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

y

ti

lie subject, I have been most forcibly struck by a document
which appeared in the first Report of the roor.law Commis-
sioners, giving an account of the state of manufacturing dis-
tress in the year 1835 ; and if such things can exist—if such a
stimulus cut be given to production as was the case--I fear the
inevitable consequence will be, that when a check arises—when
the ma rkets are encumbered with produce—when a war in China
—a war in Syria—and disturbances in Europe affect the state
of .supplies—then there must be a recurrence of that distress,
general and individual, which has been depicted in such forci-
ble terms in the course of the present debate. But this is the
accoient which Dr. Key, a gentleman possessing the confidence
of her Majesty's Government, and holding, I believe, at present
an (once of great influence, but who was employed on the Poor-
law Commission—this is the interesting and extraordinary ac-
count which he gives of the state of manufacturing industry in
1835, , and I recommend the whole document to the attention
of Host. Members. Be says, " Within two years 7,507-horse
pevrerhave been brought into operation." Ile says the addi-
tional outlay upon mills would amount to 3,754,000/. And in
viewing the universal demand for labour at the time, he asks,
from whence must the population required by manufactures be
derived.? And what is the remedy which lie suggests? Esta-
blished agents must, he says, be stationed at Manchester to
encourage emigration. He then makes this astounding
statement with respect to the increase of population in a single
township in Manchester. In 1801 the population was 1,e05,
in 1811 the populotion was 1,806, in 1821 it was 3,335, and
in 1831 it was 7,132. Dr. Key asks how is this to be ac-
counted for, and tells us that of the 7,000, 5,000 must
be emigrants into that one township. In June, 1835,
Messrs. 11. and C. Ashworth stated that it was calcu-
lated that nearly twenty thousand persons would be required
for one of our manufacturing cities alone—Staley Bridge.
See when you have got this population what takes place—a
population which you cannot prevent 'without drying
the national resources, and without interfering with
the invent on of macEnery. When you Lace thus got
five thousand 'new hands and a new population at
Stoney Bridge, and when agents at Manchester have called
this pepulstion into existence, extraordinary ingenuity devises
some mode of curtailing labour, prices fail, and the conse-
quence is extreme poverty and suffering. Now, is not that a
natural state of things ? And may not such things occur even
after an alteration in the Corn-laws, or their total repeal ?
Whet I do deprecate is that extravagant view which you take
of the remedies and advantages to be derived from a repeal of
those laws. It had been said that there was no demand for
manufactUres on account of the Corn-laws, and that our
trade could not prosper, inasmuch as we could not exchange
'our goods for foreign corn. But during the four years
which had preceded that extraordinai y development of
manufacturing prosperity, the whole amount of corn im-
portectioto this country was merely 400,000 quarters. I must
also observe, that I have no doubt but the unwise and impro-
° vident extension of credit was another source of the evil com-
plained-of. • You must bear in mind all these things, and look
-upon the question in a philosophic point of view. You must
remember there are other causes besides the Corn-laws which
account for the pressure on our manufactures ; and you must
not unwisely attribute this evil to the existing Corn-laws.—
( Hear, bear.) I have entered at some length into this subject,
and I am sure that its deep importance will justify me in the
eyes of the House.—(Cheers.) But I shall now pa's to other
topics. I cannot, I must say, acquiesce in the Address moved
by her Majesty's Ministers, If 1 implied my approbation of
the specific measures involved in the Budget frosts which I had
formerly expressed my dissent, I should be irriplyingaconfidene.:e
-in a Ministry which 1 do not feel.—(Opposition cheers.) I do not
think the Noble Lord can quarrel with me as to the proceeding
which I adopt. I think the Noble Lord will feel that it is far
more fair and more just, after the appeal which had been
made to the people, to come at once to the issue, whether her
Majesty's Government have or have not the confidence of the
country, than to permit the Noble Lord to remain in ignorance
linen that point, and take the ordinary course of thwarting him
' in his future operation. An Hon. Gentleman who spoke last
;night, the Hon. Member for Finsbury, who does some time
seem to me affected with the most extraordinary and senti-
mental oratory—(Laughter)—and who appears to suffer more
from a feeling of romantic and chivalrous loyalty than any
other Gentleman in this House—(Renewed laughter)—but
he says that we are acting in opposition to the Queen's wishes,
and moving an amendment to the address. Strange does
trine this on the part of a Whig or even of a Radical.—.
(Hear, bear, and laughter.) That we are* to be pre-
* vented from performing a duty in respectfully submitting
an opinion to the Sovereign, for fear of contravening her pri-
vate wishes ! The Hon. Gentleman contrasted the course
which I am now pursuing with that which was pursed by my
opponents in 1835. The Hon. Member has spoken of the
generous treatment which I then experienced—( Laughter on
the Opposition benches)—the forbearance which was mani-
fested towards me, and the earnest desire that was evinced to
Permit me deliberately and fairly to lay before the House those
measures for the public good which 1 prepared ; and the
lien. Gentleman added that all this ought to prevent me from
taking so indecent and so hostile a step as to declare a want
ssf coufidencu in Ministers upon the first day of the session.
But I cannot but remember the opposition I received on the
choice of a Speaker, and the declaration of the Right Hon.
'Gentleman opposite (Sir J. C. Hobhouse) that having been
defeated on the question of the Speakership, I ought at
once to have resigned.--(Loud cheers.) But there
was more in store on the succeeding day, for an
amendment was moved upon the Address, which censured me
in direct terms for having advised the Crown to dissolve the
Parliament. What affectation of the Hon. Gentleman now to
come forward and say, " True, there was an attempt to cen-
sure you, but no want of confidence was implied.—( Hear.)
That was but the abstract, dispassionate, and impartial view of
great patriots of the single measure of a dissolution, and you,
the unhappy object of their censure, are to continue in power,
-not considering the motion as an indication of the slightest
disgrace."—(Cheers and laughter.) Now, I can destroy that
illusion by the authority of the Right lion. Gentleman him-
self, because last year, speaking of this very question of a
Want of confidence, he made use of these words :—" He
(sieaning Sir Robert Peel) advised the King to dissolve the
Parliament. I do not deny his right to give that advice ;
but it was the right of the next Parliament
to give their opinion upon that advice. We
know what that opinion was —it condemned the
advice given by the Right Hon. Gentleman in that moat es-
e.ential particular. The House of Commons, by a majority. of
seven, pronounced a verdict against the Right Hon. Gentle-
man; a verdict which amounted to a vote of want of confi-
dence—(Cheers)—as mush as any vote could do." Now, I pe-
eve that was the right construction of the matter : it wasmeant
-a vote of want of-confidence, and a perfectly legitimate mode
it was of trying the question..--(Cheers.) It was but a short
trial, I must say. lam proud, however, to say, that I retained
Power until I found that the sense of the House was against
.ans ; but, oa din first great defeat I' experienced I instantly
,eve way. I;(fought the battle of the Speakership, and other
'battles, and I did not think that, upon the first indication of
dissent and distrust upon the part of the House, a Minister
should resign office.—(Cheers.) No, ho owes obliga-
tions to the Crown, which must be reconciled
with the obli-ation he owes the House and the country. I
knell Son after that th© fate of my :Government was de-
'ermined, and I had always resolved upon the first obstruction
tomy measures to taket he inevitable course of resignation. At
de same time I did not think it was unfit that I should continue
in 'power so long as I could entertain a hope of support from
the House. But, I must add, that my course was entirely
different from that lately pursued by her Majesty's Govern-
ment. It is now upwards of two years since the Government
declared their opinion that they did sufficiently possess the
confidence of this House to enable them satisfactorily to dis-
charge the public duties.—(Hear, hear.) Ido believe that
ttheir subsequent retention of power, in defiance of constitu-
hl°_,nd principles, has weighed more with the constituent
—( Opposition cheers)—than any other misdeeds
insp,i, the part of her Majesty's Government. The
.;°ole Lord at the head of the Government
sseclared that the last Government was an inefficient one,
and the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies had stated
that the interests of the couutry were exposed to hazard by a
overnment attempting to continue in office after they had lest
the confidence of this House. Those wards made an impression
en the public mind, and their conduct was, in my opinion, an
l'aslication of that just constitutional principle, a principle.
'which every friend of popular Government, ind of the repre-
entative system, ought to hold in honour, namely,
that the favour and support of the Sovereign
'ought not to maintain for a long and indefinite
Period a Government in existence against the will of the repre-
sentatives of the people.—( Cheers. ) it does compromise the
prerogatives of monarchy so to retain a Ministry, because it
aeahibits the prerogative of the monarch without its just in-
nence, when disregarded by the people, and it does exhibit
the House of Commons as wanting its just influence when it
42ah thwart the measures and obstruct the acts, but cannot de-
cide 00 the fate of a Ministry.—( Cheers.) And when you
appealed to the constituency, to that constituency composed
Of 31. the middling class, selected as being less liable to undue
ttPttence when you made your appeal to them,
list in your', opinion you were maintaining your
power at the hazard of great interests, when you found
ir representatives declaring whether, right or wrong, that
Sou did tot possess their 'confidence—when you then appealed
4° the people, what did they do ? They vindicated the consti-
gltional principle, and confirmed the decision of the House of
Commons. Sir, that opinion I firmly believe is unfavourable
to the Government. You say the opinion of the people is un-
stable and fastidious. Why these are unjust reflections, I must
_l(lnsider, on public opinion, and those whom we consider as its
YePositaries. I cannot believe these accounts of the consti-
uency of England. I cannot believe they are so disqualified to
ferns a judgment on the conduct, character, and acts of
Public men, but this is certain, that their judgment must be
decisive if you mean to maintain the popular principle of Go.
vernment. Why might not 1 have said, in 1835, 1 have pro-
Posed no measures, it is very hard to condemn ma without

trial ? What would have been your reply—" The people have
decided against you, and in deference to the opinion of the
people you ought not to remain
holding office and public trust.
submit to public opinion."
'That is the constitutional doctrine,
and it is in deference to that principle that I have moved tin?.amendment. On the consequences that may be supposed to re-
sult from your resignation
it is not for me to speculate. Others
have speculated on it. I contemplate with calmness,
without anxiety, hut with emfidence, whatever may be
not result. If power does not devolve on me I make
minlf power does devolve on me I shall ac-
andlllaint.
with the consciousness that I gained it by direct
i p
wnetitutional means.—(Loud cheers) But that I Dive
-1 to the voice of the poop!' of this country, and to the favour
'lf the Sovereien.—(Checrs.)
that I am told
p t that. in exercisng
of maintaining opower 1 must be the instrurnens
erroneous. Sir,
myself am supposed to consider a withinions my
p views of power, of the obligations it im o
it entails, and of the sacrifices it involves,-Iss; of the duties
ame little inclined
to add to those sacrifices by accepting with it discreditable
submissions.—(Cheers.) I am told I must be the ins:rutnent
°f effecting in Ireland the objects of certain parties, and
he was
Particularly of my friend, associate, and partizan, as
%ailed, who was said to ha"e offered insult to the religious
feelings of his fellow countrymen, by some appendix to a public
Work, I am not afraid to express my opinions on an act like
that I say there is no man in the House—that there is no
itornari Catholic in the House—who heard with deeper pain
that a gratuitous and unprovoked and ueneeesi.4ary insult had
been offered to the religious feelings of a great body of my
countrymen. If I cannot retain power, and if I must forfeit
ace by avowing such sentiments—if I cannot retain it except
°Y deferring to such feelings, I say at once that the day
un
which I relinquish potter rather than defer to such feelings
will he a ten times prouder day than that of my accession to it.
l--(Cheers.) If I do accept office it shall be by no intrigue_
iCheers)—by no unworthy concessions of constitutional prin-
l"cv—(CLeers)-- no unnatural and factious combinations of
Ih've men—honest men as I believe, but wha entertain ex-
trrnic opinions from which I dissent.—(Cheers). If I accept
Power it shall be by walking in the open light and direct path
of the 'Constitution ; if 1 exercise power it shall be on my own
conception, perhaps imperfect, perhaps mistaken, but my sin-
'ere com eption of public uty.—Cheers. ) That power I will
not hold nn less I can hold d
it consistently with the maintenance
of my own opinions ; and that power I will relinquish the ma-
meat I am satisfied that I am not supported by the confidence
Loaf House, and of the people of this country.—Cheers. )
J-ord J. RUSSELL--Sir, if I have to request the attention
°ti. the Reuse at this late hour, and after a late debate, I must beg
to remember that it was not until a late hour in the fourth
,to
debate that any leader of the party opposed to her Ma-
Jeaty's Government rose to justify a vote expressing want of
confidence in the Government.—( Cheers.) I complain not of
tlie motion made. I think that the very first opportunity, on
the.,__raeeting of a new Parliament, is the best opportunity fur
"rding the question as to whether the party now in possession
OL Power, or any other party, hali the confidence of this'

liollse.—( Hear, and continued cheers.) But I say, with re-
gard to the Houser of Commons, as with regard to al
the disposers of power in this country, that there must be some
reason given for your proceedings—that you would think the
Sovereign who, placed at the head of the Government persons
not possessing in any way the confidence of the country, was
not justified in such an act; and so, likewise, with rega:d to the
House of Commons being met by a Ministry in possession of
the confidence of the Sovereign, that if they think it their duty
to express their wanted eencert in that confidence—if they ex-
press an opinion that these Ministers should make way for
others, they are. bound to give their reasons, and to. found on
arguments connected with the welfare of the state the conclu-
sions to which they come.—( Loud cheering.) And yet, Sir,
I have heard no argument on this subject except the
one addressed to the House by the Hon. Alember for the West
Riding of Yorkshire, who moved the amendment, by the
Noble Lord who followed him, and the Right lion. Gentleman
who has spoken this night, and. I must say there was a re-
markable discrepancy between the line of arguments they
pursued.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman stated that he
felt it was incumbent upon him bringing forward a motion of
such magnitude, and involving such vast consequences, to
ground himself on the best reasons he could state for the neces-
sity of that motion. His whole argument was founded on the
conduct of the Government in past years, beginning; with the
Government of Lord Grey in 18-30. The Right Iron. Gen-
tleman has made a speech to-night, giving his opinion on the
state of public affairs, and the whole of his arguments have
been vested on the Budget which was proposed by the Chan-
cellor t f the Exchequer, and the measures respecting the
Corn-laws I intended to have proposed in the last Session.
Now, Sir, I beg first to address myself to the arguments of
the Hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire, and I
must say that, after the most careful review of the statements
put forth by Hon. Members, there never was a ease made put
upon such meagre grounds.—( Hear, hear.) Whenever, upon
former occasions, the House of Commons has passed such cen-
sures as arc now proposed to the House, some strong grounds
have been alleged—( Hear, bear)—some great charge has:been
brought against the Government, and strong facts were
brought forward to support them.—( Hear.) At the end of the
American war the charge against Lord North's Government
was that he had wasted the treasure and blood of the country,
and that he had sacrificed thirteen colonies.—( Hear, hear. )
In the case of Mr. Addington, the charges were equally grave.
The Hon. Member for West Yorkshire says that we are pledged
to peace. Sir, Ido not deny that we have pledged ourselves
to maintain peace, as far as we could do so without provoking
war.—( Cheers.) With respect to Belgium, which has always
been a source of war in Europe since the time of Elizabeth—
and since her time, from the reign of William the Third down-
wards—the contentions were amicably settled by Lord Grey
having made the first arrangements, and his preliminaries being
followed up by the present Government.—( Cheers. ) With
respect to Spain anti Portugal, I admit that the policy of the
Government has been very much challenged ; and I can
say, Sir, that, at all events, it has been success-
ful.—( Great and continued cheering.) But, Sir, our policy
in the East has been assailed. It was the opinion of all the
Allies that Mchemet Ali should i o longer retain Syria.
We concurred in that opinion, and it; consequence of that con-
currence we took means which restored Syria to the dominion
of the Porte.—( Hear.) In India an attempt was made- to
shake our power, and Dost Mohammed was put forward as the
instrument by which it was to be overthrown. I cannot yet
say what is thus result of our policy in respect to China ; but
this I can say, that wherever our operations have been con-
cluded our operations have been successful. Much has been
said of the inefficiency of our navy; but I think, Sir, that
there are living disproofs of that charge, in the persons of
Admiral Stopford and another gallant officer, who is now a
Member of this House.—( Cheers.) I think it is unnecessary
to occupy the House by going into any details, I think that
the result of our policy has been, that we held up the name
of England high amongst the nations of the world, and that
under our administration neither her honour nor her power
has been diminished.—(Cheers.) With respect to the Colo-
nies, all I can say is, that they are in a state of increasing
prosperity. With respect to one of them, Canada, which is
connected with one of the questions before the House--which
is, I mean, connected more especially with the timber duties,
I must remind the House of the difficulties which we had
from the first to contend with. We had given to a French
population, unaccustomed to British habits, a constitutional
form of Government, and the failure of all attempts to
conciliate that population having failed, a rebellion brake
out, which, however, we were enabled to suppress.—(Cheers. )
That rebellion was put down by a General, whose military
talents enabled him to suppress that insurrection. The minds
of men were disturbed, and it was felt that without free institu-
tions in British possessions, no permanent peace or prosperity
could be firmly established.-7(Hear, hear. ) Every thing in-
duces me to believe that those institutions will prosper as there
is already, on many occasions, a desire manifested in favour of
British connections, and a disposition and feeling of loyalty en-
gendered towards this country.--(Cheers,) But I thought it
necessary to state to the Governor-General that the whole
question being taken into consideration—the extent of the
Canadian frontiers, which is 1,200 miles, and viewing the
nature of the population, the late excitement that took
place—it was necessary to take means for the future defence
of Canada by her Majesty's arms if necessary, and for
the future improvement of the province by which its peaceful
progress in prosperity may be promoted.—( Cheers.) That
was the matter to which I alluded when I said to Lord Syden-
ham, that there was a measure through which I hoped the
people of Canada would be reconciled to the alteration in the
timber duties. He said the progress of Canada and its re-
sources, would be crippled in consequence of the debt of Ca-
nada. And when he (Lord Sydenham) introduced that in
the speech which he made, he thought proper to give the
Assembly the whole of the despatch, and read it on the oc-
casion. I know not if I should have thought it necessary
to give that despatch, but in all probability he thought it would
give confidence to those who supported them at the time, to
show that those who had been faithful to the Crown would net be
abandoned by the Crown—(Cheers)—that every means in the
power of Parliament would be taken to prove we were inter-
ested in their prosperity, and ready to make common cause
with them in all their contingencies.—(Cheers.) The Right
Hon. Gentleman did not say he disapproved of that policy. I feel
confident it was the only policy, that if you were determined as
some philosophers advocated, and as a Noble Lord, a Member
of the other House, upheld, to separate from Canada, you
should do so at once, and if you arc determined to defend
Canada, you should do so effectually, and not suffer those who
gave generous support to the loyal cause to suppose that a luke•
warm aid would be exerted in their-defence, or-to doubt

whether that aid would be continued to them. But, Sir, whc.

ther that policy be right or wrong, the present state of things
is, that the colony is well affected to the mother country, and
that it is improving in riches and strength, and that there is
not, with respect to any other British colonies, except those
external dangers with regard to Canada, any room fur appre-
hension.—(Cheers.) I now come to our domestic govern-
ment—(Cheers)--and I ask, with regard to our domestic go-
yer nment—l ask, is there anything in the state of this country
under our government that creates cause for apprehension,
if you take such measures as I will hereafter speak, of, and
which I think necessary for the well-being of the country ?
—(Cheers.) I will not speak at present of the distress of the
people; but with regard to their disposition, I think I may
fairly say that that disposition is a disposition of loyalty, of
tranquillity, and of obedience to the law.—(Cheers.) With
respect to Ireland—whatever may be thought of the outrages
and the crimes which bad long existed there—l think with
regard to political feelings, no disposition of aliena-
tion towards the Crown of this country was fo-
mented (luring the present Administration.—( Cheers.)
Well then I say that the Hon. Member for Yorkshire has come
forward to propose a vote of want of confidence on those who
had been successful in their transactions abroad—who had been

successful in their government of the Colonies—who had bees

successful in their Government of Great Britain and Ireland,

.—(Much cheering.) You may tell me you have succeeded.
You may tell ma that there are others to whom you are

posed to transfer your confidence, but though this is an exer-
cise of the right of the House, it is an exercise of it in a ease
where you have not proved any want of an efficient adminis-
tration—(Opposition cheers, answered by loud cheers from the
Ministerial Benches)—where you ,have not proved that any of
the great interests of the country have suffered in the
hands of the present Administration—( Continued cheers.)
Why, Sir, we had debates on this subject before, and we had
the same debates in the course of these four rights. I remem-
ber in the commencement of the year 1840 one motion of
want of confidence, and Honourable Gentlemen brought
forward the gravest charges they could against the
Government ; and one of the gravest charges was, that I made

a speech at Liverpool, at which no reporter was present, and
of which a garbled account had got into the papers, not half of
it being given, and that half misstated.—(Laughter.) An.
other charge was in a speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman,
that there was some person appointed by the Registrar • General
who registered births and marriages at Birmingham, and who
was by mistake selected because he turnedout to be a Socialist;

and it was upon a charge of that kind—because in the Govern-
ment of a great country an erroneous appointment had been
made—upon a crime of that extent the House would be in-

duced to. withdrtw its confidence from them.—(Cheering.)
We had another great debate this Session, and the charge
then was, that we had not been able to carry certain measures,
and, among others' was one which has been frequently re-
ferred to ; and which, even at the risk of wearying the House,
I must say a few words upon. I mean the Appropriation
Clause.—(Hear, hear.) That was not a measure brought for-

ward to deprive tl►e Right Hon. Gentleman of office,:for it was a
vote frequently given by lion. Members on this side of the
House, who thought that the revenues of the Irish Church
were too large, and that a portion might be given for the
benefit of the whole coinmlnity, Protestant and Roman Ca-
tholic. It so happened that Lord Wellesley had then recent••
mended a measure with regard to tithes, and had also recom-
mended a Commission to inquire as to the number of each reli.
gious persuasion. At the same time the Hon. Member for
Sheffield brought forward a motion, which was agreed to by a
great majority of this House; and the Right lion. Gentleman,
and the NoWe Lord opposite, left office on account of that mo-
tion. At this time Lord Spencer succeeded to the Peerage,
and a new Ministry was formed. Were we to a'ter our opi-
nions on that account? were we, who had asserted those princi-
ples—were we to say, because the Right Hon. Gentleman
was in power, that we should forget, or give them up?
No, Sir, and accordingly, during the administration of the
Right lion. Baronet I brought forward a resolution affirming
the principles we had before asserted with regard to the ap-
propriation of the revenues of the Irish Church, and th© con-
sequence was his resignation of office. The Right lion. Gen-
tleman might have remained in office till there was some more
decisive vote, but having tendered his resignation I then stated
that he had acted in accordance with the Constitution. We
immediately proposed a Bill containing that clause, which was
passed in this House, but was defeated in the House of Lords.
We had then two courses to pursue. We might have gone on
wi►h the Appropriation Clause, and left the tithe question
unsettled ; but that would have exposed Ireland to the evils
of agitation on the subject of tithes. We were anxious that the
Appropriation Clause should be carried, because we thought it
wouldjgive contentment to the Irish people, and reconcile them
to the Established Church ; but after being twice defeated In
the House of Lords, it would have looked like a hostile feeling
to do so. Then it was said that, having been unable to carry
that clause, it was our duty to resign. New, Sir, 1 think our
duty was to consider what was best for Ireland, and
with respect to the administration of affairs in that

. , . ._.
country, .
nothing whatever but experience will convince
me that there is the , greatest difference between
the party I act with and the party opposite. Notwithstanding
all the Right Hon. Gentleman says of his intentions, he must
place power in Ireland in the hands of an exasperated minority.
The orders may be benevolent and impartial, and becoming a
vie and beneficent Government, but they will devolve upon
those who oill execute them with malevolence and rancour,—
(Cheers. ) The Right Hon. Baronet and the party opposite
^many of Whom share his intentions—think I am wrong in
that opinion.—( Cheers.) I do not wonder at that, but I must
'ay that all past experience has shown the truth of what I now
,aY ; and I must further say, that the expressions made use of
regard to the great majority of the people of Ireland—the
nodt
of speaking of them and their clergy by the organs of
the party opposite—the mode of speaking even of a Member
of that House
the calling, the -people nothing but sa-
'ages, shows the spirit from! which such language pro-
,cds—( Cries of
" Hear")—and we are bound to suppose
hate the acts will proceed from the same source. With that
(pinion—holding such
sentiments it appeared to t
i
vas our duty still t in '
me that.
o remain ollice although the Appropria-
ion Clause was not • carried, because although we could not
;ive the people of Ireland the benefitof that clause, still we
:mild give them the benefit of administration of the
awe, which we thought they hada just
before, nor were
not had
.o ,
.ikely E to have. from the party then la: opposition. Now,

Sir, with respect to the internal condition of the country—we
have been charged with getting up an agitation on tits sui)jee:
of the Corn-laws. But, Sir, the tranquillity of the country
has not been disturbed by our Reform 13i11.—(Hear, hear.)
The Right lion. Baronet 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 he said, had net been true to the principles on which
wo set out ; and he said that had we continued in the progres-
sive tract, we might, still have continued in power,
backed by the country.—( Hear. ) I can only say,
in answer to that charge, that I really hardly know how
a gentleman who sets up for so much political purity could ex-
pect us to pursue that course which was against our conscien-
tious opinions.—(Cheers.) We were of opinion that conti-
nual change was dangerous, therefore we were obliged to op-
pose the propositions of thej Hon. Member for Finsbury, in
1837, and oihers made by other Members since. Suppose I
were to' say that If the Hon. Member for Bath were to
profesi himself a thorough Consorvative, he might rise to a
high station under the Government about to be formed, he
would tell me that he could not consistently approve of their
opinions. That is my answer; and when he was told that
Reformers had become lukewarm in consequence of such con •
duet, I tell him that I was quite aware of the fact. I did not
expect that zealous Reformers would remain in our favour
when we found it our duty to pause. If the Hon. Mem
ber for. Bath could prove that we ought to have taken the
course he pointed out, if welbe 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
entertaining opinions, or acting 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
Bight Honourable Baronet ; and I obsei ve that while
he has gone gravely over the different subjects of
the Budget, he has no more committed himself
than he did before.—( Loud cheers and counter-cheers.) We
have never asked hint tor the full development of his measures
—we never asked for any details—we never proposed to him to
go into details—all, we wanted was to know the general prin-
ciples on which he proposed to act.—( Cheers. ) We say there
is evidently a deficiency in the revenue—there is manifest dis-
tress in trade—poverty among the; community, and we think
that an approach to the principles of free trade will tend to li-
quidate the deficiency, and dispel the gloom which hangs over
trade. To this day, to this hour, the Right lion. Gentleman
has never made any declaration on this subject. He tells us to
be sure that he is not to be expected to give any general opinion,
but that there is one principle to whichlic will adhere, namely,
the sliding scale. Now, I really am at a loss to conceive
why the Right Hon. Gentleman, taking every other matter into
consideration, leaving himself quite open with respect to almost
every other measure, should be so especially wedded to this
sliding scale: It is as though he had thus addressed his Sove-
reign and his country, " 'robe 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 Constitution ;
but they are admitted, and the Constitution goes on very well.
As to the Reform of Parliament, I thought it would ti .ve led
to the entire destruct ion of the Alonaretiy, and the complete
ruin of our institutions : it has passed, but still the institu-
tions, somehow or other, flourishes, and none of those institu-
' tions which were threatened have suffered the smallest injury ;
and I am so perfectly satisfied with this Reform Act, that
mean to make it the guide of my conduct, and to adhere liter-
.ally to its provisions. But these things arc 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 what 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 i devote myself, and I wilts never sacrifice it.
(Hear, hear, and laughter, from the Liberal benches.) lam
extremely sorry to difler so much from the Right Hon. Gen-
Veman, but I must say that all the information I have acquired
—all that 1 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 trace. 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.—(llear,
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 authority, 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 1 trust that the country
is by this time convinced of the good sense which dictates the
policy of getting rid both of positive prohibitions and prohibi-
tory duties. Much has already been done on this subject, but
much 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 Hun. 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 whom he had alluded was es-
-pecially_cyposeilio the doing away with prohibiteryiluties, whilst
the Hon. Bart. 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 present Corn-
law is founded upon that very recommendation. I think that
law comes under the description which Lord Ripon then gave
of prohibitory duties. During the years 1834, 183.5, and
iBZiCi the duty was 475. a quarter. Now a duty of 475. a
quarter is neither 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 aro
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 then 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
having 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 cern averages
have been rising very 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. Therefore 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
the 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 this
country, 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.
Ile would be obliged to keep it more 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 present Corn-laws or any other
Corn-laws which you may establish. Put you do not mean to
be independent of foreign supply, end sf you say that a purtion
of your people must expect to subsist on foreign 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 :10s. or 100 s. per quarter. 1
would say, that the remission of duty in that case
would be advantageous to the merchant, just as now the rise of
13s. or 9s. in the price is advantageous to the foreigner, and nut
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 Bs. per quarter. But I think that.
the first answer to the Right lion 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 principle which does not require argument, but which
is almost self-evident, that in proportion as you restrict the
field from which your supplies ate! drawn, in that' proper.
tion do you cause fluctuation in price. If you confine the supply
of the people of this country to a single country, you will
have a greater fluctuation thin now, and, according to
the same analogy, meets greater fluctuation must occur in the
resent state of supply, than if you allow corn to come in from
olland, Poland, America, &c. With the wealth and menu-

facturing industry of Allis 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 on averages, but giving the
Queen in Council the weans of furnishing a cheap supply. II
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. 1 recol-
lect, myself, for two or three year ;Mr. Hnskisson produced a
Bill, by which ho proposed to have all corn in bond at a lower
duty than was imported by the existirg 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 80s. per quarter, and you may state that the average
price is 60s. ; but, with regard to the consumer,
it is totally different. The main object which I look to is no
the additional cheapness of corn, but the additional ma-
ployment of the people. With respect to wages, i-
has been said, if you change the Corn-laws wages will be lower.
1 hat ia a complete fallacy. There would be such a demand
for employment that wages would be really higher, and the men
who are now almost in a state of ?destitution, 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 I.eard language of the most contradic-
tory nature in this House, from Members of that party._.
(Hear, hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman whi,
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 difference 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 cr.)
against Lord Morpeth, and on that cry has ejected that 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 are 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.)