The Sun.
London, England, 1839-03-19 00:00:00

EVEN ING EDITION.

Right Hen. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel) to which he wished
to call the attention of the Heuse, lest it should produce
the Sr pression that he agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet
it, the statement which be had made with regard to the
export of manufactured goods from this country. The
Right [lon. Bart. expressed his hope that gentlemen on
this s;cle of the House would take into their hands the
printed table to which he called their attention. That
statement he (Mr. Wood) now had in his hand. It was a
rta-ement of the export of the principal articles of British
produce and manufacture for the two years—•lB3B and
1837, and he drew the comparison of the two years, first in
the aggregate and then in detail, and from that
comparison, he deduced a higher state of prosperity than
had been before experienced. He told the House with
evident satisfaction that that table exhibited an increase
of no less than seven millions in the amount of exports, in
comparison with the preceding year. He did not quarrel
with the figures, the exception he took was this, that the
Right Hon. Bart. concealed from the House this impor-
tant circumstance, that 1837 was a year of great commer-
cial embarrassment—( Hear, hear)--of entire derangement
of the industry of the country—of the stoppage of a large
portion of the trade of the country, and of the diversion of
other portions into other channels. He must have been
well aware that our commerce with the United States
in that year was entirely annihilated.—( Hear, hear.)
In order to have afforded the House an opportunity of
Judging fairly of this comparative prosperity he ought to
have stated what were the circunntances of 1e37. He
(Mr. Wood) would endeavour to supply the deficiency, al-
though the ye ir 1838 exhibited an increase over the year
1837 of about 7,000,0001. in these exports. The year
1837 exhibited a decrease of no less than 10,000,0001.
I
over the preccding—( Hear, hear)—and the increase of
1838 was a diminution of 3,000,000/ from the year 1836.
The Right lion. Baronet then proceeded to attack what he
stated to be the second ground of the petitioners, that
there had been an increase in the export of our
manufactures ; it was alleged by the manufacturers them-
selves to be net an increase id the export of manufactured
products, but in the raw material, or in commodities only
partially wrought out ; and though he did not go into de-
tails as he had done in the former branch, still it was evident
that he intended the House to infer that he had demolished
the arguments of the petitioners. Now in the statements
which he (Mr. Wood) made oa the first day of the Session
he took what he thought a fair view of the question.
He did not compare the commerce of 1838 with any
One year, but with the four preceding years.
In consequence of his not having shown this distinction
between manufactured goods and partially wrought fabrics,
and raw materials, he was assailed for having made state-
ments calculated to encourage delusive opinions—He
therefore, afterwards took occasion to supply the omission,
and classed the commodities, and gave the result, fully
bearing out the statement of the petitioners. To that the
Right Hon. Bart. made no allusion, and therefore the
House would excuse him ( Mr. Wood) refreshing
his recollection on this subject. ( Hear, hear.)
The average of 1838, its compared with that of the four
years to which.he had alluded of the exports of woollens,
cotton, linen, and silk cloths. increased from 25,757,000/.
to 26,0900001., or an increase of 1 to 7-10ths, while the
increase of cotton•varn, linen and woollen-yarn, in-
creased from 659,900/. to 1,832,000/., being an increase of
28 per cent. Hardware, earthenware, and glass, gave an
actual decrease of 111 per cent. ; whilst upon the export
of the raw materials—the metals there was an increase
of 24 per cent., and refined sugar, which was a manu-
factured commodity, though but very little labour was
employed upon it—there was a falling•off of 55
per cent., whilst upon the purely raw materials, viz. sheep's
wool and coal, there was an actual increase of 53 per cent
lie contended that the whole case of the petitioners was
made out by these documents. He left it for gentlemen
to draw their own conclusions; he had stated facts and he
considered them to be most important ones. The Right
Hon. Baronet had attempted to show the improved
condition of the working classes by the increase of deposits
in Savings' Banks, but the statements did not afford a
satisfactory conclusion, because it was open to the
same substantive objection as the other. It was
a comparison between 1838 and 1837, which was a
year of distress. The increase of our exports in 1838, as
compared with 1837, was made use of by the Right Hon.
Baronet with the view to another illustration. It was
stated that in 1837 our exports were only 36,000,000/. at
the time when cern was cheap ; and that in 1838, when
Fern was dear, our exports amounted to 43,000,000/. The
inference intended to be drawn was, that with a high price
of corn there was a large exportation. Here again the
same objection applied, it was a comparison between 1837
and 1538. He had no desire to enter into the general
question, but he had been looking at the question for so many
Years, he could assure the House he thought the present a
most favourable opportunity of entering into the whole
question, with the prospect of settling it to the satisfac-
tion and benefit of all parties.—( Hear, hear.) They had
legislation
ogicsliaaTiour abroad—they were left free to enter into the
Osier to a'elleasu
tßnuirgehst
wHero:.
inßaronet
cpaolnmlay and deliberately, as they could hope
qsuaeisdt,iotribaotf
ifsuhcoh
siamwpoorntarneme.anuTfalnie.
lawsi duce.ment to a
hi state of decay, it would be a strong
--n1 to take the question of the Corn-
lawslnto consideration. If they waited till the decay
?ecanle so palpable, then the opportunity would be
lost of ever retrieving ourselves. He was quite
sure that the question could no longer remain in
the state it now is.—(Hear, hear.) He was prepared,
not only to alter the existing-law, but to face the dreaded
change of its entire repeal. He believed that the country
Would be better under the change, that it would benefit all
el
. aSteS—all interests—and none more so than the ngricul-
'lir interest ,al itself. He did not despair of finding the
night Hon. .
_ Baronet allied with them on a future occasion,
and seeking for a total repeal; there was nothing inlhis
speech which indicated any great affection for the present
system.
M. BENETT felt himself called upon, as the repre-
selltative of a large agricultural county, to aderess the
House, even after the debate had been so long protracted.
--e contended that the manufacturing interests had not
Yet
Met with any of the evils complained of ; they
only .
L alt tahnettDated them—ever since the peace, that interest
ac
been told that it was impossible, while pew continued
th
the_ bad could maintain the manufacturing superiority, and
the'Y bad often been told the old proverb, 'h make hay while
tl sun shines." They said their property ad declined, but i
r'' e fact was their capital had been drawn into a number of
manufacturers
and it was a natural consequence that the small
thanufacturers must sink. By their own showing this year
tilaejaehtuardendo case whatever. They nosy came to that House
ringing they wanted to import corn and to pay for it by ma-
goods, but their former assertion was that unless
4 wages of this country were reduced, they could not main-
hn their footing in the foreign markets. They said no-
set: 'g COW about wages—they even came and said their
1.1 erne--their entire object was to raise wages. That
th°,llse knew, and the labourers of this country knew—
: altoboieci)r intention was to reduce wages.—( Hear.) It was
uponof wages alone. They boasted that there were
persons engaged in the cotton trade dependent
tsl),3` toe crops in America. In order to bolster up their
p me were they to run the risk of starving those 150,000
lietiretns ? That might be consistent with the views of po-
eee -1 economists, but it was not with hi=. The political
wolettliet legislated for wealth, and wealth alone—he
mass tlid legislate for the happiness and comfort of the great
°I. the people ; and he was obliged to recollect that
he labourers, or operatives, call them by which name they
e„s,ed, were the most important of that mass—it was them
said gave value to the land and to the machine. They
,si d that the labourers who would be thrown out of cm-
rri°jrnent would be drafted away to the manufacturing dis-
that's; but look at the misery they must undergo before
hand change took place, as was instanced in the case of the
hon'l°ora weavers. Let the manufactures provide for the
forth 0 consumption—that was the legitimate consumption
e
to_, manufactures of the country. While the agricul-
detat interest flourished, the manufactures could never be
fael)treeessed• No man had a greater respect for the menu-
de factures
than himself ; but he trusted they would not en-
tha"ur to monopolise the profits of foreign countries and
ore profits of our own country by the destruction
k,, .agslculfure. —( Hear, hear, hear.) He should vote
for the present motion, because he thought it uncalled
Gt.' because he was anxious to stop agitation, and because
p:, wras anxious the farmer should have some confidence in
th't'utolent and in the laws of his country, and should have
it° Power of investing his capital with some sort of secu-
r Y,..---(Cheers )
O'CONNELL said it was quite clear that there
00 tlmost an irresistible temptation to make long speeches
btont
sea27eninlraews and to repeat a great deal of what had
two thines •--' ( Hear, hear.) He promised the House
hear) e .first, to make a very short epeec'u—( Hear,
been already next to repeat es little as possible of what had
fallen
said. He must, however, refer to what had
;I_llo from the Hon. Baronet opposite, for he had called
lls n him Personally and had said there was a speech of
(M,
14ade t O'Connell's) reported in which he was
sir o say that " Ireland would receive a
Wang bloW from the repeal of the Corn-laws, but that he
fro content with it because it would draw the eye-teeth
1,0- eft}e landed aristocracy. He believed the Hon. Ba-
not
1, ad read this report of his speech, but merely a
ter,ltsgraPb, and there was this difference between a repor-
Iteos report and a paragraph, that the Reporters reported
torten4ratelY what was stated, while the paragraph writer dis-
tha,,, it as much as he pleased. Now be did not state
1184 Lae Corn-laws would be a great blow to Ireland, but
regretsaid the reverse.—(Cheers.) He felt something like
vt that the repeal of the Corn-laws would not be disad-
oftitiageous to Ireland, because he would have hada feeling
cril easure in asking for justice to Ireland, to make a sa-
e„ue° for justice to England.—( Hear, hear.) As to the
the teeth, those symbols of wisdom,
" leae
he had never
lam_ et notion of extracting them from the
4 secl artistocracy.—( Great laughter.) He was for
ave.:l)4l of the Corn-laws on principle. The Corn-laws
lands sought to be supported to give a preference the
u interest over the other classes of the community.
bat.
y 1:11" and cheers.) It was not candid to deny
They Cheers.) What did the landed aristocracy want ?
elle,
of outdo get rich at the expense of others.--( Loud
Peopte No, no," and Hear, ear.") They wanted the
...._tnti to Pay more for their rent t'haa they otherwise wonld
rnak_ Yet they affected to deny it was not a struggle to
oasiee the landed aristocracy rich at the expense of other
Would (Cheers.) If they had not that object in view
s;.,,airlat"i_ey come down in such strong phalanxes, battling
ban t or uie House'
going into Committee. It was a rem-
tosi,
no the feudal
system—(Laughter and cheers)—that
d4.til of only the revenue but actual power. The wis-
good subeequent generations had taken away a
Itai...t.
,deal of the power, some of which still re-
niai; o ; it Was thought the revenue' ought to re-
-5c
so
riLifi: ,
,aasrltdh c
yth only
l gavey the preference to landed property, fact
ll'aere was more safety in that than in the other. The
wanted to extort higher prices for their
Wt
wag
osut of the other classes of the community—( No, ne )
„, w idle to attempt to deny it.—(Cheers.) They
ov'aa,oyted to prevent the poor person who could now obtain
aii'es one slice of bread for a penny, from getting two
aged mil:lt his penny.—( Hear, hear.) They were high,
ni..l b Y, and dignified, and yet they were struggling,
is, le after night to et fr ti wre'ehed, the miserable
pJrTohesrern. ainder of get from the wretched, thu miserable
rntor of the sentence waslost amidst the up-
i.ea6,l u
aeries of Hear, hear, on the Conservative benches,
eeie by loud Ca, ers from the :lout;. Corn-law p'rtY.)
yeas for if the Corn-laws did not produce them money,
""'"••••.....—__

what would they be strti,eeeling for.—(Cheers.) If the
Corn-laws were of any value, it was te) make their estate.;
more valuable. It %N cold he the idlest thing in the word
to place themselves in the situation of exe,rtioners, without
gaining anything by it.—( Cries of Oh, oh and cheers.)
The principle on which the Corn-laws were founded, that
of getting more money fur the landed proprietors out of
the woi king classes of the community, was a principle he
repudiated, and was of itself sufficient to enable him to de-
cide in favour of voting for the repeal. But there was
another principle involved, the principle of free trade—
(Hear, hear)—for it had baen shown that the class who
came forward and called for a rep-al, was ready to give
up the protection on other articles of commerce. The
Delegates had passed a unanimous resolution, calling
on the House not only to repeal the Corn-laws, but to re-
peal every other law that could be called a protection
for any article—( Hear, hear)—and he for one would not
be their advocate, if they were not ready to do so.—( Hear,
hear.) The painciple he advocated was a principle of free
trade in everything—letting every man buy as cheap as he
could--letting every man in the community procure at as
reasonable a rate as he could, the products of this and every
other country.—( Hear.) Wee he to be told that that plan
would destroy their manufactures? lie did not believe it.
—( Hear.) Point out to him any country that had a
free trade, and that was the worse for it.—( Hear, hear.)
He would defy them to do it. Fortunately a report had
been laid upon the table within the last four weeks that
illustrated this doctrine completely. He maintained that
the element of prosperity was perfect free trade, and that the
principle of monopoly was a vicious principle. The spirit
of our ancestors was a monopolising spirit, robbing each
other to make the nation rich. --( Hear, and a laugh.)
How many folio volumes, and hundreds of folio volumes,
had been put together to prove the benefit of the monopoly
to the East Indies, yet they had repealed that monopely.
(Hear.) How many sagacious speeches had been made
in that House to show the benefit of the monopolies in the
time of James the First and Charles the First. The
good sense of the public had trod the most of those
monopolies under foot.—(Cries of " Hear.") The
monopoly of corn and every other article would soon fol-
low, and those who praised and supported those monopolies
would be laughed at, as any man would now be for be-
lieving in witchcraft.—(Hear, hear.) But had they not
in the report that had been laid before them within the
last few weeks demonstrative proof of the value of getting
rid of that monopoly. Ile would take two States, and if
they would give him leave, he would take the Papal State
first.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh) A Government more
anxiously disposed to act kindly towards its subjects could
not exist. They were about three millions, and it was
impossible for the reigning Prince to have any other in-
terest than that of the people at large. In that
State more money was expended in charitable works,
hospitals, attending the sick, and feeding the
poor than in any other country three times
its size in any part of Europe, including even the benevo-
lence of this most benevolent nation. But what had been
their conduct ? They had been protecting their manufac-
tures, they had been paying money out of the public trea-
sury to assist their manufactures ; they had given protec
tive duties, and had created prohibitions, and yet what was
the result of all that ? The report stated that "on the
whole the report furnished by the Roman Governor pre-
sents a melancholy picture of that part of Italy, notwith-
standing the enormous sacrifices made by the Papal Go-
vernment. The protection, the prohibition, the premium
given for what is called native industry, in Rome and else-
where, the measures taken to increase manufacturing com-
merce, have been the main cause of its decline and decay."
That was the result of a Government of protection and pro-
hibition—that was the bcau ideal of the protective
and prohibitive system. But then the State of
Tuscany offered a different picture. There the
principle of free trade had been acted upon for twenty-
five years, and what had been the result? According to
the Report, "twenty years of free trade had led to a vast
extension of cultivation ; to a great increase of building,
both in town and country ; to the establishment of new
manufactories ; to an increasing consumption of the luxu-
ries of life, a general rise of wages, and a universal senti-
ment of growing prosperity." There was a perfect free
trade in corn, and in everything. Behold the result—see
that glowing picture of national prosperity.— ( Hear, hear.)
It went on to say—" Property has become of more value,
and the revenue has increased." There they had the
effect of free trade and the effects of prohibition. During
this debate Ireland had had many a professing friend. He
believed the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Essex, had
talked of being a friend to Ireland, but certainly
he had the oddest way of showing his friend-
ship.—(Loud laughter.) Ireland had many a friend
in this debate, but it reminded him of the story of the
blessing which was given because it cost nothing.—
(Laughter.) When Ireland wanted political rights, and
sought to be placed in the same situation as England she
had no friend, but when a monopoly was sought to be sup •
ported she was overwhelmed with them.--(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) Could any man be more attached to the
interests of the Irish than himself.—( Ironical cheers on
the Conservative benches, met by counter cheers from the
Ministerial.) Why he was the only man in existence who
was paid by a nation.—(Continued cheering on both sides
of the House.) Governments paid men, but he was not
paid by a Government. If any man living was anxious for
the prosperity of Ireland ought not he to be so—nay.
more, if he was even disposed to quote the prejudices of
the Irish people agairst his conscience and judgment, ought
not he to become, in pretence at least, what his friend the
Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Brien) conscientiously, but
not consistently, was the advocate of some kind of Corn-
law. He had stood against combinations before in his native
city, when he thought they were likely to be injurious to
manufactures. When the people of Ireland were wrong
before, be exposed their errors. He would do the same
now. But they had said that the repeal of the Corn-laws,
would be a heavy blow to Ireland. Nowt, he would ask,
what could Ireland lose by it? The Horrourable Member
for Wilts had said, that the effect of a repeal of the Corn-
laws, would be to lower wages in Ireland, He would ask,
how could they lower the wages in Ireland? Ireland had
had the benefit of the Corn-laws for many years, and the
labourers of that country had enjoyed the splendid
wages of sixpence a-day when they could get em-
ployment; that was, they were paid at the rate of a half.
penny an hour, when they could get work !—( Hear, hear.)
But let them look farther into the immense benefits which
Ireland had derived under the Corn-laws. The Report
of the Poor-law Commissioners said that there were
2,300,000 persons destitute the greater part of the year in
Ireland, and 600,000 who had great difficulty in getting
occasional employment. The Hon. Member for Limerick
came out and said that a repeal of the Corn-laws would
throw 200,000 persons out of employment, but there were
600,000 already who could not get work. But the Irish
labourers had suffered under another evil. The Agricul-
tural Report showed that while the English labourers had
recovered the injury which had been inflicted on them by
the change of the currency—that most extraordinary
beneficial measure matured by the Right Hon. Bart., the
Member for Tamworth—the Irish labourerers were still
sinking under it. He would refer to the Report of
Mr. Nichols, on which they had legislated. He said the
aspect of Ireland had somewhat improved—still it was
impossible adequately to describe the miseries of the
people. Now what could the 2,300,000 wretches lose by
a repeal of the Corn-laws ?—( Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Gentleman opposite had boasted much of their great sym-
pathy for Ireland—yet when they were not able to raise
2,500,0001. to commence those railways, which promised
to diffuse so much permanent benefit through the
country, they refused to allow the Irish to borrow the
money on the credit of England—while at the same time
they were actually exporting capital to the United States.
The Hon. and Learned Gentlemen then quoted again from
the report of Mr. Nichols—referring to the contrast be-
tween the state of England and Ireland. That gentleman
said, the soil of this country teemed with the wealth of
accumulated industry—mills were at work in every direc-
tion—navigation was busy on every river, and forests of
masts crowded every port—in the other, Ireland, the soil,
though naturally fertile, was but scantily cultivated—the
sound of industry was heard but in a few favoured
spots, and its capacious rivers displayed a so-
litary sail at remote intervals. Now look at the
one picture and on the other, and let them tell him
what Ireland had to apprehend from a change in the pre-
sent system. He wished that the aristocracy should be
made to give an additional stimulus to manufactures, and
to increase the market for them in foreign countries by our
admitting their corn into this. The influence of this ex-
tended demand would gradually advance to the capital of
the manufacturers in Ireland, arid labourers, instead of
only getting occasional work at 63, a-day, would be em-
ployed at good wages from week to week. He would
refer to a meeting that had taken place not long since at
Roscommon, to petition against a repeal of the Corn-
laws. That meeting had been attended by those who on
other occasions were not very cordial to the Irish people, as
well as many others who were most deeply interested in their
welfare. However they agreed on a petition to Parliament,
and one paragraph of the petition contained the following
remarkable passage :—" And your petitioners further
show, that our manufactures are destroyed, and commerce
has been ruined." Here were petitioners in favour of the
Corn• laws, telling Parliament, that the manufactures anti
commerce of Ireland had been destroyed—then they went
on to say that " The greater portion of our produce goes
into the pockets of absentee proprietors residing in Eng-
land. By that the capital of England was increased while
that of Ireland was diminished—in short, agriculture is the
only cause of our national prosperity." Beautiful pros-
perity indeed, they have to boast of, when they had stated
that their commerce was destroyed, and their manufac-
tures ruined. They clung to the fragment of be-
nefit which the Corn-laws gave them, forgetting
what a stimulus industry would receive if the
corn of foreign countries were once admitted in ex-
change for goods in this—as long as the agriculturists of
the Continent were prevented from selling their corn to us,
they would be disabled from buying our manufactures. He
(Mr. O'C.) was really at a loss to see of what permanent
or extensive advantage the Corn-laws were, either to the
Irish farmer or labourer. The Hon. Member for Limerick
had said, that clearances were already going on in [rebind.
Yes, they were. Where, then, were the resources which
agriculture furnished to Ireland ? Let the 2,360,000 des-
titute persons, as mentioned in the. Report of the Puor-law
Commissioners, answer. But he ( Mr. O'C.) could tell
where the Irish labourers found a resource—they found a
resource in the manufactures of England—there was notone
English manufacturing town, which did not support
twenty, thirty, forty, sixty, aye 80,000 Irish labourers.
Further, to show the state of agriculture in Ireland, he
would remind them that within the last six years half the
land had come under the operation of Stanley's Act, by
which the land was let from year to year, and whenever
the landlord did not think his bargain advantageous, he
gave the tenant notice to quit. Now nothing except the
stimulus of manufacturing industry would place the agricul-
tural and the general population in Ireland in that state of
permanent social happiness which it was his chief desire to
sea her in the possession Ironical cheers from the
Opposition, folloWed by cheers from the Liberal side
of the House.)
resources oflerelawnedul He cared not what foul in-
sinuations were thrown out against him for party
purposes. He hisnly
developed conviction
by
the
that
would o urledp b eat
e o
dif-
fusion or' manufactures. He would call upon the House,
by a timely act, to avert the consequences which must