The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-04 00:00:00

n

N ING EDITION

va.•:4


0,

_.here be a vast extent of capital destroyer', 'out i
- .... mass of population would be thrown into a I
greatest misery. They should also recollect
eat F,eee, settlements and arrangements had been made
e ee e s ie::11 of the existing law, and when they recollected
eee•e;eus confusion and injustice would be produced 1
. lai -iree of the law, they ought not to make any el- I
es: a..e,c., eelesa it was imperatively required. In 1815
there was a far greater eutcry among the working clasees
than there was at present against the Corn-law, end he
world venture to say there had not been that distress
which was preleted at that time. Another reason why he
opposed any change in the existing law was, because he
was convinced it would tend very materially to dis-
turb the balance of the Constitution with reference
to King, Leeds, end Commons, and he thought that
such a change would operate very prejudicially, is
degrading the other branch of the Legislature.
Ha,knew it had been said that if the Coin-laws were re-
pealed this country would place itself' in the hands o'
P:ussia and Russia, and that the port of Dantz:c and
*Wove could easily be closed against them. He was not
one of those who had joined in the err about Russia—so
far from treating s'-ussia as our natural enemy, he thought
we ought to cultivate every amicable arrangement with
her; but he was not certain that if that sort of language
was iedulged in which had been held in that and the other
House for a year or two, that Russia would not one
day make them repent of the haughty language that had
been leald by their diplomatists. He would conclude by
iiiinfly observing, that in his opinion they ought not to
place tinernselves at the mercy of any foreign potentat es
for food, which they would do if they made any altera-
tihn in thae corn-laws.--( Hear. )
Mr. R. HYDE GREG said it was scarcely possible
to adduce any new argument in favour of the repeal of the
Corn- aw, and it appeared to him, from the determination
expressed on the part of that small but very powerful body,
the landed alistocracy of this country, that every argu-
ment would fail of effect, except it was the argument of
agitation. He was afraid the repeal of the Corn dews
would be yielded to no other argument. 'That was the ar-
gument which carried the abolition of slavery, which car-
ried the Reform Bill, and which carried Catholic Emanci-
pation, and he had no doubt that by the time it was a
little older it would be equally successful, and would effect
a total repeal of the Corn-laws ; but if there was oee
thing that would make it fail of success, it would be a
.orer sition made in good faith and good spirit by the
hire 4 interest, tomeet them by a compromise, and give
limn a moderate fixed duty, in which case he was confident
dr-union would be thrown into the ranks of the agitators, and
their forces would be paralysed. It was not his inten-
tion to weary the House with detail as to the severe and
prolonged suffering that has been experienced in the ma-
nufacturing districts; neither was it his intention to allude
to the three years of constant loss in manufacture, during
which time they had seen their capital gradually wasted
away before their eyes. The manufacturers had never
said, nor did the Hen. Member for Wolverhampton, in
' advocating their cause, state that the whole of their dis-
tress was offing to the operation of the Corn-laws ; but
they did sta a that a very great portion of it was to
be traced to that source : that if a repeal of the Corn-
laws were to take place, there would be an abatement, if
not a total cessation, of that distress ; and, finally, that the
Corn-laws compromised the permanent prosperity of their
maraufacturea. He would appeal to the admirable Report
of Dr. Boering, in proof of these statement, which he
Mr. Greg) and others were anxious to have laid before
the House at their bar, about twelve months ago.—( Hear.)
In that admirable Report would be found proof of these
See facts :-Ist. The very great increase of Foreign
p manufactures, particularly in the countries connected by
; tse Prussian League. 2:11y. The gradual exclusion of
1
English manufactures from that union. 3dly. That that
exchision was to be traced to the operation of our Corn-
laws. 4thly. That the cure for those growing mischiefs
Ivebuld be found in the repeal of the Corn-laws. And,
Elthly. That the Government of Prussia had expressed itself
ready to enter into negotiations with this country the
moment those laws were altered.—( Hear, hear.) (The
. Hon. Gentleman then read extracts from Dr. Bowring's
. Report, showing the progress of manufactures in the
Gouritries, within the Prussian League.) Dr. Bowring
1 stairsil that the tariffs of Great Britain must be modified
l
i pa ri Inman with tho tariffs of the Prussian League. The
master manufacturers had been accused of seeking a re-
peal of the Corn-laws, in order to reduce the wages
of their workmen. That was not the fact. He
O,id not believe that opening the ports would re-
duce the wages of the operatives, or the wages of
1
the agricultural labourers. He believed the demand
for manufactures would be so increased that both
! would be alike benefited. They sought by means of the
ft se interchange of their manufactured productions for the
I pre:im:tie° of other countries a fair remuneration for their
1
labour; and an increase of food and comfort to the people
tbey eeeeloyed..—( Hear.) The result of opening the ports
would be that they would give the operatives of this coun-
try the meeus sot only of purchasing foreign corn, but
that they would also enable them to purchase a larger
share of the home produce. The present law pressed on
manufacture; with a degree of malignity which it was im-
peeesible to conceive. It compelled the manufacturer to
give his labour for food grown in the United Kingdom only.
Slinu,Vtures, however, increased in a more rapid propor-
tion there agricultural produce, the improvement in which
was slow .and gradual. Tho result of this was that
1 manufacturers ;veld not get a return proportioned
to their industry and exertions.—(Hear, hear.) He
believed that there were many occupiers of land in one half
of Scotland, in parts of Ireand, and in the high grounds
of England, which were turne.:, into pasturage, who were
not opposed to a change in the .7 xisting law.—(lronical
cries of " Hear, hear," from the 00osition Benches.)
It was the owners of arable land alone :vho claimed any
iprotection. Let them give a free trade in eorn, and he
was persuaded they would find that the best means of im-
peoving and stimulating agriculture. It had been advanced
(
as a justification of the Corn-laws, that a protecting duty
was „,:aced on foreign silk manufactures. But that was
the on* article on which such a duty was placed ; and he
still contended that we should have a free trade in corn.
The only objection to flint free trade which he thought
worth a moment's consideration was founded on the argu-
. went that they should not render this country dependent
k/in other nations for its supply of food. The argument
eras a specious one, but it had already been so repeatedly
etieestissed that he would not enter into an examination
f' iof f
it then.—( Hear, hear.) He would ask, however, i
was to be admitted as a principle that the pope-
! littisia (ef ehe country should be limited to the supply
of eases w,tdeb its own agriculturists might produce. He
would unhes,''lltinglY state thet though the present laws
game as ineseaeed. value to land, it was not intended that
she monopoly_shoOci be confined to the landlord alone ;
and if w sum Zi' 20,0e'10,0001. a-year was created by these
I artificial means, he thot: eht that the state mid ht take these
20,000,000/ from the hang e of those by whom ;hey were
now enjoyed.—( Hear, hear, d the Opposition benjiies.)
He held that to be incontrovertiiele. Before concluding.,
he wished to make one observation on the sliding scale.
He behoved that such a measure would be more injurious
to the country than even a high protecting duty. The ef-
fect of such a scale would be, that before prices had risen
I it would be of no avail, and when prices had been raised,
1. it would throw on the market too large a supply. Another
evil of such a system would be, that it could not meet the
case of a harvest in which the quality of the crop was bad.
; It would be but a clumsy expedient for meeting a scarcity
iof quactity, while it afforded no remedy when the quality
was bad. An additional objection to it was that it would
resider the trade in corn hazardous and uncertain, whi..ll
was an evil attended with the worst results. 'What right,
1 he would adt, had a few thousand landholders to say to
; 93,000,000 cf consumers that they should bear an undue
I burden? What right had they to say to the manufacturer,
I the cperative, or the shopkeeper, that they demanded a
I preference above them? Whet right had they to destroy
the resource 3 of the country, and to prevent the growth of
iits prosperity ? He was persuaded that those miteralde
I jaws aggravated the fluctuations in prices, and that they
Irendered f.rod artificially and unnecessarily scarce—that
1 they curtailed our rommrrce arid deranged our currency—
that they materially compromised the prosperity of cur
manufactures, and he would therefore, with the greatest
pleasure. agree to the motion then before the House.
Sir. ORMSBY GORE was not disposed to look on
the presere question as of a temporary impartance, as he
considered it was intimately connected with the welfare of
this country, and her rank among the nations of Europe.
i-Ic believed that agriculture was the basis of our prosperity
and the superstructure on le hid) our manufacturing in.
terests should depend. He regretted the tone which
many had taken upon the present question. Ho regretted to
find that fie violence and improper conduct of a small por-
,i lion of the inhabitants of this country had ken supported
by the speech of an Hon. Member, who was a Member of
1 her M jesty's Cab riot. The Noble Lord the Member for
Sli opshire bad lately given a very proper description of
those newspapers and authorised organs of what was called
tele Ann-Corn-law League in thin country'. He would not
quote the words of that Nobly Lord, but he would give A
quetatieu from ore of those papers to which be had re'..
:erred, stud he would ask if the opinions it contained could
be supported by say Members of that House', (The Hon.
is proce.eleu to read the passage without.— stating tire
rper in which it was contained.) " The accursed Corn_
tiaieet:civiroesu.l hes
TheyrFpeal ed."—
cannot (
sloe i..) " Christian men, Cbhcers from the Ministerial
petition
—( Renewed
;; net any longer be permitted to defile' oeu
opposite cheer that rtoeleavelnld's. 'lf"
must
R Would
lion. Gentlemen
etheAs and cries of " Hear, hear," from •N—lr( Hume.)
rile was surprised to hear the head of the' poritiecel
e wailrmiste of the house cheer such sentiments as
I
Do*. He would pass to the merits of the question
and be sheeld say he was as anxious as any Hon. Gentle-
matu*Vposite for the prospelity of our manufactures. He
should oven add that if her Majesty's Ministers had
brought a measure :or instituting an inquiry into the ex-
isting laws, he might be disposed to give them his support,
but to the measure, brought forward as it now was, im
should meet strenuously object. He begged to deny,
as was supposed by some persons, that all the valuable land
tin fie country was in the highest state of cultivation. He
Ipoked on agriculture to be in its infancy (he spoke at a
ogluer): !here was not a year in which they were not
neekicg improvements in agriculture, and this being the
sire!', be asked whether his position was not borne out,
but sic would not rest there. What was the area of this
kingdom? He held in his hand a return of statistical do-
ts 'lO, from which it appeared that the cultivated land le
En:della was—without giving the fractions-23 GOO 000
acres' ,of emeultivated land, but capable of improvement
there ~,,,e. 3,400,000, and besides this there was of uncul-
tivated land:1.200,000 more.
'late of cultivation.Bo that there still remained
4.400,000 cap,Another
EL Ri Member there
the
any manufactures aitioufatheteurreestuwrinanss
andn this
used was that protec-
tion afforded to
try but Ellis; but he
tkan also, for he saw
Raw cotton was tshat c°m beggedal'nn many
i
to dissent from that pos.
worked, 20 retested
i other ieterests were protee s'44:l*
e epfer2ocent.
Iby a duty of 10 per cant. t‘ptly
' Fancy make 314 per cent. B,'"i'it en average per
cant. (Mr. Greg intimated that h: ,oid effectually
tectcd.) He was not speaking of CA. eet4"4l., but actual poprro-
teesion. Then woollen manufactures were Aretected.-:
'pistil), by a duty of 15 per cent., made up' 71 a du.tif ef 20
per cent. Iron, of three-quarters square ar_ upwards, ky
lii, A duty of 30s. per ton ; under that, 5/, per ton, °lad hoop
___

iron by a duty of 23/. per ton. A protection of upwards
of 100 per cent After this to talk of no protection to the
manufactures of the country ! He was 'lever so astonished
S when he heard the Hon. Gentleman's assertion. Fur-
iber, glass was protects d by a duty of trent 20 to ) per
cent. ; pewtes, of 20 per cent. ; end silk, from 2:. to
225. Gd. We were not the only people in the wort I who
thought it necessary to protect our manufactures, and be
it understood he did not quarrel with this protection. He
thought it quite right manufactures should be protected.
! He only begged in return that agriculture might be pro-
tected also, the foundation on which trade existed. He
would not go into details respecting the iron trade, because
they did not complain so much as others, but ,
in ten years the several exports of iron increased
from 20 to 43 millions—the cotton experts from
101, to near 17 millions. He would read en extract from
a commercial paper, alluding to this question, of June 7,
1839 to show what wore the opinions of the manufacturers
themselves resuecting it :—" It is difficult to point out a
period of five months' duration in the last twenty years,
when the state of business in Lancashire was so gloomy
mid languishing as since let January last. We might refer
to years when the prices had greatly fallen cif, and were
lower than this ear, and marked by more signal failures ;
but to no period when such general gloom and despon-
dency prevailed among all classes. It is curious this re-
markable state of things immediately succeeded the open_
ing of the British ports for the introduction of foreign corn,
the direct consequence of free trade in corn. This should
make us cautious in adopting theories in grave matters of
commercial legislation, in oppcsition to the result of ex-
perience; and the large impart of corn, including the
quantity out of bond in this country, is accompanied and
succeeded by an unprecedented had state of things in
Lancashire. So much for free trade in cerri."_
( Hear.) In these remarks he most fully concurred,
for these reasons, that in the history of the averages of im-
ports and experts of corn, he found when, the ports were
open the greatest distress in the manufacturing districts
uniformly prevailed. He had tried it, and found the result
perfectly coincident. This brought him to consider the
policy of our ancestors. The Hon. Member far Maidstone
had gone into the history of ancient times, and he might
assist his arguments by remarking that so far back as the
reign of Edward the Fourth, in consequence of a very great
dearth of provisions in this country, resulting from the wars
of the Roses, that Kin, had found it necessary to import
wheat, but in the second year of his reign he passed an Act
preventing the importation of corn, thus forcing the agri-
culture of the country. Again in William the Third's
reign, he was obliged to put a large bonus on the exporta-
non of wheat, thereby also forcing the agriculture of the
country. He (Mr. 0. Gore) was confident that instead
of advocating high prices for a most necessary article of
life he was advocating the means of reducing these to the
lowest price; as a proof of it he took the average since
this law was established, and he found that the average of
the last twelve years was 575. ; of the twelve years preced-
ing that 653., and of the twelve years preceding the latter
84s. The opinion of Mr. Huskieson was much insisted on, but
he changed his opinion before he died, and declared pub-
licly that he was mistaken, addine that if free trade could
be established to the extent he wished," the last thing which
should he made free from protection was the lane. He
was sure he need make no apology for quoting some ex-
tracts from so high an authority, and one so versed in the
history of the country. They were in his own hand-
writing in May, 1814. (The Hon. Gentlemen then read
a long extract in support of his opinions, and proceeded)
—He thought if there were a weak point in the speech
of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, that weak point
was Ireland ; but he should come to that by and bye.
One statement of the Hon. Gentleman's speech was, he
thought, the most extraordinary statement he ever heard.
It was, that the labourers in Wiltshire only received 6s.
a week. He hoped the Hon. Member for that county
would have given some explanation, for it could not be,
it was impossible, this could be the general wages of the
labourers in that county. He had understood it to be 12s.
or 14s. For himself he gave 113. to his waggoners, and
10s. to his common day-labourers, which were the com-
mon wages in that part of the country in which he resided.
It had been said that if we threw open our ports England
would become the workshop of the world. They who
fancied they could make England the workshop of the world
must fancy they could make laws for all the world. Now
much stress had been laid upon the evidence of Dr. Bow-
ring, but he would read the translation of an extract from
the Augsburg Gazette of December 28, 1829, to show
what was thought in Germany of the reports and speeches
of Dr. Bowring. (The Hon. Gentleman then read the
extract, which was to the effect that it was very natural
that Dr. Bowring should persuade the respective manufac-
turers of Manchester and Leeds, and " our cousin John
Bull in general," that Germany desired nothing better than
that they should be allowed to receive the manufactures of
Great Britain in exchange for her agricultural produce ;
but that, in fact, the object of the German League was to
unite Germany in the spirit of nationality, and to encourage
her infant manufactures, so that there was no desire upon
her part to return to the bondage of her old rela-
tive, England.) He said that so far was Prussia
from being likely to supply us with cheap
corn in a time of scarcity, that in 1801 the Prussian King
put a duty upon the export of corn, and said that it must
be increased or diminished according to the wants
of the British nation.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
We could not compel the King of Prussia, in time of bad
seasons, to relax these duties. He then referred to the
prices of rape, and other agricultural produce, at different
periods, for the purpose of showing that, although the
lowering of the import duties of this country, caused a tem-
porary reduction, of price, yet that was followed by a scar-
city of the home production, and a consequent rise of
prices. He thanked the Hon. Member for Manchester
`for
putting the question on the right bails, or, as it, was
understood out of doors, as a question between the agricul-
turist and the manufacturer. It was true that the in-
terest of the agriculturist and the manufacturer must
rise and fall together. If the manufacturer was depressed
the agriculturist had no market for his grain. If the agri-
culturist were depressed, the manufacturer had no maret
for his productions. The question was so understood
throughout the country, and it was only a few individuals
who had no interest in it who went about working upon
the minds of people, who did not think for themselves, by
a system of violent and disgraceful agitation—(Cheers)—
ho would say disgraceful, because he thought any thing
disgraceful which appealed to brute force, as had recently
been done at a meeting on the subject, when the ques-
tion ought to be discussed by the calmest and most delibe-
rate reasoning. It had been charged upon the agricultu-
rists that they agitated in a similar way for the repeal
of the malt-tax. But the charge was untrue. The agri-
culturist never encouraged appeals to force ; on the con-
trary, they never encouraged agitation. He looked upon
a fixed duty as a humbug, proposed only to deceive the
people, affording no protection of any kind.—( Cries of
t• Oh, oh," and " Hear, hear.") For his own part, he
would greatly prefer the total and immediate repeal of the
Corn-laws.—( Cheers.) But if they were repealed, it
-cold not be denied that a great portion of the land would
be tii -own out of cultivation. That would, of necessity, re-
duce, in a
pi.oportional dsgree,the number of hands employed,
_rich lands, which woula still remain in col-
would not be able to support so many
tivaticn, the farmers. •of that distress among the agri-
as at present. The effect ''e employment of the ma-
culturists must be to diminish ~ld
nufacturers, and the workhouses wow. Session
crowded. He
,
Session on the
had heard a great deal of discussion lash
+.q
question. What would you do for recruits, it t..
were to go to war? and it had been said that when- re-
cruits were wanted, it was only necessary to go into the
manufacturing districts. To that a Gallant Friend of his,
who fought under " our glorious Duke," replied, that five
out of every ten recruits from the manufacturing districts
were rejceed, whereas not one in ten of the agricultural
recruits were rejected. The Hon. Member then quoted the
well-known lines :
" lit fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates and men decay ;
Princes and peers may flourish or may fade—
A breath can make them, as a breath has made ;
Put a bold peasantry, their coentry's pride,
When once destroyed, can never be supplied."
The Honourable Gentleman then read extracts
from various Returns, to show that the ex-
port; from Ireland to this country had increased
during the protection of the Corn-laws. In 1834 the ex-
ports of gram from Ireland to this country were three mil-
lions of quarters ; in the last year they were upwards of
four mullions of quarters.—( Flear, hear.) To raise that
four millions required the labour of 23.350 families. What
:vas to be done with those families, if they were thrown
out of employment by the repeal of the born-laws ?
( 'leer, hear. ) He heard much of "Justice to Ireland,"
but it was only from the lips of those who had not justice
in their hearts. Ireland was poor, misguided, and mis-
governed, but it was a country :-here loyalty was a crime,
and agitation a virtue.— (Cheers from both sides of the
House.) It had been said that Ireland was not a corn-
growing country, but he ventured to say that there was I
riot a country in the world better adapted to the growing
of wheat. He felt bound to say, and he did it with all
respect, that many of the statements of the Hon. Member
for Wolverhampton had no foundation in truth. Before
he dismissed the subject of Ireland, ho would re-
vert to an authority that would not be disputed—
lie meant the Roman Catholic Archbishop Tuam,
Dr. M' Hale, who had stated, with respect to
the labourers of Ireland, that they ought to he employed in
That wou
working the mines of wealth which were hiddledn a
hin
riets uthe
cultivates; lend.—( Hear, hear.)_
effect d oc fa
cause
rea
that,int
iocnh thewasrincohsresourcesr
yo f
wnaasttue e,
to
oatherle
covered with a cheerful peasantry. He should have con-
cluded without further remark, had not her Majesty's
Ministers made the subject an open question. Upon what
ground they had adopted that course he could not tell, and
be r
the oi ).1
ftoiornhioscopwen.acp:rt lie should as soon have expected the ques-
tion
made open questions
havear,
se ht. b
What cooru lwdmonarchyeaestosn
eo
visr naysoi
atmonarchy,foair
thetim e
pp rue: to
their names in tl e
pose of increasing the finance for
hatthceoupludrpn7teboe,f
ticLoulin
•ofltthe'ader of the Ministry was
that of taking into consideratornre
the Corn laws. He had declared lasttehnet inreomti
yeas that
iosnsionvizei
it was madness to contemplate such a thing. Was it
that they wished to attach that party to therno. had al-
ways scoffed at them and users them, as they
them-
selves, as squeezable materials ? All ho ldsal
alas that if those with whom he was associated'
were
change tI:ICCS with the present Ministry to- morrow.rcartl
were to bring forward the question of the repeal Of the
Corn-laws, if they did net melee it a Cabinet
question, they
never should have his support.
Mr. B V NETT felt compelled to ellsedt to some
statements that had been made by the Hon. Menke; for
Wolverhampton. He had said that the wages in Wiltshire
were only 6e• a we: k. Such was not the fact. The
in Wiltshire were 9s. a week; en
some occasions
wages
they had been as low as
8s but that very seldom
the -
had taken place ; as to the statement that. farmerstheir had
met together for the purpose of paying,laboltrers
I • Id give up his defence of the Corn,-
Bs. 6d, a-weeks, he WOU
laws - could show him that any ten
altogether, if his friene -hieCt in view, fje
farmers in Wiltshire had ever such an tee sufficient,
would not
say that the wages in Wiltshire were `see
Ira whiled that
they
were very much higher, and that L....

were enabled to obtain the luxuries of beer and tobacco.
With respect to one of the viila;7,,s ti, which his friend
had alluded, where he had stsedttiat The non had only
ss, r.-week, 'ilia was the fact? NN'y these very young
men, if they only chose to go nil work at the rail-
roads, might have earned 18t. a-wuck, but they
pr4erred the Lay life they led at home.
When his friend talked of wages, he only wished that he
would go with him into Wiltshire, a county with which he
(Mr. Beaett) was well acquainted. lie would take him
to the houses of the labourers there, sod he might then
go to those in the manufacturing districts. and he would
venture to say, after having done so, he would he obliged
to admit that the labourers in Wiltshire had far greater
comforts than those in the manufacturing districts. He
was ready to admit that great distress prevailed in the
manufacturing districts, but what was the cause of that
distress? His Friend had said that it was to be found in
the Corn-laws. He denied that statement, and would
assert positively the Corn•laws had nutl,int.,F to do with
the distress in the manufacturing districts. He 'had ,fore-
told this distress twenty years ago. He had theta stated
that this country would be rivalled by others, which was
now the case, and which was !he cause of the present dis-
tress. Those who came forward to agitate this question
stated that they were anxious for free-trade. lie (Mr.
Benett) was not to be deceived by that assertion, for he
was old enough to recollect that inaay of those who now
came forward to agitate th•. repeal of the Corn-laws
years back had argued against free-trade. If they
were so anxious for free trade why had they not come far•
ward and asked for the experiment to be tried on some of
the articles which they manufacturol, and not upon such a
commodity as corn. There was a gre it diii,rence between
making experiments in corn and cottoa. It was dangerous
to tamper with corn, and in or•:er to show that he would
quote a work used by his Friend the Hoc. Member for
Wolverhampton, viz. that of Mr. Wilson. The statement
was as follows:

CORN ORrAVN-

Home Corn. Foreign Corn.
1834 36,933,000 qrs
1835 34,000 000
1836 38,800,000
1837 44,600,000
1838 51,660,000 . 4 594,000
1839 56,513,000 7 515 000
This last was 3-17ths of the cane consumption, with the
greatest exertion that could be made to bring foreign corn
to the country. What then would be the result if one-
sixth were required ? Why, it could not be supplied.
What would be the effect of the repeal? Te check the
growth of corn at seed-time more than one-fourth. The
immediate effect would be to lower the price of corn, but
the next effect would be to check the production of corn.
Vast capital, vast interests depended upon the qiiestion—
interests much greater than those of the 30,000 land-
owners—as if they alone were concerned, and as if they
had not dependent upon them hundreds of thousands of
traders, shopkeepers, and artisans —( Hear. hear.) Tne
average price of wheat for the last year was 525. a quarter.
What did the manufacturers want more? lie recellected
, all the arguments of Mr. Ricardo, the political economist,
and he recollected that they used to contend that it was
bad to force poor lands into (l:Ovation. and that
doing so we could not supply sufficient wheat for the
population. But the fact was, that we had supported a
' population, not only at that time, but .661 a great subse-
quent increase, The improvements in agriculture hod
been, and would be, proportioned to the increase of popu-
lation. Some gentlemen talked about poor lands without
knowing what they meant. The fact was that land might be
poor this year, and rich the next. By draining. and other
improvements, poor land would be greatly enriched, and
its produce increased, and thus the fee simple of the soil
was added to, and permanent add tional property created ;
whereas the manufacturers, when they built factories (for
though they said they were poor, they managed to erect
factories—if their labourers were poor they were not),
only erect buildings which were useless the moment they
were abandoned; but a new value given to land was a per-
manent investment, of which the State could never be de-
prived again, and which was available at once for taxa-
tion.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member went on to de-
clare that he felt as anxious for the prosperity of the ma-
nufacturers as for that of the agriculturists ; and he
solemnly affirmed, that if he thought the sacrifice of his
land would benefit his country, he would gladly consent to
it, but he did feel persuaded that it would not be for the be-
nefit of the country to open the trade in corn to foreign
competition, until, at least, it was proved that we could not
make provision for our own population.
Mr. WILBRAHAM rose for the purpose of stating his
reasons for voting against the motion 'of the lion. Member for
Wolverhampton. The question had hitherto been argued
merely as it affected the manufacturing and the agricultural
interests, but it ought not to be looked upon in that narrow
point of view. The proper made of considering; this question
was, what were the best means of averting from this country
the calamity of scarcity—whether it was better to protect aeri-
culture at home than to look to foreign markets for a suppry—
er whether it would be best to throw themselves into the
market of the world, and depend upon foreigners for the supply
of food; that was the greet question, and in resolving that, they
ought to lay aside all minor considerations. He had no wish
to see the price of bread high; he should like to gee the quar-
tern loaf at half its present price, but if he could obtain that
only by running the chance of great future calamities, he must
pause before he consented to it. The result of removing all
protection from agriculture might be at first Os give a-great
stimulus to manufactures—wages would rise, and
_there would
be every external symptom oeprosperity, but how long would
this last. If scarcities, such as had before occurred, should happen,
from what part of the world could we obtain a sufficient supply
of food? A reference to the snap would show how small was
the space—within how few degrees of latitude contained, from
which we could hope to obtain a supply. 11 we looked to Rus-
sia her rivers were shut up duritt.l the winter, and the hard
wheat of Odessa was unfit for the 1!loglih market; besides,
during the voyage through the warm climate of the Alediter--1
ranean it would probably seat, 'and by the time it arrived in
this country be unfit for food. Spain, Portugal, and France
would, in years of scarcity, be importing awl not exporting
countries. lie remembered tly. years 1709 and ieoo, when
every quarter of the world was ransacked for food; when boun-
ties were offered on the importation, not only of earn, but of
rice, and of every species of food, without a sufficient supply
being obtained. No country could be looked upon as really
independent that depended upon foreign countries for a supply
of food. It was not a question of profit and loss merely, it was
a question of subsistence. He looked upon the additional price
upon corn in consequence of the Corn-lags, as an insurance
against famine. It had been said that the soil of this country
was not adapted for the growth of corn. Now there was no
country in the world where wheat was grown so good as in
England. But notwithstanding he should vote against the mo-
tion he could not agree with those who contended that the pre-
sent law had answered its purpose.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
It was intended to guard a,,,:iitist fluctuations, and •
to keep the price of wheat always about sixty shillings,
in this it had signally failed. Ile thought it would have been
better at the conclusion of the war to have imposed a fixed duty
of 10s. or 12s. a quarter. Hail we done so, we should have pre-
vented foreigners from competing with us in manufactures.
We had made the great manufacturers, and if by 'doing away
with the Corn-laws we made the great agriculturists,- what
would become of the pre-eminence of this country ? ' He
thought a fixed duty imposed then would have been better than
a fluctuating scale, but he thought it would be dangerous now
to make the experiment. Knowing that the purpose of that
party agitating the question of the repeal of the Corn-laws
was to build up their own fortunes upon the ruin of that class
to which he belonged, he should give lie most decided op-
position to the motion of the lion. Memb r for Wolverhampton.
Mr. J. PARKER then rose, and addressed di.) House, but
amidst such a buzzing of conversation. inter:-nitigled with cries
of .' Divide," and" Order," that not taco consecutive sentences
could possibly be heard in the. faller y. We understood him to
say that for eight years he had given a silent vole upon this
question, but under the present eircuiestances, and considering
tai: constituency he had the honour to represent, he trusted the
I-louse tri;2ld bear with him for a few moments. As all that
was salted by the motion of the Hon. Member for Wolter-
hateptee esa.l a Committee of Inquiry lie tholight it ought to
be granted, eviseo they took into consideration the present
exceeding distress Keeeilieg, in the manufacturing districts.
To his constituents' an insieury Nets, pf f.e very highest import-
tance, for the present laws reyeeeed ,itaws ft our exchanging
their manufactures, which tbey egulq. 1^; ,ii 3-.:::,) of in this
491,1ntry, to fortigncrs, who had nothing enee It? ifkit thpa in
~,,i,mir, but their corn. There were many Gentlemee on triat
' (tee Slkestiet;4l) side of the House, belonging to the very
ce;.;fiest order of 4,,-; lit ;stied aristocracy, who viewed an altera-
tion of die Corn-laws v%4, lep lses,d than many Hon. Gentle-
men opposite. The.agricultora: i;-,,,,:d,nt fleir nded very greatly
upon the roauttfactui:ng districts, for totl;s;t.4 aiss,ie ,qrs;etiele of
their crops aud herds ; therefore it became there seri'deslFe to
consider whether, injestice to the manufacturing t
enetsinet, tliese
laws, which were tending ir) rein their ititerests, o n jus-
+4 the rnimufacturers wanted
tice or policy to be kept up.
was a fair scope, fair play, and PO ,f;t,?ibis ti 77 wanted only to
be put upon the sew footing as other chaises.
Sir R. PEEL then nese, etieLlst the cliesring ef his friends.
lie said the Heir. Gentleman wins nem; e..st-, sat down had mis-
taken the cheers of Ogritlemen of his .(itilse ((Nose:Vent ) side of
the House as to one sentimeee tittered by hint, audlie 1,-,1,e,'.V.:7
to find the lion, Gentleman, the aiitbor of the sentiment; was I
unaware of its appropriateness. His Sir Ur i'prl's,) friends had
supposed that he was alluding to a dissolution, or f i'.-t:he!..ling of
that nature, when he said the periwi had arrived- when ttree
who were responsible for Qin gOYeit4rnent anti legiSlation, ,
odcciiiisetiats: na,p4aon should seriously apply tltensaelvea to 4,e !..1,,,,..:j.j.0 I, in or:ler i
1,41, ta a
Governmentn enitotlie
pargettsactiriobne,tdhoeuot,teanadofanxiety
it."—(Cheers.) If those appealed to by the Hon: entdepii9.,n
were in favonr of a repeal of the Corn-Taws, they should com-
pose that agitation by assenting to tilts pr,akostftoss ,ar is, (.list?'
vernment; if they were in favour of a modificatiou, th,e.yaio,yl4
convey to the country the sense of a united Government with
respect to a question which wits teer bee nning more and more
difficult ; and that ditlcogy a.j4t.11 by the apparent discordance
between those holding the meat ire,v,,,!lw. ptuations in the Go-
vernment.—(Cheers.) The Hon. t;ensl,„-ug.aii.,t;: beniavk was a
perfectly just one, and at the time he thought tire .116;;;, .Cip.•
tleman was reading an intentional lecture to his friend's
around. teaching them the important truth that unity wan
most important. The period had indeed arrived when the
Government as a (e9verlM4sOS meglit to state their opinions,
because it very much added Se eiee ailteeitsitie of the puestion
when the Right Hon. Member, tlo! Irics;tesit ,O. qe• 49ff4 4
Trade, declared it to be neeeseary ter alas extertei9e 9VOne
manufactures to the Continent, that we sheize4 . tle A
o, pens
if 'on please, but I doubt whether
grown there ; yet on the
.same day the Prime. Ministek said—
" Alter your Corn-laws, ) 1 _
o. the.Commermal Depart-
foreign countries will take anyiime of your manufactures."
the Financial
i, Department
, entertained one
3Nyieltwerli thts;4
,ell;:ed,tio9fi?,
..t.!:14
tiß),.bpac.
(L.ctnkr(le'Ciltitell ,rattan stit,Keulttes ertenti
"Ill'CO, .Fee it to be won-
dered at that the agitation .ti
tl, i-414'ir.1n,,,4:e.,.L&?..: iriiii
ing the soden-lea of file gig? 4,,
__: Y _ _
~,,,, ..,/.iti:
:oiisiee e
ment ontertained opt
rid
was the statement which hail
.1) PP. "f'c',%' , X,l, 3:, • k•'''
question in no ether spiri's PT
wished to discuss thet great .
ni tortance. Ile agreed with
temper than that befitting itsho id,
appealed to the pas.
approbation on his (Sir R. Peel ',. s"!''' .'i °•'" tig"'e, . Ile
lirecuted the unfiir and ms.
those Hon. Frientls of his wb
worthy artifices resorted to
r clamours.—
hared in leer feelines, but
(11Car, hear, ie.Srer• ) 1-1° s ! , ,t :e nersons iden-
-lat the same time He din nc4 .`,' :.:" ,c,„,,...,,i' . lie 644 rot
sires 9f the multitude aYntdholseex:iitt.:(l
t_ ; _
0.
lifted with the great manufactatog tn. .
.. ,
.t. ,
which
the artifices of those who, instead of pronto . tiog. were,
lie n should
beved, injuring the cause—no indignath.n ::
forget their importance or numbers, aod no indi;.,na ion
si I ra-
of the eotinfry were involved, that calm anti SeI'IOUS 1011. t l
,y tratiileil, lie thought the best
Preeerie his giving to a sul jest, in whet' the f;"ll:'otstsivittal:(interests
tion to which 'it Wag ns'o' full-
course he could pursue for th'e.pur`isiiS of I iLit ing as lie as pos-
sible the observations with which he hiiil tti' triithi6 tiia llouse
t. He wished to avoid Tithing ; but at the same
}Would be to consider what were the main argtialeufs chiefly
gashed 99 in the course of the debate in favour of the repeal of
ehe Corn-lays
Mime, fallowing ' the - desultory tli cessiet; iiiat had now
Fseniriu.ed for three 1414; Would led•'itirie far t,eyOthl he
iiiiiAtZ 4e ''sl4e(l to prescribe to himself. ' Ile 'lveuhr et ate' what
h''' e4n4ictel.4 *Le m ' relied ' .' ' 'd if were
. . p 451 argoments Aro, ais , it
, e i

suggested that he had omitted anything, he should be ready to
correct it. 13ut he did not think that he stated the arguments
unfairly, when he represented their general sum and purpo.t
to be—first, that the operation of the Corn-lass had led to a
great drain of ballion and a derangement of the monetary sys-
tem : secondly, that there had been a great fluctuation in the

price of corn, caused by their operati n, in discouraging com-
mercial speculations, varying the price of labour, and having
therefore a tendency to derange manufacturing industry ; thirdly,
that the experience of the la: t year had shown a great depre;sion in
the manufacturing industry of the country, and a great decline
in the internal consumption, and that that depres.ion of manufac-
turing industry, and the decline of internal consumption, w ere to
be attributed to the operation of the Corn-laws. He thought
these were the three leading arguments, and he hoped he had
omitted nothing of importance, as he had no wish to avoid any
of the difficulties of the question. Now, first, with resrct

~..,.._. . .
to the derangement of the monetary system, it was said that the
sudden demand for corn had been increased importation,
and in consequence of the suddenness of the demand, there had
not been a consequent exportation of manufactured artich s—
that it was necessary to pay for the corn in gold, and conse-
quently the stock of bullion had been diminished. Now it
could not be denied that, in the course of 1838 and 1839, that
derangement had taken place, but it was assumed that was a
necessary consequence of the Corn-laws. He denied that in-
ference—he denied that the demand for corn had necessarily
caused a derangement of the monetary system, and a drain of
specie. In the first place, lie contended that a similar derange-
ment had taken place in other countries, where it was impossible
that those causes could operate. That derangement took place in
France, where the circulation was chiefly metallic, and where the
demand for corn could not possibly have existed. The same
derangement of the monetary system, and the same drain of
bullion, involving the neces-ity of the suspension of cash pay-
ments, would take place in the United States, and under cir-
cumstances where it was perfectly impossible that any cause
like the operation of the Corn-laws could have occasioned it.
It was therefore perfectly clear that that derangement might
take place from other causes than the operation of the Corn-
laws. The same derangement had taken place in England,
when it was quite impossible the Corn-laws could have had any
effect. In 1825 there was an immense drain of bullion, and
great derangement of the monetary system. They ap-
peared to be approaching a period when a suspension
of cash payments would occur, the drain of specie from the
Bank being so great, and he (Sir R. Peel) was one cf those
who had advised the Bank to pay away every guinea before
they suspended cash payments, and he believed the determina-
tion ts act upon that advice obviated tie necessity of resorting
to a measure so fatal to the credit of the Bank. Still in 1825
the state of bullion in the Bank led to great alarm, and in that
year it was utterly impossible that the operation of the Corn-
laws could have contributed to produce it. In 1815 there was
no importation of foreign corn to produce the slightest effect—
for in 1823, 1824, and 1825 the whole amount did not exceed
200,000 quarters. The derangement of the currency and the
drain of specie arose from causes perfectly uncon-
nected with the operation of the Corn-laws.—(Hear.) In
1836 the same circumstances took place, and from July to
December the bullion in the Bank was lessened from
7,362,0001. to 4,545,000/.—could the Corn-laws have operated
to cause that drain ? In 1836 there had been no import of
foreign corn whatever, and the total consumption of foreign
corn for home consumption in 1833, 1834, and 1835, was
200,000 quarters ; the average price in the latter year not ex-
ceeding 50s. But then it must be admitted that in 1838 and
1839, there was a derangement of the currency, and a drain of
specie ; and at the same tune there was an immense sudden
import of foreign corn. It was impossible to deny that the
two events were simultaneous. Possibly that might have been
the cause of the drain.—( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial
benches.) it was easy to assume that it must be so, but
he would be glad to hear the arguments in proof of it.
It would be impossible to deny that a great and sudden de-
mand for gold had probably some effect on the derangement of
the currency. But the question was whether that suddenness
of demand was an evil against which they could have any se-
curity. That was the question. It was impossible to deny the
partial effect of the Corn-laws, but was it not true that the
nrice of corn, and the quantity of it, depending, as they did, on
the vicissitude of the seasons, were things against which they
could not take any precaution by human providence, or human
legislation ? These were necessities which must follow from
the very nature of things—( Hear, hear)—and he could only
say, when Right Hon. Gentlemen took it for granted that the
Corn-laws were the cause of the evils, that he had read with
very great attention the writings of those who had put them-
selves most prominently forward, both with regard to the Cur-
rency and the Corn-laws, and lie certainly found that they did
not attribute to the operation of those laws exclusively the de-
rangement of the currency or the drain of specie. On the con-
trary, they distinctly assigned other causes as having a material
influence on those fluctuations. Of course, the parties on whom
lie should chiefly rely in a matter of this kind were those who
now put themselves forward as the opponents of the Corn-laws,
and the most strenuous advocates for their repeal. If he found
the same parties, by appealing to the public on the subject of
the currency, offered a most impartial testimony on the
matter, and if he found them assigning other causes than the
operation of the Corn-laws for the derangement he had refer-
red to, he had a right on such unquestionableauthority to doubt
whether these causes might not have great weight on the occa-
sion, independent of those laws. The parties to whom he
should appeal, were those who were now chiefly leading what
was called the agitation on the Cnrn-laws, and he would men-
tion, in particular, the President of the Chamber of Commerce
at Manchester. He was about to mention the very individual
who had supplanted the Hon. Member for Kendal on account
of the unsatisfactcry character of the speeches which that Hon.
Member had delivered.—(Hear, hear.) Surely Hon. Gentle-
men opposite would not protest against the authority of the
President of the Chamber of Commerce, and the authority of the
commercial body of the greatest manufacturing city and dis-
trict in the empire. The President of the Chamber of Com-
merce was now, he believed, a gentleman of the name of Smith,
who was one of the most active opponents of the Corn-laws,
and the President, he believed, of the Convention which was •
now sitting in London. But in the course of this very year •
the body over whom that gentleman had presided had come
forward, at the same time that they were agitating against the
Corn-laws, to assignthe specific causefor the monetary derange-
ment in this country. He wanted to show that whatever
might be shown of the operation of the Corn-laws,
the chief agitators against their continuance had assigned per-
fectly different and distinct reasons, combined certainly with
the laws in question, for our monetary derangements. If he
attempted to give a summary of the minifesto he had referred
to, which was a report from the Chamber of Commerce, it
might be said that in giving that summary he entered into an
unfair statement of the arguments, and he would rather rely on
the summary which was given by a gentleman who was also
an opponent of the Corn-laws, and one who had written with
the greatest ability on the subject of currency and banking—a
gentleman whose opinions were entitled to the greatest weight
from his intelligence, and the respectability of his private cha-
racter, he meant Mr. Jones Lloyd. He held in his hand the
account which Mr. Jones Lloyd gave of the grounds on which
the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester had impeached the
conduct of the Bank of England, and the reason they assigned
for the great derangement of the currency and the drain
of bullion. The arguments which the Report contained
consisted of three main prapositions. The first was that
the alterations in our monetary system and the depreciation
in trade, and especially those events which had occurred during
the years 1838 and 1839, were to be attributed c*liely to the
mismanagement of the circulation. That was the 'gta,minent of
the report which Mr. Jones was discussing The second pro-
position of that report was that the mismanagement of the circu-
lation was altogether the result of the improper measures
adopted by the Bank of England. The third proposition was
that the cause of the misconduct of the Bank of England was
to be found in the undue privileges which it possessed, in
wanting a sufficient capital, which rendered it impossible that
it could conduct its affairs with advantage to the interests of the
commercial and manufacturing community. It was al .o stated
that too great a power was vested in the hands of a few indi-
viduals. That was Sir. Jones's summary of the reasons alleged
by the Chamber of Commerce for our late monetary derangements
and the drain of specie. Tho e parties had assigned a perfectly dis-
tinct cause from the Corn-laws as the most important source of
the derangement in question, and they did not concur in think-
ing that these laws were responsible for it. 3lr. Jones says,
ii) his pamphlet, " that the Corn-laws had increased the evil,"
but there are other circumstances, also, not mentioned by the
Chamber of Commerce of Manchester, which had materially •
increased the evil, and the principal of those was that the Bank
did not and could not exercise over the issues of joint stock
banks of the country a sufficient control in respect to the
circulation. Mr. Junes said that when the Bank of England
contracted its issues there was a tendency on the part of private
banks to i icrease their issues ; he sod that the fluctuations in
the paper of country banks did not .correspond with the Bank
of England. He therefore observed that the Chamber of Corn-
merce had committed an error 41 not noticing the want of a
sufficient control on the part of the Bank of England. Mr.
Jones, thought that the princi pal sinner was not the Corn-laws,
but the issuers of country banks. Be also considers tits mixture
in the saute bank of the functions of a bank of deposit with
tlie'llitic7tisip cst a I..ii.y, i 4 issue were incoiroatil,le. ?Jul t„,„lit
to be separated. That, w. another re4iOq''titi his sir iiiisii. fdr
• . i ,) )
• the d fangement of the currency. Ile thought'' that persons
whose authority was enthled to the greatest respect, thought
that though the Corn-laws might have been in some measure
the cause of the evils complained of, yet there had been other
an'frsers) powerful causes in operation, and nothing could lie
mere"Piierite'lliiii4inis, firs flimise should take any consse with
respect to these laws on the i'irsiiriptidn' Olaf thdy hal iett to
the inconveniences in question. That was the answer he
would give to the Hoe. Gentleman opposite who had made an
eimeal to him on the subject last night. He was trying to
.J.fisti stita; I!.ssisi. Member not only on his authority assumptions,
or ieo(itriligiVdt Oil the aettiositt ef those who bld talceh a most
active part Will dgaAn'iCtlei Npn=laW's'lnd 'flieli.ar: O'Ct;na.-
land.— (Ilear, hear. ) He had shown, oil the authority of Mr.
on,. `,..;;:vd, that there had been other and most powerful
6.l.fies 'ln 'Oeratioe, a.))4 `;:ii.'; they should seek for a remedy
against fidtird'etei.ailgAtt,iirt; not ticfusively In apy 4
aii.eration
',
the Corn-laws but a'riankelner!fi 414111't h ecrri; Arlen' ~,..id
.t. e e.,,,y, ,r.r the bank of issue.
Me.' Cl 4 aid 4 "'a it';'"74i. " - - •
ed tnat there We-re oilier
Sir ROUST PEEL was glad to get, that F!,oiwkl-,; i.,si
~..„,,,-,...-, i,,pwever, the Cetri=l)iws mere die eilqr.”",k:-41-P4r,
3,ie-ar.) The iic::,, Member now-admitt
caries besides the 'ariV4aws i,. :-.K.-tiOti, and lie (Sir Robert
-1.0) had no doubt tilial irhe Vast anii,d .°".l`l°}loY 111atPNI 91
operation was
question. ' 'fie `e ,iii 'sie,l Nicii sit
_s .stssisisk, )..1?!
,corn I4'l,heWnfin.r,
and the necetsity of impor'thi,e7iadsimie oinerailens a, i:ggra,
e denied that that
eating the de • t alluded to i but 1
44at 4,i4-44,',41e'dOin4'Avra Would hove very' ltttle'tO do
.wit'n he
i angernen .. ,
..,_
not satisfied
cause, on the occasion ; and he was
was impossible to regulate the supPlY
ili.4 an Oteratien in the Can-lawi would afford any remedy
,or the dil: 'ie ;144 ~.;;• 4 a edit' saiie'!stiii)n cry4i4 k,ei pi!
overcome by any legislationa igr, eke subject. He
.said
thei it
the exclusive eitf3e, or use n. lain
feet or excess of which depended on the dispensations of
iro-
vidence, over which they- bad not the slightest contro .--
I, Rem, ) He doubted whether, if they discouraged the pro-
of a commodity,
pt tint
pi' cot, 4.* tt.id c,044,y, and if they became dependent
°F F'i!.l.liptieslini UtliciefiationsL4o doMil - yfl'ietlrt, il ‘'‘;
that caae a time sor ueileisi s,4reity'should aerie; e, if there should
be a succession of bad seasons or of deficient produce, het
merely in this country, but in other countries of Europe, wlhch
are subject to the same influence of seasons which affect
this country—he doubted whether in that case they might not
repent of their discouragement of the home produce, arid of
the !imited supply at home. Suppose they
frigh nations, and that no hostility should arise between their,
t frOse natiOni'rnikrii 14 oPige'ti. tl4' prinsidti for th0r0,,,,4, wiiiiis•
lie feared that in that 'ease there Might be more sn'tiden des
r6a4(l't 1114 ill" ere Sufficient sipistiei, tiil ilAt tile "ils
fluctua-
tions in the price of corn, thereby were dependent on
of the derangement of the currency and a drain of
bullion, might come upon them with a force greatly
aggravated over the degree in which it existed at present.
The next objection was, that the Corn-laws produced
in our traffic, and derangement of our commercial intercourse
with foreii-sn nations, Here. tvrain, he was compelled to admit
tliat there.bhd been animus:tintsl, much greater trap could be
wished. But what 'he deubted w'a's, Whether there hail not
producing great uncertainty
been greater steadiness of prices upon the whole under'. the
sliding scale, than would otherwise be found.—( Hear, hear.)
Now, as to this article of food, there were causes in operation
which materially affected the value and the price at different
He would quote on this 'Mint
or deficieneY''iss the sulsply'
periods.
authorities' On 'flie'sutseCt, AV Tooke, one or tine greatqt
‘,l-16 Said i` that excess
''F acorn,' eo
consumption, was attended With reater difference of price that
on most ether commodities_ i awl therefore the flucteaSinns on
corn had been such as not to be corn Pared with fhase isin race
inpalbed 'te rth tli'e a. vitaige
articles." The Hight' tion:' ihronct 'stdd: lie, would compare
the fluctuations which had occurred since the operation of the
present Corn-law system, with those at former periods. In

*. -'