The Sun.
London, England, 1852-11-12 00:00:00

,TITE ,SIIO.N, liONDOIkL FRIDAY EVENING, N'OVEMBER IQ,' 31 852.

Majesty's. Government. Is that, however, a desire to
abrogate the laws which have been recently carried into
effect as the foundation of our commercial system. Is it
Protectionism ? And I would ask the House whether the
Noble Lord has any further foundation for the charee he
has made of evasion, than those allusions to suffering
interests, which he has himself endorsed by his own
example and his oan words, when he was a can-
didate for the City, and which many gensiemen sitting
on his side of tho house have themselves put forward in
their representations? (Cheers.) I shall not on the
present occasion pursue that topic further. I :hink the
occasion will soon arrive when we can enter into these
questions more fully. All I can say is this, that it is
the intention of her Majesty's Government to take such
claims, and similar claims into their consideration, and to
endeavour to mitigate the injuries which have been oc-
casioned by recent legislation in the particular instances
to which I have referred, and similar ones ; and we be-
lieve that we can propose measures which may do all
that is necessary in that respect, and all that can be rea-
sonably required, without in any way disturbing that
Principle of unrestricted competition which has become a
Part of our commercial system. (Cheers.) The noble
lord has referred to the course which has recently been
Pursued, and represents himself and his friends as the re-
presentatives of a new and r nlightened system of commer-
cial legislation,and which has been invariably and bigot edl3
opposed by gentlemen ou this side of the house. (Laughter
and cheers.) The hon. gentlemen who have changed
sides have not lost one of their we. knesses—amiable
weaknesses, I confess—which is, to cheer too soon. The
noble lord has given an emblazoned catalogue of the
great feats of the liberal commercial party of which he is
the acknowledged chief. Free trade in corn, free trade
in sugar, repeal of the navigation laws—these are the
three enduring pyramids created by the energy and en-
terprize of that party which the noble lord heads, and of
the different individuals and different sections who side
with the noble lord. (A laugh). But if we look his-
torically at the case—and I really am only in self-defence
making these observations, for I thought from the tone
of the debate that it would already have terminated—
I cannot help remarking that the Prime Minister who
carried free trade in corn was himself opposed to free
rade in sugar, and that the Prime Minister who fol-
lowed, and who was in favour of free trade in sugar.
was not at all disposed to have free trade in ships—that,
in fact, the question was not taken up by the Govern-
ment at all, but forced upon the consideration of the
house, and committees of the house, obtained by an in-
independent member—that the question was kept pro.
iniently before the house for two sessions before the
noble lord consented to the abrogation of the navigation
laws; and when they were abrogated, they were
abrogated in so unsatisfactory a mode, that the noble
lord, at a subsequent time, as I have reminded
the house, when a candidate for the suffrages of
the citizens of London, confessed that the shipping in-
terest, deprived by recent legislation of the protection
they formerly enjoyed, had been left with restrictions
and burdens, for which that protection was the only
Compensation. (Cheers.) Neither I nor any of my col-
leagues have any intention to propose any policy which
will give artificial prices, or what has been called by the
non. Gentleman on the other side, compensation for
losses which have been occasioned by changes in the
legislation which regulated the commercial system of
this country. But what we do say, and say in a manner
as distinct as I can succeed in expressing it, with, I
c,olie, none of those misty words for which the Noble
Jeord has given me credit, is, that we think these same
changes have been effected without, at the same time,
those necessary and corresponding changes in our finan-
cial system. (Cheers.) And I say. notwithstanding
what the Noble Lord has asserted, and notwithstanding
the sympathizing cheer which he received from his col-
-1 ,eagues, that these are our intentions: believing that a
Proper revision of our taxation has not taken place, it is
our intention to place before Parliament and the country
II Policy which will place our financial system more in
harmony with our commercial system. (Cheers.) And
if the Noble Lord opp site conceives that to be protec-
tion, ho will probably not succeed in establishing his
Position, when he may favour the House with his opinions
°,,n the proposition of the Government. (Cheers.) The
klon. Member for Montrose, in that tone of friendly
cranstigation which he sometimes bestows even upon the
Government he patronises—(a laugh)—has made a most
grave accusation against the Government upon the pre-
sent occasion. The evasive paragraph respecting Free
Terade, which my Hon. Friend caught up from the Hon.
member for Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers), appears
really to have impressed him with very little importance.
The whole mind of my Hon. Friend was engrossed by
the Income-tax. He said there ought to have been a
Paragraphk in the speech announcing that there should
Property
a continuation of the committee of inquiry on the
'roperty and Income-tax. We have already had an in-
quiry during two Sessions on the subject, and an im-
mense quantity of evidence. My Friend wants still
Vore; he is a perfect glutton in this respect. (Laughter.)
confess at once to my Friend that there is no pare
graph in the Speech on the subject to which he alludes,
and for this reason—her Majesty's Ministers have made
tils their minds on the subject—(Cheers)—that subject
~which appeared still to tax the abilities of my hon.
.Friend. Her Majesty's Ministers have arrived at certain
conclusions upon that subject, and they therefore do not
think it necessary to investigate it any further, and they
are prepared to lay these conclusions immediately before
the consideration of the House. My Right Hon. Friend
the Secretary of State for tbo Home Department has
adverted to the reasons why we have not today fixed the
eXact hour upon which we should solicit the attention of
Parliament to these questions. There are reasons which
have prevented ns, reasons which for a few days neces-
sarily make the arrangements of business in this house
less clear and evident than they would have been under
ordinary circumstances. But I believe if not misinformed,
that the Noble Lord at the head of the Government has
already announced in another place that I shall on the
Part of the Government, tuke the very earliest day we
°an avail ourselves of to lay our policy before the Par-
liament, and ask their verdict upon it. (Cheers.) The
". 00. Member for Wolverhampton has already given
notice of a motion, which really would be a motion re-
quiring an inquiry into the whole state of the country.
a certainly have no wish to place any obstacle in the
w„a,Y of the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. Ido not
take
with the utmost exertion, that I could possibly
take a Government day which would come before the
,4d, and if the Hon. Gentleman persists in his motion,
~e of course will take it. But I would put it to the Hon.
rentleman that it would be far more convenient, more
,Zlr, and I think more satisfactory to the country, that
their
Government should have the opportunity of placing
„Lieir policy before it. (Loud cheers.) The debate
`2Pon the motion of the lion. Member must neces-
sarily—such a motion as intimated by him—must
necessarily partake of very much the same character
14 the debate upon the statement which the Govern-
merit will make. It would therefore be much more con-
venient if the discussion could be so arranged as that
the energies of the house should not be wasted upon two
separate occasions, and one of which certainly, if the
ruourable member persists in his motion, will be of a
62'a practical character than the one which I shall have
`„,°,.e honour to bring forward. The hon. member for
Wolverhampton can, with so adroit a master as he pos-
sesses, move an amendment upon the statement which I
shall have to make, if he finds the views of the Govern-
ment unsatisfactory to himself and his friends. The
honourable gentleman can easily bring forward, if he
pleases, a counter policy in the way of an amendment,
and take upon it as long and as elaborate a discussion as
the house may in its wisdom think fit. It is not for me
!o attempt to dictate to the honourable member, but I
hope he will not mistake the feeling in which I make this
suggestion. I merely make it for the convenience of
house, and for the sake of saving time, as well
It! for the sake of having a more satisfactory discus-
sion than we should have upon what, after all,
taut be an abstract resolution of the hon.
gentleman. I hope, therefore, that the hon. member will
wait till her Majesty's Government can avail themselves
e. the earliest opportunity, which they will immediately
'
take,ti and that we shall have at least only one discussion
(pia subject which really concerns the general con-
-4.t10n of the country, and the future and permanent
10.1ciPles upon which the financial and commercial
at of the country ought to be established, I cannot
tiattlia moment fix a day, but I should imagine, con
er,e,ring the state of public business, that probably on
ntaY the 26th—thus giving fair time to those gentle-
itten who had not yet been able to ba present, her
aiesty's Governmeet will have the opportunity, through
'l4O as their organ, of calling the attention of the House
sht,h, e consideration of our financial condition, and I
ta ail then indicate to the House those measures which
e think ought to be adopted in the present situation IS
tae
tit country. (Cheers.) I will not trespass upon the
Mention of the House by any general observations upon
" speech of the Noble Lord the Member for the city
Lo
fka tend
on on this occasion. That Noble Lord has, in
he `,confessed that there is only one paragraph of which
tbauslsaPproves, and I think I have shown the House
I,h.* ,that disapproval is not well founded on the grounds
pitri:u he urged. I think that all must feel that if the
110—graPh referred to were really so evasive as some
wellourable Gentlemen have described it, the House
ge:P not so quietly and tranquilly assent to the sug-
(ehlen of not having any amendment to the Address..
eel!,
Reserving, therefore, to that occasion which
shall't De postponed for more than a few idayse-when I
hay
tto, e the opportunity of vindicating the course
by the Government of placing, in a manner un-
tienketible, before the country the policy—the perma-
ouse,,Policy—which Her Majesty's Government think
Yohut
a. be adopted, I shall now no longer press upon
ea ttention, and I can only assure you that there is
the onoindividual
anxious to meet this great controversy than
you who has now the honour of addressing
(Cheers.)
firsaid '4A-DSTONE—Sir, so much has been said, and
so well
graph i upon the solemn subject of the first pare-
allsll ,n the gracious Speech from the Throne, that I
theta utv°,. no more than express my concurrence with
eile teano have preceeded me, and state how high a pri-
-00 feel it to be permitted to bo one of those who,
'Nan_ part of the people, carry to the foot of the
so illustrious
such a tribute of admiration to the memory of
eeee_.°4l°lni a man. I would venture, sir, humbly to
b) the
a sentiment which I think was first promulgated
to another
LN obi() Lord the Member for the city of London,
lebrat°iteene: place, and say that I trust that, amid the co-
the Duke eulogies of the achievements and virtues
those °Of
achievementsWelliantgeton, we shall not forget that if
placed beyond our imitation,
there are
moan of of his virtues, and those not the least
ae
aim many of those mental qualities, which made
,great, and made him dear to the heart of this coun-
-1111 telt:trinoifchevaere not placed beyond the range of the imi.
that earnest very
man—that love of truth and honour-
-1114141,1(in devotion to the public service—that single-
lea which'iattid that noble contempt of fraud, are qua-
the cultivation
is open to every one of us to cultivate, and
the i ton which will, I trust, not be forgotten in
a t of our lumentatioas and praises of
harem (Cheers ) Th
of Lonuon lies adverted
_ e Noble. Lord the Member for the city
the departed
?Averted briefly to a subject, upon which,

in my position, as a representative done of the Universi-
ti
s of the country, I may ho perhaps forgiven for ven-
turing a single sentence. I, like many gentlemen oppo-
site, was among tees° who thought that the Noble Lerd
then at the head of the Government ventured upon what
I may term a " stretch of power" in advising the ape
peintment of a commission of inquiry into the Univer-
sities. Bat I see no inconsistency in admitting at once
that the results of this inquiry must be considered upon
their merits, wholly irrespective of the abstract or prac-
tical discussions as to the constitutional nature of the
tribunal formed. I come, however, to the main and
important question. Much has been gained by this
disenesion— (cheers)—much has been gained by the
speech of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, to
whom I tender my thanks for his speech. (Cheers.) I
do not doubt but that it was the intention of the Go-
vernment to make the announcement which had been
made by two of :the prominent members of the Govern-
mens; but in the meantime we should have been totally
in the dark on the subject if it had not been for the
speech of the Hon. Member. (Chters.) Now we have
before us a paragraph in the Speech from the Throne
and in the Address in answer to it. upon which the im
portent—l might almost say, in the pre sent crisis, the
all important—point of the commercial policy of the
country is touched. That paragraph I confess excited
in my mind—as in the minis of others who have
spoken—when I became acquainted with its no-
sure, disappointment and diseatisfaction. (Cheers.)
thought, and still think. that under the circum-
stances of the case—slthongh I grant that rea-
sons such as have been alleged, as the solemnly
of the next week, ought to be received with respectful
coneitieration—yet, under the circumstances of the case,
considering that this is the winding up of a great con-
troversy, which has had a place tor a long period in the
polirics of the country, and is to have its place for ever-
more in the history of the country—considering that the
general election was the final issue upon which that con-
troversy was staked—considering that the Speech from
her Majesty on the Throne is the great constitutional
occasion for recognising the great subjects of Govern-
ment, and the great principles of Government—l think
that her Majesty's Government would have acted wisely,
and have done no more than their duty, if they had
given us, in the course of that Speech, a declaration on
the subject of the commercial policy of the country,
which would have placed for ever beyond dispute the in-
tentions of the party from which that Government is
composed. (Cheers.) lam confirmed in this opinion
by the defence which has been set up on the part of the
Right Hon. the Chancellor of the:Exchequer, for it ap-
pears to me that in defending that paragraph in the
Speech, the Government have defended it upon two prin-
ciples, which are not only not in unison, but which are
totally contradictory to each other. The Right Hon.
the Secretary of State for the Home Department says
that this was a paragraph suitable for the occasion.
Suitable for the occasion, in what view ? With the
special view, he says, of obviating the necessity for an
amendment either from that side of the House or this.
(Cheers.) Well, then, if you obviate the necessity of
an amendment by declaring nothing that can raise the
question of Protection, I want to know what becomes of
the other defence of this paragraph, which is—that it is
not ambiguous—which is that you may easily draw an
inference that it is not the intention of the Government
to reverse the commercial poliey of 1846. Well, then,
we must remember that in the language of the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer, there is but one thing categori
cally declared in that sentence, and that it, that unre-
stricted competition from this time forward shall be the
rule of our commercial policy. But if it be understood
that unrestricted competition shall henceforward be the
rule of our policy, and if that is the thing declared—and
the only thing categorically declared—l went to know
what becomes of all this delicacy and all this tenderness
for the scruples of Protectionists, of which we have heard
so much, if they are prepared to acquiesce in an Address
which declares, and which categorically declares, that
unrestricted competition shall from hen eforth be the
rule of our commercial policy? (Cheers.) I say, if they
do not stick at this. at what in the world are they here-
after to make a difficulty ?, (Loud cheers.) Sir, that is
in reference to the defences set up for this ambiguity.
But I must confess I am driven to make a choice be-
tween these defences, for it entirely passes my wit to
reconcile them. The first defence is the best, in my opi-
nion; and that is, that this paragraph is ambiguous, and
that it is ambiguous because the moment is unseasonable.
Why, then, I may differ whether the moment is unsea-
sonable or not. But we are not here to waste our time
in discussions upon minor points of form. The question
is this—do we know the special purpose for which the
people have returned us hitner ; and are we here to say
that that purpose shall not remain fulfilled ? It does
not appear to me that it is an ambiguous paragraph. Tee
words whether " recent legislation, in contributing with
other causes to this happy result, has at the same time
inflicted unavoidable injury on certain important in•
terests," have the merit of leaving everything open,
everything undecided. They do not settle whether un-
restricted competition is a final decision or not, or
whether we are to have an attempt to reestablish
Protection. Each and every one of those questions is
left in a much greater degree of uncertainty than it was
before this paragraph had been declared. Ido not mean
to say that you have asserted principles contrary to the
majority of this House ; but I mean to say that you
have thrown a shade and an obscurity about your inten-
tions. (Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer said that any motion which
might be made would partake of the nature of an ab-
street resolution; and I admired the generosity of the
Right Hon. Gentleman when he invited the Member for
Wolverhampton to make his motion when the Right
Hen. Gentleman submitted his measures to the coun-
try. That is, he recommended the Member for
Wolverhampton to move an abstract resolution as
an amendment to a practical proposition. (Hear,
hear.) But I hope we shall not be driven from the pur-
li
pose which was essentially contemplated by our consti-
tuents in sending us here, as it was by her Majesty in
dissolving Parliament, Ido not know whether under a
term very different tkings are not often confounded. I
do not wish to enter upon such discussions—what I want
is, that we should have a full, a final, a solemn sanction
for the system of free trade. (Cheers.) I want that
the party who are now responsible for the conduct of
public affairs, shall now, once and for all, declare their
views upon that subject. (Hear, hear.) When we con-
sider that six years have elapsed since the controversy
of free trade was decided by the adoption of a policy—
when we consider that that controversy has been resus-
citated, and its decision in a manner disturbed—and
when we, moreover, consider the maturity which public
opinion has reached with regard to that controversy, I
say it is not too much, after such a waste of time, that we
should at last make up our minds, and that we should,
in the way advised by the First Minister of the Crown
himself, place the question of free trade high and dry
upon the shore, where no succeeding wave may touch it.
(Cheers.) Ido not believe that there is a doubt about
the permanent effects of the great measure which has
been adopted by Parliament. My firm belief is, that
ever since the month of July, 1846, the restoration of the
corn laws has not been a difficulty, but an impossibility.
And I do consider that it is a great misfortune to this
country that a party containing many men of the highest
honourand the highest intellgence—a party most valuable
lie an element in the constitution of this country—that
such a party should be held together upon a basis which
has no foundation, and by a principle which it is beyond
the width and power of man to re establish. (Hear.) I
say that is an evil which it is time to put an end to. It
is time that the people of this country should understand
what is the meaning of this disturbance of the question
of protection. It is time that they should know whether
it is really within the reach of those who desire to
change our system to reverse it, and to determine the
question of the possibility of the restoration of protec-
tion. For my part, I believe there is no more probabi-
lity of a reversal of the system adopted in 1846 than
there is of the repeal of the Bill of Rights, or the resto-
ration of the heptarchy (cheers). It seems to me that
we want no abstract resolution upon the question; but
we want to set the public mind at ease, by a solemn and
formal acceptance, upon the part of this House, of the
measures of free trade already adopted, and likewise a
declaration that future measures bearing upon free trade
will be framed in accordance with the principles therein
laid down. Now Ido not call that an abstract resolu-
tion. It is a rule of conduct which, in my opinion, the
interest of the country requires should be placed beyond
the reach of further dispute. (Hear, hear.) And is it
unreasonable that we should feel some jealousy upon
this subject? Averse as lam to refer to the particular
circumstances affecting dill, rent individuals, I cannot
forget the composition of the Government. e cannot
forget the declaration made by several most respectable
and honoured Members of it. I will go at once to the
case of a Right Honourable Friend of mine, who has
shown the greatest courage and consistency in adhering
to the opinions he has once professed—l allude to my
Right Honourable Friend the Member for North Lin-
colnshire. If he heard the speech of the Right Honour.
able Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in
which he said that there was one thing declared in the
Speech from the Throne—categorically declared—and
that was that unrestricted competition was from hence-
forward to be the rule of our commercial policy—if he
heard that speech, I ask him what construction he puts
upon it? How will it coincide with the declaration which
my Right Honourable Friend made to his constituents
upon the last occasion he appeared before them? I do
not mean to stand upon any particular word or sentence.
I refer to the tenor of his speech, which was uniform,
decided, and unequivocal. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman said:—" I am here to maintain unchanged all
the opinions which I have formerly urged to the finan-
cial and commercial policy lately adopted, and which
for twenty-five years I have professed." (Hear.) Sir,
I frankly admit that I am in no condition to, and have
no right to taunt another with change of opinion. Like
others I have abandoned the inherited traditions of a
party which, when I came to examine them, gave way
beneath my feet, and I returned to those better tradi-
tions which belonged to the party of Mr. Pitt. The
Right Hon. Gentleman, upon the occasion to which I
refer, said that he still advocated those principles with re-
gard to the constitution and financial policy of this coun-
try which he had advocated for the last twenty.five
years, and he said that he would use his utmost in-
fluence as a Member of her Majesty's Government to
promote their adoption. I ask nothing from the Govern-
ment which would be disagreeable to them, either per-
sonelly or politically. I want no profession of internal
conviction—l do not want an abstract opinion uponwe theo
policy of protection—that is a thing gone by ; d
not any longer ask a man whether he is a Jacobite
(Hear, bear.) But Ido ask that those who are called
to power in this country, those who are to represent
this great country with foreign powers, should defini-
tively, unequivocally, and finally abandon all proposi-
tions for a return to a protective policy (Hear, hear.)
More I do not feel bound to ask ; less, it seems to me.
this country cannot honourably accept. (Cheers.) And
this course is rendered the more necessary since we find
that the Government is formed upon a principle which
permits their leader in the House of Commons to say

that unrestricted competition is to be the rule of our
commercial policy, while one of his celleagnee says that
he is in the Government to defend the principles which
he has advocated for the last five and twenty years.
(Hear, hear.) Sir, I hope that whatever decision is come
to by the Honourable Member for Wolverhrimpton—
whether he shall think or not think it necessary to urge
forward his resolution, or whether he snail think the ne-
cessity at the present moment is obviated by the de-
claration of the Government—I hope that this House
will never, in discussing a secondary and incidental
question, lose sight of the great end tor which we are
here. I trust that whatsoever decision may be come to,
or whatever course may be followed, without any reference
to party combinations, the great question upon which
he country expects your answer may not be lost eight
of, but will receive at your bands an early and a final
settlement. Sir, the peculiar circumstances to which we
owe our birth, render it necessary that we should rest
content with nothing which is open to argument or in-
ference either this way or that way—that we should not
rest content with a paragraph, but teat we should know
the determination of her Majesty's Ministers in plain
Errelish, intelligible to every class of the community,
beyond the reach of cavil—not leaving it open for pro-
,pcfionists to tevive the question at their pleasure. I de.
eland that .they slea_uld give an assurance to the people
of England ;Ind, there is no party in the State) prepare d
to defraud or deprive them of the inestimable boon which
hes, by the legtslation of late yearn, been cenierred upon
:hem—which has not only conduced with other causes,
but has been the mein and grand cause of the present
prosperity of this country—(Herr, 11E1LO—which has
:Tread abroad that satiA2c!inif, that confidence in spirit
end rev, rent attachment to our institutions which has
been described as strengthening the foundations of the
'Throne from which her Majesty has this day addressed
us. (Cheers.)
Mr. NE W DEGATE begged to tell the Right Hon.
Gentleman who had just spoken what the determination
of those societies was, which had for their object the
protection of native industry. It was their determina-
tion, be the decision of her Majesty's Government what
it might, that they would see the measures of the Go-
vernment fairly proposed to the House of Commons be-
fore they pronounced any opinion upon them. (Hear,
hear.) There were some minds so peculiarly consti-
tuted that they could never remain easy unless they
were resting upon some arbitrary dogma. This seemed
to be the peculiarity of the Opposition. But he could
assure them it was as much beyond their power to bind
up the future as it was to go against the intellect of pos-
terity. Be the decision of the House what it might, it
could not deprive the people of this country of the right,
either now or hereafter, of legislating upon this question
in such a manner as would meet the exigencies of their
industry. He hed no more to say but that the Protec-
tionist societies awaited the announcement of the policy
of her Majesty's Government in the full confidence that
it would meet the just requirements of all classes.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER, after all that had taken place,
would certainly not have ventured to address them had
he not been so peculiarly alluded to by the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite. But after what had been stated,
he did not think it would be consistant with his own
character or his position in the House, were he not to
make a few observations in reply. He did not believe
that his Right Hon. Friend would even impute to him
the conduct of holding out opinions to his constituents
which he was not prepared to maintain in that House.
In addressing his constituents during the last contest in
which he was engaged, he invariably stated to them his
,pinions with regard to free trade, but at the same time
he warned them, and he ventured to warn the constituent
bodies of the country, that the reversal of a free trade
policy did not depend upon an individual, or any set of
individuals, but it must entirely depend upon the
opinion of the country at large whether the principle of
unrestricted competition or the principle of protection
should prevail. (Hear, hear.) And when the Right
Honourable Gentleman ventured to twit him with
holdittg opinions at variance with his Right Ho-
uousable Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and
the Noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown, he would
tell them he was prepared, upon the fitting occasion, to
show that he had not done that which .was insinuated.
He had told his constituents, if the country, after two
verdicts, declared that his opinions were no longer con-
sonant with the feelings of the majority of the people,
that he would feel himself bound to bow to that decision
of !the country. (Great laughter.) In spite of that
cheer, he maintained that was a safe and a constitutional
principle. For the same reason the Noble Lord oppo-
site bowed to the decision of the country upon the ques-
tion of Parliamentary reforms. There was no question
upon that occasion of the soundness of the principle.
While he maintained that the principles proposed by
Sir Robert Peel were unsound, he was at the same time
ready •to confess that a return to protection was im-
possible. But when his Right Hon. Friend twitted him
with inconsistency, he had forgotten to mention one
point. In addressing his constituents, _ he had
stated that if the country were to decide against
fhe restoration of protection, that ' her Majesty's
Government would then come. forward and pro-
pose measures for the taxation of the country which
might efferd relief for the suffering interests. He
trusted that he might be permitted 'to postpone any
further justifieatiou of himself to the time when these
questions would properly come before the, House. With
regard to his own position in her Majesty's Govern-
ment, he had no hesitation in saying that he accepted
office from a sincere conviction in his reind, that of all
the statesmen in this country the Noble Lord was the
elan most fitted by his great talents for the poSition of
First Minister of the Crown, and the eelministration of
the effeirs of this great country. Gratified by the dis-
tinguished honour which the Noble Lord conferred upon
him in asking him to join him, ho felt his own unworthi-
ness, and lie had assured Lord Derby that whenever he
might have occasion to strengthen his Administration by
the introduction of a person more qualified, he would
place his resignation most willingly in his hands. He
would not he one of those who would throw discord into
a great party with which he was connected, merely
because his own views were not carried out to the letter.
(Hear.) Upon a future occasion he trusted he might
have a fuller opportunity of justifying his career as a
public man, and defending himself from the imputation
of deserting his principles.
Mr. OSBORNE said: It appeared to him generally un-
derstood upon both sides of the House that the Queen's
Speech was a mere matter of waste paper—that it was to be
the occasion for a sort of shaking of hands before the great
contest came on for decision—that the lion of Montrose
should lie down with the lamb of North Essex, and that the
Queen's Speech was to be welcomed with expressions of
loyalty, bordering upon servility. (Cheers.) It was a pity
that this doctrine was not remembered and acted upon in
the years 1849 and 1850 ; for if he remembered right, having
a seat in Parliament during those two years—if he remem-
bered right, the Right Hon. Gentleman 'who now deprecated
any alteration of the terms of the Address, the Right Hon.
Gentleman who now held the office of Chancellor of the
Exchequer, having advocated the doctrine of Protection,
that Right Hon. Gentleman moved an amendment for an
inquiry into the burdens upon agriculture. He did not, upon
that occasion, seem to have much confidence in his motion,
for after one night's debate it was withdravvn. But in 1850,
another Right Hon. Gentleman, the President of the Poor-
law Commission, moved an amendment to the Address,
praying for an inquiry into agricultural burdens, and having
more faith in his proposal than his lead er, he pressed it to a
division, and got disgracefully beaten. for his pains. He
alluded to these things, that new members might dispel
from their minds the impression that it was an unconstitu-
tional course to move an amendment to the Address. He
thought that they would be better doing their duty to their
constituents, better advocating the principles of free trade,
if they had moved an amendment to the Address, which
seemed dictated by the genius of rigmarole and traced by
the hand of mystification. (A laugh). What was the mean-
ing of this studiously ambiguous and empty paragraph, meant
to delude gentlemen upon both sides of the House ? Would
any intelligent Englishman, when he read it fail to perceive
that the question of free trade was reopened in this country?
(Hear, hear.) It might be very well for them to say that
the policy of free trade was accepted as the decision of the
country; but had the Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment, when addressing his twenty-two electors at Mid-
hurst, shown any great belief in it, when he told them that
since the adoption of a free-trade policy berth crime and the
poor-rates were universally increasing? .But the Right
Honourable Gentleman now came down, and told them
with bated breath, that the policy of free trade was not to
be reversed. Why is not that distinctly stated from the
Throne? Why does not the Right Honourable Gentleman
who is the light of the Cabinet, why does isot he who has
screwed up his courage upon many occasions—why does he
not take his physic like a man? (Hear he ar.) Why does
he permit himself to be tied up with a bundle of incompetent
Marquises. men of honourable but of questionable political
principles? Why does not he come forward and say, "I am
a free-trader; I hunted Sir Robert Peel to the death—l
maligned Sir Robert Peel—but I see I committed a
grievous error, and I embrace the doctrines of free trade."
(Hear, hear.) Let them not talk to him of the spirit of
chivalry which animated the Noble Lord at the head of the
Government. He did not believe in it; it did not exist
When that great man, Sir Robert Peel—who was the Wel-
lington of peace, as the other was the Wellington of war—
was hunted to death, why did he stand by and hear those
envenomed attacks of which he was the victim ? Let them,
then, not talk of his high chivalry or spirit. He had no con-
fidence in that chivalry or spirit—no more trust than he had
in the sincerity of the creator of the party who sat in that
House. Ile trusted that the Honourable Member for
North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate), who ought to have
held a high position in the Cabinet, would adopt a manful
course, and acknowledge the impossibility of a return to Pro-
tection. That was the proper course for his party to adopt ;
and while saying this, he quite admitted that the member
for North Lincolnshire had no object to gain in joining the
Cabinet—it was the mischievous love of party which had
dragged him into the mess. As to what was looming in the
future—as to the bottle problem which they had been pro-
mised—he would say nothing on the present occasion; but
he warned the House, and he warned the country gentlemen,
of whom they had heard so much in 1846, that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer might, after all, prove the Flying
Dutchman of the agricultural interest; that they might find
the Right lion. Gentleman had no other object than his
own elevation to power, and that their expectations were
miserably disappointed. (Cries of " Oh, oh.") Yes, but
that was not his language; it was only a paraphrase f the
language which the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself
used in 1816 towards Sir Robert Peel. (Loud cheers.) He
remarked on that occasion that there was a difference be-
tween the leader of an Opposition and the Minister of a
party—that the hours of courtship must not be contrasted
too strongly with the hour of possession—and that the con-
trast at least demonstrated this, that the Conservative party
was an organized hypocrisy. (Cheers.) He had no heart
to go into other topics. The 'Noble Lord had well remarked
that eulogy was well nigh exhausted on the character of the
Duke of Wellington. He was, indeed, a noble and a high-
minded statesman, as well as a greatiwarrior—an Englishman
worthy to be placed by the side of Sir Robert Peel.
But he must take exception to the language of the
Speech in that paragraph which related to Ireland.
In that paragraph there was at any rate no deception
—no " experimentum in vile corpore ; and he much re-
gretted that her Majesty's Ministers had thought it neces-
sary to involve tie whole of Ireland in a charge of turbulence;
lie denied that there was any turbulence on the part of the

~..•~-

people of Ireland. There might be agrarian crimes, andcmf
man lamented them more than be could do; but what were

the crimes there, compared to the crimes in this country?
He would venture to say that for one crime committed in
Ireland there were fifty committed in this country. It did
not become a Minister of the Crown who wished to have nn
amendment proposed, who wished that this House should
wear the appearance of a happy and united family on a large
scale, to place such a paragraph in the Royal Speech. He
would mkt now enter into the subject, but he thought that
when they talked of a liberal and generous policy towards
Ireland, they might have been told, when the Landlord and
Tenant Bill, which the Attorney-General for Ireland had
promised them, was to be laid upon the table. (Hear.) They
ought also to have been told whether her Majesty's Govern-
ment intended to have an inquiry into Maynooth ; whether
there was any intention to interfere with the noblest and best
institution in Ireland, the national education; for he saw in
the recent appointment to the episcopal bench in that coon•
try of a man who, however estimable he might be in other
respects, was only known to the public by his hostility to the
national system of education—he saw in that appointment an
indication that some new light had beamed upon the chival-
rous mind of Lord Derby, who had formerly established the
as stem, and that he was now about to alter it. (Hear.) He
hoped the Ministry would not change their minds on this
subiect, as they appeared to bs about to change their minds
on Protection. And with reference to this latter subject he
nm3t remind them that, if they advocated free trade, they
must do so without entertaining the idea of compensation to
the landed interest at the public expence. The country was
determined that there should be no compensation—they

...... _ _
d...nied that any injury had been done. If the Ministry
wished to retain power, it must be on these terms; if on
thes3 terms they wished to live infamous and contented, he
did not envy them. (Hear, hear.) These were the expres-
sions which the Right Hon. Gentleman had used against Sir
Robert Peel. He knew he could not imitate the eloquence
of the Right Hon. Gentleman, but be had used them, he was
sure, with greater sincerity and devotion to the cause he
advocated. (Hear.)
Mr. ADDERLEY deprecated these constant attacks upon
the Ministry before they had had time to develop their mea-

sures. He felt that those attacks would ultimately recoil on
those who made them; but he would appeal to honourable

gentlemen, whether it would not be better for their own cha-
racter and comfort, and more in accordance with the dignity

of the House itself, if they waited to have something to at-
tack, instead of making these debates a gratuitous outlet for
the prompting& of pure and simple malevolence. It might

be very well for certain organs of the Press, who were in want

of information, and were in ignorance of the facts, to fabricate
their intelligence, and to have recourse to fiction ; but such a
course did not become the members of the Legislature. The
conclusion he drew from the disputed paragraph was—that
her Majesty's Government had entirely, and for ever, given
up the notion of attempting to restore protective duties, but
that they were about to test the opinions of the House, whe-
ther the removal of those duties had inflicted injuries upon
any class, and if so, they would bring forward measures which
were already prepared to give compensation for these bake.
ties. But who were 'the parties who were opposed to the
Government? First of all, there was the late Ministry. Next
there was a party who were strangely in hostility to the pre-
sent Ministry—the leaders and the staff of the old Conserva-
tive party, of which the present Government formed a por-
tion. And last of all there was the party who ought to
have the full credit of the recent legislation—the party
headed by the honourable member for Wolverhampton, who
ought to receive the title of Friend of the Poor Man, and to
have the credit of those measures for which so much credit
had improperly been given to the late Sir Robert Peel. Now,
for what was it that these parties blamed the present Go-
vernment? For inconsistency and want of purpose. But
he would ask, in the first place, what right had the members
of the late Government to talk of inconsistency; what con-
sistency had they shown on the subject of the appropriation
clause? (Hear.) What consistency had the Noble Lord
shown only three cr four months ago on the subject of the
Militia Bill ? What consistency had he shown on the sub-
ject of a dissolution of Parliament, when he first advised her
Majesty against a dissolution, and when he pressed for a
dissolution in this House only a few dap afterwards? (Hear,
hear.) Then, again, for what did the second party to whom
he referred blame them ? Because they would not make
such a recantation as Sir Robert Peel, when in 1846 he not
only announced his intention to introduce a measure for the
repeal of the corn-laws, but stated that every argument
which he bad used with so much convincing eloquence in
former years he now recanted. Aul what did the Right
defence
Honourable Member for Carlisle do? They would all recol-
lect how the House was electrified when announced that
the eloquence which he had employed in
laws for a whole lustrum was to be swept away by one
arbitrary sentence—and how they were called upon without
reason assigned to take the new dictunt instead of the old
arguments. But this was a recantation which was little
creitable to the sagacity, however creditable it might be to
the honesty, of the Right Honourable Gentleman. (Hear,
hear.) Then, with regard to the Free-traders themselves.
They seemed to be like the children in the Market-place—
there was no pleasing them. If the Ministry announced
themselves to be Protectionists they were not pleased, and if
they announced themselves to be Free-traders they were just
as little pleased. They said that Ministers had given up the
principle of protection. He denied that it was a principle at
all. It was only a measure founded upon the far weeper
principle of justice—the principle that all classes should be
taxed alike. Now, he considered at first, and he still con-
sidered, that taxation pressed heavily upon the land, and
therefore he had supported protection; but now that
Protection was thrown aside, the same principle of
justice
called upon them to adjust the inequality
which the removal of Protection had introduced. (Hear,
hear.) Let him remind the House how the party now in
power was formed. It was formed, after maoy years of la-
bour, by Sir Robert Peel, and was perfected in 1841. When
that great man left them, with honour to himself, as he (Mr.
Adderley) had always maintained, iu 1846, the bulk of the
party could not follow him in his alteration of opinion, and
great indignation was expressed that the country gentlemen
did not follow their leader in two different operations at a
moment's notice. But while be admired the self-denial of
Si: Robert Peel, and was satisfied that the country would
appreciate the sacrifices he had made for what be believed
to be right, still he thought it was hard on the part of those
who admired only the last phase of that great statesman's
policy, that they should condemn the country gentlemen of
England for having been too much impressed with the argu-
ments and the eloquence of his preceding phases to be ready
to give them up at a moment's notice. (Hear, hear.) lie
hoped, then, that the Government had said enough to satisfy
the House, and that these attacks would be desisted from,
at least until the Ministry had declared the policy which
they meant to pursue.
Mr. COBDEN said he did not suppose it was necessary
to impress his Honourable Friend the Member for Wolver-
hampton with the propriety of not listening to the advice
which came from the other side of the House. He believed
his Honourable Friend duly appreciated the position of the
country with reference to this question. His Honourable
Friend had faithfully represented the principle of Free Trade
in the House, and now that the country was occupied with
their discussion on this question, they expected that it
would be brought to some definite result, He would ask
was their position such that the plain, honest, simple, fair-
minded people of this country could possibly say that this
clause in the Queen's Speech was A sufficient solution of the
fourteen years' controversy that, to his knowledge and
experience, had been carried on ?
aright,arr
a pwba t
began o
Why, if he read
theb
intended to mean any-
with an " if;" it was
put hypothetically, and might mean nothing at all. How
intotin
g.a paragraph
formT b a
whichpparagraph
was
n altogether t put the question
could it be said, then, that this would satisfy the coun-
tryH e
thought,on st question
therefore,
Honourable Friend had very
wisely pledged himself before the country that within a fort-
night he would bring this question substantially before the
House. But now suppose it be! true what the Chancellor of
the Exchequer had stated—and
ht
ea
w ht
histhey were so deeply interested?
he understood that what the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government had said in
another place was confirmator.
-/ —suppose it be true that the
t
Cabinet had resolved to adopt the principle of unrestricted
difficulty and the delay to
commerce, where would be vise
which his Honourable Friends resolution had given rise?
tie would undertake to say
that his Honourable Friend's re-
solution than affirm the principle of unre-
stricted
commerce. would do no m
Thoer more
eancellor of the Exchequer said
-
that was the opinion of the
Cabinet. Very well. The Right
Honourable Baronet had only to get up and second the mo-
tion of his Hon. Friend the
in one Member for Wolverhampton—
(Laughter)—and
the Right Hon. Gentleman short hour—for he could promise
he would not be troubled with
(Hear, hear.) But then thi
ogfotohdiqstastion to be mixed up
the question would be disposed of.
qmuaensytiospnes.echTesheafHteorwmardse—,T4
tmust not be mixed up with other
fiber for Wolverhampton had too
Hon.andBl-,ouse, and had seen too much of
successful advocacy of any mea-
with others.
whatTti
ey wasinu s
t ahave requiredc itphlf
eeo r
not
out
thr
and simple Free Trade principle
lased upon the casual prosperity of
muchsatutremea-
sure,
m,pt
eroedexsa7pl
allow
iwe
dnoacnyee.
Th
--e honourable Gentleman who last
b allow this question to be settled
the present. It was easy to see how convenient that
gentlemen would then go down to
fur
roke seemed anxious
y "Oh, we only asserted the prin-
ciple there is a time coming—only
pdletoofenit_
beetings and your subscriptions to
Protection societies—th,
-ere is a time coming when, instead
of the present prosperibr of the manufacturing classes, they
lure adversity, and then we shall re-
verse theigopiult
ealf would
forer bs
farmers'
keep
e,
theeres
p' becausetuapb present.ou e s
tree Trade, and adopt the policy of
bus the Free-traders did not intend to
allow that. The principle of unrestricted commerce was
true, sound, politic, and just in all times, all places, and all
circumstances. ass,
s--etrs.) If it was true, it would answer
%Pvriloitbe Protection." ' Yes,
all these conditions—e
not, it was not worth the fourteen
years' struggle which not,
been gone through to establish it
in legislation. He had no objection to see a financialscheme
brought forward.
Apart from the principle of unrestricted
commerce—apart fre the abolition of protective duties—he
thought there was a wide field open for an ingenious Chan-
cellor of the Exche'llier in the modification of taxes. This
process, to which the Queen's Speech invited them, was quite
asouilndtebreesttoin the
constituents in West Yorkshire as it
proprietors. Because his constituents,
whether they were Manufacturers of stuffs or of woollens,
were thrown into competition with the whole world; and,
therefore, he couldnot allow it to go forth that this ques-
tion tola n h
landed
las a remedy for the injuries which a
sustained in 1846. He knew what was
the interest refeked to. He knew that the parties al-
luded to were engaged in agriculture. But it would open ay
wide subject if t&e_
touched the question of competition
in land. First of
etieorntai onf taxation
classhad
all, he denied that any injury had been
d
ty proved their case? They had not
provedone.
he would mention certain circumstances
which stood in their way at the outset. There were several
large landowners in the kingdom who declared they had not
suffered at all frpm the operation of free trade. The last they
had heard on tbs subject was from the Duke of Buccleuch
it t lied
and
Graham, who both declared that they had not
suffered.
engaged farmers had not suffered either. Those who
grazing, in the raising of wool, in dairy farm-
ing, all these had profited by the prosperity of trade and com-
merce. They talked of benefiting the landed proprietors.
But they could not contemplate a modification of taxation
to benefit the Wiest growers without including in the bene-
fit the railways, the owners of house property, and, in fact,
he
es
i
one-half of the real property of the country, which was not
agricultural property at all. (Hear, hear.) Besides, what
were they to do with the seven or ten millions worth of pro-
perty in Ireland, which had been bought since free trade was
established? The parties had bought the land on free trade
conditions—where was the need of compensation to them?
Besides, there were millions worth of real estate sold through.
out the country every year—why should there be any re-
mission of taxation for them ? It would be a clumsy thing
to attempt to compensate the growers of wheat, and one or
two other things, by a measure which would cover all the
real property in the country. (Cheers.) But he denied that
the owners even of purely agricultural property could show
any loss. Was the land worth less now than it was when
Sir Robert Peel brought in his measure ? (Hear, hear.)
And even if they established their injuries, he would flow

them that other people had sustained losses as well as them.
They did not intend to compensate the lawyers for the
loss of John Doe or Richard Roe. (Laughter, and loud
cheers.) It was a well-established rule that where a class
had benefited by the operation of laws, that class had no
right to compensation by the change of those laws. It was
said that the Corn-la%s were a benefit to the agriculturists.
_ _

He said that it was a benefit they held with blood-stained
hands. Whenever they chose to bring forward the question,
he would bring forward, on the other hand, the famines, the
discontent, the turbulence, the misery which had occurred in
1816, 1819, and in 1839—a1l of which he clearly traced to
the operation of the Corn-laws—(cheers)—and he must say
that if the law of 1815 had been in operation last autumn,
when they were threatened with the failure of the har-
vest, instead of the present happiness and contentment
of the people, they would have had the same misery and
distress which they had is that year. Let them not ex-
pect, then, that the majority of the House would go into
a financial discussion with the foregone conclusion, that
certain interests were entitled to compensation. (Hear.)
It was always difficult to follow the Right Honourable
Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford, as he
seldom left anything unsaid—(hear, hear)—but on the pre-
sent occasion he thought the Right Honourable Gentleman
had somewhat failed on the one point where be was least
likely to err—he meant his casuistry. (Laughter.) The
Right Honourable Gentlbinan laid down the principle that

they were entitled to call upon Ministers for a declara-
tion of their policy, but that the House had no right
to put them into the crucible, and call upon them for a
declaration of their opinions and convictions. Now, if he
had a steward, he would like to know what were his views
on that business he was to perform, and, knowing his
views, it might he concluded, if he were an honest man,
that his practice would be in conformity with his
views. It was on that ground he wished to know
the sentiments o f the Ministers, because they were the agents
and stewards of the people. He believed that what there
convictions were their policy would be, whenever they had
the opportunity. To suppose otherwise would be to suppose
chat Right Honourable Gentlemen holding office would be
willing to carry out any policy, no matter how opposed it
was to their own convictions. Now that would be a very
compendious mode of conducting party politics, in this re-
spect, that it would greatly simplify proceedings, and put
an entire end to the migrations from one side of the House to
the other ; because when Ministers were once in office, what-
ever their convictions might be, there could be no obstacle
to their carrying out the views of the House. He could more
easily tolerate that doctrine if they had never given any
reasons for their convictions • hut he could ;not forget that
the Right Honourable the;Chancellor of the Exchequer had
told the House, knot in the heat of debate in 1846, but he
had told them in 1849, that one :of the reasons why he was
in favour of protection—why he was especially in favour of
reciprocity—was (and he gave the most elaborate arguments
in proof of his reason), that Free trade according to the
Manchester school, as he was pleased to designate it—(Hear,
and a laugh)—meaning free imports and hostile tariffs, would
degrade the labourer, lower the rate of viages diminish
capital, and produce pauperism. (Loud cheers). 'The Right
Honourable Gentleman had told them that most empha-
tically within the .Llast three years. He (Ur. Cobden)
was the last to go back to " Hansard" to quote
words against anybody ; but when he was asked to
leave the Right Honourable Gentleman in office, he could
not separate those arguments from what he believed were
the present convictions of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and
what would be his future practice if he could carry them out.
(Cheers.) Besides, he could not forget that on the last
occasion, when the Right Hon. Gentleman alluded to the sub-
ject of Free Trade, he told him (Mr. Cobden) very indig-
nantly, I deny that lam come to this side of the House to
betray the principles I professed when on the other side ; on
the contrary, I am here to carry out, if it be in my power,
all those principles." (Hear, hear.) He then thought he
was justified, and the country was justified, in asking the
gentlemen opposite what were their present convictions on
this question. (Hear.) He would not subject them to the
ordeal to which they subjected the late Sir Robert Peel when
he changed his opinions. (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentle-
' man who spoke last, talked of his (Mr. Cobden'e) side of the
House unfairly assailing her Majesty's Ministers; but the
Hon. Gentleman was mistaken, and must have been thinking
of what occurred five years ago, when Sir R. Peel avowed a
change of opinion, (Loud cheers.) The late Right Hon.
Gentleman was not allowed to remain in peace with his new
convictions, though he abandoned office as the price of his
conversion—(Hear, hear, hear)—and he (Mr. Cobden) did
not think the Right Honourable Gentlemen opposite had
any reason to complain of the retribution with which
they might be visited. (Hear, hear, hear, and cheers.)
He had felt often, and had often been on the point of
saying it, and he would not _hesitate to say it now,
that he thought the personal friends and political colleagues
of the late Sir R. Peel had shown more forbearance towards
his assailants than they had any right, to expect, or than he
(Mr. Cobden) should have been disposed to extend. (Hear,
hear, hear.) But if the right honourable gentlemen opposite
would, upon the motion of the honourable member for Wol-
verhampton, come forward and give in their adhesion, and
say they had changed their views, he (Mr. Cobden) would
give his solemn pledge they should never hear one taunt or
one syllable of condemnation from him. (cheers.) But if,
without that declaration, they were asked how they were in-
clined to trust gentlemen who professed one set of principles,
and carried out another in practice, he could only say for
himself, representing as he did a constituency the largest in
the empire, having a population of a million and a half, whose
opinion was unanimous on the subject—(hear, hear) —they
should never remain in office a day with his consent, or a day
after he possessed the power to turn them out (loud cheers.)
He had only to repeat to the right honourable gentleman
that if he would bring forward a substantive resolution, as
the right hon. member for the University of Oxford had
said, embracing the right of the people of this country to the
free and unrestricted importation of corn—if he would avow
the principle of Free Trade, and say it was just and politic,
and that it must be maintained and extended in every
practicable manner, or if he would endorse that resolution,
he should never hear a taunt from him; but if the right hon.
gentleman opposed it, he and his colleagues should have his
continued opposition so long as they remained in office. (Loud
cheers).

Mr. E. BALL said he would not hesitate to avow, even ,
he stood alone, teat he had not changed his opinions; that
his views were unaltered; that he was still a Protectionist.
(Opposition cheers.) He might be ridiculed for maintaining
those doctrines—(No)—but he should have some consolation
in knowing that there was not a single nation upon the earth
save Great Britain, which did not respond to the principles
which he now advocated. He should have some satisfaction
in recollecting that the greatest men both in America and in
France agreed with him, maintained his views, and carried
out in those countries principles which he belasved to be
sound and right. (Cheers, and counter cheers) He should
be further supported by recollecting that this country had
attained that pre-eminence and superiority which she enjoyed
by a maintenance of a protective policy, and under those
principles which it was the fashion now to despise. (Ironical
cheers.) He concurred in what had been said in the course
of the debate, that they had now arrived at a period when
it became necessary for men of all parties distinctly to avow
what their opinions were ; but he also agreed with the Home
Secretary that this was not a night to be devoted to political
and party discussions, but a night when they were met to tes-
tify and prove their attachment to her Majesty by receiving
the Speech, and responding to the Address now laid before
them. Surely the case was not so urgent, the matter was not
so pressing, that they could not brook the delay of the few
days asked by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear ?) The
Noble Lord who represented the city of London, whilst giv-
ing his adhesion to much in the Speech, had said there
was one paragraph in it so mystified, so unintelligible, one
part professing one species of principles, and the other ad-
vocating another species of principles, that he was disposed
to divide the house, or at leastthat he very much disliked it.
He (Mr. Ball) could understand how a policy might be good
for one portion of the people and not good for another por-
tion. He could understand how free trade might have ad.
vanced some interests, and might have damaged other in-
terests; and he had only to go back two sessions, when the
Noble Lord was in power, to find in the Speech from the
Throne a recognition of the distress prevailing amongst one
class of the community, and a suggestion to the House of
Commons to take their position into consideration. Ht
thought in the same Speech was an acknowledgment that
certain principles were doing good to certain parties, and
were adverse to other parties, but although the Noble Lord
did recognize that proposition, he (Mr. Ball) had not to
thank him for having undertaken to remove the distress
under which one interest were suffering. (Hear, hear, and
Ministerial cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman who represented
a million and a half of people having but one mind—(a
laugh)--a million and a half of people among whom were no
dissensions a million and a half of people who were in ac-
cordance with him in opinion, the great town of Liverpool
joining in it— (laughter from the Opposition, and an Hon.
Member reminded Mr. Ball that the Hon. Member he
was alluding to represented the West Riding of York-
shire)—the Hon. Member who enjoyed this unanimity
of feeling with so large a constituency, said, "How can you,
when no part of the community is suffering—how can you
come and ask for any redress?" (Cheers from the Opposi-
tion.) He (Mr Cobden) stated that the farmers were not
complaining—that the wool farmers and the sheep breeders
were obtaining remunerative prices; but he (Mr Ball) said
those were indications of the destructive policy of Free Trade
principles. (Laughter.) Why were the wool farmers and
the sheep breeders making money? When the policy of
free trade was first introduced, sheep were imported in such
numbers that it created a panic among the sheep breeders.
(Oh, oh, and laughter.) They brought a disease, the small-
pox, among them, they tainted all the English mutton, and
what did the sheep breeders do? They killed off their stock
—(Loud laughter)—they ceased to breed in such numbers,
and the very consequence of having imported those horrible
and diseased sheep had been that the stock had decreased,
the supplies had fallen off, and the price had advanced, and
thatiwas just the history, in a few words, of why mutton was
now remunerative. (Derisive cheers.) The same consequence
would follow free trade in corn. Less wheat was sown year
by year, and. year by year the amount of wheat decreased.
By. and-by a blight, mildew, or blast would pass over
the Continent—corn would then be as mutton was now,
remunerative to the producer—and the country in its rain
would only have to thank its own folly for having destroyed
that principle under which she had risen to prosperity.
(No, no.) He had nothing to conceal—nothing to with-
draw. e stood before the House, as he stood before his
constituency, a Protectionist, and he would not hesitate to
advocate those principles on all occasions, although Hon.
gentlemen opposite said they were opposite to good sense
and good policy. (Hear, hear.) He was not prepared to
deny that our position as a country with regard to the ques-
tion of Free Trade was different now to what it was two
years ago. But was that the result of the Free Trade
policy? Did Free Trade discover the gold of Australia?
(Loud Ministerial cheers.) He would not trouble the House
now with a statement from the " Quarterly Review"— (a
laugh) but in the review of a little work—" Three Years of
Free Trade",—addressed to the electors of Great Britain, it
was shown that the poor-rates in England, which were
13,500,0001. in 1845-46, were nearly 15,000,0001. in 1849-50,
whilst the increase in Scotland was much greater; that on a
comparison of the same years the convictions for crime were
tandantakheefnor lesse. oiHoe uarr manu-
factures
ilear
banksmuch morehad numerous;decreased f
raonmd that the depositsdo to 5,
5i
ono theom ool.savings'
He
believed, also, that, without exception, France, Prussia, the
wholeofaiGnceermwaney,
hada freendß
and laughter.) If these were facts, why should he abandon
the principles which he had professed, and incur the odium
which would justly attach to him? (Hear, hear.) Nothing,
he conceived, could give greater pain than for a man, coming
Russia
ae ll
to that House as the representative of certain principles, to
read his recantation, and to avow that he abandoned them
all. In conclusion, he repeated that, notwithstanding the
taunts of Honourable Gentlemen opposite, he was a Pro-
tectionist, and by that flag he would stand so long as it
should remain unfurled. (Cheers and counter cheers.)
Sir. J. V. SHELLEY congratulated the House that they
had found one man bold enough to avow the principles of
protection. (Hear, hear.) He trusted, when the Honourable
Member for Wolverhampton brought forward his motion,
that Honourable Gentleman, whatever Her Majesty's Go-
vernment might do, would give them an opportunity of
having a discussion, and that he would oppose that motion.
He must say he gave the Honourable Member credit for the
manliness with which he had stated his conscientious opt-
likes, but the honourable Member would allow him, as

en old Free-trader, entirely to disagree with the reasons
he had given for those opinions, and especially that the
stock of sheep was rapidly diminishing. (Cheers and a
laugh.) He believed the agriculturists of Cambridgeshire
were unfortunate enough to have the small-pox among their
sheep; but he thought the Honourable Member's constituents
would laugh when they heard the cause to which was attri-
buted the increase in the price of mutton and wool. (Hear,
hear.) To all persons having anything to do with agriculture
it was notorious that, instead of the number of sheep bred in
the country having greatly decreased, the contrary was the
fact, and that the prices of both mutton and wool had
advanced in consequence of a great increase in the demand.
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) When also the Honourable Gen-
tleman took upon himself to say the quantity of corn grown
was less than in the days of protection, he was equally inac-
curate, and he (Sir J. Shelley) could take upon himself to
assure him that never were such improvements being car-
ried out in agriculture as had been carried cut since the
introduction of free trade. (Cheers.) After they had been
told, as they had been to-night, that never again would the
Government lay protective duties upon corn, he trusted the
lion. Gentleman the Member for Cambridgeshire would
be
prepared to give his opposition to her Ma;esty's Ministers.
( Hear.) With regard to the question to be brought before
the House by the Member for Wolverhampton, he entirely
creed with those who thought the country looked to tins
House that the question should at once be settled either one
ev or the other. (Hear, hear.) eor him,elf,he was satls-
ii.A nothing had done so much inj Ire to agriculture, had so
t ruly been the bane of agriculture, as that protection to which
the Hon. Member even now adhered, and whenever that sub-
ject should be before the House. ha would take an oppor-
tunity of entering more largely than at present into the argu•
meats by which that opinion was supported. (Cheers.)
Lard PALMERSTO\ rose and said—Sir, I wish to make
one or two observations upon the Address and the Speech
prepared by her Majesty's advisers; and I cannot refrain at
the outset from joining my voice to those who have spoken
already, in bearing testimony to the good taste and good
feeling which have led her Majesty's Ministers to place in a
prominent part of the Speech a just tribute to the memory of
that great man whom we have just lost. (Hear.) Of him at
present I shall content myself by saying that 1 believe that
never was there any other man in any country whatever
whose lot it was to render such great and important services
to his country, or who had the good fortune to live so long in
the enjoyment of the universal and unbounded love, respect,
and admiration of his countrymen. (Cheers.) Sir,';l am glad to
find, talking of the principle of protection, that at least
one application of that principle has succeeded, and that
her Majesty's Ministers have been able to realize the expec-
tations held out as to the voluntary enlistment of men for the
militia service. (Hear, hear.) I certainly feel peculiar
gratification on that point—(Cheers)—inasmuch as it always
was my opinion that voluntary enlistment would answer the
purpose, and that a sufficient number of men could be found
ready to join the ranks of the militia, on the terms which
Government were prepared to offer. (Hear, hear.) I have
received, sir, great satisfaction from the statement which
the Speech contains in regard to the acquiescence and
co-operation of the Government of Brazil in measures
taken by this country for the suppression of the slave
trade. I am happy to think that the suspension of those
measures by which that co-operation was obtained—stated
to be only temporary and contingent on that co-opera-
tion—will be of a more lasting character. (Cheers.) I
should have been glad if her Majesty's Government had
been able to state that the Government of Spain had equally
co-operated in putting an end to the importation of slaves to
Cuba, and I trust that either this evening, or on some future
occasion, her Majesty's Ministers will be able to inform us,
in what degree, during the year now expiring, the slave
trade, by the good faith of the Spanish Government has
either been reduced or put an end to. (Hear, hear.) On
that great question, which has been the main topic of debate
this evening, I think if any, doubt could have existed
when we met to-day, as to the necessity of some declara-
tion on the part of this house, aye or no, on the question of
protection or free trade, that which has passed in debate this
evening would have removed that doubt altogether; be-
cause, that although it appears that her Majesty's Govern-
ment thought the question might be passed over sub silentio,
and disposed of in a paragraph in the Speech, which resem-
bles, in its ambiguous terms, the oracle,

" Alo to cEaicida
noinanos vincere posse,"
which, according as it is construed, may be taken either one
way or the other. (Cheers and laughter.) And although 1
do not blame the Ministers for the arrangement of that
Speech, after the excellent reason given by the Secretary of
State, " That it was known there were gentlemen who might
have objected to a frank and explicit declaration as to the
policy to be pursued." (Renewed laughter.) Vet, sir, we
have heard to-night that there are Protectionists still in the
llouse. (Laughter.) And if the verdict of the country is
to be inferred simply from the debate this evening, it may go
forth that doubts may be entertained what is the opinion of
the majority of the House of Commons on that gseat ques-
tion. And considering the ;formal manner in which that
question was by htr Majesty's Ministers referred to the de-
cision of the country at the late general election, I do think
it is necessary for the public interest that there should be
some formal declaration of opinion—not simply by the mem-
bers of her Majesty's Ministry, satisfactory as that has
been, so far as we have heard this evening—but a formal
declaration by the House itself, establishing permanently,
and decidedly that which no doubt will be esta-
blished—the concurrence of the Commons'. House of Parlia-
ment in the sound policy of that system of commercial Go-
vernment on which legislation of late years 'has been con-
ducted (Vehement cheers). And, sir, I cannot agree with
the Honourable Gentleman who spoke on the other side that
free trade is a measure, and not a pr inciple (Hear, hear,
hear). No doubt the imposition or repeal of duty on a par-
ticular article such as corn may be a measure—a measure
emanating from a principle ; but the principle of free trade is
of larger and more extensive application, and must be con-
secrated by the vote of this House as the foundation of all
fature legislation (Loud cheers). And, therefore, I heard
with great satisfaction that the question is to he brought
distinctly, and separately under consideration. That being
the case, and feeling that lishall undoubtedly join my vote
with others who are prepared to affirm that principle, I shall
not further intrude, but only express my concurrence, not
only in the propriety, hnt the absolute necessity for such a
proceeding, (Loud and continued cheering).
A great number of Members left tha House, and no one
rising, the Speaker put the question, and was proceeding to
read the Address, when
Colonel SHITHORP rose, and proceeded to say, that he
had intended to express his great disappointment, if he had
not used the expression disgust. at the coarse adopted by
those whom it was his great wish and anxiety to have sup-
ported. (Oh.) lie thought himself called upon, after being
so many years a Member of that House, to express briefly,
independently, and fearlessly his opinions. He was from
heart and soul a Protectionist; he came into that llouse us
a Protectionist, and he would continue in that llouse alone as
a Protectionist. When he could dare to change those opinions
which he had so often professed in that house, he would at
once resign that situation, and confess his constituents had
reposed an unworthy confidence in bins. He regretted
deeply being called on to express those feelings. He said
most distinctly he was unchangeable in opinion and un-
changeable in conduct. He confessed he was astonished at
the manner in which that party, to wnich he had been proud
to attach himself, had ventured to express themselves in that
House. (Opposition cheers.) He had heard the word " du-
plicity." He was sorry to say that was his—(The word used
to conclude the sentence was lost in the derisive cheers of the
Opposition.) lie quarrelled with no man for his political
opinions, whether they be free trade or protectionist •, but let
him know who his man was, and on which side of the House
he was called on to take his seat. He knew he ought not to
have trespassed on the House ; but, as an honest man, he
was anxious to do his duty fearlessly, and he could not have
retired to rest without expressing his disappointed feelings,
and his determination to uphold his own principles. (Oppo-
sition cheers.)
The resolution was then agreed to,:and'a deputation, on the
motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as appointed to
present the Address to her Majesty.
The House immediately adjourned, at half-past nine
o'clock.
.e

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON, 1852.-M.B.
SECOND EXAMINATION.

FIRST DIVISION.
Medical Schools.
Bridgewater, Thomas King's College.
Cammack, T. Armstrong University College.
Hornidge, Thomas King St. George's Hospital.
Jodan, R. Coane Roberts King's College.
Listor, Joseph, B.A University College.
Littleton, Thomas, University College.
Pavy, Frederick William Guy's Hospital.
Rooke, Thomas Morley Guy's Hospital.
Trouncer, John Henry University College.

SECOND DIVISION.
Gaye, William Thomas University College.
Pat fitt, Henry King's College.
Rice, Bernard St. Bartholomew's Hospital
Roberts, Elias Jones Richmond Hospital, Dublin
In accordance with tho recent regulation of the Senate,
that the examinations shall be conducted " by demon-
stration from preparations, and by requiring the candi-
dates to report on cases of actual patients."
The examiners in physiology required the candidates
to name and describe microscopic specimens, illustrat-
ing important points in physiological anatomy.
In surgery, the candidates were examined by demon-
strations from dry and wet preparations, illustrative of
various slugfest diseases and accidents, and of their
treatment.

The examiners in medicine required the candidates to
examine patients in the wards of a metropolitan hospital.
and afterwards to report in writing on the cases, and
also to examine microscopically various specimens of
morbid products.

HIGHWAY ROBBERY AND ATTEMPTED MURDER.
—A daring outrage took place in Sutton, near Maccles-
field, on Saturday night last. About half-past ten
o'clock, on that night, as a man named Joseph Wads-
worth, silk weaver, was returning home from the mar-
ket, he was overtaken on the high road to Leek,
by a young man, about twenty years old, named
John Riley, silk weaver, of the Watercotes, who
is considered by the police to bear a bad character.
Riley passed Wadsworth a short distance, and then
returned and entered into conversation with him
Riley said ho was employed at Broad's Gardens, as mas-
ter,
of the ceremonies ; and kept pace with Wadsworth,
until they arrived at a lonely spot near the Mos' flu,b_
He then put his arm round Wadsworth's neck, and '
a dagger or
bed him with some sharp instrument—either .
a knife—just above the windpipe, making
f Ho then
inch and a quarter loeg through his neckere
abnielp. incision an
stabded Wadsworth through the leftm _ cur,
d,.tive cuts in the
just missing
the great artery of the head, g
scalp at the back cf. the head, onet I lal'n inch deep. 1)u-
-ringm Wadsworth's
th scuffle to keep the instrument 's hands, almost
fro
threat, Riley drew it through Wandsworth
cawing off the right thumb' In the whole, 14 wounds
wore inflicted on th,6 poison. Wadsworth
went on his knees w Riley Wad"7l" and begged for his life
f
for the sake of his wife and a
,
and Riley's reply
mil
was' " You d—l. I'll il finish yoTe hcries of mur-
der was not heard, but the assalY•
uut after examining
Wadsworth's pockets, and taking all they Contained, six-
pence halfpenny, a purse. .and two knives, decamped,
and left Wadsworth dripping with
blood. By some
means Wadsworth scrambled to the nearest house, and
was taken home; but no person dared venture to fetch
medical aid from the tovvo until early next morning,
and he now lies in a very precarious state, his recovery
being doubtful. Information was conveyed to tho police,
who fortunately succeeded in finding Riley, with the
knives and puree, in his father's house; and his shirt
was found much died with blood. He was brought up
on Tuesday at the county police office, before Dr. Swan-
wick, and was remanded for a week.