The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-02 00:00:00

r-cf;tt --5.11114
,s.

LONDON:
rRIDAY, JULY 2, 1841

Sir ROBERT PEEL appears, by Ms Tamworth

speech, to have become quite enamoured of the

Corn-law. The passages we yesterday quoted
proved its negative advantages. It has not, ac-
cording to the Right Hon. Baronet, been the
cause of our manufacturing distress; but he went
much further than this, and insinuated that it
was the cause of our national prosperity.
With that dexterity in argument which he has
acquired from continually debating for victory
without considering the truth or falsehood of the
question at issue;'he used the statements of his
opponents to make out his case. Quoting Mr.
--
1114CULLocres late pamphlet, he said
The object of the pamphlet is to prove the advantage
of the substitution of a fixed duty on corn; but Mr.
ll‘Culloch, writing fairly and impartially, and not lend-
inb aid to the disseminations of those gross delusions
Ly which, in manufacturing districts, public indignation
has been excited, makes these admissions with respect
to agriculture :—" The price of wheat in Englund,
at an Average of the ten years ending with 1820,
was no less than 86a. 3d. a quarter. Its
tGs. 11d average
erage
price has since been reduced to
this
575.) a quarter, and, tremen-
dousnotwithstanding &11, a most witraordinary improvement
taken place in agriculture since 1820, so
has
much so that
we now provide for an additional population of at
least seven millions, not only without
any in-
crease, but with a very considerable diminution of
im-
portation." Gentlemen, these are important facts. The
price of wheat has been reduced under the operation of
the present Corn-laws from Hs-per quarter to 57 s., and
yut, notwithstanding this reduction of price, agriculture
has improved, and there has been derived from the land
of this country an additional supply of corn for
7,000,000 of our population. This is a great advantage
to have realised.
He subsequently added—
While I admit the present distressed state of manufac-
tures and coiaimeree in this country, that that distress is
not attributable to the Corn-laws, and that we should be
acting an unwise part if, under the pressure of difficulty,
which I believe to ba temporary, we were to make a ra-
dical, fundamental change in the laws which regulate the
application of capital to the cultivation of land.

Afterwards Sir R. PEEL quoted some state-
ments made by Lard PALMERSTON on the 224:1 of
.July, 1840, with a view of showing that Ministers
had not neglected the commerce of the country
as to the increase of trade, and Sir ROBERT added—
This is the Ltstimony of the Foreign Minister of this
country with respect to the increase of the trade and
commerce of this country from the year 1830 to 1839,
during the whole of 'Which period the present Corn-laws
were in operation. This boasting of the progressive in-
crease of our commerce makes me doubt whether the
operation of the Corn-laws can be fairly assigned as the
Cause: of the present manufacturing and commercial dis-
tro:;:.

Nov combining these remarks with the re-
marks as to the great increase in our agricultural
productions, and Sir R. PEEL'S declared attach-
ment to n. protective duty, it is fair to conclude
that he attributes the national prosperity to the
Corn-laws, which regulate, according to him, the
application of capital to land. The following.
Passage may be considered, in fact, as quite posi-
tive, coming from so cautious a sWpe'aker•—
e must take care lest in a well-intendtion.edend.eavoUr
to remedy the distress existigngthien t_ohuins is!rict or m that,
We run the risk of underntin in
dadlons of national

prosperity; and I cannot help thinking that if-we did di-
minish the agricultural prosperity of this country—if we
did disturb the application of capital to land, so far from
increasing the demand for our manufactures, we might
be affecting the home trade; and only adding to the pri-
vations and sufferings of those who live by manufactur-
ing labour.—(Hear, hear.) It is by a careful considera-
tion of those causes that I have come to the conclusion
that we are not so called on, and that I do think it of
such immense importance that we should make our-
selves, as far as we can consistently with the mainte-
nance of a moderate price, independent of foreign
supply.—(Cheers.) It is on this account, seeing how
rapidly the skill in agriculture had increased ; seeing
that, according to the admission of Mr. M'Culloch, that
prices are falling, and yet that we have been enabled to
support 7,000,000 of people by our own produce more
than we supported twenty years ago, that I am induced.
to come with him to the conclusion that a prudent states-
man would pause before he disturbed the principle of the
existing Corn-law--that Corn-law which, when you have
abundance at. home, excludes foreign coin from competi-
tion; but which, when prices rise, admits foreign corn
without a duty.—(Cheers.) I say that system was a
manifest advantage over the other, because I do not be-
lieve it would be possible, when corn did rise to a height
which would subject the people of this country to great
privations, to continue to levy the duty of Bs. on foreign
corn.

From Sir ROBERT PEEL, then, the suffering
and starving workmen, and the decaying manu-
facturers, have nothing whatever to hope. He is
thoroughly convinced that their distress is only
temporary, and that the Corn-laws, so far from
having any part in causing it, have encouraged
the application of capital to land, and laid the
foundations of our national prosperity. It is not
in our power to point out exactly the desires
which have suggested to the Right Hon. Baro-
net's mind so many arguments in favour of the
present system; but we are at liberty to conjec-
ture that his wishes to be at the head of the
county gentlemen, and to preserve his right to a
share of the bread-tax, which he or his father
bought, when they bought Drayton Manor,
have been the prolific parents of more delusive
arguments than we have supposed it possible
even for the brains of Sir ROBERT PEEL to
furnish.

The country, says Sir ROBERT, in great ex-
ultation, seizing hold of Mr. M'CuLLocst's
statement, has grown food under the protec-
tive system for seven millions more persons,
since 1820, than before existed. Seven mil-
lions is about one-fourth of the whole popu-
lation, from which it follows that since 1820
the productions of agriculture have increased
one-fourth under the protective system. But
what, in the same period, has been the increase
of manufacturing productions, which not only
have not had the advantage of any protective
system, but have been obliged, by the tax on
corn, to contribute to the prosperity of agricul-
turists ? Why, Sir ROBERT PEEL in the same
speech, and we will not go beyond it to find mate-
rials to expose its fallacies, showed that in the ten
years only, between 1830 and 1840, our exports
had increased from 38,000,0001. to 53,000,0001.
or more than one-third, and that in the same
periods our imports had increased from
40,000,0001. to 62,000,000/., or snore than one-
fourth. But these are only indications of the
vast increase of our manufacturing wealth. The
agriculturists have, throughout the period, re-
ceived an ample reward for all their productions.
If we were to say, therefore, that while the pro-
ductions of protected agriculture have increased
one-fourth since IS2O, the productions of unpro-
tected and even oppressed manufacture have in-
creased four-fold, we should not be far wide Of
the mark. It is clear, therefore, that the pro-
tection cannot be the cause of the increase, for
it has been greater in that branch of industry
which has been unprotected.

in the paragraph, too, quoted from Kr. MACUL-
LOCH, it is asserted that the increased produc-
tions of agriculture have taken place with falling
prices, while the intention of the law was to
keep the prices from falling. The mode, there-
fore, in which the Legislature intended the law
to operate, and encourage the application of ca-
pital to land, was never realised. It is well known
that between 1822 and 1828 the price of corn
never reached the price at which importation
was allowed ; so that the views of the Legislature
were completely falsified. 'lf the protection af-
forded to agriculture has been, as supposed by
Sir ROBERT PEEL, the cause of the national
prosperity, it is clear that the Legislature did
good by mistake, for it meant, to the year
1828, to keep the price of wheat up to 80s., while
in fact it fell to below 60s.

The plain explanation of all this increase, both
in manufa.ctures and agriculture, is that there is
in human nature an irrepressible spring of pros-
perity. Mankind have a tendency to increase,
and each generation strives to improve on the
condition of its predecessor. Hence a continual
extension of arts and a continual increase of
wealth. Government, and so-called protective
laws, cannot wholly dry up this spring, but they
can do nothing to make it flow with increased
force beyond securing to each man the enjoy-
ment of his own property. This natural spring of
prosperity has overflowed the land with an inge-
nious, industrious population, who, both by their
wants and their produce, have stimulated the appli-
cation of capital to land, of which the result is the
increase of one-fourth of our agricultural produc-
tions. The Corn-law, which takes away the
property of the industrious manufacturer and the
industrious consumer, to give something more to
the idle owner of rent, has had no more to do
with increasing the prosperity` it has been unable
to destroy than the basket and the ballast at-
tached to a balloon have to do with raising it in
the atmosphere. The power within it enables
it to carry them aloft, but they impede its
flight.
Unless protection and no protection have the
same effects—unless high price stimulates the
increase of agricultural production, and
low price stimulates the increase of ma-
nufacturing production—unless a law which
has only operated by mistake has caused
national prosperity—unless legislation can mul-
tiply the people and extend arts and knowledge,
Sir H. PEEL has made out no case for the Corn-
laws, by merely showing that, in conjunction
with them, there has been an increase of the
national wealth. Since 1820, the increase of crime,
according to the statistical returns, has been
greater than the increase of the people; and it
is far more rational, though Sir R. PEEL will not
accept that as a consequence of his protective
system, to
the increase
o
ascribe the increase of crime, than
pe people
which
e and ofi s ptroo druob ee ,
theto
a la w
the very essence
indus-
trious in order to enrich the idle.

Since the commenee—°ll-ment of the week we have
been quite stunned with the shouts of the Tory
faction on the progress of the general election.
They seem to be absolutely mad with joy, and
sorry should we be to disturb their hilarity (for
of starvation for the
pity rather than
they have been in a state
last eleven years, and deserve
reproach); but for their own sakes, as well as for
the interest of the great body of the
People, it
may be proper to ask, what cause they have for
rejoicing? All that they have gained in the
great metropolitan boroughs is only one Member.
Capt. Rous succeeded in Westminster entirely
from the apathy of the electors towards their
Members in the last Parliament ; the race in the
City, notwithstanding all the powerful interests
arrayed against the Liberal candidates, was a
dead heat; in Greenwich and Marylebone the
Tories have been shamefully defeated; in Fins-
bury neither Saint TooKE, nor any other of his
tribe, durst face the heathens DUNCOMBE and
WAKLEY ; and in the Tower Hamlets, though
three candidates (foolishly, we must say) divided
the Liberal interest in favour of the rejected
of Worcester, ROBINSON had more than
2,000 voters fewer than Fox. Are these causes
for rejoicing? We have the returns already of
between 200 and 300 Members, and our Evening
Tory Contemporary, who boasted that Sir Ro-
BERT PEEL, in 1835, would have carried the
Speakership and the Address but for the melan-
choly accident which befel some of his sup-
porters who were " snowed up," and never
were heard of, only claims ten of a majority at
present, intentionally, as usual, falsifying the re-

turns by leaving out of its list Beverley, Green-
wich, and Marylebone, where the Liberals have
gained three votes, thus giving a majority of
only seven in favour of Sir R. PEEL. We may
add to these South Shields, for which the Libe-
ral candidate, Mr. WAwN, has been to a cer-
tainty returned, and replaced Mr. INGn Am, the
Tory. So that, taking into account the great
number of rotten boroughs in possession of the
Tories, and Tory-Whig landlords, which have
returned Members without opposition, the mono-
polists have no cause to boast. The Government
will lose some votes in the English counties, and
one or two, perhaps, in the Scotch counties,
while they may gain the only burgh op-
posed to them. Ireland, will, as usual, re-
turn her fair proportion, and something more;
and, deducting the eight Liberals that ab-
sented themselves on the No-Confidence question,
from the majority which the Tories anticipated,
Sir ROBERT PEEL will find that he has gained
but little by the dissolution of Parliament. We
will wait, however, patiently for the result. W hat-
ever it may be, the great questions which agitate
the country must finally be carried, and carried
too by the Liberal party which introduced them.
Though from their slackness in pushing Reform
for the last few years they have disheartened
their followers, the public cannot forget the
beneficial changes which have taken place since
1.832, and will soon contrast them with the deeds
of the monopolists who have burdened the coun-
try with an enormous debt, who have refused
every species of reform, till it was forced from
them, and who are still determined to maintain
their character to the last.

The number of the Quarterly Review just pub-
lished calls the Reform Bill an enormous folly.
There can be no doubt, therefore, that the Tories,
whose organ the Quarterly is, will try to repair
that enormous folly. They will, yf they can, re-
peal the Reform Act. They will try to destroy
this partial enfranchisement of the people with-
out enfranchising one person in lieu of it.
Whether they will follow the covert and cowardly
scheme of Lord STANLEY, and disfranchise the
people on pretence of perjury—whether they will
sharpen the registration and so cut off the voters,
or whether they will have the courage to attempt,
openly, to force the country backward through
another revolution, we cannot say, but that they
will undo what they call an enormous folly, when
they have the power, there can be no doubt.
The Review complains of the over-dose of
poison which has been administered of late by the
Press, to the people, on the subject of the Corn-
law, "endangering the peace as well as the pros-
perity of the country." It attributes this to the
existence of " such a Ministry," and feels in
creased regret " that we must be subject for a
month longer to such shameless misrule. " The
Tories have long given a noble preference to the
Orange mode of government in use in Ireland,
and would employ the triangle or the pitch-cap
to repress those opinions which they regard as
poison. They live in joyous expectation of
their advent to power, when an end will be
at once put to the present freedom of discussion,
which the Reviewer calls misrule. He feels
that the landlords are too roughly assailed. He has
no objection to the Press discussing the burdens
borne by the land here and abroad, about
which neither he nor any one else has any ac-
curate information ;The will allow us to write at
any length about the possible price at which
corn can be raised in different countries, about
which nothing is known ; we may dilate end-
lessly concerning the fertility of Hungary, and the
sterility of the cold clay lands of England ; but
directly the press approaches the confines of mo-
ral science, and describes the landlords' tax as a
robbery and a wrong, then it maddens the peo-
ple, then it poisons them, and a dose of bayonet
and gaol is demanded to restrain the exhibitions
of the Press.

It is plain, that whenever the Tories come into
power, they will try to overthrow all the liber-
ties which, in modern times, have been wrung
from the aristocracy. As soon as they can, they
will take measures to protect the owners of the
bread-tax from being annoyed by the winged
words of the Press. They will suppress every
truth which is unpleasing to them. We know
from their own conduct that they have, no ob-
jection to calumniate her MAJESTY, but to
speak in plain and honest terms of the aris-
tocracy is treason according to their law.
Their present views suggest an unfortu-
nate parallel. Nearly twelve years ago, a
Ministry took office in France with a view
of undoing the few liberties the French had
achieved. They tried to put down the Press, and
they brought about the revolution of 1830. The
Tories would form a POLIGNAC Ministry, but
thank GOD they will not find on the throne a
bigot CHARLES X. to support fanatical attacks
on freedom, nor will they have to deal with a
people prone to take terrible and sudden ven-
geance. The English are experienced in putting
out Ministers without convulsing the empire.
Should time Tories carry out their POLIGNAC prin-
ciples, execration double-shotted will sink them
for ever. Withering scorn will palsy their hands
as they attempt to sign their arbitrary decrees,
and they will die away and disappear before the
national contempt and indignation.

Letters of the 27th ult. from Hanover state that on
the 30th the KING was to dissolve the Assembly of the
States, the Second Chamber having refused to discuss
the Budget without a declaration on the part of the
Crown, that its voting the Budget, would not be regarded
as an adoption of the ERNEST and VON SCRELE Consti-
tution. But the KING, w.ho showed so little regard for
the liberties of his people, and for their conscientious
scruples in adhering to a. Constitution which they had
solemnly sworn to inain:ain inviolate, is not to be thus
prevented from making free with their pockets. Already
has he signified to them that whether the taxes are
granted or not he will not fail to collect them. His
MAJESTY will soon have established a precedent for the
exercise of arbitrary power, as old as the Constitution,
and with such men as ERNEST and Vox SCLIELE a pre-
cedent is everything. But a knowledge of popular
rights, conjoined with a determination to uphold them,
are fatal foes to precedents, regal and Ministerial, and
thank GOD they have found an altar whereon they
are worthily worshipped in the hearts of the German
people. The Crown Prince of HANovEit, to whose
right of succession to the Throne the ablest German
jurisconsults are of opinion his infirmities are a bar, is,
we see, labouring hard to render himself as much an object
of popular abhorrence as his Royal Sire. In order to divest
himself of that, generous sympathy with which a brave
and patriotic people surround the physical affliction of
sinless youth in high station, his Royal Highness has
recently taken several opportunities of sneering, in his
place in the First Chamber, at the popularity of those
patriotic Magistrates to whom the first cities in the
kingdom entrusted their repreSentation. The very idea
of mob popularity is an abomination to this worthy chip
of a block, regarded as the sign-post of tyranny by the
people of England. We have little doubt that before
another year is expired, the Prince Royal will find
any fears which he may entertain of mob popularity
in Hanover utterly groundless. His senatorial
and filial adherence to his Sovereign's and his
father's system of collecting the taxes without the con-
sent of the National Representatives, will procure for him
all the unpopularity his princely heart can desire. But
will the people of Hanover submit to be thus plundered
of their money year after year in obedience to the abso-
lute will of a regal despot ? Will they continue to
boast of an attachment to liberty equal to that of Eng-
lishmen, and yet not imitate what all the world knows
Englishmen would do, were they taxdd without the con-
sent of Parliament ? This is the second year of the col-
lection of the taxes in Hanover without a vote of the
Legislature, and if the system be much longer submitted
to King ERNEST will go a step further, and get rid of the
Chambers altogether.
IVe regret to state that the Queen of HANOVER, who
wisely confines herself to those simple duties which
exalt and adorn the female character, continues so dan-
gerously ill that small hopes are entertained of her reco-
very. By eschewing politics altogether; and never allow-
ing herself to be drawn into the vortex of faction, which
is engulphing her husband and her son, her MAJESTY
has acquired the affection and esteem of all classes in 1
Hanover.