The Sun.
London, England, 1852-11-26 00:00:00

corn from the operation of import duties—if the com-
plexion of the new Parliament should be such as to prevent
her Majesty's Ministers from carrying out the principle,
which would raise from the foreign grower a large por-
tion of the national revenue, and, at the same time,
afford direct relief to a suffering class, then it would be
their duty, by establishing such an equalisation and read-
justment of taxation as indirectly to some extent to effect
the same object. You will have seen by her Majesty's
Speech that we have been compelled to adopt the latter
alternative. (Loud cheers.)"
Could there be a doubt after this that this was a cut-and-
shuffle transaction; that her Majesty's Ministers were about
to do indirectly what they had not the courage to do in
the face of the house ? The house had now got a meaning
to the " unreserved adherence " of Government to a free-
trade policy. It was an unreserved adherence to their
seats. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He took exception to
such men carrying on the Government of this country.
(Loud cheers.) I spite of what had been said by the
noble lord the member for Tiverton, of the indifference
out of doors, he objected to committing any cause to the
hands of men who were opposed to it at heart. What was
the theory of Parliamentary government which was first
enunciated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer? What
was his great argument against Peel? That he had no
business to remain in office to carry out principles which
had first been advocated by the hon. member for the West
Riding. He based his opposition to another bill on the
fact, that it was brought forward by a man who had no
business to bring it forward, namely, to the bill for en-
dowing Maynooth ; and the passage in which he did so was
so remarkable that he would quote it. He said—
" I oppose this bill 6n account of the manner in which it
has been introduced. I oppose, it also, on account of the
uen by whom it has been brought forward, &c. ; and to be
told, because these men have crossed the house, and have
abandoned with their former seats their former professions,
these men's measures and actions are to remain unscruti-
nised, unopposed, &c. You have permitted men to gain
power and enter place, and then carry measures exactly the
reverse to those which they professed in opposition. I say
that the Parliamentary course is for this house to have the
advantage of a Government formed on distinct principles.
No Parliamentary middleman, who bamboozles one party
and plunders the other. Let us have no party question,
but fixity of tenure. Let us dethrone this dynasty of de-
ception by putting an end to the intolerable yoke of official
despotism and Parliamentary imposture."
No man who had expressed these sentiments had any
right for one moment to remain in office, to carry out prin-
ciples he had stolen from other people. Now he must say,
since the lamented demise of that celebrated Oriental juggler
Rahmo Samee, who could swallow broadswords, and do
many wonderful things, he knew no one of such capacity
for swallowing as the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. He had swallowed two amendments
already to-night. But he called on the house not to be
deluded by a great State conjurer. (Cries of "Shame.")
Ay ! but there was no " shame" called out when he
abused Peel ; you acknowledged to-night that he was a
great and a good man, but when the right hon. gentleman
attacked him, you cried no shame, but hounded your man
on. (Cheering, and cries of " Oh.') He agreed with the
noble lord the member for Leicestershire, that something
was due to the past ; and when hon. members were called
on to recollect their duties, let them not be behindhandin
the duty which the working men of this country, who had
raised monuments as tributes to the memory of Peel, had
performed, and not at this moment hesitate to record by
their vote the belief that the policy of Peel was wise, just,
and beneficial. (Loud cheers.) Do not be alarmed by the
threat that the Ministers would resign. The threat was
not a new one in history, and he believed that if now
carried out, the country would " bow " to Lord Derby's
decision. (Loud laughter.) That noble lord had already
shown how a Government might be improvised. He had
no confidence in the professions or principles of the right
honourable 'gentleman, and called on the house not to give
adherence to a game of political latitudinarians—(cheers
and laughter)—whoehad no belief, politically speaking, but
in the existence of the Treasury benches ; no hope but in
the perpetuity of place.—(Renewed cheers and laughter.)
He could not follow the noble lord, the member for Tiver-
ton, and would give his vote with confidence and sincerity,
for the motion of his hon. friend the member for Wolver-
hampton—(Great cheering.)
Mr. BALL lacked the great quality for success quoted
by the hon. member for Middlesex ; but no greater illus-
tration of the force of " audacity" could be found than
the speech of the hon. member. He defended the farmers
of England against the assertion of their ignorance, made
by the hon. member for Wolverhampton, and maintained
that the skill and science put forth in agriculture, should
have preserved them from so unwarrantable an imputation.
The hon. gentleman then entered on the subject of the
cheapness of food being no test as to the prosperity of a
country. He had learned, he believed through Sir R.
Peel, that in Russia the average amount of consumption
of corn was five bushels a head ; in Germany, where it was
dearer, it was six bushels ; in France, where it was dearer
still, seven bushels ; and in England, where it was dearest
of all, and where wheaten bread was almost exclusively
used, the average consumption was eight bushels a head.
He could not bring himself to believe that the great
mass of the people were so deluded by the argument of
the great loaf and the small one, as still to yield their
confidence to false politicians. It was a most absurd
thing—a most cruel thing—to represent to poor people
that cheapness was a blessing. (Cheers and laughter.)
Why, they made everything for us, and cheapness would
diminish their wages. (Renewed laughter.) When they
came forward and claimed reparation for the memory
of the late Sir Robert Peel, he came forward,
too, to ask reparation for having believed in and
been deceived by him. He admired his ability, believed
implicitly everything he said, acted upon it without reserve,
and suffered accordingly. They had a right to reparation
for his having destroyed the laws under which they entered
upon their occupation. He could read them hundreds of
extracts from the speeches of Sir Robert Peel, as strongly
upholding protective policy, as any to which hon. gentle-
men opposite had alluded, as having been delivered by
members of the Government. Hundreds and thousands of
farmers who have adhered to his poli tics, whilst implicitly
trusting him, had been driven to a premature grave, or had
been irreparably ruined. (Cheers, and laughter.) He for
one, therefore, would never be a party to a resolution
which declared that the happiness of the people and the
prosperity of the country had been the result of free trade ;
for he did not believe it. But he would say, that after
the country had been appealed to with the understanding
that its response was to determine whether they were to
have free trade or not, he felt bound to bow to the opinion
so expressed, and which was said to be against him.
(Hear, hear.) However, he would not abandon the field if
he could not leave it with the honours of war, or without
being hooted at as he went out. (Cheers.) As to the re-
signation of Ministers, he felt that the destruction of the
Government would be one of the most unhappy events that
could occur. (Laughter.) When Sir Robert Peel threw
over his party, and sent down to poverty thousands of his
adherents, who cherished and almost adored him, multi-
tudes of them were obliged to violate the kindliest feelings
of our nature, and to withdraw from him the attachment
they had hitherto cordially yielded. Not so Lord Derby.
Was there a word of reproach that any of them could utter
against Lord Derby ? (Ironical cheers.) When the histo-
rian came to write of those two men, he would say that the
one went down reprobated and condemned by those who
were his nearest friends, but that the other, amidst the
distress, the clouds, and the tempests which obscured his
political horizon, had not lost the sincere attachment of
any one of his friends. (Cries of "Oh," and laughter.)
He acknowledged that they were completely beaten, but
Englishmen did not scalp their fallen adversaries as Indians
did, and it was for them to show that nobility of conduct
which would certainly have been manifested towards them
had they been unsuccessful.
Mr. PHILLIMORE begged leave to state, very briefly,
the reasons which would induce him to vote in favour of
the resolution of the hon. member for Wolverhampton.
He regretted very much that hon. gentlemen should be so
far carried away by their feelings as to speak with disre-
spect of one whose memory they should all revere. How-
ever they might differ from Sir Robert Peel, it was hardly
generous to remark upon that portion of his conduct which
was most liable to exception ; for what was there in the
conduct of Sir Robert Peel that had not been exceded
He
that of honourable members opposite ? (Cheers.) He
would only observe farther, that they were a free-trade
Parliament, and that they required to have a free-trade
Government to direct their proceedings. (Hear.)
Mr. G. BENTINCR said that as he hai the honour of
representing one of the most important agricultural dis-
tricts in the kingdom, he trusted the house would con-
sider him not trespassing if he made a few observations
on the subject under consideration. (Hear, hear.) The
honourable gentleman the member for Middlesex, after
administering a good deal of advice to the right honourable
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and recom-
mending him to take his physic like a man, proceeded to
animadvert on the position of honourable members on
that (Mr. Bentinck's) side of the house, who had hitherto
maintained Protectionist principles. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. gentleman said, that some gentlemen on that (the
Ministerial) side of the house were so circumstanced, that
they must either support the Government or give their vote
milligshhtambeelfiuelvseilien existence neethe elle(Mr
to take either course. The hon. member for Middlesex
nce. Bofentthinecdik)ffilastnieostindiswpohiscehd
the
o
party were placed, but he (Mr. Bentinck)
eclat Judmus non ego." (Derision.) He
wuiPdr
hisot say,cc
speech,itopist er
was not in the:
house when the hon. member for Manchester
made
but he had been informed that the hon.
gentleman had
quoted a s ech of his (Mr. Bentinck's).,
The hon. gentleman seemed to doubt the accuracy of the
pe
report of that speech. He (Mr. Bentinck) was not able to
say whether he was correctly or incorrectly reported ; but
whatever he had said, whether correctly or incorrectly, he
was ready and prepared to maintain it in that house.
(Boisterous merriment.) He was prepared to rest the
defence of the Protectionist principles which he now held
on the arguments of the late Sir Robert Peel, of the noble
lord the member for London, and upon the written and
spoken, and glowing and brilliant eloquence of the right
hon. baronet the member for Carlisle. (Ministerial cheers.)
He well remembered the time when those high authorities
treated as little better than lunatics any man who advo-
cated the total repeal of the corn laws. (Hear, hear, from
the Ministerialists.) What would be the consequence, if
the carrying of the motion of the hon. member for Wol-
verhampton would have the effect of removing her Ma-
jesty's Ministers ? (Oh oh;
that this motion was brought
oh; and laughter from the Opposi-
tion.) He could not be
forward in a fair and straightforward spirit. It was not
brought forward to defend a principle, but to upset an Ad-
ministration. (Hear hear, from the rn Government
no other reason for it than
sup-
Niters.)
tio n ? ? (Hear,
could hear.)
assign Niters.) After the Speech from the Throne—after the de-
claration of the Prime Minister—after the clear and lucid
tshtaeteaemgeenrtaospf
irtahteioringfhotr hon. the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, could any one think the p n danger
principle of free trade was
cea
If not, what was the object of
the motion
on the part of the hon. gen-
tlemen opposite. (Loud cries of " Divide, divide," which
lasted for several minutes.) If hon. members of the Man-
chester school were once in office, they would not only pull
down the aristocracy, but all the institutions in church and
state. (Divide, divide.)
Sir W. P. WOOD said an hon. gentleman opposite had
stated most truly, that that which had at all times created
the greatest disgust at the Opposition side of the house was
an ambiguity of expression. He (Sir W. P. Wood) had
felt extreme disgust at the ambiguity of the language em-
ployed by the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer
the other night. He (Sir W. P. Wood) felt deeply humi-
liated at the right hon. gentleman's appreciation of the
moral sentiments of the houie, in supposing that he could

_
be tolerated in asserting, in the presence of so many
honourable gentlemen, that the line of conduct ho had
hitherto pursued, was the accepting of free trade as an
established fact. (Hear, hear.) An hon. member had
referred to the distinguished supporters of the late Sir
Robert Peel, as having used powerful arguments in favour

of protection, but dici it never occur to that hon. gentle-

man that those distinguished men had separated from the

present supporters of -Governme4 for the very purpose of

carrying out free-trade principles ? (Cheers.) The hon.
member for Cambridgeshire, in a manly and straightfor-
ward speech (and it was a comfort in those days, to hear a
straightforward speech), stated that the calamities more
dreadful than had ever been recounted, had resulted from
free trade. According to him the farmers were annihilated
by hundreds, and the peasantry expatriated in shiploads.
and yet he stated, in the conclusion of his discourse, that
he had come to the resolution to support a Government
which had determined to carry out that policy. (Loud
cheers from the Opposition.) The right honourable gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer said he was willing
to bow to the decision of the majority, but surely it was
not by bowing to the decision of majorities that any great
statesman made his way in this country. He (Sir
William Page Wood) belonged to a family some members
of which sat in that house for twenty-eight years, and
during the whole of that time were in a minority. They
never bowed to majorities, but adhering to principle, they
at last found themselves in a powerful majority. (Hear,
hear.) He would tell that hon. gentleman to whom he
referred that if the policy he bowed to was fraught with
the mischief he had described—if ruin and beggary fol-
lowed in its train—if under it the farmers and agricultural
labourers of England sunk down broken-hearted—did he
think himself fulfilling his duty to his constituents by sup-
porting a Ministry who now promised to maintain it ?
What was the position in which they were placed with re-
ference to the resolution before them ? Thit resolution had
been met by an amendment proposed by the right honour-
able gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had
finally adopted the resolution suggested by the noble lord
the member for Tiverton (Lord Palmerston). As far as
the resolution was concerned, he could state that the
greatest pains were taken of making it as little offensive as
possible. (Laughter from the Opposition.) After the
course which the right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) had thought proper to pursue, he (Sir P.
Wood) did feel surprise at the resolution being treated as a
factious movement. It did appear that, by some means, a
resolution was procured in Downing-street, and it was said
it was then resolved to adhere to the resolution. (No, no.)
Yes, it was understood that it was agreed to accept the re-
solution. But then three odious words were added, and-
these were, that the measure was just, wise, and beneficial.
(Hear.) Now, they had heard that night that these words
were proposed by the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) long be-
fore the resolution came into the hands of Government.
Now, if they had had the noble lord's resolution (Lord Pal-
, merston's) with the addition proposed by the hon. baronet
(Sir James Graham), the house might have adopted it.
They had, however, to choose between the two before
them, and by rejecting the resolution of the honour-
able member for Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers), because it
contained the words professing the measure of free
trade to be just, wise, and beneficial, and adopting the
amendment, they would be deciding that the policy which
they accepted by the amendment was not just, nor wise,
nor beneficial. (Ministerial cheers.) Besides, the noble
lord's resolution, which had been adopted by Ministers,
went on to say that free-trade policy should be extended—
so that the Chancellor of the. Exchequer, by that resolu-
tion, not only adopted free trade, but had consented to ex-
tend it—(hear, hear)—and in that way had agreed to ex-
tend a policy which he believed to be neither wise, nor just,
nor beneficial. (Ministerial cheers.) The only argument
he (Sir P. Wood) had heard used against the adoption of
the words in question was that it was not gentlemanly.
(A laugh.) Now, his lordship's (Lord Palmerston's) gen-
tlemanly demeanour was known, by means of his diplo-
matic intercourse, throughout the whole of Europe ; but
they were not met to bandy compliments when they were
assembled there to discuss a great public question. (Hear,
hear.) He held it to be a matter of great importance
that a legislative assembly should have a high character
for integrity, and a Government also ; and at the present
time it was a matter of the highest moment how
public men conducted themselves. It had been at-
tempted to tell them that no such thing as a Protec-
tionist party existed since 1846. Were all the meet-
ings and speeches since that time to go for nothing ?
(Hear, hear.) They were told they were to go for nothing,
and that they (the Ministry) were about to adopt a policy
which they had previously reprobated. (Hear, hear.) Now
there was great danger to the character of public men by
the exhibition of such conduct. (Hear, hear.) The Go-
vernment came into power in consequence of their being
so active—as a great united party, banded together on ono
great point, namely, protection. Their whole energies
were directed to obtaining such majorities as made
it impossible for the late Ministers to carry on the
Government. They knew it would never do to propose
measures to do away with free trade. They singled out
individual members of the Government. If a member
sat in one house he was attacked in another, when he was
not present to answer. Who would ever forget that in that
way they attacked the noble lord (Palmerston), that in that
way they attacked Lord Torrington. and that in that way
they attacked the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ?—(hear,
hear)—and in that way they contemplated an attack on the
noble earl (Earl Grey), which did not come on. But the
object was to force individual members out of the Govern-
ment. But what did these hon. members do when
they came into office ? One noble said he had no
principles at all, but that he had confidence in the Earl of
Derby. Now at what time had he confidence in that noble
earl ? Was it when he was a member of the Reform Go-
vernment in 1832, or was it at the time he sat with Sir Ro-
bert Peel, or when he left that ministry ? In 1851 the
noble earl was still a Protectionist, and when he came into
power he said he would go to the country and see what the
country would say. Was that conduct for a minister go-
verning a great country. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir P. Wood)
had no objection to go to the country, but a Government
should be able to say what principles they were prepared
to carry out. Instead of that they found a continual mis-
leading of the public mind. The hon. and learned gentle-
man then referred to the speech which the noble earl at
the head of the Government made at the Mansion-house,
for the purpose of counteracting the damaging effect of
speeches made by members of his party elsewhere, and
said it was important, in consequence of the notions
entertained by some of the agriculturists, that the
question before them should be directly met. (Cries
of " Question, question, divide.") He thought he
was speaking to the very essence of the question. He
was not sorry that the question was brought to this
point. He believed that one result of a compromise would
have been that the people of the country would have felt
that they were not honest on the question of free trade.
(Hear, hear.) They ought to show that they had no com-
munity of feeling with her Majesty's Government on the
subject of free trade. They were there upon the requisi-
tion of honest men, and it was their duty to act in a straight-
forward and manly manner upon the great question in re-
ference to which they were called together. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON rose amids cries of " Divide." He
claimed the indulgence of
_the house while he addressed
them, and he could assure them he would only do so
a few moments. (Hear, hear.) He should not have
done so had it not been for the observations addressed
to him by the honourable gentleman who had just sat
down. He had nothing much to say on the question
before the house. After what had taken place k between
the noble lord the member for Tiverton and the Govern-
ment, and after the course pursued by the noble lord the
member for London, he could not address the house in the
language and with the spirit which he should have done if
he had spoken before these proposals were made to the
house. The discussion as it stood was not creditable to the
house. (Hear, hear.) There was, in fact no question
before the house. The only object honourable gentlemen
seemed to have was to try how they could cast more or
less vituperation on that side of the house. (Hear.)
They appeared only anxious to secure the insertion of
words in a motion which might give pain to honourable
gentlemen who differed from them. The Government
met them fairly and frankly, they admitted that, the
country was against them, and if they were contented with
the admission of the fact, they would have adopted the
amendment of the noble lord the member for
Tiverton. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) Although
he entertained strong opinions upon the policy of free
trade, he yet bowed to the opinion of the country respect-
ing it ; . but when pressed upon this point he could not
agree that free trade was a wise, a just, and a beneficial
measure. (Opposition cheers.) It was very easy to judge
of a subject after the result. But on a general question of
commercial policy, it was a difficult matter to decide as to
its value when first brought forward for consideration.
(Hear, hear.) Honourable gentlemen on his side of the
house said that if the corn laws were passed there would
be no gold left in the coffers of the Bank. (A laugh.) And
yet there was now more gold in the Bank than was ever
there before. (Hear, hear.) Well, but the advocates of
the abolition of the corn laws made some equally extra-
vagant assertions. He mentioned these things to show the
difficulty which existed in arriving at a correct conclusion
on questions of commercial policy. (Hear, hear.) In 1846
he was in favour of a fixed duty, but that proposal would
not be received by any class of politicians at that time.
(Hear.) However right the abolition of the corn laws
might be, it was absurd to say that it had not produced
distress to some parties. The sugar duties had caused dis-
tress to certain interests, and the abolition of the corn
laws had caused distress among the agriculturists, for he
knew men who had been comfortable farmers who were
now glad to find employment as day labourers. (Hear,
hear.) His friends treated the Free-trade question as a
labourer's question ; and he admitted that they were mis-
taken in the views they had taken on the subject. (Hear,
hear.) But even admitting that the labourers were bet-
tered by the success of the Free-trade policy, it was still a
question whether the labourers were to be benefited at the
expense of other classes. Honourable gentlemen on. the
opposite side of the house could not fall back upon their
constituency in respect to this question. He had fre-
quently gone into the lobby with the right hon. baronet in
support of protection, and up to 1841 Lord John Russell
was in favour of a fixed duty. Although he opposed Sir
Robert Peel in 1846, he always respected that distinguished
person. He challenged any one on the opposite side of the
house, or anywhere else, to point out what he had ever
done or said inconsistent with what he now stated. (A
voice—" Sugar.") He knew who was interrupting him ;
but he could tell that honourable member that he would
find, when the time came, he was never more mistaken in
his life than he was as to what were his intentions in
regard to that system. He was now, however, speaking
about the corn laws, and he had always held that after the
change which had taken place, it would have been im-
possible to have retraced their steps, unless they set them-
selves up as indifferent to the voice of the country. The
hon. and learned gentleman who last addressed the house
alluded to the noble earl at the head of the Government in
terms which he was sorry to hear him use. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. gentleman said that the noble earl accepted power
without a principle. He could only treat such a declaration
as an absurdity in itself. . (Loud cheers.) He thought it
unworthy of the hon. and learned gentlemen to have used
it, for he did not believe that ever any statesman enun-
ciated principles more distinct—(laughter from the Oppo-
sition benches)—or more worthy of his high and noble
character, than the Earl of Derby. (Cheers from the
Ministerial benches.) Then the honourable and learned
gentleman had asked, but he thought he would have with
greater propriety put the question to those behind him,
why had such a resolution been brought forward ? Now,'
the noble lord, the member for London, had said that the
ambiguity of the Queen's Speech, in respect to the free-
trade question, justified the introduction of such a resolu-
tion, but to his mind nothing could be more intelligible than
the paragraph of her Majesty's Speech in reference to that
subject, and therefore there was no need of any such reso
tion. He had his fears, however, that there were other
reasons for the introduction of that resolution at the present
time, and he had his suspicions that it was the same
reso-
lution with which the present Government was threatened
in April last, and that it was now brought forward for the
purpose of combining the four distinct parties on the oppo-
sition side of the house against the Government, this be'ingthe only subject on which they could be combined for such
a purpose. (Cheers and laughter.) The great object was
to get such a resolution brought forward before Govern-
ment enumerated their measures, but he was glad to say
the good sense of the House of Commons had deprived the
party who introduced it from affecting the Government in
that respect, and he had no doubt that• it would be re-
jected by the house by a large majority. (Cheers.)
Mr. MILNER GIBSON then moved the adjournment
of the debate, which was adjourned to this day (Friday.)
The house then adjotumed A a quarter to ono o'clock,