The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-03-11 00:00:00

SILK TRADE.

Mr. P. MOORE presented a petition from Mr. Henry Rowe,
a silk weaver, of Manchester, against the intonation of fo-
reign silks.

COUNTY RATES.

Sit E. KNATCHRULI, presented petition from the Magis-
trates and Gentry of the county of Kent, complaining of the incnn-
vonience and expense they were put to in making returns to the
House, and praying that they may he relieved from the same.
Sir J. NEWPORT postponed Ins motion relative to the Eta-
blished Church to the 3d of April.
COMMISSIONERS OF EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

Sir J. Nihtr PORT inquired whether tb;ComrwiiaiOneieot. Edu-
cation in Ireland had received any retarns of the number of chil-
dren in attendance on achonla In Ireland, aod that proportion of
them were Roman Catholics ?

Me F. LEWIS said, in reply, that they hipi received very volu-
minous communications on the subject, snd that they rifeers eityre-
sent under prepsrationle be laid before the lbw.
CORN LAWS.
Mr. HUM E said he held three petitions in his hand, Swaim*,
Arbroath and one from the weavers of DundFe. lie thtn,
bread tut way oppressive on the tuanufaciurirw classes. Tlisefr
or Om Corn Laws was to advance the price of other snide. air

ittitift4*ftiti rhat°lll.44l:l'airirot. think /he' petition
could expect much attention ; there was no chance (after Ministers
had so clearly and distinctly declared their opinions on the subject)
that it could be brought Inward with effect when oppoied by Mi-
nivers. The presentation of such petitions could serve no good
or useful purpose ; he therefore thought it ri.licidous to present
them ; they would only excite the feelings of those who were in-
terested for and against the measure, and would put one part of the
population of the country against the other ; he saw no possible
good that could arise from it, nor could he comprehend the edran.
wee of such phrases as " The bread tax," " The job of
jobs." Ile thought this important question was not to be
decided by noise and clamour. It was not to be wondered
that the lower classes should express themselves strongly on
the subject, and come forward with petitions, but he could not find
any excuse for persons of respectability presenting such petitions.
It was not the only article which was subject to high prices. If
the agricultural interests were to conic forward with yetitions on
the other side of the question, the consequence would he that one
half oldie country would be arrayed agait.st the other; but he knew
that petitions were withheld to avoid such a collision. As thas
petitions could not produce ally good effect he thought it foolish to
presentthetn: . . . . .

. - - -
Sir IL FERGCSSON regretted that language of severity should
be applied to those who presented such pen:ions as those alluded
to. Ile wished to have corn on the same tooting as other articles,
and in his opinion an alteration of the Corn Laws would be an ad-
vantage, not merely to the tradesmen and manufacturers, but to the
whole country. lie was sorry the landholders did not open their
eyes to the question of the Corn Laws ; but the misfortune was,
that a great deal of prejudice ptevaiied upon that subject; and in
fact the conduct pursued by them last Session afforded an evident
4xatitple of it.
Sir. HEATHCOTE explained.
, Mr. MONCIi said that the tax on bread was not 30 per cent.,
but nearer 60 per cent. The protection which was given to manu-
' tures made the tax on bread fully equivalent to 30 per cent. It
was oppressive to the poor. their wages were very low, and this pro-
tection which was afforded to the manufactures by the influence it
had on the price of corn, abridged the comforts of the poor. They
did not wish to have recourse to the poor laws, but wages are so
low that they are obliged to come to the parish for relief. In Ire-
land there were no poor laws, and consequently no compensating
principle; the effect of the high price of corn tell upon the pioor,
without imposing any burden on the land owner for his relief. It
was thought offensive to call it a bread tax; but what else was
it ? The protecting duties made it a tax which gave profit to the
landholders at the expense of the poor. He did not think it fair to
put down those petitions, and he hoped they would notwithstanding
present them. He thought they were entitled to attention as long
as they were drawn up moderately and respectfully.
Mr. CURWEN thought it was not in the power of any enact-
ment to give effectual relief; an alteration in the Corn Laws would
not afford the relief sought for. The distress did not arise front the
state of the Corn Laws, but grew out of other causes; and he felt '
convinced that nothing they could do would hare the effect of re-
moving the difficulties which were complained of.
Sir J. NEWPORT said the principle with regard to high prices
was not true, an applied to Ireland. The population of Ireland
war an agricultural population, and their prosperity in a great de.
gree depended on the high or low price of corn in this country.
The high price of corn in this country was advantageous to the
population of Irelawl, because that population was agricultural.
On the motion that the petition be brought up,
Mr. AIONCE said that the Corn Laws, as they existed at pre.
sent, were calculated to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.
As regarded Ireland, he should wish to see her partly a manufac-
turing and partly an agricultural nation. • It wan the opinion of a
very great authority, Hume (here the Hoqourable Member turned
to the Member fur Aberdeen, and said, " Not you, Sir-1 mean
I the historian"), that if a people were made to follow agriculture
they would soon also become manufacturers, and this be hoped
, would be the case with Ireland.

Mr. HUME wished that the petition should be read. which was
done by the Clerk ; it prayed Int the alteratioa of the Corn Laws,
but prayed at the satire tune that a reasonable protecting duty
should be substituted. . . .

Mr. HEM E said he had been accused as being foolish fur pre-
santing those petitions; all he could say was, whether foolish or
not, he considered it his duty to present them, even if he differed
in opinion with the statements contained in them, but in the pre-
sent case he entirely concurred in the views of the petitioners. Ile
WAS sure, if this question were put to the vote, there was not a men
in the country who would vote with the supporters of the high price
of corn. Ile wished to know why his Majesty's Minister, were so
anxious that the laws respecting corn should not be repealed ? If
the price was unnecessarily kept up, he would ask whether it wax
or was not, as expressed In the language of the petition, a tax on
bread; and nut only on bread, but animal food, of which it
kept up the price? lle trusted, that not only the Corn Laws
would be abolished, but that the Right llonsurable Gentleman
(the Cltarcellor of the Exchequer) trioirkl take into his consideration
the propriety of admitting the importation of cattle as well a. pf!
corn, which might be purchased across the thannel at one-half the
price they could in England. Ile wished fur a community of prices
between this and other countries as well as a community of inte-
rests, but which could not be the case while such an unfair systece
of taxation as that on bread existed.
Mr. HEATHCOTE explained.
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
ORDLK (11."ria: DAY—COM 111TTEE OF SUPPLY.
The LiI.ACSLLOK of We itlLliitiallEß wowed that the