The Sun.
London, England, 1839-03-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MARCH 15, 183 g.

to be an importing country, so her re-impoverization by the
withdrawal of the protection must replace her, as regarded
the manufactures of England, in the same position which
she occupied previous to her original destitution.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) But leaving aside the narrow-minded view
of the question, and looking at tit- interests of Ireland apart,
from those of Great Britain, (if indeed it were possible to re-
gard the interest of one integral portion of the Empire apart
from the remainder)—but consi&ring it solely on the ground so
' often admitted, that Irish prosperity was the best guarantee for
British tranquillity—(Hear, hear)—it ♦vas impossible to ob-
serve without satisfaction, the effect which the encouragement
of agriculture had litd during the last thirty years upon every
department of the internal economy of Ireland. The demand
for her produce had naturally given an impetus at once to the
improvement of her inland navigation, and other modes of
communication • and to her Channel shipping employed between
her ports and those of England. So lately as 1816 Ireland had
not a single steam-vessel.

Steam-vessels. Tons.
In 1317 she had 1 of 63
1825 3 198
1830 31 5,490
1816 71 13,460
and this irrespective of the enormous tonnage in steam
belonging to England and to Scotland, and chiefly oc-
cupied in the Irish Channel trade. To capital thus
vested, and to enterprize of this kind the abolition of the
Corn-laws would be absolute destruction.—( Hear, hear.)
As t• the internal communication of Ireland, although her
railroad were yet only in contemplation, the anxiety with which
t!:ey hare been projected was at least evidence of the confidence
of the country in Bee means •f traffic by which they were to be
ultimately supported. But her canals, which for so great a
length of time were regarded as exploded speculations, seemed
to have received, from the increase of her agricultural produc-
tion, a revival and encouragement which promised shortly
to render them sources of private as well as national wealth.
On the grand canal, which communicated between Dublin and
the Shannon, there were c3rried in
Flour. Grain. Meal. Malt. Cattle.
1822.... 9,805 tons 14,347 tons 2,075 2,967 - 10
18.36.... 28,378 22,255 4,533 4,862 1,912

The same result seemed likely to attend on the enterprise of
opening up the navigation of the Shannon ; thus providing a
market in Great 13rii_ain for produce •f the rich but hitherto
neglected country t-rough which that magnificent river flowed.
The boats of the Inland Navigation Company carried on the
Shannon, in
1826.... 2,004 tons of agricultural produce.
4'330. 11,027
1836.... 47,28 fl
And Limerick, which had by this undertaking become
the central depot for the export of Irish produce
to England, had experienced in trade and exports a corre-
sponding increase during the same brief period.—( Hear. )
Not only would the repeal of the Corn-laws have the instant
effect of checking all further improvement in those means for
the advancement of Ireland, which were already in existence—
not only would it repress all attempts at investment or enter-
prise in steam shipping in the Channel, in canals and still water
navigation—:n opening up rivers, and in extending railroads,
but it would effectually prevent all further progress in that
speculation which has ever been looked forward to as one of the
most instant and permanent remedies for over population, and
all the evils which flowed from it in Ireland, namely, the re-
claiming of the bogs and uncultivated lands which abounded in
the provinces of Connaught and of Munster. By the calcula-
tion of Mr. Griffiths, for the Poor-law Commissioners, it ap-
peared that there were 14,603,000 acres at present under cul-
tivation, and 5,340,000 more which were more or less suscep-
tible of it, and which year by year, as the demand for agricul-
tural produce increased, were gradually yielding to the plough.
This huge and unexplored resource must of course be for ever
locked up, should Parliament declare for the future that the
Continent, and not Irelend, was to have the supply of England's
increasing demands. And if the fourteen and a half million
acres which were at present but imperfectly tilled, afforded a
support, such as it was, to a population of 7,767,400, it would
not be much to expect that the five millions yet to be reclaimed,
if they did not snpply an equal resource for a proportionate
amount of additional population, would at least contribute, by
affording a fresh location for the superabundant labour of the
present day, to augment the comforts of the present inhabitants
whilst it added to the general wealth and production of the nation.
The prospect of such a result must be for ever abandoned,
once the stimulus and the means for its accomplishment were
withdrawn by the abolition of the Corn-laws. Even the im-
provements of our present Irish backward and imperfect state of
agricultural science must be despaired ef. Further outlay on
the land would become impossible; draining, fencing, and
reclamation would be suspended; nor would there be a possibility
of getting rid of the half human hovels which now dis-
graced, and the still less human habits which were peculiar to
them, by the abandoned hope of seeing the introduction of a
better class of farm-b iildings than those which now encum-
bered the earth in Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) Nor would the mis-
chief end with the destruction of the market for grain and
white crops in Ireland. 'The abolitionists declared as one of
their principles, that the effect of tlle Corn-laws in England
had been to bring into cultivation for corn cold and secondary
soils, which would have been better left for pasture, but which,
as a more remunerative crop, had been ploughed for tillage.
They traced as one of the causes of the increased price of
grain the increased cost of raising it off these ungenial soils—
and they proposed that the effect of the repeal should be to
return them again to pasture as before.--( Hear, hear. ) With-
out debating that point, he asked in such an event what was to
become of the demand for the live stock and provisions now
loading in every steamer which crosses the Irish Channel for
Scotland, Liverpool, or Bristol?—( Hear, hear.) Of course the
demand for these would cease along with the market for her
corn, when England was driven to supply herself with live
stock from her own pastures, and to import her corn from the
Baltic and the Continent of Europe. In fact it were impossi-
ble to conceive that department of the national resources of Ire-
land, which would not be paralysed and impeded by the measure.
Even that long:vexed, and, as he hoped, now finally settled ques-
tion, the adjustment of Irish Tithes, must be instantly re-opened,
on the passing of such a Bill. The present composition for
tithes in Ireland was originally calculated on the corn averages
of the years preceding its introduction, and on the security
that such a standard would not be superseded by subsequent
legislation. Could the occupier of the land, with diminished
prices and a closing market, afford to perform his contract
with the Clergy under the existing law ?—(Hear, hear.)
The thing would be impossible ; especially when we con-
ceived (if we could conceive) the immense masses of agricul-
tural labourers who wouLi he driven from the soil to seek em-
ployment amongst the manufacturing population of the towns,
and who, after swamping and destroying them, would fall
back upon the last resource—the poor-rates of the district,
which were to be levied compulsorily off the already over-
burthened, impoverished farmer.--( Hear, hear.) And again,
looking to the landlords themselves and their liabilities—what,
if they diminished the income from the land, was to become
of the annuitants, the mortgagees, and trustees, to settle-
ments which, on the faith of a permanent security, had been
effected upon the landed interests of Ireland ?—( Hear.) These
to the last shilling must be discharged, though the diminution of
the occupier's income should not leave another shilling in his pos-
session ? And what, he should wish to know,in such an event,would
become of the provincial importer, the small retailer, and the
tradesman of Ireland, -.hose very existence was dependant
upon the home consumption of the landed interest and resident
proprietary ? What was to be the effect upon property itself in
the towns of Ireland, where wharfs and stores, and offices and
dwellings. now derived their value and demand from the traffic
between the coast and the interior ?—( Hear, hear.) Would a
reduction in the price of foreign grain, and a readier supply
from a distant market, recompense England for the ruin of an
integral portion of her own dominions? Or were we Quite sure
that having destroyed our supply at home, we should always
find a Continental substitute, in quantity as plentiful, and on
terms as moderate? Were we quite certain that our Continen-
tal neighbours, emulous as they were of becoming manufactu-
rers like ourselves, might net one day attain their object, and of
course, diminishing their agricultural as they multiplied their
manufacturing power, raise the price of that grain which was to
be for the common supply of themselves and us, to a pitch that
we might no longer be able to afford to purchase at.—( Hear,
hear.) And on what resource are we to fall back, when our
own granary was destroyed at home? Again, would the people
of the Continent, in return for our free admission of their grain,
consent to admit the entry of British produce without a pro-
hibitory duty? Would they agree to a free trade in everything
else as well as in corn ? Or rather, would they not, as the
United States had already done, permit us to take their raw
produce ; but when we returned it to them in the state of British
manufacture, raise it only with such a duty as would be an
exclusion in any country in which labour was moderately cheap?
He ( Mr. E. Torment) had to apologise to the House for the
length at which he had entered into these details—( Cheers)—
but feeling as he did that the question, whatever might be its
importance in England, was one of life and death in Ireland, he
could not reconcile it with his duty to give a silent vote upon
it. We should remember that in this matter we were not
dealing with a colony or a conquered province, but with an in-
timate and important portion of the British empire, and whilst
corn was as much a staple in Ireland as timber was to Canada,
or sugar to the Indies, he could not reconcile it either to policy
or to justice, that Ireland should be postponed to either of
those colonies, withholding from her the same protection which
was accorded to them, and to which she had if not a paramount,
at least an equal claim.—(Cheers. )

Sir HENRY PARNELL gave great credit to the Hon.
Member for Belfast for the talent and research displayed in his
speech—but he thought he might be permitted to say that the
most of his facts did not bear precisely on the main question.
He thought Ireland would have nothing like so much to appre-
hend from a repeal of the Corn-laws as the Hon. Member would
have the Hou e believe. Tinder tiny circumstances, Ireland, by
her proximity to Liverpool, and other of our own ports, would
have an advantage of at least ss. a quarter over the foreign
produce, in sending corn to England. The average price of
corn in this country had been falling since the Act of 1815.
During the first six years it had been 31. 155., during the next
ten years 3/., during the last six years 21. 10s. a quarter.
But putting that even against this moderate price, the cost at
which foreign corn could be landed on our shores, it would be
found that the landed interest could' not possibly be effected to
such an injurious eitent by a repeal of the existing laws as they
had beed led to suppose. He would refer to the same high au-
thority quoted by the Hon. Member for Belfast (Mr.
loch) to show that taking an average of nine years' wheat. could
not be exported from Dantzic to England at less than 445. or
455. a quarter. From liamburgh it might arrive at 365., but
the quality would be much inferior to that of Dantzic wheat.
From Odessa it might be lower still—but then the quality
would be still worse. He thought that wheat from Poland,
shipped from .Dantzie, could not, affording allowance for
carting, freight, damage, &c. reach England under 50s. aquarter.
He found by reference to Mr. M'Culloch's work on this sub-
ject, that the utmost possible quantity of corn that could be ex-
pected to be exported to this country from Dantzic, did not ex-
ceed (as we understood the Hon. Baronet to say) 30,000 quar-
ters, that the utmost that could be expected from Odessa did
not exceed 40 ',OOO quarters a-year, that in fact the utmost
possible importation of corn that could take place into this coun-
try, did not exceed 700,000 quarters annually, and considering
what was the consumption of corn in this country, this quantity
would produce very little effect in the way of injuring the
landed interest. On the last •ccasiori on which the United
States in consequence of a scarcity, had to import cern, the
price of foreign corn in that country in bond amounted to 70s. ;
therefore the charge would be reduced little or nothing, which
he believed would be the state of the case, and that the landed
proprietors, and the home producers of corn, would sustain little
injury by the admission of foreign cern into our ports. He
would now remark on one curious charge which had taken
place under the operations of the existing Corn-laws. He
alluded to the great reductions which had taken place
in the price of the home produce. He would ask how this
circumstance could be explained. The averageprice of corn under
the operation of the laws had been gradually reduced from
31. 15s. a quarter, to 50s. a quarter. This could only be ac-
counted for by the great increase which had taxen place in the
production of corn in this country ; and this increase had taken
place in the face of a great increase of the population. This must
be swing to the great improvement which had taken place in
cultivation. Was it reasonable to suppose we should stop
where we were ? Great improvements would yet take place in
England. And in Ireland, which now sent 3,000,000 quarters
to th,s country, the system of alternate crops had not been in-
troduced. When that improvement took place, Ireland would
export treble the quantity—( Hear, hear)—and he had no doubt
that if the Scotch method of hnsbandry were introduced into
England, there would be an immense increase on the present
production of the soil. There was reason also to suppose that
the effect of the new law for the commutation of tithes would
also produce a considerable addition to the produce of
the soil. Therefore the mischief the agriculturists ap-
prehended from a repeal of the Corn-laws would be reduced

to nothing in consequence of the increased production of the
soil. He was not inclined to impute to the Corn-laws all
the evils which had been imputed to them. In fact, in 1814
he had advocated a protective duty because he had bell ved
its effect would be to increase the investment of capital in land,
and that an increased investment of capital in land would pro-
duce the same effect which it had done in manufactures, a di-
munition in price. The Hon. Member here quoted from his
speech on this subject in 1814, in proof of this assertion. His
object, therefore, had always been to produce a diminution in
price. Taking this question as affecting the country at large,
no doubt a great evil had resulted from the Corn-laws, in
wasting the capital of the country. If, instead of sending cot-
ton goods to Poland to the amount of 1,0001., and getting corn
in exchange, goods to the amount of 1,500 i. were required to
purchase the same quantity of corn of the home producer, here
was a clear waste of the capital of the country to the amount of
500/. by forcing inferior soils into cultivation. Another evil
of these laws was the forcing the price higher than it would
be. Now the proper object of commercial legislation should
be to diminish the cost of production so as to enable every con-
sumer to purchase at the lowest possible rate, and no commer-
cial system was worthy of support that did not effect this obct.
All these evils originated in the .Corn-laws, and how
were the people at large compensated for this exclusive
evil, the fact was these laws benefited the landed interest ex-
clusively, no other class derived benefit from them but the
landlords ; and it was a great error to say either that farmers or
labourers were benefited by them. With regard to the ques- .
ton of taxation, which pressed OR the landed interest, it was a
fallacy to say that the general taxation of the country raised
the price of corn mere than any other produce. In order to
justify the imposition of a countervailing, duty, it was neces-
sary that they should show that some tax pressed directly upon
the production of core. Now the Land-tax, which had been
mentioned, fell upon rent and not upon corn; the tithes also
fell upon rent, and did not increase the price of the production
of corn. The Poor-rates certainly partially fell upon corn,
but the greater part of them did not do so. In 1b33 no less
than three millions fell upon public buildings, mills, and facto-
ries, and a great. portion o i the Poor-rates fell in
.fact upon the
rent. The Road-rates, he would admit, fell upon corn ; but
if they were minutely examined, so as to ascertain what would
be the proper degree of taxation to impose upon the impor-
tation of foreign corn, it would .be found that these rates did
not amount to more than four or five millions ; and if this were
equally divided upon the whole value ofthe corn produced in this
country, it would not amount to more than Is. or 2s. per quarter.
The mere he examined this subject the more he was convinced
of the correctness of the views be entertained of it. Gentle-
men opposite entertained very erroneous views on this subject.
If they considered what was best for the prosperity of the
country, they would not adhere.to the present system. The
present system of the Corn-laws wasted the capital of the
country; the prosperity of the country depended upon its wealth,
and its wealth depended upon the facilities possessed by the
capital of the country for its augmentation. He should, there-
fore, eppose the continuance of the present system.—( Hear.)
Lord MAIDSTONE protested against this system of porta-
naciously bringing this question before the House. He hoped
Hon. _Members would say all they had to say on this subject
during the present debate, and if the question were proposed
again, it would be disposed of by a silent vote ; but he had
thought that a majority of 200 had decided this question
last Session, but in consequence of a temporary rise in the
price of corn, it was again brought forward.—(Hear.) In
the House those laws had been discussed philosophically, but
out of the House it had been denominated the Bread-tax, and
and a system of robbing the poor for the benefit of the rich—
an insult to God—an injury to man. Now, it would not be diffi-
cult to prove that it was none of these things, but that it was a
just protection to the producer of food within our own boundaries,
so as to render us totally independent of any foreign state, an ad-
vantage which would be cheaply purchased at the price of millions.
The effect of the present system had been to lower the price,
and to make it steadier. Who is as it who cried out for a repeal
of the Corn-iaws ? Not the working classes, but the manufac-
turers, and more especially the master manufacturers.—( Hear,
hear ) At this moment commerce was allowed to be in a very
flourishing state.
Mr. T. ATT WOOD—No, no,—certainly not. (The sonor-
ous tone of voice in which the Hon. Member gave this denial,
created great laughter.)
Viscount MAIDSTONE said, that were it otherwise, he
might entertain more favourably the request that was now
made for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Any one who went into
the manufacturing districts (and he had been there very lately)
could see the luxuries that pervaded them.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Witness the enormous wealth of the Chamber of
Commerce at Manchester. He maintained the manufacturing
districts were doing well. The effect of the repeal would be to
add fifteen or twenty per cent. to the profits of the manufacturers
which were already large enough, to take it from those who
could scarcely make any profit, and entirely to destroy and ruin
the agricultural interest.—( Cries of " Hear, hear, hear.")
If the manufacturers' profits were decreasing, that might be
attributed to their own folly in sending machinery to foreign
countries. The Hon. Member for Wolverhampton had put
the question in a very different point of view to that in which
it had hitherto been argued. Formerly it assumed the garb
of a boon to the manufacturers, but now it was said the agri-
culturists were to benefit more than any other class by the re-
peal, but he thought it would be difficult to persuade the
agriculturists of this.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman
had admitted that only one class could be injured by the re-
peal; that class would be the landlords, for the Hon. Member
hinted that the landlords would have to reduce their rents one
half. Why were the landlords, who formed a large portion of
the community, to be injured more than any other class ?
( Hear, hear.) He wished the Hon. Member was himself a
landed proprietor—he had acted rather scurvily towards the
agriculturists, and he wished that sonic one would leave the
Hon. Member a landed property--( Hear, hear, from Mr.
Villiers, and laughter)—and then perhaps he would find that
he was wrong in some of his particulars. He would find that
lan:fiords were in difficulty and distress, and that he would not
only have to return rent occasionally, but would have to come
to a permanent reduction. Had the Honourable Member not
heard of rents being reduced 45 per cent. since the war ?
Then the Hon. Baronet who seconded the. motion, said that
in the agricultural districts the Newspapers were crowded with
accidents, of suicides committed by farmers; but. he (Viscount
Maidstone) contended that the plan proposed by the Hon.
Baronet would counteract any such calamity as that, for, if
adopted, there would be no farmers to commit suicide at all.
—( Great laughter.) They would thereby destroy at one blow
the whole of the agricultural interest, and would destroy the
commercial interests, for they would lead into the commercial
community an influx of men, who would work for anything
rather than starve.—( Hear, hear.) It was a very easy mat-
ter with the machinery now used to work in some of the
manufactories, and he thought that he himself could work at
one of the mills as well as a person that'had been brought up
to it all his life.—(Laughter.) Then:who was the.persons who
would gain by the repeal of the Corn,laws ? Only the w.aster.;
manufacturer—not the operative at all. He would call upon
them to come forward in their true colours, and state that they
only wished to have a slice from the capital of the landed in-
terest. Repealing the Corn-laws would virtually have the
effect of transferring a large portion of the capital of the landed
interest into the capital of the manufacturers.-( Hear, hear. )
Having attacked Hon. Geittlemen, which he hoped they would
excuse him for doing—( Hear, hear)—he came at last to the
Government, and lee wished to know why they had made this
great and important question an open question.—( Hear, hear.)
He rather thought it was not an open question, because he be-
lieved that every one of the Members of the Government in
that House would vote against the agricultural interest.—
( Cheers, and counter cheers.) The present Government
might be compared to Meg Merrities' soup, in Guy Manner-
ing—it was composed of every description of game.—
(Laughter.) That composition might make very good soup,
but it did not make a very good Government.—( Cheers and
laughter.) What was the use of having a Government, unless
they brought forward great plans and adhered to them.—
( Hear, hear.) He believed that neither the Repealers nor
the anti-Repealers were satisfied with the Government—
( Hear, hear.) If he looked to the proceedings of the Delegates
he found that they were far more angry, and spoke in less mea-
sured terms of the conduct of the Government than the agri-
culturist did.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He looked forward
to the time when not only this uuestion but
other questions would be discussed in a different manner
and when the Government would take a straightforward course,
and hang together. —( Great laughter and cheering.) He would
venture to say, that if a Government were composed of those
who sat on his side of the House, their conduct would be more
straightforward and statesmanlike on this subject, and on every
other.--( Hear, hear. )
Mr. WARD commenced by saying, that the Noble Lord
who had just sat down was entitled, as one of our future heredi-
tary Legislators, to be heard with the utmost respect and at-
tention, and he believed the good feeling of the House had given
him that indulgence which he was entitled to. But he differed
with the Noble Lord on every point in his speech. He differed
with him as to the finality in legislation, and he doubted whe-
ther by any possibility the decision to which the House could
arrive that night, of which decision he believed very little doubt
was entertained, would be final. The House of Commons was
in point of fact a packed Jury, and were not likely to come to a
fair conclusion on this question, although they might come to a
foregone conclusion.—( Hear, hear. ) He also differed with
the Noble Lord in his prognostications of evil to the landed
interests, and although he concurred with him in wishing
that the Government had taken a unitedGovero partat
on this question, yet he should be sorrytose
altogether.—(Hear,
e a
in power who would put a veto upon it
hear.) He congratulated the House on
the aspect which the
Corn-law question had now assumed. It was a question that
could no longer be met with silence, contempt,
(Hear, hear. It was now a question
and Hon. Gents. had shown their sense
mustoftheclia b
change argued,
geinthe
position of the country, by meeting it is a more fair and rational
manner than when a sort of apathy on the subject existed out of
doors. The time would soon arrive when landowners, happily for
Hisli opinions
tteawk.taken
the country, if not too late for themselves, would come to the con-
clusion that this question must be settled in the only way in which
it could be settled, namely, by reconsidering the question, and
adapting the Corn-laws to the altered situation of the com-
munity at large.—(Cheers.) His own opinions on this subject
had voted
, with
htece.
inaBsl3el.3'ibig,
Dearing
Nr,
illenrgoenc'oonl:
conclu-
sive
the
considerationsliVnen ne‘v
tto
had undergone the greatest postsiieblecoc,hnailge.t
the question, and unaware of I
the question involved, lie
opposite, the Member for the 1 embroke Burghs, thinking the
argumentstothlei e
existence
ecocide:cc:ft ipne .
inhcuislisapreebenhrth
MSC as
landed interests. Since that time, he had turned his attention
life, he had
to the subject, NS hich into hdios, humbleforbe shpanderieearo.f)
the. utmost inducement 0 no prospects for
opinions hagd
ed by representing amanufacturin
himself and children, independent of land.—
had not been affect
for it was well known .
with
that his change of
his connection Sheffield, and that that
place long before
mainly brought about by that very change.
connection was
He conceived the plea alleged by
—(Hear, hear.)
t. lin, the tax, was a the Right
Hon. Baronet for con in , plea that could
and that there was no burthe
not be maintained ;n on the
justified them in taxing the c
agriculturists which
which the agriculturistsorn'lunity at
large. Any advantage
trade and from our manufactures.
was
gained from our foreign • ur manufactures.
Therefore it was a financial policy to injure our manufactures.
There might have been exaggeration in
—( Hear, hear.) some
produced by the manufacturers,' and lie
portions of the case
1
regretted that very much
? uch because he thought the manufac-
turers injured themselves by sonic facts they had breug
the whole character it forward.
No man could doubt that
of
our exports.
had undergone a
total change within tho last five years ; and
raw material was rapidly becoming that in most cases the
article. The Hon
sub-
stituted for the manufactured Member for
with respect to that to .
Leeds had proved this
a town which harp last night.
He (Mr. Ward) represented not the ad-
vantageto aid it in its schemes'
of that machinery.
nee nhabitants, subsist' of. i ndestry_
a town containine 12, 1 . . ,
~subsisting entirely on the
' facturing industry, and suffering snore produce of their manu g se-
t system than the
verely under the resent inhabitants of those
asil the character of
towns which could change c Y , . their exports,
to a great degree, their and could thus maintain, foreign trade.
The inhabitants of Sheffield found themselves driven out of most
of the markets which they had formerlyte
ls hardware rednjnYed. In America,
which formerly took five-eights of
w"e
of Sheffield, tho
quantity of orders was diminishing year by year, and the only
commodity now findini,
e its war, to any extent, into the Ame-
rican market was the steel, which was then worked up by the
American manufacturers. The Sheffield manufacturers found
• t them becoming every the competition evensyear more
severe.—( Hear, hear, hear.) They had
Ward) a return of several
supplied the world, in which, in spite of
the most extraordinary
reductions in price, 65 and 70 per cent. in some cases, they
found it now impossible to pay n.
their workmen. He NS ould
mention one or two of the most striking cases. They formerly
supplied America with circular steel saws, in those articles
1 there had been a reduction already of 65 per cent ; and in axes

their trade had entirely ceased ; wages had been greatly re-
duced, still the manufacturers were unable te keep up the com-
petition. With these facts before them, his (Mr. Ward's) con-
stituents were entitled to say, as they had in the petition which
they had sent to that House against the Corn-laws,
that, with every national advantage, with a. full com-
mand of water, with steam power, with coal in abund-
ance, with the necessaries to manufacturing industry
almost under their feet, they still found themselves met
and overcome at every step by the obnoxious Corn-laws.—
(Hear, hear.) Gentlemen who held land in the neighbour-
hood of manufacturing towns, would find their interest in-
fluenced by every thing affecting the trade of those towns._
(Hear, hear.) In a community like this it was impossible to
raw a line of demarkatiorabetweea one interest and another.
The prosperity if the landed interests could only be secured by
the prosperity of the community at large—( Hear, hear)--and
that prosperity could only be secured—additional value to the
produce of the land, could only be given by creating a
continually increasing demand for it upon the part of a
flourishing trading community.—(Hear, hear.) It was said
that the repeal of the Corn-laws would tend to reduce the
prices. On the contrary; he (Mr. Ward) did net believe that
the Corn-laws produced high prices in this country—he be-
lieved in spits of the repeal of the Corn-laws, there would be
high prices. If the landed interests could have kept up the
price of corn in 1814 at 80s. per quarter, which was the
avowed intention of the Corn-law of 1815, our prices would
have been reduced to the continental level, for the whole of
our foreign trade would have been lost.—(Hear, hear,
hear.) Now as to the effect of the Corn-laws upon
the landlords themselves, he would just remind the House,
that in the year 1835, in January, the price of corn was 365.
a quarter ; in January, 1839, the price was 84s. An Hon.
Gentleman had alleged that a free trade would be dangerous,
because it had been tried in Tuscany and failed, and the Hon.
Gentleman had appealed to Dr. Bowring's authority. But the
Hon. Member could only have read Dr. Bowring's report very
slightly, for though he had quoted the report accurately enough
as to the fluctuation of prices, he had omitted the fact that
those fluctuations—from two to nineteen, and from three
to twenty, in one year—that these variations did not take
place under free trade, but under the old monopolising
system, and before the introduction of a free trade in corn,
which after it had been tried, was found to be immeasurably
superior, for under it commerce had revived and population in-
creased—the export trade introduced, the agriculturists relieved
from the evils of those enormous fluctuations to which they
were formerly subject.—( Hear, hear.) The question as be-
tween the landlords and the tenantry had been so much argued
that he (Mr. W.) would not have alluded to it, had it not been
for a statement of the Noble Lord the Member for Shropshire
last night, that the interests of the landlord and the tenant were
always identical—and that this system of the Corn-laws was
one in which the labourers were chiefly interested. —( Hear,
hear.) Now the result of his (Mr. Ward's) inqui-
ries had been to lead him to the conclusion that the
interests of the tenants and the landlords were perfectly distinct
upon this question. It was the clearest possible case that the
price at which agricultural produce was sold in our markets
must be the guide by which the landlord estimated his rent—
and that to the tenants steadiness of price was the chief object.
The question then was whether the tenants had estimated
rightly their interests in this question. He (Mr. W.) agreed
with his Hon. Friend, the Member for Wolverhampton in his
opinion as to the tenantry of England, than whom there could
not be found a class more honourable, and more intelligent in
their own sphere. But their sphere was a contracted one—
they looked to their own business and to nothing else, they ex-
ercised a degree of credulity as to everything that the land-
lords, and the landlords' Parliament recommended to them,
which he, (Mr. W,) deeply regretted—they believed in the
possibility of keeping up prices by Act of Parliament. Many of
them meddled with the hocus pocus of the currency—
a great many of them talked of " remunerating
prices"—whien were much spoken of in that House. What
was meant by the phrase " remunerat prices ?" Remuner-
ating for good husbandry or for bad?-(An Hon. Member on
the Opposition side cried out " for both.") A remunerating
price for bad husbandry !—(Hear, hear)—to protect those
who had not common industry aid intelligence ! A remu-
nerating price—for England or for Scotland'? They were two
very different things.—( Hear, hear.) Looking to the evidence
before the Agricultural Committee of 1836 he found in it the
most important discrepancy between the evidence given en this
subject by the English and by the Scotch farmers. Tke English
farmers stated that farms were thrown up—that there could be
no profitable cultivation of wheat under 645. a quarter—that
there was a const nt diminution in the numbers of agricultural
labourers. But in Scotland, with a poorer soil and a worse cli-
mate, there was found a competition for land, agriculture stea-
dily improving, and draining of a most expensive kind—un-
known in England, unless under prices most unprecedentedly
high—and the Scotch farmer stated that he thought 40s. a
quarter a remunerating price. Ought not this to induce the
House to believe that the tampering with prices, in which Par-
liament had been so much in the habit of indulging, was a very
dangerous kind of experiment—( Hear, hear)—and that mo-
nopoly itself was ineffectual when applied to agriculture, unless
you could destroy the surplus produce of the land in very good
years ? Nor was he (Mr. W.) starting an imaginary theory—
the destruction of the produce by way of enhancing the prices
under the present system of Corn-laws, had been gravely re-
commended to the agricultural interests as a proiciple upon
which they could uniformly act—in Mr. Senior's letters to the
agricultural interests, recommending that the influential land-
lords of the country should destroy the surplus of very abundant
crops—feed sheep with corn, whenever the price was low, and
never use any substitute for corn.—( Hear, hear.) But then
the rest of the community were told that when by this
process prices had been established which remunerated the
farmer, corn would be grown sufficient to satisfy all de-
mands.—(Hear, hear.) The idea of a factitious scarcity
in a country teeming with inhabitants, and dependent
upon foreign trade, and exposed to a severe competition in its
manufactures with the rest of the world, such an idea was the
wildest that could be possibly entertained, and could not fail, if
attempted to be carried out, to produce the most awful convul-
tions.—( Hear, hear.) There was no extravagance of which
men might not he guilty when they came to talk of remune-
rating prices, fixed by Acts oil Parliament.—( Hear, bear. )
There had been another pamphlet published, entitled " An Ap-
peal to the Conservative Party"—the author of which was evi-
dently wild for " remunerating prices"—and which denounced
the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) as the most
dangerous enemy to the community, and that the only hope of
salvation to the country was in a union between the land aris-
tocracy and the working classes, upon three conditions-Ist, the
repeal of Peel's Currency Bill—(Hear,from Mr. Thos. Attwood)
—the repeal of the free trade system, and of the trade in ma-
chinery and inventions, and of this society Mr. Cayley's Agricul-
tural Association might form an admirable nuelens.--( Laughter. )
Again, they were told that the present was a farmers' qnestion.
It was almost tine to abandon that fallacy—it was a landlords'
question, clearly, entirely, and exclusively.—(No, no, and
cheers.) That was his deliberate opinion. Could any Hou. '
Gentleman show him a reduction in the farmers, profits without
a corresponding reduction in the price of land ? There had been
great exaggeration as to the effects which were likely to be pro-
duced by a change in the present system. He, for one, was no
believer in the statement that England would be flooded and
inundated by the immense quantity of corn which would be im-
ported if the ports were opened. Corn was a bulky article, and
vessels could only carry a limited cargo, and the distance from
which it would be imported was considerable. Let them look
to the countries to which they were likely to have re-
course—France, with its population of twenty-seven or
thirty miilions, and its minute divisions of land,
would never be an exporting country to any ex-
tent. Although from the nature of the country in Spain
a great deal of corn was grown there, and although the plains of
Castile were the finest corn growing districts in the world, they
could never be rendered available from the went of canals and
other means of transport. Then as to Belgium and Holland
they had little to fear from those countries. Sweden and Nor-
way did not grow enough for themselves, and then they came to
the ports of the Baltic and Russia, and what was the fact with
respect to these places? The largest imports that had ever taken
place were in the year 1802, 1810, and 1818, and the average
price at Dantzic was 645. per quarter. In 1802 the exports
from Dantzic amounted to 687,000 quarters, in 1810 they were
450,000 Quarters, and in 1818 the exports were 337,769 quar-
ters. The average exports for eleven years from Dantzic
were 314,000 quarters. The whole quantity of corn
exported from Dantzic in a period of 166 years amounted
in round numbers to 19,000,000 quarters. Mr. Jacob, from
whose work he quoted, stated that it required ten years of un-
exampled prosperity to enable Poland, between the years 1801
and 1805 to export 500,000 quarters of. wheat. If they looked
back to the average of prices in these places from 1791 to 1831
they would find that it amounted to 455. 11d. a quarter. For
a long series of years the first cost at Warsaw was 2sis., and at
Cracow 225. ; and the charges from the port of Dantzic ave-
raged from 21s. to 235. It was therefOre almost certain that
corn could not be imported from Dantzic under 455. It might
be said, and no doubt there wag, a large quantity about Odessa;
but then the distance of that
_port, and the risk and injury
attending its transport, would be always a protection
to a certain extent te the English corn growers.
Wheat was now at a very low price at Odessa, but the moment
the English came into the market, and threw their great de-
mand into the limited supply, it was impossible to conjecture
er i
n tahsa n t o
part stock,
of
the prices at which it could be imported.
ri'li e w
no farming implements, and a scanty population
the Russian empire ; and the distance and the difficulty of
transport ensured to the English landholder all the advantages
thoy could reasonably require. On the other hand the English
farmer had the richest market in the world at their doors—
they had capital, skill, enterprise, and the industry of one of the
finest populations in the world—(Hear, hear)—and he
could not see how such a competition could give rise
to the exaggerated apprehensions which he knew many
gentlemen of the landed interest conscientiously entertained.
The:import of foreign corn might increase, but the House would
recollect that they had seven millions of mouths to supply more
than they had in 1815 ; and could anybody who knew how the
progress of population was checked by the Corn-laws, calcu-
late how rapid the increase would be when these reseraints
were removed, and fair play given to the natural capabilities
the country ?—( Hear.) There was not an article consumed
by the landholders that was not materially affected by the price
of corn. He had put the narrow and selfish considerations
which the landlords might be supposed to entertain first; but
the moral and political considerations were of far greater
importance.—( Hear.) The Honourable Member for Nor-
folk had ridiculed the idea of depending upon foreign countries,
but his arguments had been refuted in the same breath, for he
admitted that Napoleon in 1810 had been forced te allow his
own Generals to smuggle corn cut of France, because the popu-
lation required to be supplied with British manufactures.
—( Hear, hear.) By being dependent on foreign powers, peace
was preserved; and the best security for the preservation of peace
with a great northern power was in the fact that the Russian
landholders world not allow their traffic in corn to be inter-
rupted.—(Hesr, hear.) What prevented the boundary ques-
tion between the state of Maine and the province of New
Brunswick from terminating in serious results? It was the
probability of the loss of the immense trade between England
and the United States. There was a greater community of in-
terest between the employer and the employed than some H in.
Members were willing to admit; and it was well known that
when there wag a great fluctuation in price wages followed and
very slowly.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member then' read
some returns of the wages paid to agricultural labourers in
Hertfordshire, Essex, Cambridge, Sussex, and Surrey, to
show that the increase had been very trifling, Added to
the Corn-laws there was the operation of the Poor-laws,
with which the former was altogether incompatible, and which
threw the labourer on his own resources, vrhilo the Corn-
laws did not allow him to employ his labour to the best advan-
tage. One of the arguments used by landed proprietors was,
that they were too heavily and unequally taxed ; but if that
was the ease, the proper way would be to revise the whole sys-
tem of taxation of the country. He would take the liberty of
reading to the House an extract from a statement made by a
manufacturing operative at what was called the Convention of
Delegates of the Working Classes. There was no violence in
it—it was framed in the spirit of deep and just complaint, and
contained nothing which they ought not to hear. The Hon.
Member then read the statement, purporting to be from a
hand-loom weaver of Preston. It stated, that the utmost

wages a man could earn•was ss. or 6s. a week, hut the casu-
alties of life were wholly nuprovided for, And that. bad work, or
sickness for even a day, would reduce him to a state of starva-
tion—that- he was frequently two or three days without food
provided, or any knowledge of the means by which it could be
obtained, and his meals were frequently made upon a little
meal, a few potatoes, or a few pence obtained by Way of loan.
On the Wednesday, as he had nothing to do, he was completely
destitute ; his feelings were now most poignant, not so much
on account of his own sufferings as of those of his wife, who had
a strong healthy baby at her breast, who sucked the stronger
because it had no other food. During the night he found his

wife had fainted, and he shook oat the few remaining grains
from the meal-bag and made some water-gruel, which he verily
believed had saved her life.—( Hear, hear.) Now he knew that
it was not in the power of the House to relieve the whole of
this suffering, but if it could be shown that the minutest por-
tion of this suffering was ascribable to a law which the wealthy
aristocracy of England declared to be necessary for their
support, in what position was that aristocracy placed?—
( Hear, hear, hear.) Why, it occupied the position which
had been occupied by the old French Noblesse before the
revolution.—( Oh! oh ! from the Opposition benches, responded
to by cheers from the Ministerial side of the House. ) They
claimed an exemption from their fair share of taxation--and
where was that nobility now? It had been said that the people
were devoted to the institutions of the country, he believed the
people of this country to be a loyal and faithful people,
—( Hear, hear)—but there was great truth in the
observations of Mr. Carlyle, on this subject in his history
of the French revolution. He asked, speaking of the people of
France at that time, what was the Constitution to them ? Breed
to eat was what they wanted. His unprejudiced opinion was
that the landed interest of this country were placing themselves
in a most dangerous position by refusing to give up this tax of
2d. upon every loaf consumed by the poor man._(" Ne ! no !"
answered by cheers !) He would not follow this subject further,
but he felt the vote he was about te give this night was not only
founded in justice, but was in fact an act of self-preservation,
depending as he did solely upon the land, and he felt that if the
House came to the decision they ought on this subject, that
decision would not only be dictated by principles of justice but
by sonnd common sense.—( Cheers.)
. Sir JAS. GRAHAM rose with great reluctance ; he would
not have addressed the House on this subject had not his name
been alluded to in the course of the debate. He considered this
question of such vast importance, so large and extensive in its
bearings on the national interests, that he confessed he was
unable to grapple with it, and almost shrunk from the discus-
sion. He considered that it was at all times most dangerous
for the Legislature to attempt any alterations in the
established laws regulating- the supply of food to the
people. Because it was a subject calculated to excite
the minds of the people more especially, and when the price
of food was high, thus making it additionally dangerous to legis-
late en the subject.—( Hear, hear.) He would refer to the
speech of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, who had just sat
down, to prove the truth of this assertion. That Hon. Gentle-
man had chosen to compare the state of France before the
Revolution to the present state of England; and the aristocracy
a England to the aristocracy of France at that period. Was
not this a most inflammatory representation?—( Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets had talked of the
increased pressure from without. The landlords had been held
up by the promoters of this question as the oppressors of the
people. The possessors of the soil were a powerful body, and
they were also an honourable body. If it could be shown that
any of the burdens on land had been diminished, they might be
induced to re-consider the subject. They would be ready to
listen to reason ; but those would find their mistake who
thought they could make them fear.—(Loud cheering from the
Opposition side of the House.) If a struggle were provoked,
the present possessors of the land might sink in the struggle,
but the land would still remain.—(Cheers.) But what would
become of the manufacturers? They would make to themselves
wings, and fly away to those happier regions where no political
passions prevailed.—( Hear, hear.) But if it was the duty of
the Legislature not, to agitate this subject, still more was
it the duty of the Government to put a stop to
any disposition to legislate upon it. What then was
his astonishment to hear the speech of the President of the
Board of Trade encouraging this agitation.--( Hear, hear.) A
speech well worthy the Member for Manchester, but utterly
unworthy a Minister of the Crown ; and which seemed to give
some authenticity to the report, which he (Sir J. G.) could
scarcely believe, although it was current in the north, that that
Right Hon. Gentleman at the close of his visit to his consti-
tuency last year, had requested them to work the Corn-laws.
He wished to draw the attention of these Gentlemen who sup-
ported Government on this subject—and if they still continued
that support, their eyes must be blinded that they could not see
—their ears must be deafened that they would not hear, by
party spirit—and they must labour under awful de-
lusion, from which they could only be awakened by
the loss of their estates. He was bound to say
that those who brought forward that question had explained
their views explicitly enough,--they were as much opposed to a
fixed duty as to the present system; but no one could gather
from the speech of the President of the Board of Trade, or of
the Secretary of War, what were the intentions of her Ma-
jesty's Government on going into Committee. In fast he
thought they intended it as a fishing Committee, to take the
chance of what might happen, being perfectly satisfied if they
could procure a few stray votes. In fact, with one alteration
the line applied by Pope to the human mind might be applied
to the present Government. It was
" A mighty maze, but ALL without a plan."
He distinctly asked the Noble Lord opposite what were the in-
tentions of her Majesty's Government on this subject. The
opinion of Lord Melbourne was well known.—(Here the
Honourable Member read an extract from Lord Mel-
bourne's speech of last year in favour of the Corn-laws.)
It had been said that this was an open question under Lord
Grey's Government, and he denied this as far as he was con-
cerned. Some Members of that Government, but not of the
Cabinet who had given pledges to their constituents on this sub-
ject, had been permitted to redeem them, but no member of the
Cabinet had voted in favour of a repeal. He would refer to
the speech of Lord Althorp, in 1834, as proof that he (Lord
Althorp) was then voting under duresse. That Noble Lord
said, that he could not speak in favour of those with whom he
was about to rote, because he believed that the other side had
the best of the argument. This would show that Lord Althorp
at least did not consider this an open question. But Lord
Althorp, although he had made a very short speech on this
question, had mad, one distinguished, as all Lord Althorp's
speeches were, by good common sense ; and it was on the
ground of common sense, after all, that this question should
be argued. He had given as a reason fix the vote which he
should be compelled to give on that occasion, that he always
asked himself, before voting for a measure, not only how that
measure was to be carried, but what would be the results to
which that measure would lead.--(Hear, hear, hear.) He
would ask the Noble Lord opposite if he had used the cau-
tion used by Lord Althorp on thatoccasion? He would ask Hon.
' Gentleman opposite what their intentions were with regard to
the price of corn ? Great knowledge of political economy had
been displayed by Hon. Gentlemen opposite in discussing this
subject, but after all they were bound to test it by the prin-
ciples of common sense. What, then, did they intend with re-
gard to the,price of corn ? Some of the Hon. Gentlemen had
stated it was their intention to lower the price of corn, and
others had stated their belief that although a slight fall of price
might at fir,t take place, yet that ultimately the price of corn
would be raised. Those gentlemen who were of this opinion
had some grounds for it, from the fact that in 1776
when a free trade in corn was established in this country
it ceased to be an exporting country—it became an im-
porting country, and what was the effect ? The
effect was to raise the price to 425. a quarter.—( Hear,
hear.) If they raised the price of corn, the effect would be to
raise wages. If wages rose there would be a diminution of
profits, and the diminution of profits was not what the manufac-
turer sought. But let them state frankly that their object was
to lower the price of corn ; let them be more explicit and state
at once that their intention was to lower wages.—(Loud
cheers.) Let the agricultural labourer_ let the manufacturing
labourer understand that the lowering of wages would be cer-
tain, but the ultimate effect on the price of cern uncertain ; and
that when once wages were lowered, the effect of the displace-
ment oflabourwould be to throw among the manufacturing la-
bourers additional hands; and that when the price of corn should
rise, after fourorfive years dependence on foreign supplies, and
large tracts of land should be thrown out of cultivation, it
would be in vain for the unhappy labourer to endeavour to re-
store the price of labour. He argued that this was Alabourer's
question, and his honest judgment and conviction was that no-
thing could be more dangerous to the real interests and future
comfort of the labourer, than the distress which the repeal of
those laws would drag him into.—(Cheers.) Then there was
a talk about equalizing the price of corn. He likedthe letter
from Woburn better than he did the squib fired from Downing-
street, and directed to the Anti-Corn-law Association at
Stroud.—(Cheers.) He agreed with the Noble Lord in the
sentiments he pot forth in the Woburn address, that equalizing
the price would produce wretched ploughs, wretched horses, and
wretched men.—( Cheers and laughter.) If they equalized the
price, he (Sir J. Graham) thought the inevitable consequence
would be, as in all measures of equalization, that they would
have equal beggary, equal wretchedness, and equal want ; for
by some law which prevailed in politics as well as in physics, it
would seem that it was always an easy process to pull down that
which was above, but difficult to raise that which was below—the
effect of the levelling process always was to sink both high and
low somewhere below their original level—that would be the
effect of equalizing prices.—(Cheers.) If thsy succeeded in
lowering the rate of wages they would degrade the cha-
racter of our agricultural labourers. Low prices of wages
and low prices of bread were concomitant with a wretched
and degraded population.—( Hear, hear.) But then they were
told that if they relaxed their Corn-laws they were certain of
gaining advantage from the reciprocity of commercial inter-
course, and sone hope of that sort was held out by the Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade. But the evidence which that
Right Hon. Gentleman produced on this subject was most
meagre.—( Hear, hear.) Ile had thought that the Right Hon.
Gentleman 'would have produced some official documents, or
some declaration on the part of foreign powers to bear out this
statement. But what was the evidence he produced ? Why
three letters from a Mr. APGregor, one of them bearing
slightly on the case of Prussia, and another relating to that
very important corn-growing country, in the eyes of the Hon.
Gentleman, the state of Wirtemburgh. When it was
difficult to answer an argument, nothing was so easy
as to treat it with derision and contempt ; and the danger of
depending on foreign supply had been treated as a fallacy, which
as the Hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Arr. Clay) had
said no rational man entertained, and that it was only an
imaginary danger. Now he (Sir J. Graham) had yet to learn
that Cie danger was imaginary.—(Hear, hear.) He had
heard something of an argument of this kind, that if the
country importing suffered from the loss of the commodity of
corn which it had been accustomed to receive, the country ex-
porting suffered more from the suspension of trade in its chan-
nel of lucrative commerce. He could never refer to this subject
without regarding with the highest deference and respect
the opinions of the late Mr. Huskisson.—( Hear, hear, hear. )
He knqw there was a single passage which had been
quoted as an authority against the Corn-laws in the speech lie
made in 183 Q, but he could' not set that casual expression in a
singles speech in the heat of debate against the whole policy of
Mr. Huskisson's long ministerial life. He remembered that
Mr. Huskisson was a party to the report of the Agricul-
tural • Cotnrnittee of 1821 ; he knew it also from him-
self, and Mr. Jacob was a living witness of the fact that
the present plan was an invention of his own. It was said there
would be a-mutual dependence between the ittmcirt ing country
I and the exporting country. He entreated the House to listen
to what Mr. Huskisson said when Mr. Ricardo urged this
express argument. On May 30, 1820, Mr. Huskisson thus
expressed himself:—" Another object which appeared to him
of great importance was that this country in its peculiar cir-
cumstances should not be dependent to a great extent on foreign
countries for the necessaries of life. The llon. Member for
Portarlington (Mr. Ricardo) had stated that there would be
suffering on both sides if the foreign country attempted to
withhold the supply, but the contest would not be an equal
one. TO the foreign nation the result might be a dimi-
nation of revenue; to us the result might possibly be
great revolution and subversion of the State." That was
in 1820. But in 1827 he laid down this principle, when he
brought forward, with Mr. Canning, the Act t hat :vas now the
lam of the land. He said—" I think nothing is so dangerous
to this country as to rely too largely and too frankly on foreign
countries for a supply of corn. I wish to make this country
independent of the foreigner, commercially as well as politically.
You may rest assured that as long as it is the interest of the
foreigners to produce distress, or to cause no political discom-
fiture, they will endeavour unwearily to do so.' And he then
laid down this general principle—" Whatever arrangement is
made respecting the Corn-laws, we must take care not to put
ourselves in the power of the foreigner."—(Cheers. ) Another
fallacy put forward was still more astounding than the appeal
which had been made to the authority of Mr. Huskisson. It
was no less than this—that the law of 1828 was identical with
the law of 1815. Light to darkness was not more opposed
than these two laws.--( Hear, hear.) In his conscience he
believed that if this country placed itself in a state of depend-
ance on foreign countries for a supply of daily food, these
countries might in seasons of dearth cut off that supply, and
reduce us to a state of subjection. No human legislation
could prevent the occurrence of a deficient harvest, and no
human legislation could prevent a deficient harvest being a na-
tional calamity.—( Hear, hear.) Since the year 1801 he did
not believe that calamity had visited us to the same extent as

it had in the present year; and yet under this law which had
been so much abused, he found from an account of the state of
the market in Mark-lane, last Saturday, within the short space of seven months, no less than 2,500,000 quarters had
aeaa;
brought into the market for home consumption; whereas he
did not believe that in any twelve months, under any other law
snore than 2,000,000 were available. Not only that onr " foreign
supplies from abroad were expected," but according to this
account "already prices were reduced 20 per cent., and the
deficient supply had been met by the largest importation of fo-
reign corn ever known in this country. "—(Hear, hear.) Gen-
tlemen more competent than himself had treated of the manu-
facturing part of the question, but it would appear that our
exports of manufactures in which manual labour entered, had
in this year of extreme scarcity and deficient crops been un-
.
usually large. In no former part of our history, therefore, had
so large a quantityof foreign corn been imported into this ;,roan=
try, or had our exports of manufactures in which
ma:uailabost r
material
entered, been so large as they had been under the
exisstiminigialrawdes
Reference had been made to the dependence of this
count ra for
the staple of the cotton manufacture—for the
ra
upon foreign countries, and Waves( concluded that a
pendence might take place as to the main article of food__
corn. He (Sir J. G.) was happy to see the Right Honour-
able President of the India Board opposite, and he must say, that
looking 'to the situation of this country—looking to the great
amount of capital which was embarked in the cotton trade, and
the immense population dependent upon that manufacture,
and looking to that quarter of the globe from whence the snp-
ply of the raw material was derived, it had never ceased to be
with him an object of paramount anxiety. He had always
wished that in our Indian empire, instead of dangerous at-
tempts to extend our limits, the More wholesome arts of peace
should be studied—that every attention should be paid to the
raising the Cotton plant—to the preparation of it—to the
whole process of rendering it fit for manufacture in
this country, and he did know an object of greater
national importance than emancipating this country from
dependence upon the United States for the supply of cot- .
ton.—(Hear, hear.) But in addition to the raw material of
our own staple manufacture—with our eyes open—to resider
ourselves dependent upon foreign countries for the principal ne-
cessaries of life—would be utter madness--would be fatal to tho
manufactures, to the independence to the prosperity of the em-
pire.—(Loud cheers.) Something had been said as to
the taxes affecting land. Now, in 1833, the poor-
rate and county-rate amounted to 860,0001. a year : and
of this sum there was levied directly upon the land 543,900/.
five-eighths of the whole, and of the remaining three-eighths
paid by dwelling houses, the larger portion was paid by land-
lords or by persons dependent upon agriculture. To take a par-
ticular instance, that of the county of Stafford, in 1792 the
bridges cost 298/., and in 1522 they rest 5,667/. In 1792
the prosecutions cost 102/. In 1832 they cost 6,000/.:ln 1792
the Gaols cost 2601. In 1832 they cost 7,1801.—( Hear, hear. )
He admitted thut the Malt-tax in some measure, nay princi-
pally, pressed upon the consumer; but still it was a tax that
did affect the land, because it enhanced the price of beer,
diminished the demand for malt, lowered the price of barley,
and was in fact pro tanto, as Adam Smith hail stated, a tax
upon barley land, having the same effect as though the barley
land was subject to comparative barrenness—as though the
land which naturally would produce five quarters, would under
this tax only produce three or four. If the Corn-laws were re-
pealed, the Malt-tax could not by human power be retained
another year.—(Hear, hear.) Hon. Gentlemen opposite were ,
certainly very liberal, and said they were willing to give up the
Malt-tax and all protections to their manufactures, if free trade
in corn was established. He ( Sir J. G.) would ask if the
landowners were to be precluded from the growth of tobacco
in this country by a tax of 1,200 per cent ?—( Hear, hear. )
The whole system of our finance would be affected by the
application of such a principle.—(Hear. hear.) In 1826 he
bad written a book upon the subject, from which the Right
Hon. President of the Board of Trade had quoted a decla-
ration in favour of a fixed duty, but the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had marred the passage, both in the English and the
Latin, by his recitation of it—(Laughter)—and Tacitus
himself would not have been recognized under such pronun-
ciation in an assembly of scholars.—( Great laughter.) From
that declaration in favour of fixed duty, he (Sir J.,Graham)
did not wish to shrink—he had certainly recommended a
fixed duty of 15s. a quarter, but he had also proposed a
great alteration in our financial system, and had adopted the
suggestion which he had found in an essay of Hume's, not
the Hon. Member for Kilkenny—(Laughter)—but the celebrated
historian ; that a tax should be imposed upon all annuities
charged upon land or paid out of the Exchequer ; and he begged to ask whether there was inconsistency in having
supported Mr. Huskisson in 1527, when he with Mr. Canning
brought forward a fluctuating scale, in direct opposition to the
law which then prevailed of unrestricted importation. He
supported it in 1827 and in 1828. As Chairman of the Agri-
cultural Committee of 1833, he drew up a Report, which
formed the vindication of the existing law. 'ln 1834 he took
his part, as a Member of Lord Grey's Government, in defence
of that measure ; and in 1836, upon an Agricultural Com-
mittee, he carried it against the Right Hon. President of the
Board of Trade, the Noble Lord the Home Secretary, and
the Secretary at War, who were in favour of a fixed duty.—
( Hear.) But without taking such low ground, he would say
that in 1836 he had written this book, after the great financial
crisis of 1825, when the small note act introduced by Lord Lon-
donderry in 1822 to put off the immediate effect of the mea-
sure of 1619 was about to be repeated-Lhe had argued that the
effect of the restoration of the value of money in so sudden a
manner would be fatal to the agricultural interests—but he had
stated that in questions of currency, time was every thing ; that
what was just in 1826 upon such questions, might in 1839 be-
come fraud and injustice; he was not vain enough
,to think
that there were not many errors in his book, but
he thought he might take the benefit of subseqaant
steady and enlarged experience, and he should hereafter con-
sider himself not bound by that book ; and should express him-
self upon the subjeet freely and without reserve.---(W
ear,
But now he must say, but he could not believeelying as be
en t
near. )
did upon the honour and good faith of the Govern nag
these opinions on this subject, so far as they had
yet botex-
pressed in favour of the alteration, were not of
very recent
growth ; if they were not, he must declare that they had been
guilty of a gross fraud upon the agricaltural interests. Why did
he say so ? In 1535, a measure had been introducedfor the corn-
mutation of Tithes, by the Government, by which it was pro-
vided that a fixed amount should be calculated upon an average
of the prices of seven preceding years. Now, take the case of
a parish, the landlord of which receives 2,000/. in rent—a
fourth of the produce, 8,0001., the tithe for the average of
seven preceding years would be put at 5001., which, when wheat
was at bOs. would be equivalent to 200 quarters of wheat—that
was for ever a fixed, a permament charge on the land. The
effect of the repeal of the Corn-laws would be to throw out of
cultivation half the land ; the landlords' income would be re-
duced from 2,0001. to 1,0001. ; the produce froni 8,0001. to
4,0004 ; and, in fairness, the 500/. Tithe ought to be reduced
to 2501., the 203 qaarters of wheat to 100 quarters ; whereas
the quantity remained the same ; and he (Sir J.' Graham
did in his conscience believe that the result of the repeal of tbe) Corn-laws, combined with the effect of the Tithe Commuta-
tion Act, would be, that in most eases the parson would enter
into ;possession of the estate.—( Hear, hear. Above all,
however, he viewed the operation of the repeal of the Cored
been on Ireland with apprehension—with horror. What had
been the tendency of the measures lately past, affecting that
country ? Last Session the landlord was charged with th pt yt
ment of the tithe, which he had never contemplated ; and he
landlord had been also charged with the payment Of and
alf
the poor rate. No man wag more anxious_ than he, thath the
duties—the important duties--of the landlords sheuldlie disl
charged.—(Hear, hear. ) But he could 'not fcirget that;
in Ireland, the most religious discharge, of such duties
,was
no security against assassination.(Hear, hear.) What would
be the effect of the 'repeal of the' Corn:laws in that' country?
Polish wheat would be introduced into'England instead of,lrish
wheat. The Irish tenant would no longer be able to pay rent.
Ejectment in Ireland was impossible; -and the -result would be
an agrarian law, giving over the estates to the occupiers, to the
exclusion of the landlords, who Would become outcasts. in so-
ciety.—(Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to the conapaaativo
variations of the pekes of corn. From 1802 to 1.806; the fluc-
tuation was as 100 per cent. ; from 1807 to 1811,•74 per cent.;
from 1812. to 1816, 183 per cent. ; from 1817 to 1821, 143 per,
cent. ; from 1822 to 1826, 81 per cent. Now came the operation
of the existing law—from 1828 to 1833 the variation was but 49,
per cent. the lowest ever known in this country.--(Hear. )
And from 1833 to 1836 the highest price was 565. 6d.—the
lowest 365. 6d., the only variation 19 per cent. As to the
present year, of course a deficient harvest would cause great
variation of rice.—(Hear, hear.) A fixed duty would not
produce steadiness of price. In New York there was a fixed
lars
duty of Bs. 4d. on the importation of cern. Let the House
listen to the following statement. It appearealfB3ro6m,
6
Tables, that the prices of a barrel of flour was in 1834, 5- dol-
lars, 25 cents, in 1835, 4 dollars, 87 cents, in
3 cents, in 1837, 11 dollars. Nor was this unusual,. for in
1816 it was nine dollars; in 1817 it was thirteen dollars; in
1818 it was ten dollars ; in 1829 it was eight dollars ;'in 1830
it was four dollars; in Is3l it was six dollars—a degree of
variation unknown under the Corn-laws of this counts.)
(Hear, hear, hear.) But it was urged that the price of
duce in this country would- not be raised to the extent of which
the agriculturists were afraid. The immediate effect would be
the throwing out of cultivation the inferior soils: But the Ulti-
mate effect would be a large increase in the price of corn from
foreign supply being depended upon in place of British. l Every
year he lived he was more distrustful of speculative opinions,
and mere inclined to look to the results of experience had forti-
fied the expectations of the Committee of 1536, we believe.
The Right Hors. Gentleman then read the amendment, which
it was his intention to move on that occasion, and proceeded.
Subsequent experience had confirmed him in the views he had
then taken, and if the House only let well alone, it would
found that this country could continue altogether independent
of foreign supplies. He now came to the most important part
of the subject, and that •was the displacement of agricultural
labour by land going out of cultivation. What would be the
effect of throwing the land out of cultivation ? Oh ! it had
been said "you can convert it into grasi." He feared the
result would be the tame as was produced by the tithe adjustment
in Ireland—that the working classes would be the greatest
'sufferers, and that want, discontent, and he feared insurrection
t
would inevitably follow.—( Hear, hear). It was alleged that
it was only a diversion of capital into newaresdechannel,
and nt ef the
and the Right Hon. Gentleman,
attachment.r vaa
Bcommodityoard of Trade,
withou t had
habits twes lmadsoo
country to
eor injury. .t how much_suf- •
f and gently
atedaffected
awnhoitchhermight withoutbe transported from one part
Boil
fweorirndgs. and
T he sorrow
changelaj, utnhdaetr
A change
the
manners, habits, and even the life of he
•
fo
ttrhhoe,fhemstttOelliai soft, and
these men.:
President
oetfinl'ae.bo
morn"
g
" The breezy ca
11 of incense breath'
more cruel cersld not be attempted from
to the sad sound of the factory bell. A change from the
and the village green, thatched cottage, the blooming garden,
crowded city. A change from the rural walk, and the calm
1 to the pestilential debasement
to some dark garret or dark a cellar in the noisy alley of
and temptations aal sorrows of congregated multitudes.—
were all their moralists? Talk not to him
(Hear.) Where
enjoyment a the rustic Ssbbat
of Mauritius—they contemplated a change far
f tne banishment of the Poles to Siberia, or the export of
Hill Coolies to t
more cruel and heart-rending in the bosom of their native
land. The measure which they contemplated to-night was per.
haps the first step in that direction.—(Cheers.) The y wished to
make England the workshop of the world, and dependent upon
distant nations for the supply of their daily bread. They would
not mend'in that, but if they did, he agreed with his Noble
in the • T I world h . should wish to inhabit. The present
Friend Lord Ashburnham, that England was the last country
civi isec
e
was the first st*, and he agreed with Lord Melbourne, that
next to the e consequent upon
the change was the fear of
:he change itse .
' Ile would give his cordial and deeided oppea
eition to the motion.—(Loud cheers.
he had the honour
had heard the u of the
Lord J. RUSSELL—Long as of a seat
frequently as ho a
d it had never happened to him to address
subject. He had preferred to listen to others
the House on the
iCnortnil-altaell-soduisseci'isse
whom he thought more competent to address the House, and
instruct
rather than it by the examination of the various details, as " as e theea at principles of the question
a part in the discussion himself. He therefore entered upon
the discussion with great diffidence, and he had a further
reason
, to deter him from addressing the House, because he could not
agree with either of the two parties who took extreme views
upon the subject. When Mr. Canning, in 1827, brought for-
ward his measure upon the subject, he saidathe extreme views -
on it were the total prohibition of foreign corn and an entire.
free trade. That was not now the case ; they had on one side
the proposition of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, and
on the other side there was the proposition to maintain the ex-
isting laws. He could not agree with either of those, and
therefore he feared what he bad to say would receive
very little favour from the great majority of the House. The

Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Pembroke stated that
in 1822, he (Lord J. R.) had written a letter to his consti-
tuents containing opinions different from these on which he was
about togive his vote, In that respect, he was consoled by
reflecting that the Right Hon. Gentlemen had himself stated
that he was no longer bound to adhere to the opinions he had
expressed his judgment, havingheen ianztrnved by experience
and retteetion. hliFadmittcd that justification, acid he was glad
to find that tee Right Hoe. Getitlanalisliaderecelved-s° much'
sympathy froM his side of the House—(cheers)—in claiming
exemptian from that opiiiionon 26;8 but to assert that he (Sir
James Graham) was not bound by these opinions.of 1826, and
that her ( Lord John Russell) was boiind by his.ohinion of 1822,.
would be to eXchide from hint these lights of experience from
reflection,' and was rattler a hard measure of justice.--
( Hear, hear, hear.) There was a great painter in that.:
country who, after travelling through foreign lands, examined
a pair.thig done in his early life, and Was mortified to find that
he hail not made Mitch progress in the art. He (Lord J, R. )
hoped he would /let have to feel that mortification. He had
Cr tam some este erience from his reflection, since he had given
that opinion henestly• and conscientiously. Another oh:ma-
t:on !save him some encouragement in, the opinione. he, had
firmed,- and if -,t- appeared to.him that the ._burdens .upon the
laed Ind been increased, that was an argumeht fee reconsidering
t. e ,urescnt scale of duties. H e contendeddhit when the agri-
cultural classes were in a state_ of distress, it was not deeirablo to
.e..tee mai any cousse oflegiSlation that might aggravate these
distresseee The ' operatiOn of the New Poor-law Act, to
which allusion had - been made had tended to diminish
the bertlien "upon land ; and he knew one gentleman of
gehet respectability', who had stated that he could obtain three,
years more purellase for his land than previously. It had been
asserted that the present was a season of extreme scarcity. He
( Lord .1. Russell) did not consider it' in that light, although he.
admitted that if it had not been, for some fine, weather during
r• • harvest the crop of wheat would here beep far ore injured.
...4 :leer, and a laugh.) An Hon. Gentleman, the late Mem-
ber for Nottingham, had told him that the yield of wheat in
that part Of the country had been
.remarkably good. If they
feural under such circumstances that wheat had reached a fa-
miereprice, he believed it would be IMPOssible to refuse to le-
g:slate upon the Subject: With respect to the. present Corn-laws,
he differed from those who thought they anewered the object
fur which they were framed. The law previously to 1827, was
a law of prohibition, and Mr. Canning's law was one proposed
on the ground that the principle 'of prohibition should, be
banished from thoirdrade—that 60s. would be a fair reraune-
refine price, and that that would give an average of_from Ms.
to tens. per quarter. His "(Lord J. Russell's). argument was,
that the Bill hid- not answered these expectation--that instead
of that the fluctuation had been from 36e. to Ei.=. up to 82s.—
that inetead of a steady price, it hid been an extremely vari-.
able one—thatinstead of a regular trade in corn, three teurths
of it had been admitted when the duty was une"er 6s. He con-
tereed that if the law "had 'not answered its purposes, they
were bound to get' into Committee, and make some new arrange=
went in oeder to see hem far they could carry out the principles
of Mc. Canning'S measure. If this law had not attained its
objects, than it possessed all the faults of the former, even with-
out its advantages. It obstructed trade, prevented the profit-
able employment of capital, and injured persens for whose be-
nefit it eves it:tended. Iti the first place our manufactures suffered
considerably front the foreign competition, which was rising up
against us. This competition was becomiug more formidable from
year to year, and although no dreadful calamity may hive yet
harreeed to our mandfactitree, but if fon igh manufactures were
to be pettnanently established, diminution would naturally take
place in our martufactuies;and want of emptoyment and starve-
tren would be the ceniequence.--:( No, no, from the Opposition,
and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) If that competition
contirested it Would necessarily reduce ' our.,
,manufacturers
to deenientiou and misery. That competition was greatly in-
creaSed by the operation of the Cernelaws, and that was a rea-,
son for going into Committee on the subject.. A change should
Le made inhhose laws'now, if they. wished .to hold the position
:Ise,/ yet cecunied. It would be vain tp regret the ground; they
It ;l lost in eenseqUence of thtese laws, when their mantifle-
teecs were ruined. —( Hear.) It would be- vain to hope,
'hen we had lost all our manefactures, to re-establish them
hy any change in the Corn-laws';" w,e shoeld find that when °ur-
inary:hat:tures had otiee departed from us, they had departed
from us for ever; . This reason ou.ght,, to. compel us to gd into
`!!f_ f_!)ri§,ideritian at 'the subject at ;epee., There was another •
reeson why thia'sgbject:Sheuld he oew epresidered, it wee ben
cause all reentolitthwere detaitheatal to the monopolists t emu
selvee.l3y probiliit:ng the inaporteetiort,of foreign corn, anJ ine
l• thiehete- tlie herne.eretvers to believe that -the law secueelsa
high mire tohimn you oecasion an paereprodoction, and when
- that telehi -elce; there is no venh,for theeele,of tins surplus wren.
duce, anti cohisequentie the person forswhose.benefit the mono-
poly Wa4ihstitrited snlers by it. Prohibition; had formerly heeri
• • the. generB
,pli`cv Of the counts y, but on the proposition of 111 r. .
•Ilesltiseen a ch antic was propoSed iu this policy tv ith regard teatime
rtieh.S. 'The first of those articles was silk. .The ayes-age
irneertation of raw silk to be., manutaetnred in this country
(1.trin,,,,, the 3:.;(' ai;3 !3,?(), 182], and i;e22, under the prohibitory
st; amourif,',l to 3,621,11 p ;..a,ud in. the three years endlng
1817 hand la.'hs, it amounted to ;5,470,176-, being an M-
e:ea/s of liS eer ethit., on- the raw silk to-be manufactured in
this 'ernintry in consequence of a. renewal of the prohibition. In
gleves, there had brew an increase, of cent. per cent. in eohle--
euentse of- tf,e reineval of the probileition.—( Cries of " Order,
ortier,”'in.cansequenee of the confusion at, the bar. ) In 1776
A rther
.Yetung stated that the French .manufaet urers of earthen.:
ware eihhesiett their fears of . being reined in consequence -of
the free acheresien of 'English earthenware, hut in two years
their fearis''hnd prohea' groundless, and they had been enabled
to titter into successful competition. ' Why' shouki not ;the,
vs ',n-I of a fl xed duty or corn_ , leave, the same effeit.
On the-Silk, gloves, and 'wool, and our earthenware in
nee.. Ile felt convinced that the agriculture of the country
el by nionepoly.
.The agricalture of the country wouldf
rinved, had it not been for this monopoly. That
it sto Set in heed of improvement, was proved by the fact that Lord
Spencer had thought it necessary; tap lace himself at the head of an
ehsesheiat ion, hahingfor its object the ire provementof agrieeltdre.
It treeirnposhible to travel through the country and not see the
vast alifferent method; of arming, and how, improved one part
of ,the &ytthfr v was in cella:arisen with another... These dif-
fereneeS Wehia Le removed, and ,a great,: improvement' take
plaep,in caliscehence ocompetition. One objection that had
been rhatife th a h-ie,;.l of these laces WAS, that ,it would make
reehlepenal'eht tie ihreign nations for a supply. He could riot
nedhistand the au:heel:loh of that argument to a country like'
this. AN 'e should not depend upon oae country only, we film hi'
117*-(‘ the tßole
,t-,crld to eerow corn for us. During the wh le
t,
reveltitionety yrare
_the Lau been enabled to obtain a snpply.,...
'( 11,ra, hear.) Hitt, we had `.2,0,t,c.C.0 of our,population de-
peniittg 'n‘,,,,..milie -4.0; ton manufac:,uce for subsistence, and half a •
reilliorideherrahnt on the sill' meuufactnre. Therefore if Americas
e-e/ 'Prince *lre either weak enough or"wicked-enough to re-
i• ftseenss tillh" sfhp,p4 905, might reduce two millions and a lislA Of '
bnetittthittoirtb `the greatest,distressr 4ut-no fearsneed bed...-
1 ter,. ame el. ori tfici head-their own interests, the interests of airy
i 1 at'P.ige could prevent :thisi., hot it vvas rather late to
, brine. fen-yard the argthneiat, the danger of relying upon foreign'
I tie shells let a supely. It teas, true that foeeign,powers now objetted
j to ftireish us with a supply, unless paid for. in hellion, but if we
estals.haed a regL:l,::r trade with. them no foreign .power would'
refuSe 'to enter into such a trade; and we shOUld
then semi thern- manufactures, instead of bullion. Anb:
. .
flier ohjection stated was, , that bye throwing - lands
‘ .
cut '6l mill:I:elan, the labouring classes - would be deprived
of en-ip'.oyahent, but if Cie population of this country depended
/ .
solely err thesupply, of British corn
.for their subsistence, the
preduction Of that cern shuuld increase in the same ratio as the
poptiletion increased. In the year 1800 the population of Great
Britain 'amounted to 10.900,000, and, in 1839 the population Was
about
,I8,5:1"0, and in four "or five•yearsethe population would '
he-dotible wlras, it Was in 1800.• therefore, the, limluee of the
:toil ought to be double what it ,vres at that periocltomaintainthe
poptiletion without foreign.. saPply.. In the year 1801, when
the corn testea at' 63i. , a quarter, .. foreign corn 'might. be
imported at - a chity of 2s. .6d., which was reduced to
6,1. when 'it reached 663. a quarter, so :_that with a
Pepu?ation of 11,000,066 the low duty. began at: 63.3.; and now
with a rens-hails:in _nearly double. the .I.vi duty does not commende
' until corn Ives 7ls: or 7:2s ..; .);ols, if it,werq dptormined topersevete in 3 ,
thr system a Corn-hws, at least
,let them" go back to the system of '
1801. lie, llizasett; even as far back, as• 1828, had been in favour of a '
fixed duty, bdt lie had bowedtp tho,,authority,of .Mr. Huskision
at that period; bht What 'had passed since had- induced him . to t
revert to Ids:Original opinion, and he. was,not only in favour of
a.--fixed duty,l but of a _considerable reduction iin r the present
rate .5f deft'''. .' The`' Wight 4pnourithle, Baronet, the Mem:-
her for - lienVhahellialecl. to his addresses- to difihrent '
constitheenhichh 'neither ;he coastituency.of.Devonshire, nor the
constitueney?r Stroud hed, when he represented them, objected'
to a fixed rate of duty, although they differed iii opinion 101,6
the amouteaL-( Hear, hear, and a laugh)., "The" Right Hon.
Gentleman had also objected to the Government making any
queStien an op:tel otiestion, but he should have recollected that
there had liters scarcely an administration since 1780 which
had not leech Totecd. to leave several moot important questions
es open quest-Isms. Under the administration of .Pitt and Fox;
Parliarnonfa'6 Referral hail, been an open question. Durs
ine the long administration of ..Mr. Pitt, - the Slave
Trade question
,was. an open one, on which the Minis-
ter himself was enristently ~:in.. a ,minority. -Hader the
ado/mitt tiithEt I,Kl3:.tMs,;,Catigitie: oestion was an'dpen ques-
tient: h Weld 1tod:to_181.2 theyecertairdy hail had a 'united
Aiiininistiation, but be fete= MUM not look back tothat period
with sansfaetlon. Frem 181,2:W1829, the Catholic question was
an open tit:nit:hen apdin,lB27.4r, Tierney and Mr. ,Ahercrohnie
. joitiett thentiistry upon the'.exprests understanding-that they
fwould be 'permitted Si vote in favour of Parliamentary Re-
, , as sufficient to show o etceedingly.diffieult
ir. 'whw ' lied
been conSidered,
be unitel u_ybn :every to form a, Government which shcitiltl
question.'—( Hear. ), It might be
con sideted 'thin-sera nta,eo l u ,-great' Teen 'joitrrheadt
Adenittisietione achee'ln uttese'purtivieriresY. ell' recollected
When Of ode iheaelon he 41-rc,mgnst rated whit Alri, Canning
en his acting in heejelestiereAth ,Gentlemen who-were opposed
. to him on the, quehtioo of. Catholic Ernancipation;--Mr.Canni
had answencd that ' it.he.Weye to lease: hiscalleathes. on act-'
count of htdifihreaee of oliimun regarding the Catholic qtesthin,
he sho Wt.! bd obliged to act with oth ernolleagues who differed with
him en the qhestion Of ParliamEntarr Reform. With respect
to this very qe esiioa of the Cornelaws he recolletteds when he
first enter.d Parliament, that there was an outcry, against Mr.
Rose, who w?.'s at . that time Treasurer. of the Navy,
on acethint of a
rpemphlet he had- . published on
this very (oliestion of the Corn-laws, and vrhieh the ' country
gentle men had clesigeated as seditious. The Right MM.'den-
Alembm who spoke las't, had stated that this question of the
Cetnelaw eras not an oin:n question in 18474.. - -,
-Sir .fl 13 R`Sllll Al—or said}. wailer. Lord Grey's Government.
Lord ,r: 11.1.17,',LL said ',hit this was merely'reducing the
question tea mere dispute of terms. What. Lord- Althorp hail
st-tted'in answer to a piestion at the-.opening of that Session
we-, that it svas not the intention of the Governtnent; as a Go-
vernment, to propose any alteration, in. the Corn-laws ; and in
the debate on thW.subject, at that period, his Hon. Friend, the
President of the !hoard of 'Trade,,, had , distinctly 'stated
that' on this hquestion he was ima•opposition" to . the
ferar 'Lord' Of the Admiralty..-4 Hear, hear, hear. )
if they had /6 members Of the Government voting for that
pre pontiole and 1-1 voli-.lg against it, he did not see how it Nt as
'tube 'Said that That was not an open question: but this he knew,
that my Lord Spencer considered, it was an open question, and
that he, world 'hare considered4it a disgrace to him if he had
gllowcd 16 members holding' o Mee' to veto- against him on
ant citte.stfon that was, not an open question.—( Hear, hear.)
Wire at lesst against the authort!,,v of ruy.Lord Ripon; of the
Duke of Richmouth and of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite
(Sir J. Grrham), he could state that Lord Spencer. was of ;a
different opinion:—(l. ear; hear, and. cries of " There is also
rord tharegham.".) There certaiolv must have been some pro-
vision at that tithe by which .it ;was made a breach of
privileze Si' uhli'Th the debates, ' because if they had . seen the
eteohnerit e.' the lee-Piceidenteuf the, Board, of ,Teide, that
it wet ati e.pen tiod'h ion, and se
that sixteeteMemberef the (.ios
eereeeent egret; for the proposition, the? a have ' mid.
0.-At'll,V, Surely 111-these elembers .are about to res'sen their
offiese, beca.use we ha.he never understood, it-to bea-art ' open
'criestion, and this is contreey to our understanding." There-
fore he most suppose, however elitlieulnit taight, be to me`
srieh a th inn that great cats. was taken that, no stranger
bn in thC
,lalerv, that the debates weee not reporred, and that
th
ene everyerx cats-he-to the knowlecing ef thenfact which- my Lord
Se no:3essed, and as'oci said it' would have been disgraceful
) li u it' the Corn-laws. Were not ,an open question..-.( Hear,
/h•hr. ) Ile sa,hrio reason why, if, that was the 'course adopted
at that' time, that it shaeld t b ..
no e still an -open- nuestion,
cliche': hear. ) Certainly at that time, SOMO bein,,- in favour 'of
1" c"`ll'-', w ,i..(t'onic-against gicsn: it was the opinion of the
Caalli„net,
ataha:t3:it'thotilii be an :ineorivenind time topropese any
he „Ihreht..h_ die 9'd S. Resell) concurred in that view,- but
eth;he;olyheveifintentled'heshouldbe prohibited at any future
lire
.r.,,1.
fig itio operation ot, thosO la\ vs.--( Hear. y
. i.t:; ot,p..roteed,as
hleh-hhhTl. reason, Wtv til:! Gore, nraent cf the nresent day
nee Goverement of that day did, • e'r
thouni
- , ,

Stl, ; t...
1

beeii