The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-16 00:00:00

EVENING, MARCH 16, 1852.

between these periods, the foreign shipping inwards exhi-
bited
an increase of 54 per cent. The British shipping out-
wards, in 1849, amounted to 3,762,000 tons, and in 1851 to
4,147,000 tons, being an increase of 385,0)0 tons, or about 10
per cent. The foreign tonnage outwards increased from
1,600,000 tons in 1849 to 2,336,000 in 1851, being an
augmentation of 51 per cent. Taking the British and fo-
reign together, the British imports and exports in 1849
amounted to 8,152,000 tons, and in 1851 to 8,535,000, being
an increase at the rate of only 4.11 per cent. ; whereas the
foreign imports and exports, estimated in a similar manner,
showed an increase of 47 per cent. He would now ask whe-
ther it was possible, with this slight comparative increase :of
British shipping to maintain a competition with our neighbours.
What figures showed to be injurious as a result, every day's
experience shewed them to be actually at work against them.
America always had a large quantity of shipping loading in the
ports of China, which formerly was not the case ; :and British
ships, which formerly could obtain freights of 61. and 71.
per ton, were now offered no more than 30s.—(Hear, hear.)
No one knew better than the Noble Lord opposite that the
French had made an ungrateful return for the voluntary re-
laxation in favour of foreign shipping, and that other con-
tinental nations.were disposed to follow her example. Among
other things it was said that the new policy had produced a
vast deal of export trade. ,He would remind the House
on that subject that lion. Gentlemen had no right to use
the fact of an augmentation of our exports as a proof that
our commercial system worked well ; as the years 1826 and
1827 and 1837 and 1839 were years in which, with large
exports, there was great commercial pressure. At the
same time he knew perfectly well that the labouring classes
of this country were much more contented, and much better
employed than they had been, but still he would say that
large exports were not a satisfactory proof of sound com-
mercial system. That protection must, in some shape, be a
benefit, was, in his opinion, completely illustrated in the
case of the states of the Zollverein. He had stated this much
with reference to one particular point of the debate, and he
should not have risen had it not undergone some amount of
discussion, being fully convinced that his Right Hon. Friend
had fairly, fully, and completely answered the questions put
to him.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM-1 should not have risen to follow the
Right flora. Gentleman who had just sat down, if I had in-
tended to go at length into those fiscal questions he has
raised in respect to the navigation-laws, and to the extent
of increase or decrease which may be found in our imports
or exports. But I rise in consequence of the challenge which
has been thrown out by the Right Hon. Gentleman, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, with respect to the Opposi-
tion which he anticipates 1 am about to offer to her Ma-
jesty's Government. And before I answer that challenge, I
must be permitted to draw the attention of the House and
the country to certain large admissions which have just been
made by the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Con-
trol. That Right Hon. Gentleman admits that the country
is in a state of unexampled prosperity, and that the working
classes are satisfied, contented, and well employed; and al-
though he does not attribute that contentment and employ-
ment to our financial or commercial policy, he yet admits
the facts broadly and frankly.—(Cheers.) I am now
about to explain to the House the view which
I venture to take in the present position of public
affairs. I am not disposed to enter into any factious
opposition to her Majesty's Government, because I
think that in the present state of the country it does be-
come the House, without the slightest tinge of party, fully
and dispassionately to consider the amount of force which
ought to be provided for national defence by sea and land,
to enter into their discussion in Committee of Supply, and
to proceed, having agreed on the amount of force, also to
pass the Mutiny Act. But, Sir, I do not think the ques-
tion which is now at issue at all so infinitesimal as the Right
lion. Gentleman was pleased to call it.—( Hear.) It is on
the contrary, in my opinion, as important a question as ever
was raised in a deliberative assembly, and one which un-
doubtedly affects the happiness and well-being of the great
body of the people.- (Loud cheers.) It is not a question
of a ss. or a 7s. duty upon corn ; the question really at issue
is, will you reverse your entire policy ?—(Loud cheers)—a
policy the results of which, try them by what test you may,
have far exceeded the most sanguine expectations of its
authors and supporters.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer asked what was the bond
of the opposition he saw around him. I certainly was
not prepared for that Gentleman's being particu-
larly chary as to the weapons of opposition he
used, or the nature of the combinations into which he
might enter, to resist what he had termed an organised hy-
pocrisy, and it is necessary therefore that we should come to
a clear understanding as to what is intended by her Majesty's
present Ministers; Now, although I think my Hon. Friend
the Member for Wolverhampton was quite justified in put-
ting the question he did, and in the manner in which he put
it, yet for my part I am bound to say that I have no
doubt whatever as to the intentions of Government with re-
spect to this policy, if they can accomplish their intentions.
—(Cheers.) Whether they shall succeed depends upon this
House and upon the country; btifnee to what their purposes
are, I have no more doubt than Big I' have the honour of
addressing you, Sir, at this moment.—(Hear, hear.) It is
not from the Right Hon. Gentleman who represents the Go-
vernment in this House that I ask for explanation. I said so
last year, when the Right Hon. Gentleman stated his views
in mystified and hardly perspicuous language, and I was
forced to go to the other House, when I said the Peers
would be far more etxplicit than, the Members of this House,
who were in party combination with them. Then the
purpose was frankly avowed, and it was first to change
the Administration, next to dissolve the Parliament, and
then to impose fresh duties upon imports, among
others to re-impose the corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) That
was my solution last year of the hints that were given to
me elsewhere. I adhere to that definition of their inten-
tions now, and I call upon them to deny it.—(Hear, hear.)
They have succeeded to power, have displaced the last Go-
vernment, and I now avow my belief that they intend to
dissolve Parliament, for the purpose of imposing import
duties—among others, a duty on corn.—(Hear, hear.) I
trust the House will bear with me while I read a few pas-
sages from the speeches of a Noble Earl in another place.—
(Cheers.) I shall first refer to the statement made by the
Earl of Derby on the 28th February, 1851, when he had
failed in his endeavour to form an administration. It was
on an occasion of great importance, he having to state to
the House of Lords and the country the cause of his
failure, and he completed that statement with a frank
avowal of the policy he would have adopted had he suc-
ceeded in forming a Government. I will now read the
principal passages in that speech, and point out the policy
which he would have adopted, The Noble Earl said—
"lt would be impossible for me, even if my convictions
were less strong than they are, it would be impossible for
me as an honest man to take office without a full deter-
mination to deal with agricultural distress, and to
endeavour to apply, as minister, effectual measures of
relief."—(Protectionist cheers.) Wait. The Noble Earl was
perfectly explicit. and I congratulate gentlemen opposite,
who have so long laboured for what they term some remune-
ration for the unequal burdens upon land, on the prospects
which they now have with the Earl of Derby at the head of
the Government, and the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite in
the Cabinet, of their success in that object which for six
years they have so unceasingly laboured to accomplish.
The Noble Earl goes on :—" I will take this opportunity of
explaining to your Lordships what are my views and inten-
tions on the subject of agricultural distress. I say, that by
imposing a moderate duty on the importation of foreign corn
you might raise a considerable revenue for the country,
while you need not materially raise the existing prices to
the consumer, while you might, by the acquisition of an
additional revenue of one and a half or two millions annu-
ally, enable the Government to effect an object which would
be of great value to the community at large, namely, the
extinction of the income-tax." Now, observe the Noble
Earl expects one and a half or two millions from a duty on
corn. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite said he would
scorn a ss. duty. I now understand his contempt. Five
shillings would not raise one and a half or two millions; it
must be a much heavier duty._ (Loud cries of " Hear,
bear, and cheers.) The Noble Earl then says, " I
do not hesitate to say, that if I found it impracticable
to effect such a commutation of our system of taxation
(rather a severe comment on the plan of the present Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) as should place all classes on a
perfect level, then, according to the best free-trade authori-
ties, it is not adverse to the principles of free trade to
impose in favour of the class which is subjected to
an undue share of burdens countervailing duties to an
amount sufficient to meet those burdens, and I believe
that by the imposition of a moderate duty upon
the import of corn and provisions you might raise
such an amount of taxation as, at the end of the year after
this, would enable the country altogether, and I trust for
ever, to abolish the income-tax. I express my frank opinion
that the question of protection - or, if you chose, the ques-
tion of the unrestricted import of provisions—is one which
must be settled by the country once and for ever.—(Cheers.)
The Hon. Baronet the Member for Essex cheers that. I
say there is nothing more clear than the course of the Govern-
ment, as expressed by the Earl of Derby. He asks for im-
port duties, including a duty on corn - (llear, hear)—and
the means by which he proposes to effect his purposes are, a
dissolution of Parliament. Nothing can be more plain.
The Noble Earl goes on, '• But until I see that expression
of the feeling of the country—when I find that the present
system is working an amount of evil far greater than was
anticipated by its opponents -certainly greater than I an-
ticipated myself—l cannot, as an honest man, abandon the
attempt to relieve the existing distress." How? By re-
tracing the false step that had been taken—" by the im-
position of a moderate import duty upon corn. That was the
statement made early last year, and his Lordship concluded
by saying, " I trust your Lordships will think that I have
not trespassed unduly on your time in making a full and
frank declaration of the course of policy which, if I ha .d been
called to office, I should have ventured to recommend."
What, then, is the use of inquiry further, when we have this
statement from the head of the Government? It may be
said that since then he has changed his views, but I have
here a statement which he made on the first day of the pre-
sent session, and as I know that the Noble Earl means to
carry out every word he utters, I cannot have a doubt
as to his present intentions. On Ale 2cl of February this
year, Lord Derby says,. The price of wheat for the last
four years has perpetually fallen, and my belief
wisrr?
as it was four years ago, that the cultivation of Deat
must diminish if some alteration be not In:tvzLliite,
law; aye, even to an extent which may
if not dangerous to its real welfare. I dboeTotvrolooskhouoind
this matter as one of indifference, namely, that our
draw continually a great and increasingcouenutp4s.y of oar
am
principal articles of food from foreign
n-laws will make us
convinced that the repeal of the
paoclfortritaigons,,opfregouraanstupwpiltyh,
more dependant for the principal
and that is in my opini
Qnricia staltve not altered She. opinion
danger to this, country,
„„, Anat. boatfor pu.rposes of
which I expreqed some uatiya,;iudastry it is
revenue anil ffisr„,tilel49l4:4,q4hohild heiincluded in the
desirable that agqcultgraanPi, revenue should be raised." The
articles of import on Wfijet
ct.;gQFt se cattle, and all those
sNdtste Earl' would go b 0,14
Sinented- 'friend, Sir Robnrt Peel,
pro'yiAiiS which 1_1.!
uY in. order that all the food of the
taxation.
,But more than
t ' led so ear,lles '
rtheleievgestangfwTY of my Right Hollourabie
speogshOul4. p
the University of Oxford, and there
this see 19zriowi cQy
Friend the
secret in what I am going to state, be-
4.erhy mentioned it in the House of .Lords.
s I:(,,edtihsceloßsaurrieoortb,
Lilt
e Were kept suspended until my
Rightbefe arrangementa t
Honourable Friend had returned from abroad, and
when be returned, and when the Earl of Derby made his
proposal, what was the preliminary point raised by my Ii ight
Honourable Friend? lie asked Lord Derby what he in-
tended to do with the corn.laws, and Lord Derby at dance
said, "My opinion haS been pronounced. I think import
duties must be again imposed, and I am not prepared to say
that grain mast be an exception." My Right llonou rabic '
Friend, true to the principles he had invariably a dvo-
cated, replied, "Thin preliminary objection is fatal, I ca niiot
join the Administration.”—(Cheers.) So earnest was the
marl of Derby in adhering to his faith and principles, anal so
sincerely was he of opinion that reversal was indispenieable,
that although he had made his whole arrangements turas on
the arrival of my Right Hon. Friend, when he got that an-
swer, that my Right Hon. Friend would not be a party to
restoring the corn-laws, he abandoned the idea of forming
an Administration. I am sorry Ido net see the Noble Lord
the Member for Tiverton in his place, but unless I am greatly
deceived, Lord Derby had also an interview with that Noble
Lord when the present Administration was formed, and pro-
Posed to him to take part in his Administration. But the it,

II II

i,Lud oi:l3—xab

Jux gaLia3al cruliJ tat
./iszi2 *di JIL filklisa:sui