The Sun.
London, England, 1822-05-14 00:00:00

manufacturers has offered to their labourers as. a day, besides
two pints of beer each, and fuel for their family.
Mr. ATTWOOD stated, that this was only for four days in
the week.

Mr. PEEL would leave it to his Hon. Friend the Member for
Staffordshire, who at his request had abandoned his Parliamen-
tary duties to visit in his Magisterial capacity the county which
he represented, to speak more fully upon that particular point.
He would now refer, not to the present, but to a past pe-
riod, to illustrate his argument. The period to which he should
allude was a period under which that beauteous order of things,
a paper standard, flourished most largely.—(Hear !)—Why,
the very words " paper standard" was a contradiction in
terms. Yet under that beauteous order of things what was the
state of the manufacturing population? In 1816 and 1817 we had
all the blessings of the paper standard ; but in those years we
had the Ilabeus Corpus Act suspended, and several other pre-
cautions taken for the maintenance of our liberties and the pre-
servation of the public tranquillity. Disaffection to the Govern-
ment and the Constitution was not at that time attributed to the
bulk of the people, but, as was stated in a Report from a Com-
mittee of that House, to causes existing among the lower classes,
one of which was, privation in constquence of the lowness of
wages and the increased price of the necessaries of life. " But,"
said the Hon. Member for Callington " there had at that
time been a great revulsion of prices." To be sure there had ;
that was one of the evils arising from the paper standard.—
(Hear !)—" Oh yes," said the Hon. Member for Callington,
" but you ought to recollect that a paper currency gives you
wealth and capital." Of course it did, but only till a day of
payment came.--(Hear !)--In 1816 what was it but an over-
issue of paper which led to great speculation, and a re-action of
it created much bankruptcy and distress, that reduced the coun-
try to its pitiable situation ?—(Hear !) —That system might go
on well if it were always to continue. But, though a man might
be happy when he got drunk, of when he imbibed oxygen gas,
still he must expect to endure some misery before he returned
to a state of sobriety, or before he was again able to inhale
the atmospheric air.—(Cheers.)--To go on well under a paper
system, it must always continue—just as a drunken man, to
be always happy, ought to be always drunk.--(Cheers.)--
The Hon. Secretary then proceeded to state, that he must again
refer to the evidence of the witness whom he had quoted. That
witness was asked, " Has there been no circumstance in the last
two 37ears•but supply and demand to determine the price of any
of the necessaries of life ?" To which he replied, " Certainly :
nothing can determine the price of articles but the relative ac-
tion of supply and demand." That was an admission which
the Hon. Member seemed to have forgotten that evening.—
[Here some Gentleman on the Ministerial Bench interrupted
Mr. Peel, for the purpose of informing him, we suppose, that
the Member for Callington was Mr. Matthias Attwood, and
not Mr. Thomas Attwood.] Mr. Peel then proceeded—He had
thought that it was the opinion of the Hon. Member for Call..
ington, that he had been quoting—sure he was, that he had
seen the same, or similar doctrines, from the Hon. Member in
print—and he had referred to them to show what he conceived
to be a great inconsistency in the argument o,f the Honour-
able Gentleman that evening. Alluding to what had fallen
from the Honourable Member for Callington, regarding the
making corit the standard of value, the Honourable Secretary
said, that from the year 1700 to 1783, there had been little or
no change in the price of gold, whilst, on the contrary, there
had been the greatest fluctuations in the price of. corn. In
1815, when wheat was 645. per quarter, gold was 51.65. per
ounce, and accordingly paper was much depreciated. In 1817,
when wheat was 945. per quarter, gold was of much lower
value. Indeed, of all articles corn was that which it was most
unfit to fix as a standard, since it was liable to great fluctua-
dons in consequence of the smallest increase or decrease of the
natural quantity in market. After some other observations to
the same effect, the Right Hon. Gentleman sat down, stating
that he should not have addressed them at such length, had it
not been for the pointed allusions made to him by the lion.
Member for Callington.—(Hear !)
Mr. ATTWOOD explained.
Mr. ELLICE defended the course of conduct he had pursued
on the discussion of the Bill introduced by the_ Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Peel.) There was no man who more sincerely
admired the talents of 111 r. Horner than he did, but the House
would recollect that when Mr. Horner recommended the quick
return to the coin standard, there were only thirty millions of
Bank and Country notes in circulation, whereas in 1819, when
the Right lion. Gentleman introduced his Bill, there were
sixty millions. He (Mr. Ellice) was free to confess that he did
not then estimate the extent of that measure ; and he would go
further and say, that neither that House nor the country had
even then any idea of the extent'of the results to which it would
yet lead—(Hear !y—lt would, he feared, be found as his Hon.
Friend the Member for Bramber (Mr. Irving) had stated, a sa-
crifice nearly of one-half of the property of many individuals.—
It affected every borrower, both public and private, to an ex-
treme degree, without at all being prejudicial to the creditors.
If any person could have calculated upon such an operation,
however solicitous to obtain a certain standard, he would have
certainly paused before he gave his assent to the measure.
Mr. T. WILSON defended the Bill, commonly called Mr.
Peel's, against' the epithets applied by the Hon. Member for
Callington, who called it an iniquitous measure.
Sir It. 'WILSON said, that whenever the repeal of a tax was
proposed, the Noble Lord (Londonderry) was always ready to
call out " Revolution !" He had done the same on the ques-
tion of the Income Tax, and no doubt would do the same to-
morrow, when pensions and diplomatic situations came under
the consideration of the House.
Mr. LITTLETON confirmed the statement of Mr. Peel as
to the refusal of the Staffordshire miners to accept of 3s. a day,
and beer twice a day.
Mr. DENISON supported the proposition of the Member
for Coventry.
Mr. BROUGHAM said he did not consider that he was
bound to exculpate himself, as no one had a right to arraign
him for his vote on 'Wednesday last in favour of the reduction
of taxation. Even if any Member had used an argument of a
doubtful tendency, he should feel himself justified in voting
for the question without reference either to the person with
whom it originated, or to the arguments by which it was sup-
ported. He had voted for the Resolution, because he was
convinced that the best and most effectual relief was to be
found in the remission of taxation.
The House then divided—
For bringing up the Report - - 153
Against it - = - 22
Majority
On strangers returning to the gallery they found the House
engaged in going through the Resolutions contained in the
Report.
• Mr. HUSKISSON rose for the parpose of submitting his
Resolutions, not with any view (after the decision which the
House had just conic to) of opposing- them to those of his Noble
Friend, but he wished to have them recorded on the Journals.
lie thought the House had, in approving the Resolutions before
them, attended too much to one inconvenience—that of the danger
of too great an influx of foreign grain from the warehouses,
while they overlooked another—the want of a steady remune-
rating price to the farmer. It was his opinion that the safest
mode would be a free trade in corn, with a fair protecting duty.
Without this, the farmer would in time of dearth be inundated
with foreign corn without an adequate protection. The time,
he was convinced, would at length come, when we should have
such a trade, by which the British grower would be protected
in a degree equivalent to the advantages under which he la-
boured. .The Right Hon. Clentleman then moved his Resolu-
tions by way of amendment.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that in giving
the negative to the Resolutions of his Right lion Friend, he
would not deny the general principle which they involved, but
he thought that principle applied to a different state of things.
Hewes anxious to see the general basis of the Corn Laws in
other countries settled down, before he consented to such a
measure.
The amendment was then put, and negatived.
Mr. RICARDO then submitted his itesolutions for the sake
of having them recorded on the Journals. They were also put
and negatived. The other Resolutions were then ordered to be
read a second time. After some of them had been agreed to,
Mr. MAXWELL suggested to the Noble Lord that, by way
of experiment, he should allow one species of grain to be im-
ported free, to ascertain whether the suppositions of several
members on the subject were well founded; and to satisfy the
manufacturers, who saw that every protection was held out to
the farmers, while they were obliged to pay the increased price.
He did not wish that we should have a trade without a fair pro-
tecting duty, but that should not be such a one as would keep
corn enormously high. To talk to the farmer of 80s. of the
present currency was delusion. *The consumer, whose pur-
chase regulated the prices of commodities, could not give such a
price. It was idle, therefore, to expect it. Among the causes
of the distress at present felt, he would place an under-
circulation of money, not an over-production of grain—an un-
equal taxation, and not a redundant population. •To render
taxation more equal, he would, as money was the ground of
taxes, follow it into whatever channel it flowed. Ile would,
therefore, abolish all taxes on the necessaries of life, and sub-
stitute a property tax in its stead. Any other remedy which
had not this principle for its basis should not have his support.
The whole of the resolutions having been read, were agreed
to ; and a Bill ordered to be brought in pursuant thereto.
ENGLISH AND IRISH POSTMASTERS-GENERAL.

Mr. S. RICE, adverting to a motion of his which stood for
to-Morrow, wished to learn• from the Noble Lord, whether it
was the intention of his Majesty's Government to resist the
motion for the removal of the second Postmaster-General in
Ireland?

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that, pursuant to
an address of that House, Ministers had advised with his Ma.

jesty, who had been gra'ciously pleased to recommend the re-
moval of one of the Post-masters in England, and he had now