848 proved nothing, he would remind the House that during the year 1845, when pro tection was in full operation, the exports exceeded those of 1849 to a considerable ext sr, hear.) He did not make those statements as a proof of the failure of free trade, but simply to show the slender foundation upon which the Right Honourable Gentleman raised that superstructure of prosperity which ho had exhibited to the House the other evening. In regard to the sub ject more immediatoly connected with the amendment before the House, it had been admitted on all hands that great distress prevailed among those connected with agriculture. Government admitted that there was such, although not in a satisfactory manner. Those who had addressed the House on the subject also made the admission, and the Honourable Mover of the Ad dress not only made the admission, but told them what was the cause of the distress, namely, the lowness cf the price of agricultural produce, caused by the repeal of the core-laws. But that was contrary to what the Free-traders said pre vious t) the repeal of the corn-laws, for they then declared that the repeal of these would increase the prosperity cf the occupiers of land, and raise its value instead of lowering . it. W as i t r i g ht th a t th e y should place the agricultural interest of the country, which was the most important interest connected with it, in jeopardy, in order to try such an experiment as that they had had recourse to ? H e a pp re h en d e d n ot, and he did not despair of seei ng th e d a y w h en that amount of protection which that interest conceived they were entitled to would bo fully conceded to it. Mr. LABOUCHERE said, conceiving that 'there was but one opinion as to the desireableness of the debate being concluded that night, and being aware that other Gentlemen occupying a higher station than himself, would be expected to address the House, he would con fine his remarks within a very short compass. At the same time, there were one or two observations made by the Right Hon. Gentleman who- had just eat down which he could not help referring to in the outset. That Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that so f sr as the navigation-laws were concerned they bad no right to say that the apprehensions entertained by those who opposed the repeal of those laws, as to the evils which would result from the passing of that measure, would not be realised. Now. he agreed that it would bo wrong either in himself or any one else to boast of success so far as the effect of repeal of those laws were as yet visible. Yet, on the other hand, when challenged to the contest, he conceived that he had a right to appeal to Hon. Gentlemen con nected with the principal shipping ports of the kingdom to say whether the effects predicted by Hon. Gentlemen opposite had been producel by that change.—(Hear, hear.) So far from that being the case, he never made an assertion in that House with greater confidence than when he said that he believed that the shipping interest of this country was in a most satisfactory and en couraging state.—(Hsar, hear.) He believed the-fact to be, that there were at least as many ships building at this moment in this country as there had been for:many years past.—(Bear, hear.) Those ships so building were of a larger class and a better description than those hitherto built, and in fact the result had shown that the predictions made on the passing of the mea sure, that shipping and ship-building would be greatly increased by it, hal been fully re tlised.—(llear, hear.) There was more energy displayed and a firmer de termination exhibited to meet that competition which was deemed inevitable from the passing of such a measure. Those Hon. Gentlemen who had taken a part in the discussion of the question when it was before the House would recollect the; numerous letters which ap peared from time to time in the Standard newspaper, signed by a gentleman of the name of Linds?-y, con demnatory of the measure, and predicting its evil conse quences. That gentleman had since the passing of .the Act issued a circular, in which he recommended the shipowners, as the ease now stood, to accommodate themselves to the altered state of things , by having their vessels commanded not only by gentlemen of great nautical skill, but also of expert business habits; and who were well acquainted with the customs and pecu liarities of the inhabitants of the various countries with which they might trade, in order that they might enable them:to compete with the ships of other countries. That was exactly what he:anticipated would be the effect of the repeal of those laws—that it would cause ship owners to exhibit more energy in the pro.eeution of their business, and eint,loy on board their vessels gentlemen of the most undoubted skill and business habits. A gentlemen of great experience in the ship ping trade in Norway stated his conviction that every Norwegian ship destined for the long voyage must come to this country, in the first instance, to be coppered, so completely had British shipbuilders gained the ascen dancy in that great branch of their commerce. Another point had been raised in the course of the discussion on this subject, and that was the t a.certain degree of favour, in the shape of protection, had been shown to the manu facturing interests in thwe vestiges of protection which still remained on the statute-hook. Now, there could not be a gee ater error than such an assumption. It was quite true that some vestiges of protection to their mantifx tures still remained unrepealed, but if any gentleman took the trouble of looking through the tariff, he would find that as far as favour was concerned, there was no ground whatever fir saying that manufactures were preferred • to the agricultural interests. The chief article which still remained protected in manufactures was silk, which had a duty on foreign imports of 15 per cent., and from which a revenue accrued of 274,0001. Glove;, artificial flowers, embroidery, boots and shoes, and other articles, were also protected; but the House would allow him to observe that all the great *staple m uffecture; of the country were completely un protected—(Cheers)—with the single exception of silk, and that the protection which still remained applied ex clusively to the industry of those artisans who took manufactured goods in a secondary state, and above all to that class of females for whom so much deserved sym pathy had been lately exhibited. The duty on goods in which they were concerned was as high as 25 per cant., the very highest on the statute-book, and which yielded a revenue of 12,8001. But, thou, let them see how the agricultural classes were situated in the same way, and then judge if any favour was shown ono class above an other. Butter was protected by a duty of 10 per cent., which yielded a sevenue of 140,0001.; cheese 5 per cent., yielding 160,000/ ; tallow the same, yielding 95,0001.; cloves, agricultural seeds, 38,0001.; and eggs, which he apprehended were not manufactured articles— (Great laughter)—brought in a revenue of 32,0001. (tlear, hear.) Now he made out a list of manufactured articles, from which, in the shape of protective duties, a revenue was derived of 430,0001., while the duties on foreign agricultural products imported into this country were nearly the same, as they amounted to 427,000/. — (Hear, hear.) Ile (Mr. Lebouchere) thought it right to go into that statement, in consequence of what had been alleged at various meetings in the country, that if they were to have free trade at all, they ought to have it equally applied to all branches of rational industry. It was incorrect to say that agriculture was left out of the question, and as to what had been alleged about the grievance of not permitting foreign tobacco to come in duty free, it was well known that any attempt to grow tobacco in this country would be fruitless if such was done, and it was therefore obvious that the protection now on tobacco was no impediment whatever to British agricultural industry. He denied in the most emphatic terms that the slightest disrespect was intended to be cast es the landed interest by the words in the Speech from the Throne.—(Hear, hear.) He knew from his own personal knowledge that distress existed, and ho deeply deplored it; but it was his conscientious convic tion that they could not do anything more injurious to those interests than to hold out any expectation that that or any future House of Commons will again return to the system of protection, and thus divert their attention from their efforts to improve their condition by such an ignis fatuus. He was therefore opposed to the amend ment, not because distress did not exist in the agricul tural districts, but because he believed such distress was only of a temporary character; for to him it apreared inconceivable that when their manufactures and com merce flourished the fields of that great country could be left uncultivated.—(Cheers.) Mr. DISRAELI then rose, amidst great applause from the Protectionists—Sir, I rise to support the amendment to the Address, which has been moved by the Honour able Baronet the Member for Lincolnshire. I am sure that the Noble Lord opposite will not think it disre spectful on my part if I do not enter into any comment upon any other portion of the Address which he has offered to the consideration of the House, which Address contains notioes of subjects of great interest and impor tance, upon many of which I myself might venture, under other circumstances, to require some information from her Majesty's Ministers, But, considering the hour of the night, the general tone of the debate, and the anxiety which I believe is felt on both sides cf the House that the question should be closed to-night, the Noble Lord will permit me to confine myself to that particular paragraph upon which my Honourable Friend has moved the amendment. I believe there is no question in this House at present, whatever there might have been at the commencement of yesterday's discussion, that what is called agricultural distress does prevail. We have had, after some sceptical expressions, several witnesses from both sides of the House, of considerable influence and importance, who have attested that fact, the last of whom was the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade.—(Hear, hear.) And I think I may state without exaggeration that agricultural distress does prevail in England, in Scotland agricultural dismay at least, and I suppose I must leave for Ireland agricultural desulatior.—(Cheers from the Protectionists.) Un questionably, whatever might have been supposed to have been the cause of this distress, whatever differences of opinion might have existed with respect to the de gree of this distress—unquestionably it has prevailed for a considerable period, has evinced itself in a variety of quarters, and has been expressed by persons whose opi nions certainly, from their position and importance, are entitled to the highest respect. But, Sir, I am entirely precluded from the necessity of entering into any evi dence upon this important and interesting point, because the evidence is already Wore me. I want no better evi dence with 'meet to the existence of this distress, and with respect to the cause of this distress, than that of the Hon. Gentleman who moved the Address to her Majesty. —(Hear, hear.) That Hon. Member has with perfect frankness informed us, that he has no doubt that a sum equal almost to one-eighth of the national debt has been taken from the agricultural class, and within a very biicf period, by the influence of legislative enactments. —(Cheers.) I am not speaking now with respect to the wisdom or fully of those enactments, or with respect to the necessity or expediency of them, I am merely calling a witness forward who, upon such a topic, must surely be considered one of a first-rate character—(A laugh)— who comes forward and tells us that one, and that the most important, branch of national industry has, accord ing to his own account, within a very brit f period, been deprived of the receipt of between 90,000,000, and 100,000,000 sterling, which, according to the Hon. Member, it was in the habit of receiving, and that that want of receipt has been occasioned by recent, and cer tainly unexpected, changes in our laws.—(Cheers.) Therefore, it is evident at present, and I think it will be acknowledged by all, that it is not surprising that this distress should be severe—should be so severe and so general as that it should be prevalent in England, acknowledged in Scotland, and that it should be over whelming in Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) For cer tainly, great as must be the cause which produces, if not universal, at least general distress in three such famous kingdoms, in this financial age, it surely will be acknowledged that the cause is sufficient when we hear and accept the calculations of the Hon. Member who moved the Address t her Majesty.—(Cheers.) Let me, under these circumstances—the House recollecting how wide and prevalent is this distress, how —according to the lion. Gentleman who moved the Address which he calls upon us to support—how great is the cause of the distress, and how ascribable is that distress to the previous conduct of this House—allow me once more to recall te the House the language in which that distress is noticed in the Speech from the Throne. Unhappily, it is not there described even as distress—(Hear, hear) —but the expression of feeling on the part of the . great classes who have been submitted to the ac tion of cacum. stances so vast as those acknowledged by h Gen tleman the Member for Wolverhampton the (Mr. Villiers) oVnilliers) are merely noticed as complaints—(fiea justice of which is most studiously notkr'nowledged.— (Ilea?, hear.) It had indeed been acknowledged.— in defence— mind you, after this critical observation had been made —that in a subsequent sentence these words appear— " that her Majesty greatly laments_ stthreasts.r That is any portion of her subjects should be suffering di abstract obsertation—(Cheers)—one which bears no re ference to the condition of either kingkingdom,but merely says that, as an abstract pri nci p le, the Sovereign of these realms sympathises with any class of he r as subjec tstract s who in i an ab are in a state of distres s.g APP l y proposition is virtually o denying that it practically exists—(Cheers) —and is followed by a sentence which is one of philanthropic mockery.—(Cheers.) Well, now, is it surprising , is it unreasonabales, passedthat i n and the after pre sent state of affairs—atter thatll h all that is passing —that this House should meet again, and that it should virtually not acknowledge ence of this great distress, whichis not only recognised by the reputative of the Government—which is even accou nted for by him—that we should not loess in silen ce thi s occasion, especially when we come fresh from our constituents, who are the victims of this change o f your l eg i s l a tion, which, whether it be right or wrong, YOU agree by your prime organ has produced these effects? Is it, I say, surprising that we should feel it our first duty to come forward here to express our opinion of the causes of that distress, and our sympathy with those who are suffering?—(Cheers.) Let me beg the Hous e carefully to consider this amendment, because it is upon it alone that the question is about to be called, and not upon some imaginary statement of a case which it may be convenient to the Government to adopt, and espe cially to any Hon. Member cf that Government who may have prepared a speech not adapted to this amend ment.—(A laugh.) The amendment which you are now called upon to decide consists of two parts. Let me new call your particular attention to the first of them. You are asked humbly " to represent to her Majesty that in mony parts of the United Kingdom, and especially ,in Ireland, various classes of her Majesty's subjects connected with the cultivation of the soil are labouring under severe distress, mainly a' tribut del° in our opinion, to recent l eg i s l at i ve enactments." Who denies that proposition ?—(Cheers.) Not the Hon. Moser of the Address to her Majesty.—(Cheers.) He admits the fact, and he accounts for it; and this amend ment is merely prospective of th e s p eec h w hi c h he made last night.—(Cheers.) Is it unreasonable, then—or, if unreasonable, no one can maintain that it is untrue?— (Cheers.) It has been said that you are called upon by the amendment to-night to declare that you must in stantly return to protection, and that the protective sys tem must be instantly re-constructed in this country. It may or it may not be politic—it may or it may not be expedient —to call upon the House to take that step ; but rely upon it, if we think it our duty to do it—if we think it is for the advantage of the ( country that that step should be taken, we will not hesitate to come forward, frankly, and completely, and tengibly, to express ourselves upon that subject.— (Cheers.) Ido not think that an amendment to the Address is the right occasion for contesting so great ! a principle, or for entering upon such en encounter; but remembering what the etete of the country is—believing that it is universally acknowledged that, whether right or wrong, the distress of great portions of her Majesty's subjects has been occasioned by recent legislative enact meats--I say that nothing can be more legitimate, no thing can be, upon our part or opus the part of those who sympathise with the land in its di:tress, an act of more clear or complete duty than to come forward, when such an Address to the Throne is proposed to es, and express, with temperance, but with firmness and with precision, our belief in the existence of a great cal mi!y, and our conviction that that calamity has been occasioned by our legislative enactments. (Cheers.) But ; is there anything unreasonable in it? What caa be me; e natural than that the House of Parliament which repre sents the Commons t f England—whatever may be the truth or falsehood, whatever may be the justice or injus tice, of certain economical principiei—What, I say, can be more natural than that when we meet togetier, and when it is flagrant and notorious that great bodies of the people are in a etato of great depression and embar rassment, that we should come fsrward and exprese that fact dutifully and respectfully to the Sovereign. And what can be more natural than that ese should &lege our belief in the causes—net an unwarranted belief, not a wild or extravagant belief—for we have bees antici pated in the course which we have pointed out by the very organ of the Government who has proposed the Ad dress?—(Cheers.) So fir from this be:ng a violent course upon our part; it was a most constitutional, most natural, and most probable one, for it was the general anticipation of the country that her Majesty's Ministers would have expressed some sympathy with the depres sion and distress of the great body of her Majesty's sub jects. They might have done that without giving up any of those economical convictions to which they have been such recent converts.—(Cheers.) Isdeed, it was for a considerable time a very prevalent opinion that her Ma jesty's Ministers were really not ashamed of feeling seine sympathy with the distress of this great body of the country. There were a variety of rumours abroad, to which, I confess, I myself never gave any credence, but which, I believe, imparted some hope to those who were suffering during that period. The Right Hon. Gentle man opposite shakes his head, as, I dare say, he who is in possession of the cabinet secrets has very good reason for that signification cf his sceptism; but there were rumours abroad that a personage of considerable import ance, who had even reached the highest class in the peer age, did commit that great sin of political economy, of sympathising with the sufferings of the farmers of the country. I was always sceptical on the subject—indeed I cared nothing about the subject. I don't care if any duke in the land gives his adhesion to those prin ciples which I advocate in this house, or whether he an nounces his def , ction from them.—(Cheers.) I don't care one jot if all the dukes in the land took either course. It is the cause of labour in the agricultural die tricts—(Cheers)—or it is nothing; and if they be not the interests of the British labourer which we uphold, all the patronage of all the peers in the country cannot sustain us.—(Cheers.) Still it must be acknowledged that there were some foundations for that popular belief at the time. There were a gre at many cabinet councils, frequent and hurried, and the people of the country who had seen before what were the consequences of frequent and hur ried cabinet councils, were full of hope and alarm. There is a story told of a certain gentleman, who was once a Member of this House, and afterwards the Lord Protector of the Commonwealth, who was himself disturbed by cabinet councils. A certain stranger waited upon him, and ho sent him away by saying that " he was seeking the Lord." When he got rid ef the stranger, he said, " What a simpleton the man must be ! Ile thinks I was seeking the Lord, while I was only seeking the corkserew."—(A. laugh, and cries of " Oh, oh.") So it was with the late cabinet councils. The people of England thought that the cabinets of England were guilty of the high sin of sympathising with their distress. The people thought the cabinet was seeking the Lord, but the councils fre quently, hurried as they were, merely terminated in a cabinet dinner; and it turned;out that instead of seek ing the Lord, they were only seeking the corkscrew.— (Cries ef " Oh, oh," and cheers.) Now, after all, the Cabinet puts a bold front upon the question; and the only way they can get out of the scrape, according to their idea t f Parliamentary tactics, is, by asking the Hon. Member fir Wolverhampton to come forward on the present occasion. We have the Address to the Throne moved by an old Member e f the Anti-Corn League, and seconded by a Member of the new Parlia mentary Reform League.—(Cho ere.) I must do this justice to the candour of the Hon. Seconder, that he in troduced the topic in his speech to which he is of course devoted, though it does not appear in the Address to her Majesty. He expressed a hope—the (areal if the Go vernment, be it remembered—that her Majesty's Go vernment wore prepared to support those opinions to which he has himself recently given in his adhesion at Freemasons' Hall. But no Member of the Government has answered that ingenuous inquiry —(Hear, hear) — and it still remains a problem, how the ques tion is to be settled. I suppose it will be in this case as in ono even more memorable, if the mountain will not-go to Ministers, Ministers must , go to the mountain.—(Cheers, and cries of " 0h,.01t., ) The Right Hon. Baronet. the Chancellor of the Exchequer has called our attention to the state of the manufactures of the country. It is no difficulty upon our part to acknowledge the satisfaction with which we I hear her Majesty's Ministers counsel their Sovereign • that the manufacturing interests of this country are in a flourishing condition. I may ba allowed to say very briefly, before I touch upon that sulict, that the Right Hon. Baronet, in noticing the complaints which had been made by the agricultural interest of the distress which they at this moment experienced —while he has, in unison with the language of the Address which wo are recommended to give to-night to the Speech which has been delivered from the Throne—while he has dilated upon the prospects d the manufacturing in terest, he has at the same time thought it his duty to denounce the wanner in which the agricultural body have thought fit to bring forward their complaints before the consideration of the country and cf the Government. It has struck me as very surprising, that that Right lion. Baronet, who is himself a Member of the Imperial Government,e3pecially at a moment when lie tells us that all other interests are in a state of prosperity, suffer ing, think it his duty to come forward and say that is another great branch, which he acknowledges himself has acted in a manner, if not unconstitutional, unauthorised, because they have come forward in 'a manner quite consonant, net only with the Speech, but the machinery of the constitution, and expressed their sense of their suffering., and appealed to this House or to the Throne for relief and sympathy. The Right Hon. Baronet stated last ni g ht that there had been very violent language used upon several recent occasions. I thought at the time that that was a speeies of criticism which might have been omitted. It is r. ther unusual t carp at expressions which may be used at county meetings, for examp!e; but really if h e is so critical, I should almost say that he has formed his opinion of the violent language used at public assem blies of the people, probably in some town in the country in which he has taken his summer recre itiona. I should have thought that it was some of the tones of the town of Leeds that had reached him—l should have thought that he might have been ruminating on some of that Jacobin jargon which may perhaps have floated to his ears from the Free-trade Hall of the town of Man cheater—(hoar, hear)—and when the Right Hon. Gen tleman, a gentleman from Yorkshire, conies forward and says that ho not only regrets the agitation in the rural districts, but that he disapproves of thetone and of the strong language used at these assemblies, he might, perhaps, have recollected that there were other popular assemblies where the language use l was equally strong and much more unconstitutional.—(Cheers from the Opposi tion benches.) I am sure at least that the Right Hon. Gentleman would never have heard, at any county meeting in England, that the English Constitution only existed on sufferance. He never would have heard at an English county meeting that the three estates of the realm were only to be endured so long as they listened to the dictation and the caprices ef a particular interest. —(Hear, hear.) I will not, on this occasion, go into the question which the Right Hon. Gentleman has raised in relation to the value of our exports.—(Hear, hear.) I am bound to say that, so far as time, and study, and ob servation assist me, I see no reason to relinquish the opinions I have repeatedly expressed on the subject. I believe, I know it can be proved, that the exchaugeablo value of the products of British industry has materially diminished- within the past few y eare.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman last night said he could not understand my arguments, which went to prove that the manufacturers of England were content to manufacture at a loss. I will beg to remind him of an economical paper called the Economist, in which there has been a series of articles moat elaborate in composition, and most amp!, in calculations, the whole object of which is to prove that for the last four years the ma nufacturers of Manchester hare been manufae turing at a loss.—(hear, hear.) Well, I recom mend the Right Honourable Gentleman—l know not whether he has a personal acquaintance with the editor of the Economist or not—(Laughter)—to take advantage of his first ten minutes' leisure, and enlighten him-elf upon that topi c , an d ascer t a i n anther it be a fact that a Manchester manufacturer can manufacture at a loss, and even continue to manufecture at a loss. The Right Hon. Gentleman, as he thinks, has established his case to prove the success of his system, the success or failure of which I do not at all consider to be the question to night, or in any way connect el with the amendment; and the only reason for my referring to it is, because I would not seem to shrink from meeting his stelementa. He has adduced, as his test, the state of pauperism in the country. I accept that test, as far as it is valid, to try the efficiency and truth of his system; but I must say that the data ho has offered us have not, in my opinion, been fruitful of any very encouraging conclu- sion. He has established that there is a reduction of pauperism to the amount of something under '7 per cent. compared with last year—a year of unpa ralleled gloom, of unprecedented depression, which the Right Honourable Gentleman always told us during the last to4sion, must never bo taken as a precedent, because it was a year when the manufacturers of Eng land, in every branch, were in a state of distress which probably had never been approached for many years. But the Right Hon. Gentleman now conies forward with this case, that the manufacturers of England aro in a a state of almost unparalleled prosperity, and ho says that pauperism is reduced, compared with the last year of gloom, to the amount of nearly 7 per cent. If, then, the manufacturers of this country have been, and are, in such a flourishing position—if the manufacturing popu lation are not altogether employed, but there is even a demand for labour in the manufacturing districts, how are we t) account for the fact that the rally has not been much more considerable ? And how, when we are called upon to congratulate the Sovereign upon the ge neral prosperity of the country, aro we to couple that CYen congratulation with the Assn and dark fact, that, the c tse is much less encourrging, when CO remember now, your laripirri.,rn is very insensibl:v reduced ? .P ut _ the stile of the rural districts. W Right Honourable Gentleman and his Friends' that the-I'? was this great difference b( tveen the manuftcring and agricultural intererts—that it was in the power off nu eo manufacturing interest, at periods of depression, te themselves in a great degree from those whom they, employed, whereas, from circumstances which I ne.f; not now minutely detail, it was clearly irnposs.ible these who lived in the egricultural district, ex these at a long interval, b y s l a w degreo's t h e isec . e t 0 shyer told tho with extrewe difficulty, to reduce (hey rioployctl. And I have no hesitation in sayirg the employment of the rural Ly pelatien during the 1 1 1 : 8 twelve months has been, to a very great degree—to amount, I believe, of not less than 0 0 per cent.--a fa' tioUS employment, an employine it honourab le to theo feelings which we have always cherished in this countr.fiy ran;but which is totally opposed to those econorn!eal ciplea advotatsd by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. N°.°6l, imagines that the pressure f pauperism in the nil al district; would be felt with the fetal and insto7 t neoas consequence; which are experienced in the hives of manufacturing iedustey ; but what we o der that though the result may he more slow, it *i ll, ro the most favourable circumstances, be much t he n in t h ° er permanest.—(llcar, hear.) There is, however, ° wil l reason why, in the agricultural districts, that 92 . , ti not inure lia'ely increase. You quite forget have in this country a .social system which throw,so law the employment of those who are not eugagc d 1 44 1 hour upon a machinery which is sustained by the o . l _ o , of the owners and occupiers of larel.—(llear, !et° and cheers.) This brings me to the second part l ot 4 0 amendment we have suggested, in which we the distress that House, in the first place, to acknowledge a a ck n .kat existence of which the Government themselves - pauperism lodged, and to allege that the cause of that distress Is which the organ of the Government has accepte; 11 . 11 0 of the second place, to acknowledge that the operatrerred h a " rele tion. those legislative enactments to which I is aggravated by the burden of local tixa and Now, is there an in this house who wili s rise o - s es say that agricultural distress is not aggravated Olt io , liar burdens? It has been said, laced, that in t „ ot be stance of the occupiers of hal, the distress innY t hat aggravated by there burdens; but nobody Will ass ay do such burdens do not exist, and, if existing, tha t DSO not press upon some one cf the agricultural classei. I think, after the speech of the Hon. Alemt er° Lr tud verhampton, who was so ostentatiously brough t „- tor to propose the Address, that we should have sow t Isola conception of the n a t u r e o f t h e se burdens. Ti'ithore Gentleman has derid e ] th e id ea that a reduction af, land. burdeas could afford a n y re li e f to the occupi ers ° so der' I want Hon. Gentlemea opposite to meet, this I t AO with some de s ;ree of fain ess and candour. Nie w s ide: night last ear Hon. Gentlemen rose on the a t ,", ; ;d a nd and told us there was no diffelence beta eel' land more tad any other property; that land was nothing raw maserial. Those opinions were cl7eered t uir :p ad gentlemen opposite, they have virtually leers f ", r y par t by the Government, and are, iu fact, a reoess",os d en' of their economical creed. Now what I ask the' slo p r d t'emen is—it land be only a raw material, N WbY tax it?—(Cheers from the Protectionist benches',ooo. do you not extend to this raw material the sa m° , mical principles which you extend to all others e if s t 4terials ? (Hoar, hear, and renee el land be, as you say, only a raw material, whY iS matey:tures of corn to be subjected to other eosti ou t be principles, and another economical system , t t ° tbe manufacturer of cotton ?—(llear, hear.) :.lessThl fats question you must meet and answer. It is on lan d you to tell us that if you take off the burden s 1 n ot. the owner will he benefited, but the occupier w ag t his tax The quo ;Hon is far beyond that. Why do you.,-.. - od the de olu v i cetio g raw material—this material which was other clay by l a leader of your school at a gre at . oa 's as the first, the principal, raw material a a " 11 o pt to dustry?—(Hear, hear.) Some gentlemen a r i e so untr think that this is a question of poor-rat " b n ote rates, and of church-rates. I toll them it is a Ent r i ptigil le ' complicated and extensive question than theY %,,, or oel 4 From the moment an Englishman is born to the of his burial the raw material is taxed unde r 1 . ( r ) or big sent social system, in order to guar d either hi s h•enorish death. If a pauper-child is born, you send th,eorCs e fee' doctor, and tax the raw ma t er i a l to pay the d°c be rc . If the child ba not that of a pauper, A s birth Intl'" rs gir gistered, and you tax th e raw ma t e rial to pay th u m trar. If the child b ecome a pauper, yo u theca w immense edifice to receive him, and you tsX lun atic% material to pay for its erection. If he is stasis you raise an immense edifice, and tax the rac r if he to pay for that—(Hear, and a laugh.) nis,',l a criminal, another pile arises, and you tax ther" ho din" terial to pay the architect's bill.—(Hear.) If "' p oi t o is vaccinated—(A laugh)—you tax the raw ra,, i t t f, ot air e ' lay the vaccination fee. The child of a on' " to Oil who . has 40,0001. a year in the funds, is es virulent disease as the child of the agricultaris tal le why, then, should he not pay some portion of t he o f the, tiers? You cannot in this country exercise semf p reen most important duties of which an Englishm an 140 0r ' without taxing this raw material. If you are a Sa'sysen the raw material is taxed to prepare the jury h i t if you wish to exercise the suffrage the rew, lll ;) e NO' taxed to prepare the list of voters.-Allear, n a , s e - s " V 111 „' I ask the great economists, the professors of t chest; r school and their pupils—either h e t a h n e t r e ' y l n d ain i the late Gavernment—(A. laugh) tain such a state of things aceording o t w o the in ,, Ci e P tl i r upon which they have built their financial. and mical system? We ask you, then, now that tn,_ a ltot cultural intmest is in a sta . .e,of great and, as 1 11 : 0e C e unprccedented depression, to come forward a rid fully . and humbly to express to the Crown your ay P O wrth ttes, distress, and your belief that the c ause ' i g li s a distress is that which has been alleged by th , ° , l .° of the Government on this occasion. Is ths' ; te en: sonable ? Is it tictious? We ask you, in the led hi place, to acknowledge that that distress s ag4r av-t 1 the burdens that are pressing upon the agrieultuilhoo dustry of Great Britain and Ireland. Now ti„st„ilaghat put this queA.on fairly before you, I want to an t sh oe man can allege a single rational reason whY. il h e coi l ; oppose these two propositions ? I have no vil6", to eual what are my ulterior views upon the gres;hll the of the rival industries of this country . I thinl‘ c n ult h ivater of the soil has a right to tw o !' i s , that he has a riglA w n o o Le put " h rf e P rsK. that, as his fellow-subject—(llcar, and e fr ", t - to be i t ne e fo first pla ce , I saecondly, he has a right in his own motreesro same I'e:en:nalssenti ent s t p t h h u e e t s a u e e are not • tooting must govern nations, cf f r admit that I am greatly with the foreigner.—(rub s l e d up just princiles—if they are not. fohunito; p i t c h a e tin s in IP7 II, thea ot ri l g .a h ti t e w ns hich n;ust .0 tb were are g enti t m he ent i s ill o w ft e h s mistaken. I ani lf, e ts m the declarations that have been rath e , r e ofl from them during this debate as from the lang°%bis Speech from the Throne, Ishould suppose tho supp its yle an insignificant interest , that was so urgen t s ons sa tress as to ask for your sympathy, and Si) unr teteis re 0 . Go o v f errilj a-: fs s c ; in its suffering as to suggest the possibility cs sec We are told that they are only " the (Poe" for s tirlli s ' t 'p o t r e d rs of land." One of my friends, the Mei:ober on .tile. f (Ur. Ilerries) has touched 11 1 ) ati e " very t h at.! i t not a ela„ for point; he has show n on that . it los,. !snare,whosiisecos, merely of the owners and Y in oc a cupi r e e r a s t touar to; tunes to-night you are, na rro th at o t: upon. But 1 shall take a much. g more the question before I ask for your vote- 13° ,0t is only the owners and occupiers of 10-iv aid -pa thinking themselves aggrieved, and certag? itvnu own acknowledgment suffering, are c oming s o In asking you to interfere in their favour, are sh d e ii'ioo merous a class, are they in number and in al i t , - s rliaa tt ibio significant that it becomes statesmen sau, L , c o ~"„ros to pass them by di sr a.slegarded and unhee"osso,oooross there are according to the best accounts e o f Or 0 , priet ms of the soil in the united hin ls ,g 6l° X 1 0° !„ 1 : 1 4 Britain and Ireland.—(Hear hear.) It s Jets merous class—the most numerous separate c-B etm; t¢' country, as regards property; if theY are a 0 119 to slightly by the proprietors in the funds, Yr)fundi 1)F0 f member that many cf the proprietors in t h , e in oen te fon oreigners. Are the occupiers of land "i et? POO tible in number, in character, and iu conu a s 70 0, .,01 have, according to the most moderate accon al B ri tain "i t e 130 farmers in the united kingdom cf Gret's,„" w eert Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) Why, take your':":, and the your occupiers, with their immediate fdlo"'; - ;' 01 1 00 alone is an affair of millions.—(" Hear, 110 , 9 " e onot Opposition.) You acknowledge that t" ( :,:l e dge are in a state of great distess—you aclot - e cple' l o oo o are in a state of great distress, in c A °-.s youtoil your recent legislative enactments ; your Sovereign to treat their feelings, a '; n r, P e i do' and mockery. (Renewed cries cf t otle ° 0 0 „, 1 Why, one u ould have supposed from the " nn th,, e n o t" debate, that we had come forward to-nigh t ' ; s it ',jells° assembly cf this session of Parliament, La p - d, to '; o ote, repeal the laws that you have recently tato h a " thP all the principles of political economy th e shrined; that you should come forward aiw o olf,. r o "pose you have flagrantly erred, and that riurt,,no post you for national regeneration was to fall boo' r"fi re n t li ' leg it}' , t ot lion which you have quitted. Is it so? r fr - e P -1113 " - gentleman on this side who shrinks tie on s a bt ~4 occasion from advocating, to the best of "'; p°' l s bat principles upon which we think the illdUS de n t this country ought to be established; b ut A to O s ; 01 this is the occasion on which we are (0 11 ' a- th t g k ; troversy and that battle.—(Hear.) A" 7Sig o f r asked of you is this—that it being aPP ar° „ l : ' bot i „f tt. matter of national notoriety that ef a b .i o g h ie nation is in a state of suffering—that it e ' e s go' on ti o ios of Parliamentary acknowledgment, eve" on° the Government, that that suffering has --,T-121" house by our recent changes in the laws - C ou hear")—you should come forward—that 3; 010 to t he think it decent to come forward and " P s° °f ires' . Sovereign your recognition of the ea b li o - di' 0 1 0 suffeing, and your sympathy with yo ll can' —(Hear, bear.) Instead of that being! the cant ng to pretended it to be, in a manner not flatterf aOl °tit Vigil ve r licie dour of Pai liamentary discussion, an on the first night of Paiiianseet meeting, te, e ,, s r eseite House it of Commons suddenly to ahregste,t'frieed,:reioP which the Parliament of England hal rap vsnioti sou; pub il , o p,r to 'wiser (if it does anything) indicates guided by justice, by that high principle _ a ODD o ith which must in the long run influence eve_ r i; lan athY t th° express tititato this country, you may not only but OF . ( v ou to your suffering fellow.countrymens sources for the remedy of their , for I ho . l ° hear.) Do not suppose that it is poSsll,,,lear, escape the settlement of this question. n,.`insajero You may pride yourself upon your a ccida . 7„ 1 1 tiy! and arraycheers) —you may pride Yeal.,,,eitions'ooos' array of three parties, full of hostile a so l br ieg ot ISI unanimous only in their hostility to 6 94 00' 0 /Wel munity—(Great cheering from the oppo hop o n ew es have the happiness of living in an le.„vviten of rarl to truth is never unsuccessful, an" ') principles c f justice must be the fotiuss r a g , bow unwary statutes.—(Loud cries of THE SUN, LONDON, 2, 1850. 1