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

Methay, in France, at the Korne, Hamburgh, and Stretton-
upon-llunsmore, in Warwichehire, though the success had
been more or less complete, according to the duration and
extent of the experiments, the system bad been successful.
In nothing more distinctly, was that success shown than in
the small number of re-committals, and there were much
more accurate means of testing these than at Reading, for a
distinct account was kept of the conduct of every one after
they left the establishment. The system was simply to em-
ploy them in the field and garden in their turn, where there
was land sufficient for that purpose, and where there was
not, to introduce staple manufacture, by means of which
they supply their own clothicg, and at the same time look
forward to something of their own on their liberation. The
effect of this system had been perfectly satisfactory. But
the reformatory system was not consistent with short periods
of imprisonment. Mr. Rushton, the police magistrate of
Liverpool, had shown the effect of short confinement, in the
fast that children—lads under twelve years of age—had
been committed 16, 17, and 18 times. Just see the effect of
this on the country. During the last forty years the popu-
lation had increased 65, the consumption of caffee and tea
75, of malt, spirits, &c. 55 per cent., or nearly in the ratio
of the increase of the population ; but crime had increased
400 per cent., or more than six times the increase of popula-
tion and luxuries—(Hear, hear)—and of that increase 81
per cent. was composed of juvenile offenders, or nearly four-
fifths of the whole.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore their Lord-
ships would see that this came to be a serious matter, and
they ought earnestly to consider how they were to deal with
them. It had been said that as long as receivers of stolen
goods existed, juvenile crimes could u,t be arrested. But
the system he proposed, by taking away his allies from him,
by attracting his affections and training him to habits of
regular industry, would deprive the receiver or " fence," as
he was called, of those on whom he depended ; and when
these reclaimed and industrious persons were once more re-
stored to society, they would be able, from their knowledge,
to point out the dens where these receivers lurked—to drag
them into the light of day, and thus put down an atrocious
traffic. He thought that was an answer to the objection.
He could not conceive anything more awful than that chil-
dren of nine or ten years of age should be sent to gaol, and
be compelled to associate with those who had, as it were,
graduated in crime, and thus be exposed to contamination
of the worst description. Of all the crimes the country could
possibly commit this was the greatest, the most heinous.
The Noble Lord, after some further observalons, concluded
by expressing a hope that the House would consider the
resolutions he then moved, and that if they found it too late
to agree with them this session, that at all events they
would take them,into consideration, with a view to practical
measures, at an early period of next session.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said his Noble and
Learned Fries had certainly not, in his opinion, overstated
the importance of the subject to which he had called the
attention of the House, and, unfortunately, also, he had not
overstated the difficulties by which the subject was sur-
rounded. During the time that he had been in power, in
common with those who took part in the administration of
public affairs, he frequently called attentiou to the many
de-
fects of the system, and many were the remedies applied, but
be said to have attained the never saw that remedy suggested which could confidentlydtl
have obtained. The efforts in
the duty of all legislatiod.to
the exbpeerimsaefenityal treatmentemplo3.ed.
iwvhiitchh,resaptecat the right direction, however, were not uselese, for they laid
ftuotuthee resolutions of his Noble and Learned Friend—resolu-
tions which embodied his opinions, and the result of his ex-
perience, there, was much in them that he approved, and
much that had his full concurrence; but at the same time he
could not avoid stating that there were some expressions
in them not befitting the adoption of their Lordships. The
two first resolutions referred to the subject of classification
and the importance of enforcing it. His objection was not
to the importance of classification, but was founded on
the impossibility of attaining a perfect system of classifi-
cation by any ether mode than by the classification
from the separate confinement of each prisoner. All ex-
periments, and the calculations founded on those experi-
ments, showed that the system of separate confinement,
regulated so as to fall short of anything like cruelty, under
properly constituted authorities, was the safest, most humane,
and not the least economical for the public.—(Hear, hear.)
If they carried out a sy-tem of classification in accordance
with the wishes of the Noble and Learned Lord, hose was
it to be? They could not, if they desired to promote his
views, put persons who committed the same crime together,
for then they would have an association of the most aban-
doned characters and the worst offenders, a classification of
age would be subject to every variety of criminality. They
might have, it was true, a classification of sexes, but then
the Noble Lord's object would be far, indeed, from being
gained. Classification on any other principle than that of
separate confinement must be a bad one. In the one or two
model prisons where it was established. it had not only in-
-sited the attention, but commanded the approbation cf
foreigners ; and throughout fifty or sixty prisons
in England means were being adopted fur carry-
ing the system into effect. The system was not
uniform as applied to every individual, but it ad-
mitted .f work being apportioned according to the habits
and dispositions of each, as a species of solace to the indus-
trious, and as a punishment to the idle, but still enforcing
the great object of penalty. Some of the Noble and Learned
Lord's resclutions were inconsistent with the position laid
down in the fourth resolution. The real object of punish-
ment was to deter from the repetition of crime. Reforma-
tion, most laudable in itself, applied only to hundreds, but
the principle of deterring from the commission of crime was
applicable to millions. With respect to assimilating the sys-
tem in our prisons to that pursued in the prisons of the
United States, he regarded it as impracticable, from the dif-
ference of circumstances and the greater value of labour in
the United States. He certainly gave a preference to that
portion of the resolution which dwelt on the importance
of deterring men from becoming prisoners a second time,
and he believed that desideratum was carried out to a
great extent in some prisons, where the despotic system was
practised.—(Hear, hear.) The almost total abolition of
capital punishment, so revolting to humanity, and asso-
ciated with the shedding of blood, imposed the ne-
cessity for inflicting a very different species of punishment,
characterised by an amount of severity short of absolute
cruelty, yet of sufficient s.ringency to deter from the com-
mission of crime. For cases of this description separate im-
prisonment was peculiarly applicable. He hoped that in
the progress of those regulations, which magistrates through-
out the different counties of England were bound to bring
under the consideration of the Se retary of State, who had
the power of modifying them, not many s ears would elapse
before the means for adopting separate imprisonment would
be provided in all gaols, so that the system might be intro-
duced into each establishment, and a uniformity of punish-
ment established for particular classes of offences and
offenders. When that uniformity was attained great good
evidently could not fail to be the result, and an effectual
reformation brought about.—(Hear.) Where the separate
system had been adopted, the number of re-commitments
was much less than in those gaols where it was not yet in-
troduced. This was a very striking result of the advantage
of separate imprisonment. He assured the Noble and
Learned Lord that the subject which he had brought under
the consideration of the House was one which had constantly
attracted the attention of the Goftrnment, and would con-
tinue to do so until they effected as much benefit as they
possibly could. Will regard to the dietary provided in gaols,
he admitted giving the smallest quantity of food consis-
tently with the preservation of the health of the prisoners.
For the reasons assigned in the course of these observations,
he should be under the necessity of moving the previous
question, unless the Noble and Learned Lord withdrew his
resolutions.

shall be made according to such valuation, and it
is expedient to amend the said provision ;
it therefore enacted, that from and after the
passing of this Act, so soon as the guardians of
any union shall have received from the Commissioners
of Valuation the valuation of all the townlands situate in
any electoral division of such union, all rates thereafter
to be made on such electoral division shall be made ac-
cording to such valuation, until the same be revised, as
in the said Act is provided, and thereafter acccording to
such valuation as revised from time to time: provided
that all salaries, establishment charges, and other
sums payable by the union and ch 9rgeable on
the several electoral divisions, according to the
net annual value of the property situate
therein respectively, shall be chargeable on such electoral
divisions according to the net annual value of the rate-
able property therein, as set forth in the rates last made
on such electoral divisions, previous to the time when
the board of guardians received from the Commissioners
of Valuation the valuation of all the townlands situate in
any of the electoral divisions as aforesaid, until the
guardians shall have received the valuation of all the
electoral divisions in the union, and no lorger."
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said there could be no doubt
that the bringing into operation a speedy valuation was
most desirable, but he thought the addition of this clause
would lead to considerable embarrassment and confusion.
He hoped, therefore, he would not press it.
Sir R. FERGUSON consented to withdraw the
clause.
Mr. BATESON moved to add the following proviso
to clause A:—" Provided also, that where.any person
chargeable to any electoral division shall have received
relief, and shall erase to be relieved, and shall thereafter,
within the period of twelve months, again begin to receive
relief, such last-mentioned relief shall be chargeable on
the electoral division to which such person was in the
first instance chargeable."—The proviso was agreed to.
Mr. FAGAN moved to add the following proviso to
clause A: —"Provided always, that the cost for the relief
of destitute poor who shall not have resided in the union
where such relief is given for the last three years next
previous to receiving such relief, shall be charged and
chargeable according to the provisions of an Act passed
in the tenth year of her present Majesty, intituled An
Act to make further provision for the relief of the desti.,
tute poor in Ireland. '
Atter a brief desultory discussion the proviso was
agreed to.
The report was then agreed to, and the Bill ordered
to be read a third timeS on Mondiy.
UPPLY.

in Hunger y.—(Hear, hear.) That was the explanation
which he d passed between our Government and
the Govrirnment of Austria, Russia did not intend in
any °tilt r way to interfere with the affairs of Europe,
nor wowid their assistance to Austria disturb the treaty
of Vienn a.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME observed, that it was alleged that a cer-
tain agreement had been entered into between Prussia
and Austria, by which certain portions of Europe would
be conceded to Russia, which arrangement would greatly
interfere with the Treaty of Vienna.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not awaro that any such
agreement had been mule or was even contemplated.
Mr. OSBORNE—WiII the Noble Lord state the
grounds, for his calling this an insurrection 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
Against it ... ... 136
Majority

- - -76

Mr. FORBES complained of the mode in which the Go-
ve-..nment ao- ed in respect to these two Bills, and moved that
Vac 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 Hos. 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
fe,it 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.—(year, 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 lion. 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,
be asked, did not the Government select twelve o'clock oil
Monday for proposing the grant of money for the Irish rail-
way, instead of fixing the discussion upon two Scotch Bills
atthat hour, when it was most inconvenient for Scotch Mem-
bers to attend?

Lord J. RUSSELL intimated that he proposed to
take the Committee of Supply on Thursday next.
The House then aninurned till Five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'ci.,ck.
PETITIONS.

Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition against the
endowment of Roman Catholic clergymen.
Mr. SPOONER presented a number of petitions in
favour of the Protection of Women Bill.

Mr. COWAN presented a petition from Edinburgh,
praying that the Public Health Bill for Scotland may be
delayed till next session.
An Hox. MEMBER presented three petitions frcm
places in Lincolnshire complaining of agricultural dis-
tress, and praying for a moderate protective duty.
Mr. DISRAELI presented a petition from a number
of shopkeepers in Netherby, in the West Riding, com-
plaining of the failure of free-trade, and suggesting re-
medies.—( Hear.)
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

Sir R. PEEL said that he had a strong desire to express
his sentiments in regard to the nudion of the Hon. Member
for Buckinghamshire, and he had come, down to the House
this.eveniug for that purpose. His experience went to show
that it was usual to proceed from night to night with an ad-
jo-urned 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 mote 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 be held in coniiption with the
Government. He denied that the opposition was confined
to the one side of the House—it was egos& strong on the
other side. He thought that the Scotch =Members had a
light 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, represeht the whole of the Scotch Members.
Mr. FIUME was opposed to toe 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 band, 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 reterred to were
postponed to twelve o'clock on Monday.
• THE STATE OF THE NATION.

The House at its rising was ordrred to stand adjourned
till Monday.

THE SCOTCH BILLS.

Mr. HUME inquired if it was finally settled that the
Scotch Bills were to come on on Monday. If so it
would seem that the Government cared little for the
opinion of the Scotch Members, who generally opposed
the Bill, or for the vast number of petitions which the
people of Scotland had petitioned against the measures.
The Scotch Members agreed in opinion that the Bills
should be postponed until another session.
Lord J. RUSSELL replied that the Government in-
tended to take the Bills on Monday. They should then
see if the statement of the Hon. Gentleman was correct,
that the majority of the Scotch Members were averse to
proceeding with the Bills this session.
Mr. HUME said but a small number of the Scotch
Members were in town, and they would be sitting on
Committees during the early part of Monday. The
Government were acting most unfairly towards them.
Mr. M'NEILL could not help stigmatizing the way
in which these Bills had been dealt with. It appeared
that the Government considered these Bills so urgently
important that they were determined to put them upon
the people of Scotland whether they would have
them or not, and would not even allow them to
bo heard upon them ; and they arrived at this late
period of the session without having had an op-
portunity of discussing the merits of the Bills,
except after midnight Surely it they were so
urgent the people of Scotland bad a right to be
heard upon them. And now they were to be discussed at
a forenoon sitting, when many of the Scotch Members
had left town. Surely the Government ought to defer
to the wishes of the people of Scotland, and postpone the
Bills until another session.
Mr. DUNCAN sa;d, it was remarked last night that
at the recent meeting of Scotch Members no decision
was come to with respect to these Bills. Now he could
show thut out of 16 five only voted against the postpone-
ment of the Marriage Bill, and all save two voted
against proceeding with the Health of Towns Bill.
A vast number of petitions had been presented against
the Bills, and scarcely any in their favour.
He had not received a single letter or petition in favour
of the Bits, whilst he had received hundreds praying
for delay. That being the case, he should consider it
his duty to oppose the measures in every stage.
Mr. ELLICE, jun., said he was boand to say that
all the petitions he had received from his constituents
were against the Bills, but after the best consideration
which he could give to the Bills, he was unable to come
to the same conclusion as his constituents. He bad
sent down to them a few of the reasons which
had induced him to look favourably upon the
Bills, but as yet he had received no rejoinder.
It was his firm opinion that the petitions had been got
up in the way that petitions usually were—(Hear, hear)
—that the parties signing them were really unacquainted
with the nature of the measures. The Registration Bill
would be a most valuable improvement of the present
law, and it was most disgraceful that such a measure
had not been introduced and passed long ago.—(Hear,
hear.) The Police Bill and the Health of Towns Bill
were also most valuable and important measures, and he
trusted that the Government would not give way to
any representations which were made against them,
seeing that they would confer a great benefit upon all
classes of the community in Scotland.—(Hear, hear.)
The LORD ADVOCATE said the Registration Bill
had already passed the House of Lords twice, and he
should be able to show that it was of the greatest
possible importance to Scotland. He was per-
fectly aware of the number of petitions which
had been presented to the House against the Bill, but the
arguments which they contained were insignificant, and
were, in point of fact, not against the measure generally,
but against one or two of the clauses.
Mr. COWAN said be was perfectly free to give
his vote either way, but, after mature consideration, he
was not prepared to support the Registration Bill with-
out mates ial alteration. He was surprised to see the in
difference with which petitions from all parts of Scot-
land had been treated—(Hear, hear)—and he could
assure the House that they were not only genuine, but
contained very earnest appeals against these Blls.
In answer to a question from Mr. E. B. ROCHE, who
requested that Mr. Monckton Milues would postpone
his motion,
Mr. MONCKTON MI LNES said, that his motion had
been upon the paper for many months, and he felt,
therefore, not inclined to accede to the request.
Mr. ROCHE endeavoured to explain that he spoke for
a large portion of the constituency of Ireland, although
hecould not profess himself to be their representative.
The order of the day as respected Mr. Milnes' motion
was then agreed to.
THE PUBLIC RECORDS.

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 t rice of land. But he was mistaken
if he thought he could go back to the old system of the corn-
laws.—(titar.) If rents were a .methieg 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. That he denied, it appeared,
from the reports of various Commissions which examined the
subject that the reverse was the case, end 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 fig 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. They had also fallen in the en-
joyments of the comforts of lite. The greatest cost to the
landed proprietors was the cost of crime. In 1836 a Com-
mission was appointed to inquire into the cost of the con-
stabulary. It appeared that the cost of crime in Liverpool
was 70u,0001. a year. Liverpool was the sixty-fourth part
of the rated amount of the entire kingdom. He would
take the entire cost of c:ime in that ratio, and would
state that the cost of crime throughout England and Wales
amounted to 11, 00,000/. Then the neat item was the
poor rate, whiCh amounted to 5,200,100/. a year. The evils
of the poor arose from neglect of their education and to
sanitary regulations. Then he estimated the amount
paid in alms was not less than 5,400,0001. The police cost
one million and a half. Then there was to be considered
what it cost the working class from illness, which might
have been prevented by sanitary regulations. Thus they
had 11,000,0001. for the cost of crime—a,200,0001. for the
support ofif
He
eopud ol estimate the cost upon these items I'mor-1?,400,0001. for arms-1,500,0001. for the
p
Scotland and Ireland as equal to the half of this amount, or
13,65e,0001. Then there was ten millions expended in
spirits, giving a gross total of 51,000,000. He implored
them to consider this subject, and if the landed interest was
really depressed, here were fifty millions of money 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 ale..
to raise the price of food by putting a duty on corn.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said he would tench 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 Irisb
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.
Therehead of
thedisposition
Government
every
facility
give
h eNoble Lord at
to carry out his intentions, and to forget all party feeling, in
order to assist him in every way. The Land Commissioners.
of whom he had the honour to be ono, called attention in
ism to the wretched condition of the labouring classes, and
wasthe a
various suggestions fin- improvement were given. That was
the condition of Ireland when the free-trade measures were
introduced; and, without entering into a discussion on that
great subject, he might say that Ireland had to suffer and
bear 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 tht
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 18:6. 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 men in 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, 60,0001. 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
4,848,2551, 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. sord 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 do continue the met,
from the public works. A series of resolutions was presented
to the Noble Lord at the head of the Government last year,
signed by almost all the Peers and Commoners in Ireland,
but they bad no effect. They protested against the system
of out-door relief, on the ground that it would interfere with
the ordinary agricultural pursuits, bat in vain. Apart, how-
ever, from those resources for the relief of the poor, they in-
truduced crude 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 which 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 in 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 18th
clause of which a person having a derivative intereot was

After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM and the Mar-
quis of WESTMINSTER, in explanation,
The Earl of CHICHESTER desired to offer a few remarks
on the subject generally, and on some of the propositions of
the Noble and Learned Lord. He quite agreed that there
ought to be a more uniform system of punishment, and
greater control vested in the Secretary of State for the
Home Department. The want of a controlling power in that
office bad been long felt; and though several recent Acts
had extended his control, he hat not yet been armed with
authority sufficient, and legislative interference of a still
mere comprehensive character was required. He quite
agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord that there ought
to be a different system of punishment for the least criminal
of the juve ile classes. With regard to the system of sepa-
rate confinement, it had been adopted under the provisions
of.a special Act of Parliament after the Legislature and
the public had full opportunity for considering the
able report on the subject by Mr. Crawford, who had
been aent to the. United States to make inquiries connected
witb:the working of the system.—(Hear.) He did not see
whyf the separate system should be objected to, particularly
when it had been adopted, after many able and judicious re-
ports on its efficiency in causing reformation among pri-
soners, some of whom were known to be of very bad cha-
racter. The utility of the system was also supported by the
evidence of the prison officers, who had frequently visited
them, and by the improvement in the morality of the pri-
soners. He did not at all understand what the Noble and
Learned Lord ( Lord Brougham) meant by classification in
one of his resolutions, and should say that if it tended to
allow prisoners to associate together, that nothing could be
more mischievous, as had been long since proved, and as had
ueen long since condemned. The experience of the last
ten years in the case of separate confinement, should, he
thought, serve as a sufficient proof in favour of its con-
tinuance, particularly as economy and reformation were
materially advanced by it.—( Hear, hear.) Were their
Lordships to refer to the penal colonies, it would be
found that those prisoners who had undergone the
separate system had turned out to be the most useful
members of society, and the b-st promoters of morality.
The Bishop of OXFORD said that he felt it his duty to
make some few remarks on the opinions of the Noble and
' Learned Lord (Brougham) relative to Reading gaol. Re
was sorry to say that the Noble Lord, unintentionally, he
felt assured, misrepresented the state of Reading gaol, for
the magistrates a• .d chaplain who visit it give the strongest
proof that th separate system carried on there tends more
to deter men from committing crime than any other system
practised throughout England. Ile did not at the same
time mean to say that the influence of a few weeks in that
prison would have the desired effect, but he knew, from the
best authority, that from three to six months always had
the eff..ct of reforming prisoners, and that there was a re-
duction of from 30 to 20 per cent. since the separate system
was intro lured. He agreed with the Noble Lord that,
wherever the dietary amounted to the character of luxury,
it should be cut down, but did not think that it prevailed in
Reading gaol.
The Earl of HARROWBY said that he was well ac-
quainted with Pentonville Prison, and also the prison in
Staffordshire, and was pleased to say that there was not
more than one in twenty committed since the introduction
of the separate system, and that there was not one in-
stance of mental aberration, and also that religious instruc-
tion had a most beneficial influence on the prisoners. The
Noble Marquis had expressed himself so clearly and dis-
tinctly in favour of this system, that he was quite sure it
would strengthen the hands of its friends all over the
country, and Pad to its introduction in quarters where, but
for that encouragement, it would not have been adopted.
Lord BROUGfiAIt replied, and after commenting with
er i esdh po
ur ilsdo nneor st
in separate cells, co
some severity upon tnheelupdraedctiheye osftectoirnifig
n itnhga that nht
he begged leave to withdraw, and 1
trouble their Lordships to divide upon the resolutions, which
hands of the Government.
The resolutions were then withdrawn.
RAILWAY ACCOUNTS.
The audit of Railway Accounts Bill, after a few words
from the Earl of Yowls and Lord MONTEAGLE, was read a
third
ahe
time Land dpassed.
Drainage Bill was read a second time.
Their Lordships tlien adjourned at a Quarter to Nine
o'clock.

Mr. HOPE inquired whether her Majesty's Govern-
' ment had taken steps to procure a suitable receptacle for
the public records which are now deposited in the
Chapter-house of Westminster Abbey, and the Norman
Chapel in the White Tuwer, to thereat detriment of
those very interezting and important monuments.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
that he believed every means neeebsary for their due
custody had
Tbeuenzs
taken.DA
DANISH BLOCKADE.

Mr. SANDARS, in accordance with his notice,
begged to ask the Noble Lord the Secretary fur Foreign
Affairs if it be a fact, as is publicly stated, that the
British Consuls (or Vice-Consuls), Mr. Petersen, of
Stettin, and Mr. Krause, of Swinemunde, have been
dismissed from their respective offices, and, as is alleged,
fur having certified to facts in certain documents de-
claring the inefficiency of the Danish blockade. He
did not sec the Noble Lord at the head of the Foreign
Department in his place, and was therefore somewhat at
a loss to know to whom to put his question.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that his Noble Friend would
be in the House on Monday, when, no doubt, he would
be able to give a sufficient reply to the question.
STATE OF THE POOR OF IRELAND.

Mr. SLANEY gave notice that early in next session
he should revive his motion for an unpaid Commission
to report on the state of the poor population of Ireland.

PROrEOTION:

Mr. TIERRIES gave notice that on the motion for
the Committee of Supply he should draw the attention
of the House to the advisability, if not to the necessity,
of in3posing a fixed duty upon the importation of corn.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 6.
POOR-LAW (IREL AND) BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Sir ROBERT FERGUSON then moved the to-flow-
ing clause:—" And whereas by an Act passed in the
tenth year of the reign of her present Majesty, intituled,
' An Act to amend the Law relating to the Valuation of
rateable Property in Ireland,' it is provided that every
rate for the relief of the destitute poor in every union
which shall be made after thirty days from the time
when the board of guardians shall have received the
valuation of all the townlands comprised in the union,

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 7, 1849,

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 believed they pursued a course of con-
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 had 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 telt constrained to vote for the motion of the
lion. Member for Buckinghamshire.
Mr. HUME said, that the Government had been censured
by the Honourable Gentleman for 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. It th-t session were rightly
characterised, it might justly be designated as one ate-
journed debate upon the affairs of Ireland.—(Hear.) lie
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 o. complaints. He dig not
think he had made out any case whatever, and he should,
therefore, leave the subject. He certainly had intended to
move an amsndm nt, but when he considered the object of
the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, namely, tue 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,
bear.) lie 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,
bear.) 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 alio the inequality of taxation, could be fairly stated to
be the cause of the distress-d state of the country. When
he went back to the year 1817, he found hat 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 millions, of which nine millions
formed the interest of the debt. When, there ore, he looked
at their p:esent expenditure, no man could say fora moment
that he was in error in attributing their present distressed
state to the over-taxation of the country. If Hon. 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, they 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 tar distant when they would
:evote 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 bad
been' subject to, and which it was incumbent on them to
meet.- (Hear, bear.)
The Earl of MARCH said he would confine himself to that
part of the subject which related to agriculture. When the
Hon. Member ( elr. Hume) had attributed so much injury
to the inequality of taxation, lie ( the Earl of March) had a
right to ask that Hen. Member how it was that he had not
supported the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for
Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli) 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
Chancellorhe had dealt with an immense mass of figures, he must at the
same time observe that he placed little value on the letters
he
ef the
complimented Exchequer,
him on the n n tfirst.ni
abilityght o f
with thede debate,
and while
the
which the Right lion. Gentleman had read to them, for
would unhesitatingly write to him that nothing but
selectnothing
in easierth e etehnnant
)110 r
efh i
stun
s(s Efoarr
nosft Da Inacrec, hw)
htoo
protec.-
Lion 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
r icul t uhreaeln t interest.he
cause Heef
the statefree-trade of thesystemg
a
had
the ruin which had befallen the landed interest. Had the
idea
aat of
the
sliding scale been retained, it could have adjusted itself to the
change of seasons, and to the necessities of the country, but,
contended
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 It. PEEL then rose, and spoke as follows : —Mr,
Speaker,— Sir, I do not propose to enter at any length—i
indeed at all—into those considerations of a purely politicd
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 ? (Cheers, and
cries of " Hear, hear.") Since the accession of the Fre-
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 preva-
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
aublic 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 1 mean to im ay by the vote which
I shall give this night is this, that I cordially approve of the
,:eneral principles of commercial policy by which her M
jesty's Government have been guided, and that I will not
consent to a motion, the direct and avowed object, or, at all
event, 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.— tHear, hear.) Sir, the
course which I propose to pursue is thii--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.—(llear.)
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—
iamely, 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)—I 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 lion. 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
adtnission. Sir, the Honourable Gentleman was describing
the state of the Government of the country when the Noble
Lord succeeded to office. 11.3 then made this admission with
respect to the position of the country, and the European in-
fluence of the Goverment of l 84i—he said that Europe was
then in a state of unequalled tranquillity— that there was
great confidence reposed in her Majesty's Government—
:bat 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 1845, 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 tile 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 ha 1841 ,
there was a deficit of 2A00,000/.. In the preceding

year, in 1840, you had adopted the system of
im-
posing additional duties on our imports—you had int- '
posed an addition of 5 per cent. upon all existing
duties on the import of raw ma'erial, upon articles of '
food, and, indeed, upon everything which constitutes the
import trade of the country. I find that that addition, so
placed upon imports, had produced no corresponding aug-
mentation 'cf the revenue—(Cheers)—but directly the re-
verse. I find that, in the case of additions to the assessed
taxes—of additions to direct taxation, the anticipations • f the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had been realised, while in the
instance of additions to Customs' duties upon imports his an-
ticipations had not been realised. The nominal 5 per cent.
of addition to taxation had produced no 5 per' cent. of ad-
ditional revenue.—( Hear, hear.) But in 1842 you adopted
a different principle. You imposed an income-tax, and you
reduced taxation upon all the great articles of subsistence.—.
( Hear, and cheers.) You reduced taxation upon raw ma-
terials, and upon the food—upon the subsistence of the
people. You found prohibitions upon every animal which
constitutes food. You found prohibitions upon meat,
high protection upon corn, and heavy duties ueon raw ma-
terial. You adopted a different system in 1842. You im-
posed an income tax, by which 5,000/. was raised. You
removed the prohibitions upon the import of animals and
meat; you reducied the duties upon every article which en
ters into the subsistence of the people; you greatly reduced
the protective duties upon corn ; you reduced the duties upon
555 articles of Customs: and the result was what the
Honourable Gentleman has represented to have been the
state of this country in le46.—(Cheers.) Now, observe—
agriculturists looking forward with hope, Ireland in a state
of comparative prosperity, the greatest export trade that
ever was knewn to take place,--all this av is, I won't say the
result of, hut at least coincident with, that reformation of
your commercial system. But, then, says the Hon. Gentle-
man —"ln 1846, you adopted a totally new principle, and
from the introduction of that new principle have resulted
the evil consequences which we deplore in 1848." Now, my
answer upon that point is this,—in 1846 we adopted no new
commercial principle, but we certainly carried further the
commercial principle which had been adopted and acted
upon.—(Cheers and counter-cheers.) Sir, I wish to conduct
this argument as I should conduct any other argument. 1
thiuk it is much more respectful to the Hon. Member for
Buckinghamshire to submit his arguments and views to the
ten of reason than to adopt any other course- (Hear, hear)
and I am at tempting to conduct the argument precisely
in the manner in which I should conduct a purely ecien-
title examination into which party feeling did not enter.—
(Cheers.) But I adhere to my statement, that in 1846 f;o
new principle was introduced; and I give else Hon. Gentle-
man the fullest opportunity of answering my arguments.
What new principle was introduced in 1846 that tailed in
1818? Before the end of 1:445 the duties upon cotton and
wool had been repealed. In 1842 the reduction of duties
upon articles,of import amounted to 1,092,000!., in 18;3 to
411,1001., in 1844 to 45',0001 , and in 1845 to 4,511,000/. ;
the total amount of this reduction of taxation to the cud of
1845 being 6,582,000/. The articles upon which that reduction
maiely took place were eh her raw materials, articles of food, or
articles of subsistence. What new principle of commercial
legislation, then, was introduced in 1.46 ? The amount of
duties remitted in 1846 was 1,151,0001., and the amount re-
mitted in the four preceding years 6,58_',0001. The articles
which in 1846 were selected for reduced taxation were these
—tallow, timber (being an additional reduction thereon),
brandy, soap, linseed cake, rape cake, and a great many
articles the use of which is important to the agricultural in-
terest.—(Hear, hear.) There seas, indeed, provision made
for the ultimate repeal of the corn-laws, but that is the
single instance in respect to which err e' can say that any dif-
ferent principleof legislation was adopted in 1846 which had
not previously been acted upon in 184!, 1 43, 1844, an.l 1845.
—(Hear, hear.) And now observe, with respect to the re-
peal of the corn-law, that did not take place until the Ist of
February, 1849—(Hear, hear)—and from necessity, in 1817
you repealed the duties, and the Honourable
Member for Dorsetshire seconded the motion for
their repeal. But during nearly the whole of 1848
you had a duty of about Bs. or 10s, on foreign corn, and,
consequently, if there have ensued any evil effects from the
repeal of the corn-law, you cannot date them from an earlier
period than the Ist of February, 1849 ; and the protection,
as long as you thought it expedient to retain it, lasted up to
Ist offebruary, 1849.—(Hear, hear.) But it has been said
that the tariff has caused commercial depression, and that
the principles of free trade adopted in 1846 or the preceding
years have created distress in the country. Now, it is my
firm conviction that the principles embodied in that tariff
have not caused any one of the evils which bare been
dwelt on--( Hear, hear) —but that, on the contrary, the
principles Involved in that tariff have greatly mitigated' those
evils.—(Cheers.) Let us analyze the tariff,—and i challenge
you to show me in what it is possible that the free trade in-
troduce... into the tariff can have caused the distress of the
cou,ary.—(Hear' hear.) Let us refer to the official value ot
the imports into Great Britain in 1848, and compare it with
that of 1846. In the latter year the official value of the
imports was 73,000,0001, and the official value of 1848 was
89,000,0001. Some contend that it is the amount of im-
ports, without any corresponding amount of exports,
which bas caused the depression of industry in
this country. Let us, then, analyze these imports,
and consider of what this tariff consists. I divine it
into three great branches. First, I take the articles of con-
sumption—the food, the luxuries—the articles which the
people eat and drink. - I next take the raw materials, and
next the manufactured goods. Your argument is that the
amount of the manufactured goods which under the opera-
tion of free trade have been imported into this country
has interfered with domestic industry, and caused many
laborious and incluftrious persons to lose their trade.
Let us divide the imports of 1848, amounting in value to
89,000,000/., into the three heads I have referred to—viz.,
articles of consumption, raw materials, and manufactured
goods. The amount in official value of the articles of
consumption imported was not less than 32,500,0001.
Will any man tell me that he grudges the payment of
any one single pound of that money for articles of consump-
tion ? (Hear, hear.) What have those articles been done
with?—(Hear, hear.) They have been imported, they
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
imported, paid for, and consumed?—(Hear, hear.) And
how paid fur? By gold, I supp se I shall be told.—(Hear,
hear.) It had been argued that if you permit these free
imports there will be a great derangement of the currency;
that the foreigner will not take our manufactured goods in
return, but will insist on payment in gold, and consequently
the currency will be disturbee ; the reserve in the bank will
be withdrawn, and there will be a constant and enormous
exhausting process going forward. There will be imports, it
is true; but, as a necessary consequence of those extriava-
gent imports, there will be a constant exportation of gold,
and an apereciation of the currency. But the bank had at
that time 10 millions of gold, and now it has 15 millions.
How happens it then that, concurrently with this great in-
crease ot imports, there has been, at the same time, no
diminution of gold; but, in consequence of the state of the
exchanges, an accumulation, an increase of gold ? Who have
consumed this 32,500,000 e worth of eatable and drinkable
materials ?—( Hear.) Who grudges the expenditure? Has
there been any case of surfeit ?--(Cheers and laughter.) Is
the cholera attributable to that consumption, or have disease
arid suffering been entailed in consequence 'of this increase
of imports ?—(Hear, hear.) I believe not; but, on the con-
trary, I believe that the whole of these imports and the con-
sumption of them have contributed to the material comfort
of the people, and thet it would have been a public misfortune
it this 32,000,000/. worth of imports had been by any pro-
cess reduced to 22,000,0001. or 25,000,000/. M orth.—(Cheers.)
I believe that the import of these commodities, being articles
of subsistence, has not only contributed directly to the ma-
terial comfort of those who consumed them, but has also
encouraged their labour, because they have been paid for by
the proceeds of their labour.—(Cheers.) So much for the
articles of consumption; and I come now to the articles of
raw material. The great operation of any tariff with which
I was connected was in the diminution of the duties on raw
materials. Is it possible to contend that you have dimi-
nished the encouragement to domestic industry by having
by a reduction of duty rendered the articles used in our
manufactures a little cheaper? Is it possible to contend that
the reduction of the duty on articles used in dyeing, on
timber, on madder, ineigo, and all those raw materials re-
quired for our manufactures, can have any other effect than
that of diminishing the cost of the manufactured article
here, and enabling the manufactured goods of this country
to compete with greater advantage with articles of foreign
manufacture? --(Hear, hear.) Is it possible to contend that
such a measure has interfered with the domestic industry of
this country ?—(Loud cheers.) But it is said that it is
the import of manufactured goods which has caused the
distress of the country. Now, how stands the case? Here
is this great commercial country interfering by the export of
its manufactures; if it be interference—if it be not a positive
addition to the material comfort of those communities with
which we deal.—(Cheers.) But if this introduction of foreign
articles in a country be interference and cause. of misfortune,
where is the delinquent so enormous as Great Britain?—
(Cheers.) In 1848 you exported in official value about
133,000,000/., the produce of your industry; and you im-
ported manufactured goods to the amount in declared value
of about 4,721,000/. worth. Is that suffisient to account for
the distress ?—(Cheers.) Your imports, in 1848, of raw ma-
terials to be fabricated by your industry amounted in value
to 48,400,000/., and the manufactured goods imported only
amounted to 4,700,0001. (Hear, hear.) But is that
4,700,00 t/, worth the amount which was taken for home
consumption, and which could by any ,possibility interfere
with your native industry? No. Deduct from that amount
all that you re-exported. You cannot deny that that is a just
mode of proceeding. Of cotton goods from India and
Europe you imported in value 512,0011. worth ; bur
you re-exported a very considerable portion ot
that quantity so imported. You exported again no less than
'27 ',OOOl. worth. Therefore, deduct from the 512,000 e
worth imported the 275,0001. worth re-exported. Could
there be a greater proof ( f the benefit of free trade than this,
that it enables this country to become the entrepot for the
goods of other nations, inviting those goods to these shores,
and, to the advantage of our warehousing system, causing
them to be deposited here fir re-exportation? Thus our
shipping was employed, and great advantage conferred on
this country, without those goods interfering in any shape
with your domestic industry.—(Hear.) .You had a great
import of silks, not on account of the natural operations ot
trade, but on account of the state of France and the desire
which the French manufacturer had of realising whatever
could be gained. With respect to silk and other articles, you
had unnatural imports, to be attributed to the depression of
trade in other countries, and not to the natural operation
of trade. But of the silks imported you exported 870,000/.
worth; and when it is said that the domestic manufacture was
interfered with by the import, then on the other baud allow-
ance must be made for the amount re-exported.—(Hear,
hear.) But another and still further deduction you must
make. You must deduct from the whole of the legitimate
imports all that would have been imp irted by smuggling, if
you had chosen t r retain high duties of 40 or 50 per cent.—
(Hear, hear.) No doubt in such case the apparent amount
of imports would have been greatly reduced, and the manu-
facturer in this country perhaps might have consoled him-
self with the thought that at any rate but one-fifth or one-
sixth of the amount of the present imports had entered. No
idea could be more delusive. The smuggler would have
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 5U 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—l 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 approxim ition 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, what is the prudent course to pursue?
Would it be the prudent course to continue the duty so 'high
as would hays the effect of handing over half the reyenue