The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-25 00:00:00

• would say to us, in times of scarity, " You have thrown
your own lands out of cultivation, you have a starving
population, clamorous for food, and we know that, whatever
duties we choose to impose you must pay, for you can-
not do without our corn."—(Hear, hear.) If the state
required additiohal burdens to be laid on the people,
the agricultural interest would cheerfully bear their share
of such burdens.—(Hear, hear.) He would say to the,
Government lay them on, but do not pursue the fatal
course of raising this cry of cheap bread throughout the
country,:—(Hear, hear.) Did the Noble Lord wish to
see the price of wheat down to 355. a quarter, as it had
been in 1932, when the labouring classes had no employ-
ment ?—(Hear, hear,) Of what use would cheap bread
be to them if they had no employment ?—(Hear, hear.)
The manufacturers, he was convinced, were as much in-
terested in the maintenance of the Corn-laws as the
agriculturists, and he coincided in the opinion which had
been attributed to Mr. Chaplin.--(Hear, hear.)
Earl FITZWILLIAM cared little about the accusation
brought against him by the Noble Earl of having misre-
presented Mr. Chaplin, but the fact was he had not done
so. He had said Mr. Chaplin was labouring under a
misapprehension, and the Noble Earl seemed to labour
under a similar one, that the present price of corn in fo-
reign markets was to be taken as a criterion of what it
would be under an altered state of things, forgetting that
the first consequence of a demand for corn from the Eng-
lish market must be to raise the price abroad.—(Hear.)
Lord REDESDALE characterised any alteration of
' the Corn-laws as the spoliation of the largest interest in
the kingdom.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl said that
if a man could stock a farm under the proposed system
for 1,0001., whereas it would now cost 1,5001. to do the
same thing, he saw no great harm in it. That was the
same as saying there would be no great harm if a manu-
facturer should be able to purchase for 100,0001. a gentle-
man's estate which was now worth 150,000/.—(Hear.)
He believed that was what the manufacturers wished to
(lo—(Hear, hear)—that the object was, by these mea-
sures, wherever they had a mortgage, to obtain posses-
sion of the estate.—(Hear, hear.) All the great landed
interests, the landlords, the farmers, and the labourers
must all go together, for he was convinced that the
farmers and the labourers were equally interested with
the landlords in upholding the present Corn-laws.
Earl FITZWILLIAM should .be very sorry to have
uttered such a speech as the Noble Baron had just made.
—(Hear, hear.) He denied that such were the motives
of the manufacturers in seeking a repeal of the Corn-laws.
The Earl of HARDWICKE said it was too much to say
that the object of their Lordships was only to keep up
rents. Their Lordships were not the sole proprietors of
land, but they were anxious to protect the rights of
those who possessed a few acres only, upon which their
whole subsistence depended. The Noble Lord talked of
rent as if it was something that affected the Members cf
that House alone—as if it were not the staple of the
country.—(Cheers.) In time of war and financial dis-
tress, where did you turn but to the land, which bore
every burden ?—(Cheers.) Tax us (said the Noble
Lord), but do not destroy us.—(Cheers.) The Noble
Earl (Fitzwilliam) spoke not to their Lordships, but to
the reporters of the press and to the people out doors.

—(Clieers, and a laiigh.) Why did not the Noble Lord
, fix a day for the discussion of the whole question ?--
(Hear, hear.) He did indeed give notice once, but (said
the Noble Earl, repeatedly clapping his hands) he
flinched—he was choked off.—(Great laughter.) He
(Lord Hardwicke) deprecated the practice of making in-
cidental speeches of an inflammatory tendency upon this
subject night after night, and imputing sordid motives to
the Members of that House.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of RADNOR supposed that the reproof of
the Noble Lord was intended to apply to him as well as
to his Noble Friend (Earl Fitzwilliam), but he denied
that either of them intended to excite the people. He
still contended that the whole object of the Corn-laws
was to uphold rent. It was said that the object was to
employ labour in the cultivation of the land. Now, if
that were the case, why was the produce of grass land
protected ?—(Hear, hear.) There was a tax upon the
importation of horses, also upon the importation of asses.
—(Laughter.) Horned cattle were prohibited, so were
sheep and swine.—(Hear, hear.) Turkeys, fowls,
cheese, milk, and eggs were taxed.—(Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) There was not an article of food of any descrip-
tion which was not taxed. What could be the object of
that but to put money into the pockets of the landlords?
—(Hear, hear.) Not only the produce of the land, but
that of the seas was taxed.—(Hear, hear.) Now, this
was said to be done for the sake of protecting the
fisheries, and of encouraging a race of seamen.
How was the fact ? What fish was the most highly
taxed ? Why, salmon the fisheries of which
had nothing to do with educating semen. Se-
veral Noble Lords by means of this tax derived
as much as 4,0001. and 5,000/. a year from their
salmon fisheries. But what fish did their Lordships
think was exempt from taxation ? They would suppose
it was some ignoble fish ; but it was no such thing. It
was a fish that never was seen on the table of a poor
man. It was turbot.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Yes,
there was another fish not taxed. Was that a poor
man's fish ? No, indeed ;it was lobster—that their
Lordships might have sauce for their turbot.—(Laughter.)
This was not a matter for their Lordships to laugh at.
Hundreds of thousands of their countrymen were starv-
ing around them ; whilst every animal upon the earth,
every fish in the sea, and every bird of the air, was taxed
to prevent its coming to those famished people.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Earl then went through a series of
returns from 1802 to 1839, to show that the rate of
wages did not depend upon the price of food, but, like all
other prices, on the demand and the supply. In the
course of the years to which these returns referred wages
were at the highest when food was at the lowest, and on
the other hand when food was dearest wages were lowest.
It was also pretended that the effect of the Corn-laws
was to render this country independent of foreign coun-
tries for the supply of corn. Nothing could be more
contrary to the fact. In the years 1838, 1839, and 1840,
6,235,000 quarters of wheat were imported ; and since
the establishment of these pernicious and disastrous laws,
one-sixth of the corn consumed in this country was de-
rived from abroad. He believed the laws to be most mis-
chievous, and he would do all in his power to procure
their re al.

Lord...ASHBURTON hoped that the temper in which
the subject was discussed in that House and throughout
the country, would be a warning to the Noble Viscount
at the head of her Majesty's Government, that he should
not, without the most urgent r ecessity, agitate questions
which had the effect of setting every interest in the coun-
try in hostile array against every other.—(Cheers.) It
was a maxim with a statesman, to whom history has done
tardy justice (Sir R. Walpole), quieta non movere.—
(Cheers.) But the Noble Viscount acted upon the very
reverse of that maxim.—(Loud cheers.) But he would
not accuse the Noble Lord of throwing the country into
agitation, for tke sake of covering his weakness in both
Houses of Parliament.—(Cheers.) As the Noble Lords
opposite contended that the wages of labour did not
depend upon the price of food ; he would beg to refer to
the practice of the manufacturers, when the price of food
.was low. They collected labourers from all parts of the
country to compete with those already in employment.—
(Hear.) In their petitions upon the very'question of the
Corn-laws, they made it a subject of complaint, that the
high price of food compelled them to pay high wages,
and prevented them from competing with those countries
in which food was cheaper.—(Hear.) He read an ex-
Apia from a pamphlet of Lord John Russell, in which
the Noble Lord pronounced political philosophy to be an
awful thing—(a laugh)—upon themost important points on
which no two writers were agreed—this question of the
relation of wages to the price of food being the most dif-
ficult and the most disputed.—(Cheers.) In the same
pamphlet the Noble Lord (J. Russell) deprecated any
interference with the Corn-laws.—(Hear and a laugh.)
He (Lord Ashburton) was of opinion that, if the people
of this country would have food at the same price as
other countries, they must be content to live as the
people of other countries ; and it was to be remembered
that Mr. Jacob, in his report to the Government stated
that the people in the east of Europe all lived upon
black bread, and that he never saw white bread on the
East side of the Rhine.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord then
went into a comparison of the quantities and kinds of food
consumed by the mass of the people in this country, in
France, and Germany, to show that the condition of the
people of England was, in respect to food and comfort,
vastly superior to that of the people on the Continent.
He contended, therefore, that the system had conduced
to the good and happiness of the nation at large, and
ought not rashly to be upset topsy-turvy.--(Cheers.)
The Earls of RADNOR and FITZWILLIAM ex-
plained.

- Lord PORTMAN brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Brighton and Shoreham Railway, which
was ordered to be re-committed to-morrow.

Lord YARBOROJGH presented a number of peti-
tions from Wigan, and other places, against the repeal of
the Corn-laws.

The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented petitions
from Paisley, and other places, in favour of free trade.
Lord MELBOURNE presented a great number of pe-
titions from Dundee, and other places, for a moderate
duty upon imported corn.
Lord RODEN presented petitions from Hereford and
Essex, against alteration of the Corn-laws.
Lord SONDES presented similar petitions from Kent.
Their Lordships then Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 24.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly Mom Four
o'Clock.

_ ----...
Mr. Rawson, from the Poor-law Commissioners,
brought up papers.
Mr. BERNAL brought up the Reports of the Com-
mittees on the Leeds and Selby Road Bill, the Gourdon
Harbour Bill, the Olveston Inclosure, and the Great
Leinster and Minister Railway Bill.
Mr. GREEN brought up the Reports of the Com-
mittees on the Totnes and St. Helen's Small Debts' Bill.
On the motion of Sir B. CHICHESTER, the Barn-
staple and Braunton Roads Bill was read a third time and
passed.
On the motion of Mr. BLAKE the South Western
Railway Bill, was read a third time and passed.
Sir D. NORREYS brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Ipswich Docks Bills.
On the motion of Mr. LOCKHART, the Shotts and
Welsontown Railway Bill was read a third time, and
passed.
Mr. GILLON presented petitions from Kilmarnock
and Renfrew in favour of the propositions of the Govern.
ment ; and from Greenock, against any alteration in the
present system of banking in S'cotland.
Mr. LEADER presented a petition agreed to at a
public meeting of the inhabitants of Westminster. The
petitioners complained of the laws which enhanced the
price of provisions, which appeared to them a violation of
national justice--that the Corn-laws were enacted to secure
high prices to the landlords and to cripple the trade,
commerce, and manufactures of the country—that legis-
lation for class interests as they regarded the laws relating
to corn, timber, and sugar, would no longer be endured
bv- the people, and they prayed the immediate repeal of
all taxes affecting the necessaries of life. The Hon.
iliewher alsO presented petitions to the same effect from