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

taro restrictions which exist under the system of protec-
tion, we will deal tenderly with them, but our principle
is liberty to commerce, and the ultimate removal of those
restrictions. He did not understand from aeytliing
which fell from Hon. Gentlemen opposite that th y took
the same view of protection. They took a view
consistent with that of the Right Ho. ourable
Member for Harwich (Mr. Herries) that it was
necessary to protect certain classes.—(Hear.) He
(Mr. Villier) begged further to state, that he considered
that system of protection as most unfair and unjust,
when applied to this country; particularly so when not
applied generally, and as regarded the persons who were
made the exceptions. The landed proprietors, the West
Indian planters, and the ship-builders, had no more
right to the laws which protected their several interests,
than the working men had to laws which should protect
them against the application of machinery to the produc-
tion of manufactures. They knew that claims had been ad-
vanced by the working classes to be protected against
the use of machinery, and that a notion prevailed among
those people that they had a right to such protection;
and they were not wrong, according to the principles
advanced and supported by some Honourable Gentle-
men with respect to protection. But the claims of
these poor men were met as if arising from their
ignorance. There was not a particle of the grounds
on which they were refused the protection they sought,
that was not adopted by Hon. Gentlemen who made that
refusal. Railroads might be objected to on the same
principle on which the proposition of Government was
opposed. They involved the ruin of many individuals
residing in towns on the old lines ; but why were they,
nevertheless, established ? On the principle that the
general good ought to be preferred to that of particular
classes. The principles to which he now gave utterance
he had, on former occasions, when he brought forward the
question of the Corn-laws, professed and expressed in
that House, and he repeated them now only because the
public attention was at the present time particularly di-
rected to the subject—because the public mind was ex-
cited on the matter, and because those who maintained
opposite principles were obliged to enter into a vindication
of them. He knew not why it was the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth's speech on the pre-
sent occasion was so anxiously looked forward to. The
Right Hon. Baronet had spoken on this subject on vari-
ous occasions. Perhaps the anxiety arose from the belief
that circumstances had so far changed that some change
'must have also taken place in the Right Hon. Baronet's
opinions. If the Right Hon. Baronet opposed the motion
of the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies—if lie
opposed all change in the Corn-laws, lie would be per-
fectly consistent, because the Right Hon. Baronet had
opposed every Committee of Inquiry into the subject.
There were no circumstances under which a Committee
on that subject had been
.proposed in which the Right
Hon. Baronet had not given his .opposition to the pro-
position " under those circumstances.' But the Right lion.
Gentleman had.. however, by something which he
he had said; excited hopes and expectations in some of
his commercial friends, and hence the intense interest
that existed as to the opinions which he might now ex-
press. It was high time that this question should be
decided some way or other. The pretexts were so vari-
ous which had been urged against the consideration of
the subject, that the time had arrived when the persons
who opposed the motion must say they had some other
grounds than those hitherto assigned. One of the
grounds stated by one of the Hon. Members for York-
shire for supporting the Corn-law monopoly was, that
they were not so weak as to abandon an advantage
which they had the power to maintain. That was the
real state of the question—it was a question between the
rights of the people and the power of the landlords.
There were not ten people out of that House—nor
any within it—who believed that the resolution
of the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool (Lord
Sandon), contained the real ground of objection to the
motion before the House. The question was not dis-
cussed on that ground. It was on the ground that great
changes were expected, and that the measure was pro-
posed by. her Majesty's Government, that the approach-
ing division was about to take place. The people of the
United States had the same right to exclude our manu-
factures from their ports as we to exclude slave-grown
sugar from this country. And it was not improbable
that they would exclude our manufactures in conse-
quence of their aversion to our Corn-laws. He had a
few days ago received a paper from America, in which it
was stated that they took the same view of our Corn-
laws that we did of their system of slavery—that the
merchants and farmers regarded the Corn-laws ofEngland
and the slave trade as belonging to the same class
of establishments. The Hon. Gentleman read a long ex-
tract from an American pamphlet which he had lately
received, in which the weiter spoke of the Corn-laws of
England as prejudicial to the people of this country, and
such a nuisance to the people of other. countries, that it
became incumbent on the United States to consider whe-
ther they should not take some public measure to obtain
a repeal of those, and show their sense of their injustice.
What had been :the policy of Hon. Gentlemen on the
other side with respect to other countries in which sla-
very existed with many aggravations ? What had been
their favourite policy with respect to Turkey, but to
preserve the integrity of the Turkish empire, on which
was supposed to depend the balance of power ? We
knew that slavery existed in Turkey, under ciroum-
stances of greater aggravation than in the West Indies.
We had become more familiar with, during our recent in-
tercourse with that country, yet we had made no stipu-
lations for preventing the slave-trade, and not an argu-
ment had been advanced on the other side on this
ground against our policy.—(Hear, hear.) And so it
was with the East Indies. The present resolution
had been seconded by an East Indian Director,
yet the organ of the Company, at the present
time, was filled with details of East India
slavery—(Hear, hear)—which was winked at, or openly
countenanced by, the Company's servants. What then
were the people of England to think if they were not to I
be allowed to onsume a necessary article of life, because I
they were noio be allowed to consume slave produce ?
What were they to think of it when the present motion
was supported by those who were recently indemnified
for the sacrifice of their property in slaves , when
it was supported by those who were actually owners of
slaves, and sharers in the profit arising from their labonr.
Why in the world was the British House of Commons
to stop an intercourse with other countries pn such
grounds as those which were put forward ? Would it
not be seen that such a proposition could only have
originated in party views.—(Hear, hear.) He had been
told of some great experiment being made, and that they
ought not to disturb it, for that the interests of humanity
was involved in its success. This was a great mistake,
So far as he understood the experiment, it was whether
a portion of the African race was capable of being free,
and whether they had any taste for the arts of civilised
life. The experiment was made, and it was shown all
the statements to the contrary were 'fallacious, made for
the purpose of keeping fellow-creatures in bondage.
The experiment was made at once in Antigua, one year
before the emancipation of the slaves ; and this circum

stance constituted the difference between one island and
another. In Antigua the population found it easier to
obtain work, and were willing to work for wages ; and
and they would find this to be the case wherever the
quantity of labour rather exceeded the supply than the
demand. When we emancipated the slaves, we never
inidertook to guarantee the planter against all the con-
tingencies that might arise from the difficulties of ob-
taining labour.. The difference between the
islands did not arise from the emancipation of
the slaves, but from the difference in the fertility
of soil and other circumstances.—(Hear, hear.) There
was another topic in the proposition of the Noble Lord
(Sandon) which he could not sit down without referring
to, namely, that this was not only a question of slavery
but also a question of the adequate supply of sugar.
The Noble Lord implied by his resolution, that if the
supply of sugar was not adequate, we might then allow
slave produce to come in, and the Noble thereby
implied that the present supply was adequate, that is,
that this necessary article of consumption was , cheap
enough. That was quite sufficient to raise the question
of what was the condition of the people of this country.
He thought the Noble Lord must have overlooked, or
must, be totally ignorant of what was the state of the
country where he considered that any article of neces-
sary consumption was cheap enough.—(Hear, hear.)
He (Mr. Villiers) believed that there never was a period
in the history of this country in which the
people were worse off than at present, and had been for
the last two years. He had with him abundant details
of the greatest physical sufferiugs that were now being
endured by the poor of the country. The Hon. Member
for. Finsbury had supplied the House with details of this
kind, and he (Mr. Villiers) should occupy the House to
the, end of the week were he to read to them those with
which he had been supplied. He would not, however,
occupy much time of the House with those details, but
1
lett-Ulla not help adverting to the sufferings in some of
the districts with which he was acquainted. He was in-
'formed by a communication dated the 10th of May
instant, that at Preston the number of empty houses
was 1,220 ; that the 'increase of the_ number of paupers
who:receive out-door relief from the pariah from 1837
.to 1840, was 83 per cent., and from 1837 to 1844 127
per cent., being an increase of 40 per cent., while the
in-door relief was continued"- in the usual ri p opol t'on.
During this time large subscriptions had been-na-de andl
1,320 women received various articles of bedding' It
was the opinion of some who were connected h
. this
charity, that 2,000 families, consisting of 10,000 indi-
viduals, had not a single blanket to cover them. The
Chaplain of the House of Correction stated that crime
had increased 30 per cent., while it was impossible to
say how many were subsisting by beggary. The Wages
on some of the trades were decreased 10 per eent. with-
in the last three months, and 25 per cent, since 1832.
Many of the trades kept up their wages by Unions and
combinations, but tiiie class were tramping 'about the
country. At Bolton it was stated that the mills, amonp
which were those of the Hon. Meniber for that pla,e7,
and employing no less than 14,000 persorre were
but for a very sluirt time; ; thatat,l3la,Chhurn there were
four mills that „were not working; and that a, fire proof-
mill. with its machinery,. which a short time ago !cost
50,000/.., had been recently sold for 15,000/. ,It wag Stated
also, that at-Little:Bolton 300 house-, were visited; eon-
taiaino• 500 beds; end that in 'one of them'hiettstS they
found twenty-three persons without a bed; eight,
who slept in one bed ; forty-two who -slept
,in
seven beds ; seventy-eight who slept in six beds ; 185
who slept in fire beds ; 432 who slept in four beds ; and
582 who slept in three beds ; that there was I,o2s_per-
sons whose average income was below Is. 6d. per week ;
359 whose average income was below 2s. a week ; and
165 whose average income was below ls. Gd. per week,
The Hon. Member also read-statements from Oldham,
Nottingham, LeiceSter, and other places, of the existence
of similar distress at those places, one. of which stated
that a cow having died and been buried, the owner a
day and. a half afterwards was besought by a number of
women to allow them to have the carcass for their
families ; and that upon his yielding to their impoktunity,
they disinterred the carcass, and devided it among them,
and 'afterwards declared that it was the only meat they
had tasted for many -years. The Hon. Gentleman then,
read an extract, the report of Mr. Hickson, a Govern-,
. .