The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-28 00:00:00

-
sent Parliament, but I believe a great number, upwards
of a hundred. But the vast majority, I would say, in
many cases, the same person has been returned, and in
some cases persons entertaining similar -views. But this
I state with confidence that in 20 elections in which the
former Member has been changed—in large towns—in
agricultural constituencies—in every description of con-
stituency—out of these 20 vacancies in which a change
has taken place, there have been 16 returned adverse to
you and four only in your favour.—(Cheers.) And in
the vacancies in which there hare been changes during
the present session there have been a positive loss of
not less than twelve. I say, therefore, whatever
may be your expectation of future appeals to the people
of this country, you have no right to assume that the re-
sult of the elections has hitherto proved that on your
abstract merits as an administration, the opinions of the
constituency differs from the opinion of their represents-
tives.—(Cheers.) I know it may be said that all my
general doctrines may be true •, that it is right, under
ordinary circumstances, that the Ministry should have
the confidence of the House of Commons, but it will be
said that here are special and peculiar circumstances
which exempt us from the ordinary rule, and entitle us
to remain in office. Sir, this is the ready excuse which
maybe made by those in power at any time.—
(Cheers.) Who can deny the important position
of this country—the complicated affairs to be admi-
nistered ? There must be at all times special and pecu-
liar circumstances, and if at once you, being judges, you
the Executive Government, may discover special
and peculiar circumstances by which you are exempted
from the ordinary principles of Executive Government,
there is no limiting the application of this principle.—
(Cheers.) Moreover the men to determine on that
principle are not impartial judges—(Cheers)—as to the
circumstances constituting these special cases.--(Cheers.)
Perhaps it may be said, however, that you contemplate
an appeal to the people, that you are holding office for
the purpose of making that appeal. Sir. I know nothing
whatever on this subject. As a Member of this House
of Commons I can have no evidence of the intention of
the Government. I see you perpetually in a minority—
I see indications that you have not the confidence of the
House of Commons. I know that you have the power
at any time of dissolving, and that you can choose the
most favourable time, unless some particular Bills are
before the House. I know this is a delicate prerogative.
But the existence of that prerogative, and any concealed
motives actuating you, cannot make it less my duty to
call upon the House to say whether it gives you its con-
fidence or not.—(Cheers.) I shall have no additional
confidence in you after you have greatly excited the pub-
lic mind on a subject of no less importance than the sub-
sistence of the people.—(Cheers.) I firmly believe that you
are not advancing by that course the measure of which
you are the advocates. I don't underrate your power,
nor do I underrate the evils which your course has and
must produce—however I do doubt your power to carry
the measure which you have propounded, of a duty of ls.
per bushel on corn.—(Cheers.) My belief is, that you
have less power to carry it than you had to carry
the Sugar Duties—(Cheers)—and, although I have no
right to anticipate what may be the decision of the
House upon the question of the Corn-laws, does
not every man within the House concur with me in
thinking that you bring forward the measure without a
hope to carry it ?—(Loud cheers.) You could not have
even the most distant hope to carry it in the present
House of Commons. You bring it forward, I will not
say for the purpose, but certainly the effect of your pro-
position will be, to cause increased agitation among the
people, and an increased indisposition to come to any
settlement of the question.—(Cheers.) Still you con-
ceal your intention, and say that after a debate upon the
Corn-laws, you reserve to yourselves the right to come
to a decision as to your future policy. That, in my
opinion, is a reason for bringing forward my resolution,
and I am fortified in that position by the course which
you have taken with reference to a Lieasure of scarcely
less importance—l mean the consideration of the.
Poor-laws.—(Loud cheers.) And see what that course
has been. You propose, without sufficient authority •
as a Government—you propose to submit that measure,
and yet at the same time you will not bring forward that
measure which you deem essential to the public welfare
—the Poor-laws. On what ground do you withhold that
measure from our consideration ?—(Loud cheers.) I have
your own authority, the statement from your own
mouths, of the grounds why you withhold from discus-
sion in the House of Commons so important
a measure as that of the new Poor-laws.—(Cheers.)
The Noble Lord said that in the present state of affairs
he thought they had better not go into the consideration
of the Poor-law Amendment Bill, and what was his
reason ? because, in the first place, he thought it would
lead to protracted discussion without any final result.—
(Cheers.) That is the ground upon which it is urged
that the consideration of the New Poor-law Bill should
be withdrawn from the cognizance of the House of Com-
mons—that it will lead to protracted discussion, without
producing final results.—(Hear.) Nov, if you may
anticipate as to the Poor-law, may not I also anticipate
as to the Corn-law.—(Loud heers.) If I am deficient
in forms, and non-observant of technicalities in antici-
pating the result of the discussion on the Corn-laws,
are not you as non-observant of technicalities in antici-
pating the result of the discussion of the Poor-laws ? If
you antici-.2te a protracted discussion without final re-
sult, as the consequence of the discussion of the Poor-
laws, may I not anticipate the same with regard to the
Corn-laws ?—(Loud cheers.) The next reason you
give for postponing the consideration of the Poor-
laws is, the expectation that every honourable
Member will soon have to give an account of his con-
luct at the hustings. The Noble Lord thought a great
many motions and speeches would be made, intended
rather for the hustings than for any useful purposes of le-
gislation.—(Lould cheers.) Now, the reason you give is
not the unpopularity of the law, and not because you
suppose that the discussion of the law might be incon-
venient to Members just prior to an election ; but the
ground for withdrawing the consideration of the Poor-
law from the cognizance of the House of Commons is
that it will lead to protracted discussion without pro-
:hieing final results, and that Members will bring for-
ward motions and make speeches addressed rather to the
hustings than to useful purposes of legislation. For
these reasons the Poor-law is withdrawn, yet the Corn-
law is proceeded with. Now, is there more prospect of
final legislation with respect to the Corn-law than with
respect to the Poor-law ?—(Loud cheers.) Is there less
expectation of long speeches addressed rather to the
hustings than to useful purposes of legislation ?—(Loud
cheers.) Is there a prospect that the discussion of the
Corn-laws can lead to any final result ? Is there any
prospect but that the discussion of the Corn-law ques-
tion must at the present time lead to the aggravation of
the agricultural and manufacturing distress ? And it is
.vith those opinions to which I have already adverted
AS to the discussion of the Poor-laws that I am informed,
Although I can hardly believe it, that her Majesty's
Ministers propose to bring forward the question of the
Corn-laws, and on the result of that discussion to ap-
peal to the people.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial
benches.) Sir, if that appeal be made, and on such grounds,
so far in my opinion from tending to remedy the depressed
state of trade it will tend greatly to aggravate it by the
continued agitation which it will introduce into the
public markets by the interruption which it will occasion
in all retail transactions, and by the state of uncertainty in
which the public mind must be for months, as to what
may be the ultimate decision of the House of Commons.
I believe, Sir, that the agitation of this question of the
Corn-laws will only tend to aggravate all those evils from
which the country is already suffering.— (Cheers.) And
so far from the expected discussion of the Corn-law ques-
tion being a reason why I should not press my motion
to a division, it constitutes an additional ground in my
mind for so doing.—(Loud cheers.) There are other
reasons for this motion, into which I will not now enter.
My plain and simple proposition is that you do not pos-
,ess the confidence of the House of Commons, and there
ire other reasons besides those I have mentioned on
which I withdraw my
confidence from ) ou. I have no con-
ridence in your administration of the finances.—Cheers.)
I believe that the evils of your financial administration
ire owing to the same causes—to your attempt to admi-
lister the Government without possessing the confidence
,f the House of Commons.—(Cheers.) I do not believe
that if you had possessed the confidence of the House of
Commons you would, in the face of an increasing expen-
liture and an increasing deficiency, although not with a
decreasing revenue--.I do not believe you would have in-
uirred the risk which you, have incurred, by giving up
1,200,0001. of your Post-otk-.4 revenue.—(Loud Tory
sheers.) I believe the same causes induced you to have
recourse to that expedient which are ac:ll44ing
—(Cheers.) You had been for some time you now.
nigt be-
tween Conservatism and Liberalism. You fout
ne-
cessaryprineipletos,
antico whennduct youyour attempted Governmentto
ond
o Csoo 47
n seor
av
for-
feited the confidence of those Gentlemen opposite, who
had up to that period been ytoour
rseupporters --(Loud
.:lieers.) It was necessary
opinion ; some means weretheir good
pose ; you were pressed on the necessarysubjectersg.)oa fin
And
ohuredPost-officewhen
thathe pu
wasr -
revenue, and you gave it up.—(
the Post-office Revenue given up I After your failure
in the Jamaica question.—(Cheers.)
the recesses of your counsels—l do noteasna
yn thatdive
of cannot
measures stand in the relative situation cause and
effect, but it is remarkable that the Post-officeßevenue
should be given up just after you were defeated in
on your
colonial measure. I resisted and opposed that measure
'or giving up the Post-office Revenue at the time, not
)ecause fwas insensible to the advantages which might
• g
accrue from a diminished rate of postage, but becauseli .hlt
thought you could not afford, with your deficiencies, to
give up such a source of revenue; because I could not
')elieve that your resolution to supply the deficiency of
the revenue by increased taxation could be trusted to
after the revenue was gone—(Cheers)—and I believe that
the same cause—your weakness as an Administration—
induced you to propose that measure, that has induced you
to bring forward this measure relating to the Corn-laws.
—(Cheers.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer has
never explained how much he calculates to raise by this
tax upon corn ; but unless he can raise 1.600,000/. by
ads tax upon corn his budget is worth nothing.—
Xheers.) As I understood the Right Hon. Gentleman,
I have a doubt whether he said 600,000/. or 1,600,0001.
would have to. be raised, but if I am to estimate the
customs at the'same amount as they were last year,
1,600,000/. must be raised upon foreign corn during, the
present year. With respect to the duty on timber, I
have seen an answer returned by Lord Sydenham to a
deputation, in which he stated that he had no informa-
tion on the subject of those duties. Lord Sydenham had
also stated that even if the Government should bring for-
ward the timber duties it would be his imperative duty to
urge that a due regard should be had to all existing in-
terests, and that there should be ample time for parties
who have vested interests to dispose of them. If that
were the case, and if it were an imperative duty imposed
upon Lord Sydenham, would it be possible to realise in
the course of the present year the amount required ? It
is not my intention to enter at the present moment into
many other matters connected with the Government. I
will reserve my opinion on them. I will reserve my
opinion on the question of China, though I cannot but
consider that we are placed in a position with regard to