The Sun.
London, England, 1839-01-29 00:00:00

was called to the chair. The Mayor baying vacated the

the rest of the nation, are deeply impressed with the con-
viction that any tax on the importation of corn and provisions
must inevitably prove injurious to the landed proprietors
themselves, inasmuch as among other considerations the de-
struction of the manufacturing interests of the country would
leave no other class than the owners of the soil to bear the
entire burdens of the State, and they therefore believe that
only the blindest infatuation can induce landed proprietors to
support taxes on food.

same,—
Mr. R. K. DocoLas, in moving a vote of thanks to the
Mayor, said be congratu!ated the meetiqg on the victory they
had just achieved.—(Loud cheers.) He hoped they would
go home in perfect peace and harmony. They were
all agreed upon one point that the Corn-law was
a bad law—( Hear)—but there was another point
on which they did not exactly agree, and that was as to the
means of getting rid of it.—( Cheers.) Let them maintain
union among themselves ; and he would tell them that if one
thing would have dissevered them more than another, it would
have been the abandonment that day of the plain straight-
forward course of consistency they had pursued.—( Cheers. )
He implored them not to forget what took place last Spring.
They would remember deputations from various parts ot Eng-
land were sent to Glasgow ; that a deputation from Birming-
ham was sant, and that when they returned to Warwickshire
they agreed to a petition by a majority as astounding as that
which they bad just witnessed. He begged of them to hear
what that petition was, and he would ask them with what
sort of consistency could they have agreed to the shallow reso-
lution originally proposed, after having put their hands and
seals to the National Petition.—( Hear, hear, bear.) What
was this National Petition ? It condemned the Corn-laws as
strongly as any petition could, and it contained these words :
" We tell your Honourable House, that the capital of the
master must no longei be deprived of its due profit; that the
labour of the workman must no longer be deprived of its due
reward ; that the laws which make food dear, and those which,
by making money scarce, make labour cheap, must be abo-
lished; that taxation must be made to fall on property, not on
industry; that the good of the many, as it is the only legiti-
mate end, so must it be the sole study of the Government."
Mark what followed, to which 60,000 men and 50,000 women
of Birmingham put their hands :
" As a preliminary essential to these and other requisite
changes—as the means by which alone the interests of the
people can be effectually vindicated and secured, we demand
that those interests be confided to the keeping of the people.
" When the State calls for defenders, when it calls for
money, no consideration of poverty or ignorance can be pleaded
in refusal or delay of the call.
" Required as we are, universally, to support and obey the
laws, nature and reason entitle us to demand that, in the
making of the laws, the universal voice shall be implicitly
listened to.
" We perform the duties of freemen; we must have the
privileges of freemen.
" We demand Universal Suffrage.
" The suffrage, 'o be exempt from the corruption of the
wealthy, and the violence of the powerful, must be secret.
" The assertion of our right necessarily involves the power
of its uncontrolled exercise.
" We ask for the reality of a good, not for its semblance.
" WE DEMAND THE BALLOT.
" The connection between the representatives and the
people to be beneficial must be intimate.
" The legislative and constituent powers, far correction and
fur instruction, ought to be brought into frequent contact.
E roes, which are comparatively light when susceptible
of a speedy popular remedy, may produce the most disastrous
effects when permitted to grow inveterate through years of
compulsory endurance.
" To public safety, as well as pubiic coefidenc-, frequent
Elections are essential.
" WE DEMAND ANNUAL PARLIAMENTS.
" With poser to choose, and freedom in choosing, the
range of our choice mast be unrestricted.
"'We are compelled, by the existing laws, to take for our
representatives men, who are incapable of appreciating our
difficulties, or who have little sympathy with them; merchants
who have retired from trade, and who no longer feel its har-
rassings; proprietors of land, who are alike ignorant of its
evils and their cure ; lawyers, by whom the honours of the
senate are sought after only as a means of obtaining notice in
the courts.
" The labours of a representative, who is sedulous in the
discharge of his duty, are numerous and burdensome.
" It is neither just, nor reasonable, nor safe, that they
should continue to be gratuitously rendered.
" We demand that, in the future election of Members of
your Honourable House, the approbation of the constituency
shall be the sole qualification ; and that, to every representa-
tive so chosen, shall be assigned, out of the public taxes, a
fair and adequate remuneration for the time which he is called
upon to devote to the public service."
This petition was not concocted ina, corner, but:was wafted on
the wings of the Press to every part of the kingdom—it had
been translated into French, and had reached Belgium—it had
been circulated among the National Guardss—and, in fact, it
had gone through more editions, and had been more widely
read than any other document ever published in England.—
( Cheers.) What bad they gone on to say ?
" Finally, we would most earnestly impress on your
Honourable House, that this petition has not been dictated by
any idle love of change; that it springs out of no inconside-
rate attachment to fanciful theories; but that it is the result of
much and long deliberation, and of convictions, which
the events of each succeeding year tend more and more to
strengthen.
" The management of this mighty kingdom has hitherto
been a subject for contending factions to try their selfish ex-
periments upon.
" We have felt the consequences, in our sorrowful experi-
ence—sheet glimmerings of uncertain enjoyment swallowed up
by long and dark seasons of suffering.
" If the self.government of the people should not remove
their distresses, it will at least remove their repinings.
" Universal Suffrage will, and it alone can, bring true and
lasting peace to the nation ; we firmly believe that it will also
bring prosperity."—( Cheers.)
The men of Birmingham bad signed that petition-merely as
a preliminary. The subject of the Corn-laws had at length be-
come the very focus of agitation, and did they believe the
Whigs were not willing to take advantage of it?—( Hear,
hear, hear.) It might be all a Whig trick, and it was well
known they were very anxious to shuffle off another Session.
There wine to he speeches made—witnesses were to give
evidence at the Bar of the House of Commons—the right of
discussing petitions was to be asserted—there were to be
deputations sent here and deputations sent there—subscriptions
from this quarter and subscriptions from that quarter—and in
the end they would shuffle eff in doing nothing.--( Hear,
bear, and laughter.) He had thought it necessary, not hav-
ing spoken on this question before, simply to vindicate their
character for consistency. He would give some of the
gentlemen who had come forward that day credit
fur good motives, but he thought they were a little
mistaken. He was sure there was one feeling they
would all unite in, and that was, to give a vote of thanks to the
first Mayor of Birmingham, for his conduct in the Chair that
day.—( Cheers,) He felt great pride in moving a vote of
thanks to the first Mayor elected by the free constituency of
of that great town, and he was sure that the fair, impartial,
and admirable manner in which he had conducted the meeting
anus: have given satisfaction to all parties.—( Loud cheers.)
Mr. COLLINS seconded the vote of thanks. My friends, I
congratulate you.—( Cheers.) I anticipated from the first
moment that the meeting was announced, what the result of
it would be. I knew the minds of the men of Birmingham.
I knew they never met upon a subject they did not understand.
Knowing that they understood this subject, and were well ac-
quainted with the National Petition which they sent to Parlia-
ment, I could not for a moment suppose, that a majority at any
public meeting would decide contrary to that petition.—
( Cheers.) You have realised my expectations. In conclu-
sion, I have only to say, that I heartily concur in the cube-
gium just bestowed on the worthy Mayor, and that I feel great
pleasure in seconding the vote of thanks.—( Cheers.)
Mr. JOSEPH STURGE—I am sure the vote I am going to ask
at your hands needs no arguments of mine to support it. Be-
fore putting it, however, allow me to say that I hope we shall
all part in perfect good-will, and if any body has made a mis-
take, I hope it will be attributed rather to want of judgment
than to a want of kindly feeling..—(Hear, hear.) I happen
to be one of those, unfortunately perhaps, you will say, who,
riot being a dealer in corn on my own account, am in a pe-
cuniary point of view interested in the high price of grain ;
but I would rather suffer the greatest privations of the humblest
individual in this assembly, than enjoy the most princely for-
tune at the expense of the working classes.—(Cheers.) I can
only say (as I have said before) that however mistaken in
judgment you may suppose me to be, and that however humble
my services may be, yet I shall always be willing to become
your servant.—( Hear, hear.) With these few remarks may
I be allowed to put the resolution which I know will be re-
ceived with acclamation.
The vote of thanks was then put, and carried amid thunders
of applause.
The MAYOR—I most heartily thank you for your kind ap-
proval of my conduct this day. Whether I agree with such
meetings as the present, or whether I do or not, I shall feel it
to be my duty to convene and preside over such meetings,
when properly called for, and at all times to exercise impar-
tiality.—(Cheers.) Gentlemen, I heartily thank you.
Three cheers were then given for the working men, and the
immense assemblage quietly dispersed.

Your petitioners are further convinced that, in proportion
to the activity of commercial intercourse between nation and
nation will be formed a mutual dependence of interest, and,
thence a mutual interchange of good offices, which 'rust
contribute mainly to consolidate and perpetuate universal
peace, an object which must be desired by the Members of
your Hon. House, as well as by all other friends of religion
and humanity.

" Your petitioners therefore pray that your Hon. House
will take the premises into its earliest and most sericus con-
sideration, with a view to the total and immediate abolition of
alit laws restricting the importation of food as unjust in them.
selves, detrimental to the interests of every class in the com-
munity, and calculated to impede the establishment of peace
and good-will among mankind.
" And your petitioners further pray to be heard on the sub-
ject of this their petition, and to adduce evidence in suppert
thereof at the bar of your Hon. House, or in such other way
as to your Hon. House shall appear right."

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.
(YESTERDAY.)

( Continued from The Sun of yesterday.)
Mr. LAUkENCII could not agree with the proposition that
had been put forth, that the lowering the price of corn would
not affect the farmer, because he felt convinced that it would.
Our manufacturers found that their trade was rapidly going
from them, and it was time that they should look about them
and endeavour to discover what might check their pro-
gress to ruin. The eminent manufacturers of Man-
chester had declared that their business in many :arti-
cles was rapidly dwindling away, being superseded
by other nations—and this was owing to the high price of
corn in our country compared with foreign countries. Why,
up to about the year 1770 this was a corn-exporting
country, and it was observable that from the time
when the Corn-laws were imposed, the distress of
agriculture commenced. It was quite just that the agricultural
interests should be protected. Poor-rates pressed more heavily
upon those interests than upon manufactures, and tithe was a
burden which tended to discourage their improvements. But
on the other hand, the agriculturists received benefit from
all the improvements in manufactures, and they ought not
to receive more than their fair share of protection. —( Hear. )
When free-trade was clamoured for, in every department of
commerce, it was right that it, should be recollected that free-
trade meant, in fact, freedom from taxation : and if such
freedom was to be universally established, why some new mode
of answering the exigencies of the State must be devised.
Now, suppose the Corn-laws repealed—the unproductive lands
in this country (which ought never to have been cultivated)
would be thrown out of cultivation. The foreign corn-grower
would take in payment our manufactures. The result of an
increased demand for foreign corn would be to raise the
price ; that would be a " protecting duty" to our own farmers.
—( Hear.) In Dantzic, the price of corn for a long time
averaged forty shillings a quarter, not • such a very low
price.—(Hear, hear, hear.) There must be a heavy
pressure upon the Corn-law makers in the Houses cf
Parliament—to induca them to repeal those laws—
for they, being the landlords; of the corn-growers, would be
unwilling to give up their high rents, and would not do so
unless compelled by some great public demonstration.—( Hear. )
When the price of manufactures was reduced, the agriculturists
would reap the benefit of that, reduction, which would go far to
compensate them for the reduction in the price of corn.—
,
( Hear.) The Hon. Deputy concluded by saying that he
should vote for the motion.

Mr. JourisoN said this question ought to be decided upon
facts. It was said that a reduction in the price of corn,
from a repeal of the Corn-laws, would injure the farmer. He
denied that it would, for the farmer would never pay more for
his land than in just proportion to its productiveness, and rents
must be lowered.—( Hear.) Our manufacturers found that
France, Holland, Belgium, Switzerland were all quickly super-
seding our manufactures; and it was not to be wondered at,
for we had forced them, to become manufacturers by re-
fusing to receive their corn. Hence our artisans were
being reduced almost to starvation, though fully equal in
ability to the manufacturers of any other country. If the
fetters of the Corn-laws were removed, commerce would again
expand its wings, and spread from shore to shore ;
the ocean would again be laden with our traffic, waft.
ing back to us in return the commodities of other
nations.—(Hear, hear.) It was not for a member of that
Council to advocate physical force ; but he must say that,
looking to the spirit which was rising in the country in
opposition to these laws, it was not to be marvelled at that
the manufacturing classes should be in the state of excitement
in which they now were, upon this subject: and, as the Legis-
lature had always paid great attention to the petitions of the
Common Council of London, it was desirable that a petition
should issue from that body, praying for the total abolition of
the Corn-laws, before it was too late.—( Hear. )
Mr. Srevzils said that the real question was, whether they
would give to the growers of earn a protection beyond the
other classes, and he would say that a. protection to one class
was a tax upon all the others. What. was the state of the
country ? Its population was increasing, whilst its. manufac-
tures were decreasing. Why, he tioulcLataite was, a, tax, to be
imposed on one class of the cominuniteJor thaaalte merely of
another ? Were the -agricultnribta an enlightened body of
men? Certainly not. There-was numore•igaorant or stupid
class of men than the agrioulistral labourers, whereas the ma-
nufacturing operatives were nevi: divalent, and expended a
considerable portion of their earnings in the promotion of
moral improvement—this was the kind of population which
should be sustained, and which would place. the country in
ihe high station it should hold. Bat who, he would ask, were
the makers of the Corn-laws, but the landowners themselves ?

The following is the petition which was to be moved by the
requisitionists :
" Sheweth—That your petitioners view with alarm the
change that has taken place in the commercial relations of
Great Britain.
" That foreign States, whose supply mainly depended upon
England. now not only manufacture for themselves, but largely
export their own manufactures.
" That even after payment of our import duties they ac-
tually undersell our own manufactures in this country, and
especially in a great number of articles formerly the exclusive
production of this town.
" That this has occurred, notwithstanding that Great Bri-
tain possesses a larger capital, a more skilful and persever-
ingly industrious population, better and cheaper machinery,
greater and more available mineral resources, better means of
internal communication, and a finer commercial navy, than any
other country in the world.
That, in the opiuion of your petitioners, this change is
to be attributed to the absurd and unjust laws which former
Parliaments have vainly endeavoured to promote the interests
of one class of the community at the expense of the rest, in
prohibiting or restricting the free importation of corn and pro-
visions, and obliging the whole labouring population to un-
dergo a scarcity nearly approaching to starvation before, in
the case of corn, the ports can be opened for their relief.
" That, in consequence of other countries being this year
drained of their stocks of corn, and the uncertain demand from
this country tot c,ffering a sufficient inducement for further
tills e, if our next harvest unfortunately prove as unpro-
ductive as the last a famine must ensue, and a consequent state
of society fearful to contemplate.
" That your petitioners, while they deny the right of a
small part of the community to the enhancement of the value
of their property at the expense and to the detriment of all

He did not desire to make the Corn-laws a political question,
further than this--the landowners formed the House of Lords,
and no Bill could pass without their consent. Let them keep
an eye on the House of Lords.
Mr. R. TAYLOR said that the high prices of corn, and con-
sequently the high prices of labour, he felt sure were oc-
casioned by the Corn-laws. Corn was the great medium of
exchange in all countries, and it was impossible that these
prices could be maintained above those of other countries with-
out being undersold by them.—(Hear.) A great change
had certainly taken place in this country since the peace,
when there were no manufacturers in other countries. We
then had a monopoly—but a very great change had since then
taken place. British capital and machinery were carried
abroad. And was this a state of things which they should
shut their eyes to ?—( Hear.) It enabled foreigners, who
could not compete with it in skill or capital if they had not
the advantage of cheap- corn, to do so. This was the cause
to which he attributed the evil.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
There had been an argument used by one gentleman
present, who had stated himself to be of. the agricultural
interests in the Council-'-he referred to Mr. Jupp, and
he (Mr. Taylor) congratulated the Court that the agri-
cultural interest could be heard in that Court as well as the
representatives of manufactures. The Gentlemen, however,
in that place, who advocated agricultural interests there,
usually drove, not the plough, but the quill.—( Hear.) In
saying this he did not allude to Mr. Jupp, who doubtless
spoke in reference to his tenure in Essex, beyond Bow-bridge.
—( Hear, and a laugh.) He would refer, however, to the re-
marks of Mr. Gadsden, who had said that there was not a
return of more than 24 per cent. on investmeets in agriete-
ture. Now, in his ( Mr. Taylor's) opinion, the question of a
large or small return depended upon what was paid for the
investment.—(Hear, hear.) If a person employed Mr;
Gadsden to invest money, not in land, but in shires, he in-
vested it for as much as they were worth, and although the
shares might have risen to 2001., where only 1001. had been
paid, yet what would have given 5 per cent. to the
party paying. 1001. would only give 2, per cent, to him
who paid twice that value.__( Hear, hear.) The worthy
Deputy opposite had said, that if we depended on foreign
states it would be ruinous iu time of war, but he had thus
talked of foreigners as if they could all meet as they were
assembled in that Council-chamber.—( Hear.) Corn could
be produced in all parts of the world ; in fact there was
scarcely a country from which wheat could be not derived—and
if there were war, although he did not think this by any means
likely, for he believed that all persons and countries were
much lees disposed for war than they had been formerly, and
therefore he did not take war, or at least an extended war, into
his calculations—yet, if there were a war, he considered that
this, a maritime country, could be deprived of a supply of
wheat, was an utterly fallacious and absurd supposition.
The experience o: Holland proved that the capitalist and
shipper, taking advantage of their resources, could go and
bring to any country where they were wanted, any supplies, or
keep them there till a year of scarcity occurred.—( Hear.)
That was the best mode of procuring an adequate supply,—
( Hear.) Another important point had been touched upon—
the growing of wheat on bad lands, but he (Mr. Taylor),
would say that the employment of capital in growing corn,
where its cultivation cost double the price it did elsewhere, was
a loss to the country. The burthen of this might be shifted
from one class to another, arid the price might be kept up,. but
it was done at the expense of the consumers.—( Hear, hear.)
What would be the value cf land but for the populous state of
the neighbourhood in which it lay ? The value of all land was
doubled by the neighbourhood of a manufacturing district, and
the very worst ground, although it might not be fit for the
production of wheat, yet it would yield other products
which would bring a high price in the vicinity of a large
market.—( Hear.) Again, as to the argument that an
alteration of the Corn-laws would throw the agricultural
labourer out of work it was absurd : the manufacturers
could not put the land into their pockets. There would
still be the land and the people on it, and the question
was, whether they should have a half or a whole loaf?
With regard to wheat, he would now again remark, in conclu-
sion, that it was the most portable of all agricultural produce;
all others must be produced near the market. where they were
to be disposed of. In wheat there was the greatest quantity
of nourishment in the smallest compass, and therefore it was
the produce most fit fJr importation : then it was the great
medium of exchange, and the sale of it at a low price, there-
fore, would enable the country to increase in prosperity.
Mr. OBBARD could not know why the agricultural interests
should be taxed for the convenience of the artisan. The duty
on glass here was 735. a cwt., and why, then, should there not
he a tax on corn for the benefit of the agricultural interests ?
( Hear.) He considered that it would be beneficial that a fixed
duty on corn should be imposed.—(Hear.) Mr. Taylor had
referred to politics, and bad expressed his desire that they
should be kept out of sight in the discussion of this question ;
but how could this be, when they heard other gentlemen say,

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY- 29, 1839.

i.cep your eyes on the Lords."—( Hear.) They had also
heard of " the external pressure from withou•."—( A
laugh.) With respect to the prices of corn, he would
say that manufactures had always thriven must when the
prices of corn were highest.—( Hear. )
Mr. J. Dixon hoped there would be a fixed duty of ss.
placed on corn, in order to protect the home grower. He
would vote for the original reso!ution.
Mr. W. PRITCHARD observed there had hitherto been a
disposition on the part of Governments to meddle with trade,
under a notion that they could better direct the operations o;
traders than they could themselves. This was more particu-
larly the case With regard to the articles of human food, and
in this country those who made the laws having the chief inte-
rest in the land, it was not surprising that from the first intro •
duction of Corn-laws into this country, in the reign of Henry
(1436), .a s} stem of giving bounties on the export of corn and
restricting its import had been persevered in, until the im-
mense interests which had grown up from concentrating in
this small island an extent of commercial enterprize and ma•
nufacturing ingenuity never before equalled, demanded the
adoption of a less short-sighted legislation. The owners of
the land, however, would not part with their monopoly
easily. It was propped up by the laws now under considera-
tion, and, however party feelings might be deprecated, the
present was strictly a poitical question, deserving all
attention. The question of exports was at an end,
but the prohibition by law to import grain, unless the home
price reached a certain maximum, was attempted to be justi-
fied on two grounds—first, that it tended to secure a a suffi-
cient supply without being dependent on other nations ; and,
secondly, that it kept the trade steady, and prevented fluctua-
tions in price, which would be ruinous to those engaged in it.
But neither of these objects did it accomplish. The supply
of corn, as of everything else, was regulated by the demand,
and unless the demand for foreign corn in this country, in
exchange for her manufactured goods, was regular, the
foreigner would not cultivate a sufficiency beyond his own
consumption, and would have nothing in exchange for our
goods. If, on the contrary, the demand was steady, each
party would benefit by the exchange of what each could pro-
duce with less cost and labour than the other, and this would
create a bond of interest which it would it would be difficult
for warlike monarchs to rend asunder. Holland was an ex-
ample of a country existing without home-grown corn. in the
days of her greatest prosperity she had subsisted solely on
imported corn, and yet the prices were moderate. The
first effect of a prohibition to import was to raise prices.
In 1815, when the law passed, wheat was at 86a. per
quarter; a deficient crop in 1316, and the prohibition to im-
part, made the price rise ip 1817 to 945. 9d. per quarter. The
farmers thought the golden times of the war, with wheat at

1255. per qr., were coming; but a scarcity occurred in 1822,
and down went the price, as low even as 38s. Id. per qr.
What farmers could bear up against such ruinous fluctuations
as these? Where was the security for the employment of his
capital and labour? His employment ceased to be trade, and
became mere gambling. Ireland, with all that she still suf-
fered, had had some benefit from making the trade in corn
free' in 1806. Prior to,tlit time she exported but 400,000
quarters, but now her exports ',mounted to 2,400,000 quarters
—and this showed the operati n of the principle contended.
The direct tax, it appeared, of the prohibitory laws,. was
equivalent to about twenty millions on a population in Eng-
land and Ireland of about 27.milliOns—and for the benefit of
between 30,00 and 40,000 lendholders only. But the land•
owners were net so much benefited as was supposed. Mr. P.
then alluded to .the statements lately made at Manchester
of the gradual decline, and lste :ly the total departure of the
velveteen trade to Russia, the shipments of one house having,
since 1834, grade .11y declined front 345,000 yards to none at all.
Cotton prints. tco, sold here at 17s. 6d., it appeared, were
now made in Germany at 153. 6d., and the consumption of
cotton for manufactures in America was now equal to that
of England in 1816. She also exported largely to Canada,
India, and the Cape, and at Lowhill, now the Manchester of
America, where the roar of the cataract was alone formerly
heard, there was now a water power of 5,000 horses engaged
in manufactures. In short, capital, labourers, and machinery
were leaving England for lands where cheaper subsistence
could be procured. Upon every ground, therefore, he (Mr.
P.) should vote fur the entire abolition.
Mr. T. Winetesis said that the effects of the high price of
bread were felt by those least able to stand against them.
When he looked to the agricultural labourers he found that
they could not cat the corn they produced—the rate of wages
paid to them would not permit it. The only conclusion he
could come to in order to remedy this evil, was to agree to
the amendment proposed. After the last day's debate on this
question in that Court, a gentleman told him that lie could
state a fact that ought to settle the Corn-law question—he
had sent for goods to Germany, and had bought them so much
less than he could in this country, that he was now exporting
them at a good profit ; whereas, if he had bought them here,
he could only export
,at a lose—( Hear.) On the average of
five years the imports of England increased 18 per cent. ; in
France, in the same time, the increase was 91 per cent. ; in
America, 74 per cent. This was the effect of our Corn-laws.
Mr. PEWTRESS did not despair of seeing the time when
this country would raise sufficient food for its population with-
out any importation from foreign countries. Another measure
lately passed—the new Poor-law—deprived the poor of their
ancient mode of relief ; where a poor man had a iarge family
and his wages were not sufficient for their support, before the
passing of that measure the difference was made up to him out
of the poor• rate ; the poor were told when the law was altered
that they were not injured—what was the fact? They were
deprived of their ancient relief to the extent of two millions,

and their wages were not raised—the saving had gene into
the pockets of the landlords. One landlord in Sanlk had
saved 1,2001. a-year front the new law. On his own land
he derived an advantage of from 6s. to 15s. per acre. All
this was taken from the industrious poor. From the high
price of corn now, the labourer pays double for his bread,
though his wages are the same, and he is deprived of his an-
cient relief. All this was done for the advantage of the land-
lords. Even the lower class all saw that the tendency of
legislation was to favour property at the expense of the poor.
They saw that this would be the case till they were better
represented in the Commons' House of Parliament. He
bad lately read in an old magazine that Battersea was a mo-
rie:s ; now part of it was let for 50/. an acre. There
eas one-fourth of the land of this country uncultivated.
If the lower classes were prosperous, all classes must prosper
—manufactures would prosper—commerce would prosper—
the landowners would prosper—and the whole community
would prosper.—( Hear.)
Mr. GALLOWAY rose et a late period of the debate, and
said—My Lord Mayor, there has not been brought before this
Court for many years so greatly important a question, as that
of a total repeal of the Corn-laws, and all other restrictions
upon the free importation of human food; and he was per-
suaded, in the present excited state of the country, of the vast
importance that the Common Council of London should fully
and fairly deliberate, and express its opinion upon this great
aed overwhelming question, upon which the future happiness
and welfare of this country mainly depends. When Man-
chester, Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham, and the principal
manufacturing districts had all unequivocally stated that,
unless these laws were wholly and completely repealed, the
manufacturing greatness of this country would not only
be eclipsed, but would be wholly destroyed, and millions
of the productive operatives would be wholly ruined by fo-
reign manufactures, making as good, but much cheaper corn
modities than we can produce, having dear food, and as such,
necessarily high wages. A cheap supply of food is one of the
principal sources of the people's welfare. To interfere by le-
gislation with this cheapness, is to erect a barrier against the
attainment of those comforts of life by the industrious opera-
tives, on which their social and mural condition, and our
country's true dignity and strength, so much depend. Capital
and labour, when employed without restraint, constitute the
prosperity of our people.—( Hear, hear.) Labour is as es-
' sential to capital as capital is to labour; they ought always to
be united, and when so united, they will secure the solid bene-
fit of both parties; and when they have fair play, no power
can disturb or injure them. Steadiness of prices in the cost
of human food is a powerful element of public welfare; great
changes in the price of corn, such as have occurred since
the passing of the laws of 1815 and 1828, ate replete
with evil consequent s. In plentiful harvests, such as
occurred from 1831 to 1835, and in the latter year, best
wheat sold at 365. a quarter, while at the present period
it has reached 795. and 80s. a quarter ; these great fluctua-
tions inflict considerable injury on the farmer. The pros-
perity of the agrit ulturists is of equal importance with the ma-
nufacturing population, for although the latter are four times
the number of the former, yet a free trade would ultimately
be as advantageous to the one as to the other class. This
country has for many years proved that we were fully capable
of growing all the corn we could consume among all classes
of our people. It is stated that the people of Great Britain
and Ireland require fifty millions of quarters of wheat to com-
fortably supply them with bread during every year, which
would be nearly two quarters or sixteen bushels each indi-
vidual. He is of opinion that forty millions would, with other
necessaries, be quite ample for their comfortable maintenance.
He was fully satisfied that we ought not to grow as much corn
as we could consume, because he thinks we could employ our
capital more advantageously than in the growing of all the
corn we require. We, as a great manufacturing country
ought to purchase one-fourth or a-third of the corn we re-
quire, from those countries which would be most willing to
buy our manufactured products. He had no fear, in case of
war, of this country not being able to provide all the corn or
other requisites for its complete and comfortable support.
This country would alwals, under a system of free trade, sup-
ply other countries with articles as valuable to them as corn or
their natural products are to us. He thinks the spirit of the
age and the progress of knowledge will fully convince all par-
ties that their happiness and prosperity will be more fully
accomplished by a state of general peace, than by any war-
fare that could be undertaken. All civilized nations were
beginning to see that peace would do crush more to promote
their welfare than could be obtained by the most successful
exertions of any kind of warfare. As an Englishman he did
not wish for any advantage over any other country, but what
the capital, the skill, and industry
of Englishmen could pro-
duce. He knew we had many advantages, from the abundant
possession of coal and iron. He would state to the Court
that our yearly product of iron was throughout Great Bri
tain 900,000 tons a year, one-half was employed for the
making of rod and bar' iron, and the remainder was used as
pig iron for foundry purposes : taking the pig iron at 51. 10s.
a ton, and the bar iron at 101 10s. a ton, which see the pre-
sent prices in London, produced the enormous sum of
7,200,0001. One great and mighty advantage in the metals of
this country was, that after using them for many years they were
convertible into present
tlse ; 500.000 tons of old cast iron
were broke down every year and mixed with new pig iron,
and castings are formed of them. Taking this iron at 4/. a
ton it produced the sum of 1,200,000 L, and about 200,000
tons of scrap icon was again converted into various purposes,
and at 6/. a ton produced 1,200,000/. These sums, with the
purchase of 30,000 tons of foreign iron, which is made