The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-08 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS,

The Earl of RADNOR would make a few remarks
upon the injurious effects of the Corn-laws upon the
interests of the labouring classes. It had been found
that wages had been sometimes highest when corn
was lowest ; and it did not at all follow as a general
rule that wages should vary directly with the
prices of corn. Another point mentioned by the Noble
Earl was, that crime had increased as corn became dear.
It was contrary to every sound principle to suppose that
it was to the advantage of the labourer to pay a high
price for bread. It was not only contrary to reason, but
contrary to the evidence which had been adduced before
Parliamentary Committees. The fact might by ware
accidental circumstances be, that the labourers were
better off when bread was dear than when-cheap, but this
was not to be taken as a general rule.—(Hear, hear.)

Lord BR AYBROOlcsaid that the Noble Earl had
introduced many subjects to which he had not alluded
when presenting his petition. The perant signing that
petition had lived long enough to know that when
corn was cheap, they were very much worse off than
when it was dear.

Lord STRADBROKE said the Noble Earl intro-
duced several topics into his speech, which had nothing
whatever to do with the question, and came to the most
extraordinary conclusion. He admitted that poor-rates
must be high when corn was dear, but it did not follow
from that circumstance that the labourer must be
better off.

Lord ASHBURTON said it was impossible that
the English agriculturist, who paid 12s. a-week for the
cultivation of his land, could compete with the foreign
grower, who only paid 3d. or 4d. a day, and if
the Corn-law was •to' be repealed, the English
agriculturalist had better realise his capital abroad,
and go to cultivate land in Pomerania and Mech-
lenburgh, and other parts of the north of Germany.—
(" Hear, hear," and a laugh.)
The Earl of RADNOR said they conteuded with the
Irish labourer at the rate of 4d. a day.—(No, no.) There
were many of them only got 6d. a day, and worked but
two-thirds of the year. Did not that reduce the rate
of wages to 4d. a day ?—(Hear, hear.) If they
could compete with the Irish labourer they could com-
pete with the German labourer.—(Hear, hear.) It had
been said that for every quarter of foreign corn that
came in, a quarter of English corn must be displaced.
Earl FITZWILLIAM—It is meant, I suppose, that
for every quarter of foreign corn imported a quarter of
English corn would fail to bo produced

The Earl of RADNOR—Yes, that is doubtless what
is meant ; but that is not what the statement says.
The Noble Lord (Braybrook) had said that as the price
of corn camedown the food of the people would be de-
teriorated.—(Hear, hear.) But he (the Earl of Radnor)
begged to ask the Noble Lord whether the food of
the people had deteriorated as the importation of
foreign corn had increased ?—(Hear.) No, it' could not
be said that it had ; on the contrary, the poor had eaten
better bread as the importations had increased, and
when the importations were small, they were compelled to
cat rye and barley bread.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord ASHBURTON said that if the agricultural
labour of this country were brought into compe-
tition with the labour of those countries in which this
state of low wages and low diet existed, the labourer of
this country would inevitably be brought into the same
state of low wages and low diet. Every one knew
that the labourers of this were better fed and better
clothed than the labourer of any other country.
Earl FITZWILLIAM said the labourers of this coun-
try were certainly better fed and better clothed than any
other. But the Noble Lord seemed to think that the
agricultural labourer was the only labourer of the country.
The Marquis of SALISBURY thought it would much
better become the Noble Earl to make an original motion
on this subject, and thereby raise a discussion upon it.
He (the Marquis of Salisbury) couhi not admire this
getting up discussions on the presentation of petitions.
He thought it was quite contrary, too, to the regulation of
the House, in opening a discussion, to allude to a speech
that had been delivered in that House on a former day.—
(Hear, hear.)

Earl FITZWILLIAM—I made no such allusion.

The Marquis of SALISBURY alluded to the Noble
Lord who opened the discussion. He believed that the
Noble Earl (Fitzwillia,m) thought a repeal of the Corn-
laws would be a source of benefit and happiness to the
labouring classes of the community, but he doubted very
materially if that opinion would be backed by the la-
bourers themselves.
Earl-FITZWILLIAM rose, 'but was received with
loud cries of "NO, no." -
The Earl of HAIIEWOOD admitted that the mauu-
facturers of this country were in a depressed state, Ike,
he denied that they were caused by the existing Corn
laws. The depression' in'trade in the manufacturing dis-
tricts arose from the manufacturers underselling each
Other, and the spirit of speculatiOn that pervaded them.
When he saw in his own county factories being contin-
ually erected, he could not sit stilt and hear it said that
distress in the manufacturing districts was caused by the
present Corn-laws.(Hear, hear.)
Earl FITZWILLIAM said he had never stated
that the distress in the manufacturing districts was
caused wholly by the present Corn-laws ; he had stated
it was in a great measure caused by them. He thought
the Noble Earl had fallen into the error he (the Earl of
liarewood) had attributed to him (Earl Fitzwilliatn),
that of stating that the distress was caused by specula-
tion and underselling. In answer to the Noble
Marquis (Salisbury) he begged to state that early in
the next Session of Parliament, he should move that it
is the duty of this House to take into serious considera-
tion, the present system of the Corn-laws. And also to-
morrow he should move that there should be au exami-
nation of all the signatures to the petitions presented
for and against the repeal of the Corn-laws.
Lord BROUGHAM said that two year; and a half
ago he moved a similar motion to the Noble Earl, and
he was then prepared with evidence at their Lordship's
bar, to prove that low wages would not be the consequence
of a low price of corn ; that motion was met with
so much opposition that he did not then press a division.
The Noble Lord presented several petitions from Szot-
land in favour of a total repeal of the Corn-laws, in
which he fully concurred.
Lord DUNCANNON moved the second reading of
the following Bills :—The Assessed Taxes and Compo-
sition Bill, Militia Suspension Bill, and County Courts
(Ireland) Bill. The Noble Lord also moved that the
Sugar Duties Bill be read a first time.
The Duke of SUTHERLAND presented a petition
from Newcastle-under-Lyne, in Staffordshire, praying
for an alteration in the Corn-laws.

The Earl of STANHOPE presented a petition from
Devonshire against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Lord PORTMAN presented a petition from the in-
habitants of Paddington, praying for a repeal of the
Corn-laws. In that petition he most fully and cordially
concurred.

Earl FITZWILLIAM presented several petitions
from Greenock, Derbyshire (2,666 signatures), Kettei-
ing, Caernarvon, Norfolk, Yorkshire, and other places,
praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Their Lordships adjourned at Twenty minutes past
Seven.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 7.

The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour.

TheDrogheda Harbour Bill, theßlackburn Improvement
and Market Bill, the St. Helen's Small Debts Bill, the
Launceston Small 'Debts Bill, the Salisbury Small Debts
Bill, the Sleaford Small Debts Bill, the Wemyss Estate
Bill, the Lincoln Road Bill, the Trusley and Doncaster
Roadl Bill, the Bourn Drainage Bill, and the Burnley
Small Debts Bill, were reported.
The Forth and Clyde Navigation Bill, the Scrabster
Harbour Bill, and the Brighton and Shoreham Road Bill
were severally read a third time and passed.
BELFAST AND CAVEHILL RAILWAY BILL.
Mr. 'O'CONNELL moved the re-committal of the Bel-
fast arid Cavehill Railway Bill.
Colonel 'VERNER seconded the motion.

/4,114.1N8AR opposed the re-committal of the
• Coloner CONOLLY opposed the motion. The lion.
and Gallant Member denied that the railroad, as stated
by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, was com-
pleted in all its parts as the Act of Parliament required.
Sir R. BATESON .was also opposed to the re-com-
mittal of the Bill. He considered it a groat hardship
that a large number of witnesses . who had come over
from Irelnd to be examined before the Committee
should be again, after having returned to their respective
homes, brought back, particularly as there was just now
such a short prospect of their remaining here.
Mr. ESTCOURT likewise opposed-the motion, on the
grounds that the Committee,' in his opinion, had not
come to an erroneous decision.
After a few words froth Mr. O'CONNELL in reply,
Sir ROBERT FERGCSSON said she. Committee
had considered it useless to proceed, because the Acts
were out. - -
Sir GEORGE CLERK considered it would- be'eSta-
Wishing a dangerous precedent to allow a Bill to be
' re-committed, when a Committee had sat on it and had
reported that the preamble had not been proved. Besides
all the Witne.,es-S opPosed to the Bill had gone back to
Ireland, and considering the declarations which 'had
beevinade by the Ministers, it was extremely doubtful
whether the Parliament would be in existence at the
time of their return.
Mr. FOX MAULE denied that the Committee had
reported that the preamble had not been proved.
Mr. LITTON said that the Acts had expired which
the Bill ' 'professed- to enlarge and continue, and that
herefore it Ntis- impossible to prove the preamble.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when there appeared—
For the re-committal
.69
Apirlst-it
Majority against the Re-committal - l32_
• - LANDLORDS IN IRELAND.

Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that.he should shortly
move -for leave to. bring in it Bill to amend the law of
landlord and tenant in Ireland, so far as to iiive compen-
sation to yearlv tenants for improvement of the estates:
The Hon.. ancllearned Member said he hoped the House
would' ibldge him for a few moments while ho referred
4zirietter personal to himself,—(Hear, hear.) The
Ifottaf wag Atvatiia the serious charge made against him
(Mr. O'Connell) the other evening, of distrainin in
.A,lll4urent, due to him on the 25th March. Ha Dlr.
I, I- al Thr

~ . , ,

O'Connell)
understood the charge to telate-tn the pre-
sent year, and therefore he did not know whether some
1 agent of his might not have put in a distress from mali-
Icious motives; and therefore he was not able, when it was
made, to give it a positive denial. Since then he had desired
Ids Eon to wait upon Sergeant Jackson to learn from him
his authority for the statement, and he said that he
(Sergeant Jackson) did not know the name of the
tenant, but that a gentleman called on him some time
since in Dublin, named Twiss,—that he (Sergeant Jack-
son) recollected to have seen him on juries iu Kerry, but
did not know his Christian name ; that the affair took
place on his (Mr. O'Connell's) estate in Iveragh, where Mr.
Twis.s said he had seen a number of cattle impounded
in the month of April, and on inquiry was told that they
beloeged to tenants of his (Mr. O'Connell's), and had
been distrained for March rent. His son asked in what
year this was, but Sergeant Jackson did not know—
(Hear, hear)—but said he had a memorandum thereof
somewhere among his papers. He (Mr. O'Connell) was
in Kerry ia the month of January last,' and was able to
contradict the statement in the strongest terms.—(Hear,
hear.) It was not for him to condemn the manner in
1 which the statement was made, but he would beg the
House to remember that the man's name was not known,
that his address was -not known, and that all that the
statement amounted to was, that some one had told Ser-
geant Jackson that these cattle were impounded.—(Hear.)
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON said the statement made by
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman respecting him was
not precisely correct. The Plion. Member for Tralee
called upoet snee this day, stating that he did so by his fa-
ther's desire to know the name of the person to whom
I had made reference in the course of the late debate,
mid he informea2ne that I should acquaint him with the
whole of the ciremestances. He (Mr. Sergeant Jackson)
told him thathe had known the gentleman for many years,
having seen him on Jraies in Kerrv, that he conk not tell
him his Christian name, but he knew his name to be
Twist. The, gentleman teeld him that he had seen the
speech of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in which he
had indulged in time usual stray' of attack on the land-
lords ; that he knew that he was himself au ex-
ceedingly harsh landlord ; and he then told me
what he had seen, in the month of April ;in a
year he mentioned at the time, but which I could
nut tell him till I referred to the memorandum I
made at the time. He said that he had been at
the Hononrable and Learned Gentleman's property
in the month of April, when he found the cattle of a
number of the tenants distrained for rent due in the
March preceding. ' He said he was quite certain
of the accuracy of • his statement, and would
be ready f o substantiate it on any occasion.
In the presence of the gentleman, he (Mr.
Sergeant Jackson) had written down the particulars
of his statement, adding that he should mention the fact
if ever the Hon. and Learned Gentleman wide a charge
against the landlords of Ireland. He (Mr. Sergeant
Jackson) would not have mentioned the matter to the
House if he did not believe it to be perfectly correct.—
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL would appeal to the House whether,
when. the Hon. and Learned Gentleman stated he had a
document he shoidd not hare produCed it—whether he
ought not to have taken down the name of his informant.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was aware there
were several persons of that name in the county.—(Loud
cries of " Chair, chair.")
The SPEAKER said, if the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber had anything further to state in explanation of the
facts, of course the House would be ready to hear it; but he
submitted to him whether he ought to prolong this con-
versation when there was no question before the House.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the name of the party accusing
him was not given, the name of the lands were not
given, or the date when it occurred ; and the only place
where it could have happened, ' was his college
property; because on all his other property the
rents were received in May and November, and therefore
the statement as regarded his properties would have
contradicted itself. He had been met with a total ab-
sence of accuser, date, and particulars, and he was '
therefore entitled to pronounce it as gross a falsehood
as ever was invented.—(Cheers.)
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON said—Perhaps the House
would permit him to say, that he Would put the Hon-
ourable Gentleman in possession of all the parti-
culars at the earliest possible moment.
NOTTINGHAM ELECTION.
On the motion of Mr.' T. DUNCOMBE, the petition
of William Belbie, presented a few days ago, was or-
dered to be printed with the Votes.
Sir R. H. INGLIS would have no objection to the
motion, if there were any further proceeding to be
founded thereon.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE said that the subject was to
be brought under the consideration of the House on
Thursday next.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. VERNON SMITH moved for certain returns
connected With secondary punishment in New South
Wales.
CLERK OF THE PEACE FOR HERTFORD.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved that the Clerk of the
Peace for the county of Hertford should then attend at
the bar of the House.
John Samuel Storey then appeared at the bar, and
stated that he was Clerk of the Peace for the County
of Hertford. He received an order fa nu that Hous'e
for a copy of the Register of Electors for that County.
for 1840 and 1841—lie would have had much pleasure in
complying with the order, but the register was not in
his possession or under his control. The 56th clause of
the Reform Bill made the Sheriff the Custos of the
register, and it was in his possession.
By Mr. DUNCOMBE—He was aware that under the
55th section_ of the Reform Bill be was bound to give a
copy of the register to any one applying for. it. Ile
weld not' say what was the dote. on which he re-
ceived the order. The Magistrates of the County
of Hertford had constantly refused to print the register,
and unless they ellowed the expense there was no
other way of paying the expenses. He (the witness)
had, from his notion of respect for that House, refused
to give that which was. but a copy of the
register. He had not the register in his pos-
session, and, them'efore, could not give a copy of it.
He had when applied to by a freeholder for a copy of
the register answered that he would furnish it at a
reasonable price, bat lie had refused to furnish it for 15s.
He had applied on the subject to the Noble Lord
the Chairman of the Quarter Sessions as to whether he
ought to have the register printed (as we understood
him to say), but his Lordship advised him not
to do so. Witness had not been an agent at
either the Lest St. Alban's or the last county election,
but witness's son had been an agent at the last county
election. , His son is not a clerk is his office, neither
is lie his partner. He is in witness's office.
Does lie hold any situation ?—Yes ; he is there as
my son.—(A laugh.)
Iu answer to questions by Mr. Hooper, witness said
that he had no doubt as to the authenticity of the copy
in his possession. It had been made by his own
clerk, but he thought the sending of a copy
would not be in compliance with the order
of the House. If any elector had asked him for a
copy of the register, he should have furnished it from
that copy. Ile did not send the espy in his
possession, because he had not been ordered to do
so. The order of the House was to . furnish ' a
copy of the register. The cepy in his possession
was not his own, it belonged to the county—(Opposition
cheers)—and he did not think that that would satisfy-
the order of the House.
Mr. ALSTON—You stated that you applied to Lord
Deere, the Chairman of the Court of Quarter Ses-
sions, when applied to by a freeholder on the subject, of
the register. . Did you apply to his Lordship, as
Chairman of the Court of Quarter Sessions, whether
-yogi should furnish the copy after you had received the
orders of this House ?
Witness-=Lord Eacre told me that the order of Quar-
ter Sessions absolutely prevented me from having it
printed; and that if he had not been so ill he would have
-attended the House himself.
- The witness then withdrew.
Mr. DUNCOMBE said it must be quite clear to the
House that this order was sent to the Clerk of the Peace.
The Hon. Member for Ripon had been decidedly of opinion
that it was the duty of the Clerk of the Peace to furnish
a copy of the copy of the register; it was quite clear, after
the statement of the witness, that he was in possession of
the register, and that it was his bounden duty, as Clerk of
the Peace, to ftirnish it to the House. • An Hon. Mem-
ber had asked him if it was an authentic copy, and
he replied that it was. It seemed that his only
object as an individual in not furnishing this cop y
was to create delay, in order that the House might
not be able to place it in the hands of the electors.
It was for the House to say . whether it would have its
order evaded for such et purpose. He (Mr. buncombe)
thought that it was quite necessary that this order should
be enforced, and he would therefore move that the Clerk
of the Peace attend to-morrow with a copy of the regis-
ters? of-theE .s ue lectori sN o,
Ifv Hit
oelrrtaf us rnt
el sah ir
ii;ei
naudible, said that his
Opinion coincided with that of the majority of the HoUse
tabr
t?le
eanied eoorder
of
ai toi_tAe.totstt
obfe obeyed,rariaat
about.;
Housema tte n
r independent 'that t i f
was the a
He thought the orders respecting this gentleman were
rather hard. The House did not appear to pay anythine
for the copy ordered, but, on its own authority, ordered °a
. copy to be returned. Such an order must sometites operate
mexaksholya • oconpyanbiroe
indsitiift,lual. This gentleman could not
but must pay to have it done;
andthough this was no reason why the power of the House
should - not be vindicated, it was a reason for not
pressing- harshly against an individual who had not
• tranegNseed against the order. The House required a
a copy aif . the register, and he had not the means
of furnishing a copy„for the register was not in his pos-
session. Ite Honourable Member was aware this gen-
tleman • na. a copy of the register in his possession,
• and asked hiat if he did not know that it was a faithful
copy, ta.r.auen t- e witness answered in the affirmative.
.lie 'was theta asked •why he did not send that, and
he answered, because it belonged to the county,—could
there be a' better reason ?—(Hear, hear.) if he had
the :register in his possession he (Sir E. augilen)
'thought he ought to have obeyed the House, and after-
wardsappeeled to its justice fur payment, but
_ it struck
hiMihaaehai ;g obeyingeatleman had not the power of
between
.
the 'Wei; , .There had been a trial of legal skill
lck
the Honourable Member for Finsbury and time wit-
nesshest ;orletettbeit
argument.
—(Hear,
1 vai Enndessla itliagdllilti a
the
)
ed
He believed the gentleman in attendance was
prisoner, but a .more improper expression could not be
j used. • -
that the gentleman,
Mr. O'CONNELL
ifsarto,
thoughttt. it appeared to todisli:ien!
theiva 5
expensesa C acting uonfd,etbr
ea
Clarkii
gtaakred. the
T The edacert °en jtolimneedHotliilaset,
g a! ianieso,urn;
necessary
ofof
tthhee
oPoeuanctey
fur any
ebxepadoesfie-asebeedlmibeh the freaasttdurhe:
had, therefore, no loss to sustaiu. t.
should
imagine haveanouni
bacecroorfdicnogpiteos,thajetdAncotet tlasiat
heth
one. Dile had applied the word prisoner to the gen-
tleman, he had done so .solely through inadvertence. -
e appeared clerk
w.
to

EVEN.] NG EDITION.

The question was then put -amd agreed-to, that tho
Clerk of the Peaez, for the county of Hereford should_
attend at the bar of the House to-morrow, and bring with
him a copy of the register of electors for 1840 and 1841.
Mr. PALMER wished to put it to any member of the
Covernment who might be present, whether it were fit
that public officers should make use of their position for
the purpose of obtaining signatures to public petitiont
lie had understood that certain officers of the Excise had
so interfered, for the purpose of procuring-signatures to
Anti-Corn-law petitions.
The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER thotOt
that Filch a course of proceeding would be extremely IM-
proper ; but it appeared to him that the Hor. GentreMan
must be mistaken upon the subject, as no such fact -had
come within his (the Chancellor of the :Exchequer's)
knowledge.

Mr. WY NN said, that seeing the anxietvof the Ifoue
to hear the statement of the Noble. Lord the Secretary far
the Colonies. he would postpone the motion of which ho
had given notice till to-morrow.