The Sun. — London, England, 1840-05-27 00:00:00

i i I EVENING EDITION. CORN-LAWS. MEETING OF DEPUTIES. The Deputation met yesterday at one o'clock at Brown's Hotel, New Palace Yard, when the following deputies were present :—From Burnley, Mr. J. Barnes; Birming ham, Mr. Joseph Sturge ; Colne, Mr. T. Thornber ; Cupar (Fife), Mr. W. Tullis ; Chorley, Mr. A. Turner; Dundee, Mr. A. Kinloch ; Droilsden, Mr. M. Christie; Dcwsburv, Mr. J. Alison; Dickinfield, Mr. S. Robinson ; Derby, Sir. J. Johnston; Glasgow, Messrs. J. Tennant, W. Weir, A. Johnston, D. Murray ; Huddersfield, Mr. W. Brook ; Halifax, Mr. W. Morris ; Kendal, Mr. I. Wilson; Kirkaldy, Mr. W. Tullis; Lambeth, Mr. J. Richardson ; Leeds, Mr. H. Marshall, Mr. P. Fairbairn ; Liverpool, Mr. L. Heyworth; London, Dr. Bowring, Messrs. P. A. Taylor, and T. M. Gibson; Maidstone, Mr. G. Beaver; Manchester, Messrs. J. B. Smith and A. Prentice ; Nottingham, Mr. S. Beard; Oldham, Mr. D. Meller ; Paisley, Messrs. D. Forrett and J. Grieve ; Southwark, Messrs. J. Bowler, W. Wil son, and J. Gibb ; Stratford, Mr. E. Burford ; Tower Hamlets, Mr. Coates; West Ham, Messrs. J. Sutton and J. Palmer. Mr_ J. B. Siam having been elected to the Chair, read the minutes of the last general meeting of Deputies, held in London, which minutes, on the motion of Mr. Coates, were unanimously approved and confirmed. Mr. P. A. TAYLOR read the report of the preliminary meeting of Deputies held yesterday, and a letter received from the Commissioners of Poor-laws, acknowledging the communication which had been forwarded to them, pur suant to a resolution of the Deputation. A desultory conversation then took place as to the course which the Deputation should in the first place pursue, and as to the re-appointment of the Executive Committee, to prepare such resolutions as might be submitted to a public meeting, to be immediately called in the event of the failure of Mr. Villiers' motion this evening. Mr. Were did not think it was necessary for the deputa tion to wait until the conclusion of the Debate, to know what the result of the motion would be.—(Hoar, hear.) It was necessary for them to take at once such steps as would make it known to Members of the House of Commons, their determination to oppose the re-election ei every one who should fail to do his duty upon the question.—t Hoar, hear.) It was necessary for the advocates of repeal to have some advocate in Parlia-4 meat of suMeient influence and energy to do the causer full justice, and he know no one so well fitted for that office as Lord Brougham, notnithstanding all the foibles of that Noble and Learned person. He did not think it was necessary for the delegation to wait for the result of the debate befor e they decided on their course. If they were not pi.eparil to tike a bold, he might say a reckless course, they m i g ht as well go home, and give up the ques tins of Coren a w repeal altogether.—( Hear, and a laugh.) A Dert:T e suggested that it should be an instruction to the Committee to take measures for calling a public meet ing in Pal tee ..yaid, in the event of the failure of Mr. Villiers' ir, hone Mr. Ce.tr es sold that the first question to be determined waslhe re. a ppointrner,t of the Executive Committee. He accordin g l y , 1L)ee d....." That a Committee be appointed to prepare tir e business to be submitted to the Deputies, and in particular to submit for the consideration of the Depu tes I;tteit ecurse as nay be deemed best cult ulated to se cure the iuccess cf the League." The motion was seconded by Mr. BowLER, and una nirntaeliagreed to, and :Messrs. Wilton, Coates, Brooke, Taylor, Le2er. Jell: eon, Prentice, Hayworth, Weir, Wi!- SOII U 4 41 00, Gibson, a.ed Dr. Bowring, were appointed the itlemher, of the Committee. Wles.iti thought Ito could not very well serve upon Vi e Committee, as he count not confine himself to the discussion to which they were restricted by their rules; fir lie rens still of opinion that mere agitation agains t the Core-laws would not be sufficient to secure th e ir repeA. :rlr. TAYLOR agreed with the last speaker, that they would never effect their object without the agitation of other questions besides that of the Corn-laws. At the same thee lie sh bold regret exceedin g ly that the present Corn-law agitation should tie missed up with any agitation for another object,_( Hear.) The members of the Deputation wore not precluded from exerting themselves elsewhere for the attainment of other objects, although they met there f , r the repeal of the Corn• laws, without regarding the difference of opinion on other 9ubj .eta from those with whom they co-epos ° P C rsted on this. Nothing c ou ld g ive their ensrnies more pleasure than to sea the Association' change their name of Corn law Deputies inei that of PrOgri'S3:Ve Parliamentary .kel'orm Deputies."__( Hear, hear, hear.) Ile agreed with other gentlemen iu believiug that agitation for the repeal was not sufficient ; but when others saw the effects of the agitation and the discontent ;..ted disgust of the people rho had hr 20 Short s time sere in petitions with two millions and a half of signatures, they would pro- ce• d to a7;:itte ith equal energy the objects of which t' roost desire the success But he was convinced that the Deputies would never succeed in their efforts until the -edorninance of the landed aristoerecy was broken down. did net think that th ere was quite so anuch reason fo r despairing of success by the agitation of the Core-laws :ileac. If they would give him three De puties f rom th e country, he would venture to hazard r.n opiaion that they should have a meeting in Lambeth, of s ufficient importanen and determination to produce som e fleet —( Heer, hear)—and the example would SODD b e followed in every district of the metropolis. —( Hear, hear. ) PRENTIer., in reply to the observations of the gen -*lemon wh o desired greater c.i;itatiott, thought it neees:iary to remind the deputies that they were apeuintecl for this purpose of Corn.ht.v repeal alone. They had come under a solemn covenant with the people who had subscribed the Looney for the purpose, as, for instance, the people of Man cheater, who had subscribed 6,000!, nut to lee applied to Parliamentary Reform, but to the repeal of the Corn-laws. ("Hoar, hear.) Mr. COA'rEs hoped that gentleman (Mr. Wilson) would not persist in withdrawing his narziefrom the Committee upon the ground which he stated.—(liter,) He (Mr. Coates) 'would not say that he differed from Mr. Wilson on the 'question of Referm, but he hoped that no such test of political opinion would be introduced among them, they might very usefully co-operate for the - repeal or tee Corn-large, however much they might differ upon political questions. At the same time, he must ad inaz tinac the failure of their efforts to obtain from Parlia- Melri: that repeal. would give still stronger proofs of the necessit . y for a further reform of Parliament. Mr. NaiesoN said that after the explanations he had hear 1 he would not hesitate in withdrawing his objection. —( tpplause.) Th eff,tiaMAN then said that at the suggestion of Mr. Kiiilieeh be begged to remind the Committee of the im portenee of proceeding immediately to business, arid pre paring resolutions, and reconimending the course which the Si !puthtion should pursue, as they could not know how toxin the debate inlght terminate, and they should, there fors, be pretiared to act on the mornent.—( Hear, hear.) The next busmesv of the m ee ti ng was to re - a pp o i n t th e Finaneial Ceinimittoe, which was accordingly done. Mr. MEt.e.ert said that he had a contribution of 50/. from Oldham, th.pli...ce at the di s p osa l o f t h e Fi nance C omm i t t ee . Iu answ, t o at question from Air. RICWARD2ON, The CIIAIRSIALN said it would be well to have it und,r stood that every .D.. - legate should give notice to the Executive Con:mitt. 'w of any notice which he wished to brin g forward. lie set:d he had received from Mr. Mar shal! of Leeds, whose ►')rother was Faucet as a Delegate, a letter which contain. tci some important suggestions re speeting their future co urs,., one of was worthy of immediate attention. H e the., read the tolio wing extract : " it is of vital haportan,u, L 0 our success in the debate that the Council should hare, the othole of the stati i , tic data, and the economic rea:„.oning:a and conclusions dedue:lde there from, ready worked out in tile most compreheueiee and accurate manner possiiiiis e To do this well in so wide' a subject in all its bearing aas the Corn-laws, is an arduotel endertaking, and requires high qualifications both as to the knowledg e of facts and acquaintance with the princi ples of economic science . I would suggest that one of the first steps of the Counci I should be to obtain the assistance, it possible, of some such parties as Mr. Tooke, Mr. Hume (late of the Board of Tat ado), Mr. Porter (of the Board of Trade), Mr. Maceulloat , or Mr. Marshall (author of the Statistic Tables), to giv et, in conjunction with a sub-cam mattee of their own body, their undivided attention to this departinent. We ought to know hero - Fehand every fallacy. that Sir fl °beet Peel will or can teter in the debate, and for every one of them have a cannon pointed and spotted with grape, ;ready to blow it to pieces. I mead not allude t o th e va l ue of E. Baines' (j un i or ) services in this v..ay, at our last mee Ling. One point certain to be insisted on by our oppon ants, is what they will call the great over -trading, espee daily in the seven years preceding. 1839. An increase, ace ordie to Mr. Wilson "F O to lu. Nations in Commerce an d Magnufacture.s"),Piolffn (2-6rom 460 millions of pounds, taken into consumption per an num. Now, if this view of the case taken by Mr. Wilson is correct viz a n ue t t :t it is siireetly traceable ti?ns and derangements to the vast peri o di c in the direction in which capitala employed; and also in the real quantity or am )untof roldsductive capital existing in the country in thu period of P .ro wue.tive harvests as com_ fluctuationscorn. laws, arc w o pared with unproductive onek;, greatly aggravated if not produced b leb to the obje c _ should be furnished with a conclusive ' the riePtel:uer favour. The tion and a new argument of great power more deeply and accurately we analyse the more do the iniquit ous C orn -l aws assume the c s h u a b r i acter the of a master evil, lying at the very root of the a and poisoni ng a ll i ts f ru i ts.—( i lear, hear, l eial tree, pconclude with remarki ng t h at these m:0%,) ensive ;views of the eff ec t s o f t h e Corn-laws enabl us, in the clearest and most conclusive manner, to show that the demand for this repeal rests on no narrow base such as the profits of the. mill owner and merchant, as stated by our opponents; but on the broad basis of the . .. common benofit of all classes of the community, and most empatically of the working class, which is the mess numerous of all." Atter considerable (but desultory) discussion, it was agreed that the suggestion should be left to the consi deration of the Metropolitan Association, and Mr. l'avlor undertook iltat he would brin. , it - un ' der ihe consideration of that branch of the Leacwue.' ~. 11 r• IZICIIAIS,DSON.said it' had been saftrfe tn 4 tht anv ...tots which could be obtained bearing ‘ ll7on -3 t ' ll ' e• rate ' o - f wages should be stated to the Delegates. There - was one fact which had latei co zhought of some i2portmanec to h:3 kn"ledge' wirich he ,A rn.nufacturer rrlctntly tool; a contract for 41,000.cvarcs()f flannel—if woe well Pa; atthe trade that . out of zhe five _known to every person to th-t -contracts, three would not priec at which it had bec...n taken. It appeartd that wtiii,e;rc'ce• ryas a!1 underitandiog wutai;elenasunt.ttiheaynt,t,tadntiogthre,er,d that :among the manutacturers by one should not pay less ue tit the return of the the contract to his houtn, lie red: 7:d had Lk ; 15 of bi g ;Kid: men in . order to o ,b ,n t. ( a l in he n he r , o l t o r t :t7 (l 0: a 't - ',C contract, li . that were the ealc, th,: aalliraey of the information he had ro eel - wed, it .. ° l ubt 1 ho , rm. ,,-. ~-t•-• stiff; rings of 01.3 labou:in,-: ci azses 1 ,,, 5 .Z w , c ,, - t h e .7::13 t;: employment and the high priee6of gravlted by / 0 ,4 .......(i, 4r. ) M . L. f-lfriwoftru thought the fact which had just been ruL.at,oned m.,,,i Vtlry important in showi ng th e baneful effect 'lt f..e r; orn -1a , ,, ;., which appeared to him to lie at the root cti the vvil.,— (11';,,.7, hear, hear.) FEr.nocl was i•crlaal., more extensively used than any other article among the la bouring classes, but when food was dear the poorer people were unable to purchase it, and there was consequently a diminution in the consumption. The manufacturers had not the same amount of orders, because the consumption had lessened, and there were therefore more manufacturing labourers to produce flannel than there were persons to con sume it. The consequence was, that persons were driven to employ the workmen at lower wages rather than not employ them at all. Now, it appeared to him, that it was of importance that these facts should be communicated to the public.--( Hear, hear.) It had been well observed that the great means after all by which they would be able ultimately to accomplish their object was to return members for Parliament favourable to their views, but they must endeavour to bring that to bear upon the next election. They could only do that by personal exertions and by money.—( Hear, hear.) He would suggest that the system of gratuitous lectures should be more extensively carried out. He believed the system had been adopted in Bolton, Blackburn, Leeds, and other places, and he himself had tried the scheme last week, having given lectures at Lancaster and Preston.— ( Hear, hear.) Ho had had on these occasions most at tentive auditors, and he understood his statements had made a very considerable impression on those present. He had told them the only way to effect their objects was to return Members to Parliament who would pledge them selves to vote for the repeal of these iniquitous laws. Now, if that system was generally adopted among the operatives, he thought it would ensure to them a host of advocates among that class of the community. Mr. PRENTICE had been recently in Scotland, and he was much delighted to learn that the system of voluntary lectures had been carried out to some extent, in the spirited borough of which Kinloch of Kinloch was the re ! presentative.—(Hear.) Two intelligent young fellows had gone fromvillago to village, who had conversed with the people, and lectured to very large assemblages ; in that way they were diffusing correct information to every hamlet and village within ten or fifteen miles of Dun dee. He (Mr. Prentice) was about to proceed to Cheater on a mission of the same sort, when he had received the summons to attend the meeting of Delegates in London, but a young man, not quite 21 years old, had volunteered to go in his stead, and he had no doubt the people would be interested and instructed by his lecture.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Bailantine, of the Bolton Free Press, had also adopted the system, and he had last night given a gratuitous lecture at Ratcliff.bridge. He believed the plan would be found exceedingly advantageous if, in addition to the lecturers who were already employed, gentlemen would exert them selves in the same way, because half a dozen could not pos sibly give sufficient information to the public on the ques tion. He had on a former occasion shown that it would not require more than 125 gentlemen to embrace the whole of Great Britain, and none of these need travel more than ten miles from their own homes. The question could not he properly understood until like Mr. Heyworth they went out and instructed their neighbours. During the time he (Mr. Prentice) had been out he had never had a word of incivility addressed to him, and he had come in contact with Chartists, Tories, Whigs, agricultural labourers, and farmers. In fact he had always had most attentive audi ences, for the people had come to the conclusion that the Cdrn-law was in no way a political question. Mr. HEYWOItTII would suggest that the circulation of pamphlets would be also an excellent means of diffusing in formation among the people, and instanced one which had been written by the Rev. Mr. Spencer, entitled " The Prayer-Book against the Corn-laws," of which he (M . Heyworth) had circulated a large number. Mr. Lass, of Saddleworth, said it was most important that the public should have correct information with respect to the present state of trade in the manufacturin g districts. It was of the more importanc e b ecause i t bad been lately represented in the public prints that trade was improving* generally throughout the country. So far as his k low sedge went, it had not improved. Ile begged to state that be knew pretty well what was the position of Grantham when the worsted trade was extensively carried on ; and so far from it having improved since they last met, it had grown worse. There were many large houses in that town in the worsted trade which for the last two or three years had been going on at a certain loss, and they had seated that they would not do so much longer. if the trade did not very soon improve they would retire with the Little they had made. He could confirm that statement frorn a fact which had lately come to his knowledge ; a large Government contract for the navy, for blatikets and dreggets, had been a short time since taken be a maeufhe turer from Dewsbury, but at a price which could Let pay him unless be reduced the wages of his workmen. in order to make it pay he did reduce the wages of hes workmen, so that the instance mentioned by Mr. Richardson was not a solitary one.--( Hear.) That was an important point, in asmuch as it showed that the evils of the Corn -laws even tually fell upon the working classes. It %vas universally admitted that the price of labour depended upon the dc mand, and its results were now seen it the reduction of wages which followed the decrease in the consumption of manufactured articles. He thought these facts ought to come to the knowledge of their legislators, and he would be glad if they made any impression on them. Mr. SYDNEY SmITII said the present state of trade was one of the most important subjcts they could discuss— whether, in fact, it was better or worse, since they last met, so that the Legis!a'ure, if it was shown that under the present system the trade of the country was deelieing, might be induced to come to a decision different from that which it had come to when the question of the Corn-lass was last before it. Su far from its being then at Zero, it appeared from oil the statements they had heard, that after the lapse of two months it was much worse. There were a few exceptions, for instance Huddersfield, but in Halifax, Leeds, Manchester, Bradford, and ail the manufacturing towns in that district it was much worse. As for Hudders field, it would appear that the person who reported the state of trade in that town had a tendency to look at the bright side of things.—( Hear.) A manufacturer of Shef field had lately told him that the London hat trade wes in a deplorable state, and he added that strong able bodied workmen of Sheffield were actually breaking stones on the public high-roads at Sd. per day, and some who were unable to do that were employed in sweeping the streets at 4d. a-clay.—( Hear, hear.) These facts ought to be known to the Delegates and the public; and with respect to the statement of Mr. Richardson, what did it prove ? Wi:y, that the argument that wages were kept up by the high price of food was fallacious, inasmuch as, although bread was now rising in price wages were tumbling down. Mr. JOLLY had been last week through Yorkshire, and had made very minute inquiries as to tile state of trade. He did not go five miles in any direc tion without making inquiry, and the result was, trade was very much worse. The universal cry and the universal complaint was, that the manufacturers were attempting to reduce the wages of their workmen. 'flat was occasioned by the slackness of the demand, and if they did not do that they could not employ their men at all. The last time he was in that room, Mr. Livesey had stated that the average earning of the hand-loom weavers was 6s. a week. Now he (Mr. Jolly) most unequivc cally asserted that the average wages did not exceed 3 , :1, a week. A DELEriATE inquired where ? Mr. JOLLY—In Blackburn, Chorley, and other places in Yorkshire, the names of which we did not catch. lie knew several instances of persons working sixteen hours a-day, who could not care 6s. a-week. There were many men working full time that were earning only 3s. or 1;. At the Select Vestry one man stated his earnings to be 9i. 9d. a-week, and, by the way, they were opposing him (Mr. Jolly) on the Select Vestry, be cause he was an Anti-Corn-law man, and they were that very day polling against him.—(Laughter.) The man's statement was so astounding, that he (Mr. Jolly) went to his employer (Mr. Friar) and looked at his books, end he must say that he never knew so large a quantity of work to be done by one person ; but his master eeplained it by saying that he worked day and night. It appeared that the total amount of his earnings was ss. Id. a week, but they had been reduced latterly i.d.,—( Hear, hear,)—and deducting the outgoings ea r his work, viz , Is. 3d. a week for fire, as he required an iron constantly heated to dress his work, and Is. 3d. a t seek for the room for his loom—it left his net earnings 1 6s, 114 d. ; and there was one of the best workmen in Ch orlcy working for one of the best masters 16 hours a date . Mr. Jolly then gave the case of a man named Scott who I: had seven children, of the respective ages of 16, 14, , 10, 8,6, 3,1; he earned himself ss. 3d. a week, and the eldest child as much. The child 14 years old earn, xi 4s. and the wife Is., making a total of 15s. 6d. Out t hi ' that he had to pay 71. a year rent, besides keeping I fire 1: - '4 hroughout the day, which must cost at least Is. 3d. (.; c is. s 'd. per week. It was quite impossible that a family of nine persons could be supported upon the remainder._ (I-f ser, hear.) To show the difference between the pay of tile s %ote king classes in Lancashire during a time of peace, 1 whe n tl lore were no Corn-laws, and the present, he would stet( ! the, tin 1803 the wages paid being for 5 a certain ss. to 6 description osthe of w oak :was 335. the piece, corn quay tee, Cld every thing else in the same proportion. The , Wag., 'a f o .- tnat description of work now was from 3s. 6d. to 33. 1 od., ~'s. being the utmost paid by any manufacturer. Fern terly the foreign merchant would take goods out of the vm-ehoustr and pay for them at once, whereas he had 1 now i to en waitieg for one remittance three years, and, in manu facture ri a ,e r businesstoo t a t t e b v r e e r e c m o u o l n d t h b s o . done, unless the mane d the pi eceding speeker. In Forfarahire , where a great Mr. i 7. iN eocit, of Kinloch, corroborated the statements kbillS :Vtl a ‘ quantity . of canvass used to be woven, wages had been re duced fro tn "is. 6d. to 6s. within the last four weeks, and a numbs rof hands were idle. Where there were two wet vers in one family the manufacturer gave a web 1 .o one one week, and the other another wee7e, sot ,s to share the little there was to do as equally poseible. The Corn.laws forced the manufacturers to take contessete ; 4 t a very low figure, or to stop their works alto getlitirs— e . Hear, h ear .) I n F or f ars hi re an i mmense capita C,'.ha u l.l een vested in machinery, and if the works were once I• 1 on, 0 . it wa s we ll k nown t h ey cou ld not b e eas il y set in molt on of ,e e n ; therefore hands were employed merely to keel I th , got ks going, which could not be done with out gre ,at lo . ss to . the manufacturer, and he was consequently obliged. So redeems the wages of his workmen.—( Hear, hear.) T ney =tee'. upon the principle that the people were hette r off v,'',th h ill a leaf titan none at all.--( Hear.) Befe rc 1 P—, "... Lue-, foot:. , e 1 district coming to him every be lent heats be was annoyed by the s e m employment in agriculture at - were willing to woik even for th " e n i y r more than w h er e e c i oLldc i ff ie o a rd r, to do, iic g a d enap.oya , .. . a manylanded proprietors .:r t e lLY - w w a e o- ck te !L I i'elinst2ltilhi:, tj(f i they ~t, x , „ e Ane• d . h o had employed weavers in agri ee hoe %e in tilt • ricigl'e ur !could net get employment in their _ l, :tio 0 ~, t, h e dvisttirlaetsset srtea.:, use tiloy et Mil C ' I'''C" I, ' hear. ) `l t o make matters worm, it o Nii se , d•e.---( l : c i r L y a ne w Freeell tariff to put an hddi ad been ProP— the on ly InantZacture that As paaing in iouel date' rayon the only • erns and linens. A great deal faith that the duties , For:arshire, W..ineq, • on thC v li. re, but the Lew tariff had ems wee aid continue is thee -:e . s of renteneration. The .dl rospea, r , 7 „, p 1( tely annihilated , p . , 1 to toe eaornda en a t be ttrientet of ieloney had peen investe)d wl .ole of this was to a it was unfair to b 1V ages, when .e lama the n e to do I. was obliged eitker , maufacturer for reducing , er,r.) that or to stop Ihi ;works altop-,ether.—(Hear,L. . .11 ortant that state. Mr. TAyLca thoeght it highly 1, p 'z~~ IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HO USE OF LORDS, 117 A r 9.6. This day their Lordships met at Five o'Cloca. Lord .Bitouou.tm took his usual scat immediately after their Lordships met. .'h(l F,',uir:; - r of Entailed Estates (Church of Scotland) Bill pasied through Committee. Lord KENYON presented petitions from several places in Suffolk and Pembroke, praying for Church accommo dation. Also petitions from places in Northampton, against anv!urther grant to the College of Maynooth. Lord STRANGFO R D presented a petition from the hand-loom 'weavers of Norwich, praying tor the protection of national. industry. Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions from Green wich, St. Andrew's, and other places, praying for an alteration. in the present Corn-laws. Also petitions from the Bapti*ts of Weymouth, and from places in York shire an 3 Somerset, praying for the abolition of Church rates, and the release of John Thorogood. Also a peti. tion from Aberdeen, signed by upwards 2,600 persons, against any additional grant for the purpose of Church Extension. The Noble Lord then presented a petition from Paisley, pray ng that patrons in Scotland might receive some com pensation for the loss they would suffer by the Bill of the Noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Aberdeen), and a petition from' Dunfermline, praying for the total abolition of an 'Established Church in Scotland ; also a pe tition from Neweastle-upon-Tyne, praying for the enforce ment of the law for punishing any adulteration of tobacco, and a petition from Gloucester for an alteration of the law relating to real property. The Noble and Learned Lord then presented a petition from 200 poor inhabitants of North Uist Island, complaining of great distress, owing to the alteration in the duties on salt. CHINA. The NonLt and LEArtNED Lotto proceeded to present a petition from the Corporation of Merchants of the City of Edinburgh, in which he said that not having had time to peruse the• immense mass of papers which bad been pre .i,entcd to Parliament on the question of China, he would simply state what these petitions (worthy of respect) wished to represent to that House. They stated that they believed the impending war with China was pro duced by the opium trade, and prayed that as the Secretary of State had in 1838 declared that the British Government had taken no steps in favour of those who had incurred the penalties of the contraband trade— it should not be insisted upon that the Chinese make compensation for the opium which had been seized. The Noble and Learned Lord tnon said—My Lords, without at present declaring any opinion on the justice or injustice of the war with China, this I will:venture to say, that I believe the grezt majority of the people of this country and of sour Lerdships will concur in the prayer, that this war may not be found to have orie•inated in a desire to obtain compensation for the opium—and that such may not only not be found to have been the purpose of the war, but may not be made the reproach against its success, and that it may not be said of this war as was said by an historian of the wars of Henry Vll.—that they arose from thirst of treasure--that they resembled a mine, with iron at the top, and gold at the bottom. PRINTED PAPERS. Lord ELLENBOROUGH gave notice for Monday of a motion for a Committee on Printed Papers. REFORMS IN THE CHURCIL—ALTERATION OF THE LITURGY. 'The Archbishop of DUBLIN, in presenting a petition from some clergymen and lawyers, praying for certain would alike ka was be qu n i t u e m s e e r n o s u i 3 1) l e a n t d h a t i m i p u r o a p c o ti s , alterations in the A rt i c l es an d Li turgy o f the Church, said i s dk ( ;--- t b h e i c s au k s in e d , rally, irreconcilable' and often: contrad . ctory. But still he thought the represatations of personi of high respect ability and character worthy of at least a hearing. But this he must declare that he could n .1 concur in any application to Parliament for alterations i n any other tha n the temporal arrangements of the Chu, and that the only proper authority for changing its putt:ly spiritual and ecclesastical arrangements, was a cony, waticii, the absence of which ecclesiastical legislation, he was of opinion, had been long severely felt ; for he was convinced that the early Reformers of our Church could n, ver have intended that after they had effected their alterations in the Church the means of carrying - such necessary changes in future should be lost, when those changes were rendered neces sary by the sure - vet silent vicissitudes of time. The Bishop of LINCOLN said he had expressed an opinion that uncompromising adherence to the exact terms of all the Church formularies—to these far instance of the Athanasiaa, creed—should not be required as a sine gnu non, for ordination; and that if a large body of the clergy of his diocese should apply for alterations of the Liturgy, he should think that a convocation ought to be called for the purpose. But he did not believe that the desire for alterations in the formularies of the Church was at all general among the clergy ; on the contrary, very limit d. —( Ileac, hear.) 'rho Archbishop of CANTERBURY said he did not believe the wish for change was at all general in the Church, but as to the expedience of reviving the convoca tion he thought it mi'bt he worth cooaideration. The Bishop of NORWICH FiaLi he felt that in the minds of many, both clergy and laity, a great tenderness of conscience existed as to subscribing to the creeds and aitiele s of the Church. There was, 'however, an answer to this, that the Church ..,: - :ranted a certain degree of elas ticni and expansion to tlic belief of its members. Placed, as its early reformers had been, in the difficult situation of settlin g the standard for men of many different sects, it bad been said by a distinguished authority THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 1840. ments should not be made that were not capable of being proved. It had been stated that since 1603 a parti cular class of wages had fallen from 375. to 4q. That could certainly not be attributed to any one cause. The increase of machinery, the use of power-looms to a large extent, and 10,000 other improvements had been brought into operation since that time, which had a great tendency to lessen the amount of manual labour, while production was increased. Mr. PRENTICE suggested that the amount the weaver earned, and not the price paid per yard, should be looked at. He had had some experience in these matters, and he must say that he did not think the weaver ever earned ten times as much as he did at present. Mr. JOLLY had spoken of fine plain muslin!, and in 1803 the weaving of these articles was ten times more than it was at present. A DELEGATE—Did the wearers get ten times as much wages? Mr. JOLLY—Yes. Mr. JOHNSTON, of Derby, thought there could be no doubt that the Corn-laws limited the supply of employ ment and increased the price of food.—( Hear, hear.) The Corn-laws pressed on particular classes, and it was to remove that pressure they had been sent there.— (Hear, hear.) It would be a pity, as well as folly, to draw an exaggerated picture of the evil effects of the Corn-laws, because the truth was sufficiently distressing to excite the sympathy of every friend of humanity.— (Cries of " Hear, hear.") The state of the trade of Derby had improved, and employment had increased since the last meeting of the Delegates, but that improvement was by no means likely to be lasting. The parties who had suffered most in Derby were the workers of gloves and hese. There had been a great revival of that branch of trade, owing to the four or five weeks of fire weather ; but he understood it was likely very shortly to relapse into its former state of dulness. But the state of Derby was not to be taken as a fair criterion of any other town. There had been a great demand for labour in consequence of the railways near Derby, and there was a variety of other em ployment, so that nearly every member of a family was employed.—( Loud cries of " Hear.") The feeling of the people of Derby, however, on the subject of the Corn-laws, was one of despondency, but he thought that despondency was in some degree unnecessary, because they would not take history as their guide. They ought to bear in mind the number of years the Reform Bill, the Catholic Relief Bill, and the Repeal of the Test and Cor poration Acts, were agitated, before carried into effect— ( Hear.) A great deal of expectation had been raised that something would be done by the reformed House of Com mons, and the people had been bitterly disappointed at the slowness of the reformed House of Commons to do justice ; but he thought the people of England were as able now to carry on agitation for the repeal of the Corn-laws as ever they were, and be had not the least doubt in kis own mind that their efforts would be ultimately crowned with success.—( Cheers. ) Mr. B.ICON, of Maidstone, mentioned that a great deal of distress existed among the agriculturists in his part of the country. Among the small farmers the distress was very great, because they had great difficulty in raising money to meet the demands upon them from week to week. They were obliged to sell their corn before Christmas, in order to pay their rents, and the great evil of the Corn-laws with regard to them was, that they were obliged to buy corn to support themselves; but the large farmer could keep his corn until there was a wet harvest, when it would fetch a higher price. He wished to mention ono face with regard to the Anti-Corn-law Circular. having nothing else to do, he had made it his business to visit the coffee hi.uses and eating-houses of London, and he found they would be most willing to receive the Circular at the price of one penny, which lie thought might be done, because by having an agent in London they could distribute the paper without the penny stamp; the parties he had men tioned not wishing to sen.l it into the country, but merely requiring. it for the perusal of their customers. lie sug gested that that should be taken into consideration by the Executive Cominittee ; and also that there should be in each number of the Circular an address to every trade, showing 'now the Corn-laws operated on every branch of industry. Mr. RicuAßDsos thought if the Circular was made a good newspaper, and sold at a low price, it would be found to be a most efficient instrument for forwarding the views of Corn-law repualers. Mr. COATES suggested that the Circular should be sent to every public-house, where it would be read by an astonishing - number of persons. Mr. LEns, of Saddleworth, begged to state that trade was worse in that portion of the West Riding of Yorkshire from which he came. The condition of the people was deplorable, end they weie almost perishing from famine. He was assailed on all hands by petitions for la ork from people whom he knew to be respectable and honest, and it was really heart-rending to witness the distress that ex- Isted.--( Hear.) The CHAIRMAN stated that in the cotton trade in Lan cashire th e rate of wages bad declined 15 per cent. this year. Mr. COATES observed# ought to b.O borne in naiad that this deciension of wages was contemporaneous with the spring trade. Mr. PIIENTICE mentioned that trade was so bad in Stock port that the manufacturers declared they could not give out work at all unless at such a reduction as would make n difference of 2001. a-week in that place slime. Mr. Mortals observed that similar distress existed in Bradford. The CHAIRMAN stated that the Executive Committee would sit every day from eleven till two o'clock, to whom the Delegctes were rcque,ted to make any suggestions that might occur to them. Toe general public meeting would take place every day at two o'clock, till which boar to morrow the Delegates then adjourned. that the Church had a Calvinistic Creed, and an Arminian clergy ; others thought there was enough of Arminianism to satisfy them, and sufficient liberty for a Calvinistic clergy. In fact, the Church was so constituted as to admit persons of different minds and persuasions ; those only who agreed, however, in the grand, the distinguishing principles of Christianity. What, then, was the next policy under these circumstances ? In his opinion, boldly to meet the difficulty. The Church was founded on liberty of conscience, and the right of private judgment. It allowed a certain latitude of opinion ; therefore let there be an expansion of the sense of subscription ; in that he was quite certain that there would be a great relief to really sincere and tender consciences. He had never met a single clergyman who contended that the formu laries of the Church were to be adhered to: strictly in every iota. And it should be rec o ll ec t e d that what these petitioners required had been recommended from the throne in 1689, and only got rid of by an intrigue of which, as a Churchman, he was ashamed to speak, and by a groundless cry of Volumus leges Anglia mutare? A groundless cry it was, unless the smallest detail of Church government was to be considered as unchangeable as the laws of the Medes of old. Of this he felt con vinced, and he spoke from the sincerest zeal for the wel fare of the Church, that if these alterations, so conscien tiously asked for, were not now acceded to, they would hereafter be carried amidst changes far more violent and to be dreaded.—( Hear, hear.) The Bishop of LONDON said, after the temperate and sensible speech of the Most Rev. Prelate who began the discussion, and the Most Rev. Primate, he should not have spoken, had he not felt that the speech of his Right Rev. Brother of Norwich, was in a g rea t d egree a lib e l on the clergy.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The Right Rev. Prelate, unaccustomed to d e b a t e , an d there fore, perhaps, not knowi▪ ng the import of the terms be used—( A laugh)—had talked of the Church being founded on liberty of conscience. Most certainly it was the glory of the Church that conscience was not in terfered with by its formularies, except so far as was re quired by the integrity of the Christian religion. But the Church was founded on TiteTit—(Cheers)—on great truths extracted from the Bible, and condensed into those compendiums of belief which were necessary to secure in its clergy a uniformity of right doctrine.--( Hear, hear.) Let it be recollected that subscription to the Articles was only required from the clergy, who were now, m ore th an ever, averse to tamperi▪ ng . with them.—( Hear, hear.) Most ungrateful would this country be to Divine Provi dence if it abandoned these securities for the true faith which had so long continued unaffected by the vicissitudes of time.--( Hear, hear.) This cry for change was cer tainly not new—it had been ably and unanswerably ex posed by that wise man, Mr. Burke, when clumsily ex pressed in the House of Commons in 1772. As to the expansion of the subscription, nothing could be more fatally pernicious. If the Articles swore wrong, for God's sake alter them, but don't allow an expansion of the sense of the sub scription, which virtually meant that every man might subscribe in any sense lie chose, and which would admit any extent of heresy, for the sake of a few morbid con sciences.—( Ilear, hear.) He thought there ought to be a Legislative body within the Church—he had long thought so; the only difficulty which he had not been able to solve was, how it was to be formed. Viscount MELBOURNE presented several petitions against the Intrusion of Ministers in the Church of Scotland. Also against any grant of public money for Church Extension, and ono from a Society for promoting Religious Liberty, in Glasgow, praying for the entire severance of Church and State. Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 26. The SPEAKER took the Chair a few minutes before Four o'Clock, when Sir A. Grant, the new Member for Cam bridge, Mr. B. Botfield, for Ludlow, and Colonel Rawdon, for Armagh, took the oaths and their seats. On the motion of Mr. G. PALMER, the British Iron Company's Bill was read a third time, and passed. Soveral petitions were presented against certain clauses in the Hull Dock Bill.—Referred to the Committee. Mr. Alderman COPELAND presented a petition from Stroud praying for Church Extension. Mr. ARCHBOLD presented a petition from the county of Kilkenny, and two from parishes in the same county against any alteration in the Corn-laws, and against the importation of foreign flour. Sir W. HE ATH COTE presented several petitions from Hants against any alteration in the Corn-laws, for Church Extension, and against any further grant to the College of Mayhooth. Captain WEMYSS presented three petitions praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. MURRAY presented three petitions against Church Extension. Major HANDL E Y presented a petition signed by up wards of 1,500 handloom-weavers of the City of Norwich, praying for protection for native industry; also a petition from Cork against the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. GREG presented a petition from Lancashire against the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. BOUSFIELD presented seven petitions from Yorkshire, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. CORN-LAWS.—CITY PETITION. The Sheriffs of London and Middlesex appeared at the bar in their official costume, amid much laughter and chewing, and presented a petition front the Mayor, Alder men, and Common Council of London, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. LIST ER presented a petition from the West Riding of Yorkshire praying for a total repeal of the Corn laws. Mr. PLUMPTRE presented petitions from parishes in Kent in favour of Church Exten.ion ; end petitions from places inNorthartipton, Denbiglishire,and Yorkshire against any further grant to the College of Maynooth, and for the exclusion of Roman Catholics from Parliament. Mr. BROTHERTON presented 31 petitions from East Retford, Reading, and other places praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. E. BULLER presented petitions from Stafford shire to the same effect : also a petition from Burton-upon- Trent, praying for the abolition of Church -rates, and a petition against the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill. Mr. D. ROCHE presented a petition from the Grand Jury of the city of Limerick in favour of the present Corn laws. The Hon. Member did not, however, agree in the prayer of the petition, as he was in favour of a fixed duty. Captain AL SAGER presented several petitions flout places in Southwark, and i n th e v i c i n i ty o f L ondon, against Sunday trading , . Lord G. STUART presented a petition from Ayr shire praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Captain AL SAGER presented a petition from Little hampton, in Essex, against the window -tax. The peti tioners prayed that houses should be exempted from the tax which continued for six mouths untenanted. Mr. PARKER presented a petition from Yorkshire, against the present Corn-laws. Mr. BRAMSTON presented petitions from Essex, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. FITZROY KELLY presented a petition from Mr. R. Bateman, praying for an alteration in the laws of debtor and creditor. Mr. HUME presented a petition from St. Paul's, Westminster, signed by 704 persons, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws ; also a petition to the same effect from Hampstead, signed by 410 persons ; and two similar petitions from places, the names of which wo could not catch ; also two petitions from places i❑ Scot land, praying for an extension of the suffrage ; also, a petition from several of the inhabitants of London, praying that the British Museum and the Na- tional Gallery might be open to the public in proper hours on Sundays. He would move that the petition be printed, as he intended to bring forward a motion on the subject on Tuesday next. Mr. BAINES presented several petitions praying fora total repeal of the Corn-laws ; also four petitions against any grant of money for the purposes of Church Exten sion • also, petitions against Church- ra t es f rom p l aces i n Hertfordshire, and a petition against the Chinese war from some place in the county of York. Mr. M. ATTWOOD presented a petition in favour of Medical Reform. Mr. F. DUNBAR presented petitions against the Corn-laws. Mr. E A STH OPE presented a petition from Leicester of e,775 persons, complaining of the way in which their former petitions had been treated on the subject of the Corn-laws, and of the great regret and disappointment with which they had observed the manner in which Mr. Villiers' mo tion had been treated when it was last brought forward, and which had reluctantly compelled them to believe that the great measure of Parliamentary Reform was a failure, and had disappointed the expectations of the people, and that their grievances would not be remedied until they ob tained a greatly extended system of representation ; they therefore prayed for Household Suffrage, Vote by Ballot, and Triennial Parliaments. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE presented a petition from one of the suburbs of Nottingham, signed by 965 persons, against the present Corn-laws. Mr. GALL Y KNIGHT presented a petition, signed by twenty ministers of the Established Church, in favour of the Church Revenues Bill, which they considered would conduce greatly to the safety of the Establishment. Mr. E. J. STANLEY presented a petition from the congregation of Wesleyan Methodists at Staley Bridge, praying that Dissenting chapels might be exempted from Church-rates. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from the physi cians and surgeons of Gloucester, against the Vaccination Extension Bill, which had passed the House of Lords ; and in favour of the Small-pox Prevention Bill, which had been introduced into that House ; also a petition from per son employing fifty labourers, stating that they were in great distress from the existing Corn-laws, and praying for their total and irrevocable repeal ; also a petition from certain inhabitants of London, complaining of the treat ment of Henry Vincent in the Penitentiary, and praying the House to afford some remedy. Mr. LITTON presented. a petition against Church Intrusion. Mr. G. ROCHE presented petitions for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. E WART presented similar petitions, and also for the abolition of the Post-horse Duty. Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from the West Riding of Yorkshire, complaining of the incarceration of Feargua O'Connor in the felon's cells of the gaol of York. Mr. WAKLEY said, seeing the Attorney-General in his place, he wished to know from him whether Mr. O'Connor had been placed in that species of confine ment by orders of the Government'—( Order.) Sorely this was a ease of in.essing grievance.—( Hear.) The SPE AhE EZ said the Hon. Member could ask the question when the petitions were over. Mr. WAKLEY a:dwd if he would be allowed then, in doing so, to make a few observations, as lie was now en titled to do, ck. tile petition, which clearly came w ithin the rule allowing sFeaking petitions, as it concerned press ing erievanees.--.( Hear, hear. ) The SPEAKER Said the Hon. Member could not make those observations now, as the question that the pe tition do lie on t h e table had been put , without remark, before the Hon. M em b er rose ; nor cou ld he do more than simply put the quest i on, after pet i t i ons . Lord R. GROSVEN OR pre sented a petition from Chester, for the ab o li t i on o f Church-rates. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a petition from the merchants of Edinburgh, stating that by reason of the tax on the importation of foreign sugar, which made a difference in favour of the British Plantation Sugar, of be tween 21s. and 425. per cwt., a sum of four millions was imposed on the people of this country, and praying for the abolition of the tax. NOTICES. Mr. HUME gave notice of a motion for an address to her Majesty, to secure the opening of the National Gallery and the British Museum on Sundays, between one and four. FREEMEN. Mr. F. KELLY gave notice for the 4th June, of a motion to give to all freemen having the Parliamentary, the Misnicipal franchise. _ _ COFFEE AND SUGAR. Mr. E WART gave notice that on June 6 he should move for a reduction of the duties on sugar and coffee. Mr. PEASE asked the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies whether he had yet receivced any official in formation respecting a question he had put to him on a previous occasion, relating (as we understood) to the re moval by Sir Charles Metcalf of a Stipendiary Magistrate, and if so and such were the case, whether it had received the approbation of the Government. Lord J. RUSSELL said he had written to Sir C. Met calf on the subject soon after the Hon. Member had asked him the question, but had not yet received any answer. Mr. E.' ASE begged also to ask how far it was the Noble Lord's intention to propose the licensing of the re moval of the natives of Ilindostan to the .Mauritius ? Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Member would shortly have an opportunity of seeing in the clauses of the proposed Bill. MR. F. O'CONNOR. Mr. AGLIONBY moved for an unopposed return of a copy of the rules and regulations of the jail at York. Mr. Sergeant TA L FOURD said he had that day re ceived a communication from Mr. O'Connor of great inte rest and importance relative to his confinement in York Castle, on which he had been in communication with the Under-Secretary of State, and as he proposed taking future steps on the subject, he would suggest to his Hon. Friend (Mr. Wakley) not to ask the questions of the Attorney- General he had intimated his intention of putting. Mr, WA KLE Yassented. Lord JOHN RUSSELL brought in two Bills to amend the Registration of Voters in England. Sir CHARLES ADAM wished to correct an error in to which he had fallen in answering a question relating to the North West Passage. He had stated that the Admi ralty had received no despatch on that subject—he now found that during his absence in the Easter holidays such a despatch had been received by the Noble Lord at the head of the Board of Admiralty, and it was now amongst the records of the Admiralty. He saw also that in the public Newspapers it was stated that a dispatch had been received from the officers engaged in the expedition—that was an error, he had not said that, but that a dispatch had been received respecting them. He was anxious to make this explanation, so that it should not be supposed that the Hudson's Bay Company had neglected their duty upon so important a subject. Mr. GOUL BURN said, in the absence of his Hon. Friend the Member for Stamford, he bad to state on his behalf, that he, considering that during the pendency of an election it might in many respects be inexpedient to enter into a discussion upon the circumstances attending upon the appointment of Mr. Horsman, he would postpone any further questions upon it, reserving to himself the right to ask for any explanation he might think necessary under the circumstances, at a time, probably, when Mr. Horsinea might be in a position to give that explana tion himself. Lord JOHN RUSSELL would certainly be very glad if there was any undersevading or rule laid down with re gard to the acceptance of office. He had already observed that Mr. Stewart had some weeks back declared his reach flees to resign office at any time it might be convenient. Of course he was not able to state precisely what occurred during his absence from town. ROUGH RICE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was anxious to take that opportunity of correcting a mistake that appeared to prevail with regard to some observations that had fallen from him a few nights previously on the subject of rough rice. He had obscived that his statement was not very correctly reported in some quarters, and lie was therefore anxious, as the question was one of some importance, to set the matter right. He had not said that the American Minister had not made any re presentation to the Government of England. That was not so; and he thought he had sufficiently explained that the American Minister had made a representation—in tact that he had presented a note to his Noble Friend on the subject, and one of the objections he had made to the motifs* of the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite was, that it ought not to he entertained while negotiations were pending. He had not stated that no representations were made, but that the American Niiniater was not instructed by his Government to press the question.—(Hear, hear.) Lord MO R PETH presented about fifty petitions, for the repeal of the Corn-laws, from the operatives employed in manufacturing establishments at Huddersfield and other places in the West Riding of Yorkshire. Sir G. STRICK LAND presented forty petitions from various places in Yorkshire, all praying for the total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. WARBURTON and Mr. FIELDEN presented similar petitions. Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from a place in Somersetsbire, praying the House to continue the protec tion to agriculture. Admiral ADAM presented a petition, signed by 500 in habitants of Kinross, praying for the repeal of the Corn laws. Many of the petitioners had stated to him since they had signed the petition, that if the Corn-laws were tv.t abolished altogether, they hoped the House would modify them to a great degree. Mr. VILLIERS presented forty-two petitions from places in Derbyshire, Staffordshire, Yorkshire, and Cheshire, and from various Dissenting congregations. CORN-LAWS. Mr. VILLIERS having been called upon by the Speaker, rose and addressed the House as follows :—Mr. Speaker, I believe the House is perfectly aware that it is in consequence of the very singular course the House thought proper to adopt with respect to the last motion that I thought it right to submit to the House on the subject of the Corn.lar,vs, that I have thought it my duty again to press the same question on the consideration of the House. I trust the House will feel that if the course adopted on that occasion was unsatisfactory to the public, offensive to the persons interested in this discussion, and almost cruel to those who refer the cause of their sufferings to the present state of that law, neither can it be recom mended on the score of its advantage and convenience to this House.—(Hear.) I know that it may be said that the cause of the course pursued was occasioned more immediately by the motion of my Hon. Friend the Member for Bridport.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposi tion.) But I ask, when was it that he made his motion for the adjournment of the House? When the House had refused to adjourn the debate on the question at all, and that refusal occurred after six hours out of seven had been occupied by Members who spoke against the motion, after forty Members favourable to the motion had left the House, and after persons on this side who represented most im portant interests, had been alluded to by the last speaker, and who felt themselves called upon to address the House in consequence. U n d er t h ese circumstances nay Hon. Friend thought that the more expedient and advantageous course would be, seeing it was the object of the other side to get a decision upon any terms on that night in their favour, to adjourn the House to give an opportunity of ascertaining what was the real opinion of the House on the subject. I own Ido not regret that the House should have been put to inconvenience on this subject, when it was disposed to shrink from the discussion of a question so deeply interesting to the people at large. Ido not sup pose that is for th e a d vantage of those who are desirous of maintaining the present law, to attract public attention to this subject more than need be.---( Hear, hear. ) As to the scornful manner in which the Hon. Member for Bristol referred to the manner in which he had introduced the subject into the House—when he complained of that impatience which Gentlemen like himself felt at being detained front their avocations in the country, to hear te dious treatises on the Corn-laws—l say, taking that Hon. Member to represent the taste and temper of the House, I cannot suppose it can be much more agreeable at this sea son of the year, when there is still more to divert the mind away from the House, to hear another essay on that which can only affect the poverty and privations of the humbler classes of society. But I hear complaints that I have again ill selected the moment to discuss this question. I do not know when the time would be that it would be extremely agreeable to the majority of this House to discuss it.—( Hear.) The alle gation of the Hon. Member for Bristol or Somerset was that he wished to attend some Bench of Justice who were accustomed to receive the benefit of his learning.— ( Hear.) I am told at this time gentlemen in the country forsake the Bench and take the field on ' another service, and that the tenants are now passing in review before their Lords, and it is complained that Mem bers arc compelled to come from the country to town to hear such a tedious treatise as this of the Corn-laws. Cer tainly lam not disposed to under-rate those duties, which are far more innocent than many other occupations, but I am persuaded they would be more likely to attract the con fidence and respect of the people to this House, by giving a portion of their attention to the laws which oppress them, than by displaying their inefficiency on the bench, and their incompetency in the field. —( Cries of " Oh, oh," and " Hear, hear.") How ever, Sir, whether it was trick or policy that terminated prematurely the debate on the last occasion, I certainly have no reason to complain. I listened anxiously to the things said and done upon that occasion, and I have found the cause rather aided by that discussion ; and I, anxiously watching the diseussion of this question, feeling assured that it has almost done all for it which it has always done , for questions based on truth and justice, and for those based on error.—( Hear, hear.) The discussion of this question has done all it eau for the discovery of truth on this subject, and taken away all pretence from those who have uniformly opposed it, and has brought it back to the plai❑ and simple question which the people ask,—What right and reason have one class of proprietors of th e country to impose heavy burdens on the rest of the I community, for the purpose of saving their own fortunes ? That is the question the people ask, and it has not been answered. In that the y must be satisfied, or they must contin ..e to think this I.e.v rests on nothing but the. rough rule of might, or of reckless violence, and that it is a law passed for the benefit of the few and the injury o f Hear, hear.) That wa3 the opinion entertained of those laws by the great body of the people, as far as the public sentiment could be calculated by the ordinary means. Ile wished to call the attention of that House to the pro gress which the question had made of late years, It had beer, denied that the people at all cared k r this subject, and what bad been the result ? In 1837 the question was mooted in that House, and either through a despair of justice or the dread of a conflict, great apathy was shown, and when he (Mr. V.) rose to propose his motion, some country Member was enabled to count the House out. This is now the fourth Session since th a t period. I heve now a much larger audience. This is the second discussion of the question in the present Session ; and there are now the representatives of one million and a half of the population, representing at least two-thirds of the community, anxiously waiting outside to hear how you dispose of their prayer.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear. ") Again, in 1838 it had been said in debate that the Corn aws did not press upon the manufactuting interest—thati t was of advantage to that interest, along with all the other interests of the country, and that that interest did not complain. Now mark the result of that assertion Before the session of 1839 commenced every Chamber of Commerce in the country had assembled, and drawn up their petitions against those laws —every manufacturing town bad elected their Delegate. They assembled in this city, and they implored you to hear those important facts which they had collected. How did the House deal with the prayer upon that occasion ? You admitted the facts—you stated that they bad reason to complain, that they were distressed, and that they had rivals abroad. But you said it was a general question, a question which rested upon general policy, and you further stated that the working classes were not with the petitioners, and that it was merely a selfish manufacturing question, and what was the result? Ido not believe that there was a single town in the Empire, in great Britain, at least, where the work ing classes did not meet and petition this House for the purpose, at all events, of placing upon record their opinion of the Corn-laws.—( Hear, hear, hear.) And although they may never pray this House again_ although they may never meet upon this subject, at least they will have placed upon record their sense of the in justice and cruelty of these laws. And what has been the result of all the agitation and discussion on this sub ject? Why, that all the pretences on which the system rested have been thoroughly sifted and examined, and that there is hardly a mechanic in the country who is not familiar with those arguments which you have brought forward in favour of these laws, and who is not pre pared with their refutation. Sir, I have listened to the arguments used in this House, and I have marked the debates, and I find that all the pretences and reasons for these laws, are to be summed up in some three or four phrases. And if I allude to them now, it is only for the purpose of notifying them to the public, and in the hope of warning persons from repeating them. What is the sum and substance of the arguments in favour of these laws ? First, that the high price of food obliges high wages to be given to the working classes, and that the people are interested in these laws. Next, that the high price paid for food begets profitable customers to the manufacturers, and that therefore they arc interested in these laws. The next is, that it is part of the system of the country, that when a system cannot protect itself it should be protected by law; and the last pretence is that it would be unwise to depend upon other countries for a supply of food. Now, Sir, I ask any person to look through all the discussions on this subject and they will find all the arguments comprised in one or other of those pretences. lam extremely glad that these things have been put forward-_I am glad that these discussions have taken place; it has awakened the public attention to the question as to how it bore on the condition of the working classes ; it has directed their attention to subjects which they would be disinclined to attend to under other circumstances, and it has led to a deliberate inquiry into the truth or fallacy of these things. But most espe cially am I glad that it has been pleaded in favour of these laws that they were for the benefit of the working classes, for this has induced a careful inquiry into their operation. it has led people to examine whether there was any truth in the statement of a connection between the high price of food, as produced by these laws, and the happiness, and contentment, and comfort of the poor. I ask, Sir, what has been the result of that inquiry ? It has been, that a greater mockery of their misery could not have been devised or uttered by any person than to say, that the high price of food has been productive of anything but sorrow, and mi sery, and wretchedness. I should be sorry to think what conclusion it would be necessary to arrive at with respect to the working classes; but with respect to the agricultural labourers, it is impossible not to conclude, and, in my judgment, he is worse off now than he has ever bees before. That lie has been worse off these last eighteen months than he was immediately before ; and I think the agricultural peasant is considerably deteriorated in his condition, as compared to what he was three centuries back. Ido not state that without authority. I refer to the deliberate and calm opinion expressed by Mr. Hallam on this subject. Mr. Hallam, after inquiring into the history of ale labouring classes, says he is obliged to come to the conclusion, that notwithstanding all the improvements mule in machinery, and the additions to the comforts of the people, yet that they arc now less able to procure that which is essential to their health than they were a century ago. I will quote his very words. Ile says--" I should find it difficult to resist the conclusion, that however the labourer has derived benefit from the cheapness of manu factured commodities and the inventions of machinery, he is much inferior in ability to support a family than his ancestors were three or four centuries ago. I know not why some here suppose meat was a luxury seldom at tained by a labourer—doubtless he could have procured as much as he pleased, but from the greater cheapness of cattle, it seems to follow that a more considerable portion of his diet consisted of animal food than at present, It was remarked by Sir John Fertescue that the Eng lish lived far more on animal food than their neighbours the French, and it was natural to ascribe their supe rior courage to that eircumsonce." I think, Sir, we ought not altogether to overlook the condition of the la bourer at this time, for we are judging of this question by the agricultural classes, and I find that this statement of Hallam corresponds with the statements of other writers. Arthur Young has a paper upon the annals of agriculture, in which he states the condi tion of the labourers of Suffolk, after a survey in that county, and having regard to what wages could command of the necessaries and comforts of life at that time, as compared with what they were able to do last year, no one could avoid coming to the conclusion that the labourer was better off forty-five years ago than he was at this day. It is within the power of every person to make this inquiry and to learn what is really the condition of the labourer whatever money wages he may receive, and I defy any person to come to any other conclusion but that he is ill fed, ill / clothed, and ill housed. I made some statements to the House on a former occasion with re spect to the labourers in a particular county, which an Hon. Member disputed. I instituted an inquiry immediately after the discussion, and I found that I had rather understated than overstated the privations of the labourer in that county.—Cries of " Hear, hear.") I stated then what I must now repeat—that in the agricul tural counties of this kingdom the young and unmarried labourer barely gets 7s. a week wages, and that a married labourer with a wife and children frequently gets but 9s. a week, and never more than I is. We know that when, by a Committee of the House of Commons, a deliberate inquiry was instituted into the operation of the Poor-laws, it was found that a labourer must spend 7s. 6d. a-week in flour for bread, and when you consider this you may judge of his condition, while he receives but 9s. for the ex penses of living, clothing, and house.--( Hear, hear and cheers.) But perhaps the most astounding statement that has been made on the subject, is with respect to the manufacturing classes, and I have a right to refer to that statement, as it was made since the last discussion of the ( question, and even within the last two weeks, in a pub lication which has proceeded from a Society that has just been instituted, for the purpose, as it says, of protecting British agriculture, but as we collect from its manifesto, of preventing a repeal of the Corn laws. The statement I allude to is contained in that paper, patronised as it undoubtedly is by a certain portion of the nobility, gentry, and clergy, that the object of the manufacturers in seeking a repeal of the Corn-laws is to lower the wages of their men. Why, Sir, I should like to know if that be uttered in ignorance or deliberately, with the knowledge of its being untrue. Is it possible that these parties can have inquired into the condition of the people of the manufacturing districts ? How can their wages be lowered more than they are at present ? How is it possible they can suffer greater distress than they do at this moment ? Why, if the manufacturers were ready to lower the wages of the poor, they could not find a more convenient time for doing so than the present. Have those gentlemen who have put forward this manifesto, which will doubtless be read by thousands, ever read the Reports of the Committee which were appointed to inquire into the state of the hand-loom weavers ? I be lieve that not half a dozen Members ever dipped into the books. But what do we find there ? We find those people amounting to eight hundred thousand of our fellow beings and our fellow subjects, calling without exception for a repeal of the Corn-laws as the only remedy for the evils. But then we are told by the Society for the Protection of British Agriculture that the master manufac turers seek for a repeal of the Corn-laws in order to lower the rate of wages.—(llear, from Sir C. Burrell.) I hardly know how to explain that cheer ; but if he means to affirm as a fact that the manufacturers seek to lower the wages of their men, I can only repeat my question to the Hon. Baronet, and asked him how ho thinks that the,e) wages could be lowered ? How could we find any portion of the people of this country who could become poorer or more degraded ? The Honourable Baronet should make some inquiry into their condition before he states that it is possible they can be reduced to a more wretched or a more degraded condition.—( Cheers.) Let any ono who wishes to understand this question, or to know what the condition of the people really is, read the answers of these poor people to the questions of Hand-loom Weavers Commissioners. If they wish to know the real state of the question—if they are desirous of knowing that with which they ought already to be acquainted—(Cheers) —let them read those answers, and they will nowhere find exhi bited a greater degree of sagacity and shrewdness than has has been shown by those humble men with regard to this question. I was so struck with the sagacity and shrewdness of their answers, that I asked one of the Com missioners, who is no very ardent Corn-law repealer, what he thought of their answers, and his answer was, We were all astonished at their sagacity. Look at what they say when asked why they desire a repeal of the Corn laws. They say the Corn-laws restrain the trade of the country, and whateverextends the commerce, extends the demand for for labour, and whatever extends the demand for labour, encourages our industry ; whenever there is an increased demand for labour, we are well off; and that is why we desire a repeal of the Corn-laws. We feel those laws are pinching us. It is true they also give other answers ; they call for a tax on machinery and they are also desirous of Universal Suffrage ? but what do they say about both these questions , They say the Corn-laws is a system of taxing the country for the benefit of a class, and therefore they contend, tax the tmehinery for our benefit—the principle is the sonic The Corn-law is a tax imposed to prevent cur getting cheap food from better soils; therefore tax ma chinery to prevent the public from getting cheap manufactures, and so help us—the principle is the same. Or say they, you deny us a repeal of the Corn-laws, or , a tax upon m ac hi nery. Th en we ask you to give us r epro- sentation in P ar li ament , i n or d er that we may ho to legisl a t e f or ourselves.---( Cheers. ) T .shat the .at ,:c of their reasming, and t o lay m i n d i t see rna pet fee Y and conclusive. I have already stated that one s e e ff t e u e , t n ( t ) . f;.; , e , Cc:rn-laws is to produce scarcity of food, i t , i Lac more generate disease, and to occasion pr F rnat . ur d ti l i N i . s ith sub f j d f c !c ts t : populous diA.iiets. I have made inquiri , r ° _ , s in ' ( t ) , u_ and have become in consequence acquainted EVENING EDITION. which lease no doubt erhateJeer on my mind that such ie the case. I have a letter in my hand from a medical gen tleman, who is no acquaintance of mine, and from whom I did not solicit any information, and who has written to me to inform me what is his experience and knowledge en this subject. He is a Member of the College of Physi cians residing at Stockport, and who has recently had great experience amongst the poor, and he bears his tes timony to the great extent of disease produced, and the wretched diet to which this law condoms the poor. This gentleman says : "My practice is much among the poor of this town, as I am physician to the Stockport Board of Health—the majority of the disease amongst the poor is occasioned by insufficient food and clothing--the high price of flour absorbs the prin cipal part of their earnings —I find that the scarcity of food is the cause of many diseases amongst the children especially—for their food ought to be principally farinaceous, and amongst the poor, who have cveral children, the whole of their income is absorbed in the purchase of meal and po• iatoes. Still the greatest misery is endured by many of them rather than seek relief in the workhouse, al though at present the standard of wages is sinking, the price of provisions rising. Such is the information which I have been able to obtain in going from house to house: day by day I see such scenes of misery as can be known only to a physician, to wh om a l one i n t h e extremitY O f illness the national pride of the English people will allow them to expose their poverty." Such is the substance of this gentleman's communication. But I see this evidence is received with indifference by the House.--( Hear, hear.) But it is not to be disregarded.—( Hear, bear.) This gentleman gives his name and his profession, and the place where he resides—(Name)—Dr. Ryan, of Stockport. -- ( Hear, hear.) I trust his evidence will' be published by the public journals.—( Hear, hear.) Sir, I have Its ° rn had several stati s ti ca l d e t a il s f urn i s h e d to e, and what is the result in the mortality according to the high and IoW prices of food in each year? But I will take the four years at the commencement cf the century, and on com paring the price of food in this country with the mortality, we shall see so close a connexion between them, that it's impossible not to suppose that it is the connexion of cause and effect. In 1801 the price of wheat was 10 8 °' per quarter. In 1804 it was 603. per quarter. In 1 801 the number of deaths was 279,825. In 1802 it wa° ne more than 222,000.--( H ear .) I n 1 80 7 t h e pr ice . 0 t wheat was 735. per quarter ; in 1810 it was 106 5 . p et quarter. In the former year the number of deaths wa s 240,000; in the latter it was 294,000, showing an exe c ' s of 50 per cent. in the y ear w h en the corn was at the higher price. A work has lately been published relative to the condition of the poor in Scotland, and in it the author refers to the state of the health of this town is 183 5 and in 1838. In 1835, when bread and food was chvaP: when trade was good, and the people comparatively well off, there was a singular ab sence o f t h ose l ow f ever s which arc general in a crowded town ; and in 1835, when wh eat was 20s. a quarter dearer, th ere h a d not b een suc h a pre valence of those low fevers f or a per i o d o f f orty-on e years previous. Now, Sir, is n o t thi s a s h oc ki ng state o f things —can we coolly in this House m a i nta i n a l aw w hich pre" duce^ famine, disease, and d ea th among the populatwe' And for what ?—merely to swe ll th e rent-ro ll s o f the ge,n: try and proprietary of the coun t ry . I d o no t accuse the upper classes of the country of being less charitable ths.iin others—l think that many of them are unaware of the eV": of which these laws are the parent.—( Hear.) Ido 13 °` believe that they are aware of the shocking consequence! of limiting the food of the people—they, therefore, trust to those who they think have studied the question' and are deceived. If these facts were brougnt home to their minds, I fully believe that they would give the question their most serious consideration. The Hon . Baronet opposite cheer e d w h en I spoke of the co u rseiak taken by the manufact urers upon this question. lit those manufacturers have been grossly misrepresent cd to (Hear, hear)—they are charged with having a w ish lower the condition of the working classes. That I deny. The manufacturers of this country come to this 11°"s complain that by you r l eg i s l at i on you s h ut them out ' 'of certain markets which they could supply—that you ex elude elude them from m ar k e t s w hi c h t h ey wou ld s uPPIY for these Corn-laws. It i s no answer to t h e m to en . n e , down with a short of figures and say that the export the whole empire ar c increasing, and that thereleci: they have no case. Th ey say t h ese laws preve" from effecting an exchange with thcsc countries which are anxious to receive our manufactures—that is the mischief they complain of. No doubt the manufacturers ' l ' anxious to employ their capital, but they lower wages. The people are distressed, but you exclude Your manufactures from markets ready to receive the"''r namely the corn growing countries. No answer has hc e given to that. I hear a great deal of chuckling' ou t of , o doors at the complete answer supposed to have been made to the manufacturers' case. I contend no answer has been glv'w_ have no wish to to it. The manufacturer cannot export to these countries because we will not take their products, and it cannot b i said these countries are not ready to negotiate with us.. shall hear no more twaddling doubts about that matter, ter there is evidence before the ' House to prove that they lia,l been ready, and I believe still are . I w ill r efer to tu evidence, for since the last discussion papers have been laid on the table which may make known to the Pe e l' _ that it is no fault of other countries we h ave not conw ne . r . eial intercourse with them. W e h ave a di re ct prelw. from the Prussian G o v ernmen t t o enter i nto a treatY wl5l this country. In order that it may go forth to the pee; plc, I beg leave t o re a d an extract f rom the proposal 13 the Prussian Minister in 1826, before tho League Iv" formed, and from our answer to it. He sass ; " The Prussian Government object that the British Government will not allow the importation of foreign corn, except sub ject to such duties as now exclude the possibility of carry ing on that trade with reasonable profit. As the pro duce of English industry finds an extensive market in Prussia. while the produce of the Prussian soil and corn does not find a market in England, it is only by grant in g ' , the relation bet ween th e two countries on a footing o f importation of th ese art i c l es that it is possible to establig re- of the Prussian Government, which was ciprocity." Th ere i s a di st i nct proposal on the part submitted to Mr. Canning, an d h ere i s hi s answer— " I t becomes the duty of his Majesty's G overnment to state when a proposal for the alte ra ti on o f t h e C orn- l aws i s ma de by foreign powers, as a conditi o n o f somet hi ng to be done, t hat the _ Government at once d ec l are th ey never can entertai n sne . h a proposal." That i s th e answer th e B r itish Minister s obliged to give to Foreign Governments.—(llcar, hear.) Our Legislation must at all times be governed by cir cumstances originating among ourselves, and not on inter national relations affecting other States." This was _be fore the League was f o rmed, and now what is called the commercial League of Germany, consisting of 26 millions of people, commercially speaking, living under the ga m e circumstances. And w h a t i s b e f or e us but evidence tl Minister after Minister, that all these people were ready to negotiate with us, if we put ourselves in condition to do sor As the French Minister said, i n or d er t o g et concession g ► they must grant them. But the British Minister says , dare not mention a word about the Corn-laws—we are go' verned by a landed aristocracy, and dare not interfere w it h them.—( Hear, hear.) Does any one doubt the tr uth , of what the Minister says ? Look at the interests ,o_l these twenty-six millions, and compare them with til interests of our own country. The proportion of thus interests in agriculture in Germ an y was eighteen raillioal, while the proportion of the twenty-six millions in our ow n country—for I suppose we arc near ly arrived to that amount, and every year the census has been taken the Pr os portion of agricultural to manufacturing labourers has here diminished, and putting it now at the very highest t ',' i ts cannot be more than one-fifth which arc interesteiceiLea agriculture, which is very different from being inte r iv _ in the Corn-laws. Therefore, if you look at the twer J e. six millions forming the German Commercial League, and the twenty-six millions of the British Isles, that all find that their interests are alike, but the fact tha these arc merely pretexts to avoid going fairly w :isl"is question. I believe it is generally understood thatif a moment when we can negotiate with advantage , u". 0 .0 we can dawdle and put off the question for one ororttip years, then we shall be too late. This is a great opP . a vette nity for negotiating with Germany and the that the States. Every authority in America tells you t he tariff will be shortly disc usse d, an d i t mus t depend upo" s , terms you offer to th e A mer i cans w hat this "' the cussion will be. It is notorious also that s tariff will be discussed in 1842 by the German S t r ie t r e e : it cannot be altered for twelve years more. Th ig , i ' es , are fore, is an important subject to this country, and ti 000 the reasons why I am anxious to put upon eecord lature statements, that it may be shown whether the Leg is ne t he of this country will deliberately betray and postg main interests of the community at large for the putr se i. „eople taming those laws ; for the day will come when their will take to task those whom they have intrusted n'_lt h ben interests, and will refer to the present moment, who f opportunity presents itself of saving their matinf ac t promoting their commerce, and employing rtis aei. their :I re have It is idle to talk about a system of protection. 75 had too mbe rmoufch Commerce evidence o t n . l that o s u u h i j n e c i t t . s p e l,V t t h i c a ato b t a s t o f is opposed to the system of protection. he'T - te ld Yo u Liverpool, of Manchester, and Glasgow have h e ist t; that they want no protection but protection g b - t he W ig " Corn-lae.vs. Even those who have always be e° w ease rs timid-._l mean the silk trade and the hand- 10 ° re ,, s ay ere of Coventry —they, through their accredited oega ns ' Cont' don't went this protection if we can get rid of the danger laws—it is that which injures us, that ma kes i P s l dang er high, makes trade slack, and exposes us to t 1 aga i n st of foreign rivalry. we only want protection b e er.) the unjust lees of this country. —(Hear, hear, re duce re duce When people ~ ay that the manufacturers wisblittle of the the wages of the labouring classes, they know .. , 1 w hich• foreign trade of this country. In the district I am connected, I am told that orders come front no be to be executed at a certain price, and e e. ;f thei: o done for that they cannot be executed at all. at of lover informed that every year those prices coto? Be l g ians; rate ; thee say, if you do not execute them, the_ o,retched tile Gerinans, or the Swiss will. What is ,„ a veered house to do under these circumstances he sees is offered house before him, he sees his family starving, e have b e en an inadequate price for his labour, and bet'° wan the struggles which have taken place as to w hether , rew ard, ladequa, will go into the workhouse or take the hours a 1 which compels him to work fifteen or sixteenween his pre' instead of eight. Such is the difference bet . yea rs sent condition and that which the artinn s): • nd that effect is produced by those la" Conti" liich ago; a on the ‘4-- e l" a hroad, cripple cur trade, which Create rivals community of t he Dont, which deprive the working cort!n i . feear.) conifoits, and even the necessaries of life; on t he A n a ttempt has been made to justify those ground that it would b;:iinproper to depend ”Pen ally .. reign country for it supply of food. I b e li e ve that stet of m oot has been made on the authority of the Presidentidea the United Sti.tes. lam surpri se d that the loyal , tukc the dictum 0 . i " rity , ` support of those l aws aristocracy of this country will se e k for American iturtltni,c,: President of the States. What is that clinai That nothing can be amore disastrous to a country than _ t ° depend on a ' foreign etete for its food. But there is s.) ra t_ . thing still more disastrous, which is, when a country That not supply i'scif, not to have a country to supply it. I take to he the condition of Eng land, whizti, ver Inay le the condition of th e was t e lands in the United That is our case; and after a quarter cf a century of w I