The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-14 00:00:00

PRICE 5d

SIR ROBERT PEEL, AND THE
MANCHESTER CHAMBER OP COMMERCE.
FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE.

TO THeibITOR, OF THE 14.81XC11ESTERG1.7ARDIAN.
Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 11, 1841.
Sir,—When we requested you in your last paper to
insert the correspondence between Sir Robert Peel and
ourselves, we thought it had-closed. Since then, how-
ever, another letter has been received from the Right
Hon. Gentleman ; and we shall be obliged by your in-
serting this and our reply thereto, in your next publica-
tion.—We are, Sir, yours respectfully,
T. B. SMITH,
HOLLAND HOOLE.
Whitehall, June Bth, 1841.
Gentlemen,—l have received your letter of yesterday,
and cannot permit it to close our correspondence.
There is no doubt a variation in phrase between the
passage to which you refer in the Report of the Morning
Chronicle, and another report in which, according to
your remark, all the finis-statements which led you to
address me are altogether omitted or corrected.

Now, in this latter report are the following allegations
with respect to the pamphlet of Mr. Greg :
That, at my interview with the deputation, a particular
wish was expressed that I would read the pamphlet,—
that I was assured I should attach great importance to
it, and that I entered on its perusal with no little anxiety
after the assurance I had received from such high au-
thority, that it was difficult to resist its conclusions.
In this latter report also I speak of the author of the
pamphlet as the chosen champion of the Chan:o;er of
Commerce.

The expressions themselves may be different, but there
is no such difference in the purport of them, as would
justify me in saying that the passage in the report of the
Morning Chronicle is an erroneous one.
I cannot discuss the subject without observing that the
course which has been pursued by the members of the
deputation has been a most unfair one.
I spoke in the House of Commons on the 18th of May.
On the day following, one of the members of the depu-
tation published in the newspapers a letter nominally ad-
dressed to me, impugning the correctness of my state-
ments ; but he did not send to me either the original, or
a copy of that letter.
From you I received no communication whatever until
the 2d ofJune, a fortnight after the debate ; and then.in
a letter which professes to give a simple and true recital
of the circumstances of the interview which you had
with me, you wish to make it appear that nothing had
passed on the subject of Mr. Greg's pamphlet during our
conference ; but that, after the members had left their
seats, Mr. .Ashworth asked whether I had seen some ob-
servations upon Sir Powell Buxton's schemes, in a pam-
phlet by Mr. Greg.
This is completely at variance with the fact.
In your last letter, you write as if I had not at once
admitted to yourselves, that there was a material error
in one of the passages in the report of the Morning
Chronicle, and you assume, without any foundation, that,
independently of that error, there is a substantial diffe-
rence in the two reports to which you refer, in respect
to the importance which was attached to the pamphlet
of Mr. Greg at my interview with the deputation.
Though I cannot understand the motives for the course
which you have pursued, either in respect to the original
delay in your communications to me, or to the tenor of
them, and must protest altogether against the fairness of
your proceedings, yet I shall abstain from following
your example, and decline the interchange of harsh and
abusive expressions.
I have the honour to be, Gentlemen,
Your obedient servant, ROBERT PEEL.
Chamber of Commerce, Manchester,
June 10th, 1841. •
Sir,----We beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter
of the Bth instant. ; in which, after we had supposed
ftie correspondence had closed, we regret to see, for the
first time, that you make a charge of unfairness against
us, "in respect to the original delay in our communica-
tions to you."
If this charge were at all warrantable, it would in
no respect alter the facts of the case : with regard to
them it is entirely unimportant. But it has no substan-
tial foundation : Mr. Ashworth, through the news-
papers, without a moment's delay, addressed you on
the subject ; and, in your reply to a letter he subse-
quently wrote to you, you say, " I make no complaint
of discourtesy on your part." For ourselves, we beg to
remind you, that in the very first paragraph of our first
letter to you, we explicitly stated the reasons which had
prevented us from previously writing to you. We dis-
claim, therefore, your insinuation of any " motive" for
the delay.
We have complained that, in your speech in the
House of Commons, and in your letters to us, you have
misrepresented the real object for which the deputation
sought an interview with you. You do, indeed, in the
only sentence relating to it in the published speech
corrected by yourself, say, " They (the deputation)
called on me to advocate the principles of free trade
~•"
but you kept out of sight the arguments adduced by
them in favour of these principles the evidences of
the want of employment and distress, 'as evinced by the
10,000 empty houses in Manchester and five neighbour-
ing towns, and the fears entertained that if the system
of monopolies were persevered in, we should shortly lose
the two best customers we had in the world for our
manufactures, viz., the United States and Brazil. You
had not the candour to refer to the documents in sup-
port of their views, which were formally and officially
presented to you by the deputation, viz.—" The Report
of the Directors on the it/Tolley of restrictions on trade,"
and the " resolutions" adopted by the Chamber thereof ;
but you represented the object of the deputation, in call-
ing upon you, to be "to express a particular wish
that you would read a certain pamphlet on the extinc-
tion of slavery," written by Mr. W. R. Greg, and that
they told you " they would abide by the decision you
came to upon this pamphlet."
We again most explicitly declare this statement to be
a misrepresentation of the objects of the deputation, and
of. the, fact, which occurred at the interview ; and we
leave you, after having affirmed its accuracy, to account
for the suppression, in the published speech corrected by
yourself, of this, latter statement, viz., that the deputa-
tion told you they would abide by the decision you came
to upon Mr. Greg's pamphlet.
We feel that we. were. bound, in our own justification
to the body whom we had the honour to represent, to
call upon you to explain the misrepresentations made by
you in the House of Commons, relating to your inter-
view with the deputation. On a review of our corre-
spondence with you, we still think that the circumstances
of the case justify the comments and language to which
we have given utterance; and of which you complain.
The whole matter, however, is now before the public ;
and we are willing to abide by its decision upon the
" fairness," between you and ourselves, of the whole
proceedings.—We have the honour to be, Sir, your
obedient servants,
(Signed) J. B. SMITH,
HOLLAND HOOLE.

P.S. • Your letter, and this reply, will be published
through the same channel as the previous correspondence.
The Right Hon. Sir Robert Peel, Bart., M.P.
London.

DEAL PILOTS.—The Deal pilots are known
almost to a man to be Tories ; and acting up to the prin-
ciple that a divided body cannot long be prosperous,
they make no exception to the rule, and have become a
bye-word and a pi overb ; and the world has read bow
celebrated they are for the celerity of their movements
when under the whip of their Tory leader, and how
readily they run to the poll to record their votes as the
aristocrats of the borough may dictate. It is a great
offence for them to have an opinion: A somewhat whim-
sical scene occurred. yesterday. A gentleman came to
Deal, on the alleged pretence of waiting for a ship coming
into the Downs; and, taking from his pocket a letter,
asked one of the boatmen (conceiving that a boat-
man and a pilot were one and the same) the reason
why the pilots voted as they did against Colonel
Fox, significantly whispering in his ear that he knew
a friend willing and able to bribe them to stand
aloof at the coming election. This soon got wind, and
in a twinkle the whole town was ringing with the joke.
But to be serious ; it was concluded that the person had
come down on purpose to test the sincerity of their adhe-
rence to the Lurd Warden. A report had got abroad
that they were becoming wise, and about to divide their
votes half and half. But to indentify the pilots with the
boatmen, when their functions are so different is very
amusing. The merchants and shipowners in London do
not know the distinction, and conclude the pilots to be
seafaring people ; though we who live on the coast know
them only as gentlemen, rich, and adding to their wealth
acre after acre, and house to house, boasting that they
spend each from three to four hundred pounds a year fur
the benefit of the tradesmen. Can we wonder, then, that
so. many turned, and so many refrained from voting at
the late election ? There are in Deal about sixty pilots
—a rather formidable body, certainly.—Doter Chronicle.
STATE OF TRADE.—We are sorry to say that
trade is extremely dull in Carlisle. Last week the
Messrs. Dixon and Mr. Slater announced a considerable
reduction in the wages of the men employed in their
mills. The men refused to accept the terms offered, and
turned out. A part of Messrs. Dixon's men have re-
turned to their work at the reduced wages, others have
gone off to America, and their places have been supplied
by new hands. Mr. Slater's men offered to return to
their work on Wednesday, on the terms offered, but, in
consequence of the stagnation of trade, the offer was de-
dined, and the mill is now closed, but will be re-opened
on Monday. In Messrs. Cowan's mill the men are work-
ing five days a-week, and are under notice that a reduc-
tion of wages will be made next week.—Carlisle Journal. 1
Several changes will take place at the close of the
session among the subordinate Government functiona-
ries. It is understood that the Hon. B. J. Stanley will
vacate the post ofvillonehe succeeded
eteheeedSeedy )
Secretaries
L
iestoe
i‘ietherehTrea-
sury, in which he
E's Ci
Sheffield,. , o f thenelßv o aornde
°off rtrhrea de.
LordsiN' I ro. fjt.hle'alr'kreeasr,ul‘ 'rly.
, will
take the place of R. More OTerrall, Esq., as Secretary
to the Admiralty, who succeeds Mr. R. Gordon, M.l'.,
for Windsor, in the office of Financial Secretary to the
Treasury. A vacancy in the number of the Lords of the
noeluedeothtehre changesHo Hon. L.
. are,j.
115'.ereahsetairr3:
ciosilemtthuspoiaccteads:olnvehdic.h Sim
Stanley's introduction to a higher post in the Govern-
ment.
The Earl of Fortescue is not considered in im-
mediate danger.