The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T.

HOL J.S'E OF LORDS, lu.vE, 11.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the
Woolsack at Five o'Clock, during the temporary absence
t of the Lord Chancellor.
There was a very full attendance of Peers, and the
Dukes of Sussex and Cambridge were among the first
that entered the House. Around the Throne were seve-
ral Foreign Ambassadors, and the eldest sons of Peers.
la the boy of the Hence we noticed among the Peers
present Lord Grey, Lord Brougham, the Duke of Wel-
lington, the Earl of Aberdeen, the Duke of Richmond,
Lord Langdale, the Marquis of Connyngham, the Earl
of Albemarle, Lord Abinger, &c., &c.
M. Guizot, and the brother of General Paez, the latter
of whom was introduced into the House by the Duke of
Wellington, were also present.
The space below the bar was crowded 'with Members of
the House of Commons, and the whole House presented
a most animated appearance. Several Peers, on entering
the House, and perceiving the two Royal Dukes present,
immediately went up and shook hands with them.
Lord LANGD ALE presented netitions from the soli-
citors of Huddersfield, Colchester, Gloucester, Monmouth,
and other places in favour of the Chancery Bills; also a
petition from the solicitors of Liverpool, against the aboli-
tion of the Equity Court of Exchequer.
Lord ELLE NB ORO UG I-I presented similar petitions.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented numerous pe-
titions against any alteration of the Corn-laws, from Yeo-
vil, and places in Somerset, Essex, and Sussex ; also a
petition from Newbury, in Berkshire, against the rating of
workhouses.
The Duke of RUTLAND had to present a vast number
of petitions against any alteration in the Corn-laws, upon
which he would trouble their Lordships with not a single
observation in the present state of the House.
The petitions were then laid on the table.
ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY.
Lord MELBOURNE, who seemed to labour under
strong emotions, and was heard with difficulty, said—My
Lords, your Lordships have all doubtless heard with sor-
row, as well as myself, and with mingled feelings of sur-
prise and horror, which such an event was calcu-
lated to excite, that an atrocious attempt has been
made upon the life of her Majesty—(the last
words of the Noble Lord were scarcely heard, and a
marked sensation of horror pervaded the House.) My
Lords, it is now my duty, formally and officially, to ac-
quaint you that a desperate attempt on the Queen's life
was yesterday made in a Royal park.—(Marked emotion.)
Two piatols were fired, dnd the only matter of wonder is
(as well as we could understand from the faltering tone in
which the Noble Viscount spoke) that her Maj. sty was
unhurt.—(Great sensation.) Upon all former occasions of
which, my Lord,, unfortunately, the recent history of this
country affords too many—it has always been the custom
of this House to address the Throne, in expressing its
horror at the attempt which had been made, and to offer
its congratulation on the harpy and fortunate es-
cape. On all former occasions this House hes
taken that course, and your Lordships will not be surprised
that I seize this first opportunity of your meeting, without
any notice—( Hear, hear)—to propose that your Lord!hips
should follow a similar course. (Hear, hear, hear.)
At the same time, I feel, my Lords, that it is
unnecessary,—indeed that it would be indecorous,—to
expatiate further on the circumstances, or to conjecture
what might have been the consequences if the unfortunate
event which has taken place—(The Noble Lord's voice
so much faltered, that the termination of this sentence was
not heard.) The matter is in course of legal inquiry, and
it must hereafter be the subject of judicial investigation;
and it would ill become me to make any observations which
would in any degree interfere with a dignified and impar-
tial course of inquiry.—( Hear. ) My Lords, I have now
to move that an humble Address be presented to her Ma

jetty, to assure her Majesty " That this House feels it a duty
to express its horror and indignation at the late atrocious
and treasonable attempt against her sacred person, and
its heartfelt congratulation to her Majesty and the
country, for her Providential deLverance from so
great a danger ; and to express to her Majesty
the deepest concern to find that there exists within
her Majesty's dominions a person capable of so flagitious
an act, and to make a❑ eanest prayer to Almighty God
to preserve to us the protection of her just and mild Go
verarnent, and a life so justly dear to us."
Motion agreed to.
The following Peers were appointed to prepare the
Address :—The Duke of Sus ex, the Duke of Cambridge,
Viscount Melbourne, Duke of Wellington, Marquis of
Normanby, Lord Privy Seal, Lord President of the
Council, Bishop of Londoo, Earl of Abercorn, &c.
These Peers then left the House.
:Their Lordships shortly after returned, having revised
the Address, and on the motion of Lord MELBOURNE a Con-
ference was desired with the House of Commons ; the
Duke of Sussex, the Duke of Cambridge, the Earl of
Shaftesbury, the Duke of Wellington, and father Peers
were appointed to attend on behalf of their Lordshiks.
During the absence of the messengers to acquispat the
House of Commons with their Lordship's wishes.
Viscount DUNCANNON moved the second readitlit9f,
the Irish Grand Jury Cess Bill, and that it should be cocrl-!'
mitted with the Irish Corporation Bill to-morrow, and the
debate be postponed until that time.—The Duke of Wel-
lington having acquiesced, the motion was agreed to.
CUSTOMS DUTIES' BILL.
On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON, the second
reading of this Bill was adjourned to Monday next.
The Duke of RUTLAND presented several petitions
against the Corn laws.
The Usher of the Black Rod then announced to their
Lordships that the House of Commons agreed to a con-
ference, and that the managers awaited at the bar for that
purpose.
The following Members of lira House were then ap-
pointed to conduct the conference with the Committee of
the House of Commons:—His Royal Highness the Duke
of Sussex, his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge,
the Lord President, the Duke of Wellington, the Bishop
of Durham, and Lord Melbourne.

Their Lordships returned after a few minutes, when
The Duke of SUSSEX said that the Committee ap.
pointed by the House had conducted the Conference with
the House of Commons. He had left the Committee of
the House of Commons a copy of their Lordship's address.
The Duke of RUTL AND presented several petitions
in favour of the present Corn-laws.

Lord VESEY FITZGERALD presented a petition
from Ireland, against the repca‘ of the present Corn-laws.
Lord GOSFORD presented a petition from the county
of Armagh against the importation of foreign c,rn.
Petitions against the repeal of the Corn.laas were prc
•
seated by the Earl of Carberry and the Duke of Buck
ingham.

ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY.
The Noble "r 7 n 3 here interrupted 'oy the LORD
STEWARD of the HOUSEHOLD, who had shortly
before entered the House, and t.ho now informed their
Lordships that Her Majesty had been graciously pleased
to appoint to-morrow at two o'clock, at Buckingham Pa-
lace, as the time and place at which her Majesty would
receive their Lordships' address of congratulation.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY took this opportu-
nity of explaining what he had said in the course of the
evening. He had thought there should have been other
motions nearer the heart of the Noble Earl this evening
than the Corn-laws, but as the House wished to proceed,
he had not persisted in his attempt to postpone the busi-
ness of the evening. The precedents which had been re-
ferred to, and particularly that of 1817, were directly in
favour of the adjournment of the House. He had made
his suggestion because he thought their Lordships wou'd
not desire to go into the discussion of this question after
the event which had taken place.
The Earl of FITZ WILLIAM., amid loud cries of
" Go on ; go on," then proceeded—He was always de-
sirous, on matters indifferent to him, to comply with the
wishes of the House--(" Hear, hear," and laughter)--
what he meant was, that it was his desire, in matters in
which no public principle was involved, to consult
and act in accordance with the wishes of their Lordships.
—( Hear.) He was well aware that in approaching this
subject he was mooting a question on which he would not
presume to say, with his Noble Friend on the cross benches,
their Lordships had made up their minds ; but on
which considerable prejudice, or, at least, say strong feel-
ings were entertained, and by some persons different to
those he himself entertained. But he thought on this oc.
casion, above all others, their Lordships would not so much
consider the individual who addressed them, as the thou-
sands, and he might say millions of petitioners of whose
sentiments he was the organ. In some of their former
incidental discussions on this subject, he had maintained
that the people of England had for many months been
suffering under severe privations--( Cries of " Hear, hear")
that proposition had been, be would not say, denied,
but at least there had been an endeavour made to show
that he ( Earl Fitzwilliam) had taken an exaggerated view
of this subject. Reference had been naturally made to
the average prices of corn, as shown in the Gazette.
These averages did not present a fair view of the rate at
which the people of England paid for food. It had been
the misfortune of this country of late years to experience
two or three bad harvests,—certainly two exceedingly bad
harvests. Their Lordships were aware scarcity might
arise from two causes,—the crop being bed, and the har-
vest good, or vice versa, or it might arise from a combina-
tion of two misfortunes. The crop of last year was
not a good crop, and the harvest, as all their Lord-
ships knew, was unfavourable. A large portion of the
corn was introduced to the market ; the consequence
was that the averages were brought down far below the
point which their Lordships' Act had sought to fix at the
rate at which the people of England should obtain their
food. The averages undoubtedly had remained at some-
where about that price which the framers of the present
law conceived they ought to do. They had been between
655. and 70s. during the last winter; bat that price did
not at all represent the means which the people of Eng-
land had of supplying themselves wth food. If their
Lordships would turn to any of those periodical papers
in which statements were made of the price of corn in
the leading markets of the country—he meant the mar-
kets of consumption, because it was necessary to distin-
guish between the two descriptions of markets—he did
not mean the great markets of productions, where large
quantities of corn were produced, and comparatively but a
small quantity consumed, but those which provided for the
sustenence of great masses of the people, such as Birming-
ham, Liverpool, Wakefield, and other places with which he
was less acquainted, and their Lordships would find the
average price in these markets was from 655. to 68s, a
quarter. Their Lordships would find that the average
price of best corn (by which he meant that description of
corn of which the bread c )nsumed by the great mass of the
people ought to be made) was as low as 655. to 675.
There had been a much greater difference between the
average price returned in the Gazette and the price paid
last year, than was ordinarily found. In many years their
Lordships would find that the price of corn had not varied
more than ss. or 6s. above the constant average ;
but during the last year the same corn had varied from
103. to 12s. above that average. He dwelt on this subject,
because it struck him that it was one which perhaps had
not presented itself to the minds of many of their Lord-
ships; but it was a very curious fact, and one to which it
was most desirable to pay attention. There had oftimes
been a sort of dispute between himself and others as to
what was the intention of the Legislature in enacting
this Corn-law. He had sometimes presumed to state that
the design of the Legislature was to raise the price of corn,
and he had been corrected when he made that state-
ment, and told that it was not the intention of the
Legislature to raise the price of corn but to regulate it.
—( Hear, hear.) Now, if that were true, it did not ap-
pear to him that the Legislature had been successful in
their endeavours. It would be necessary to advert not
merely to the present state of the law, hut to that for which
it was substituted. The present system of Corn-laws was
a perfect novelty in this country. It never had been the
object of the Corn-laws of this country to exclude
foreign corn, but to regulate or raise (whichever
their Lordships pleased) the price of corn until 1815.
It was proposed by a Committee of the House of Corn-
:eons, which had sat in 1814—and the whole gist of that
inquiry was to show that wheat ought not to be produced
in this country at less than 803. per quart. r. The object
of the law of 1815 was to provide for the English farmer
the prico of 80s. per quarter. They well knew with what
effects that law had been attended—or rather, how it had
failed in its effects. Under that law the price had fallen
below 40s. per quarter, and the law itself was at-
tended with the greatest possible injury to the
agricultural interests. He was not in the habit of
doing so, but he was desirous of reading to their Lord-
siies a portion of the evidence that had been given before
the Committee of the House of Commons in 1836, which
came from that quarter, from whence they would always
obtain the soundest information on agricultural subjects—
from the southern parts of Scotland. It began at ques-
tion, 9,651, and was the evidence of Mr. Hope, who lived
in Haddingtonshire. The Noble Earl then read the evi-
dence, which was to the effect that the Corn-laws had in-
duced the farmers to give higher rates, in expectation of
obtaining greater profits, in which they had been universally
disappointed The Noble Earl then proceeded to read
the evidence of Mr. Howien, a farmer from East Lothian.
He was asked what was the reason that the farmers had
given up their farms, and his answer was, that they had
all conceived that they were to have 80s. a quarter for
their wheat, and on that their calculations had been made.
They were disappointed, and ruin was the consequence.
An early writer on political econornt (Sir Josiah Childe)
had said that, when it was well with land, it would be well
with trade ; and that when it was well with trade, it would
be well with land. The Corn-laws, however, prevented
that coincidence of prosperity, and rendered it im-
possible. It had never taken place under the Corn-
laws. The farmers have prospered for the last few years,
but the manufactures have suffered. The Government of
this country had the singular infelicity of so constructing
its laws as regarded corn, that both classes of the popula-
tion could not thrive under them. The gentleman whose
evidence he had quoted was afterwards asked whether the
Corn-laws of 1815 had deceived both the landlord and
the tenant ? His answer was, that they had. The
calculation, he said, which they took, was al-
most universally 41. a quarter, as the Corn-laws
had promised that amount, but not effected
it. Their Lordships might suppose that • the
questions put to that witness were put for the purpose of
extracting from him answers favourable to the views of
those who advocated a repeal of the Corn-laws. But
who was the party who put the questions? It was Mr.
Cayley, the Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire,
who is the most d termined advocate of protecting du.
ties. The evidence which he had just given referred to
the law of 1815. He would next pass to the law of 1828,
which was that under which we were now living. The
witness was asked whether he was well satisfied with the
law of 1828 ? His answer was, that the subject was one
he was not able to grapple with—that he was satisfied pith
the scheme at first, but that it had been of no benefit to
the farmer for the last three years of agricultural distress.
He said he should prefer a moderate fixed duty, but that
the question was not one which he could properly decide
on. That was the evidence of a farmer from East Lo-
thian, and that was a county which afforded the best op-
portunity of forming a judgment on the subject. The evi-
dence which he would next refer to would be that of Mr.
Ellis, a considerable grazier iu Leicestershire. He stated
it as his opinion that the present duty was too high. He
was speaking of the duty of April 183 C, when the price
was low and whenahe duty was accordingly raised. He
said that the present law gave the farmer an expectation
that something might come to his relief which could
never arrive ; and it, therefore, raised the value
of land fictitiously. In that opinion he (Earl Fitz-
william) entirely agreed. He had seen fluctuations
of rent and fallings of rent with occasional increase. The
question, in his opinion, was altogether a question of rent
Hear, hear) misunderstood he believed—(Hear,
hear)—grossly misunderstood by the landed gentlemen
and Peers of England.—( Hear, hear.) They did not
comprehend their own interests—they looked merely to
the next rent-day without looking to the permanent in.
terests of themselves oe of those who were living under
them. They took a short-sighted view of the matter, but
not he believed from any selfish motives on their parts as a
body. That had always been his opinion. He did not
accuse the landlords of selfishness, but he thought they did
not look beyond the surface. They did not see how the
value of their land was increased by its connexion with
other interests. They did not, in short, act on the wise
sentiment that when it was well with trade it would be
well with land. That maxim presumed a free system.—
( Hear, hear.) It was because they endeavoured to 'else
artificially the price of land that they could not ensure the
prosperity of the labouring and the manufacturing interests
at the sometime. Let them return to a sounder and more
natural system than the present. Let them take courag-„
and not have those wretched apprehensions of what might
iriPPem Under an alteration of the present law, even the
poor lands of England would not be thrown out of cotta_
vation. Lincoln Heath could never swain appear in Eng_
gland. Neither could they again see 'Norfolk and Suffolk
in the state in which they were formerly. He thought
that it would be impossible to exaggerate the present dis-
tress of the manufacturing districts. He had warned the
Noble Viscoun. at the head of her Majesty's Government
on the subject at the commencement of the Session, and
the condition of those districts had not improved strew.
He would not hesitate to say, that if their Lordships would
institute a Committee for the purpose of inquiry into the
subject, they would find that the state of things was infi.
nitely worse in the manufacturing districts than any of their
Lordships could imagine. He did not say that the Corn-
laws were the immediate cause of these evils, but he said
that they had a good deal to do in producing these events
which caused them. The Corn-I :ws had destroyed the
cemmerciat intercourse between this country and America.
The Government had been warned that that would be the
result of the Corn-laws by their official representative at
Washington. The Core-laws grievously aggravated that
distress which might proceed from other causes. They
raised the price of corn under certain circumstances but

not under all circumstances. They did not raise the price
of co:er when there wr,; r7rianee. of it he cottc:try.
L I Bee, 1e35, and 1836, they had not raised the price. In
1835 the average price was lower than it had been since
the year 1793, The Corn-laws therefore raised the price
of corn then only when there was a scarcity of it in the
country—that was to say, at the very moment when , it
should be the object of the Legislature to diminish the price
as much as possible. There was thus an unhallowed alli-
ance established between scarcity and the present system.
During the last twelve moi,ths the Corn-laws had probably
raised the price of wheat by 12i. or 15s, a quarter. Let it
not be imagined that the agricultural labourer himself re-
ceived any benefit from those laws. Prices might rise while
wages would not rise in proportion. On the people
of England the existing laws operated with great severity,
and that severity their Lordships had the means of alle-
viating. He would venture respectfully to say that it
was their duty to do so. Were their Lordships aware what
was the amount of the debt which America now owed to
this country ? He could not himself state it exactly, but
it certainly amounted to many millions. America was
willing to discharge that debt. If the present Cot n-laws
were repealed she would also be able to do so —(Hear.)
He knew that the subject he was discussing was distasteful
to their Lordships; but unless they were prepared to incur
a degree of odium which no men would wish to be exposed
to they should put an end to the present Corn-laws. He
thought their Lordships would act with great wisdom if
they agreed with him in reconsidering the subject. When
the present Corn-law was passed he recollected a Right
Hon. Friend of his who was then in the House of Com-
mons, but who was now a Noble Lord, saying that the
law he was then proposing was a very good temporary
alteration of the last law—that it was very good
for that time, but he did not say it was permanently good.
Though it was a great improvement upon the then sys-
tem of law, it was one that he proposed in one sense as a
temporary law. In that view of the law he concurred ;
be had supported it, and he thought he did right in doing
so, as the present system was far better than the mischie-
vous one that preceded it ; and it was therefore for their
Lordships now to say whether it was a system to which
they could permanently adhere. The law was not
intended to effect absolute exclusion, but it did effect it
by high duties. It effected the exclusion of foreign corn
up to 655.; and if there was anything in what his Friend
had stated with respect to the currency, and he was in.
clined to think there was, the price of 645. in 1828 im-
plied a great deal more than 645. in 1815. They were
now, in fact, excluding corn up to the price of 703., taking
it at the currency of 1815. The principal argument in
favour of the exclusion of foreign corn, was that advanced
by an eminent man out of Parliament, He alluded to
what had been stated by Mr. Malthus. The view he took
of the Corn-laws was, that it was desirable, with a view
to national independence, to exclude foreign corn. That
might be a sound political view, but he would not go into
that question then. Ifs Noble Friend near him had said
that was an important point...--( Hear.) Su it might be,
but when they were told they could not do without foreign
corn, there was an end of the important point, and the
question was, how they were to admit foreign corn ? He
understood that the President of America had said that it
was important that a eountry should be independent of
of foreign supply. That gentleman might very well say
that, because that country, of all °there, was least likely
to require a supply of corie_( Hear, hear.) In this
country they could hot do without foreign corn. What
was the condition of their farmers when they did without
it in 1834, 1835, and 1836? They were then suitors at
their Lordships' bar, praying their Lordships to alter the
Corn-laws, and not, as at the present moment, asking
that it might not be repealed. On that occasion Com-
mittees were appointed to inquire into agricultural distress
—( Hear, hear, hear)—and in 1836 a Noble Lord
gave, before a Committee of the House of Commons, some
good advice. That advice was honestly given, and being so
he trusted that it would have its weight with their Lord-
ships. That Noble Lord stated, in answer to a question
put to him by the Committee, that he really did not know
anything they could do for the agriculturalists but to tell
them honestly that no Parliamentary relief was possible,
for he was not aware of anything that could be done for the
agriculturalist by Parliament. He (Earl Fitzwilliam)
entirely subscribed to that opinion—(" Hear," from the
Duke of Richmond)—and it was with that view that he
desired to enforce his motion upon their Lordships.
Lord ASHBURTON wished to know whether the evi-
dence the Noble Earl had alluded to was that which he
had given.
Earl FITZ WILLIA M said that it was—(Hear)—and
he was satisfied that the sentiments contained in that an-
swer were founded in fact. He remembered being told
on the occasion that there had always been Corn-laws in
this country ; there could be no doubt of that, but they
never had Corn-laws in the country with the same ob.
jects as the present.—( Hear.) They never had this
system till 1815, when the landed gentry in an evil hour
thought they were going to be ruined by the peace. The
attempts that had been made to bolster up the present law
were miserable in the extreme, and he was sure that the
landed interests of the country stood far too high to re-
quire such quirks of legislation.—( Hear, hear.) He
thought, therefore, that it would be wise in Parliament to
re-consider the law, because if they did not, they would
hare alternate complaints from one or other of the two
classes of society ; for the moment they established an
artificial system, the coincident prosperity of both classes
was impossible.—(lleare hear.) In the year 1810, when
tho Continent was closed against this country more than
ever it was known, even at that time] aspelies of fresh
corn carne into the English market. Therefore, to talk
of the law being essential to their political independence
was preposterous.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to culti-
vation, it was remarkable that in an Sc districts of the
country which were best cultivated there was little or no
desire to maintain the present Corn-laws ; but where
agriculture was at a low ebb, there there was a desire for
the retention of those laws. There was no fear that
the poorer lands of the country would be thrown out
of cultivation; there was in reality no rational cause
of apprehension.—(Hear, hear.) He would not, however,
deny that the rent of some of the weaker lands must be
lowered, but it would be to a very limited extent. During
the last 25 years, what had been the changes in practical
and theoretical agriculture ? He supposed in that period
the advance had been greater than in the proceeding cen-
tury, aid the effect was to make lands very tolerable which
before that period were very bad; such a knowledge had
now been obtained of the proper management of manures,
that even if the Corn-laws were entirely swept away, he
would be bound for it that there would still be as much
corn grown in the counties of Norfolk and Warwick as
there was now. The price of land might fall; but that
was a consi leration which would not influence their Lord-
ships—that was a consideration which their Lordships
would put far from them. The landowners were a very
wealthy, a very respectable body, but they were far from
being numerous—they did not amount to more than
from 30,000 to 40,000 persons—he admitted they were
a very powerful, a wealthy, and most respecta-
ble body, but he could not admit them to be
a numerous one, and, therefore, while considering
what was for the good of the nation at large, it is a class
that ought to be the last considered ; they are not suffi-
ciently numerous to justify their Lordships in sacrificing
other interests to theirs. But that was what they did
by the Corn-laws ;to what other interest d d they give
any similar boon ? They did not to the fun holder, nor
to the manufacturer,: or any other class. He saw the
Noble and Learned Lord was ready to catch him on that
point ; he remembered that about a month ago, on his pre-
senting a petition, the Noble and Learned Lord (Lord
Wynford) asked him if the manufacturers were willing to
give up the protection the State afforded thorn. At that
period he was not prepared to answer the question, but lie
would now say that they were perfectly ready to do so.—
( Hear, hear.) But what was the protection the manufac-
turing classes enjoyed ? It was intended that they should
have a protection of 30 per cent. ; even if they had that
protection, was it anything compared to that enjoyed by
the farmer? No, the protection enjoyed by the farmer
amounted to thej absolute exclusion of the article
produced by him until the price rose to sixty-five s'eillings
a-quarter. The price of wheat at Dantzic
say 40s.a quarter, then a duty of 20s. a quarter Vv7iS pro-
tection to the amount of 50 per cent. ; but that was not
I all; when there was a little scarcity, then the difference in
the price was much greater than the difference in quan-
tity—the farmer's protection was actual prohibition, until
the price of the foreign article rose to 655. ; therefore the
Legislature had dealt more liberally with the agricultural
interest than they had done with any interest in the coun-
try. Now that might be all very right and very proper,
but for the life of him he could not see it. On the ground
of justice to the other classes, and still more upon the
ground of true policy, he would say the time had arrived
when they ought to revise the Corn-laws. He was about
to use a phrase which he was afraid might give offence--
The Duke of RICHMOND—Don't use it then.—(A
laugh.)
Earl FITZWILLIAM—Oh yes, I will, for however
harsh,ll think it true. The immediate object of the Corn-
laws was to make corn scarce in the country, He knew
others said it was to raise and regulate the prices;
he knew that was what was said of the object of the laws,
but the immediate object was to make corn scarce until it
had arrived at a certain price. In a year of abundance,
the Corn-laws were a dead letter—they did no harm `to
any one but the farmer, to whom they held out hope', of
getting 655. while he might be forced to ply.: up with
355. In abundance then they were useless, but when
there was a little scarcity—to take a supposed case—
suppose
in place of having 100 quarters there were only
98, then the Corn-laws immediately commenced ope-
rations. Suppose the natural price of wheat, when there we's precisely as much in the country as was sufficient for the
maintenance of the people, neither more or less--suppore under these circumstances the price of wheat were 50s. a
quarter—that is, with an exact supply ; but then suppose
in place of 100 quarters they had.only 99 ; the deficiency
caused a much greater effect upon the price than the deficit
appeared to warrant—in place of rising to 50s. 6d., it
would be 525., or 55s.—it was impossible to say 'what, be-
cause then come the Corn-laws ; they step i.n and say
you shall not import any corn until the price vises to a cer-
tain height. The intention of the laws was to aggravate a
slight scarcity—he would not for a mow nt suppose that
they were intended to aggravate a great one—and he con-
sidered the system as entirely inconaiseent with sound le-
gislation. They could never regulete prices nicely and
exactly, and it appeared to him that they should not at-
tempt it at all. Durir"e a period of ',25 ye ars they had been
making the attempt, arid never yet had they succeeded, and
they never would ; therefore he would conclude by moving " That it is expedient to recons•der the laws regulating'
the, importation of foreign corn."
Several Noble Lords rose, hut there being a cell for—
Lord WESTERN, the Noble Lord addressed the
House, but in so low a tone of vnie as to render it impos-
sible to hear hint in the gallery. We understood him to
contend that the average price of corn for the five yeas
preceding 1815 was 1003. a quarter, and there was no com-
plaint against it—the great fell which had taken place
after that period was clearly to. be attributed to the change
then mode in the currency. By the Act of Chadcs the
Second the price was raised to 53s a ceuartere which was
subject to a duty of Bs, a quarter. The. only object he had
had in view.in consenting to these laws had been to prevent
the agricultural interest from being ext, rrminated. If foreign
countries, the inhabitants of which were content to live on

EVENING E DIT lON

the offal corn which they sent to us, Supplied to the"
population food ea eco-i i. 3 tca, of the ie.r.i)
country, they would not have much to spare.—( Hear,
hear.) He looked to the commercial and manufacturing*
prosperity of this country to sustain the prosperity of the
agriculturists. What was the reason the price of corn in
this country was so much higher than on the Continent:
which was always the case ? It was the accumulated
weight of taxation.—( Hear, hear)—the artificial situation
in which this country was placed. The distress which had
taken place in Ireland in 1822, was never equalled. The
price of wheat wits SO low as 38s. a quarter, et at that
time Ireland exported nearly a million quarters, wh le her
own people were dying of starvation. Why was tine? Not
from the want of corn, but of money, in consequence
of the want of employment. This was the greatest pos..
sible infliction on the poorer classes. It was this which
broke their spirit ; but where men could get employment
and carry their labour to market they felt themselves in-
dependent and of their proper value in the scale of society.
He had looked with some curiosity at a document which
had appeared some months ago—the report of the Man-
chester Chamber of Commerce. This Indy being de'
sirous of ascertaining the cause of the distresses whl .ea
prevailed had met to enquire respecting it, the
sat for a long time ; but among all
ed
topcs they had represented in their report, they" si"
nothing about the Corn-laws, but attributed the distress
which prevailed to the extraordinary fluctuation of the
currency; and were they to sit again, they would still
base to come to the concusion that this was the real Cat"
of the di.tress in this country and America. He was one
who had looked with extreme alarm at the distress which'
for the last twenty years, had pressed upon the manfactu.r-
ing districts ; but if the Corn-laws, which had existed for
,
t‘,enty-five years, had occasioned this, why did they not,
also attribute to the Corn-laws the great prosperity whil
had also prevailed during the same period? He could not
but think that it was indirect taxation that had caused this
distress, and he thought if the Noble Earl succeeded
in lowering the price of corn to the continental
price, ho would produce still greater distress thS4
at present existed.—( Hear.) The Noble Earl o'oll.
have it supposed this was a landlord's question. It was"'
a landlord's question—the Noble Earl had failed in convinc;
ing him of that. The farmers and labourers of Essex badd
been more active in getting up the petitions which he h'
presented than the landlords. Among these there wag but
e
one feeling of indignation at the means taken to bully and
overawe the Legislature by the Anti-Corn-law League'
The Noble Lord concluded his speech, of which we hr
only been able to present unconnected frogmen% by passing
a severe censure upon this bodyo and expressing a bop
that their Lordships would not be deterred by such ages%
from persevering in such measures as they believed 1101"
best conduce to the prosperity of the country.
The Earl of ROSE BERY said that as be intended to
vo:e for the motion of the Noble Earl, he was anxious to
state to their Lordships the grounds on which he Wee
duced to du so. He was most anxious to contradict the
up nion advanced by those who advocated a free trade"'
corn, that the restraints upon it proceeded from what Off
termee the cupidity of the landlords, end that it was ,'°ll
their personal interests an injurious system was impose) on
die country. It was said that the present system viro do"
tritnental even to the landlords. He believed this: .tbat
proposition was self-contradictory. Again it was ,sid
those who contended for a repeal of the existing law, that
it was a source of monopoly. It did not appear
to him that it could be looked on in that
light. Very large importations of foreign core
bite this country had taken place within the last fel
years, and that was a proof that there was no monopoly of
the corn trade in the hands of the lendlords. There were,
however, erroneous views maintained by the advocates.ni
the present system, as well as by its opponents. For las,
stenee, a Noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond) contends'
that if the Corn-laws were repealed, a great portion of al°
English soil would be put out of cultivation, and aft "?:
tnense number of the labouring population would thus be
left without work. He did think the statements made on
this subject were at least exaggerated. In his opinion,
the great evil of the present system was the great influx Of
foreign corn to which it gave rise at certain periods, and ,
the total absence of it which it caused at other times.
enabled speculators to come forward into the market, and.
have recourse to unfair means for the purpose of advancing'
their own interests and injuring the public. To that
he thought their Lordships should apply a remedy. He,
wished, therefore, that instead of the present.
scale they should substitute that which had he,
introduced by Mr. Canning in the year 182,1 _
If that was not adopted, there were only two other moo!:
that could be adopted in the place of the one at presert
existence—either a fixed duty, or an unrestricted poser t:
import. The latter seemed a most wild scheme, arid cn
tr.at was calculated to be injurious to the country at
..
large. With regard to a fixed duty, he had many and
serious objections to it; and with respect to duty at
all, he thought such a system was anti-national, wild, an a
nos i
visionary. Conceiving that it would be utterl:/ kora--; 6, bl&
for their Lordships to maintain much longer some
most important provisions of the present Cornele%Aat
thought it would be more wise and just to dctermift"raii, a •
change should take place, and in doing so, to make as vial:-
compromise between all parties as they could, ftithcdt ing for some great change, which would certainly ultimately
take place unless something was done. It was fro.n a firm
conviction of this that he had not hesitated to bring his
mind to vote for the motion of his Noble Friend, under the
impression that the best change would be to continue the
present principle of the system, accompanying it with a set
of duties varying in amount according to the price of carn,•
and altered so as to render the price of corn between t.
Continent, America, and this country more certain than it
was at present.
The Earl of FALMOUTH opposed the motion. He
admitted that the question was on of great importance.
lie agreed entirely in the principle of protection laid done
by the Noble Earl. The Noble Earl who had brought
forward the present motion had so framed it as to catch all:
the stray fish, and he had cautiously abstained from telling,'
them that his object was a repeal of the Corn_laws. It wanthen said that the operatives were in favour of repea',
what had caused that ? Why, the highly improper Prt"
ceeding of the Anti- Corn-law League, a body which,
must say ought not to be suffered to exist, or spoken' off -
without disgust. He was anxious to see the question
properly laid before the operatives—he was anxious to see
the Anti-Corn-law Lectures properly reet, as Ire was
sure if they were, a year would not c' apse without their
having the operatives in their favour. The Noble Bart had
been rather shy of stating why he wished the question to
go before a Committee—he had not referred to it in his
speech, but he had in his letters, in which he had lugged
in words of Scripture for political purposes. The (mll
thing in which he agreed with him in that letter was era'
high compliment he had paid to the clergy of Eug bend. 41
He was sure that that compliment was deserved, and, that aer
the clergy would support him if he could show that
opinions he entertained on the subject were soured ones.
The Noble Earl quoted Sir R. Peel's speech order to
prove that under the present system of Corn.).asva the nos
tuations had been less than under former ser genre, and only
a strong necessity would justify them in m a-king any altera-
tion. An isolated passage of the Ri-4ht Hon. Baronet's
speech had been quoted in an attemr,t to prove that be bs4
glorified the manufacturing interest'at the expense of tuto
landed. It was unnecessary f
him to say that there wen
no foundation whatever for the assertion. No patriotic
mart would attempt to crer.te differences between the two
interests, but certain nt.rties had been actively engaged Is
inciting the labourers against the proprietors, and tY:ey
were of the manufacturing interest. They sough?. to
take care that -while they joined with the Anti. Born-
law agitators, they ought to be aware that they ha'd often
heard of the vitiated morals of large towns_of tb e condi-
tion of the factory—they ought to be careful tb at a body
of exasperated farmers did not go among them rind stir up
the workmen against The masters. Both bce.Y,es ought to
he united, as theie interests were closely ii,entified, and
any one tryieg to separate them was an enemy to his
country. He denied that there was any truth in.t,h!
cry e.f. a bread tax—it was not a bread to x upon English
wheat—it was a tax upon foreign when c and when they
had ruined and beggared the agriculterral classes of this
country, it would then, be dearer rib an it is now. The
Noble Earl then quoted the late ci'seumstances attending
the sulphur question, in order to e'dow the impolicy of 00
being dependent on a foreign ne'tion for an article of ne-
cessity. He thought both in.t wrests were entitled to the
same protection, and that it was the duty of the State t
riterpose equally for both. In their present situation,
whichever way they loaked, they saw a complication
of difficulties, but the Noble Lord must know that
if any measure could, be devised to increase those
difficulties, it would be. tampering with the Corn-laws. Ho •
did not complain of the Noble Earl briing forward t°lll7
question, but he did, complain of the Government
this an open question, which he thought, if the Noble vitssr::;,„s
jest, he ought
mor,nrc,ontLe
mariner
Aoi
nRb
whichaEv Ne done.—( ooinl
eeN.
had
da(
count retained the opinions he held last year on this
ibilde,ceaanif after the
alludedthe somewhat
(t Mrs
t
u n buer t cEoaursi
andby
reti
tilTel beenediide
tto9 eja,re,rld-
'troublepgol
eo
of
uponeFt dh
Ae iiLtri
Lords
this
dgussaur
subject,
ect,
h Conventions,fe
ifelt
Noble Earl, wno said that persons who had lived abroad,
Kith
aa
ffeeww °wbosredn's24aic°rOss.e.
the table in explanation. hwimerseelfneeot eel;
'Etc Earl of CLARENDON:continued. The l'itebsi.
Earl had repeated the very words that be bad useu:ssark,,,s
Although he freely admitted that what he might 95.:5"„:.;
might prove the truth of what the Noble Es':
had said respecting his unfitness ever to resent
a petition on the subject from Liverpool, he could assure
their Lordships he had not the presumption to think be
could add any weight to what the Noble Earl had said or)
introducing this motion.—( Hear, hear-) If the N'ihie
Earl's powerful, and to his mind most convincing speech,
should fail to induce the House to 'consider that it ws"
necessary to reconsider the laws which regulated the ill!:
portation of corn into this country, lee must indeed despair
of doing so. But this question was one which increased
every year in importance—one which would force itself
mo:e and more urgently upon their Lordships' consideration
—and as this was the first time he had had the opportualti°C etfoir: .41
delivering his sentiments in their Lc,rdships' House, be
.;;,;:f
trusted he should be permitted to state the reasons en 80,:
which he supported the motion of the Noble Earl. He 4;14
.:1
thought there could be no doubt t his question was one O'
9901 r
11-$
f_
annually increasing importance, whether they regfulled
the vast interests concerned in it, or looked at it in that ;.,/, 65;:;
point of view in which it had been placed by the
Noble_ es,
Earl— the mode in which the attac'e and defence was cone ..„,,
ducted by those persons who entertained different opinions-,
on the subject; and he thought it was the imperative duly lov:16"0
of Parliament to regard the effect of impressions on the .erti:kel
public mind with respect to the production
and price of the,
the necessaries of life. He thought Parliament ought auentltil
deal between the two classes--the agricultural and en anu-
facturieg—with impartiality; and be thought w;eh the
Noble Earl they should cockeye ur to restrain 0,9 exag-.lenr:
gerations of both ; of the. arriculturalists, em the one
,0021091;
hand, who maintained that without the, protection 010 c =
they now enjo) ed they could not 'maintain the
rfj,
value of the land, end discharge the 'ow-dens imposed
ituftricodsnedtt :teehmapiriutch, e
ople nf
acbtoohfuefro,oot,ll)
would,,e rha nd the m ufa,tu r s con•
• steel-atoll o t ese
Corn.laws be greatly reduced. He thought the Agri'
culturists, by exaggerating tbe adrarittiges they derioad
triti.t.cera,t?tin.
.es extent rehgo-