The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-07 00:00:00

THE S N, LONDON . liri 1-4N.gr ANT A T‘ir,
rittiL 7, 1840.

Viet were the cc Imes that afflicted society? were they the crimes
incidental to luxury ? No, they were the crimes committed b
had y
b theen
e
men who were struggling fur existence.—(Cheers.) They
I Id that agriculture was the true basis of the wealth and power of
a nation—now, how was that evidenced ? Look to an nent history,
and there they would see that Egypt which, from time im-
memorial had been a corn growing country, had been ''
-eon get
ages in poverty and distress from which it
wet * ,now
recovering tleroue'e The talents and ;-s
man who..eeettgerite 'of 1 t reat
geetrned her. 17,111 1.. Ylott ifb 6 'ttilaposed that
England, with all her pOICer e*Asii\ig the arts, sciences,
trade,rt
ua- r
.d manufactures, wesnkk hive been the proudest of,the
P
, and that her setcseehants would have been among ft+e g mat
ollee of the eartaie but what was the case ? Living to the
resent existing Corn.laws, which were !t pt up only for the pur-
pose of supporting a small bawls t'Ne trade and commerce of the
country was crippled and PriS:ired. Some time since a great cuter?'
had been raised agaisest Yailways, and gentlemen wet-veleta with
alarm when it vets Intimated to them that rsiiWays were coming
I near their peoperty ; butt at the present moment what was the
case ? Why, those who were reetterly so much against them noVie
saw that the nearer thee thought their fellow-creature's to them,
the more they increesesed the value of their prere.'Y ? Years back,
within three wales north, east, eeEtle, and west of where
he was risen standing were *eels of corn,: but what was
the case at present ? by the building and other things twat
were upon the land, its Value was increased fifty fold.e-e-Ocers.)
The Corn-law supporters, in his opinion, were like the boy who
had the goose that laid the golden egge=e-l'acy were trsing to get
everything, and would ultimately get nothing. The agriculturists
complained of the taxee to which they were subjected, and they
complained loudly or tithes. Now, he would venture to esty, that
the agriculturists did not suffer so much from that AS many of the
inhabitants Of that City,—(Cheers,) Thee takes affected the City
of London, and large and populous places, far snore than it did the
agricultural districts.—(Cheers.) He would not occupy the time
; of the Court by going into detail on the subject, as there were
nth, rs present far more able than himself to do so. He
was proud in having been the first to bring this motion under the
attention of the Court, and he would leave it 10 Others
to discuss it, who were far more able than himself. It had
been said in what a lamentable situation would England be
placed, were she to rely upon a foreign country for a supply of
corn, and a war were to arise. Of all the empty fears he had ever
heard expressed, that was the worst. Those who advanced such
argument forgot that in the exact proportion as countries became
interested in each others' commerce the more difficult was it for
them suddenly to cut off all intercourse—a mutual dependenet
on each other was created which rendered war impretticable.
The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving "That this Court do
petition the Commons House of Parliament for a total repeal of the
present graduated scale of duties on the importation of foreign corn
into the kingdom, and the establishment of a free trade its all are
tides of food."—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Leone' seconded the motion. He did not eXpett that there
laws would be totally and immediately repeated, but he was con-
vinced that some legislation on the subject was necessary. and he
trusted that that Court would do all it could to obtain the repeal of
those obnoxious and iniquitous laws,—(Hear, hear.) In his opinion
the happiness of the people, and the prosperity of the rietistn, as a
commercial nation, depended on a full and edenrickellt supply of food
belt .g furnished to the people, It had Well said that if those laws
were repealed, poor land would be thrown out of cultivation. He
thought the sooner nti‘:wasf vig It ,i oia
t'skteeoewtnt out
lof
ttivtiuh
cultivationti
the better, if for the 2o ct o
the country have to v:J.; a high price flit tiiteigtl corn: Let the
Court consider -
eenat the effeet of the Corn-laws Was. They re:.
stricted :.ntercourse between country and country. He was himself
-... manufacturer, and knew a person *leo found that he &int pUr.
chase the article which he liothltraetured on the continent and send
it over here, And Sell It cheaper than he could afford to do, manufac.
taring it himself. The reason was that labour in this country suf-
fered under dearness of bread, which had produeed poverty, discon.
tent, and disloyalty. It had been found that the clemegogues, who
profited ty agitating the lower classes, Were opposed to the repeal
bf
the Corn-laws, because they feared the result would be to prevent
the discontent on which they worked, and knew that Cheap bread
would produce satisfaction and content. Ile was quite convinced
the time was now arrived Wheii the PdbielaWs cblild not be rfidln.
tained in conjunction with the toin.laws How could out-door
relief be denied to men whom the operation of the Corn-
laws prevented from obtaining employment, or prevented from
obtaining for their wages the requisite amount of the neces-
saries of life.—(Hear, hear.) If the labonteee tbttld fief e. large?
quantity of bread fbr their Willey, a very Moderate amount of
wages would mak% to keep them in Comfort. It Was said by some
that the repeal of the Corn lairs *Mild profits& great illsifbasi tiiid
that the national debt wiitild detaiE be hquidated. 14e teotild ask
in reply Whether the iiation could exist without commerce and
manufactures? Was this nation, or could it be, an agriculture
country? No. Our trade had in fact outgrown our agriculture I
The present Corn-laws were, he was convinced, prejudicial to land:
and the sooner they were abollaliM tile better for all interests,
He cordially secenuaert 'he Motion.
Mr, Ilebi,ette mid he rose to oppose the motion, not that he
doubted the injustice and the impolicy of the Corn-laws—not that
he doubted their ill effects upon all orders of steiety.—(Rear, hear.)
Why then, it would i!etttl;eil, should he oppose the proposition for a
petition. 9tritilit the Corn.laws? Because he was thoroughly eon.
Villeed that it was utterly futile—that it wee positively inane, to pe-
tition the House of Commons in its present constitution.—(Hear,
hear.) After some weeks that Honse had been engaged in a
course of inteferente With the la* and the Judges of the land—Arter,
with petty tyranny, incarcerating the officers of the law—after im.
prisening a stripling for acting in obedience to his father's orders—
the House had received with derisive cheering a proceeding by
which the question of the Corn-laws, so awful in its importance—
was got- rid of without placing on record the names of those
who voted for and sgaintt the rejiell.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.)
He should therefore venture to move an amendment to the effect,
that that Court was duly sensible of the many and great mischief
arising from the impolitic and unjust restrictions on the trade in
Cern, but nevertheless a'nitainad from petitioning the House of
Commons from a conviction that it was useless to petition thhe e House,
of Commons as et preseht eenstittited f
, for a remedy for t evils
under Which the people were sabring, i such remedy sit uld be
deemed, to sacrifice any portion of the interests of the landed
classes of the community. It was his conviction there was nothing
in that amendment but was strictly true. He had felt it his duty
to propose it ; but if the Court should differ from him in opinion,
and believed that any benefit, however small, would arise from the
adoption of the petition be was willing to vote for it ; but he could
not withhold allowing the Court an opportunity of putting on record
their opinions on the subject.—(Hear.)
Mr. ANDERTON had great pleasure in seconding th e the amend.
ment, believing that the House of Commons never wanted Reform
more than at the present moment. He was very glad his friend
Nut had the boldness to propose this resolution, and behoved that
if it were carried it would tend more to effect a further Reform
in that House than any question that had ever before been die.
cussed in that Court. It was imyossible to look at the proceedings
of tt e House of Commons without seeing a Reform. in that House
was necessary, and the Reform he would effect would be to return
those gentlemen for three years instead of seven.—(Seve red cries of
one year only.)—for he believed that triennial Parliaments were the
only means of saving the country.—(Hear, hear.) He would not
take up the time of the Court in discussing this question, because he
confeised he hardly understood it.—(Laughter)—but in that respect
he did 'not much differ from the House of Commons—(Hear, hear)
fir after three nights' discussion they had shirked the question, and
had not ventured to come to a resolution upon it, but had left the
thing just as they found it, and he hoped that Court would do the
name.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. SrevEasmueh regretted the introluction of the amendment. '
He was ready to admit great reform was necessary in the House of
Commons as now constituted, but he thought the Corporation of
London should not refrain from going into a question because a
reform was necessary in the House of Commons, a thing which they
must know would be very distant. He should be inclined to sup-
port the amendment on some other occasion, because it contained a
truism—that the Reform 8.11 had not done eoerything that was ne-
cessary for the country—(Hear, hear.)—but when a question like
that was before the Court, was it to be thrown aside by an amend-
ment of that description ? If so he thought it would be better for
them never to take up political questions. It was quite true this
matter had been disposed of in the House by a ruse, amid roars of
laughter, but that was only occasioned, as a similar scene a short
time since in that Court, by one party thinking they had obtained a
victory and the other that they were tricked. But he felt it pos.
sible, the measure being to be brought forward again that Session,
they might obtain yet an alteration of these laws, which were so
injurious to the commerce of the country and so beneficial
to pauperism. He was not, however, in favour of the motion
as it now stood, and when the amendment had been got
rid of, he shinildmoYe another, for he-was not its favour at _present
of a total repeal=-(Hear)--but of a moderate fixed duty as a step
td entire :epeal.--(Hear, hear.), The commerce of this country
!lust be considered to be in an artificial state. Many had em-
barked large, capitals in the growth of corn, and they must not by a
sUelden and total repeal be shaketito the foundation, but a moderate
• fiked duty neustbe first 'obtatned,- that persons in that line of busi-
l+siniight.have an "opportunity of righting themselves. As re.
garded the trade in corn it appeared that article, which had always
been the subject of nibbling interference by the Legislature of the
country, but not for the benefit of the farmer, the labourer, or the
manufacturer, but to keep up high rents that the landowners might
support themselves in luxury. At one period in the last century
a bounty was given for the exportation of corn to the amount of a
million and a-half, for the benefit of the agriculturist, because
more corn was grown than could be consumed. After that period
there was a duty of 6d. on importation, and when corn was at 445. the
bounty on exportation ceased, and the fixed duty came into force.
The object of landowners was to increase the price of a commodity
which was one of the recessaries of life, merely because the number
of these customers had increased, and the quantity of land culti-
vated remained the same. Why such a monopoly was neither
more nor less than if 100 men were ordered to subsist upon the
sense quantity of land which could only give food to CO. It was
said that the repeal of these laws would lower the price of bread,
and consequently the price of wages. He believed that was a com-
plete fallacy. The result would be to give some employment to
the manufacturing operative, who would consequently have more
money to lay out in food, and in that way even the corn-grower
would be benefited. The manufacturing interest had outstripped
the agricultural, and was now the leading interest in that country,
—(Cries of " No, no ") Gentlemen might say no, but destroy
the manufacturing interest, and where would the agricultural interest
be. It was well known that while the manufacturing interest
had grown up the agricultural interest bad gone down. Could they
find any where a more stupid, indifferent, ignorant set of men than
than those who cultivated the ground?—(No, no.) Who was it
joined the ranks of the impostor Thom at Canterbury ?—(Hear.)
Who were the great bulk of the rioters at Newport ?—(Cries of
" No, no ; they were workers and miners.") He had endeavoured,
when out of town, to get into conversation with the agricultural la-
bourers, and he rarely found them acquainted with any thing fur.
Cher than knowing how to drive their spades into the earth. It was
true that these men should be placed in a better situation.—(Hear.)
It was argued that certain lands would be thrown out of cultivation
if the Corn-laws were repealed. If they were not able to pay the
expenses of cultivation they ought tobe thrown out. Would any one
say that steam-boats should be prohibited by Act of Parliament from
going faster than sailing boats least they might throw the latter
out of employment. Such a regulation would be equally pouchpreste-
rous with that of endeavouring to make common land pay s
as the best land. He trusted the amendment which had been pro-
posed wouldbe negatived by a large majority.
Mr. BOWER regretted that the amendment had been drawn up
in the terms which had been submitted to the Hall. If that
amendment had been proposed it was his intention to have met
the question distinctly by moving the previous question, because
he differed from the motion in tom. It appeared to him the Corn-
law agitation had been set on foot by some men of large capital
for the promotion of their own interests, had banded together,
and had resorted to the most unjustifiable means—unjust in them-
eelees, and unfair towards their opponents. They had sent about
men who were paid for preaching their doctrines, and it was really
a serious thing that the Corporation of London should join them_
selves with men whose object, he believed, was to inflict a serious
evil upon the interests of the country. It was sid that only a
small band were defending the agricultural interests. Who were
alluded to, he did riot know.—(A cry of " the landowners.") His
opinions was, that every man who tilled the ground had the bread
of his labour—that universal England, except a few overgrown and
enormously wealthy men, who had procured that weelth from the
sinews of the labourers (he meant the manufacturers), were all in
favour of the agricultural interest.—(Hear, hear) These
manufacturers had built mills, and called up a popula.
'ion around them, which, but for them, would never have had
existence, and now when the trade, which a long war had thrown
into their hands had ceased—when other nations began to mantle
facture for themselves, they got up the present agitation against
the Corn.laws. The competition abroad had interfered materially
with the profits of that class. He maintained that it was the
working man in the manufactories, that was maintained on the
smallest pittance.—(Hear, hear.) What was the object of the
manufacturer in agitating this question—was it to give their
labourers more food? No, but it was to see with how small
a quantity they would be satisfied, and then to decrease
their wages, in order to enable the manufacturers to compete watts
the manufacturers abroad,—;Cries of " No, no.") The Worthy.
Deputy ern 'Now hheeag
brieclui
el
vt
ecal
tlhaabtouthreerys w
e
r
e
told
them
stupid,ellYopposite
it
poo
r,anhdad td
h
Ignorant

n-ather stupid, poor, nor ignorant, compared with the other •
of sr ciety : but this he should believe, that
tuous. Let those who doubted • • -
.—(alear. hear ......e-were far mare air•
bath
`• Cotter'. . travels:" tire .apes; 7n Die
v:O:Nd it) 11 •
, • e _urns [lac ale;
eararassa y.,,lff hit >r 't n"„,- •••! • 1' •
his
,own
aC
aer iciZt
ser
tfiaittrozecl:::
r,bin 'wt;at he, 8.: I,
or Blanchester— •
I'44who t"
441'ined i:ahlt'hj'ai‘u:rin'e
vir-
tuous thantheo aiiracolteral, it. v.)
‘..e.ey tind the mass of the people they did
oriel it be worshipping God, or Bp;ambulat
ourcravee s
ion
t h fields
as
Sundae-, water° s
shops, or in congregations met for ppoolrittii.enals
zdmiring his works, or would it be in the public hous go
the beer
purposes.—(Hear,
They had been told that certain
h.
db_rfought landr-
thrown oet ef teltiVation. aeo\i eV) ought to lie
thrown
elealft•; titit he Was of
I,ih 'vtailT 'diger
into
ohatc
cultivation
ent opinion now ; for
ek lewaoothdaotro7s7 considered
of opinion
It,oart they ought not in any
way to do away with the Corn.lawtsh.,,t
titn
which Ina laaah considered
had x
rbeeniesoifn
o h existence,,ot,our-nhotaing, but which now
triienteertve fare they
add.l kfd. tuli'eit'r: had been less s4fluctuations during
their existenet ti; the necessarlet of life inlesthishcaodun7ryrkteldian'eliln.
Ferrate. He was of opinion that if the lawin a
'eery short time a great portion of the arable lanwdaoricrgentigeia,,len.di,
would
be thrown ous of cultivation, and he theralbretrusted
Court world not throw its weight Illto the scale of
a Ir, TteoVeta exist.a sthose
shied tohwa,t theyhc whoaudl
would
ae
kn
w toldh what
wase l
e toeeli that that
who were
in favour of a repent of the Imes, by adopting the petition,w
alone—
t they
the Cot n. laws had worked well, and that therefore they ought to be
allowed
were to let alone. There had been a dispute in the newspapers
anel
in the Houses of Parliament at to the amount of wages t 1
agricul-
tural laboe ter had to Hat on: The dispute was bet Ween what hat
the maximum;; and Minheutn. Was it Bet Ween as, and 00, ? C
tainly not, fat the Pqkt of Buckingham, who had .
denied that
hod stated that he wondered the agricultural labourers should c hemo
except
plain of having 9s. a week, had admitted that the maximum was
101.—(Chrers.) That was just the paltry pittance of Is. a week mote.
wasa I
.1- .oBcrtoouser.
t. BROWN otbhjeercet e
beingd to
no
the H eAti
Alderman
et3rneltal tnl e Mp
present
e nthe as
there
going on,
Lord
Mayer,
At, TAVLOrt thought that it' the Court was gdod while Mr.
Bowen spoke; it Wits equally co while he was speaking' Ile had
talked a great deal of leaving well alone, and he hoped, therefore,
he 'e•outil leave the Court alone.—(Laughter.) Was 10s. a week,
he would ask, enough for a man to live on and keep a family ? He
thought common sense and common justice would say it was not.
It was the wish of the landlords to maintain the present Corn-
law, end net the wish any more than it was the interest of the
agriteltural labourers. Let them Compare things now with what
they were forty years age. The same land that produced 40s. or
50th an ;tete; their produced only 10s. an acre; and thus the in-
tense of the landlord was quadrupled, while the laaourers's wages
were less than they were, although he hail to pay twice as much
fc r his btearl(tiear.) He Wondered that gentlemen should in
the City of London, and before so many connected with the manu-
facturing interests, endeavour to maintain the fallacy that if feed
was cheaper, wages would be lower. That had been tested by ex-
perience, and it had beeti Shown that Wages did not fall with the
price of food. lie knew the wages of journeymen printers were
not reduced wheis Weed was cheaper. (Hear.) He, therefore,
meiutained that there was no conspiracy among the mester menu.
faeturert to create agliatien ih the Coin_laws for unworthy pur-
poses, and in order to cheat the people. A gentleman who had
spoken stated that he could not understand the question, and that
the House of Commons did not understand it. None were cc
blind as these that would not see, and the majority of the House of
Commons had tin interest in stafaing the poor.--(Cries of " No,
no," and " Hear, hear.") The majority of the House of Com-
mons were landlords, whose rents, as he had stated, had been
rising, while the means of the poor to maintain themselves had
been reduced.—(Hear, hear.) It was in vain to expect justice
ftom the Bosse of Common.) and although he agreed,
that the Chartists had been very foolish in the means
they emp:oyed for obtaining a redress of their grievances.
yet thilc o j ,ct was quite right, and it wet useless to
araition that House for an alteration of the. Corn-laws, until it
represented the peOple, ht present the House of Commons only
exercised its powers for the purpose of reltrbery and oppression.—
( "Oh, oh," and " Hear, hear.") The conduct Of the lionse of
Commons had been so well described by a Manchester Aidernian
that rot tile information and enlightenment of shat Court he
would take the liberty of reading it. [The Hon. Gentleman read
Mr: Mre Aldetrnati Cobden's speech at the meeting of theas Dole-
dates: laAt faittirdaa, its reported in " The Sun.") He w ton
winced there was a deep feeling intone the lower classes, teat to
detition the House of Commons was ridiculous, end the higher
classes entertained the feeling that the Corn-laws would only be
carried by a pressure from without. That purpose could only be
detained by a great union of all glasses of the community
except thasa tato tetre interested in the scandalous monopoly
It was uch a union that ptdeutea. the passing of the Reform Bill
The Reform Bill was produced by " pressure from without." He
had no difficulty in accounting for the alienation of the working
Classes from the House of Commons—they had found the Regh form
ts,
Bill a deliallote Englishmen felt that they had p ol.tical ri
that they Were entitled to a full representation in Parliament.—
(Hear.) The greatest lawyers had laid it down that the political
franchise was the common law right of the people, and Judges had
so held. It was the House of Commons themselves who had nar-
rolaed their call foundations. Parliaments were in former times,
and according to the andent Constitution of the countrya, t
annual.
con-
-
(Cry of " The Corn-laws.") He WAS speaking of wh he
s dered the causes of the maintenance of the dear bread laws. The
" Mee ning Chronicle" had stated that "
all that were in
Government and Legislation they were through the House of
Com Mons." neaven help the people then I—(A laugh.) But the
people had a much broader foundation—they rested on the mouu-
ments of their ancient Constitution, Which had been handed down
from their forefathers. The fact was the House of Commons, as at
present constituted, made up their minds ecr. keep up rents at all
hatatds, let the 'manufactures and the commerce of the nation.
perish as they might. -The Poor-law he considered an admirable
measure in itself—(No, no, and hear, hear)—but he was persuaded
it could not be carried into effect-under the present Corn law. He
concurred in the • prineiPles laid down by the supporters of the
amendment, but as a petition to the House of Commons was the
usual form —(A laugh)—of expressing the opinions o
ar f
.) a public
body, he should support the original motion.—(blear, he
Mr. LAWRENCE said he thought the last speaker had risen to
speak about the Core-laws—(A laugh)—but he had wandered into
a great variety of other topics, which really had nothing to do with
that subject, and unreasonably protracted the discussion.—[,Hear.)
He felt that the House of Commons was the only body to
as whi
they
were dealt with. This question of the Corn-laws was one between
landowner and manufacturer, not between farme
ealr
of and menu.
facturer. It was a fallacy to suppose that the rep the Corn-
-1
aws would lower wages. The rate of .N‘ ages depended not on
hear,
the
Price of wheat, but the demand for labour.—(llear,
hear.) In 1810, when bread was higher than now, wages
were lower; in 1811, when bread was lower,
wages r
to a greater extent than bread had fallen.—(Hear.) The labourers
were among the best customers for manufactures, and it must
strongly influence manufactures, when the labourers had not enough
of wages as compared with the price of bread, to expend on other
articles.—(Hear.). He was not, however, for leaving corn entirely
free, and thus putting corn on a different footing from all
w otheicom.
modities. He thought a small fixed duty of (is. or 7s.would be a
sufficient protection; added to the expense ef transit from t
Nhe
two na.
foreign
country, which would raise it to 15s. or 16s. a qu.
Commerce must
aiter. o
tions could go on paying money for any
art icle
be carried on by exchange of the produce of countries. Another
objection made to the Corn-laws was, tha they had occasioned
be
a
drain of the bullion of the Bank of England;
that would always
the case when a sudden demand was made without preparation, and
therefore the argument went for little, but as regarded the pctitipn
teei-e were no grounds for hoping for any success attending it, and this
was not unnatural. He believed if that Court were great landed pro-
prietors they would refrain from repealing
rom those
ithout, t laws as longherefore
as
they could, until there came a pressure f w
they must not only show they had justice on their side,
but vigour
to act accordingly. It had been well said wonder was but
at
the great wages paid to the agricultural labourers, but no more
than I 2s. was paid any where, and the majority were paid less than
that. The agricultural labourer must provide for his family as well
as the manufacturing labourer, and, no doubt, suffered as much
frpm the high price of bread. One great reason urged by
the House
of Commons for not attending to petitions was that they were carried
but by a; small majority, and, therefore, on this occasion,
they should
avoid affording them a similar excuse. No doubt a great many unjust
acts had been done by the House of Commons, but that was no
reason why they should not petition them, for they-had made many
laws of Which-he waSiure. his friend much approved ; and bad as
they were now, they were ranch better than his ftiend could re-
collect them id have been. Great 'improvement had been made
them by the preisuie_ from without;' he' should therefor support
the amendment foe a moderate fix ed •duty,—(Heara)
Mr. \Neat...4 did npt understand the Whole: of the motion of, his
Hon. Friend, especially' that Part Of 'it 'Which related te free trade
in food. He had not condescended to tell them what fop od ,he
meant—whether bullocks, or gingerbread, or what, t appeared
to him unimportant whether tl e petition was carried or not. The
Court of Common Council were now so odious that no
good could result from their petitions. If he thought
the poorer classes were adverseaies of the Corn.laws. The motion
should have his support, but the honourable mover and seconder
reminded him of the com of strolling players, who advertised
to perform the tragedy of "Hamlet," bat found themselves obliged
to omit the part of the Prince of Denmark. What was the real
question—the real cause of the national distress? It was theade
na
tional debt which made the bread of the country so
high Why
did not
, and m
them unable to compete with fareign countries.
gentlemen come forward and tackle that monster, for while it re-
mained it was impossible to remove distress as it would be to
remove St. Paul's. In fact, the Corporation themselves were taxers
of bread. Did they not derive a revenue from corn? They were
as much taxers of corn as the other House at the other end of the
town. What had taken place during the last Iwo years. Why,
the countries to whom we wanted to send our manufactures would
not take them. The Prussian League was carrying out the prin.
ciples of Bonaparte's policy for the ruin of this country. Now, if
tire Corn-laws were repeated, could they compete with foreign coun-
tries with 20 millions of taxes pressing on th e country. It was quithad
e
impossible. He thought a great many unfair observations
been made respecting the character and conduct of the landowners.
He regretted to hear the terms in which the stows,ariy of the
country had been spoken of in that Court. Why, owing to
their aristocracy that arts and sciences were encouraged, talent
brought forward, and charity and morality fostered and encour-
aged. When she saw their old mansions, their splendid parks,
their old servants, and their unbounded hospitality, which he had
had the honour of enjoying, although it must be that those who had
them never had the honour—(Roars of laughter)—he re-
gretted that such men should be held up to scorn in that Cote t. It
was urged that the manufacturing interest was everything, and the
landed interest nothing; but if so, why, instead of petitioning the
House of Commons, did they not takepossession of these estates at
once, and let the landed interest go where it could.—(A laugh.)
The value of the agricultural interest in all its branches was
250,000,000/. He would ask them, was that nothing ?—(Hear,
hear.) It was said that the agricultural labourers were a
low, stupid, ignorant set; those whom Isis Honourable Fri
end d h
ad
come into contact with might be
such, but
)Mr. Wells) had met with were a moral, religious,
industrious, happy' class. When the amendment was disposed of
it was his intention to move the previous question,
rub et
convinced
that if they repealed the Corn-laws they would the agricul-
turalist without doing any good to the manufacturing interests.
B. Norms sapd the effect of the Corn.laws had been to introduce
corn from no less than twenty different countries into their ports,
but with the system of restrictions whi h there laws imposed, their
merchants and traders were not disposed to speculate in corn, and
the bonding system which had grown out of
the washese regulations had
brought them to the very verge of ruin. astonished to
hear one gentleman say, that since the introduction of the present
system there had been less fluctuation in prices the han formeestablish-
rly.
Now the fact was that in the fifteen yearsreced
ping
meat of these Corn-laws the mean average fluctuation had not
exceeded as. 10d. per quarter, while the fifteen years that had
elapsed since their introduction, the mean average fluctuation
had been not less than 50s. 10d.—(Hear.) How then could the
argument be set up that these laws produced sieady supplies and
fixity of price. ,?; ith regard to steadiness of supply in nets year,
they had two million seven or eight • undred thousand quars of
wheat imported, and in tee succeeding year not one-?ixth of that
quantity. They hoe, of course, in addition to the unsteadiness of
supdly, an extraordinary fluctuation in price—the money market
was deranged—their commerce was interrupted—mercantile spe-
culations were suspended with all the other inconvenember ien
tocers of such
clumsy and improper machinery. The Hon. M BiLi
gate had said that if the prey :t laws were to be repealed it would
have the effect of reducing the price of labour, especially in the agri.
cultutal districts. Now, what was the fact ? In the year 1834
when the iron hand of oppression ground eown the agriculture
labourers, eausine them to rise up and break the mach
I2sinery of their
employers ; when they did that, they goe tl Is. '
corn went a
downh ' for
wages. In ,
the next year, when the piice ofthe
agriculturists reduced the wages of their labourers from 12s. to Os.
In the next year wheat rose to 565., but there was no advance
thein
the price of agricultural labour. Corn had gone up

- .
prelant year, but instead of there treinga.ememertsurV ad/ance,lta.
the priti, Ilabpur;upptitlje 1).4,5.3.14 by 1.4 e farmers In
igh "gFS:;!ViTti Irfea'CLl to ti ]le cf a week,. I
„bet t:-.eo,becaree of the argtmient; that the agricultriral lab?uter
wes, b.:.tter cs' when
.there was dear than when there was cheap,
II
bread ?. And in. aiswer to ttre: argument, that Ihe.agticulttitel,
14.}a:wcer wp.rl(l 79fr7, r,OrorioiSion; ,thle home-gre,v,T colisrpt '
lieu, haa onl' to saris, that at the iYekiit lime the average
amodra
hi wages paid to he agricultural labourer was not as much as
it costs many parishes in London to support their paupers, and
the expense of keeping felons in the gaols.—(Cheers.) What
therefore became of the argument that this was a hoalthy system,
and ought to be let alone?—(Cheers.) Mr. Bower should have re-
collected when he( quoted the
.lopautituliescription of domestic hap-
ttinesK
itiven by erne that It teas 'draft it a time end in a Country
a here no such laws existed.—(Cheers:) He Contended that the
existence of the present Corn laws was to be attributed to the de-
fective state of the Reform Bill, that defect being in a great mea-
sure attributable to the Duke of Buckingham, then lilarquis of
Chandok Hie irrolild benthre tO say that, under the present law,
the flucttlat:ons in the :price of corn were grater than they had
ever been under the old system. He should give his cordial sup-
port to the originei motion,
Mr. MAITLAND observed that the Hon. Gentleman whc had last
sat down bad referred to the state of the country at the time Burns
wrote his " Cotter's Saturday Night." That Hon. Member would
find that the valie of cotton manufacturing annually :.t that period
did not amount to much more than 500,0001., while our manufac-
tunes hail made the most extraordinary, unprecedented and, he
might almost say, unnatural rapid progress as to amount, in annual
value 37,000,000/. Our progress in manufacturiug in cotton
goods had gone on stele by side with those very Corn laws that were
now so bitterly and suddenly eondeMned.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He
would not agree that it would be politic to impose on Foreign Corn
such a restrictive duty is to give the home farmer an undue ad-
vantage over the foreign agriculturist, but he contended that the
national debt to w.irah reference had been made in the course of this
debate required them to put the foreign farmer on somewhat the same
footing as .he home farmer, and that they should not permit the
foreign farmer to ei.ter our ports, to enjoy the high prices of our
count' y, to sell his corn, perhaps, to the English agriculturist,
when he was not contributing towards the payment of the interest
in the enormous national debt.-Hear, hear.) If they abandoned
altogether every species of restrictive duty in foreign corn, they
w ;al act most grievously against the first principles of political
economy and would err against the first hrinciples of free trade.
The statistical details of this question had been amply discussed,
and it had, indeed, ben,. sai I in another place,
"give me figures,
and I will prove anything."—(Hear, hear, hear.) He should
not therfore have recourse to figures, but would simply ob.
serve that Sir Robert Peel had proved by certain figures tho
convey: e of the proposition of these who had advanced
them, and have shown that in the mauufactin e of highly-wrought
fabrics there had been an annual increase of eight per cent. He
would call upon that Court, and upon every well-wisher to his coun-
try, to disassociate himself entirely from that party who, in agitating
for a repeal of the Corn-laws, had invoked the aid of the Chartists.
If the Legislature were to sweep away everything like a fair and
proper protective duty, either by means of a fluctuating scale or a
fixed impost on foreign corn, they would entail ruin on the agricul-
tural interests of this country. A great deal had been said about
the affluence of the landlords and the enormous rents wnich they
received, but any one at all acquainted with land knew that it was
the very worst investment an individual could embark his capital in.
What would be the result, if men of stern purpose were to arise,
and attempt to carry into operation the violent principles of coercing
the Legislature, asserted by the opponents of the Corm laws ?
It was a fallacy to call this a poor mans question. It was incor-
rect to say that the man who paid 9-10ths of his income for bread,
was more interested in the question than lie who paid only 2-3rds
or one-half. So large was the dead weight of labour on the land
of the lower grades, that the simulus arising from an extension of
manufactures through the repeal of the Corn-laws, would be but
temporary—land would be thrown out of cultivation. It wa
absurd to say that capital employed in cultivating the poorer lands
was thrown away, for lime and other manures would speedily con-
vert the poorest lands into tho richest.—(Hear, hear, hear.) No
country could be said to be truly rich till a considerable
portion of its capital was invested in thus improuing and cultivating
land. And who could be insensib'e to the vast difference in the
respective tendencies of the labonr in agriculture and in warm fac-
tories? Who would not acknowledge, when he lookdd upon the
miserable, sickly, feeble artisan, engaged in the emaciating toil of
crowded factories. that far happier was the lot of the pale, hearty,
agricultural labourer, employed in the healthy, pleasing task of till.
ing the land, amidst all the beauties and the attractions of nature.
M. PEWTRIS said the agricultural and manufacturing interests
only had been spoken of. He thought there was another large
portion of the community whose interests ought to be regarded.
He was reminded sf it by the petition of the innabitants of the
City of London, signed by 37,000 persons, whose intererts he
thought the Court should take into consideration. When they
considered the population of the country was in.
creasing at a ratio of one thousand per day, he
theught something should be done to secure sustenance for
this larger increase of population. If it were found the manufac-
tures of the country could not be extended further, and that the
supply of provisions had also attained its maximum, it was evident
the Legislature ought to adopt some measure with regard to this im-
portant question. He looked at it as one which affected the
whole population of the country, and if it were necessary
increased employment should be given to the people in
order that they might obtain the support they ought to receive,
this could be done in no other way than by making some regula-
tion with respect to the Corn-laws. He thought a beneficial altera-
tion tnight be made which, without injuring the agrieulturists,
and benefit the manufacturers. The present fluctuation of duty ope -
rated to prevent that fall benefit being received by their Commercial
transactions with other countries, which they would otherwise
enjoy. Some said why not import corn from Canada ? Be-
cause it was impossible to ascertain what price would be
obtained in this country; but if they kept the price of
corn moderate, in which the alteration would not exceed 10
or 15 per cent., they could send their manufactures to obtain
corn to the benefit alike of the manufactures and the population.
of the country. What he contended was that the Cerra.laves ope-
rated without advantage to the manufacturer or agriculturist. -No
great interest could be injured without every other class of the corn.
munity suffering in constquence. He should, therefore, regret the
adoption of any measure which would at all injure the agricultural in.
terest. What he wished was, some plan by which no interest would
be injured, but the community greatly benefitte d, which he was per.
suaded was possible. Another class greatly Afrcted by the high
price of bread was the small fundholders. He should therefore
seriously snpport an application to Parliament.
Mr. GALLOWAY thought they should discuss this importaat ques.
Lion before a larger assembly, and wished -an adjournment.—(No,
no.) He wished a total repeal, but thought at present the safest
plan was to obtain a moderate fixed duty. It had been said this
was not a poor man's question; he should like to know who were
so much interested in it as the poor ? All classes
were deeply interested in it, hut the poor of all classes especially.
Everything was regulated by supply and demand, and was a com-
plete fallacy to propose that the price of corn h ad any effect wha
ever in the price of labour. If these laws were not repealed, he
was firmly convinced that the best interests of the cotmiry would
suffer. He believed that there was a difference of at least 60 per
cent. in the price of food in this country and on the continent.
The exclusive advantages which England enjoyed from her ma-
chinery was here no longer, and foreign competilion had enormously
increased within the last few years, by which the manufacturing
superiority of England was almost annihilated. He thought the
question was particularly and especially a poor man's question, and
it was on these grounds that It had his best su;poet —('.Question.")
Mr. STAGY replied. He repeated what had been asserted, that
a more ignorant miserable set of men than the agriculture) la-
bourers did not exist. How could they upon 9s—how could they,
even upon the:r own maximum of 12s. a week, educate themselves
or their families? In fact the wages they at present received were
given them more as a charitable pittance, than as the reward which
they were entitled to receive for their labour. The national debt
had been eferred to by several gentlemen, but roe one of them
had pointed out the most remote connection between the Corn-laws
and the national debt.—(Hear, hear.) Aftor some further obser.
stations, Mr. Stacy concluded by saying that he could not consent
to any alteration in the terms of his motion.
The question was then put, and the amendment was negatived
by a large majority.
Mr. STEVENS then moved as an amendment, to introduce instead
of the words " a free trade," the words" a moderate fixed duty."
Alter a short discussion, the amendment was carried by a large
majsrity.
An attempt was then made to move the od)aurnment of the
Court, which was negatived.
The motion for the petition In, the amended terms .wes .then
agreed to, atutthe Court ad)ourned; , . ,

MPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Their Lordships met at the usual hour.
Petitions against the repeal of the Corn-laws, from
various places in Ergland and Scotland, were presented
by Lord Lovelace, the Earl of Winchilsea, and the Earl
of Aberdeen.
The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented several
petitions from the West Riding of Yorkshire in, favour of
an alteration in the Corn-laws.

IRISH CORPORATION REFORM.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a pe-
tition from the Corporation of Londonderry against
the Irish Corporation Reform Bill. This pe-
tition was sealed with the seal of the Corpo-
ration, so that although the petition which be
had presented on a former night were only the petition of
the Mayor and Sheriffs in their own individual character,
h's Noble Friend oppisite was deceived by his Radical
friends when he was told that the corporation of London-
darry were in favour of the Bill.
Tbo Earl of WIN C HIL SE A presented a similar peti-
tion from the corporation of Dublin.
After the presentation of several petitions,
The Bithop of EXETER rose, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HO USE OF COMMONS.
Tho SPEAKER took the Chair at five minutes before
Four o'clock.
M
Mr. BAILEY, the new ember for Inverness, was in-
troduced by Captain Gordon and Mr. Mi Kenzie, and took
the oaths at :I .e table.
A clerk from the omen of the Poor-law Commissioners
brought up certain returns.
On the motion of Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND,
the Braekston Ash Court of Requests Bill was real a third
time and passed.
STON, the
On the motion of Mr. AL Bedford, Wo-
oad Bill was read a second
burn, and Leighton Bussard R

time.
ENISTOUN, the Calton
On the mation of Mr. D
of Glasgow Police Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. BERNAL, the Stroud Church
Bill was read a second time.
On the motion of Mr. HANDLEY, the Farmer's and
General Fire and Life Assurance Company Bill was read
a second time.
Mr. :11'K ENZIE moved that Mr. Houston be added to
the Committee on the Clyde Navigation Bill ; the omis-
sion of his name, in the first instance, having been caused
by his accidentally late arrival on the occasion when the
Committee ‘‘as nominated.
Mr. GREENE opposed the application as inconsistent
with the due observance of the Standing Orders.
Sir G. GREY coincided with the objection.
Mr. MACKENZIE contended that it was quite con-
sistent with the Standing Orders that the House should
add a new name to a Committee after its original nomina-
tion. The Bill affected the interests of Mr. Hous-
ton's constituents to a very considerable extent,
and his local knowledge would be of infinite assistance to
the Committee in examining the details of the Bill.
Mr. CAMPBELL (of Argyleshire) opposed the me_
tion. If the plea of the Hon. Member's constituents,
being interested in the Bill, was admitted in favour of the
departure from the Standing Orders, the same plea might
be alleged in favour of nominating upon the Committee
any other Member for any part of Scotland or Ireland, or
even of England, as all were interested in the navigation of
the Clyde.—( Hear.)
Mr. ESTCOURT and Lord G. SOMERSET also
opposed the motion, which was ultimately negatived.

EDINBURGH AND OLA F,POW RAILWAY
Li,.
'the AIToIIN,V Y-GENERAL rose " to caii tiie
attention of the House, to the petition (presented 6th
Aprid for leave to bring :no )\iil for ,the Edinburgh and
Qla.sgow 'a he on. and iscs's4‘j"4 flensleman
precee4ed. tootsteithe circumstances under which he ‘kai
forward his mot,oq. , ;The t,indertaking to which
the mot-on reerrcei was csne which had beat ;Commenced
fur the purpose of establishing a conatsunieati'oai betweep
Edinhur4l) and Glasgow, and was cite of great importsnce.
The undertaking was a bona fide one, but the Bill brought
in on the subject was introduced as a third class one, while
if should have been introduced as one of the second class.
The B 11 lad been thrown out do this technical objection,
which he now proposed to remedy.
The SPEAKER here intimated that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman should for a moment defer his motion.
COMMITTEE; ON THE TOTNES ELECTION.
Mr. ORD then brought up .a report of the Members
who had been chosen to serve on the Totnes Election
Committee. The Members were as follows :—Lord
Mahon, G B. East, the Hon. C. Langdale, G. R.
Philips, Tuffnell, Captain Jones, and the Han. R.
Clive.
Mr. ORD then brought up a report of the Members
who had been chosen to serve on the Cambridge Election
Committee. The Members were as follows : Divett,
Sir J. Walsh, H. Compton, J. E. Sutherland, E. Pro-
theroe, Sir G. Ssrnerville, and Sir C. Lemon.
Mr, Thomas Hamilton, medical attendant of Mr. Su-
therland, being called in and examined, stated that the
Hon.. Member was:too unwell to attend to any regular busi-
ness. He would not be able for three weeks or more to
discharge his duties as a Member of a Committee of
that House. He might have been able to come to the
House tc-day, but he would not have been able to enter
into any defence of himself, or make his own excuse.
After a few words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL and
Mr. STANLEY, who did not think the excuse quite satis-
factory,
Mr. ORD, the nominated Chairman of the Committee,
stated that :f the [louse accepted this excuse, as ses.med to
be the case—( Hear, hear)—according to the rules of the
House the. Committee was dissolved de
,facto, and it would
be the duty of the General Committee of Election petitions
to select another Committee from the same panel, and every
Member upon that panel would be required to attend daily
in his pl cc until the Committee was sworn in.
EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW RAILWAY BILL.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then moved for leave
to bring in a Bill to amend the Edinburgh and Glasgow
Railway Bill.
Sir G EORGE GREY suggested that the more regu-
lar course would be to present a petition for leave to bring
in a Bills which petition being referred to the Committee
on private Bills, would give an opportunity of bringing the
merits of the application fairly before that Committee.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL adopted the sugges-
tion of his Right Hon. and Learned Friend, and having
withdrawn the motion, presented a petition from the Edin-
burgh and Glasgow Railway Company, for leave to bring
in a Bill.
The petition having been read,
Tne ATToRNE Y. GENERAL moved that it be re-
ferred to the Committee on Private Bills.
FR.ES Id Fl ELD objected to the motion as incon-
sis.ent with the rules and prectice of the House. In the
ca,e of the Ardwick Improvement Bill, a similar petition
was opposed (as we urderstood( by the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman himself (ths. Attcrney-General), and was rejected
by the House, although the improvement was one of great
impurtance. The petition was rejected in consequence of
a siugle error, without any intention to deceive the House
on the pal t of the petitioners, and though the circumstances
were different fro n the present case, the principle was the
same. The reception of such petitions, and the referring
them to the Committee on Private Bills, would lead to the
re-agitation of questions which had been already settled by

the House.
GEORGE GREY supported the motion, on the
ground that there ought to be some indulgence given by
the House which ought not to exclude parties from all
means of escape from an accidental error, be the merits of
the case what they might.
After a few observations from Sir G. CLERK and
Mr. GREEN, it was agreed that the petition should be
referred to the Committee on Private Bills.
Mr. ORD then moved that the attendance of Mr.
Sutherland on the Cambridge Election Committee should
be dispensed with.
Mr. WA RBURTON was not at all satisfied with the
medical testimony given with regard to Mr. Sutherland.
He wished to speak plairily, and the truth appeared to him
to be, that though that Hon. Member could not attend a
Com nittee, he Would be. very well able to vote with his
wirty, and attend a division of the House.
Atter a few words from Sir CH ARLES DOUGLAS
and Sir G. GREY,
Sir G. CLERK moved that, for the further information
of the House, Dr. Hamilton should be again callen in and
examined;
It was found, however, that Dr. Hamilton was no longer
in attendance.
Mr. STANLEY wished th it the consideration of the
question should be adjsurned till to-morrow.
The motion was then withdrawn.
Mr. W. STANLEY gave notice that he would in the
Committee on the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues
Bill, move a clause in conformity with the recommendation
of the Ecclesiastical Commission of 1835.
Mr. F. MAU LE gave notice that on this day se'night,
he would move for leave to bring in a Bill for the regula-
tion of the trade of chimney sweeping.
CHINA.
Sir J AMES GRAHAM then rose and said—Mr.
Speaker, wean I consider the magnitude of the subject
which 1 have felt it my duty to bring under the
considertion of this House, ard when I think of
the immense natural interests which are at stake.
and when I think of tire perlous position in which
these arc placed at this moment, I confess
that I shrink from the task which I have imposed on my-
self—not so much on account of the inability which I feel
to do justice to the cause, but from an apprehension that
any inadvertent expression or imprudence of mine
should place those great national interests in a
state of greater jeopardy than they are at present.
But Sir, 1 think it impossible, considering the present
state of our relations with China as evinced in the papers
laid on the table of the House, that this House, though not
invited by the Crown to express any opinion on this sub-
ject could with advantage to the public interest any
longer delay the expression of their opinions.—( Cheers. )
I therefore conceive I am cischarging a public duty when
I bring this question under the notice of the House, and
that I shall most faithfully discharge it if I give
expression to the feelings and impressions which
a careful and attentive consideration, of the subject
has produced on my mind. I fear I shall not be able to
command the attention of the House during the length of
time I must occupy in bringing under their notice the de-
tails of this great question, But at all events I shall best
deserve their patient forbearance, if I at once proceed to
the subject-matter to which I call their attention. And'
Sir, in the first place, I would beg to call to the serious
consist ration of the House the magnitude of the interests
which are involved in our relations with that country. 1
am guilty of no exaggeration when I state that
one-sixth of the whole unitt d revenue of Great
Britain and India is dependent on our relations with China
and India. In the last scar the revenue paid into the Ex-
chequer on account of tea in this country amounted to no
less a sum than 3,660,000/. - Besides that there are seve-
ral reoeipts arising from imposts upon other imports from
that country, making the Bri.ish revenue derive from her
inters urse with China no less, a sum annualy than
'2,400,0001a Now, with respect to India, where our dilli
rattles are principally financial, I would beg to call to the
attention of those House how large a proportion of the
revenue of ttat country is remitted into China
The gross income of India may be stated a'
20,000,0001 annually ; and, unless I am mis-
tak n, the income derived from China is no less than
2,000 000/. annually ; and the difficulty of our connection
with ludia being the difficulty of remittance, China has
aff oded this remarkable facility in its intercourse with
China, that year by year, for the last five years, since the
trade, there has been an annual influx from China into
India of species averaging 1,300,0001. annually, and in the
last year yielding no less a sum than 1,700,0001. I have
already, I think, related enough to this House to fix its
attention to this subject as a most important one, consider-
ing that at the present moment, whether at home
or in India, our difficulties are principally financial.
But I should not do justice to my subject if I did not for
one moment ask permission of rho House to call attention
to the peculiar character, the vast importance, and the
great strength of the Chinese empire. Unhappily we
were on the verge of a rupture with that country, and
there is nothing less wise than to despise our enemies.—
( Hear, hear.) And it will be well to consider what are
the resources of the country with which we are about to
engage in war. Now I must say I think a very general
fallacy prevails in this country respecting China. —( Hear.)
Our notions of that country generally are derived
from the intercourse with a single port, to which alone
Birtish subjects are admitted ; and the public opinions is
formed from intercourse with Canton alene. And if I
wished in the plainest manner to illustrate the extent of
this error, I would say it is exactly as if a foreigner were
permitted to anchor at the None, and after a time to land
at Wapping, and when there placed in close confinement
during his residence under such circumstances were to
pronounce a deliberate opinion upon the resources, genius,
and character of the British Empire—(Hear, hear)—sir,
I will now just call attention to what is the real truth with
respect to the Chinese Empire. It is inhabited, three
hundred and fifty millions of human beings—all
directed by the will of one man—all speaking
one language—all governed by one code of laws—all pro-
fessing one religion, and ail actuated by the same feelings
of national pride and sympathy. They date their
origin not by centuries, but by tens of centuries, transmit-
ted to them in regular successsinn, under a patrialchal
government, without interruption ; and boast of educa-
tion,eeev conveniences
printing,eee es
andluxuries
arts,es
of
f lifeand b a ofs
enjoyed all t
nhd
by them when Europe was still sunk in badr
in this
• morancyjvci,ifizathtirlL
and
when the light of knowledge was olescure
only with regard to that unity which
.great
western hemisphere. But not onlyh theiris
stnreuemgbther,s—hentotl
call the attention of the House—their means.
gularly collected—they have no e y
onion of Asia. Nearly one-
They possess an annual revenue
of
h6t_o,othoeo,9ooie,
harhei-t
the largest and fairest por
climate they
third of that which is in thefinest.
finest rivers and intersected by a canalhe
N.,- miles in
cultivate a most fruitful soil, whichiswiaoteoroed by the
every portion of this im
length, which is one of thmeenwoendeemrsphirfet
therveorilid,enaenduniin_
formitv of system—one jealous suspicion of stranger-,
evinced both on the shores cf the yellow sea and along the
confines of India, and the boundaries caskve, Tebet, and
I may the question
surely, then,
taN,heePtahnetr. it is not wisor to trade than to quarrel
with such a nation as this ?—( Hear, hear, hear.)
would it not be more prudent to conciliate such a people
by the arts of peace, than attempt to use them with the
cruelties of war.—(Hear.) There is one remarkable
characteristic of this people, to which I have already
alluded. Their extreme jealousy and suspicion of stran-