The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-14 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 14, 1851.

with a frankness which he did not now regret, his own
sentiments on certain other subjects which some might sup-
per' lietie connected with this. lie had said the other
nlielirthat it was not his intention to make any attack, di-
rect or indirect, on the new commercial legislation of this
country: (Hear.) More recently he had declared it to be
his opinion that that which was popularly called the " pro-
tective " system should not be advocated with a view to the
reenactment of the laws formerly regulating the trade in
corn ; and be had further expressed his determination not
to bring forward any proposal having for its object the es-
pecial advantage of one class exclusively, and over any
other. Finding that the only specific which be knew
of for reducing at once the admitted amount of agri-
cultural depression would not be carried, he had re-
sorted to a proposal for • change of the financial system un-
der which it had happened. (Hear, hear.) No
gentleman could deny that two-thirds of the ee-
-1 tire revenue levied in this country were raised from
one single crop of the produce rued by our farmersand
the monstrous system of our excise applied to the crop of
barley or the melt duty. (Hear, bear.) This enormous
proportion of our public revenue was equal to the whole
public income of the great empire of Austria. (Hear, hear.)
Rut then the hon. member fur the West Riding dieaisses
this consideration by calmly observing " that the consumer
pays the malt tax. (Hear, hear.) That ever he (Mr.
Disraeli) should have lived to hear the consumer so lightly
ennsidered by a leader on that side of the house.
(Cheers and laughter.) After appealing ti the evi-
dence of the see-eery of the Treasury, a most com-
petent judge, ad taken before the Select Committee of
the Lords, in confirmation of these views of the enormous
inequality of the taxation pressing on the agricultural
interest, said its identity with the main cause of their dis-
tress, the hon. gentleman proceeded in a strain of great
humour to address himself to the objections whi had
severally been urged to his proposition by the right hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the right hon. mem-
ber for Ripon (Sir J. Graham). The former, he said, came
to this debate under the disadvantage of not having been
present at • former one when a similar sort of proposition
introduced by him (Mr. Disraeli) had been lost on a divi-
, Mon by an adverse majority not quite so large as that which
ministers usually commanded in that house. It wasonly2l.
(Hear.) No one could be more sincerely sorry than
he himself was for the cause of the right honourable
Chancellor of the Exchequer's absence: it was illness;
and he had been inforwed that the smallness of that
majority had exercised a very considerable effect in
retarding the right hon. gentleman's recovery. (Laughter.)
Now that right lion. gentleman was his (Mr. Disraeli's) old
and constant political enemy—(laughter)—yet he had given
him the most friendly warning, and especially exhorted him
not to have recourse, as he reassure to do, to the reports of
the poor law commissioners on this occasion. Ile had told
him that if he did coo he would damage his (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer's) own Mk'. But, despite of all he weld
say, lie had repeated that imprudence, and he was suffering
now for his rashness. (Laughter.) What could be the
meaning of this ominous practice in a Chancellor of the
Exchequer—always resorting for aid to poor law unions ? '
(Much laughter.) What did it mean? The right hone
gentleman was himself an able-bodied Labourer, re-
ceiving good wages too, and yet, do what he could, re-
moirtnite as they might, there was the right hon. gentleman
always prowling about the purlieus of the poorhouse--and
there he now left him. (Renewed laughter, in which Sir
Charles Wood very heartily joinel.) The eight hon. mem-
ber for Ripon (Sir J. Graham) had endeavoured, by putting
on his best armour, to discomfit the proposition he (Mr.
Disraeli) hail brought forward; but he had been scarcely
lees unfortunate than his right boo. friend. lie had
indeed got aboard the navigation laws fir the pur-
pose; but be must forgive him (Mr. Disraeli) for
saying that never had that rght hon. gentleman
made • more unproductive or disastrous voyage.
The right hon. gentleman cited France as the ease of a
country ruined by protectiou. There he said the price of
corn was so low that the land was actually going out of cul-
tivation. That was not a m•atter of congratulation surely
to gentlemen un either side of the house ; but it was also an
unfortunate fact, that corn was continually royale; into our
ports from this SLUM, France, where the Lind was going out of
cultivation. (Protectionist cheers.) '1 he right hun. gentle-
man next asked how was the public faith to be preserved, if
the assumed pe,lirywere adopted. lie (Mr. Disraeli) begged
ti assure the right hou. gentleman that there was no glass
more interested in the peewee: ion of the public
faith than the owners and occupiers of land—
(hear, hear)—and woe prepared to make greater
elerifiree for the purpose. (Cheers.) All they said was—
" Don't let us pay more than our fair quota." (Hear.) He
now approached the eerie of the West !Udine. (Laughter.)
That lion. pe•ntleinan called the present motion an avowed
attempt to obtain rompeneation tor the repeal of the corn
laws. The lion. member was quite mistaken. It was
' merely and solely a demand upon the IMUSC for that
justice which they were entitled to for the present un- '
just system of taxation. The hen, gentleman further
said, that the claim was founded on the assumption at the
time of corn-law repeal, that there was an implied con-
tract that a certain price should be maintained. Nothing
yield be more unfounded than that assertion. He (Mr.
Disraeli) following in the wake of more distinguished wlvo-
cateelaboured throughout that discussion toshow that the con-
eequences of repeal would inevitably be a serious fall in
pewee It was nut gentlemen on the protectionist benches,
who were then glib with their estimates, who, with the
recklessness of audacious ignorance, offered to the world
their calculations. (Continued cheers.) Notwithstanding his
grave assertion to the country, he believed that the hon.
member himself was the prime offender with those atatis-
ties. (Protectionist cheers.) In one memorable speech
that hon. Melnik r had said that the nearest approximation
to what priers under free trade would be, that he could
find, was the priers in the Island of Jersey. He found
there that the overage fur 10 years gave 4Ss. to 495.,
and he thought that the opening of the trade with England
and the consequent drain on the continental markets might
add 35., and thus the hon. member settled to his own satis-
faction that the permanent price would be 515., the price at
that time in Englund being 565. (Cheers.) He merely
mentioned this to show who it really was that indulged iu
amenities. (Cheers.) They (the protectionists) were
asked to prove their distress. lie would not enter into that
subject, but leave it to a sympathising cabinet,
who had authorised an acknowledgment of that
distress being inserted in the speech from the
throne. The hon. member for the West Riding had said
that the iron trade and the shopkeepers were suffering, and
that cotton was not • bit too well off. In short, he (Mr.
Disraeli) began to fear that all the prosperity was melting
Into thin air. (A laugh.) The hon. member added, in
that language which he (Mr. Disraeli) leas sorry to Ray
was becoming parliamentary, that the farmers and owners
of land were not the wily parties—meaning persons who
wanted moistener., although they were the only parties to
demand it. They, the owners and occupiers of land, did
not went uoidauce. What they wanted was just
legislation, and a modification of their unequal burthens.
Ms honourable member for the West Riding also said
that the malt tax was paid by the consumer, but
a year ago he was of a different opinion, for on Jan. 12,
1840, he was all for sympathising with the farmer. He
trusted there was so much public spirit in the members of
that house that they would not be daunted by the mistaken
notions of a prime minister, or the more authoritative
threat that might reach them from other quarters. If there
were any landowners present who felt that they were not
doing their duty in supporting the motion, he trusted at
least they would for the future take a more active
part in defending the interests of their tenantry. This was
mainly a farmer's qui anion, but from mistaken feelings,
r he thought, the owners of the soil had not hitherto stood
'Omani to vindicate the interests of their tenantry. He
touted, however, this would be the commencement of a
new era, and he hoped that no man, whether owner or w-
eepier, would be afraid for the future of asking from in
English parliament that justice to which every English
subject was entitled. (Cheer')
Mr. MUNTZ, who rose amidst general calls for a divi-
sion, admitted that protection could not be restored,
but he was prepared to vote for the honourable
gentleman's motion as he had stated it, uad according to the
plain meaning of the words.
Mr. GREENALL expressed his intention of voting f
the motion.—The house then divided—
For the motion
Against

267
281

Majority for government l4
The announcement of the numbers was received by the
apposition with loud and long.contiuuui cheering.

RELIGIOUS ORDERS.
Mr. OROGAN moved for returns showing the number of
Jesuits, and of the members of any religious order, com-
munity, or society of the church of Rome, bound by monas-
tic or religious vows, registered pursuant to the act 10 Geo.
IV., e. 7, a. 28, in the United Kingdom, subsequent to the
23d day of April, 1829; of all liven es granted pursuant to ,
said statute to all Jesuits or memtwrs of any religious order,
community or society, as aforesaid, to come into and re-
main within the United Kingdom, subsequently to the said
date; and of all Jesuit., or members of any such religious
order, community, or society, as aforesaid, who shall have
been prosecuted for any misdemeanor or oßence under the
said statute, and subsequently to the said date.
After some conversation,
Sir G. OREY bad no hesitation in saying, that the re-
turns would be ail.
Mr. ANSTEY said he should vote for the adjournment,
And after a short discussion, the house divided on the
question of adjournment.
Ayes
Noes

Mr. M. O'CONNELL maintained that it was necemary
to go into the question. It could not be gone into at
that hour of the morning, and he therefore begged to move
that the debate be adjourned.
Mr. KEOGH supported the motion for th; adjournment
of the debate. It was quite neeessary that the returns
moved for by the hon. member (Mr. Grogan) should be
before the house, sad he trusted that the motion which had
' just been made by the hon. gentleman (Mr. M. O'Connell)
would he agreed to. lie (Mr. would strive by
every means in his power to secure the adjournment of the
debate. (Hear hear.)
Sir G. ORE' submitted that after the explanations he
had already given, the motion ought, in common courtesy
to the ministry_ and to the house, to be withdrawn.
Mr. OROGAN, after a few words in .aplanation, with-
drew his motion.
Mr. ANSTEY wished that the law should be supported,
and that a few of the Jesuits should be transported.
The other orders of the day having been di
sposed ot, the
house adjourned at a quarter past two o'clock.

THE LEEDS TOWN COUNCIL, at a meeting held on
Wedne•dny, •greed to • resolution ligliUat all Wes on
knowledge, including thaw on bode and paper.