The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-31 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS.

DAILY

Extracts. from the Morning Papers, March,31,1825

[BRITISH PR uss:l
There was an interesting discussion last night
iritthe House of Commons, on the subject of the
Quarantine Laws. Mr. -John Smith expressed
this regret that the Bill now before Parliament
did not go to the full length of the doctrine of
non-contagion. We agree perfectly with Mr.
Wallace, that this subject is one that requires
youth consideration, and therefore We would have.
the,inquiry renewed at the earliest opportunity.
.Legislation, we think, ought to keep pace with
the progress of public opinion, but never go far
..beyond it ; and for that reason we hold it the more
desirable that those inquiries should not be delay-
ed, which in all probability would in their re-
suit convince the public that the dreaded danger
is .wholly imaginary. _ All the weight of evidence
is decidedly subversive of the opinion that the
riague is contagious. To us it appears that no
proposition was ever more clearly established
than that the plague is simply an epidemic dis-
ease. Why, then, if this be so, should our
commerce be burdened with restraints to protect
AA, against evils that do not exist? Why, at any
rate, should not further inquiry take place to de-
6ile whether we or those who differ from us are
in error? We are not friendly to precipitate le-
gislation, neither are we to the continuance of
absurd regulations, founded on exploded and
mischievous prejudices.

[MORNING POST.]
The day now fixed by Sir Francis Burdett for
the second reading of the Roman Catholic Bill,
is also, we believe, that appointed by Mr. Whit-
more for bringing before the House the present
state of the Corn Laws. We presume, therefore,
that some arrangement will be made between the
Hon. Baronet and the lion. Member by which a
separate day may be devoted to each of these
important subjects. At the same time, the shorter
the interval between the two discussions the bet-
ter; for the call of the House on the 18th of April
will ensure a full attendance of Members from all
parts of the country, and nothing can be more de-
sirable than to have such a question as the Corn
Laws debated in theamplest manner by the various
Representatives of the United Kingdom. We
express this opinion without any reference to the
result of Mr. Whitmore's motion. Whether any
immediate or any future alteration, or, on the
contrary, no alteration in the Corn Laws be
deemed advisable by Parliament, we cannot dis-
guise from ourselves the extreme anxiety which
now prevails upon the subject. Distinct from
-every shade of party feeling, the public is divided,
end of course the House of Commons, into two
opposite classes with respect to the admission of
Foreign Grain. The Country Gentlemen of
England, Scotland, and Ireland, are naturally
adverse to a measure which would open the home
Market to the Agriculturists of other nations,
and reduce the price of land produce pro-
portionably in the United Kingdom, as well as
reauce the present scale of rent, and generally
i,Tjure our landed interests. The Irish Members,
two-thirds of whom are returned by Counties,
may be supposed to object strongly to any change
in a system which gives their Constituents a
monopoly of the English market, and certainly
contributes most essentially to the present pro-
sperity- of the Sister Country. Arrayed against
the supporters of the Agricultural part of the
community, are all those connected with large
towns, and with Manufactures and Commerce,
who see the vast importance of cheap food
in promoting not only the welfare of the
messes of ps,eple they represent, but also of
the public at large in a remote and extend-
ed sense. The business of the latter, in short,
is to prove . that ultimately. the Agriculturists
would be benefited by a free trade in grain,
—in other words, that if the existing system be
pursued, a retrogression in our mercantile and
manufacturing prosperity must take place, at-
tended by the direct consequences to the Agri-
culturists themselves. Let the landed interests
be convinced of this truth, and they may yield
tit argument. to their antagonists ; but otherwise
the fate of Mr. W hitanore's proposition is not
doubtful. It would still, however, be one thing
to establish in the minds of the Agriculturists
an abstract conclusion, and another to gain their
asient to a practical change in which the pro-
spect of distant advantage was counterbalanced
by the loss of certain and immediate profits.