The Sun.
London, England, 1841-08-28 00:00:00

of the Corn-laws. But, Sir, the tranquillity of the country
has not been disturbed by our Reform Bill.--(Hear, hear.)
'1 he Right Hon.llaron. t said our
,exports were now greater
than before ; then I say that the great changes, of which we
have been the authors, has not given rise to that hurtful agi-
tation which was predicted. But, on the other hand, we are
assailed by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, because
we, as be said, had not been true to the principles on which
we set out ; and Ise said, that bad .we continued in the progres-
sive tract, we might stiil have continued iu power,
backed. by the country,—(Hear.) I can only say,
in inswer to that charge, that . I really hardly know how
gentleman who sets up for so much political purity could ex-
pect us to pursue that course, which Was against our conscien-
tiousnpinians.—(Cheers. ) We were of opinion that conti-
.nnal change was dangerous, thereforewe were obliged to op-
pose the propositions of thej Hon. Alember for Finsbury, in
-1837; and-ciihers made by other Members since. Suppose I
wire.to.,saythat if the Hon. Member Bath, that if he were to
profess hlinself a thorough Consorvative, he might rise to a
high station under •the Government about to be formed, he
would tell me that he would not consistently approve of their
opinions. 'That.-is my answer. and when he was told that
litformers had become lukewarm in consequence cf such con •
duet, I tell him that I was quite aware of the fact. I did not
expect that ;ealous Reformers would remain in our favour
when we timed it our duty to pause. If the Hon. Member
Member for Bath csuld prove that we ought to have taken the
coure he pointed out, if we be driven from office in conse-
quence of not doing so, as it would have been entirely against
our conscience, then I say welcome the charge. We thought
our opioions, if carried into effect, would prove beneficial to
the country, and if we had a certainty of retaining power by
entertainino opinions, or ncting upon them, which we thought
dangerous to the country, it would have been unanimously re-
jected. Well, then, Sir, I come to the opposition of the
Right . Honourable Baronet, anl .obsei ve that while
he has gone gravely over the different subjects of
the Budget he had no more committed himself
then he did:before.—( Loud cheers and counter-cheers.) We
have never asked him for the full developement of' his measures
—we never asked for any details—we never proposed to him to
go into-details—all they wanted was;to know the general prin-
ciples on which he proposed to act.—(Chew. s.) We say there
is evidently a de—ciency in the revenue—there is manifest dis-
tress in trade. Poverty among the community, and we think
that an approach to toe principles of free trade will tend to li-
quidate the deficiency, rnd dispel the gloom which hangs over
trade. To this day, to this hour, the Right Hon, Gentleman
has tievi-T made any declarstion on this subjec'. He tells us to
qe sure that he is not expected to give any general opinion,
but that there is one principle to which he will achere, namely,
the sliding scale. Now, I reallo am at a loss to conceive
by the Right Hon. Gentleman, taking every other matter ireo
con,ideration, leaving himself quite open with resp:et to almost
every other measure he should be to especially wedded to this
sliding scale. It as though he had thus addressed his Sove.
reign and his country, " To be sure with regard to the Roman
Catholics, their admission to power I thought would be the
destruction of the. Church and the ruin of the Coostitution ;

theynit
As to the Reform of Parliament, 1 thought it vvould have its
to the entire destruction of the Monarchy, and the complete
ruin of our institutions : it has passed, but still the institu-
tions somehow or other flourishes, arid none of those institu-
tines which were threatened have suffered the smallest injury ;
and I am so perfectly satisfied witn this Reform Act, that I
mean to make it the guide of my conduct, and to adhere liter-
ally to its p.ovisions. But these things are small matters.
The admission of Roman Catholics to Parliament, the admis-
sion of Dissenters to civil and religious liberty, the de-
struction of some fifty or sixty rotten boroughs, and
the admission of numerous classes to civilization—these,
perhaps, are trifling matters, upon which changes of opi-
nion may be well admitted ; but the sliding scale is a
principle which I will never give up. The sliding scale is so
necessary, that come v hat will—be the change in the Corn-
laws what it will—l have not precluded myself from any change
whatever, or that the sliding scale be kept inviolate ; to that
sacred principle 1 devote myself, and I will never sacrifice it.
(Hear, hear, and laughter, from the Liberal benches.) lam
extrem.ly sorry to differ so much from the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, but I must say that all the information I have acquired,
, all that I have read in the writings of enlightened men on the
subject of the Corn-laws, has only convinced me more and
more that that graduated sliding scale, to which the Right
Hon. Gentleman is so much attached, is the main cause of the
evil which at present exists.—( Hear, hear.) If you have a
fixed duty, no doubt you have a tax upon corn, but you may
have a certainty in trade. If you have a moderate fixed duty,
you will have a constant admission of corn, admitted at all
times, with a constant market in this country.—(Hear,
hear.) But if you have a sliding scale, you will have
no such market. Now I take the liberty of asking, in the
first place, how this sliding scale accords with the general
notions of trade which the Right Hon. Gentleman proposes
to hold? The Right Hon. Gentleman read the Speech from
the Throne in 1825, which recommended to this House mea-
sures founded upon the principles of free trade, and he declared
himself to have been one of the advisers of that speech. In the
course of that year there was a comment upon that speech, not
only by Mr. Huskisson but another great anthority, the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer of that day, Mr. Robinson, who was
very much attached at that time to the principles of free trade.
He said, " The House, I am happy to say, has gone along with
me in promoting this great object, and I trust that the country
is by this time convinced of the good sense which dictates the
policy of geAing rid both of positive prohibitions and prohibi-
tory duties. Much has already been done on this subject, but
anuch remains to be done, and it is the intention of
my Right Hon. Friend near me—(Mr. Huskisson)—to take
an early opportunity of submitting to the House a plan for a
moderate and reasonable reduction of the remaining prohibi-
tory duties, and thus to strike, as it were, from our recollec-
tion all those errors and prejudices which have so long restricted
the industry of the world." Unhappily those prohibitory duties
so far from being struck out from our recollection, are before
us at this day.—( Hear, hear.) But that declaration of Lord
Ripon was received with very great approbation in this House,
and one Hon. Member (the Hon. Member for Wiltshire) de-
clared that these restrictions ought to be taken away; that
there ought to be free trade in the world ; and that if there
were free trade he was convinced the country would rise to a
degree of prosperity which it had never before reached. Great
changes had taken place since that period.—( Hear, hear.) it
appeared that the Noble Lord to wham he had alluded was es-
pecially opposed to the doing away with prohibitoryiuties, whilst
the lion. hart. had lately presided at a dinner at which he had
strongly attacked the Ministers on the same ground.—(Hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that the prserit Corn-
law is founded upon that very recommendation. 1 think that
law comes under the description which Lord Ripen then gave
of prchibitory duties. During the years 1834, 1835, and
1836 the duty—was 47ii a quarter. -Now a duty of es. a
quarter is nen her more nor less than a prohibitory duty. You
may tell me it is right that there should be a prohibitory duty;
that when corn is cheap it is right to have prohibitions. Yes,
that may be, but do not tell me with one breath that you are
going to do away with all prohibitory duties, and next impose
a duty of 475. upon corn in the course of four years. It seems
to me that. it is this prohibitory duty which destroys all regu-
lar commerce in corn. Speculators in corn are enabled, by fic-
titious sales, to lower the duty, and to raise the averages, as
soon as they have entered, as in the present year 900,000
quarters, or, as in another year, one million of
quarters at once. They th; n take an opposite course of pro-
ceeding ; they send bad and wet wheat into the market. By
these means they raise the averages and lower the duties, and
hating acted against the farmer in the first instance, they act
against the consumer in the second. It is shown by the re-
'turns made to the Board of Trade, that while the corn averages
have been rising verp high at one time, and falling very low at
another, the price, as between the farmer and his customer, did
not vary to any perceptible degree. '1 her efore the result of
this intricate and artificial scheme is clearly to promote job-
bing in the trade. I own that the evils of this system seem to
me not to be corrected by any alteration in the averages, or by
any new alteration in the sliding scale. It seems to
me that we are proceeding upon a false system
in endeavouring, by a false system, to defeat the natural ope-
rations of trade, and that we must abandon it altogether, and
resort to a fixed duty, 'allowing persons who wish to deal in
this article, to send their orders abroad, to bring it to thisandcountry, and to dispose of it as they would dispose of any
article of commerce. There are 900,000 quarters of corn in
bond, which will be entered in the course of September. If a
merchant were to send to America for corn, and it
were to arrive after that period, the speculation would be ruinous
He would be obliged to keep it mose than a year, and he must
therefore be a great loser. Why, I say this is not only injurious
to trade, but that it is evidently injurious to the great body of
the people. Tell me if you will, that you wish to be independ-
ent of foreign supply. But that is at once shown to be an ab-
surdity, because in the last ten years you have been
introducing, on an average, several millions of quarters a year,
The notion of being independent of foreign supply is one which
ought to be now obsolete. It is one which cannot be enter-
tained whether you have the prosent Corn-lags or any other
Corn-laws which you may establish. [int you do not mean to
' be independent of foreign supply, end sf you say that a portion
of your people must expect to subsist on foreigu corn, let them
get that foreign corn at an equal and steady price. Let them
not pay a larger addition of taxation than you profess to pay for
it. With respect to a fixed duty, the Right Hon. Gentleman
says, supposing you had a fixed duty, could you venture to keep
it up when corn had risen to '2os. or 100 s. per quarter. I
would say, that the remission of duty in that case
would he advantageous to the merchant, ust as now the rise of
Bs. or 9s. in the price is advantageous to the foreigner, and not
to the consumer. That is my belief. At the same time, I
would say, that if there was a real scarcity, you would not be
able to preserve the duty at 18s. per quarter. But I think that
the first answer to the Right Hon Gentleman is that which he
himself suggested—that if you have a regular trade in corn,
you would very seldom have any actual scarcity. That seems
to me a priuciple which does not require argument, but which
is almost self-evident, that in proportion as you restrict the
price field from which your supplies are drawn, in that propor-
tion do you cause fluctuation in price. If you confine the supply
of the people of this country to a single country, you wiil
have a greater fluctuation than now, and, according to
the same analogy, much greater fluctuation must occur in the
present state of supply, than !if you allow corn to come in from
Holland. Poland, America, &c. With the wealth and manu-
facturing industry of this country, with a people willing and
anxious to exert themselves, I can scarcely believe you would
incur any danger of scarcity. If that danger did occur you
might then have a power in your Act of Parliament, which
would not be a power dependent an averages, but giving the
Queen ih Council the means of furnishing a cheap supply. If
you say that the price of corn is to be 725. or 735. a quarter,
you could then have a similar power to order that the corn be
raised to the amount. That is a scheme that has been adopted
with regard •„ to sugar, corn, and other commodities. I recol-
lect myself. for two or three years Mr. Huskisson produced a
Bill, by which he proposed to have all corn in bond at a lower
duty than Wa3 imported by the existing law, in order to pre-
vent scarcity. With regard to those averages, you may have
corn for five years at 40s. per quarter, and the next five years
at dos. per quarter, and you may state that the average
price is 60s- ; but, with regard to the consumer,
it is totally different. The raain object which I look to is net
the additional cheapness of corn, but the additional trA-
ployment of the people. With respect to wages, it
tins been said, if you change the Corn-laws wages will be lower.
That is a complete fallacy. There would he such a demand
for employment that wages would tic really higher and the men,
which are now almost in a state of (testi ution, would then
be able to get employment, and change the produce of
their !:industry for the productions of other countries.
With respect to the party opposite, there were various divisions
among them. I have heard language, of the must contradic-
tory nature in this House, from Members of that party.--
( Hear, hear, hear.) 'the Honourable Gentleman who
moved the amendment, when addressing the electors
of the West Riding of Yorkshire said that his great object was
to amend the Poor-laws. Confinement of the poor in the
workhouses he held to be unnecessary. There is, in my opi-
nion, a total stiff, rence of language between the leaders
and followers of that party on that subject. But,
I say, Sir, that after all this, the Right Hon. Gentleman
goes into the West Riding of Yorkshire, and raises a cry
against Lord Morpeth, and on the cry has ejected the honest
servant of the Crown—( Oh, oh)—and he now comes down to
the House with a proposition containing not one word about
that law, but only having for its object to put out of office the
present Ministers, and to substitute for them a Noble Duke
and the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth, who arc declared
supporters of the Bill. It was by means of misrepresentation
on that question, and fifty other misinterpretations against us,
that a majority has been made up on the other side.—(Cheers.)
We have carried a tithe law, by which the clergyman obtains a
opt* income without the- unseemly contentions which he