The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-07 00:00:00

SAT:I7IIDAY VENING, JULY 7, 1846,

i
n Hungary.—(Hear, hear.) That was the explanation
which had passed between our Government and
the Government of Austria, Russia did not intend in
any other way to interfere with the affairs of Europe,
nor would their assistance to Austria disturb the treaty
of Vienna.—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. HUME observed, that it was alleged that a cer-
tain agreement had been entered into between Prussia
and Austria, by which certain portio•as of Europe would
be conceded to Russia, which arrangement would greatly
interfere with the Treaty of Vienna.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not aware that any such
agreement had been made or was even contemplated.
Mr. OSBORNE—WiII the Noble Lord state the
grounds for his calling this an iny,urrection in Hungary?
Lord J. RUSSELL—That is hardly a question that I
can be called upon to answer.
Mr. OSBORNE—Then I beg to give the Noble Lord
notice that I will take an early opportunity of bringing
the subject under his consideration.
The subject then dropped.
MARRIAGES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the order of the day
relating to this Bill be postponed till Monday.
Mr. F. MACKENZIE moved as an amendment, that
it be postponed till this day three months.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ..• ... 60

enabled under it to acquire a perpetuity to the prejudice of
the lessor. Then came the Rate-in-Aid Bill of the present
session, which he denounced as unjust and impolitic in the
highest degree, and as regarded the Constitution-of the Irish
Poor-law Board, he belioved they pursued a course of nen-
duct which in many instances was far from justifiable. He
also complained of the carelessness evinced by the Govern-
ment in the present year, in not rescuing the lives of so
many unhappy people, who had perished of famine, in the
Southern and Western districts. It did appear to him that
the measures taken by her Majesty's Government with refer-
ence to the prevention of starvation in Ireland, were con-
demned even by Sir Charles Trevelyan. As regarded the
western districts the proper measures had not been taken
even now.—( Hear, hear.) He was authorised in stating
this from what had fallen from Mr. Osborne. The Ho-
nourable Member read a communication of this gentle-
man, on the subject, to the Times, in support of his assertion.
And further, with reference to the poor, a case of mis-
management had been made out against the Government by
the Commissioners themselves. Details of misery never ex-
ceeded had been laid before the House in reference to the
western districts in Ireland, but nothing had been done by
the Executive Government. Ireland was prostrate by a visi-
tation of the Almighty, and no efficient effort had yet been
made to restore her. It was true they bad expended their
treasure, but not wisely, and they would. ultimately experi-
ence the evils of their want of foresight.—(Hear, hear.) For
these reasons, he felt constrained to vote for the motion of the
Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire.
Mr. HUME said, that the Government had been censured
by the Honourable Gentleman fur their administration of
Irish affairs, but he thought that they were not to be blamed,
for greater anxiety, or a greater amount of labour, or more
attentive consideration had never been bestowed by the
Ministry upon any subject. If thst session were rightly
characterised, it might justly be cleignated as one ad-
journed debate upon the affairs of Ireland.—(Hear.) He
did not absolve the local authorities in Ireland from blame.
Things would have taken a different course in that country,
if they had efficiently aided the measures of the Legislature.
He could not think that Government in this instance was
liable to the censure of the Honourable Member. With re-
gard to the Labour-rate Bill, he could not think that there
was any ground to blame the Government. With regard
to the poor-law, that might not have been so efficient, but
it was the House, and not the Government that were to be
blamed, it indeed blame attached to any one for the provi-
sions of that measure. With regard to the Rate-in-Aid Bill
he looked upon it as a means of promoting industry.—
( Hear, hear.) He, therefore, thought the Hon. Gentleman
was not fortunate in his choice of complaints. He did not
think he had made out any case whatever, and he should,
therefore, leave the subject. He certainly had intended to
move an amendment, but when he considered the object of
the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, namely, the re-
moval of the Ministry, and the nature of his statements,
that he had not suggested any new course of government,
except with regard to free-trade, which he did not consider
to be the cause of distress, and that he had not suggested
who were to succeed if the Administration were removed,
and the consequences which would follow such removal,
under such circumstances he had thought it right and
fair, after considering the answer of Government, not to
bring forward any amendment or to support the motion.
(Hear, hear.) He was anxious to state his views of the
cause of the distress which existed. He thought the grounds
selected by the Honourable Member for Buckinghamshire
to found his motion were not the most happy chosen ;
but still he had made out a case which ought to arrest
the attention of every thinking man. The mere statement
that the able-bodied paupers in this country had increased
from 1846 to 1848 by 74,000, required most serious reflec-
tion. It was true the number had decreased since, but not to
anything like a satisfactory extent. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer had reported an improvement in individual towns
without which they would have been in a condition of the
greatest distress. But how would that relieve the distress in
the agricultural districts.—(Hear, hear.) The cause to
which he attributed the distress of the country was excessive
and unequal taxation. They had all the expenses of a war
establishment in time of peace. Unless that was remedied
every panacea would fail. It might excite a smile to look
back to compare the revenue raised in former times with that
expended at the present day. It was still increasing, and it
was utterly impossible, notwithstanding the cheapness of
provisions, that our industry could compete with the whole
world under such a pressure of taxation. It was quite im-
possible that they could keep up this expenditure.—( Hear,
hear.) The only means by which they could benefit the
country and remove distress, was by reducing their esta-
blishments, lessening their expenses, and leaving more in
the pockets of every class to benefit themselves.—(Hear,
hear.) He did not believe that the Government knew the
state of the working and industrial classes generally. A
very large portion of those who were formerly in
ease were now very differently situated. It was utterly
impossible to continue that drain upon the purse of every
man. From an analysis he had prepared of the sources
of revenue, he had arrived at the conclusion that the
middle classes were oppressed and the rich let off.—(Hear,
hear.) The taxation was utterly unequal, and bore very
heavily on the poor man in comparison with the taxation
which the rich man had to pay. The increase of taxation,
and also the inequality of taxation, could be fairly stated to
be the cause of the distress, d sta eof the country. When
he went back to the year 1817, he found chat from that year
up to 1827 the expenditure averaged about fifty-three mil-
lions, and the income about fifty-five millions, showing that
during that ten years the excess of the income over the ex-
penditure averaged about two millions per annum. In 1792
the expenditure was fifteen million., of which nine millions
formed the interest of the debt. When, therwore, he looked
at their p! esent expenditure, no man could say for a moment
that he was in error in attributing their present distressed
state to the over-taxation of the country. If lion. Gentle-
men opposite were anxious to improve the condition of the
agricultural population, they ought to join with him in re-
ducing the expenditure, and not only in reducing the expen-
diture, but in making the taxation fall equally upon all
classes. While the removal of some restrictions had done
good, tkey had not gone far enough, taking the great evil of
the country to be excessive taxation, and on that ground
he hoped the time was not far distant when they would
devote their attention to bringing in proper measures.
He would conclude by reiterating the sentiment he had
commenceed with—that but for free trade they could not
have got over the difficulties which the country had
been subject to, and which it was incumbent on them to
meet.— (Hear, near.)
The Earl of MARCH said he would confine himself to that
part of the subject which related to agriculture. When the
Hon. Member Cllr. Hume) had attributed so much injury
to the inequality of taxation, he ( the Earl of March) had a
right to ask that Hon. Member how it was that he had not
supported the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for
Buckinghamshire (Mr. Lisraeli) in the early part of the
session, for revising the taxation of the country, on the
ground of its inequality ?—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl
then alluded to the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the first night of the debate,
and while he complimented him on the ability with which
he had dealt with an immense mass of figures, he must at the
same time observe that he placed little value on the letters
which the Right Hon. Gentleman had read to them, for
nothing could be easier than for him (the Earl of March) to
select farmers in the county of Sussex, for instance, who
would unhesitatingly write to him that nothing but protec-
tion would bring back a state of prosperity.—(Hear, hear.)
He altogether denied that the prices of agricultural produce
which had been quoted, and the years selected by the Right
Hon. Gentleman for his quotations, gave anything like an
adequate idea of the state of the agricultural interest. He
contended that the free-trade system had been the cause of
the ruin which had befallen the landed interest. Had the
sliding scale been retained, it could have adjusted itself to the
change of seasons, and to the necessities of the country, but,
instead of that principle being maintained, they had abolished
that protection which the farmer was entitled to, and their
present condition showed the consequences of that measure.
Sir R. PEEL then rose, and spoke as follows : —Mr.
Speaker,—Sir, Ido not propose to enter at any length—if
indeed at all—into those considerations of a purely political
nature, which are naturally raised by the questions brought
forward by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Bucks. I
should find it wholly out of my power to do justice to those
considerations in the period during which I can fairly expect
the House to listen to me with patience. To discuss the
question of Ireland—of the colonial, of the foreign policy of
this country—in one speech, must, if any attempt were really
made to do justice to these various topics, absorb so much
of the time of the House, that little time would be left for
the discussion of that which I consider to be the main point
at issue this night, namely—Shall we displace her Majesty's
Government for the purpose of subverting the commercial
policy upon which they have acted 2 (Cheers, and
cries of " Hear, hear.") Since the accession of the Ire-
sent Government to power I have felt it to be my duty
to give the great majority of the measures which they
have introduced my cordial support. I have made allow-
ances for the great difficulties with which they have had
to contend—(Cheers)—the difficulties arising out of
commercial convulsions, famine in Ireland. and the preys-
lent moral and social revolution by which the peace of
Europe and the tranquillity of individual states have been
disturbed.—(Hear, hear.) I have thought it was for the
public interest that the energy and power of the Executive
Government of this country during such a crisis should not
be impaired by factious or by captious opposition.—(Loud
cheers.) At the same time, Sir, I wish it to be distinctly
understood, that all that I mean to imply by the vote which
I shall give this night is this, that I cordially approve of the
general principles of commercial policy by which her Ma-
jesty's Government have been guided, and that I will not
consent to a motion, the direct and avowed object, or, at all
events, the main object, of which is to censure them for their
adherence to those principles of commercial policy which I
have mentioned, and to substitute in their place some other
and different economic principles. -- Hear, hear.) Sir, the
course which I propose to pursue is thie—to examine the
grounds on which the Honourable Gentleman the Member
for Buckinghamshire has impugned the commercial policy
which has been now acted upon for some years.—(Hear.)
I shall then propose to consider whether or no that new—
or, at least, that different principle of economic policy,
which the Honourable Gentleman proposes to adopt has
any foundation in reason, and whether it would contri-
bute to the welfare and prosperity of the country. In ex-
amining the arguments of the Hon. Gentleman, I will take
that course which appears to me to be by far the best—by
far the most likely to conduce to the elucidation of truth—
namely, to state his arguments, each separately, as nearly as
I can, in the words in which it was conveyed, and then to
give that which appears to me to be the answer to it.—
( Hear.) And, Sir, were that the course generally pursued—
(Cheers)—a course substituting the plain, simple test of rea-
son for vague declamation—(Cheers)—l think, on the whole,
that it would more conduce than the method now so much in
vogue to the satisfactory elucidation of the matters with
which this House has to deal.—(Continued cheers.) Sir, I
understand the Hon. Gentleman to impeach the commercial
policy which has been for some time acted upon, and to at-
tribute a great part of the suffering under which it is ad-
mitted that some interests in this country and some portions
of this country are now labouring to that commercial policy.
But I was struck—l confess it—by one admission of the Hon.
Gentleman at the commencement of his speech; and I owe
an acknowledgment which I willingly pay him for that
admission. Sir, the Honourable Gentleman was describing
the state of the Government of the country when the Noble
Lord succeeded to office. Ha then made this admission with
respect to the position of the country, and the European in.
fluence of the Goverment of 1846—he said that Europe was
then in a state of unequalled tranquillity—that there was
great confidence reposed in her Majesty's Government—
that if troubles arose abroad there was a ready reference to
the authority of the British Government, and a willing
acquiescence in its decision, whatever it might be, for the
solution of those difficulties. The Hon. Gentleman said,
morever, that Ireland was in a state of comparative pros-
perity, that the agricultural interest here was contented, and
looked forward with hope to the future. He said, too, that the
greatest export trade which this country had ever carried
on had existed in the course of the year 18 in, and that the
present Government found, on its accession to office, a sur-
plus of between three and four millions. Well, then, if that
were the case—if all interests were so prosperous—if such
was the condition of our finance—if such was the condition of
our export trade—l ask this question—what were the prin-
ciples of commercial policy which had been pursued for some
time previously ?—(Loud cheers.) I found that in 1841
there was a deficit of 2,500,0001, la the preceding

Against it ... 136
Majority
Mr. FORBES complained of the mode in which the Go-
vernment sated in respect to these two Bills, and moved that
the House do then adjourn. The hour proposed on Monday
for the consideration of these Bills was the most inconve-
nient one for the Scotch Members.
Lord J. RUSSELL could hardly believe that such objec-
tions would have been raised to his proposition after having
conceded to the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire the only
two nights they had this week for Government business.—
( Hear, hear.) It was the intention of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to propose an advance of money to a railway
company for the west of Ireland at five o'clock on Monday,
as it was advisable, from the intense degree of distress in
that part of the country, that no further time should be
lost in affording this relief. Under these circumstances he
felt himself obliged to adhere to his proposition respecting
the Scotch Bills, unless it was the general wish of the
House to proceed with them then, instead of the adjourned
debate.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI expressed his great surprise at the course
taken by some of the Scotch Members on the present occa-
sion.—(Hear, hear.) Considering the late period of the ses-
sion, and the inconvenience of having an adjourned debate of
this nature still pending, he hoped that the Hon. Members
would not press the opposition any further against the gene-
ral feeling of the House...

Mr. MACKENZIE said that they had never had a discus.
sion in this House upon the principle of these Bills. He
thought that the Scotch Members were fully justified in their
objections to the course proposed by the Government. Why,
he asked, did not the Government select twelve o'clock on
Monday for proposing the grant of money for the Irish rail-
way, instead of fixing the discussion upon two Scotch Bills
at that hour, when it was most inconvenient for Scotch Mem-
bers to attend?

Sir R. PEEL said that he had a strong desire to express
his sentiments in regard to the m.tion of the Hon. Member
for Buckinghamshire, and he had come down to the House
this evening for that purpose. His experience went to show
that it was usual to proceed fry m night to night with a❑ ad-
journed debate (all Hon. Members who had business on the
paper giving way for it), in order that they might have the
advantage of a continuous discussion, as the more interrup-
tion that was given to such a proceeding the less were the
public satisfied. He thought that, considering the conces-
sions made by the Noble Lord in relation to the subject of
the adjourned debate, the opposition of the Scotch Members
was not quite fair.
Mr. ELLIOT wished the public to understand that the
opposition on the present occasion was only confined to a few
of the Scotch Members on the other side of the House.
The Earl of LINCOLN thought the taunt thrown out by
the Hon. Member for Roxburghshire came badly from him
considering the office which he held in connexion with the
Government. He denied that the opposition was confined
to the one side of the House—it was equally strong on the
other side. He thought that the Scotch Members had a
tight to ask the Noble Lord to postpone the consideration of
these Bills to some more convenient day than the one named.
Mr. HASTIE said that though he did not approve of
these Bills, he wished the House to understand that the
Hon. Member for Peebleshire did not,.on the present occa-
sion, represet t the whole of the Scotch-Members.

Mr. HUME was opposed to tne mode in which the Go-
vernment were proceeding in respect to these Bills, which
were pressed forward against the wishes of the people of
Scotland, expressed through their petitions. He was sur-
prised that the state of the Exchequer at present, when there
was not a penny in it, was not sufficient to deter the Go-
vernment incurring the heavy expense which the carrying
out the details of these Bills would necessarily entail upon
the country. As to there being a surplus in hand, that was
mere nonsense. Let the House but look at the decrease of
400,0001. in the last quarter. ( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
Mr. FORBES ultimately withdrew his amendment.
After a short discussion both the Bills referred to were
postponed to twelve o'clock on Monday.
THE STATE OF THE NATION.

The order of the day in reference to the adjourned debate
on the state of the nation having been read.
Mr. SLANEY resumed the debate, and said that, although
all his interests were identified with the land, he could not
concur in the view taken of the subject by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Buckinghamshire. He contended that, in looking at
the distress which pressed on this country, the Hon. Gentle •
man was bound to take into consideration the famine that
had occurred in Ireland. The great object of the Honourable
Gentleman seemed to be, a desire to raise the price of food to
the people, and also the trice of llnd. But he was mistaken
if he thought he could go back to the old system of the corn-
laws.—(Hear.) If rents were something less than they
were, they should consider that they got all those things
which were the subject of expenditure at a much
lower rate than they did formerly. It was said
by gentlemen opposite, that the working people
advanced in an equal degree with the other
classes of society. Teat he denied, it appeared,
from the reports of various (3,-mtnissions which examined the
subject that the reverse was the case, and that they were
in a very depressed state. In fact, they were neglected in
mind, body, and estate. If they were to pay greater atten-
tion to the condition of the working classes, they would
create a new source of demand for the home market. A
proof that the working people were not progressing like the
other classes, was that crime had increased three times
as fast as the population. Ttiey had also fallen in the en-
joyments of the comforts of lite. The greatest cost to the
landed proprietors was the cest of crime. In 1836 a Com-
mission was appointed toinquire into the cost of the con-
stabulary. It appeared that the cost of crime in Liverpool
was 700,000/. a year. Liverpool was the sixty-fourth part
of the rated amount of the entire kingdom. He would
take the entire cost of crime in that ratio, and would
state that the cost of crime throughout England and Wales
amounted to 11,.00,0001. Then the next item was the
pocrferate, which amounted to 5,200,u00/. a year. The evils
of the poor arose from neglect of their education and to
sanitary regulations. Then he estimated the amount
lessl, b thanen t s,loo,oool.berewes e Tbhee
considered
ecroesdt
class from illness, which might
oteatcve,oboostthieoffceorcs crime—b,`2oo,oool. mn
hopwiaalheivdaemti bnti eltleaicnolonmstas tnpreventedhwdeaaswiolaorlktfl byhg sanitary . regulations. Thus they
:o'o,ooooolf. . forf..r theth e
upon these items for
Scotla.nd and Ireland as equal to the half of this amount, or
13,650,0004 Then there was ten millions expended in
cpheoapldipceel
rl
t,Oegret.Obv,oe,ooplue.iderfoeitarit;l4:l
gross total of . .
51,000,000 . implored
spirits,t
reallyh considerldoegpirvetsreged, a
this
here swuebrjee ctit ,f
fifty
millionsd t h
the landedef
money
interesteney
w which
they might gradually diminish, and thereby relieve that in-
terest from many heavy burdens, by improving the condi-
tion of the working classes. He felt obliged to oppose the
motion of the Hon. Member, because it would have the
effect of removing the present Government from office, and
which possessed his confidence, and that the object was also
to raise the price of food by putting a duty on corn.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said he would teuch upon this
subje t, as it referred to Ireland, which was now as great a
difficulty as it had ever been. He contended that the
evils of Ireland were greatly aggravated by the conduct
and policy pursued by the Government, and that the Irish
difficulty was rather increased than diminished by that
policy. True, they were surrounded by no ordinary diffi-
culties when they came into office, but they had advantages
such as no other Government had, in almost entire disap-
pearance of party feeling. and the existence of an anxiety on
all sides to lay aside all differences for the sake of the
country. There was a general disposition in Ireland to give
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government every facility
to carry out his intentions, aud to forget all party feeling, in
order to assist him in every way. The Land Commissioners,
of whom he had the honour to be one, called attention in
1835 to the wretched condition of the labouring classes, and
various suggestions for improvement were given. That was
the condition of Ireland when the free-trade measures were
introduced; and, without entering into a oiecussion on that
great subject, he might say that Ireland had to suffer and
near the brunt of that policy.—(Hear, hear.) The interests
of Ireland, he contended, were, on that occasion, sacrificed to
the manufacturers of England; and in answer to what was
said of the famine accelerating the abolition of the corn-laws,
a speech of the late Lord George Ben inck, who quoted the
opinion of the Duke of Wellington, proved that the sliding-
scale would have answered every purpose required, without
repealing the corn laws altogether. Such was
the condition of Ireland in 1816. When the
Noble Lord. had almost uncontrolled power to remedy,
the Irish social system, he was not without receiving warn-
ing on the subject, and that too from some of the most
practical menal Ireland. On the 27th of July, 1846, Lord
Clancarty called attention in the House of Lords to the
state of Ireland, and on the 31st of the same month,
shortly after the Ministers came into office, Lord
Monteagle moved an address to the Crown to the same
effect. Previous to this a measure was passed by the
Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, for the
relief of distress in Ireland, under which 120,000/. was ex-
pended, 60,000/. of which was since paid back, and by
means of which the greatest good was done. But the pre-
sent Government, in the following year, namely, in 1846,
when they came into office, passed the Relief Act, under
which so many enormous abuses were committed. Under the
circumstances it was quite impossible it could be otherwise.
It was a costly experiment for the country, having cost
4,848,2i5/., one of which would have been sufficient under
a proper management ; besides introducing a system of de-
moralisation which they had so often since reason to
deplore. Many remonstrances were made, and his Hon.
Friend the Member for the county Limerick, who had not.
then a seat in that House, called the attention of the Irish
Government to the subject. , ord Besborough. then Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, was in favour of reproductive works,
but he was overruled for a time, until the celebrated letter of
Mr. Labouchere was published. That, however, came too
late, for it was then found impossible to discontinue the men
from the public works. A series of resolutionswasthperessyesntteemd
to the Noble Lord at the head of the Government last year,
signed by almost all the Peers and Commoners in Ireland,'
but they had no effect. They protested against
of out-door relief, on the ground that it would interfere with
the ordinary agricultural pursuits, bet in vain. Apart, how-
ever, from those resources for the relief of the poor, they in-
troduced cruee Bills in respect to the property of Ireland.
He had no hesitation in saying that he approved of the ob-
jects of those measures, but he condemned the hasty manner
and want of forethought and judgment wLich characterised
their introduction. Last session a measure was brought for-
ward respecting the condition of the landlord and tenant in
Ireland, and though extremely desirable, it was most inju-
rious to leave it iu a state of doubt. Then another respect-
ing the conversion of leases for lives,into leases of perpetuity,
and it did not pass as yet, nor would it probably during the
present session. It was drawn up by an Hon. and Learned,
Friend of his, but was now very much altered. The Encum-
bered Estates Bill was sent to the House of Lords, and
was there much altered also, so that doubt and hesi-
tation characterised all the measures which were brought
forward in respect to Ireland.—(Hear. hear.) He next
denounced a Bill, called the Estates Leasing Bill, by the 18i1i
dame of which a peon haying a deriyatin lutorot was

year, in 1840, you had adopted the system of im which ought to lie derived from gloves to the smuggler, and
posing additional duties on our imports-you had im- to permit lace and embroidery to be sent into this country
posed an addition of 5 per cent. upon all existing under circumstances which no vigilance can control; or is
duties on the import of raw material, upon articles of it not the wiser plan to facilitate the legal import by lower-
food, and, indeed, upon everything which constitutes the ing the duties, and enabling the trader here to know at any
import trade of the country. I find that that addition, so rate the nature and extent of the evil he has to contend with?
placed upon imports, had produced no corresponding aug- -(Cheers.) Let us take the case of foreign manufactures
mentation of the revenue-(Cheers)-but directly the re- imported in brass, copper, and cutlery. I have not forgotten
verse. I find that, in the case of additions to the assessed the speech of the Hon. Member for Birmingham, in which he
taxes-of additions to direct taxation, the anticipations , f the described the state of Birmingham to be snch that the Bit
Chancellor of the Exchequer had been realised, while in the minghem manufacturers in brass, copper, cutlery, and but-
instance of additions to Customs' duties upon imports his an- tons, could not find a sale for their articles ; that their trade
ticipations had not been realised. The nominal 5 per cent. was greatly depressed, and that the quantity of German and
of addition to taxation had produced no 5 per cent. of ad- other foreign cutlery and buttons imported interfered with
ditional revenue.-( Hear, hear.) But in 1842 you adopted the Birmingham market. But is it not marvellous that the
a different principle. You imposed an income-tax, and you Birmingham manufacturer should be beaten in Birminghata
reduced taxation upon all the great articles of subsistence.- by the foreigner, when he can . beat the foreigner in all the
( Hear, and cheers,) You reduced taxation upon raw ma- other, markets of the world ?-(Hear, hear, and a cry of
terials, and upon the food-upon the subsistence of the " No, from Mr. Muntz, we believe.) Being aware of the
people. You found prohibitions upon every animal which deep interest which the Hon. Member takes in all that cons
constitutes food. You found prohibitions upon meat, cerns Birmingham, and of his general knowledge of the mtie
high protection upon corn and heavy duties upon raw ma- nufactures of that town, I was startled by his declaration,
terial. You adopted a different system in 1842. You im- which elicited some cheers, and I said to an Hon. Friend of
posed an income- tax, by which 5,000/. was raised. You mine, "Let us know the truth ; let us have an account of all
removed the prohibitions upon the import of animals and the metallic articles brought into this country; and in the
meat; you reducied the duties upon every article which en same return, also, a statement of the amount of manufactured
ters into the subsistence of the people; you greatly reduced articles precisely of the same kind sent out of the country;
the protective duties upon corn; you reduced the duties upon and then we shall knew what is the foundation for the asset
555 articles of Customs: and the result was what the tion that the Birmingham cutlers and button-makers cannot'
Honourable Gentleman has represented to have been the sell their own goods in their own market."-(Hear, hear.)
state of this country in 1846.-(Cheers.) Now, observe- Well, here is a return which was moved for, and includes
agriculturists looking forward with hope, Ireland in a state brass, copper, zinc, &c., manufactures and buttons, and
of comparative prosperity, the greatest export trade that lacquered goods. It gives the amount of all these articles
ever was known to take place,-all this was, I won't say the imported from abroad. If you tell me a great many other
result of, but at least coincident with, that reformation of articles are smuggled in, my answer is-then let us reduce
your commercial system. But, then, says the Hon. Gentle- the duty again.-(Hear, hear.) If you tell me this return is
man -"In 1846, you adopted a totally new principle, and not a fair return of the total amount of imports, that assets
from the introduction of that new principle have resulted tion constitutes anything but an impeachment of the reduce
the evil consequences which we deplore in 1848." Now, my tiun of the duty; tor the legitimate conclusion is, that the
answer upon that point is this,-in 1846 we adopted no new duty, then, is too high. -(Hear, hear.) If, on the other
commercial principle, but we certainly carried further the hand, you say that there is no smuggling, but that this
commercial principle which had been adopted and acted return contains a true account of the imports of the articles
upon.-(Cheers and counter-cheers.) Sir, I wish to conduct I have referred to, then let us compare the import of
this argument as I should conduct any other argument. I these manufactured goods for the last three yore
think it is much more respectful to the Hon. Member for with the amount which we sent to other countries
Buckinghamshire to submit his arguments and views to the In 1846, 1847, and 1848, the aggregate average amount
teat of reason than to adopt any other course- (Hear, hear) of all these imports into England from Germany and ever/
- and I am attempting to conduct the argument precisely other country was worth 102,0001. or 34,0001. a year on O.
in the manner in which I should conduct a purely scien- average of the last three years.. Now, if we had exported
tific examination into which party feeling did not enter.- only 20,0001. worth, that might be a
proof that our ma'
(Cheers.) But I adhere to my statement, that in 1846 no nufacture was depressed and interfered with, and that
new principle was introduced; and I give the Hon. Gentle- it was impossible for us to contend with these foreign rivals
man the fullest opportunity of answering my arguments. in neutral markets. But in the same three years in which
What new principle was introduced in 1846 that failed in we imported this 102,0001. worth of metal goods we eV,
1848? Before the end of 1845 the duties upOn cotton and ported annually to the amount of 4,400,0004 worth 01
wool had been repealed. In 1842 the reduction of duties exactly the same articles; the total aggregate amount of the
upon articles of import amounted to 1,092,00 W., in 18 '3 to imports in the three years being 102,0001. worth ;
and -the
411,0001., in 1844 to 458,0001., and in 1845 to 4,511,000/. ; total aggregate amount of the exports for the three year;
the total amount of this reduction of taxation to the end of being 13,372,0001. worth, being on the average 4,420,0004
1845 being 6,582,000/. The articles upon which that reduction worth a year; while only 34,00)4. worth was imported a year' mai uly tookplace were either raw materials, articles of food, or -( Hear.) Now, what must these unfortunate foreigner*
articles of subsistence. What new principle of commercial who have not half our skill, or the advantage of half 04
legislation, then, was introduced in 1846 ? The amount of mechanical inventions think, when we denounce them as iii'
duties remitted in 1846 was 1,151,000/, and the amount re- terlopers interfering with our industry for sending bee
mitted in the four preceding years 6,581,0001. The articles 34,0001. worth of metal goods in the year, while we feel tie
which in 1846 were selected for reduced taxation were these scruple, at the same time in interfering with their domestic,
-tallow, timber (being an additional reduction thereon), manufacture by sending them at - the same time 4,400,000 n
worth.-(Hear, hear.) What a grasping, exacting people tre
brandy, soap, linseed cake, rape cake, and a great many
articles the use of which is important to the agricultural in- must seem to them 1-(Cheers.) Will you tell me then hot
terest.-(Hear, hear.) There was, indeed, provision made it is possible that the changes made in the tariff 'either 161
for the ultimate repeal of the corn-laws, but that is the 1841, 1845, or 1846-that the free import of raw material*,
single instance in respect to which you can say that any dif- and such an import of manufactured goods as I have de`,
ferent principleof legislation was adopted in 1846 which had scribed, can be justly made responsible for the manufacturiot
not previously been acted upon in 1842, 1 43, 1844, and 1845. distress of this country?-(Cheers.) That is my ansWer
-(Hear, hear.) And now observe, with respect to the re- to that part of the speech of the Honourable Gentlernsit peal of the corn-law, that did not take place until the Ist of which attributes the misfortunes of this country to our he February, 1849-(Hear, hear)-and from necessity, in 1847 ing attempted to contend by free imports with hostile tariffs' you repealed the duties, and the Honourable -(Cheers.) I come now to view the second ground on wbisl3.
Member for Dorsetshire seconded the motion for the Hon. Gentleman impeached our commercial policy.
s'
their repeal. But during nearly the whole of 1848 think he said that the average official value of all exports, to
you had a duty of about Bs. or 10s, on foreign corn, and, 1845 and 1846, was 133,000,000/., and that the average d,e'
consequently, if there have ensued any evil effects from the dared value in those two years was 59,500,0001.; that, SI
repeal of the corn-law, you cannot date them from an earlier 1848, the official value which signified quantity did not OS'
period than the Ist of February, 1849 ; and the protection, very far short of the official value in 1845 and 1846, but that
as long as you thought it expedient to retain it, lasted up to the declared value, in 1848, fell by 6,500,000/. ; and amount
Ist ofFebruary, 1849.-(Hear, hear.) But it has been said to only 53,000,0001.; and the Hon. Gentleman drew 07
that the tariff has caused commercial depression, and that conclusion-that the working classes had received 6,500,0001'
the principles of tree trade adopted in 1846 or the preceding less, in 1848, than they did before. The Hon. Gentleman
years have created distress in the country. Now, it is my also instituted a comparison between four months of 18'1
firm conviction that the principles embodied in that tariff and four months of 1848, He said that there is a deprecis:
have not caused any one of the evils which have been tion in cotton goods exported, comparing 1849 with 180
dwelt on-(Hear, hear) - but that, on the contrary, the to the amount of 646,0001., and he added that consequentilo
principles involved in that tariff have greatly mitigated. those
the English workman has been obliged to receive for Ils
evils.-(Cheers.) Let us analyze the tariff,-and I challenge labour 646,0004 less than in last year. I totally deny ti',
you to show me in what it is possible that the free trade in- inference which the Honourable Member drew from ths
troduced into the tariff can have caused the distress of the cireumstance. I deny, because there was a falling off ' T 1
country.-(Hear, hear.) Let us refer to the official value of the declared value of exports, in 1848, as compared with
the imports into Great Britain in 1848, and compare it with the average declared value of those of 1845
and 1846 n„
that of 1846. In the latter year the official value of the the extent of 6.500,0001, that therefore the working class,'
imports was 73,000,0001, and the official value of 1848 was received, in 1848, 6,500,(,001. less for their labour t 10"
89,000,0001. Some contend that it is the amount of im- they obtained its 1845-6.-(Cheers.) It would be • n3e1811:
ports, without any corresponding amount of exports, choly, indeed, if that were the case; but my consolation 1
which has caused the depression of industry in that nothing of the kind has taken place.-(Cheers 911,,
this country. Let us, then, analyze these imports, laughter.) First, let me observe, that nothing P
can be ru°,,`;
and consider of what this tariff consists. I divide it fallacious than any inference drawn from a falling off in s,
into three great branches. First, I take the articles of con- decldred value of manufactures exported. Owing to 00
sumption-the food, the luxuries-the articles which the manner in which the accounts are prepared, all arguntell,
people eat and drink. I next take the raw materials, and drawn from that source must be exceedingly fallack'S
next the manufactured goods. Your argument is that the Take the case of cotton manufactures; the official value 2j,
amount of the manufactured goods which under the opera- drawn from the aggregate quantity of the goods exports,/
tion of free trade have been imported into this country without any reference to that most important element
value-quality.- (Hear, bear.) If you are to argue tbs,
has interfered with domestic industry, and caused many
laborious and industrious persons to lose their trade.
is below that of another period we have sustained.;
because the declared value of manufactures exported at on:
Let us divide the imports of 1848, amounting in value to period
89,000,0001., into the three heads I have referred to-viz., national loss, I will prove to you that this country our,
long since to have been completely ruined. - (Ill;
articles of consumption, raw materials, and manufacture
hear, and laughter.) It would, indeed, be a visa
goods. The amount in official value of the articles of
consumption imported was not less than 32,500,000 L wonderful circumstance if, with our recent improve(
Will any man tell me that he grudges the payment of ments in machinery, and with a reduction of the price
any one single pound of that money for articles of consump- not cotton alone, but of all the raw materials which enter
lion ?- (Hear, hear.) What have those articles been done into manufactures, there had not been a correspondingsfalutij
with?-(hear, hear.) They have been imported, they off in the declared value of all manufactured articles.-(L°°
cheers.) The Hon. Member for Bucks was not in Parlialoes;
a ift
Ia
recollect
ceoalrl
el ice:
aright,
period,
towards
whenardas t
the
e controversyconclusion
hisw i with
rrye : Pa:,l4d;
have been paid tor, and they have been eaten by some one
or other.-(Loud cheers.) Can you deny any one of these
three propositions, that the articles in question have been
speech the other night -" Nunc quid
em
this very question.-(A laugh.) The Hon. Member PSI
imported, paid for, and consumed ?-(Hear, hear.) And
civitas moritur ;" now I Want to show that this is an old dog t
how paid for? By gold, I suppose I shall be told.-( Hear,
gut em novo quodam 110;•,
hear.) It had been argued that if you permit these free
ease-(Laughter) -and I undertake to prove that it nun °-
imports there will be a great derangement of the currency;
that the foreigner will not take our manufactured goods in
former periods, afflicted the country under a much more sg;
return, but will insist_on payment in gold, and. consequently gravated form than it doesat present - (Cheers and laughter.)
the currency will be disturbed ; the reserve in the bank will The doctrine which infested the late Alderman Waiti°3°..
be withdrawn, and there will be a constant and enormous -(A laugh)-and which he carried with im to his gril;
exhausting process going forward. There will be imports, it was this, that there had been a vast diminution in ,t,..,, is true; but, as a necessary consequence of those extrava. declared value of articles exported, and that the couu7,l
gent imports, there will be a constant exportation of gold, therefore, was rapidly consuming its own strength ,11ss and an aprreciation of the currency. But the bank had at approaching utter extinction.-(Laughter.) The Ins
that time 10 millions of gold, and now it has 15 millions, Member for Buckinghamshire would have been sus)
How happens it then that, concurrently with this great in- prised at hearing how eloquent Alderman Waithman con
crease of imports, there has been, at the same time, no be upon this point.-(Hear hear and laughter.) "oe.
diminution of gold; but, in consequence of the state of the was the worthy Alderman's argument: he said, that the '-'0
consumed this 32,500,000/. worth of eatable and drinkable
exchanges, an accumulation, an increase of gold ? Who have
Who grudges the vernment forgot that every branch of our trade ,s..iss
materials ?-( Hear.) founded on prohibition-that the country was struggil"
cots
there been any case of surfeit ?-Cheers.and laughter.)
expenditure? Has with dreadful difficulties-that 3,000,000 quarters of CO
the cholera attributable to that consumption, or have diseasels and 2,000,000/. worth of silk manufactures had been S",a
and suffering been entailed in consequence of this increase ported into this country, and although it was argued 0' II
the money paid for all this would come back, he could tets
trary, I believe that the whole of these imports' but,
the con-
of imports ?-(Hear, hear.) I believe not • on the con- the House it was no such thing, for that, whatever we wig,"
import, our exports would not increase in consequence it;
that in the course of the last twelve years preceding thacA6
sumption of them have contributed to the material comfort
of the people, and that it would have been a public misfortune which be spoke we had lost 120,000,000/. of our export trans
if this 32,000,000/. worth of imports had been by any pro- and he proved it by the. paper which I now hnld in olf,
cess reduced to 22,000,0004 or 25,000,000/. a orth.--(Cheers.) hand.-(Cheers and laughter.) -This only shows now mace"
and laughter repeated.) Observe I believe that the import of these commodities, being articles more aggravated the disorder was in those clays.-(Cheoes.r
of subsistence, has not only contributed directly to the ma-
took place in the time of protection.-(Cheers.) Aideroo4"
that this fatal deco,
terial comfort of those who consumed them, but has also
encouraged their labour, because they have been paid for by IVaitlaman took the exports from 1814 to 1828, with theS
the proceeds of their labour.-(Cheers.) So much for the
articles of consumption; and I come now to the articles of
official, declared, and real value, and divided them into tau
Periods, one from 1814 to 1820, and the other from 18201; raw material. The great operation of any tariff with which
1828. He showed that in the first period the excess of reel
I was connected was in the diminution of the duties on raw over official value
was 41,521,000 i., and in the second perio,i
materials. Is it possible .to contend that you have dimi- a _ota
namely, from 1820 to 1828, 83,243,0004, making t
nished the encouragement to domestic industry by having amount of depreciation in value of 124,764,000 i. He salsa
that the yearly _value of exports from 1814 to 1820 110
by a reduction of duty rendered the articles used in our
manufactures a little cheaper? Is it possible to contend that 45,262,0001., and from 1820 to 1828 36,462,0004 He Maio
the reduction of the duty on articles used in dyeing, on the annual decrease amount to 8,800,000/. To which 1,
timber, on madder, indigo, and all those raw materials re- addd decrease of colonial and foreign produce, 4,524,0 we
quired for 'our manufactures, can have any other effect than making together 13,325,000/. Finally the worthy AldeS3/,
that of diminishing the cost of the manufactured article made out that there was a depreciation in value of 28,000,tn,
here, and enabling the manufactured goods of this country ou 48,000,0001., or 60 per cent., and then he prophesied, ts
to compete with greater advantage with articles of foreign doubtless, he would have been justified in doing if his the°:a
without being overwhelmed by bankruptcy and rintil;
manufacture? - (Hear, hear.) Is it possible to contend that had been correct, that we could not continue in that con':
such a measure has interfered with the domestic industry of
this country ?-(Loud cheers.) But it is said that it is Ought not this to suggest to the mind of the Honours
the import of manufactured goods which has caused the Member for Buckinghamshire the possibility of his bet
falling off on the declared value of exports ?-(Hear, h.e/is!
distress of the country. Now, how stands the case? Here wrong in the deduction which he has drawn from t's
is this great commercial country interfering by the export of
its manufactures; if it be interference-if it be not a positive Having diminished the cost of cotton, oil, and evertuSse
addition to the material comfort of those communities with which enters into the composition of manufactures, it i5.,01
which we deal.-(Cheers.) But if this introduction of foreign
duction, though not a reduction in the amount of wages 13!1.,i1
natural result that there should be a diminished cost of KJ,
articles in a country be interference and cerise of misfortune,
where is the delinquent so enormous as Great Britain?-
It is a totally erroneous conclusion to state that bean:,
(Cheers.) In 1848 you exported in official value about the declared value of exports happens to be 646,000/. lend
133,000.0001., the produce of your industry; and you im- at one period than another, therefore the workmen el,
ported manufactured goods to the amount in declared value plod in manufacturing the exported articles have t
of about 4,722,000/. worth. Is that sufficient to account for ceived 646,000/. less wages at one time than another.
4
the distress?-(Cheers,) Your imports, in 1848, of raw ma- (Here Mr. Disraeli made an observation which did Ov
terials to be fabricated by your industry amounted in value reach the gallery.) The Hon. Members words were-cc the
s
to 48,400,0004, and the manufactured goods imported only cotton goods exported in 1849 were 646,000/. less in declared
amounted to 4,703,0004 - (Hear, hear.) But is that value than the same quantity of goods exported in 185
4,700,000/. worth the amount which was taken for home and, therefore, the English workman had received 646,0
consumption, and which could by any possibility interfere less for his labour." That is what I understood the .11011
with your native industry? No. Deduct from that amount Member to state-(,Hear, hear)-and I say in reply that's
all that you re-exported. You cannot deny that that is a just is totally erroneous to infer that because there has bee° s 0
mode of proceeding. Of cotton goods from India and diminution in the declared value of export;, the labour;,
Europe you imported in value 512,0001. worth ;
freill but who produce the articles exported stiffer any loss. I 7
you re-exported a very considerable portion of give another proof of the fallacy of conclusions drawn
sir
that quantity so imported. You exported again no less than
the declared value of manufactures. In 1815 the numb
t
275,0001. worth. Therefore, deduct from the 512,000!. of yards of wove cotton manufactures exported from .isiS
worth imported the 275,000/. worth re-exported. Could country was 252,000,000, and the declared value
there be a greater proof c.f the benefit of free trade than this, 18,1:58,00010 and in 1845 the quantity of wove cotton moo" that it enables this country to become the entrepOt for the factures exported was 1,091,000,000 yards, and the deelarls
goods of other nations, inviting those goods to these shores, value was 18,09,000/. Thus it would seem that 100 piece s,
and, to the advantage of our warehousing System, causing calico cost 18s. in 1815, and that 400 pieces cost no more 1'
them to be deposited here far re-exportation? Thus our 1845. This circumstance alone is sufficient to show how e?C:
shipping was employed, and great advantage conferred on tremely unsafe it is to draw inferences from these acconl3i
;
this country, without those goods interfering in any shape of declared values. The Hon. Member for Bucks contend;
with the loss which he assumes to be exhibited in the &Ilia
with your domestic industry.-( Hear.) You had a great
import of silks, not on account of the natural operations of off in the declared value has fallen mainly on the labours";
trade, but on account of the state of France and the desire and be drew from that circumstance the most melanchu:4l
which the French manufacturer had of realising whatever inferences with respect to the future condition of the count'J'
meats fairly and dispassionately, I will as far as possib,
could be gained. With respect to silk and other articles, you I beg to observe that, being desirous of meeting his argre
had unnatural imports, to be attributed to the depression of
comply with his suggestion, that M the course of this discus;
could
in other countries, and not to the natural operation
of trade. But of the silks imported you exported 870,0004 sion we should refer only to official documents, but it is i°3
worth; and when it is said that the domestic manufacture was possible to do so altogether when we come to deal with lire
interfered with by the import, then on the other hand allow- state of the country. Like the Chancellor of 'the Exobsee
I must be
quer, permitted to refer, upon tills point, to the
ante must be made for the amount re-exported.-(Hear,
hear.) But another and still further deduction you must most recent information which I have received, and on the
make. You must deduct from the whole of the legitimate credibility of which I can fully rely. After all, 'by far the
imports all that would have been imp )rted by smuggling, if most important part of the question is the condition of 00
three manufacturing towns in different parts of the kingd° ,
von had chosen to retain high duties of 40 or 50 per cent.- labourer.-(Hear, hear.) I have received accounts fr°o
-from Chippenham, representing the manufacturing istltsee
(Hear, hear.) No doubt in such case the apparentammaonuun..t
of imports would have been greatly reduced, and the
hi
the centralr part of England; and Dundee, representing Sc°, se,
might have consoled him. rests of the west of England; from Nottingham, representing
self
rhe
do
.r one-N No
actu r e r in this country perhaps
ssiexlft hwoitfhththeland. The letter from Chippenham, dated the 80th of Jo"
the thought
of thatthe present
tosaennyt
imports
eorts buth
aodn ee-nfit
idea could be more delusive. The smuggler would have is as follows :-
corrected the aburdity of your commercial system-(Cheers)
and he would .have pocketed the gain the country has
derived from facilitating commercial intercourse.( Cheers.)
To take the articles with respect to which there was
great complaint, such ,as watches, leather gloves,
embroidery, and needlework, do you think that, with
a restored duty of 50 per cent., there would be a correspond-
ing protection to domestic industry? No such thing. There
would be a loss to the revenue, but you would not have in-
creased protection.-(Cheers.) There was a Commission
over which my lamented friend, whose loss, all who knew
him, either personally or by character, must deplore-I mean
Lord G. Somerset-presided in 1844. It was a Commission
of inquiry respecting the Customs defaulters, and they re-
ported that they were disposed to admit that the annual loss
which occurred bore some approximation to one-half the
amount of duty; that, with respect to lace, they were as-
sured that more than one-half was introduced without pay-
ment of duty; and that the proceedings which had taken
place in the courts showed the almost unlimited amount of
fraud committed in respect to the article of gloves; and that
they entertained serious apprehensions that extensive frauds
were not confined to the articles above named. With such
evidence before us, wkat is the prudent course to pursue?
Would it be the prudent course to continue the duty so high
IQ would haye the effect Of handing ever half the memo

" Cheham, June
" My dear .sir,—My statement to you this morning I P" g
in reference to our books, to be correct. In the six mond:,
ending this day we have paid to the same number of pe9Eig
twenty-five per cent. more wages than in the corresponuq.
period of 1847, and fully twenty per cent, more than in 18ei,
and I believe the people in this place generally are better ,4
better clothed, and in every way more comfortable than th ;
have been for years. The general trade of the town is ilia;
very flourishing state ; poor-rates about 3s. 4d. in the polio
the number of people in the union workhouse, 97-
West of England cloth trade is unquestionably better thail,
has been for years. I have reason to know that in the torh;
of Trowbriege more goods have been made and sold in t 74
last six or nine months, and a larger amount of wages Fete
to the people than were ever before known, and th s I bell' of
is the case in the whole clothing district of the `rest
England; the Parliamentary returns of the consutnptio3e
cotton and wool prove it to be the same both in Yorkalw
and Lancashire."
In the West of England and other parts of the clothing t.sc..
trict one complaint prevails. What is it? The ma
turers cannot get a sufficient quantity of foreign vi°°i,io,4
(Cheers.) When we reduced the duty on foreign wool it
ce,
said that the measure would interfere with domestic procW 0
and Nedgce the y4lue 9f Cho w99lgroyna at ilellle. So fotrill