The Sun.
London, England, 1852-11-27 00:00:00

cure. (Cheers.) Having said thus much with regard to
the past advice which I ventured to give them, I will
venture to say a few words with respect to a question
which has been raised within the last few days, which is
likely to become a question of very great importance, and
upon which, I fear, we have had the signal of a fresh
struggle held out by the right hon. gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer—l mean the question of what he
will not call "compensation," but which, I believe, he
calls "relief" to the landed interest. Sir, I am afraid
I shall be as little believed by the landed interest and by
the farmers when I speak upon this subject as when I
said that the corn laws would probably be repealed, and
that an Bs. duty would be more than the farmers could
get. But, sir, it is certainly my opinion that it would
not be wise for the landed interest to ask for any special
relief, or any special benefit, whether it be called com-
pensation or relief. (Cheers.) In the first place, let the
house observe that the landed interest, the owners and
occupiers of land, and the labourers, upon that lat. form
a great part of the property and population of the coun-
try, and that it is byno means a matter of indifference to
them when you relieve the inhabitants of the counter at
large from any species of taxation upon industry
or property. (Cheers.) The right hon, gentleman, in
his calculations, used to reckon the property of the
landed interest as about one-third of the whole property
of the country. It does not much signify what the pro-
portion is, but taking it at one-third, you will observe
that if you have a reduction of 12,000,000/. of taxation,
4,000,0001. of that relief is given to the landed intdrest.
(Cheers.) If you have, as no doubt you have had, within
the last ten years, 7,000,0001. of taxes remitted over the
amount imposed, more than 2,009,000'. of the taxes so
remitted have gone to the landed interest. (Cheers.)
And that is a remission of taxation of whickno man can
complain. That is a just and fair advantage, which they,
being a part of the property and population of the country,
highly deserve. They enjoy, with the rest of the com-
munity, that great benefit. The cost of production is
rendered less, their whole industry is made more pro-
ductive, and not a single manufacturer or merchant will
say a word against their receiving that benefit. (Cheers.)
But if you say you will give a special relief to the landed
interest, and if you say that that special relief is to be
given by the two houses of Parliament, which consist in
a great measure, if not mainly, of persons who are
owners of the land, you at once set up the landed interest
as an object of suspicion and of envy—(hear, hear)—
you are making the other classes of the country think
by tnewuntry atlarge, but
that you show a favour and preference to one particular
body. From my birth I have been connected with ilbe
great agricultural proprietors, and I beg, for the sake
of the landed interest, that you will not in your approach-
ing statement ask for some special favour for them, whe-
ther you call it compensation or otherwise ; but if you
can remit taxes—if you can confer a benefit on the people
of this country—make it large and general, and do not
make it special and particular. (Cheers.) With respect
to these conflicting resolutions, I will take this oppor-
tunity of observing that I do not agree in the view which
I understand to have been taken by the hon. member
for the West Riding, that the word "just" shuts out all
question of compensation to the landed interest for the
losses which thay May have sustained. I think it would
certainly bar any positive claim—it would bar their say-
ing "we are losers of so much, and are entitled to so
much." But it never would prevent a minister from
saying " the landed interest are in a state of difficulty
and distress, and I prOpose to you to give relief to that
interest." Long before the corn laws were touched, I
remember Chancellors of the Exchequer coming down
and proposing considerable relief, to the agricultural in-
terest without reference to their having suffered losses
in consequence of the corn laws. Nothing would be
easier than to give that turn to any proposal. Although
the insertion of the word "just" may seem to shut out
the claim of compensation, I do not see that it effec-
tually does so ; and I do not see that there is any
difference between the two sets of resolutions on that
special ground. (Hear, hear.) An hon. gentleman
has adverted to the advice which we, as Ministers of the
Crown, gave to the Sovereign with respect to the insertion
of certain words in the Speech from the Throne ; and
it has always been represented that that Speech described
the agriculturists as in a state of distress, and that her
Majesty had called the attention of Parliament to the
distresses of the agricultural interest. Now, I must ask
the house to listen to the terms of that Speech, and it
will then see that the meaning has not been exactly re-
presented, and that omissions have been made of very
great importance. The following are the words in the
Speech which her Majesty was pleased to deliver at the
opening of the session of 1851 : "The state of the com-
merce and manufactures of the United Kingdom has
been such as to afford general employment to the labour-
ing classes. I have to lament, however, the difficulties
which are still felt by that important body among my
people who are owners and occupiers of land. But it is
my confident hope that the prosperous condition of other
classes of my subjects will have a favourable effect in di-
minishing those difficulties, and promoting the interests
of agriculture." Now, sir, these words were especially
meant to show that the Government did not propose any
particular relief for agriculture, but that it was the belief
of the Government of the day that agriculture would
recover from its difficulties owing to the prosperous state
of the commerce and manufactures of England—(hear,
hear)—and I believe that that expectation has been
completely fulfilled. (Loud cheers.) Aly belief is that
the increased consumption which has followed from
your cemmerpial legislation has been such that,
r.,--pect to -many aa:ticres of farm produce, a very suffi-
cient, not to say a high price is obtained, and, above all,
that the value of the article of land has been lately very
considerably enhanced, and is now of very great value
in the market. (Cheers.) A statement was made the
:other day by the hon. and learned gentleman tho Attor-
ney-General for Ireland, which showed that in Scotland
the value of land had greatly improved ; and only the
other day an estate in Northamptonshire was sold for
40 years' purchase. (Cheers.) My belief is that the
agricultural interest is not to be • taken for a dis-

tressed interest • and on that ground I shall object to
any special relief on the ground pointed out. (Cheers.)
Having stated my views with respect to these resolu-
tions—having stated the course which I took when I
was a Minister of the Crown—l will now refer for a few
moments to the speech made by the right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answer to the
argument of my hon. friend. The argument of the
right lion. gentleman went to show that he, and the
party with whom he acts, had since the year 1846 never
attempted the restoration of protection, but that they
had endeavoured to alleviate the burdens, to mitigate
the distresses of certain interests that were affected,
without disturbing the settlement then come to. (Hear.)
Now, sir, that argument was very ingeniously carried
out, and the right honourable gentleman's quotations
were very apposite ; but the great defect was that the
argument was wanting in truth. (Loud cheers.) By
picing out a speech made by one member, and a state-
ment made by another, by pointing out the conduct
which he himself had pursued at various times, he seemed
to afford something like a proof that the conduct of his
party had been such as he described it to have been.
But it is necessary to look to other facts, and some
of those facts were stated by the hon. member for Mid-
lesex, in a manner not very agreeable, I believe, to
honourable gentlemen opposite. (Hear, hear, and
laughter.) There are abundance of facts all around us.
Supposing every volume of Hansard to be burnt, there
would remain in our memories sufficient to prove that
the Protectionist party have been trying to restore pro-
tection, and destroy the system of commercial policy
established by Sir R. Peel. (Hear, hear.) I must say
that I consider them to be men of the highest integrity.
The Duke of Richmond always said, 1" Turn out the
Ministry, get a dissolution of Parliament, and you far-
mers will have protection back." I cannot be so much
surprised as hon.
my friend that the noble duke has not
lately appeared in his foriner prominent position. His
position is a very embarrassing one. (Laughter.) I
have no doubt he made that promise to the farmers in the
assurance that the Earl of Derby would fulfil it, and it
must be a great mortification to him to find that he has
unintentionally been the means of deceiving a great body
of his fellow-countrymen. (Cheers and laughter.) But
beyond what passed at these meetings, the Protectionist
speeches made during the elections showed that many
honourable gentlemen opposite were fully persuaded that
they could restore protection. (Hear, hear.) What
thei
the hon. member for Dorsetshire say
Protectionists were divided into
classes.
can
three? lie
said
tetfirst
class is composed of those who think that
thosea n e
never be restored ; the second of thtoisiee
that it may be restored in time ; andVithrespectito the two
who would re-establish it at once.
lith regard to the first,
protectiont
wh who imagine
oi mf
latter I have nothing to say;
protections very ad of them
stored, I must say that it
c''O'uasntry that if their friends
those namely who think that bulw
never can be
to tell tell the farmers of
poweris they
would at once see high
should be placed in
hear.) Well, but the right hon.
and that case is, I think, not a
prices
gentleman rest restored. .a
case, (Hear,
gentleman. But
his, and one of
granting the case as by the right hon.
nting that he has a character like that
very pleasant one forttohtlaiase
been stated
gentleman—gra •
( 1
beinga ugh t er)
which has been given predecessor of
the ablest and wittiest of his predecessors—Mr. Towns-
end, I mean, of whom Mr. Burke said that he was infi-
nitely
haobno.vgeenhtaleviman
likeright opinion—(laughter)—giving
prede-
cessor in that respect, why then you must come to the
conclusion that without thinking protectioncould be re-
stored, and being rather in favour of free trade, he has
allowed this great party, the great party of the farmers
of the country to believe that ho
would restore pro-
tection, when he never believed •
any-
thing of the kind.
think that some part of the ous those ho are
called the Manchester school—may be described as
interested parties
; but I think the farmers have
this owing to them that they should know the truth,
and that they should know the opinions which eminent
men in this country equally entertain ; and I think that
if the right hon. gentleman has known all this, that it
would be impossible to restore protection, and that bene-
fits to the land must be sought elsewhere, I think it was
due to that body to tell them so (hear, hear) ; and I be-
lieve the farmers of this country to be as respectable and
worthy as any body of men in the kingdom. I do not
believe that upon these economical matters they have
reasoned the matter to the foundations, though they
may have gone through Adam Smith, or some of his
disciples. And therefore I think it was due to them to
tell them what was the settled opinion of ahe last House
of Commons, and of what would probably be the settled
opinion of this house (hear, hear). I remember, with re-
gard to the Roman Catholic question, when the Duke
of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel proposed the settle-
ment of that question—l remember meeting a farmer
and asking him his opinion. He said My opin-
ion would certainly be against the Roman
Catholics, but I see all the great men in Parliament
are for them, and therefore I give up my opin-
ion to theirs." Why, upon this question of pro-
tection, I believe :that if a fair statement had been