The Sun.
London, England, 1839-03-16 00:00:00

the manufactories contributed fairly for the support of the poor.—
(Cheers.) Were tithes no tax upon the land ? Was the land•tax
no burden ? What would they say of the legacy duty, and the s'amps
upon conveyance;? He would not speak of the malt tax,
because some Honourable Members said it was paid by the
consumer; but by levying so enormous a tax on malt
and spirits it diminished the consumption. Of course they were
bound to apply the principle of purchasing where they could get the
cheapest, to the long list of manufactured articles.—(Cheers). If it
was good to buy corn in the cheapest market, it was a'so good to
buy silk. (Cheers, and counter cheers). Would it not be
decorous, before they came to the farmer, to apply that principle to
manufactuf ed articles ? (Loud Cheers). Shear the pigs, before you
Recce the sheep.—(Loud Laughter and Cheers). Just reverse the
order of proceeding. After they had visited the farmer, what
security had he ?—(Cheers). Before they applied the 1 rinciple to
the farmer, they would make this distinction—according to pali.
tical economy, there is a distinction between taxes imposed for
protection and revenue. (Cheers, hear, hear, and counter
cheering). Then let notice be given next week for a
committee to consider the laws respecting the duties on
these articles.—(Hear, hear, hear) In the first place they had
men of business to deal with.—(Tory Cheers). The poor ignorant
farmer who had not studied political economy—(A laugh)—was not
yet thoroughly convinced of the wisdom of that rule, that they
ought to buy at the cheapest rate; but the trader, being a man of
intelligence, and a man of business—(Loud laughter from the Tory
benches)—and not the least attached to locality—they would be able
to convince him of the wisdom of the application of the principle;
and supposing he should hesitate for a moment, they might
just say, because you pay a higher price for corn, that
is no reason why we should pay a higher price for buttons.—(Hear.)
When they had reduced the prohibiting duties on all these articles,
what security had they against the exportation of capital to for cign
countries. Corn was cheaper abroad, and it was likely English
skill and capital and enterprise would be employed there, and that
the produce of that skill and industry would would be transmitted,

fno import duties were imposed upon foreign manufactures, to
compete with them in the English market. It appeared that her
Majesty's Government were not agreed as to the policy of a total
repeal of the Corn-laws. They staid they were willi'ig to permit a
change, and the project they were inclined to was a fixed duty.
The difference between the advocates of a fixed duty and of a total
repeal was as irrecencileable as between the maintenance of the
present system and the latter.—((Hear, hear) The Government say
they are in favour of a fixed duty, but what advance did that snake
in the question ?—(Cheers.) They made no advance unless they
stated what they meant. Did they invite the House to go in to Com-
mittee, in the hope that under the influence of Mr. Bernal they
would be inspired with greater sagacity ?—(Laughter,) If they had
the slightest notion of what the fixed duty was to be why not pro-
claim it.—(Cheers.) They invited the House to go into Commit-
tee on the application of a gentleman to whom they were opposed,
and who was for total repeal, but they said "Go in•o Committee,
various schemes will be proposed, and we hope to be able to find
one—(Hear, hear)—the smallest donations will be thankfully ac.
cepted."—(Rears of laughter.) They pet forward nothing to guide
the House or public opinion. If they gave a duty on importation
they must give a drawback on exportatiori.—(Hear, hear.) Was it
ever known that on so exciting a question a Government would ask
the House to go into Committee without telling them what they
intended?—(Loud cheers.) He could understand their saying
that the question ought to be settled, and that they
came down with the authority of a united Cabinet.
He could understand their saying that they saw no prospect of a set-
tlement—that agitation was a great evil, that as there were irrecon-
aeeble difference.: of opin on, that they would not go into Commit.
tee—that they would have no baiting with delusion, and no fishing
for popularity.--(Loud cheers.) But to invite them to go into Corn.
mittee without having any plan to propose, WPS a course perfectly ir.
reconcilable with either the practice or dut), of a Government.—
(Loud cheers.) He had read all that had been written by great au
thorities and political economists upon the subject, and
without disparaging that noble science, which treated
of the principles upon which the advance of commercial_prosperity
and social happiness depended, he must say, that after having read
all that was written by the most eminent authorities on the subject
of corn, with a view of determining the principles upon which a
fixed duty should be imposed, and highly as he respected those au-
thorities, he had retired from the task in greater despair than he had
commenced it. He had read all that had been said by Malthus, Ri-
cardo, and M'Culloch, but he had vainly sought for any simple and
intelligent guide in their lucubrations. Ricardo proved that Adam
Smith was totally erroneous—(A laugh)---and observed that his (A.
Smith's) error lay in supposing the value of corn to be constant.
Ricardo endeavoured to show that the price of corn was low in a rich
country and high in a poor country; while Adam Smith contended
that the price of corn was high in a rich country and low in a poor
country.— (Great laughter.) He (Sir R. Peel) had then referred to
the recent work of M`Culloch, who discussed the important question
of whether there were any peculiar burdens on agriculture, and he de-
signated tithes, the land_tax, the poor and other rates as these burdens.
Mr. M`Culloch said that neither of those opinions was right.—
(Hear, hear.) He would refer to another eminent writer on Corn.
laws, Colonel Torrens, and instead of throwing light upon the con-
flicting authorities, he made the obscurity ten times greater.—
(Laughter and cheers) Colonel Torrens said that Adam Smith
was fundamentally wrong—that the French economists were quite
wrong—that Ricardo and his followers were quite wrong, and that
he should also refute Mr. Malthus.—(Great laughter.) A.a the
Gallant Colonel had devoted one whole chapter to that undertaking.
Now, if they were to go into Committee, they might rely upon it
that the obscurity would not be much cleared up by the sagacity of
her Majesty's Ministers.—(Cheers.) The conflict would not be
between those on that side of the House and those on the
other, but between the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton and his
supporters, for the Government repudiated a total repeal, and yet•
did not know what to substitute for it. Now, would it not there-
fore be the wisest course in them to refuse the Committee ?
(Cheers.) Whattemptation should ho (Sir R. Peel) have to enter
the Committee after the letter which the Noble Lord referred to
last night ? in which, in the year 1822 he warned his constituents
against too readily falling in with political economists. The Noble
Lord had certainly, as he had stated, a perfect right to change his
opinions, but they could never obliterate from his -memory the
epigrammatic defence which he had left there of the opinions he
was now about to abandon.—(Laughter and cheers.) The
Noble Lord referred to Sir Joshua Reynolds, who, in surveying the
paintings of his early years, turned away in candid despair of being
able to surpass the first comparatively inexperienced efforts of his
pencil. The Noble- Lord said that the lot of the great painter
would not be his. But he (Sir R. Peel) apprehended that it
would.—(Cheers.) The skill and fidelity with which hesketched
a political economist in 1822 would never be surpassed by any
subsequent attempt.—(Cheers.) In exhibiting his gallery of po;
litical sketches'and referring to his later works—whether Ws histo-
rical sketches—(Laughter)—his vindication of the resistance of the
Summer's and the Russell's to Papal yranny—.(Cheers and laughter)
whether his fancy sketch, in which he vindicated O'd Sarum—
(Laughter)—and referred to the example bequeathed by the credu.
lous servant who gave old lamps in exchange for new—the old and
tried fabric for the untried burnished imitation—whether as a por-
trait painter—(interruptioe.) (Sirß. P.) was not surprised at the
interruption,perhaps theHon.Gentleman from whom it proceeded had
also sat for the sketch—(Laughter)—whatever the recent work might
be it could not in vigour, skill, power, and fidelity, compete with
that celebrated sketch of a political economist.—(Cheers and
laughter.) After that he (Sir R. Peel) should never go out with a
political economist without thinking of the dangerous company he
was in.-(Laughter.) But if the Government should come down
now, and propose their plan of alleviation—even though they
should convince them of its feasibility, still he (Sir R. Peel) should
hesitate before he should agree to it. He should take higher con-
siderations into view—he should state the fearful consequences that
might ensue to the' country if, in the contingency of war or famine,
she should have to depend for food upon foreign relations.—
(Cheers.) They said the interests of commerce would prevent
tfhoreeiganmhbosittilolinty
ofin fuotnuere.greTat mheyitar
attl
livedy
he t
i overruledn 'e
al
l
those which
ll
those considerations, and directed all his powers to the
destruction of this country.—(Cheers.) Nor could they be sure
that now the commercial interests of nations would always controul
their desire for conquest. Looking to the state of the Peninsula—
to the state of affairs all over the globe—he had not the confidence
which other Hon. Members indulged in, that the spirit of
men, like ambition, had relaxed, and that the thirst for glory and
Power would no more prevail over the desire of the steady acquisi-
tions of commercial gain.—(Cheers.) Before they determined to
favour the agriculture of Poland at the expense of the agriculture
of Great Britain—let them first remember that the encouragement
which the Legislature had given to agriculture in this country had
been the main stimulus to the draining of fens, the reclamation of
waste and poor lands—the improvement of the social condition
of the population, and their general health and happiness.
He should be sorry to see cultivation receding from the tops of the
hills to which it had climbed, and the whole country a series of
manufacturing towns, connected by railways travelling through an
abandoned rural district; he would admit that this might increase
the wealth of the country, but the change which would take place
in the social condition of the people would be an afflicting one.
They would refuse to yield this question even to ti a authorities of
a united Cabinet ; but when he saw that the oflic al authorities in
the Cabinet were divided upon this subject, that Members in that
House were at direct variance with their colleagues in the other,
that the Cabinet was conflicting and disunited, that the arguments
were unreasonable, and the statements contradictory, lie must refuse
to defer to their authority, and, notwithstanding the language of the
Noble Lord, he would not consent to throw the protection of agri.
culture into the lottery of legislation, in the hope of drawing the
prize of a good Corn.law.—(Loud cheering, which lasted some mi-
nutes.)

Mr. BROTHERTON rose, but could scarcely be heard for the
confusion which prevailed in the House. We understood him to
defend the Manchester Delegates and manufacturers from the charges
which had been brought against them of lowering the rateof wages.
The Hon. Member entered into statistical details, the object of
which was to show, that at the present time the agriculturist was
receiving three pieces of ca!ico for the price he paid for one in 1513,
while, at the same time, the manufacturer was still paying as dear
for his bread, and that during all this their wages had not been
lowered ; those who had introduced the improvements in manufac-
tures were receiving the benefit of them, but that this benefit bad
wholly been reaped by third parties. The Hon. Gentleman being
unable to obtain a hearing sat down amidst loud cries of " Divide."
Mr. Fielden rose and made several attempts to address the
House. When the Speaker had succeeded in restoring partial silence,
Mr. FIELDEN moved that the debate be adjourned to Mondry,

The noise upon this was redoubled, and cries of " No, no," " Di-
vide, divide," resounded from al parts of the House. The confusion
lasted for ieveral minutes.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who spoke amidst great noise and con.
fusion, hoped that the House would be enabled to come to adecision
that night. Postponing the debate,and resuming it again on Monday,
would be of the greatest inconvenience to the public service.—
(Heaa, hear). If the debate must be adjourned, he trusted that it
would be resumed on sonic other day than Monday, but considering
that it was not now very late, he hoped the House would not con-
sent to the adjournment.—(Hear, hear).
Mr. FIELDEN said, that according to the regulation
adopted, every Member was totally prevented from stating
his opinions upon the presentation of petitions—if any
Honourable Member attempted to say anything on the presentation
of a petition, he was instantly told that he must reserve himself for
the debate, and now he was to be prevented from expressing his
opinions upon a subject of the great importance cf the present sub.
ject, upon the proper settlement of which he would venture to say,
depended the prosperity, the happiness, or the misery of the country.
If it would be more convenient to the House to adjourn the debate
until Tuesday, he would have no objection. Of this he was deter.
mined that the debate must either be adjourned or he would divide
the House upon that question.—(Cries of Hear, hear, and Go on.)
Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN said that although be was not one who
was desirous of the debate being adjourned, yet, as it would ap.
pear singular that upon a subject so deeply affecting the interests of
Ireland only one Member from that country should have spoken,
he was anxious to let the people of Ireland know that that occurence
was not voluntary on the part of the Irish Members, for he had him-
self attended four nights in that House, and had not been able to
address it.—(Cries of "Hear, heur," and "Go on.") He must enter
his protest against the debate being concluded without an oppor-
tunity being given to the Irish Members of being heard.
*Mr. EWART rose amidst loud cries of " Divide, divide," and
great confusion. He wished to know whether it was the intention
Hon. Members to hear him or not 1 If the House would allow
him to go on, he would adopt that course which he thought was
for the benefit of the country, but he would not attempt to ad.
dress the House if he was to be interrupted.—(Cries of " Go
on, go on," and great confusion.) Was he to understand that the
House would allow him to go on ?
Mr. FIELDEN rose amidst much confusion. He hoped if the
Hon. Member meant to asldress the House, he would confine him.
self to the question of adjournment.—(Hear, hear, and cries of
" Go on, go on.")
Mr. E WART considered that the proper person to decide that
question was the Speaker.
The SPEAKER s-id that, in strictness, the I-Ton. Member for
Oldham, having moved the aclkiurnincr.t of the House, was entitled

perscvere in his motion for an