The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-09 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS.

Lord HATHERTON presented petitions from eleven
places in Staffordshire, praying for a repeal of the
Corn-laws.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from the Mayor, Aldermen, and Town Council of Chip-
ping. Wycombe,' in Buckinghamshire, in favour of the
Government. measure for the alteration of the duties on
corn, sugar, and timber ; also a petition from a person
named W. Brookes, who was unknown to him, praying
to be heard at the bar against the Jews Relief Bill.
The Noble Marquis then moved for returns of the ave-
rage prices of corn in London, and also for the king-
dom generally, during the' months of July, August, and
September, in the years 1820, 1830, and 1840.
The Earl of RIPON presented petitions from certain
parishes in Sussex, against any alteration in the Corn-
Jaws. •

The Earl of HAREWOOD presented several petitions
against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Earl FI rZWILLIAM presented petitions from Hun-
tingdon,- Strathraer, Wisbeach, and several other places,
all praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws,
• The Earl of YARBOROUGH presented a petition
from the county of Lincoln, against any alteration in the
Corn-laws.
_ .

—...
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented several petitions
from Yorkshire, to the same effect.
The BishOp of ROCHESTER presented a petition
from the clergy of the Deanery. of Worcester, complain-
ing of the present mode of rating tithes. '•
The Earl of GLENGALL presented petitions' from
Tipperary and Lincolnshire, against any alteration in
the Corn-laws,
Lord SONDES presented a petition from Kent, against
any alteration in the Corn-laws.
The Earl of MINTO presented petitions from Rox-
burgh 'and Melrose,. against the Corn-laws.
The Earl of DEVON presented several petitions
from 1 Devonshire, against any alteration in the Corn-
laws
Lord BROUGHAM wished particularly to call their
Lordships' attention to the petition he was about
to present,
as it proceeded from a most respect-
able meeting, which had been held at the
Guildhall, . in the City of London: • - That meet-
ing was called by public advertisement by the Right
Hon. the Lord Mayor. It was attended, not- only by
persons of the greatest wealth and respectability in the
commercial world, not only by persons who• held the
highest rank amongst • the citizens, lint it was also at-
tended by a most numerous assemblage. All persons
Were adMitted to that meeting, and the. Guildhall' was
completely filled The petition was signed by upwards
of 21,000 in the course of four days, and four *days only..
He had been informed that the petitioners were anxioiis
to have the petition presented to their Lordships as •
early as possible, or double the number of signatim.s
'would have been attached. Having stated this much,
.he•(Lord Brougham) thought he would be entitled to
read the petition at length. (The Noble Lord then pr,i-
ceeded to read the petition, which was in favour of the
'pleasures which had been introduced by her•Majestv's
.Government.) He (Lord B.) would state to their Lordshlps
the 'petitioners • only prayed for the alteration
in the duties relating to corn, as tendinc, to the ultimate
abolition of the. whole duty. It was the opinion of the
petit otters that a fixed duty was not a sufficient change
of ,the law, but they prayed for the present measures as
!.a step towards a further course of legislation on .the
subject,. viz., a repeal of all laws affecting the prices of
the necessaries of life, which are not objects' .of protec,-

tion to any hitettsti and not the proper subject of re-
venue. He (Lord Broogham) thought that a repeal of_
such laws would be a great measure of justice to the
people, and the true line Ivhich the law-givers of this
country ought to take, and that it was a line which the
people of this country ought to expect.
Lord ASHBURTON thought the Noble Lord must
either have mistaken the object of the petitioners or the
petition itself, as he said the petitioners were for a total
repeal and not it !heti duty.
Lord BROUGHAM said he was never . more as
tonished in his life, he had read the petition at
length to their Lordships, and how could he make any
misstatements respecting it. The Noble Lord had read
the petition. He (Lord Brougham) had no objection to
his reading it, though bills were read three times, but
petitions were generally read but - once.—(A laugh.)
When the petition was brought; five or six gentlemen
accompanied it. They stated that they were satisfied
that the measures of her Majesty's GovernMent would
prove a stepping-stone towards the gaining of a total re-
peal ; and it was with that object that th petition had
been got up.
Lord ASHBURTON thought that if those were the
opinions of undo four or five gentlemen, it was unfair to
the petitioners for the Noble-Lord to state those opinions
to the House on presenting the petition. He (Lord
Ashburton) recollected that when lie and his Noble
Friend were in the other House, his Noble Friend had
supported as strenuously the preicnt protective system of
duties as he was now opposed to it.
Lord BILOUG}IAM said that his Noble Friend had
made use of the most extraordinary misstatements he
had ever heard ; fir at the time to which his Noble
Friend alluded, he (Lord Brougham) was not a Member
of the House of Commons ; he was not there when the
debates came on, nor was he in Parliament in 1815. He
never took part in any of those debates, and he could not
tell for whom his Noble Friend had mistaken hint, but
he could assure him that lie was not in Parliament at the
time.

Lord ASHBURTON said that what made him recol-
lect the circumstance so well was, that at the time his
Noble Friend made some very severe remarks upon
him.--(Laughter.)

Lords BIIOUG.HAINI said it must have been 6onle
commercial question to which his Noble Friend referred;
most probably it was the Bill brought in -by a Noble
Friend of his (Lord Brougham's) relating ,to the cur-
rency.
Tne Earl of WINCHILSEA said that with respect
to the principles of total abolition of thepptective
duties on corn and other necessaries, .advocated by the
Noble and Learned Lord, he would ask how was our
enormous national delft to be paid if all protective duties
were to be abolished ? Were not the leather trade, the
hat trade, and other trades, dependent upon the prospe-
rity of agriculture ? He wouli! repeat, therefore, that if
they abolished the protective duties upon corn, they
might-look for a total:annihilation of the national debt.
After a few words from Lord Brougham, Earl of Wick-
low, and the Marquis of Lansdowne, the subject drp‘d,
The Marquis of BREADALBANE presentifl, pe-
titions from Perth and its neighbourhood praying for an
alteration in the present Corn-laws.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented petitions
from places in Kent against any altenttion in the
Corn-laws.

The Earl of CHARLEVILLE presented a petition
from a place in Ireland to the same effect."

The -Earl of STANHOPE presented a petition with a
similar prayer.
Lord ASHBURTON moved for a return of the quan-
tity of wheat imported into this country in each month
of the years 1838, 1839, and 1840 ; and also since the
Ist of January of the present. year ; distinguishing fo-
reign from colonial vheat.—Agreed to.
Earl FITZWILLIAM moved for an enumeration of
the different petitions for and against the measures pro-
posed by her Majesty's Government, with an enumera-.
tiun of the signatures to each class of petitions.
The Marquis of SALISBURY wished they should.
have, in addition, a statement of the number of signatures
in the same handwriting.
Lord MOUNTCASHEL—And also the number . of
Crosses.--(A laugh.)

Lord DUNCANkON suggested that there would not
be sufficient time foe preparing the returns ; and that it
would be advisable under the circumstances not to per-
severe with the -motion.

.11444 r some discussion this suggestion was agreed to.
and the infiiiort was withdrawn.

Several 13i1i5 were then forwarded a stage, and their
Lordships adjourned until Thursday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 8.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'Cl9ek.

On the motion of Mr. ESTCOURT, Warrener's Es-
tate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be corn:
!flitted.

On the motion of Col. ROLLESTONE, the St. He-
len's Small Debts' Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. CHRISTOPHER, the Lincoln
Road Bill was read a third time and passed. .•
On the motion of Mr. BRODIE the Salisbury Small
Debts Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Sir J. YARDE BULLER Jackson's
Estate Bill was romi a third time and passed.
Lord HOTHAM presented petitions from different
parts of Lincolnshire and Suffolk against the alteration
proposed by her Majesty's Ministers in the Corn-laws.
Mr. CA DA pres_ented, petitions from several pa.
rishes in the West Riding-ot. the county of York, against
any alteration in the Cora-laws.
tr. WM. ROCHE presented a petition from. Lim-
erick, nutoorouSly signed,' nainst the intended change in
-the duties on Corn and Timber.

Mr. KEMBLE prewntod thirteen petitions from plums
in Surrey against anv alteration in the. Corn- ln ws ; and
twG ?N4titions from Peekhain. and Lambeth, praying for
Church I;.l%,:nsion.
Col. CONOLLY presented several petitions from thc,
county of Donegal, against any alteration in the Corn-
laws.

.rnr. DENNISTOITN. presented forty-one petitions,
praying far ft:l alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from Renfrew-
shire, and a petition from Greenock, praying fbr an
alteration in the Corn-laws, and the adoption of the
proposed alteration in the Import Duties.
Mr. EASTHOPE presented petitions from Leicester,
and from places in Northampton, and Worcester, to the
same effect ; also petitions from Leicester, praying for
the abolition of Church-rates.

Mr. PACKE presented several petitions against the
Government measure affecting the importation of corn.

Mr. W. TURNER presented a petition from Black-
burn signed by 4,920 persons, praying for a repeal of the
Cont-laws ; also petitions from the different Dissenting
congregations of Melkl urn, to the same effect.
Mr. LEADER presented petitions from the Tower
Hamlets, from several parishes in Westminster, from
Spitalfields, and from various other places in the county
of Middlesex ; from Newington-butts, from St. George's,
Sduthwark, and from other places in the county of
Surrey; from Stratford, in Essex; from Scarmouth, and
from Newburgh, in the. county of Aberdeen; all most
numerously signed, and all praying for a repeal of the
laws affecting the importation of corn and provisions
generally, to the existence of which the petitioners attri-
buted the present distresses of the country.
Mr. HOME DRUMMOND presented forty-five peti-
tions against any alteration of the Corn-laws.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from a Dissenting
congregation in Birmingham, praying the House to aid
the Government in effecting an alteration ih the Corn-
laws ; also a petition to the same effect from Henley-in-
Arden, in Warwickshire, praying for a repeal of the
Corn-laws, and stating the opinion of the petitioners that
the effect of those laws was to make bread dear and
money scarce, thus producing a most disastrous effect
upen the- currency. In that opinion he entirely con-
curred, and should, therefore inure that the petition be
printed. • The Hon. Member then brought up the petition.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD rose, but was met with loud
cries of " Order, order," from the • Tory benches, and,
aFteria vain attempting to gain a hearing, sat down.
Mr. LEADER rose to order, lie thought there must
be some misunderstanding on the subject. The Hon.
Member who had presented the petition had moved that
it be printed, • and he understood that the other Hon.
Member for Birmingham had risen for the purpose of
seconding the motion, and he imagined that his Hon.
Friend was perfectly in order in so doing.
The SPEAKER said that when the Hon. Member for
Birmingham had brought. up the petition he had Intl-
mated to him that he must give notice of his intention
to move that the petition be printed.
Mr. MUNTZ had Misunderstood the Speaker's inti-
mation. He would now give notice that to-morrow he
should move that it be printed.
The SPEAKER—The Hon.
Member cannot give no-
ticeMr.n ,rhzer mustrr zwi
ca uK
ntil five
dooffa'eNlt,ooue severalkr
of tet.
ps
etitions
refenorrlinni
Caolutenrtayt,ioinn.
filleancetsmineateregufoeren.asn
timber,3ir and
.BRo
Tli TON presented 15 petitions, signed
by 19,000 persons, praying for the abolition of the 0)111-
laws. Of these petitions one was from the 'borough of
Salford, signed by
17,500 persons, and four petitions
were frOm parishes in the county of Buckingham, and
were signe by farmers and agricultural labourers.
Mr. HINDLEY presented nine pttitions in favour of a
repeal of the Corn-laws from Ashton-under-Lyne, signed
by 4i500 person ; froth Warrington, by 4,200 persons ;
from Ardenshaw, in the county of Lancaster ; and' from
various other places in the Counties of Lancaster, Ches-
ter, and Buckingham. Also a petition from Ashton in
favour of the Drainhge
Mr. YILLIERS presented the following petitions for
the totnl'repeal of the Corn-laws :—From the borough of
Wulvcrhainpton, signed
.by 12,800 : from Rowley, ill
Staffordshire, signed by :3,000 ; from Chesham, in Bucks,
signed* by 1,80 ; from Kirriemuir, in Foriarshirc,
signed bey 1,980 women ; six from different counties in
‘Ncirth Ni'aleS'; and seven petitions from different agri-
eitlturid *Plies in the county of 13uckingliam
siditiett 'kt ura I labourers. , chiefly
at
u. ptibli rhe'eti4 of the working classes held at Li
• IAT h tiN 4LI- presented a petition, agreed. o‘n
pool,yrving for a total abolition 0
held in that town, hay-
f the Corn-laws. The
ni6Oing was one of the la rg•es(trefr
100.
000
Persons. The
ing.been attended by upwar s
'the hands of the
procleedings had been entirely
.11
labourinc, classes ; and the chairman, at %%1)1..111,1 th..n,
behalf of the meeti.ng.—_
' :en
the
petition working people.of W9l-
- , wels. a
verhampton to the same.efreet.
Mr: M. PHILIPS presented see oral petitions from in-
. habitants Of Atanchester, complaining of great suffering
irld distresS, and priiying that every monopoly. and espe-
I • • f lel •be abolished ; also a
the monopoly ,
from the licensed victuallers carrying on bust-
nogg in the towns Of Manchester and Salford, praying
that they may be exempted from the liability to distress
for refit, as far as regards their beer barrels.
Mr. EWART presented petitions from Liverpool,
Spitalfrelds, -llolborn, the Tower Hamlets, Bethnal-
green, Biackfriars., and Other parts of the Metropolis,
gainq the' present Corn-laws.