The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-16 00:00:00

MORNING E DIT i.ON

assertion that the poor were not interested in the aboli•
Lion of the Corn-laws. No greater advantage could be
conferred on the poorer classes than effecting such a
change in the system as would ensure a steadiness of
price. At present the landlord might- defraud a tenant
who was about to take a farm and did not understand
the system of averages, and by exhibiting 'to him the
list of averages returned to Parliament. It was not the
farmer, but the • speculator who pocketed the averages
returned to Government. The Hon. Gentlemen oppo-
site ought to admit that it was fir the
interest of the farmer in making out his lease
to have some arrangement made to insure a steadiness
of price. it appeared to him (Mr. Hindley) that it stood
to reason the more the means of production were ex-
tended, the more likely were they to have a steadiness
of profit. If the county of Buckingham alone were to
supply the market, you would not have steadiness of
price,' nor would the- firmer of Buckinghamshire derive
much advantage. The same observation applied to the
plan of confining the supply of the market to England
alone. He would now trouble the House with sonic
facts. In the years 1817, 1818, and 1819, the price of
co:n per quarter was 41. 14s. 9d., 41. 4s. Id., and
31. I3s. In the years 1821, 1822, and 1823, the price was
21. 16s. 2d., 21. 4s. 7d., and 2/. I3s. 3d. per quar-
ter. Then trade was good, and the labourer

was content and happy. In the years 1829 and 18:30
corn per quarter was 31.65.3 d., and 3/. 4s. ad.. Then trade
was in a deplorable state. In the yeare 1833. 1834, and
1835, the price of corn varied from 21. 12s. 11d. to
11. 19s. 4d., and in the years 1833, 1839, and 18-10, corn
was sold, per quarter, at 31. 45. 7d. 31. los. Bd., and
31. 6s. 4d. In those latter years trade was in a most
wretched and deplorable state compared with that of the
preceding years. That was merely the progress of
cause and effect. If they took away from a man the
money he would spend in clothine, manufacturers -must
meet with but a slow demand. But the evil to the la-
bourer in the manufacturing districts did not end there.
It was not merely that he was unable to provide him-
self with
.clothes, but in manufacturing districts inge-
nuity was put upon the rack. Every proprietor was
intent upon reducing his expense by doing away with all
superfluous hands. He joined wheels together, and he took
every possible means of lessening the number of
of hands, and thus a large number of persons were
thrown out of employment and obliged to look to the
precarious subsistence of charity. Individuals had fre-
quently applied to him in a most distressed state in those
manufacturing districts, stating that their employers
were obliged to couple wheels together, and thus put
them out of employment, and that they were often twen-
ty-four and forty-eight hours without tasting bread.
Now, if corn were brought into the country from abroad,
it would enable them to overcome all difficulties
by increasing the supply. The census of 1831
proved that there was little diminution in the nums
be: of persons , employed in agriculture. His .(Mr.
Hindiey's) opinion was that do what they might they
would not have a diminution in that class of
labourers. The great injustice done the labouring
classes was first making them poor and then punishing
them for being so. lie (Mr. II.) was for doing away
with the Poor-law:; and amending the Corn-laws. Beth
sides of the House seemed determined to adhere to both
laws ; but those who upheld both laws were like persons
who tied a man's hands behind him, and then whipped
him because he could not earn his subsistence. Up-
wards of forty millions sterling had been spent on rail-
ways. Had those million's come from the landed interests?
• Let those gentlemen who sat on railway Committees
answer the question.. Had they not found that those
millions came from the commercial interests, and that
the only part the landed gentry took in those schemes
was to squeeze as much money as possible out
.- of the pockets of tile persons engaged in railway
speeulations, fur the land sold for the line of roads ?
He thought the landed gentlemen were making but a
poor return to the manufacturers when they then refused
to let them exchange their manufactures for corn. He
(Mr. H.). thought the country had a right to know
from the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth
• whether he intended to better trade, to continue the
Poor-law, and abide by the present system of Corn-laws ?
—whether he would have a sliding scale or a fixed duty
It was but right that the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite,
the Member for Pembroke (Sir J. Graham), who was
acquainted, no doubt, with the intentions of the Right
Hon. Baronet, should tell the House what they in'lended
to do. If that Right Hon. Gentleman's party were to
come into the enjoyment of power, and bring forward
treasures in conformity with the views which he (Mr.
IL) had put ihrward that night—however lie might •
differ from them on their general policy—he should
give them his decided support. Party spirit had
been said to be of great benefit to this coun-
try, but he confessed that he did not enter into that
sentiment. He was afraid that in maintaining they
were Whigs, Radicals, and Tories, they sometimes
forgot that they were Englishmen.—(Loud cheers.)
He wished the love of country prevailed over the love
of party, and to see the great object of the House to
promote the happiness and well-being of the great body
of the people. Ile said they could not do injustice to
to the working classes without producing injury to them--
selves. The surplus population of the agricultural districts,
which had been great in the manufacturing districts, on
the distress of trade and ruin of manufactures would
return to their own birth-place, end become a charge
upon the land, and then neither by immigration, emi-
gration, or by the New Poor-law, would they bring back
England to her I'm-met-state of prosperity.—(llear.)
Sir F. BURDETT said, with respect to the motion of
the Hon. Member for Binning-hem, he could have no
possible objection to it, except it could be supposed not
to express views which its promoters had in view. Every
gentleman partook in the sympathy that was manifested
for the manufacturing distress that prevailed ; all they
watn.eti was souse one to point ont to them a remedy for
the evils complained of. At the same time he had rea-
son to complain of members of that House coming down
and making the sort of speeches they did, conveying in-
vectives or insinuations against the upper classes, and
representing them as bloodsuckers of the poor.—(llear,
hear.) He thought the proper course for these gentle-
men to have adopted would have been to have moved
for a committee to inquire whether the distress they com-
plained of was capable of immediate or any relief. The
Hon. Gentleman had brought this question into a very
narrow compass—he stated all this distress and the evils
accompanying it resulted from taxation. He could not
believe that taxation could have any such effect, but if
it had it '.as a matter that ought to be inquired into.
But these matters ought not at all to have been mixed
up with this great question of the Corn-laws, which
seemed to him to be made the pith of the question. It
was called a great monopoly, but there was no country
less burdened with such monopolies than England, and
it happened that during the last three years under the
operation of the existing Corn-laws a great deal more was
imported than previous to the passing of the Corn-law of
1815, when the trade was free. It was a great delusion on
the people at large, to make them believe that all the
distress existing was to be attributed to the monopoly of
the landowners. They should looh: at the causes that
produced that distress, such as the stagnation of trade,
and the markets from which our manufacturers were
shut out for want of protection by the Government of
this country. We had lost all our trails with Poland—
(Ministerial cheer:)—with Centrai India since the affair
of the Vixen, and we had also lost our trade with Hol-
land. fur want of due protection from the Govern-
. ment. lle did not believe that the manufacturers
of the eountry were so ignorant of their own interests as
not to know that it depended upon the agricultural in-
terest as its parent, without which it could have no exist-
ence. If they destroyed the landed interest, the conse-
quence would' he that they would have a poor and meagre
manufacturing interest. The strength of government
was founded on that of the agricultural interest, and it
was this that had made England the first country in the
world.—(" Oh, oh :" from the Ministerial benches.) He
said it was the wealth and stability of the agricultural
interest that had inadeEngland the first county yin the worle
The great trade of the country was that which was car-
ried on between the town and country, and the foreign trade
was slight iu comparison with it. He did not consider
this as .a question of a Corn-law at all. It was a ques-
tion of administration of the ctemntry.. Ministers were
driven to their last shift, but the people of England
comprehended it, and would not be deluded by so mani-
fest a bubble. It was absurd to speak of a bread-tax,
because the tax was not paid by the consumer.—(lroni-
cal cheering.) Foreigners who brought corn into this
country paid a tax on it, because it could not be other-
wise admitted ; but it waste who paid the tax, and nut
the consumer.—(lronical cheers.) He thought that it'
there was free trade of any kind, it shoulu be all free
trade—(Cheers anti laughter)—and he should be happy
to see it, because he was one of those who was
convinced in his own mind of the advantages that would
be derived from free trade.—(Cheers and laughter.) But
this was matter of consideration, and- not to be handled
rashly, since they had gone on so long in a course of
protection. He thought it was most absurd in a manu-
facturing country like this to lay taxes upon raw mate-
rials—(Cheers)—and that if there was any part of the
industry of the country that should be protected from
burdens it was this portion of it.—(Hear, hear.) To
revert to the Corn-laws he denied that there was any
protection to the landed interest at all.—(Cheers and
laughter.) If he thought so his opinion ought to be in
deference to that of a large portion of his consti-
tuents, .and he should vote against them. When he
airs member for Westminster, his constituents were ap-
prehensive of a shop tax, but he pacified them by show-
ing them that the tax would not fall on the .1, but on
their customers.—(Loud cheers and lue6ater.) He
thought this subject ought not to be made a political
matter of, but be considered in a perfectly calm and un-
impassioned way, and he most sincerely thought the
Ministry had incurred a very great responsibility by their
conduct on the subject.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he confessed that when the
Hon. Baronet rose to address the House, lie felt more
than ordinary curiosity to know what were his senti-
ments, because it was now many yeare ago since
he had heard the Honourable Baronet expresss
any opinions on matters of trade, and because he
remembered the valuable assistance which the Hon.
Baronet had given, when the representative of West-
minster, to those who opposed the present Corns-laws—
(Cheers)—acid also the support which he had given to
the measures of Mr. Huskisson, in the most mrqualified
.manner, stating, at the same time, that his own opinions
were decidedly in favour of free trade, and that he was
Prepared to go any length in support of those opinions
--(Cheers.) But he (Mr. Labouchere) confessed, that. aideceserrlviesdr7hineglto the Hon. Baronet with the attention he
at a loss to understand what were the
Opinions that lac entertained on these subjects.—
(Cheers.) The Re,
he must bow to then. Baronet said, that on these matters
shire ; but, the osPeteous of his constituents in Wilt-
impossible for- bin' to pew, he appeared as if it were
representative of ?I-get that he was once the
gave one half of Luivsuster, and therefore he
the doctrines of free trade, gush in
support of
support of those of monopoly. a(dii, one half
not unusual in that House to argue during; It was
„ one half of speech in support of one side of a question,
and the other