The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-04-29 00:00:00

;

low

11111

erov,'

7

i~~

IlleMitsr, from the Merchants and Manufactstrem of Newcastle-
Via yne.-T
Petitions against any 'iteration were presented by Captain
WEIIITIIS, from the county of Fire ; by Sir C. Coax from the
.„ Owners and Occupiers of land in Glarnorganshire: by Sir C. Dow-
," Das, front the Farmers in the neighbourhood of Newbury, praying
as fares they concern the importation of foreign corn, the
Laws may not be repeaed ; be Mr. J. FAYE, from Banbury,
fordahire, by Mr. LascELtrs, from Pontefract, in York.
• by Sir R. Ww•tax, from the Owners and Occupiers M-
in the East and West Hundred of Cornwall; by Mr. Jake,
owe, from the county of Mayo; by Sir A. CaktennLL, from
the Coen-merchants of Glasgow by I.ierd BAINARD, from the
neighbourhood of Bandon, in Cork; by Lord ENNISMOIE, from
the county of Cork : by Al r. II u Me, from the Owners and Once—
pieta of land in Arbroath, Montrose, and Brechin ; by Coked
11,towirt.. from the Millers and Corn-dealers of Clonmell,
tog shat, from their large stock of grain in hand, no alteration=
take place for six months{ by Sir AL W. RIDLEY, from Blimp.
hatn,in Norfolk : by Mr. CuaTEts, from the Owners and Occu.
piers of land in the neighbourhood of Lewes, in Sussex, and from
the Editor of the British Farmers' Chronicle; by Sir J. MARJO.
ll MANES, from the county of Berwick; by Lord F. Osnoawk,
from various places in Cambridgeshire and Buckinghainddre,,
amounting to 57 ; by Sir G. CLERK, from the Freeholders and
Justices of the Peace in the county of Edinburgh, complaining that
the House was about to enter on the inquiry at too late aperiod of
the Session ; by Sir J. ASTLEY, from the Owners and Occupime
of Land in Devises; by Mr. CriarLtw, from the neighbourhood.
of Lincoln and Boston; by Mr. SOT R ERON, from Newark, Oiler.
ten, Worksop, and Retford, in Nottinghamshire; by Mr. Best.
ITT, from the Owners and Occupiers of land in the vicinity of
Marlborough, in Wiltshire, and from Salisbury, in the same
councy ; by Mr. HEATUCOTE, from the East Hundred of Rut.
landshire ; by Sir W. LcoLEBY, from Rarton.on-Humber, and
several places in Lincolnshire; by Sir G. Wall RENDER, from
Haddington and Roxburgh shires ; and by Lord UXBRIDGE, from
some places in Anglesea.
These petitions were laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. LESLIE FOSTER presented a petition from the Land-
owners of the County of Louth, against any alteration in the Corn
Laws. He had been consulted on the subject of the Corn Laws,
and bad given it as his opinion that no alteration ought to take
place ibis year, but that a revision of them should be gone into
nest year. He found since that he was correct in both of these con.
jeerers] opinions.
IMPORTATION op FLOUR.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY was desirous of taking the present op.
pottonity from the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Huskia.
eon), as he had given notice of hie intention to submit a proposition
respecting bonded corn, whether any part of his plan was to make
any alteration with respect to the importation of corn.
3lr. lILISRISSON replied, that as It was his intention to pro-
pos no alteration in the revision of the Corn Lave this year, he
wade adopt the same plan with respect to the importation of flour,
and abstain from proposing any alteration from the present law
upon tat subject.
Sir T. LETH BRIDGE presented a petition from certain land-
holders in the Counties of Gloucester and Somerset, against any al.
teration in the Corn Lain.
Mr. R. SMITH presented a similar petition from the millers of
the County of Lincoln.
Lord E. SOMERSET presented a similar petition front Stowe-
in. thc,W ohl, in Gloucestershire.
Mr. T. WILSON presented three petitiors from the merchants,
shipowners, Atc. of Leith, and one from the labourers on the
Theme*, praying fora revision of the Corn Laws.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the millers of Bristol,
praying for protection from the importation of foreign corn.
Mr. NEWMAN presented a petition from the county of
Devon. against the Corn Laws.
Mr. HUM E presented a petition from Perth, praying for a re•
vision of the Corn Laws. He expressed his full concurrence in the
'orepodterser of such a revision.
Slr E. HARVEY presented a petition from Rochford in Essex,
against any alteration.
CORN LAWS.
Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from Scarborough
against any. alteration in the Corn Laws, and a petition from Shef-
field, praying for a revision of the law between landlord and
tenant
Mr. IItONCIC presented a petition from Reading, praying for a
revision of the Corn Laws.
Mr. DENISON presented a petition from certain millers in
the county of Surrey, against the Importation of Foreign Corn,
and also a petition from the inhabitants of Lambeth against the
Corn Laws.
___

Sir T. ACLAND presented two petitions, one from Tiverton
acid the other from Dartmouth, against the Corn Laws.
Mr. COKE presented ten petitions from certain towns and
hundreds in Norfolk, against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
At the same time that he presented these petitions ire begged to
repress his dissent from the prayer contained in them. He was of
opinion that some revision of those laws was requisite, and the
present existing Corn Laws were calculated to create a ferment in
the country, and were at variance with the real interests of the
agriculturists themselves. He regretted this difference of senti-
ment with the petitioners; but he gave it sincerely, and he might
be presumed to know something on the subject, as he had devoted
its whole life to agricultural pursuits. (Hear, hear.) He at the
same time disapproved of any sudden or violent change.
Mr. FLEMING presented petitions from Southampton, Win.
chester, Petersfield, Portsmouth, Farnham, and other places in
Hampshire (eight in number) against any alteration in the Corn
Laws.
Col. JOHNSON presented two petitions from two hundreds in
Lincolnshire, against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
Sir G. NOEL presented a petition from certain landowners In
Poland, against any alteration In the Corn Laws.
Mr. P. MOORE presented a petition from the cotton-spinners
of Stockport, against the Combination Laws.
Lord G. CAVENDISH presented a petition from Chichester
against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
Mr. WILDIO AN presented a petition from the eastern division
of the county of Essex against the Corn Laws.
Mr. W. WHITMORE presented a petition from Davenport,
praying for a revision of the Corn Laws.
MOTION TO AMEND THE CORN LAWS.
Mr. W. WH ITAIORE then rose. It now became his duty, In
Forename of a motion, of which he had given notice in the early
part of the Session, to bring before the House the consideration of
Le important question of the Corn Laws. Previous to his enter.
ing on this subject he was desirous of offering a few observations
with respect to the motives which actuated him in undertaking to
bring forward this question at all. His motives he was anitisulio
explain, not from regard to any personal feelings, but from a
regard to the fate of the measure which he had undertaken to its.
troduce. If from rersonal vanity he had brought forward this
question, or if he had undertaken it under the absurd notion of
occupying a prominent station in this House, which his talents, his
habits, and his inclinations alike unfitted him to till, he would
then, indeed, well deserve the censure which in the course of the
last week had been so liberally east wean him but this
was not the motive that actuated him ; he was induced to
Introduce this question at this time, because the period had
now arrived whlsla called upon them to revise and alter
the Corn Laws, 'Which were disgraceful to the country.—
The Corn Laws, as they now stood, were a glaring exception to
the principle of free trade which the Goveructient and the country
professed to hold. If continued, they would diminish, if they did
not altogether destroy. the benefits which we may hope to derive
froan the adoption of liberal commercial principles. it was im.
possible to reflect how deeply these restrictions on an article of
prime necessity, affected the labourer and the manufacturer, with.
our feeling the inconsistency of continuing them whilst we pro-
leased to adopt liberal commercial principles. It was impossible to
approach the subject of a free trade without meeting a striking
grievance in the shape of this unjust and oppressive tax. He (Mr.
W. Whitmore) had strong and deep conviction, that by conti-
nuing the restrictions on C47:41, Parliament would Inflict a moat
dreadful evil, not only on this country but on Europe. We should
see the agricultural-interestogain involved in the difficulties from
which it had lately escaped. It was strange that a body of men sO
enlightened as the agriculturists could not sec their own interest on
tins particular sulkier. Every man of experience must be aware
of the injurious effects produced by the prodigious fluctuation in
the prices of Curn. There was another tremendous evil--an evil
which it behove, every man of humanity end consideration to
guard against—an evil which comes upon any people with horror,
but which would come upon the people of this populated country,
attended by circumstances of peculiar aggntvation—he meant the
probsbili.)4at one period of a dearth, and at another of a sigge.
abundance and a glut. it was his considerate conviction That wo
were drawing gradually towards the evil which he had last Lin.
t toned. The stocks, widish three or finer years ago were very
were now gradually diminishing. %Ve hail latterly become more e
pendent upon the seasons, end if the stocks continued to diminish,
upon the occasion of a dearth we should find it exceedingly dint.
cult to get from the wt...ic world corn sufficient for our consump.
non. It was easy to prove that restric:ive laws upon corn operate
so produce the more frequent recurrence of a dearth. Let Gentle-
man conceive the probability of a famine in a parish which was
confined to itself fur the produce of all the corn consumed by its
inhabitants. Extend this principle to a county, and the danger
diminishes, but still exists. Extend it to a kingdom, and although
dearth wouldbe of rare occurrence, it would be by no means im-
probable. It was clear that any kingdom was the more liable to
famine when the importation of corn was restricted. (Hear,
bear.) It was an indisputable maxim, that the wider the
basis upon which we depended for a supply, the less chance
there was of dearth, and the narrower the basis, the greater
chance there was. (Hear.) He had no desire, unnecessarily, to
alarm the country, but he must express his belief, that although
propitious seasons might for a while avert the evil, and Parliament,
by altering the laws, might avert it for ever ; yet, he was con.
towed, if those lows were continued, which were at variance with
the free principles of trade. a period would arrive when we should
reap the bitter fruits of such a law. Those who could contemplate
such a period with coldness or indifference, were possessed of
stronger nerves than be could boast. EmTland was the grand regu.
. . .
of • - :factoring produce,
a effect upon the
great part of the
intended for inn.
-Corn Laws, and
Ail effect, which
inexperienced t ye.
I the most injurious
Mu consequence of
ptainced a glut in the
at foreign powers
',err found so dim.

~~

,

11 law of agricultural produce, as well as of manufac
1.4 and the English Corn sws had a very serious e
agricultural produce of other countries. 19hen agn
lauds on the Continent were cultivated, the corn in
ter
was thrown back on the ports by the 'C
caused a glut. Our Consuls abroad remarked this
; i caused a range of prise quite wonderful to an lima
le was his opinion that the Coml.:us produced the
effects upon the whole cultivation abroad. The
I.S England shutting her market was, that it produret
t: \ foreign ports, which was found so injurious, that I
posed r 2,5 of a similar tendency to three which r..r
.
.
• i
, to, 1
.