The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-19 00:00:00

NDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1841.

Right Hon. Baronet, not having met with any single an-
tagonist worthy of his powers, had determined to reply to
twelve gentlemen at once, and to spit all of them on his
lance.--(Cheers and laughter.) He was more willing
to suppose that than to give credence to a rumour
that the Right Honourable Gentleman had remained
silent under coercion--(Cheers and laughter ; " Oh,
no," from Sir E. Knatchbull ; and renewed laughter)
—that he had been induced to refrain, least he
should make some inopportune disclosures.—(Cheers and
laughter.) The Right Hon. Baronet, in the course of
his s'eech, had said the time was now come when it
would be right for them to speak out.—(Cheers.) The
countenances of Gentlemen on his (Mr. Buller's) side of
the House had, at the commencement, been gilded with
the expression of hope ; the hungry sheep had looked
up, but they had not been fed.—(Cheers and laughter.)
The countenances of the Right Hon. Baronet's paulo post
futurum colleagues--(A laugh}—had fallen in terror at
the thought of the imprudent revelation which they
dreaded.—(Cheers and laughter.)—But neither the hope
nor the terror was destined to have long endurance.
The Right Hon. Gentlemen had said that the time was now
arrived when gentlemen opposite should speak out as to what
they thought of •certain doctrines which had been laid down
by the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton. He had called
upon them to say what they thought, not what they would do.
On that point he supposed the Right Hon. Baronet was satis-
fied with the revelations of the Budget.—( Cheers and laughter. )
The Right Hon. Baronet had said that he should confine his
observations within a narrow compass and certainly
if by a narrow compass he meant a compass quite
outside the question in debate, he had done so, for not
once in the course of his speech had he alluded to the sugar
duties. He (Mr. Buller) should not follow the Right Hon.
Gentleman through all the topics which he had
introduced into his speech. He hoped they would
have another opportunity afforded them when they
might discuss with more propriety, according to the rules of
House, the question of the Corn-laws—( Loud Ministerial
cheering)—and when the Right Hon. Baronet would have
an opportunity of describing the terrible state to which the
country would be reduced, by becoming a series of smiling
pastures studded with towns, and the horrors which might be
expected to overwhelm us when war should become unknown.
—( Cheers and laughter.) The Right Hon. Baronet had
taunted Members on his side of the House with their inconsis-
tency. He wondered how the Right Hon. Gentleman could
talk ofeiriconsistency. He wondered that when his lips at-
tempted to utter that word they did not refuse to form the
syllables, and come out with the words " malt tax" instead.
The Right Hon. Gentleman had complained of the spirit of de-
ception in which these measures had been brought forward.
In fact, his opinions might be summed up in his old motto
" Nusquam tute fides."—(Loud cheers and laughter.) It was
not his intention to depart from the principle whieh had been
observed by the House by going minutely Into the subject be.
fore it.—(Cheersa) The arguments in support of the propo-
sition of her Majesty's Government were so exceedingly special
as hardly to afford matter for a very lengthened debate, and,
above all, the resolution of the Noble Lord not to take any
slave produce, seemed to him to be so completely the essence of
the most refined fanaticism, that he could ndt seriously discuss
it. '1 he principle was worth nothing unless it was consistently
acted up to, and to realise it we must confine ourselves rigidly
to the use of articles the produce of free labour. Now, he
could not seriously discuss this question, because,
he believed that the supporters of the Noble Lord's resolution
did not value their consistency on that point as much as they
did a pinch of snuff.—(Cheers and laughter.) The arguments
of those who supported the sugar monopolies, were the extra-
vagant and absolute arguments, by which a protective trade
had always been defended, and on this occasion they had even
been carried higher, for it had been contended that we were
bound to maintain those high duties, not only for the purpose
of maintaining but of creating a protective trade, for what else
were the arguments brought forward on the subject of East
India sugar ?—(Cheers.) At any rate that was not an esta-
blished or ancient trade—that was not a vested interest. Until
very recently our laws had discouraged the production of sugar in
that country, but now the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite came
forward with a poetical description of the valley of the Ganges,
and said that it ought to be devntedlo, the cultiyation of sugar,
and, that for that purpose the sugar trade should protected!
For whose benefit he would ask ?—for that of some.. great capi-
talist, perhaps, who might be induced to divert his capital
from the West, to the .East Indies; but would any one tell him
that it would be for the advantage of the poor native of Hin-
dostan that he should be induced to devert his industry'solely
to' the' purpoSe: of raising sugar for the English market ?
It would be the greatest curse that could be inflicted upon
the natives of India to tempt them to raise sugar, not for the
market of the world, where they might improve by meeting
with competition, but for the protected and confined market
of the mother country, thus making their dependant upon
every fluctuation in our commercial policy.—( Cheers. ) We
had reflected many injuries upon them ; we had needlessly in-
terfered with their prejudices ; we had ground them down with
taxation, we had destroyed their manufactures of cotton and
muslin, but there were one curse greater than all whieh we
might inflict upon them, and that was in fostering an artificial
and protected industry.—( Cheers. ) These who argued in
support of the West Indian monopoly, said that after all
monopoly was the best way to support lowness of price ;
that after an indefinite time, if they were sufficiently
protected in the West Indies would furnish an ample supply of
sugar. But that was not the high argument which was put
forward that they should foster the growth of sugar in the
West Indies, in o.der to prevent the production of sugar by
slave labour. Now, no man, he thought, could be chimerical
enough to suppose that by refusing the sugar of the Brazils,
they should put an end to slavery in that country. The only
reasonable ground advanced in support of the monopoly, was
that it was desirable to continue it to give the experiment of
emancipation fair play. That was a most dangerous policy,
because it was leaving the success of that experiment upon a
result which must disappoint them. When they freed the
slaves, the result ought to have been foreseen,that the industry of
the blacks would be transferred from exportable products to
articles of consumption. It was not to be expected but that
in Jamaica, when the old sugar lands, were worn out, and
when there were plenty of other lands, the blacks should take
to the cultivation of other products, and the exports of sugar
should, consequently, decrease. In Antigua and Barbadoes,
where there were no waste lands and plenty of labour, the ex-
ports had not diminished ; while in Demerara, Berbice,
Guiana, and Trinidad, where the lands were not worn out, the
proprietors expressed themselves as not fearing the competi-
tion cf the Brazils if they could get a supply of labour. Mr.
Burnley, in Trinidad, had said at a public meeting in that
island, that if they would remove all restrictions, he would be
ready to enter into a competition with the whole world ; but
that gentleman had not slumbered under the tree of protec-
tion, but immediately upon the emancipation had taken mea-
sures to procure a supply of free labour. But it was not, after
all, on these special grounds that the question was to be
argued ; it was not even on the ground of revenue, but it was
on the necessity of adopting such principles of free trade as
should not only maintain the existing markets but open up
new ones to the great export trade of this country. When
gentlemen, talked so lightly of our foreign markets did they re-
member what it was that enabled us to maintain a more vast
population and a greater extent of comparative comfort than
any country in Europe? It was our export trade.--(Hear,
hear.) Between 1811 and 1821 the population of this
country had increased by 875,000 families, of these 65,000
only had been added to the agricultural class. Be-
tween 1821 and 1831, while the agricultural class had
actually decreased in mumbers, the population of the country
had increased by 475,000 families, so that altogether there
were upwards of 500,000 families, containing about two mil-
lions and a half of human beings, depending upon other em-
ployment .than agriculture. Now, how could they be main-
tained except by manufacturing for the export trade —(Loud
cheering)—and if they distroyed existing markets, and failed
to raise up new ones, our population must become the most
beggarly in the world. Our trade with the Brazils, and the
United States were now in jeopardy. Both countries, in the
revision of-this tariff, threaten retaliatory measures. Under
these circumstances, it was the duty of the Governmen to tell
the House they eould not keep up the present system, but must
have free trade, that the people might live. A great deal had
been said about the present being an inconvenient time. He
had ever found that the time proposed was ever the most in-
convenient to those who had to give up their privilege.—
( Cheers and laughter.) But he would ask them if last year,
when sugar was dear, the measure had been proposed they would
not have called it precipitate; and with regard to the Corn-laws
if the abolition had been proposed during a moment of fa-
mine, then they would have been swept away ; but 'without
any regard to existing interests, without even the protection
at which Hon. Genvlemen opposite affect to sneer. Gen-
tlemen opposite affect to sneer at what they called the agita-
tion of the Corn-law question. For himself he could only
say that the effects produced by the Government preposition
had been greater than he had anticipated. But they should
recollect that it was the nature of such excitement to go on in •
creasing.—( Cheers.) He trembled for the consequences if
they were allowed to go on. But the sin of maintaining the ex-
citement rested not upon those who had brought for-
ward the question to relieve the distresses, and to in-
crease the resources of the country, but upon those
who refused to co-operate with them, who put an extinguisher
upon the measures proposed to alleviate the troubles of the
country, and who defended a monopoly which pressed with
such horrible effect upon the great mass of their countrymen.
—(Cheers.) They had not succeeded in eliciting from Gen-
tlemen opposite the course they would pursue; they had not
stated whether they would maintain all existing monopolies, or
whether, which, judging from the cautious plan they had pur-
sued, might be the case, as it had been heretofore, and they had
opposed as an Opposition those concessions which they would
grant when in power.—( Cheers.) He hoped that so unworthy
a course would not again be adopted—(Loud cheers)—and he
hoped that Hon. Gentleman having attempted to displace the
Government, would let the country see on what grounds they
were proceeding, and on what principles they intended to con-
duct the Government, if, unfortunately, they should obtain it.
There was one thing in the power of the Government, and he
trusted that they would attain that end. They might force
the Gentlemen opposite to say what they in ended to do, if
not by words, by their votes. They could only prove their
sincerity in the propositions they had laid be ore the House
by the perseverance and determination which they showed ih
carrying
.them out. Whatever imputation might be thrown
upon theire' motives, and abundant imputations were always
thrown out by those who were in the expectation of succeed-
ing to office, but the country would not heed them. The peo-
ple would see that the Government was engaged in a great
popular cause, which would justify a great and even unusual
struggle. Let them force the Hon. Gentlemen opposite to
state whether, if they would not grant cheap sugar
would they grant cheap timber—(hear, hear )—and
grant cheap coffee;
but, above all, force them to say
if neither of those, would they
whether they would
grant them cheap bread.—(Loud cheers.) Perhaps in the
course of that discussion they 'alights extract from them, or it
might be let fall inadvertently, how it was that they intended to
provide for the national expenditure, and if they refused to
make up the deficiency by diminishing the burdens of the
( . ) He could
people, let them at least explain what new burdens they in-
tended to place upon the country.—Cheers
not have any doubt of what the issue of the strnggle would be.
He was old enough to remember when the advocates of a mea-
sure were in a small minus ity in one year, which measure was
carried by acclamation in the following, but he had never seen
a permanent failure of any popular cause, when taken up by
any great party in that House. The advocates for the repeal of
these duties never battlsat under better auspices than now.
—(Loud cheers ) They had on their side the unanimous
opinion of every writer and thinker on the subject.
—(Cheers, and counter cheers.) He
repeated, of every
writer and thinker of any eminence on the subject ; but above
all, they had on their side the wants and urgent necessities of
the people—their sense of justice, their revolting sense of the
injustice which had been committed upon them in being so
heavily taxed for maintaining the luxuries of the aristocracy.
Those fighting under a standard like that, were sure to con-
quer.—(Loud cheers.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL—Mr. Speakers
this, Sir, is not the
first time that I have had oceasion to feel the extreme .embar-
rassment of being called upon to address the House when
every argument has been exhausted, and when the inge-
nuity of those who have preceded me had availed them-
selves of every topic that
could be pressed into lithe
,dis_
ssion ; and I would hive been perfectly content to re-
linquish any claim that I
,may have on the attention ofee t
the House but that I feel that the
House must see that
mi
I haveno alternative than to prefer that claim—that I should
not permit this debate to close without giving
an expression of
Loud cheers.) And as I feel that I have no
my sentiments._(
alternative left but to address the House, I trust that, without

allowing party feelings to interfere the House will grant me a
patient hearing._( Cheers.) Sir, I shall first address myself 1
to that whick is the proper subject of debate on this occasion,
viz., the question which is involved in the resolution of my
Noble Friend. Sir, that resolution embodies an opinion on
the part of this House that, considering the sacrifices which
you have made for the abolition of the slave trade and slavery,
we ought not to sanction the proposal for introducing into the
markets of the United Kingdom sugar the produce of slave
labour. And, Sir, after all the reflection which I have given
to the subject, and which it so eminently demands, my opinion
remains the same, that it would not be for the interest
or the honour of this country—( Loud cheers)—to open
our ports to sugar, thgi produce of slaves. Sir, I shall, give
my vote on this abstract question apart from any other consi-
deration. If upon this occasion I heard nothing of the Con-
laws—had nothing been said respecting the timber duties
should have been prepared—without reference to any other con-
sideration—l should have been prepared, Sir, earnestly to sup-
port the resolution of my Noble Friend. Ido not support it
upon the assumption that there is an overbearing moral oblige
tion which compels us to abstain from the consumption of all
the production of slaves. lam not one of those who con-
sider that the Right lion. Gentleman opnosite can be charged
with any dereliction of principle in bringing forward this mea-
sure. I, Sir, have myself voted for a reduction of the duties
upon articles the produce of slaves. I have contended for a re-
duction on the duty on cotton, for the purpose of encouraging
the industry of this country.—(Loud cheers.) Only last
year I supported the Right Hon. Gentleman in the attempt
to get rid of an absurd system, by which coffee, the produce
of certain slave States, was admitted into this country at a
lower duty, in consequence of its having been trans-shipped at
the Cape ; and it was from no opposition that I offered to that
measure, that it was not proceegled with. Ido believe, Sir,
that we must combine with the proceed
of a moral na-
ture, prudential considerations of a powerful nature. For in-
s'aice, Sir, I am not at liberty to peril the manufacturing in-
dustry, and threw hundreds of thousands out of employ, from
a conscientious scruple that the produce of slave labour should
not, under any circumstances, be admitted. Such large pru-
dential considerations, combined with the moral considerations
belonging to the question, are fairly within the cognizance of
legislation. lam perfectly willing to admit that those pru-
dential considerations must enter into this discussion; that
we must look and inquire whether its advantages or its
disadvantages most pi eponderate. Those considerations
I have maturely weighed, and my mind has been made up in
favour of the resolution of my Noble Friend—my mind has
been made up upon a consideration of the State of the West
Indies, and the progress which that great and important ex-
periment, upon which we have lately entered, has made. Ido
not ask you to continue the exclusion of other sugars
for the purpose of supporting any individual interests.
—(Hear, hear.) I admit that your liberality towards
the West Indians has been so great, that if their mere personal
interests were concerned you would have a right to ask them
to make some sacrifice for the public advantage. Sir, I look
at the moral and social condition-of that part of the empire in
which we have made the greatest and most arduous, and I am
happy to say, so far as it has gone, the most successful experi-
ment ever made in civilised society—(Cheers)—and I cannot
bring myself to take a step which might decide for ever that
sugar cannot be produced by free labour in our West India co-
lonies. The Hon. Member for Liskeard said, "If sugar can-
not be grown in the old islands let it be cultivated in Berbiee
and Demerara." Now I will ask the House is that the way in
which to look at the interests of a great colony like Jamaica?_
(Loud cheers.) With what fairness can we say to the white
inhabitants of that country that it is necessary for the moral
improvement of the slaves whom we have emancipated that
you should be put to large expenses ? You must have a
large new police establishment—you must provide a large
Church Establishment, and you must provide the means of
education. How can we hold that language to them, and at
the same time time say that it is to us a matter of indiffer-
ence whether sugar can be produced in Jamaica or not ? Is
this, Sir, to be the result of this great, this glorious experi-
ment ? Is this, Sir, to be the example by which we are to
persuade other countries to remit their claims on slavery ?
—that in the greatest colony which England possesses, the re-
sult of that experiment has been the total expulsion of the
white inhabitants—the destruction of their
,capital, the posses-
sion of their country by the negroes, who are contented with
the-mere agricultural plisdnee of the knit; and that trade with
England has totally ceased, and that is the happy condition in
which emancipation his resulted:-(Loud' cheere,). And yet,
says the Hon. Member for Liskeard, there is riot a writer of
authority, or a thinker upon the subject; whohas not supported
this view, and one of the witnesses Whona ,he cited, and whom
he justly' stated to be a man of high character,
was Mr. Burnley. Nor it is very odd that I am prepared
with a refutation of all the arguments of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, from the mouth of Mr. Burnley himself.
I have here a pamphlet, in which Mr. Burnley says, " Withont
the power of combining labour and increasing it, before 1840
all the capital hitherto combined by slavery must perish ;" and
he further insists upon the necessity of extensive emigration,
without which he feared that the great experiment might be
disastrous ; and if so it would create an impression
throughout the world against emancipation, which no subse-
quent efforts would be able to coumteract. That is Mr. Burn-
ley. But, Sir, I have here another authority. A few days
ago I had an interview with three gentlemen of high standing
in the commercial world, and of great ability ; they waited
upon me as a deputation from the Chamber of Commerce of
Manchester, in order to discuss this question. Of course I
told them that I must reserve any expression of my feeling
until I was in my place in this House, but I listened to them
with great attention. At the conclusion of the interview they
asked me to read a pamphlet, and they informed me that if I
would only do so with attention they had no doubt that even I
would become a convert. Of course hearing that from such high
authority, I commenced my task with some anxiety ; but as it
was written by a gentleman stated to me to be of high autho-
rity upon the question of slavery, and as it was pressed upon
me by a gentleman of the very highest charactey, and, as I
found in our interview, a gentleman of the greatest intelligence
and ability, I mean Mr. Ashworth, I did so. The pamphlet,
I found, was the production of Mr. William Greg. At first
I was inclined to believe that it was the production of the Hon.
Member for Manchester; but I am informed that it is the
work of his brother. At the end of the pamphlet he says,
6. the planters had no right to demand that the nation shoutd
endure the payment of the present enormous prices for the pro-
duce of our colonies." He also is well acquainted with our
Brazilian trade, and is a strong advocate for its being main-
tained. Yet. this chosen champion of the Chamber of Com-
merce at Manchester, a man of enlarged and enlightened
views, comes to this conclusion, that without a large emigration
of labourers into our colonies the capital there employed in the
sugar cultivation would be destroyed, for the white inhabitants
would carry what of their capital remained to other parts, and
his words are, that "in such a case emancipation will then
have signally failed." "If ever the black population shall be-
come squatters on waste lands, or cultivators merely for
subsistence, then slavery and the slave trade will have re-
ceived the last encouragement which can be given to it."
The Hon. Gentleman the Deputy of the Chamber of Com-
merce foresaw that I should he convinced that their panegyric
upon their selected champion was not just, he foresaw the argu-
ment which has been made use of in this debate, he foresaw
the argument that would be used—" you consume tobacco and
you consume coffee"—arid he says "it may be urged against
you, how can you conscientiossly permit the admission of slave-
grown sugar on the ground that it would encourage slavery and
the slave trade, when you receive into your ports, without im-
pediment, slave-grown cotton." He foresaw that his answer
to the objection is rather smart than sound—(Loud cheers)—
and its inapplicability will be obvious in a few mo-
ments. I will not give you the whole of his rea-
soning. He sums it up in a short sentence---" In a
word, the country is not called upon to exclude slave-grown
cotton, because it never has been excluded, and because of its
continued admission." (Here some observation was made in
an under tone from the Liberal benches.) You may not be a
member of the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester; but re-
collect the Chamber of Commerce are all advocates for free
trade, the men who are agitating against the Corn-laws,—they
asked me to read this pamphlet, and told me that they would
abide by the decision to which I came upon reading it._
(Cheers from the Tory benches ) He says, " This country
is not called upon to exclude cotton,—this country is called
upon to exclude slave-grown sugar, because it has always been
excluded, and because its admission now would he the greatest
possible additional stimulus to slavery and the slave trade which
England for thirty years has been lavishing all her efforts to
abolish."—(Cheers.) And the conclusion of his pamphlet is
this. He says," I think we have now clearly made out all the
propositions. The only method of abolishing the slave trade
is by destroying the demand for slaves. This object can only
be attained and may certainly be attained by establishing,
through the prosperity of our West Indian colonies, the supe-
rior cheapness of free labour, and that the prosperity will be
ensured and can only be ensured by extensive and systematic
immigration, and by a temporary continuance of the present dis-
criminatingduties on sugar.''—( Cheers from the Tory benches. )
Lest the Hon. Gentleman did not hear me, I will repeat
that " And by the temporary continuance of the present dis-
c.iminating duties on sugar."—(Loud cheers.) Now this is
not the first time that I have been indebted for an argument to
the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester.—(Hear, hear.) I
have read the pamphlet which the advocates of free trade
placed in my hands. The result of the reading of that pam-
phlet is, great respect for the abilities of the author, and a
confirmation of my previous impressions i favour of the con-
tinuance of the present discriminative duti&.—(Cheers. ) At
the same time I cannot conceal from myself the fact that there
has been, in consequence of the abolition of slavery, a great di-
minution of the productions of sugar from the West Indies,
and if I could look to no other source of supply, I believe the
pressure would be so severe, that you could not maintain the
monopoly of the West Indies.—( Hear, hear.) If you could
only look to an annual produce of 115,000 tons of
sugar, I think you could not maintain the protection.
But I look to that country which gives us hope of future pros.
perity ; I look to India, as affording a check upon extravagant
prices, and I have a competent hope that if you permit the ex-
periment to be fully made, the West Indies the Mauritius, and
the East Indies will afford you a supply which shall secure the
impertati mof sugar at a moderate price. The Chancellor of
the Exchequer referred with some satisfaction, only a satisfac-
tion, lam sure, as confirming an argument of his, to a sud-
den increase which had taken place in the price of sugar. New,
I think the Hon. Gentleman will find that, subsequent to the
day on which he spoke there has been, fm some weeks past, a
progressive reduction in the price of sugar, and, notwithstand-
ing the expectation that the House will not confirm the scheme
of the Hon. Gentleman for admitting slave sugar into the
British market, that expectation has not tended, I believe, to in-
crease the price of sugar. What may take place hereafter I
of course cannot foresee, but I am told that since, the com-
mencement of this debate, there has been again a material
fall in the price of sugar. The Hon. Gentleman who spoke
last says we are going to inflict an enormous injury upon
India by giving to the West Indies a monopoly of sugar. Ido
not exactly understand the Hon. and Learned Gentleman.
Why, if we give this encouragement to the home market, we
are preventing East Indian sugar from competing with Bra-
zilian sugar in the market of Europe. The Hon. Gentleman
says, " For God's sake don't divert the capital of India, don't
divert the labour of India by this production of sugar, which
is certain to end in subsequent disappointment." Divert the
capital of India! Why, have you considered the relation
in which we stand with India ? The question
simply is between the introduction of slave-grown
sugar and the introduction of free-labour sugar.
With respect to India, the amount of remit-
tances on account of Government is 3,200,0001.,
besides private receipts to the amount of half a million. If I
can encourage the produce, and find employment for labour,
shall I be told that 1 am inflicting an irremediable injury upon
India?—( Hear, hear.) If I enable them to make these re-
mittances by it, by encouraging the production of sugar and
protecting agricultural labour, shall I be told, with reference
to a country from which I demand an annual remittance of
3,2:10,000/., which it has no other means of making up except
by agricultural produce, shall I be told that some clear, in-
fallible doctrines of free trade prevent me from giving
encouragement to that ?—(Loud cheers). 1 recollect
some recent debates in this House upon the condition
of India. I recollect the amount of the injury you had in-
flected upon that country by the unavoidable, unintentional
cheapness of our produce. The town of Jappa was reduced
from 1,500,000 to 15,009 or 20,000, and the Malaya was
gradually advancing upon it. I recollect in the debate re-
specting the Hill Cool es, the speech of the Hon. Member for
Roxburgh, who had personal experience of the condition of the
labouring classes, and I refresh the Honourable Gen-
tleman's memory for the purpose of calming his alarm as
to the extreme danger of diverting the resources of India. The
Hon. Gentleman said he was appointed to inquire
into the condition of the . agricultural labour of
Bengali He found that they were paid about Is. 6d.

per week, or 2d. per day, that they " subsist • on
rice, and when rice fails they starve." He says " I have
seen the people by hundreds and thousands hurry towards the
point at which relief was distributed by the Governor of
Bengal. I have seen whole villages swept away by a dread-
ful inundation, and vast tracts of land utterly ruined." And
then he gives a picture of horror which exceeds anything
that the most romantic imagination ever pictured. I know
of nothing more striking than that statement.—( Hear. )
He says I know this, that an official charged with a mission
from Calcutta, was obliged to return back in consequence of
the smell from the carcases of persons who had died from
famine. Looking at our relations with that country if we are
responsible for the moral condition, for the happiness, and
comfort of its inhabitants, shall I be told that there is some
superior obligation which makes me encourage the slave pro-
duce of Cuba, in preference to the produce of a country from
which I exact a large amount of produce, and where the
labourers are in the condition I have stated? 'lfiese are the
grounds I thought before, and which I still think ought to
induce me to give my vote for the resolution of my Noble Friend
the Member for Liverpool.—( Hear, hear.) I never sought to
inflame the minds of the people of this country on the subject
of slavery. I -never took an aative part on the subject. I
gave my snpport to my worthy Friend, although I confessed at
the time that I viewed the matter with apprehension, but I
gave my support to it. I never lent myself to the cry of
slavery, and I will not now lend myself to the cry of cheap
sugar when the slavery cry begins to fail.—( Cheers.) The
Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Devonport has charged
my Right Hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge and myself
with inconsistency, with respect to East and West Indian
sugar. He stated that it was discussed in the Cabinet of
which Lord Glenelg was a member, whether or not East
Indian sugar should not be placed on the same footing as West
Indian sugar. He said it was clear that that proposition was
submitted to the Cabinet, and that the great principle involved
in ta. e question was giving protection to slave sugar in pre-
ference to West Indian sugar, arid the Right Hon. Gentleman
after stating this asked with great warmth if we were prepared
to ride into office upon such manifest inconsistency. I, Sir, do not
recollect anything of that, sort having taken plate, nor does
nay Noble Friend Lord Glenelg. If he had recollected such a
circumstence I should instantly have bowed to his deci;ion,
but I think that my Lord Glenelg's impression is the same as
mine, that the proposals were never submitted to the conside-
ration of the Cabinet. I believe they were communicated by
my Noble Friend to some Members of the Government, but
they never underwent any formal consideration. In 1828 and
1829 we declined to adopt these resolutions. It is trite that
my Noble Friend said he did not assent to the principle of
them, but the principle to which my friend referred was the
reduction of the ditty on sugar, for the purpose of increasing
consumption, but the introduction of East India sugar and
slave sugar never was the subject of discussion. It must be
remembred, too, that since that time slavery has been abolished
in the colonies of this country ; and it must be recollected also
that there was at this time a bounty upon West India sugar.
The protection then was a complete one, and therefore sugar
the production of slaves, could not enter into competiton.
Sir, I was surprised, in the course of this debate, to observe the
altered tone taken by gentlemen on the other side
of the Housa with respect to slavery.—(Loud cheers.)
I must say that after all our magnificent professions, I was sur-
prised at the course which on the other side of the House they
are prepared to take. We are to tell foreign countries that we
have at length discovered the only effectual way of putting
an end to slavery and the slave trade. We
are to tell them that the only way to do that is to encourage
competition between sugar the produce of free labour, and
that which is produced by slaves—( Great cheering)—and then
we are to be told that this proposition of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer is really and truly brought forward, not so much
to encourage the consumption of sugar, bat for the purpose of
putting an end to the slave trade.—(Great cheering.) How
was it proposed to extinguish slavery ? Why, by open-
ing the markets of England to sugar, the produce of slave
labour. Such a proposition, I will venture to say, will be
scouted in every part of the country.—( Hear, hear.) Again,
I have heard in this debate, on the authority of a Cabinet Mi-
nister, that the delinquencies of other countries are no con-
cern of ours ; that it was quite indifferent to this country what
course other countries might pursue. I think that such a state-
ment is unworthy the source from which it comes, and I hope
that the time is far distant, before we shall hear it broached again.
The Hon. Gentleman, the Member for'Wolverhanipten said that
the United States had as much right to refuse to trade withva
on the ground that we would not take their cotton', as that we'
had a right to say that we would not receive into this country
sugar the produce of slave labour. The Hon. Gentleman has
also stated that the municipal fegulaticms of ' other'Staes were
no concern of ours, and that we had no right whatever to hold
any language which might be considered as dictating the course
they should pursue. That may be all very well, but I don't
think it is the language that her Majesty's Government would
hold. Let the House look at the course which the Noble Lord
has pursued in making treaties with other countries. If I
understand rightly the Noble Lord in making the treaty with
Texas, he made it one of the provisions of that treaty that they
should abandon the slave trade. I cannot therefore think
that it is matter of indifference that we should
see what course other countries • will take with
respect to slavery. I think, whatever Hon. Members may
say of the influence these propositions have had in the country,
that the country would view with disgust and alarm the aban-
donment of the position this country has hitherto contained in
its opposition to the introduction of foreign slave-grown sugar.
Sir, the real question is not whether a certain amount of ca-
pital is employed in sugar refining—in this trade or in that—
the 'seat question is, whether we do not incur the hazard of
giving a fresh impetus to sugar the produce of slave-labour.—
( Hear, hear.) It appears to me that in abandoning that posi-
tion you are cescending from the high position you have here-
tofore occupied. Sir, you have made great sacrifices to carry out
this experiment. You have paid twenty millions of money to
emancipate your slaves in the ti est India Colonies. I trust that
that disinterested conduct will still be maintained by you, and
that you will not disqualify yourselves from holding up the ex-
ample of England as an example for other nations.—( Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord the other night, in comparing the po-
sition of England with that of Rome, observed that the circum-
stances of England were entirely different, and in a beautiful
paraphrase of Dryden observed—
" Rome, it is thine alone with awful sway,
To rule the world and make mankind obey,
Dispensing peace and war thine own majestic way."
—( Hear, hear. Sir, we are in different circumstances, for
we have formidable competitors in the arts of war. We can no
longer rule mankind by physical force, we can no longer
compel obedience to our decrees by physical force, but
I had hoped, till this debate, that there was an awful
sway by which we might still rule mankind, and make
the world obey by the influence of our example, and the disin-
terested efforts we had made for the abolition of slavery and
slave trade.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, lam sorry the Noble
Friend did not continue his quotation a little further—
" So tame the proud the fettered slave to free,
These are imperial acts, and worthy thee."
—(Much cheering.) Sir, that is the majestic way in which
I hope we cannot dispense peace or war but dispose other na-
tions to follow in our path, and by our all-glorious example to
promote the interests of humanity.—((;heers.) Sir, these
are the grounds on which I shall vote for the resolution of my
Noble Friend ; and in voting for that resolution I am taunted
by the Noble Lord with pursuing a factions course. The Noble
Lord commenced his speech by repelling with indignation the
accusation preferred against the Government, and said he was
confident that no man who had watched the progress of events
could be possibility suspect them of bringing forward any
public measure with a view to party motives. Now, Sir, I
should have thought that the Noble Lord's experience might
have freed us from the charge of having offered to him much
of factious opposition. I think the Noble Lord might have
called to his mind some occasion on which, if a factious op-
position had been offered to him his position as a Minister
would have been infinitely less safe. —(Loud cheering.) But
the Noble Lord before he preferred that charge of faction
against those who support this resolution might just have
borne in mind the question of Privilege—(Cheers)—the
question of the Union of the Canadas—(loud cheers)—or
the question of the Poor-laws.—(Loud cheering). And the
Noble Lord might have had the justice to have given his
opponents credit for not having been desirous against their
conscientious convictions, of embarrassing his course on public
questions, when embarrassment would have been the result.
--( Hear.) But a factious course ? I who have t.ken precisely
the same course which I took last year.—(Cheers.) I, who
when the Hon. Member for Wigan, proposed to me to intro-
duce sugar, the produce of slave labour recorded by my vote,
my opposition to that motion. I now stand here advocating
the same principles, putting on record precisely the same
opinions, when I say that 1 am not willing to admit slave-
grown sugar after the sacrifices the country has made. And
yet I am charged by the Noble Lord with faction. Why,
Sir, the only prima facie suspicion of faction attaching to my
course is, that it was the course taken by the Noble Lord
last year.—(Much cheering.) Really I don't see any assign-
able ground for it. I guilty of faction for adhering to my
opinions of last year ! Really 1 have had some experience of
Parliamentary assurance—(A laugh)—and I can conceive
that if I had embodied the Corn-laws, and the sugar duties,
and the timber duties in one measure, and that I had said
" Don't discuss these question separately, but try to get as
many as you can to Tote against sugar, by mixing up
with it timber and corn," then I might have been
charged with faction.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) But for
the Noble Lord, under the present circumstances, to accuse me
of faction is one of the most extraordinary charges that was
ever made. When I referred to the Right Hon. Gentleman's
proposition, did I use a word of taunt—did I not perfectly ac-
knowledge that if the interests of the country required it,
the Right lion. Gentleman was quite justified in taking a dif-
ferent course. That accusation I beg most distinctly to repel.
—( Hear, hear.) One of the charges of factious motives was
founded on the allegation that we had embodiod no great and
in evocable principles in our opposition. Sir, we have had ex-
perience enough in these principles —( Loud cheering.) The
Nob!e Lord might, perhaps, say " Why don't you imitate our
more illustrious example. Why do you not move a resolution
that no arrangement on this subject ever can be satisfactory."
( Vehement and long continued cheering.) Why, with the
mt.morable example before us of the policy of the Noble Lord
in reconsidering his resolutions—that the tear of the possibility of
our being obliged, not to recant, for that they would not do, but to
leave on the journals of the House that standing opprobrium to
all Government—(Loud cheering, in which the remainder of
the sentence was lost). That may perhaps be a sufficient ex-
cuse to all the successors of the Noble Lord to view with ap-
prehension that example ; but see what an absurdity you commit.
The Noble Lord may say that we leave to ourselves a loophole
to escape, and who could predict that we might not be guilty of
the unparalelled iniquity, that next year we may be compelled
to introduce propositions of a similar character? If we are,
shall we be worse than the Noble Lord ?—(Cheers.) Leaving
a loophole ! Why what loophole have you !—( Cheers.)
The charge you bring against me is faction. You, who op-
posed these resolutions last year, are you so uncharitable
as to think men can be actuated only by factious
motives, who leave to themselves the opportunity
at last of taking another course ?—( Cheers from the Ministe-
rial benches.) Now, do not mistake—do not believe that I
move this resolution with for forethought of being able, next
year, under similar circumstances, of deviating from the course
I now take. I will be frank.—(Loud cheers and counter
cheers.) Ido say that my opinion is that this experiment
should be fairly made, and that you ought to encourage the
introduction of free sugar and the attempt to supply the
market of the United Kingdom. And if, perhaps, if I take
the course I state, it is not that I contemplate if I succeed to
office, following your example, and having opposed your propo-
position this sear, coming down next year and proposing it—
( Cheers.) The principle for which I contend is this, that East
India sugar, rum, and the produce of all our colonies, ought
to be placed on the same footing. It is my confident
hope and expectation that the produce of our own colonies
will afford a sufficient supply of sugar ; and it' this should
prove true, since the necessary supply can be procured, 1 for
one am prepared to contend for the existing protection, so
long as the West India colonies remain in a state analagous to
the present.—( Hear, hear.) As I said before, I would not
have said a word to Hon. Gentlemen with respect to their
having taken an opposite course ; but when I am charged with
faction I have a right to refer to it. And what was-the lan-
guage held on the motion of the Hon. Member for Wigan,
which was resisted by her Majesty's Government ? We were
told that the price of sugar was high to an unparalleled degree,
that the stock was short and scanty to a degree never equalled,
and that we ought to introduce a supply from the Bra-
zils. But you, the President of the Board of
Trade, met the argument respecting the introduc-
tion of cotton, tobacco, and sugar, the produce of slave
labour, and said that there was a broad distinction between
sugar, and tobacco, and cotton. Then, when Hon. Gentlemen
on this side attempt to show that distinction, is it not too much

at or
,suamy
ett at
an wed ae d r
ar guiltysaomf
efadci
stin bt
in
ceocna u?s_e
(wce h useenrs t. he)
.15
said the people of England required that the great exPer4lso
should be fairly tried. "If, then, at this moment," you said, 4
the colonists are struggling with such difficulties as have D 791
described, you are about to do what ? to epen the flood
of foreign supply, and inundate the British market ,uvf!tl
i
sugar, the produce of slave labour, the people will be atl
nant." The price of sugar in July last was 565. 10d-,
its
now 375. 10d.—(Cheers.) You have since then given
creased facility to the introduction of East India. sugar, at
s you have equalized the duty on rum. You now find it ear
e-,
r
dent to try a different course. Be it so. Take that court'
I should have given you full credit for your motives; but n
you take that course do not think it necessary to Charge yor
opponents with faction because they take the course sva;
you have abandoned.—(Cheers.) Sir, that is all the ob:ers"
tion I wish to mate with respect to the question of sugar; an
I could have been contented to have here terminated mY,"
servations, if I had not been constantly reminded that this 11_,
great commercial and financial crisis—that the question ofst,'
is intitnately connected with other measures—that the t
vernrnent solicit investigation of their general plan, and that ef
tee
have no right to confine ourselves to the simple discust of
the question. Sir, I say that the principles of free trade
in no way concerned with this question of sugar.-0_ e,
hear.) It stands in so peculiar, special, and unparalleled t:d
aition that it is apart from all the principles of free trade,
.70
all other questions, and on its own sacred ground I give
vote against the introduction of slave-grown sugar.—( Cbeue.s
I do not deny that there is in this country great manufactr•
in;
distress, and I am sure that to whatever party we may bell
we all hear with the utmost pain and grief those details of
dividual suffering which are brought under our notice ; but
protest against them as legitimate arguments by which t°,beni
tluence the judgment of the House. No man can hear them
with greater pain and affliction than I do. I heartily ado
_no
some measure could be devised for their relief ; but, at the sauir,
time, I am bound to say that at all times, and under a
cumstances, we have had similar details of this eharactitte e
and that never can hope, in the complicated se,
of society in which we live— with the extensive manufacturol
sue
concerns in which we are engaged, to see the time when nc
appeals may not be made, and when it may not be attentittereei„
inikence our reason ani judgment by harrowing up our
9s,
the 's
ings with these melancholy details. Although I admit
vere pressure of this manufacturing distress, I must at these
time say that I do not view with the same alarm and despp,7,
ency as other Hon. Gentlemen the commercial position oftfo.
country. Ido not see the grounds for the alarm they L'at,
expressed. I have referred with some anxiety to the accost
laid before the House, of commerce and manufacture!, anedthis
belief is, that it is bat a temporary pressure. forme- opinion on the documents printed by the House, and solja.
try
ing the amount of the expert and import trade of the coo ,
during the last three years-183g, 1839, and 1840: The :3'9,
cial value of our exports in 1838 was 92,000,000/. ; in
el di
97,000,000/. ; and in 1840, 102,000,000/. If you judge 0y;,
official value I am aware that with respect to quantity noso4
factory reference can be drawn, so I turn to the a__„,ni°u".
of declared value, which, in 1838, was 49,630,01 i,
In 1839 52,700,000/., and in 1840 51,000,000/., being ade e
cation for the last year in the declared value of British prodOc,
of 1,700,0001. In the cotton manufacture there was no
crease. In the linen manufacture there was no increased
The decrease was in earthenware, in hardware, 7,00
in woollen and silk manufactures. On the declared 'said,
of 1839 and 1840 the defalcation in earthenware, iZoi,
ware, and in woollen and silk manufactures was 1,6000';,,
I find that the United States take the chief part of our nlof
factures. They take two-fifths of our handware, one-half
our silk-manufactures, and one-third of our woollen rnann't e
b
tures. When I consider the embarrassed situation d
United States, on account of the state of credit and currency
in that country—when I see the increased demand for a;
articles of British produce, I entertain a hope that when
el
temporary difficulties of the United States shall have posse,
away, there will be a corresponding increase in our maneiato
tures. We must not be in a desponding mood with respect
the demand for our articles of manufacture in the 02ite
d
_OO
States.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The value of experts f' s,
Great Britain and Ireland to the United Slate
et 36
amounted in dollars in the year '1835 to 612,000,000, inS'es
to 783,000,000, it then suddenly, fell to 44,000,000, it _s'
de-
wards rose to 65,000,000, and the next there was a great
was
crease, as might naturally be expected. Although there ihel
such a defalcation, yet experience in bur trade wiai`the 014
States warrants a hope that the demand' irk that dii bird again revive. Now just look-to thestate of our trade and
vigation ; I cannot reconcile that state .witlethe assertions n
specting failure in our manufactures and prosperity.
the
year 1838 the tonnasse on new built vessels registered into)
United Kingdom we:157,090, in the year 1839 296,000; in '
333,000; in 1838 the total number :of ships entered' ittrhe
was 4 000,000 ;in 1839, 4,432,000 ;in 1840, 4,657,000•. die
abipping outwards amounted, in 1838, to 4,099,000 ; in f
year 1839, 4,492,000; in 1840, 4,781,000. Now, certainly,
there were that severe and universal distress which is °la
re
tinned, he could hardly reconcile that incase it, trade a
navigation, as determined, not by the number of vessels, but by to
the tonnage, with any statement to that effect. Looking...,
the condition ef the United States—looking to the natural mi
terruption in trade from our relations with China—kioking
the interruption of our commercial intercourse with Syria'
looking; at the position of France and other countries of Europe
.
convulsed with the fears of war, whereby commercial trails,
%
tions must be necessarily interrupted—if a deficiency in
declared value of British exports during the last year has ete
place, I do not infer from that circumstance that
,;',e
ought to give up all hope in the manufacturing prositer
of this country. I am not prepared to admit that it
t,
country be prosperous, there should not be a relaxation in not
due restrictions on commerce. lam not prepared to say
et us remain stationary, if we improve the commercial c" es
tion of our country ; but let us apply ourselves to the C0°.7,,,
deration of the means by which we may increase the proseetlr',_
of the country. The Hon. Member for Wolverhampton (°"__,
Villiers) insisted that I ought to make a declaration of.„,lailL
sentiments' with respect to the principles of free trade. •-t_. Poi
Hon. Gentleman said that his principles and the principles
such of his friends as concur with him, are those that, without
reference reference to any other consideration, your true policy
be to buy in the cheapest market. If these are the
of 'the Hon. Gentleman, and if they are to be invariably applied
without deference to circumstances or times, I can onlY
that in the application of these principles I do not concur•
don't press them with reference to a country where there ar:
no reformod institutips, but, as my Noble Friend said, in,
country of such compricated relations, of such extensive emr-
as this, with such various moral and social obligations, inde-
pendent of mere commercial advantages, to say that yon'shou.ri
prorngmple;
rigidly and uniformly apply those principles, would_ bde_
my opinion, only involving this country in inextricable ittli_•
cnities. I apprehend her Majesty's Government, however the
Hon. Gentlemen may laud the course they are taking, will wes
as laid do
be
obliged to d ssent from the principles of free trade,
by the Hon. Gentleman. If the Hon. Gentleman's principles
,
really be to buy in the cheapest market, what does he say ,0
„t_,.,
the proposition of the Government to impose a duty of "
uponree a m
wheatdun?r—est(r Hear,
importation
ri, hear.)N Vhynfrimn.thepa,
etrmanitgaar,Petictfetbete_l
f
and everything else, if the principles of the Hon. GenGentlemanbe fully carried out ? The:Government claims for themselves tit:
same privileges which I claim for myself, namely, I liaise n
thing to do with these abstract principles without knowing the
circumstances under which, and the time when they are
applied. Notwithstanding the Noble Lord had said that
corddie']
support than he did from me, I will not hesitate to say, that d
the time I did support the proposition of Mr. Huskisson, at, '0
the result has confirmed my opinion. I think I could appeal
the Noble Lord for a confirmation of this, that one of the reaso°
assigned by Mr. Huskisson for joining in the Government P',
the Duke of Wellington, was his having received cordial, rut''
port from me. The only obstruction thrown in his WV vias,
by the Hon. Member for Coventry, and that was on that very
could]
question to which you referred. Every argument that coo
be collected was, with the assistance of the silk manufactUrorgz
of Coventry, put forward by that Hon. Gentleman, in order'. to have. Coventry exempted from the application of the 1%4°5'
ples of free trade. The only opposition in the motion met by
Mr. Huskisson was by a motion proposed by a Right ie-10°'
Gentleman who is now the columen decusque reruns "Pf het
Majesty's pi.esent Government, and he was sup Portia.
in that opposition by a faithful adherent of t,"-
same party, who was then the Member for Lincoln,
and who has since been promoted to the office of Judge'
The colleague of the Noble Lord was not content with decryingr
the principles of free trade, but he accused us, who advocat a,
them, of being cold and bloody metaphysicians.—(Cheers 30d,
laughter.) We, according to the language of Burke, as quote
by the Right Hon. Gentleman, were actuated by all the malif
nity of the^ devil, and with a sovereign contempt for the we
fare of mankind.—(Cheers and laughter.) Such was the law
guage of the Noble Lord's colleague, and he said this 17,,,
,
merely against the motion respecting silk, but: to discredit ow'
whole commercial principles, and our perseverance is thie,
course which we had framed. That was the occasion to
vsLiej.
the Noble Lord referred with so much exultation, and h: which, he said, we gave a cold and lukewarm support to
measures ef Mr. Huskisson, who, the Noble Lord would hap`
us believe, was borne on in his course by the tide of 147,1%i
support.—( Cheers and laughter from the Opposition.)
i'3;:r the Noble Lord claimed exclusive credit for the suplwr`,. „
those principles, and said that if he went out of office he
pack up his principles of free trade, and carry them with lu're —(Great laughter from the Tory benches)--ehat
would carry them away, foreseeing that we, who teed 31.'113-
been opposed to them, would try to rob him of his proe,ettii
but that such was his magnanimous generosity beforehar d, h'
he would stand by his principles, and not withhold fro•ln us t'e,
;
necessary supply of Liberal principles.—(Shouts o', teteatttc:
from the Tories.) How does the Noble Lord claim this'o'n'iu-
sive dominion over the principles of Mr. Huskiss an ?—(r err
cheers.) Where did we ever hear of that claim till,,the pres
sent moment ?—( Vehement cheering from the oppo4t,i?ir.e Was there ever a public man that pronounced a
into ,
.? ,‘v
condemnation of the principles of free trade,. than the Prime
Minister ?—( Renewed Tory cheers. ) 'When Lord Alelbourne
said that it was absolute insanity to deprive agriculture of .pro'
beentection( Cheers)—and who used language that.anight have
mine—(Qheers)—that in the present coneplicated
tions of the country it was impossible to apply the principles 0'
free trade—( Hear, hear)—yet no man rose in this House
wtt
as ethe nedspgteerta gcnaefni nts.lta
sutt
ph
oi
ysne
atdhreecol
canruastttiohoemn .3—_(Loud t
trade'
re:
0;
that trade?e—(Tory ocr
cent,
tc.h eers t‘hVeillpdutye
asadendditaccordingo_laughter.)aj u,po principles of
say
tobacco last year which was , already taxed 1,200 per' cent. ,ell 5
according to the principles of free trade
(Renewed -OFfel.-
ing. ) In truth Government do not mean to apply. theprig" ciples of free trade, and you should not talk of them as if you
were the exclusive professors of them for a long series of years'
I assented to these general principles of free trade
when they
were presented in a very different manner, when they were sui
berly and cautiously presented, with the power and means°
effecting what we proposed—( Vehement cheering from the
Tories)-when the public mind :was prepared for them, When
opposition wnas weak and its success was prevented by the ea"„:
tious and deliberate manner in hich our meaSnr%
were brought forward.—( Vehement cheers
from the Tories.)
We acted in this manner when we were in union with Mr.
Huskisson. —( Hear, hear.) I have no doubt you will ric";i•
quire from me what I propose relative to the Corn-laws',,,-;
( Hear, hear ) I will not shrink from expressing
my on the subject. lam aware that I can consistentlygwith my un'
tv
give my opinion, and 1 will give it
—( Cheers.) If I had se'°
reason to change my course, I would do so, as lion. Gent'ee-
men opposite have `tone; I maintaSii the opinions and /
adhere
to the course which I have already avowed, perfeetly.unde
terred by the menaces whichappear to threaten declarations of
opinion on this subject.—(Cheers.) Notwithstanding the
i
formidable combination which stands against the supporters °
the present Corn-laws—notwithstanding the declaration tilt they must either be repealed, or a fixed duty must be soh',b-
tuted for the sliding scale—notwithstanding this 'probe'
tion and declaration, I do not hesitate to avow my adherence
to the opinions which ex • d 1 d reference
piesse ast year, an my p
of a graduated scale
to any fixed duty.—(Great cheerin*
I said last year, tiotl
and I repeat now what I said on the:rll,6.
of the Hon. Member for W 1 h t Isaid that I
o ver amp on—
_awes
with anxiety the state of manufactures—l said then and 45
think that a prosperous state of manufacturing industry
country was most intimately connected with a prosperous 'kSa e
of agriculture. I could 'then andh t the r°s-
- now t a _ Neje
petity of
Ruse t"-
manufactures is a greater support to agricu )
system of Corn-laws could be.—(Ministerial
But I said last that I decidedly prefer the principle of
Ind
dusted
and
sliding scale to a fixed duty.—( Cheers.
not bind myself to a rigid adherence to the exact scale,as it file
rated, but I reserve to myself the fu.l power of considering:t,
details. All that I declared was, that I preferred the friiielpi_es
as compared with that of a fixed duty. I hold the" same opinou

y// F