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

Lord BROUGHAM last night presented a petition from
Glasgow against the Corn-laws, which was received as
such. His Lordship in presenting the petition, re-
ferred to some recently recovered accounts of the De-
bates in Parliament, about the year 1770, and quoted a
small but admirable specimen of Mr. BURKE'S wisdom,
delivered at that period. His Lordship, by other re-
marks, introduced the petition with some pomp, to their
Lordships. It was of great size, and was carefully tied
up ; but when it was opened the Duke of RICHMOND
discovered that it did 'not refer to the Corn-laws, but
was against Church Extension. This little mistake
eseited some laughter.
Lord BROUGHAM then moved, assuming the debate
to be a continuation of that of the evening before, and
,:refore making uo speech, that the House resolve itself
into a Committee to take into consideration the Acts
regulating the importation of corn. Lord MELBOURNE
saw no reason for the motion. On a division it was
supported by 7, and opposed by 61. So ends, we are
afraid, the Corn-law question, for this Session, in the
Loch. We regret this for the sake of the Peers ;to
them it is pregnant with danger—to the country it is
full of hope, as it foretells the extinction of two evils,
where we sought to get rid only of one. If the Peers
will not put an end to the Devil's laws, the authority of
the Peers must itself be put an end to. Their Lordships
immediately adjourned.
Sir STRATFORD CANNING, in the Commons, put a ques-
tion to Lord PALMERSTON, which elicited the statement
that the last advices he had received from Washington
were by the Great Western ; that the negotiations with
respect to the boundary question were still going on ;
an'el that he believed the best feeling on the subject
existed in the Government of the United States. His
Lordship said not one word about Mr. CoLoumous
being expected here on a special mission connected with
this subject, as was reported yesterday.
The adjourned debate on the Corn-laws was re-
sumed by Mr. HUME, and was virtually concluded by
&c ROBERT PEEL, for the House would not, after he
had addressed it, listen to any other person. And
let us at once notice the superiority of the be-
haviour of the Anti to the Pro Corn-law men.
Tile latter would not hear any one of their oppo-
nents with patience. Mr. POULETT Tnom-
etre and Lord Hownic were both denied a
hearing, while the Anti-Corn-law men gave great
and silent attention to Sir ROBTRT PEEL.
They comprehend and will be better able to refute
ii:s arguments. The speakers who intervened
between Mr. HUME and Sir ROBERT were Col.
Wool), Mr. HANDLEY, and Mr. HOBHOUSE, the
latter of whom made a bold straightforward speech
against all compromise. Sir ROBERT PEEL spoke for
t,.vo hours and a half, and was heard throughout with
unabated attention. The Right Hon. Baronet made
a plausible statement, and was the more feasible, inas-
much as he pretended calmly to examine and refute
the arguments of his opponents, while he misrepre-
sented them. For example, Mr. GROTE had stated that
we could get 1,000,000 quarters of wheat from the Conti-
nent, obviously meaning that supplies could not be imme-
diate, and, till cultivation was extended, could not be en-
larged; Mr. CLAY, again, adverting to the capabilities of
the world, held forth the fertile land on the banks of the
Vistula and Oder as offering us hereafter a boundless
supply ; with a specious candour, and which did but the
more betray the jesuitism of the proceedings, he arrayed
these two statements against each other, as if they
both applied to the present moment. Then assuming
for his purpose that the million of quarters to which
Mr. GROTE limited the immediate supply, would
ba the utmost quantity we could get from
the whole world in all time, he made the Tory side of
the House ring with cheers as he pourtraycd the
wholly inefficient effects of the millions of quarters in
altering the relative condition of our own and foreign
manufacturers. He forgot that neither the manufactu-
rers nor Mr. VILLIERS count so much on the abolition
of the Corn-laws making an alteration in the prices, as
on that abolition allowing of much mutual interchange,
which the laws now prohibit, and setting their
industry free. Again, Sir ROBERT, referring to Lord
Howices statement that the growth of wool had
flourished since the duty was abolished, in order to
prove that the apprehensions of the agriculturists from
the repeal of the Corn-law was unfounded, made the
Noble Lord appear to prove that the abolition of the
Corn-laws would raise the price of corn without lessen-
ing fluctuations in price. But Sir ROBERT should know
that both the rise in the price of the wool and the fluc-
tuations in its price, are consequences of our Corn-
laws, which cause fluctuations in the price of
nil things, and also enhance their price. Sir
ROBERT took bold of the manufacturers' state-
ment, that their prosperity was corning to a
still stand ; that, impeded and hampered in the opera-
tions, they were unable to go on prospering as is natural
to industrious and willing men ; and, to prove that they
were wrong, he quoted the amount of deposits in some
savings banks, which we rejoice to know are increasing.
Because the moral habits of the artizan are improving,
and they are becoming frugal and careful, and because
the Corn-law has not been able wholly to annihilate the
irnmrnse advantages of our great coal fields and the
wondrous ingenuity and skill of our people ; and
because they hare not wholly stopped the pro-
gress of population, Sir ROBERT finds them
advantegeous. Admitting his speech to be clever for The debates of the night before last have made
his andieece, we must, at the same time, say that it was
one fact very manifest.
4 mere collection of poor fallacies, unworthy of the great
questio Our statesmen will not
nhe undertook to discuss. He made the Mi. give up the Corn-laws, because that would derange
enters look ridiculous, we admit ; and the proudest of
his triumphs was obtained over their indecision. the revenue. We believe they are mistaken ; but
, taking the matter on their showing
After Sir R. PEEL had done, Mr. BROTHERTON, Mr.
Has
eve , this, that these abominable laws are to be kept up
Mr. FIELD- and
other gentlemen, essayed
to address the House, but the landlords would listenln orderi to keep up another bad system. Our
ealy to • lea- own friends. Mr. FIELDEN then moved financial system as an opprobrium. We have waste
an adjournmenta. of the debate to Monday—for the
motion 61,and extravagance at home and abroad. The duties
moved an against it 475. Mr. EWART subsequently on timber, on sugar, on coffee, the excise on malt
adjournment till Tuesday—for, 53, against, and soap, the legacy and probate duties, have
377' Finally, after a lonhgathubbub, the debate was ad- long been a scandal and a reproach to the coun-
journed till Monday. W
protracted debates, we knowmnayotb, ec raetns lanai
combining
ththeseem t 7
amongst the Minister. witl
he the
). And because the Ministers will not look these
with the dissensions'
absolute necessity .or all the Members of the
difficulties and these evils in the face, and amend
p.ltate themselves from Lord M " 1 them, the
large towns to Corn-laws must be continued. That all
ik;:r constituents madmen for E9°DitNi who
calls
CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER may play
pursuing an honest and with Exchequer Bills and make the Bank of Eng-
J ;ISt object—an object which •is dear to their hearts, land an annual present of 300,000 i. or 400,0001.,