The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1840.

state to the House and the country the grounds on which
he was about to give his vote. He felt that the Conser-
vative party were bound to consider some mode for the re-
construction of the corporations of Ireland, although they
had for some time resisted it. But, at the same time,
they had had to encounter an agitation against the exist-
ence of the Established Church in Ireland—t'ney had had
to encounter an Appropriation Clause, brought forward
originally, solely he believed, to drive his Right Hon.
Friend the Member for Tamworth from the Government.
The Ministers pledged themselves to the Appropriation
Clause, and said that no Bill would be satisfactory without
that clause, and that their existence as a Ministry was ident
tified with it. In 1837, the great leader of the Conserv-
ative party of the other House said the aeitation in Ire-
land must end—they must have a new Poor-law in Ire-
land, and then Corporate Reform. Similar language was
held in that House, in consequence of which he felt him-
self bound to the recognition of that principle; but he told
the Noble Lord that the Bill must be greatly modified in
Committee. He remembered the language of the Go--
vernment of that day when the first Bill was introduced.
It was said by the Hon. Member for Greenock that the
Bill would wrest the power from the Protestant hands it
was then in, and place it in the hands of the Catholics.
He for one would never be a party to such an object as that.
Had the Noble Lord opposite ascertained the number of
voting houses belonging to Catholics and to Protestants
respectively in the towns to which he proposed to extend
municipal corporations? That was an important consi-
deration ; and he (Sergeant Jackson) could tell the Noble
Lord that an overwhelming majority of voting houses
were in the hands of Roman Catholics. Ministers had
declaimed as earnestly as he could have done against any
intention of transferring power from one class in order to
bestow it on another. That sentiment had on a former
occasion been most strongly insisted on by the Right lion.
the Master of the Rolls. If these were the feelings of
Hon. Gentlemen opposite, and if, at the same time, it was
thought necessary to abolish the existing municipal cor-
porations of Ireland, Government should beware how they
threw them into the hands of opposite parties. That
would be a most unjust and unwise policy. Was not this,
he would ask, a Protestant State, and was it not intended
that it should continue so ? As for his part, he should
be sorry to think that this should ever cease to be
a Protestant country ; and he would ever oppose any
measure which he thought might lead to such a result.
He would take the liberty of offering two propositions to
the consideration of the House, with a view to obviate any
danger of party ascendancy which might follow from the
new Bill He would first propose to continue to all free-
men and burgesses in the several corporate towns of Ire-
land the right of voting under the new Bill for torn coun-
cillors. lie could not conceive any reasonable objection to
that proposal. It would, he should observe, be a strong
measure to divest any body of men of their vested rights,
and those freemen had at present a voice in the manage-
ment of their local concerns. The proposal in question
would be found in addition to he a valuable means of coun-
teracting the exclusively Catholic character of the new
corporations. He would next propose a principle which
was to be found in the English Municipal Bill—he would
propose that no one who voted for town councillors should
vote for more ti an a moiety of them. That proposal
would be no novelty, as it existed in the English Corpo-
rations Bill, with respect to assessors and auditors.
He also found the Earl Grey, whose authority Hon. Gen-
tlemen opposite would not object to, in his speech deli-
vered on the 27th of June, 1836, offered a similar
suggestion.—(The Hon. and Learned Nlember here read
an extract from a speech of Earl Grey's, suggesting a
proposal of the same nature as that which he was advoca-
ting, as the best means of securing the minority cglinst
the majority who might b,: opposed to them.) He should
now beg leave to call the attention of the House to a pe-
tition from the town of C!onmel, which was one of these
places to which the new Municipal Corporation Bill was
to extend. The petition was from the Mayor, Corpora-
tion, merchants, and other inhabitants of that town, who
stated " that they felt alarmed by the most injurious
provisions of an Act for altering the Municipal Corpora.
tion of Ireland, and they prayed the Hon. House to ex-
clude them from the list of those towns to whom these pro•
visions were to apply." He would ask if it were fair to
force Corporations on a town which was unwilling to
receive them. The petition in question had been
signed by the Mayor and Corporation, and by three-
fourths of the rated population of Clonmel. He held in
his hand a similar petition from certain inhabitants of
Belfast, which had a population of 85,000 inhabitants,
whose wishes should not be disregarded. There had
been a petition to a similar effect already presented to
the House from the town of Galway. It might ba said
that the petitioners in that case merely prayed for the
removal of certain clauses in the Bill, but he could
show the House that their objections applied fully to the
measure then before the House. The petitioners from
Galway prayed that the freemen might have their
rights reserved ; and that the counties-of-towns might be in-
cluded. Was it not a breach of the principle that pro.
perty should be represented—that those who did not
contribute to the municipal rates, should have the right
of voting Was it the express provision of the Bill that
the rural district surrounding Galway was to be taken from
the municipal limits ; while the right of voting for Mem-
bers of Parliament was preserved to that district ? To the
borough of Cork there was attached an immense district
of 45.000 acres square, which under the Bill would he
part of the borough for the purposes of voting, though in-
habited by persons who could no more be called citizens
of Cork than citizens of London, and who generally were
so ignorant that they could neither read nor write. He
should vote for the Bill, in redemption of his pledge, but
he should oppose the Bill in every future stage, if it were
not made a safe Bill—a Bill that would not render the
corporations exclusively Roman Catholic.
Mr. O'CONNELL was glad of the support of the
j' ht Hon. Recorder of Dublin, and the Learned Ser-
gear t who had just sat down, whose vote, hoWever, be
would rather have than his speech.— ( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) This Bill would place the Conservative party
in Ireland ida better position with their fellow-country-
men.—( Hear. There had been a great deal said of
;
Roman Catholic and Protestant voting houses, as though
a house could have a religion.—( Laughter.) If the Bill
took away anyt'iieg from Protestants, as Protestants, to give
it to Catholics, he (Mr. O'Connell) would resist it. But
the fact was that hitherto Catholics had not had fair play.
--(Hear.) For 47 years the Catholics were by law ad-
missible into the Corporation of Dublin, and not one had
during that period been admitted.—( Hear, hear ) Now,
let one single provision be pointed out in the Bill which
gave anything to the Catholic= because they were Catho-
lics. It made properly the basis of qualification—saying
nothing of religion at Ai!? The Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
.
Inglis) might think that n: en should have privileges
merely for being of the State ret:^mn—but such was not
now the feeling of the people of Eug,, nd.—( Hear, hear.)
He did not quite think the Bill what it on; lit to be ; still
he was willing to accept it, if granted now. But if now
refused—if the principle were altered—it wouLl not be
satisfactory again. The peop!e of Ireland had declared
themselves ready to accept a moderate measure on thecon-
dition that in three years the qualification should be On
the model of the English Bill.—( Hear. )
Sir R. PEEL said as to the admissions he had made
on the former occasions, he did not wish to retract them.
The main question was now, however, whether this Bill
should be read a second time, that is, whether an attempt
should be made to settle the long agitated question.—
( Hear, hear.) lie should vote for the second reading
—( Hear, hear)—and he should do so on two distinct
grounds ; first of his former delaration, and, secondly, which
was by far the best ground—that be was convinced the
Protc'stant interest in Ireland would not be promoted by
keeping this question longer unsettled.—( Hear, hear.)
He had never made any " compact" with any set. of men,
nor would he ; but he had made declarations of the course
he should pursue, which might have influenced the pro-
ceedings of others, and the substance of those declarations
was, that provided a satisfactory Tithe Bill were passed,
and a test of rating established through the intervention
of the Poor-law, he would apply himself to the settle-
ment of the Corporation question ; and he did not think
any disaff iction as to the Tithe Bill, or any disposition on
the part of the Learned Member for Duhlin to agitate
against it, would release him from that engagement. In-
deed, he would not make the lion. and Learned Gentle-
man of so much importance.—( Hear, hear.) He doubted
the policy of doing so.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. O'Con-
nell.) He would not believe tnat the Catholics of Ireland,
with their good sense and discernment, would be induced,
by the agitation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, to
consent to unsettle the tithe question again.—(Hear,
hear.) Now, he certainly retained the opinion he bad
formerly expressed, that it would be much more for the
advantage of Ireland to abolish Corporations altogether;
and he had tried the experiment of the proposal ; but, in
1836, the majority against it was sixty-four, and, in 1837,
eighty; and it then became a question whether the
interests of Protestantism in Ireland would be promoted by
the exciting of all that and irritation which must be
created by allowing the Protestant minority to govern by
self-elective Protestant corporations.—( Hear, hear.) Ile
had consulted the whole of the Gentlemen with whom he
was accustomed to act, and it was almost their universal
opinion that the ground which they had held was no longer
tenable, and that the Protestant interest required the set-
tlement of the question by the establishment of corpora-
tions in Ireland upon the elective principle. If the Noble
Lord, upon the declaration made by him (Sir Robert
Peel) on a former occasion, had given more favourable
terms to the Protestant church, he would feel bound to
accede to those terms, unless some paramount considerations
of public interest placed his public duty in opposition to
his previous declarations. He would feel that a most
painful position, but he felt thatthat in the vote he was about
to give, he was at once fulfilling his own pledges
and taking that course which was most advantageous to the
interests of the Protestant Church.—( Hear.) Besides,
he did not apprehend that extreme danger from the pre-
dominance of number and influence which the Roman Ca-
tholics were acknowledged to hold,—( Hear.) He was
sorry that they did hold that predominance. He would
prefer that the power and interests were Protestant. But
it was quite clear that the possession of the corporations
did not add to the interests of the Protestant body.—
(Hear.) Looking to the eleven towns contained in sche-
dule A, which now had corporations, and must continue to
h Drogheda, have them under this Bill—Belfast, Clonmel, Cork, Dub-
lin,gheda, Galway, Kilkenny, Limerick, Londonderry,
Sligo, and Waterford—he found that out of all these Bel-
fast alone returned Conservative Members.—( Hear.) Now
he did not despair that Belfast would exert the same influ-

ence in the election of a good corporation. He believed
also that in the other corporations the Conservative influ-
ence would exert itself beneficially. He had found prac-
tically that in places where what was called the Liberal
interest prevailed, and popular town councils were elected
in the first instance—the popularity of the councils was
very soon lost when they began to exercise the power of
taxation.—( Hear and a laugh.) Out of the thirty-three
Members who sat for Corporate towns in Ireland, only nine
were Conservatives, and he apprehended that a diminution
of the Parliamentary influence of the Conservatives was
diminished as much by the elective franchise, given by the
Reform Bill, as it could be by any alteration of the pre.
sent system of corporations. The corporation which was
proposed to be established in Dublin. would have very
few corporate powers. The control of the paving, light-
ing, and improvement of the city was to be withdrawn
from it, and the only thing to be apprehended from it
was that its members finding they had nothing else to
do, would apply themselves to agitation. He concluded by
saying that he would vote for the second reading, both
because he was bound to do so by his previous declarations,
and because he thought that course the most advantageous
to the Protestant interests, and to the interests of the
United Kingdom. He would go into the Committee with
a sincere desire to come to an amicable settlement of the
question in the course of the Session.
After a few words from Mr. VILLIE RS STUART,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he was sure the House would
excuse him for answering some observations which had fallen
from the Hon, and Learned Members for Dublin Univer-
sity, and for Bandon. The former Gentleman had
said that he had made no contract with the Govern-
ment, but that the course which he was taking
on this occasion was in accordance with his
previous declarations upon the subject. He (Lord
Jahn Russell) must say that that statement was
perfectly true.—( Hear, hear.) But with respect to what
the Hon. and Learned Member for Bandon had said as
to the willingness of Government last year to agree to the
alterations which the Lords had made in the Bill, he
(Lord J. Russell) must say, that although there were
some some of those alterations to which he might be dis-
posed to concede, there were others with which it would
be impossible for him to concur. The Hon. and Learned
Member for Bandon then suggested that in a particular
town the Protestants, although in a minority, should have
the appointment of half the town councillors. Now that
was a proposition to which he ( Lord J. Russell)
could never assent. He thought it would not only per-
petuate, but greatly aggravate the dissensions which already
existed. It could not be expected that he would then
enter into any discussion of the details of the Bill, and lie
wauld only express his hope that all would go into the
Committee sincerely desirous of soon coming to a settle-
ment of this long-agitated question.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading .... 149
Against it l4
Majority --135
The Bill was the❑ read a second time, and ordered to
be committed.

FLOUR IMPORTATION (IRELAND) BILL.
After several petitions had been presented against this
Bill,
Mr. L ABOUCH ERE moved its second reading.
Mr. EMERSON TENNENT then rose to oppose
the second reading of the Bill. Ile had stated
in a former stage of the Bill his determination to
oppose it, not. as had been suggested, merely on the
narrow ground that it was a measure affecting the
interests of the millers only, but on the broader prin-
ciple, that it would materially interrupt the career of agri-
cultural improvement in Ireland, and, so far from bene-
fiting either of the classes for whose advantage it pur-
ported to be introduced, the manufacturers and the poor,
it would be a direct and serious injury to both. And
when Hon. Members spoke of the proprety of assimila-
tiug the laws of England and of Ireland in this respect,
he would beg to remind them that it was out of very
dissimilar circumstances of the two counties that
the present dissimilarity in the law had arisen.
This not an Act of a recent date, or a measure of the
British Parliament, which they were about to annul and to
repeal—it was an Act passed by the Parliament of Ire-
land long before the Union took place, which had been
recognised by the Act of Union, and which had been con-
tinued and perpetuated by every Corn Act passed by
the Imperial Parliament since.—(Hear, hear.) The
Howe were aware that down to a very recent period
Ireland was not only entirely destitute of a home manufac-
ture of flour, but was totally dependent upon England, and
that even within the last thirty years the wheat and
rats even for her home consumption, were sent to
Bristol, to Liverpool, and to Glasgow to be ground,
and were thence returned to her in the shape
of flour arid oatmeal. It was to remedy this
serious want that the present law was enacted
He (Mr. E. Tennent) did hope that the House would
weigh well the consequences, not only to the millers but to
the country in general, before they proceeded to unsettle
and weaken a branch of trade so new and so prolific, and
the ramifications of which extended equally to the mer.
chant, the manufacturer, and the agriculturist. But thee
he (Mr. E. Tennent) was to be told that there was a
groundless alarm excited on the part of the millers, that
this was a measure, the effects of which would only be felt,
if at all, in seasons of great scarcity, and that he would be
so protected b 3 the existing duties of England, which it
was proposed to apply to the new trade in Ireland, and
the diff,renee and cost of freight, that the Irish flour would
still have a preference in ordinary seasons. Why, if this
were realiy the case, and that the whole matter was such a
bagatelle, he (Mr. E. Tennent) would concur th. t a suf-
ficient ground had been established against the Bill of the
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere). Who would the
House, for such a temporary trifle, such an abstract ar,d
comfortless theory, overthrow the existing law, and strip be
property embarked in mills in Ireland of that permanent
security and protection which it had enjoyed for years be-
fore the Union, and which gave it present value ? But the
fact was not so; and he (Mr. E. Tennent) was prepared
to show that the existing duties would not be a protection
against the American miller; and that so far from the
freight being a security, that the balance of the freight
between a cargo of flour and one of unwrought wheat was
considerably in favour of the former. So that the practi-
cal result would be this, that in years of scarcity, or of
crops of inferior quality, such as the present, the Irish
miller imported foreign wheat to make up the deficiency,
or improve the quality of his own. The American farmer
and the Dantzic miller would send us their rascal and flour,
instead of their corn and wheat, thus depriving the Irish
miller of the profit of menutacture, and the Irish poor of
tire supply of cheap food, from the coarser produce of
the Bear, hear.) - The object, as proposed
by the Bill before the House, was to permit the im-
portation-of foreign flour into Ireland, at the same duties
as were now paid on its introduction int England.
He (Mr. E. Tennent) had been given to understand that
in a memorial forwarded to the Board of Trade from one
baking establishment in Belfast, the measure now under
consideration had been pressed upon the attention of the
Right Hon Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) on the ground
that flour of good quality, could not now be procured in
Belfast. A petition from the same town had likewise been
presented to the House, but it with more caution abstained
from making so absurd an assertion. As to that memorial
from the one baking-house, in order to meet it he (Mr. E.
Tcnnent) held in his hand a memorial signed by twenty of
the first bakers in Belfast, all of whom state that having
learned that such an allegation had been made as that a
supply of sound flour could not be had in Belfast, they felt
it their duty to give it an instant and direct contradiction ;
as not only in this season, but in others of similarly defec-
tive harvests, they had an abundant supply of the best flour,
ground from foreign wheat, imported specially by the mil-
lers around them. The argument for the Bill, therefore,
from the necessity of importing flour to amend the quality
of Irish wheat, fails utterly, inasmuch as it cannot be ad-
vantageously mixed when ground ; whilst wheat can most
readily be imported for that purpose, and all the profits of
its manufacture into flour retained at ironic, instead of given
to foreigners. One evil which had been imputed to the
Corn-laws, was the amount of speculation which it neces-
sarily entailed upon the dealers in grain by the present
system. But if the trade were now to be compelled to
speculation in stocks of Lur instead of stocks of wheat,
the evil would be multiplied one buudred fold, because
wheat was an article which, with proper care, would keep
sound for years, whilst flour was liable to heat, sour,
and to encounter numerous capricious changes which it
was impossible to guard against, and on the least symptom
of which the entire stock must be forced into the market
at any sacrifice, to insure immediate sale, and thus
an inevitable deterioration in prices must result even
to the sound stocks in the hands of other holders.

But it was incorrect to say that the millers alone were in-
terested ; the farmer and the land-owner were equally as.
sailed through this measure. The cultivation and the
growth of wheat had been found in every instance to be
promoted by the establishment of mills. Lands which be-
fore were in pasture or potatoe are immediately prepared
for wheat wherever the establishment of a flour mill held
out the inducement of a ready market. This has been
eminently the case in the counties of Tyrone and Armagh.
It was quite clear that any discouragement to the pros-
perity or the increase of mills, such as was threatened
by this Bill, must put an immertate check to all
such instances of agricultural advancement. Such
was the opinion of Mr. Spring Rice, expressed
in the Debate on the Corn Bill of 1827.—(11ear.)
But there is another and a most important class whom
this measure ostensibly professed to serve, but on whom he
(Mr. E. Tennent) was prepared to show that it would in-
flict a serious injury, namely, the operatives and the la-
bouring classes in Ireland. The great outcry against the
Corn-laws in England was based upon the assumption that
they tended to render the food of the anizans of
that country more expensive than that of the operatives
of foreign countries with whom they had to compete.
Now he (Mr. E. Tencent) was prepared to show that
such would be precisely the effect of this measure upon
the operatives of Ireland. The mere cost of converting
wheat into flour, the miller's profits, in short, in Ireland,
and in the countries from ye horn Ireland would be likely
to import flour, would, so far as he could ascertain, be
pretty nearly equal; but the country in which the corn
was ground for export would always have this advantage,
that whilst the finer sorts alone were worth exporting,
the coarse and the secondary flour went to increase
the quantity, and consequently to diminish the
cost of the operatives and middle classes.
The effectual method to relieve the operatives and the poor
was to diminish the price, by increasing the quantity, of

the food they consume, and for this the most obvious ex-
pedient is the encouragement of the native mills, which
afford not only the food to lata bought, but the wages where-
with to buy it. If from any aslverse circumstances of de-
fective harvests or of unsound native grain, it becomes ne-
cessary to import at all, that import should be the raw
material, and not the manufactured article. We should
import not the flour, but the wheat, the grinding of which
secures the profits of the process to our own capitalists
instead of foreigners, gives employment to our own ope-
ratives instead of others, and augments the quantity whilst
it dimishes the cost of the Lod of the middle classes, whilst
every barrel of foreign ground flour we import takes away
not only a proportion of food, but a proportion of employ-
ment from our own mechanics. Such was the view of
this question taken in 1827 by Sir John Newport. If we
must be driven to import at all, let it be grain and not
flour. "If grain were imported," he said, " the worst and
middlings went to support the poor, but where flour was
imported, it was the best son. an I was consumed exclu-
sively by the rich. In the first instance our own poor
derived the benefit, in the latter it went to the poor of
other countries, and he (Sir .fohn Newport) was convinced
the House would not c nrsent to give away that benefit to
Foreigners." He (Mr. Emerson Tennent) had to apolo-
gize to the House for the length at which he had ventured
to address them upon this question but the importance
which he attached to it would, he hoped, plead his best
excuse. He saw in it not merely the immediate injury of
the miller, by the depreciation of his heavy stock in hand,
but the permanent depreciation of his property embarked
and invested in buildings and machinery. He saw in it
double injury to the operative, by at once augmenting the
value of his food, and diminishing the amount of the employ-
ment; and, above all, he saw in it an inevitable blow
inflicted upon the agricultural advancement of Ireland.
Thu principle of assimilation between the laws of England
and Ireland failed as an argument in this case. The mea-
sure might be a good one as regarded England, which was
already an importing country in the article of flour, but it
was preposterous as regarded Ireland--it was carrying coals
to Newcastle, to provide for importing flour into a country
which already exported nearly 2,000,000 cwt. of it every
year, unless it was meant to suppl tot that export. But if
not in intention, it would at least prove in operation, a
heavy blow and a great discouragement to the agriculture,
which was the sole reliance and support of that country.
It was on this ground that he (Mr. E. Tennent) relied on
the assistance of those who represented the English agri-
culturists in that House to resist it. Their securiv in this
country lay in making comenon cause with the agriculturists
of Ireland. So long as England had Ireland at her back,
as her granary, as a second Sicily to supply all her wants,
she had an unanswerable argument in reply to those who
sought to supply her with food from the Continent, that she
could draw that supply from borne, and from an integral
part of her own empire. This answer she could have so
long as Ireland was in a situation to answer her demands,
but if England allowed the agricultural protection of Ire-
land to be invaded or weakened in the least degree, every
step by which Ireland was incapacitated from supplying
her was an approach towards a dependency- on other coun-
tries for her food. The present measure was an attack
upon the security hitherto enjoyed by the Irish agricultu-
riet. It was so felt in Ireland, and he did firmly hope
that he would have the co-operation of the English
agriculturists in resisting it —( Hear, hear, hear. )
The Right Hon. Gentleman who introduced the Bill
(Mr. Lahouchere) seemed to consider it a measure of
limited practical importance and operative only in peculiar
seasons, He (Mr. E. Tennent) had laboured to show
that the contrary was the fact, and that it would prove in-
stantly and actively detrimental. He hzd endeavoured to
show that it would be a violation of public faith, relying
upon Acts of Parliament unrepealed for nearly half a cen-
tury ; that it would cause the immediate destruction of the
miller's stock in Ireland, and the ultimate deterioration of
his vested property; that neither the duty proposed nor
the ordinary checks of freight and costs would be any
protection to him ; and that both to the operation in the
price of provisions, and to the agriculturist in the
growth of wheat, it would be a serious and instant injury.
And if, in any one of these points, he had succeeded in
establishing his case, he conceived he had just grounds for
calling on the House to support the motion that the Bill
be read a second time this day six months.
Colonel CONOLLY seconded the amendment. The
miller would be the first person injured by the alteration
proposed by the President of the Board of Trade, because
not only had he embarked great capital on the faith of the
existing law, but he had imported a sufficient quantity of
grain to meet the deficiency of crops. He was firmly con-
vinced that the proposed alteration would likewise in a
very material degree injure the Irish public at large. The
Bill would inflict a deadly blow on the agriculture of Ire-
land, and as soon as the contents of the Bill became
known in that country, it would be universally condemned.
Mr. LABOUCHERE believed that great alarm and appre-
hension had been expressed on very slender grounds.--( Hear,
hear.) He would state to the House, as he had stated to the
deputations that had waited upon him: from believing the
Bill to be founded on just and fair principles, and denying that
it would prove injurious to any of the great interests in Ireland,
and believing the present law to be absurd, he had thought it
his duty not to leave it to an individual Member of the House
to propose an alteration in that law, but to undertake the task
himself. He certainly did not expect to find so strong and de-
termined an opposition on the part of Irish Members to the
Bill. He was prepared to rest his support of it on these two
principles—first, that the alteration of the law could not possi-
bly have any effect whatever in ordinary seasons; and, se-
condly, when these circumstances arose in which foreign
flour would be permitted to go into Ireland, it would
go there paying the same duty which it would have to pay
on coming into England. It was an absurdity to suppose that
Ireland would be deluged by foreign flour if this Bill were
passed ; it 'could merely be allowed to be imported under the
same regulations as it was allowed to be imported into Eng-
land. The Hon. Member for Belfast had argued on the as-
sumption that Ireland had been in the habit of receiving flour
from England instead of being as she was, and as he trusted
she would be, the granary of this country. Therefore it was
chiefly with regard to the second point he had made that he
should address the House. He would read to the House the
number of quarters of wheat and flour, and of the total amount
of grain exported from Ireland from 1819 to 1839, and it was
gratifying to observe how the agriculture of Ireland had in-
creased. '1 he quantity of wheat flour exported from Ireland
In 1819 was 153,000 quarters.. In 1830 was 529.000 quarters.
1820 403,000 1831 527,000
1821 569,000 1832 790,000
1890 463,000 1833 844,000
1623 400,000 1834 779,000
1824 356,000 1835...... 661,000
1825 396,000 1836 593,000
1826 340 000 1837...... 534,000
1327 405,000 1833...... 542,000
1821 652,000 1639 258,000

1829...... 519,000
Therefore the House would see how suddenly the number of
quarters exported had fallen down within the last year, and
that would perhaps account for the complaints that existed
with regard to the non•importation of flour.—( Hear, hear. )
He would then read the return of the quantities of grain which
had been exported from Ireland during the same time :
In 1819 ... 967,1.00 quarters. In 1830 2,307,000 quarters.
1820 ... 1.415,000 1831 .. 2,215,000 .
1821 ... 1,822 000 1832 ... 2990,000
1822 ... 1,003,000 1833 ... 2,327,000
1823 ... 1,513,000 1834 ... 2,719,000
1824 ... 1,634,01)0 1835 ... 2,679,000
18 5 ... 2,203,000 1836 ... 3.300,01)0
1826 ... 1,693,000 1838 ... 3,277,000
1827 ... 1,121,000 1839 ... 2,340,000
1829... 2,826,000
He thought that a country which exported its grain on such a
scale, might rest assured that its agricultural prosperity did
not rest on such flimsy anti fallacious grounds as the Hon.
Gentlemen opposite bad endeavoured to rest it upon. It did
not rest on the circumstances of a few sacks of foreign flour
being admitted under peculiar circumstances, but it rested on
the fact. of Ireland being a great grain-growing country, and
having the markets of England to bring her flour and grain to.
The lion. Member for Belfast had stated that this Bill was like
a Bill fur carrying coals to Newcastle. lie admitted that,
under ordinary circumstances, that was the case.—(Hear.)
But he would as soon expect to see the Members for Newcastle
rising up and claiming a prohibitory duty to protect them, as to
hear the assertion that if this Bill were passed there would be
an end to the agriculture of Ireland. If there were no demand
fir foreign flour, then it would not go there, but if, under pe-
culiar circumstances, there was a demand for foreign flour, as
there was at present, then it would be advanta-
geous for Ireland that foreign flour should go there.
He would not trouble the House further, but his opinion re-
mained unaltered; that the measure would be productive of
benefit to the people of Ireland.
Mr. SLIMY contended that no case had been nude out by
the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite for the introduction of the
present Bill. Indeed, he believed that only one petition had
been presented from Ireland in favour of the measure. The
question was not a party one, and he trusted that some Hon.
Member on the other side of the House would give his senti-
ments on the subject, and he had no doubt. it would be shown
that the opinions of all parties would be adverse to the intro-
duction of such a measure.
Sir D. NORREYS denied that the Bill would be in any
way prejudicial to the agricultural interests of Ireland. It was
merely a question between the miller and the consumer, with
which the agriculture of the country had nothing whatever to
do.—( Hear, hear.) He should give his cordial support to
the Bill. _ _

Mr. HUTTON also supported the Bill.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the House had been told more than
once this Bill was to assimilate the law of England and Ire-
land; this was an advantage to those who, like him, looked to
the interests of the consumer; besides this, there was this prac-
tical reason for supporting it, the two last crops had been defi-
cient in Ireland. Was the Hon. Gent. aware that last year the
crop was particularly defective, both in quantity and quality.
In 1839 Ireland did not export one-third the usual quantity.
Yet, as the rents of Ireland were receivable in England, an ex-
port of corn must be made to meet them. An advantage of
this Bill was that it would introduce good and proper flour to
mix with that of an inferior quality. The Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman did not understand the matter
when he said the different qualities of flour would
not mix together. The bakers of Dublin were much better
authority on this subject than the Recorder of Dublin. There
was no absurdity greater than this—that this Bill would
injure the agricultural interest. Year after year Ireland had
increased her exports of wheat and flour, except when there
came such a year as the last, when the crops failed. Who
would dream then of importing .flour into Ireland in this case ? •
He believed nothing in Parliamentary history had been offered
to the House so absurd as the argument on this question.
Would it he supposed by any reasonable man that flour could
be imported at a high duty, into a country that exported it in
great quantities at no duty at all ? Why not allow theimpor-
tation of flour as well as wheat ? Because they wished to
make a miserable profit fur the millers of Ireland. And who was
to give them this profit? Not the foreigner nor the Englishman,
nor the Scotchman, but the Irish consumer. This was "rob-
bing Peter to pay Paul." If the millers in Ireland could grind
as cheap as foreign millers they had an advantage in importing
wheat; if not, they wanted to grind it by grinding the consumers

—the people of Ireland. But he would put it on this ground
in addition—it was a question affecting the health of the people ;
they who were of the upper classes, for the lower classes in Ire-
land, who consumed little or none of it, were not interested in
it. They all knew that the typhus fever was raging in Ireland
—let it reach the higher classes who had not strength of consti-
tution to resist it, and they would soon become advocates
for this measure.--.( Hear, hear.) It was a question of life
and death in Ireland.—( Laughter.) He stated it distinctly, it
might be a question of laughter to SO:4le, but would they like
to have bad flour themselves ? Would any man deny, that if
the crops were deficient in quality, it were a question of life
and death? At present, it would be necessary to import ; but
the quantity would not be considerable, nor adequate to the
effect produced by the measure. lie hoped he should never
again hear an argument against importing into a country that
was a great exporting country.
Mr. LITTON thought this was a tin' brought in to benefit
the rich at the expense of the po w. He asked if a single
petition had been presented in favour of the Bill. In proportion
as they imported foreign flour into Ireland, he said they de-
prived the poor of the profit of the only manufacture they had
—they were, therefore, bound to protect their interests.
Mr. 011.11SBY GORE, as a person who deprecated the
slightest infraction of our present Corn-laws, could n it give a
silent vote on this question. He thought the House ought
not to legislate on this question without hearing the opinions
of those who would be affected by it. He had heard no rea-
son for altering a system which ever since the union had worked
well. As nothing but the finest flour could be imported in
consequence of this Bill, the Irish labourer would derive no
benefit from it ; therefore it was not a poor manss question, but
that of the bakers of Dublin only. The most thriving manu-
facture in Ireland now was, as he understood, the mills which
had been spoken of, and he did not see why that should be
depressed. He begged the Hon. Gentleman to postpone the
Bill until he had ascertained the opinions of the people of
Ireland upon it.
Lord SOHN RUSSELL said, that the Hon. Gentleman
opposite had stated that his Right Hon. Friend hail done no more
than remove the objections which had been brought forward t o
this measure, thus admitting almost in terms that the objection
of alarms and dangers, which had been stated by the opponents
of this measure, had been almost entirely removed by his Right
Hon. Friend. He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman had
allowed that, when he had admitted that, he could not perceive
any very great danger from the proposed measure. But an-
other Hon. Gentleman had said that although his Right Hon.
Friend had removed the objections of the opponents of the
measure, he had adduced no arguments in. support of it.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) Now if the objections to this
measure were removed that was a reaFon quite sufficient
in its favour, because the measure which it was proposed to re-
move was a restriction, and a restriction for which no ground
of necessity or justice could be shown, was in itself an evil.—
( Cheers. ) The Legislature had no right to say to the great
body of consumers, you shall not consume such and such an
article ; therefore, when once it was admitted that there were
no grounds of objection, sufficient grounds had been shown for
the removal of the restriction.—(Loud cheers.) They might
tell consumers that they thought they were wrong to use foreign
flour—that home flour was cheaper and better, but
that was a question for cansumers to decide.—(Loud cheers. )
And they could not teach people by legislation, what it was
their interest, to do.—(Cheers.) With regard to-any danger
affecting the agriculturalist or the miller, the MITI. Member
for Belfast, had actually made out the case of his Right Hon.
Friend. He had proved from statistical details, that there was
no danger to be apprehended. He had shown how much better
for the consumer was the lour manufactured by the millers of
Ireland, and how much better it was for importation into Eng-
land, than that of foreign countries, thus proving that
it was naturally for the interest. of the people of England
and of Ireland to use Irish flour, and his facts proved
that they actually did so, so that no danger could
be apprehended from this measure. The reasons for
this preference were two-fold, first that there was a duty im-
posed on the importation of foreign flour into England, and
secondly the nearer distance of Ireland to England than
foreign countries. Neither of these reasons would be affected
by the proposed measure. It was not proposed to do
away with the duty at present payable on the imrorta ion of
flour into England, and he could assure Hon. Gentlemen the
effect of this measure would not be to remove Ireland to a greater
distance that it was at present.--(Cheers and laughter.) The
grounds on which he supported the present. 13111 rested on the
general principle that they ought not to have any restriction or
prohibition without strong grounds being adduced for its exist-
ence, and that mere restriction, for the sake of restriction—
mere prohibition, for the sake of prohibition—interfering with
the rights of consumers, to judge as to what was best for their
own interests, was wanton, useless, and mischievous legislation
--(Loud cheers)—and it mattered not whether that restriction
were imposed one or two years ago, or in the year 1774. He
felt that the millers of Ireland had nothing to fear from this Bill,
and lie thought that no sufficient grounds had been brought for-
ward to justify the opposition which had been offered to this
measure.

Mr. SHAW explained.
111 r. BEAMISH, as a party practically interested as a mill-
owner, considered the prohibitory law totally unavailing to the
Irish miller, who had been entirely misled with regard to the
objects of this Bill. He had heard no valid reason for conti-
nuing the prohibition, and therefore should support the motion
of the President of the Board of Trade. He thought it far
better the law should be repealed as an use!ess enactment, but
he 11,,ped the Right Hon. Gentleman would postpone the opera-
tion of the Bill to a lat,r period, say some three or four months,
to enable the millers to work off their present stocks.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON bore evidence to the kindness
with which the Right Hon. President of the Board of Trade
had received the deputation yesterday. He had received many
communications from all parts of Ireland deprecating this
measure, which he believed was not called for by any class in
Ireland. He joined in the prayer of the Hon. Gentleman
who spoke last for delay.
Mr. W. ROCHE wished the measure should he delayed for
the present, in order to give time for investigation, and the ex-
pression of the opinion of the Irish people.
Mr. CALLAGHAN had been asked by some of his consti-
tuents to oppose this Bill, and he would now stie e his reasons
why be could not do so. The reasons of the Hen. Mernher for
Belfast adduced in opposition to this Bill were, in his
opinion, of no weight whatever. The measure was in
strict accordance with the doctrines of free trade, and he
felt it would not be at all injurious to the Irish miller. The
Irish flour wee now sought after in the English market, and it
was to this that the incraase in the numbers and prosperity of
the Irish millers was to be attributed. There was a general
call for this import from the merchants, more particularly from
the North of Ireland. There was a growing demand on the
part of the commercial body for the abolition of restrictions,
and he wished to see all restrictions abolished ; he would, how-
ever, join his Hon. Colleague in his application to the Govern-
ment for delay, and he felt the more the subject was investi-
gated by the millers, the more would they be convinced that
this measure would not be against their interest, and he hoped
they would petition for permision to grind foreign corn in Ire-
land for exportation to the colonies.—(Cheers.) This could
not injure the British agriculturists; and at this moment, when
mills were erected in foreign countries fur the purpose of
manufacturing flour for exportation to those British Colonies
which did not grow wheat, he thought this was an advantage
that the Irish miller was fairly entitled to.—( Cheers. )
Mr. BROTH ERTON wished to enter his protest against
any postponement of the measure, because the present period
was the time when it would be most beneficial to Ireland. On
behalf of the consumers, he called on the House to pass the Bill.
It was those alone who advocated the interest of the millers
who were opposed to the measure. The millers had ever been
a class of men who had ever been ready to grind down the poor.
He remembered a saying relating to two millers who had lived
some years ago iii Manchester, named Skin and Bone.—
( Laughter.) The saying was as follows :
" Bon and Skin, two mil'ers thin,
Would starve the poor, or near it ;
But be it known to Skin and Bone
That Flesh and Blood can't bear it."

—(Great laughter.)
Mr. FITZSTEPIIEN FRENCH said a few words in fa-
vour of the measure.

Mr. LABOUCHERE said that if the Heise should assent
to the principle of the Bill by voting for the second reading,
he would not take the next step regarding :t until after
Easter.

Mr. WAKLEY rose to address the House in consequence
of what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman who had
just sat down. He (Mr. Wakley) wished to know if it were
not true that the immediate passing of the Bill was necessary,
inasmuch as the wheat of Ireland was at the present time
of a very bad quality, and was such as would be likely to pro-
duce disease among the people of that country. He believed
that it would be universally admitted that the wheat of Ireland
was this year of a very inferior description. If that were the
case he thought it a most urgent reason for the immediate
enactment of the present Bill. He believed that if it were
a measure for the benefit of the aristocracy it would meet
with no delay or opposition from a large portion of the
House.—(" o, no," from the Opposition Benches.) The
Bill might be thought an infraction of the present Corn-
laws, and Hon. Gentlemen opposite might on that account
oppose it. He had no hesitation however in saying, that the
days of the present Corn-laws were numbered, and he could
assure them that the conduct of the House on that, question
had created indignation and disgust in the country. He
trusted that the Bill would immediately be passed, and that
the millers of Ireland would no longer be able to send among
the people food which was dangerous to human life. He be-
lieved that every Member who should vote against the Bill
would vote for typhus fever in Ireland.

The numbers were.—
For the Bill
Against it . • 102
Majority -32
THE SHERIFFS.

Mr. Alderman THOMPSON in rising to bring forward his mo-
tion with regard to the Sheriffs, said he had no intention of
making any remarks reflecting on the conduct either of those who
had originally ordered them into custody, or those who had since
voted for their retention in custody. He grounded his motionlon
the feeling that the privilege and the authority of that House
had already been sufficiently vindicated by the long imprisonment,
and the many privations of the Sheriffs. Mr. Sheriff Wheelton
had already been discharged on account of illness, which had
not since been removed. Mr. Sheriff Evans had also suffered much
indisposition, though not to so great an extent. It was an addi-
tional argument for the release of the Sheriffs, that the authority
of the House to commit had been fully vindicated and sustained
by the decision of the Judges that the return of the Sergeantat.
Arms to the Habeas Corpus was sufficient. Moreover, it should be
considered that the difficulty of the Sheriffs had arisen from the de.
fective state of the law of Parliament as to privilege, which came di.
rectly into opposition with the law of theland, so that the Sheriffs, if
they obeyed the Courts were committed by the House, and if they
obeyed the House they were imprisoned by the Courts.—(Hear,
hear.) Hopes had been excited that the difficulties of the ques-
tion would have been settled by the introduction of a Declaratory
Act.—(Hear, hear.) A writ had been issued to assess damages in
the present action, those damages had been laid at 50,000/.
It was admitted upon all hands that the Sheriffs had discharged
their duty in the moot honourable manner. The petition to the
House of Lords was not intended to give offence to this House, but
merely to make the House of Lords acquainted with the subject.
The vindication of the privileges of the House had been complete,
and would not be affected by agreeing to the motion that the Slie-
riffsbe d scharged.

Mr. DAB BY thought that the Sheriffs ought to be discharged,
and that they ought not to be held in ustody as hostages for the
passing of any Bill which might be sent from that House to the
house of Lords. The law offlcers of the Crown ought to be
prepared to recommend to the House a Bill to settle the question of
privilege to which the House of Lords would assent without hostages
being held in the custody of the House. He hoped that the
Noble Lord would consent to the release of the Sheriff, whose

conouct the Noble Lord himself allowed to have .beens actuated
by perfect honour and sincerity.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the Honourable nertilemaiw who
spoke last entirely misunderstood him. The House had :id as-
sert its privilege of printing and publishing. That privilege Was
not vindicated by the committal of the Sheri& It might-be.
painful that for the assertion of the privilege it was necessary o
select an individual for confinement, and much reference had
been made to the conduct of the Courts of Law and Equity in
such cases, when their authority •was questioned. But= he
would ask, did these Courts in considet ing the importance of main-
taining their own power, take into account the inconvenience
which individuals might suffer ?—(I4 ear, hear.) Ne one could
doubt that the eiercise of the privileges of this House was of the
highest importance. The matter which had been addressed to the
feelings of the House, he felt as much as other Hon. Gentlemen
could feel it. But he thought the House was not to sacrifice to
compassion that which was necessary to maintain its privileges,
more than it would be required of a Court of Law to sacrifice
that which was necessary to maintain their authority.
tie did not think it necessary to say a word more with respect
to the motion further than that he h ttended to give it his decided
negative.
Sir E. SUG DEN thought if the Noble Lord was prepared to go
the length of keeping the remaining Sheriff in custody until the
powers of the House were free and undisturbed,—that be was
ready to go the length recommended by the Solicitor-General, and
make the imprisonment perpetual as far as the House could
do so.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the motion of which
he hag given notice for to-night, and upon which he was
determined to divide the House, he would only say that if it was the
intention of the Noble Lord to keep the other Sheriff in custody
until he had paid the whole amount back to Messrs. Hansard, he
would find that the sense of the country would not be with him either
upon the law or justice of the case. He wished to know from the
Noble Lord what course he intended to. propose to the House to
pursue on Monday, relative to the actions that were pending.

Mr. GODSON considered that the privileges of the House had
been sufficiently vindicated by the imprisonment the Sheriff
had already undergone. The real question the House had to decide
was whether the Sheriff had suffered sufficient imprisonment for the
breach of the privileges of the House ? He thought he had. Surely
there was to be some end to the punishment, and how long was it
intended to keep the Sheriff' in confinement.—(Cries of " Question,
question," " Divide, divide.")
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided,
when there appeared—

For the motion ... 76
Against it
Majority against the motion

Sir E. SUGDEN moved that the order d'secting the Sheriffs of
Middlesex to repay the sum of 640/. to Messrs.Hansard, be rescinded.
Mr. LAW seconded the motion.

The motion was nega ived without a division.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL would be glad if the Noble Lord would
state what course he intended to pursue with regard to the petition
of Messrs. Hansard?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was impossible he could then
state to the House what proposition would be made.

Mr. GODSON gave notice that he would, on going into a Com-
miitee of Supply on Monday, move- that Mr. Sheriff Evans be
discharged.

NEW WRIT.

Mr. E. J. STANLEY moved that a new writ be issued for the
borough of Morpeth, in the room of Viscount Leveson, who had
accepted the office of Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds.—Ordered-
The House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'Clock.