The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-13 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS.

The HoN. MEMBER presented twelve petitions from
various trades in Manchester, and several from London,
praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws.
Petitions to the same effect were presented by Mr.
Turner, from Lancaster ; and by Mr. Hindley, from
Warrington, Ashton, and other places ; against any alte-
ration in the Corn-laws by Mr. Waddington, from
Suffblk ; and by Sir Charles Burrell, from Sussex.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Leeds,
praying for the release of all political prisoners ; and
from Leicester, stating that Mr. Feargus O'Connor
would be a proper person to represent that borough in
.Parliament—(Laughter)--and praying that the House
would allow to him the liberty to address the electors
through the public press.
Mr. L. HOI)GES presented a petition against any
grant for Church Extension.
Col. CONOLLY:presented a petition from Armagh
against the present system of Scotch patronage.
Mr. -BARNEBY presented a petition from Lincoln in
favour of Church Extension.

Mr. BROADLEY presented a petition from Beverley,
to the same effect.

Lord WORSLEY presented a petition from Lincoln
against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Sir T. ACLAND presented a petition from Yeovin
against the grant to the College of Maynooth.
Mr. R. CLIVE presented a petition in favour of
Church Extension. _ _

Colonel SALWEY presented a petition, praying for
the extinction of Church-rates, and the abolition of the
jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts.
Mr. MILES presented several petitions—one in favour
of Church Extension ; another in favour of the exclu-
sion of Roman Catholics from Parliament, and against the
grant to the College of Maynooth ; and another against
some parts of the Corn-law Amendment Act.
Mr. ELLIS presented a petition in favour of the mea-
sure introduced by her Majesty's Government for the re-
duction of the duties on corn.

Mr. ORMSBY GORE presented a petition in favour
of Church Extension.

Mr. P. HOWARD presented a petition from the Me-
thodist congregation of Carlisle in favour of free trade,
and especially in favour of a revision of the Corn-laws.
Mr. OSWALD presented a petition signed by 15,200
persons, from Glasgow, in favour of the abolition of the
Corn-laws, and the revision of the Customs Duties.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented several petitions from
the soap-boilers and other trades in Dublin, which
were very numerously signed, in favour of a repeal
of the Legislative Umon ; also three petitions
against the Registration of Voters (Ireland) Bill, and
several petitions from Wigan and Bolton praying for a
_Repeal of the Corn-laws ; also a petition signed by a
a very respectable constituent of his, Mr. James Haugh-
ton, of Dublin, praying that the House would not permit
any trading with Brazils and Cuba, as it would only tend
to increase slavery in this country ; also a petition &Om
Mr. Acland, the Anti-Corn-law lecturer. The petitioner
Stated that he had been inquiring for the last ten weeks
into the state of the labourers in the county of Buck-
ingham, and that he was able to prove that the labourers
of that county do not receive above 2d. or 2id. a
day as wages, for their subsistence, and that
many of those poor men are actually turned out
of employment unless they signed petitions against the
repeal of the Corn-laws. The petition prayed the House
to institute an inquiry into this state of things.
The LORD ADVOCATE presented a petition from
Leith, praying for the abolition of the Corn-laws.
Mr. LABOUCHERE presented 19 petitions to the
sum effect from Manchester and its vicinity.
1-135,1 r. HUME presented several petitions from Castle-
town and other places, with a similar prayer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pre-
sented a similar petition from Portsmouth. ••
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented several petitions
from places in Yorkshire, many of them numerously
signed, praying for the abolition of Church-rates, and a
relaxation of all the duties which fetter trade. _ _

Mr. WOOD presented a petition from Kendal, pray-
ing for a revision of our commercial code, and in favour
of the measures of the Government. .

Mr. AINSWORTH presented a petition, with a simi-
lar prayer, signed by one thousand inhabitants of the
town of Bolton ; and a similar petition from an indivi-
dual in the same town, praying the House to disregard
the cry raised in favour of the negroes. He was himself
an advocate for the abolition of slavery, but she found
that the negroes had less to complain of than our own
population. A number of emancipated slaves had, he
stated, lately purchased 20,0001. worth of land in the
West Indies, and that could not be done by any number
of our labouring classes.
Mr. CHARLES WOOD presented 39 petitions from
Halifax and other places in Yorkshire, in favour of the
Government measures for an alteration of our Commer-
cial Code.

Mr. MARK PHILIPS presented 35 petitions from
Manchester, Rochdale, and several other places, praying
for a total repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. E. ,BULLER presented 4 petition from the Pot-
teries praying for a total abolition of the Corn and Pro-
vision laws.
Mr. F. HOWARD presented a petion from Cumber-
land against the Corn-laws.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition agreed on at a
large meeting at Liverpool, held on Monday last, pray-
ing fur a total repeal ot the ta-x upon bread, stating the
great satisfaction which those present felt at the step
taken by Ministers for that purpose. and also stating
Alat tUe citivulatiow ot 440-tcts LI favour of tigr.

doctrines of free trade entitled them to support, and pray-
ing. the House to give effect to those declarations. The pe-
tition was signed by Sir.J. Walmesby, the late Mayor of
Liverpool, on behalf of the meeting; also a petition from
'Galley, near Manchester, praying for a repeal of the
Corn-laws.

On the motion of Mr. HUTT, the Hull Flax and Cot-
ton Mill Company's Bill read a third time and passed.

TIIE-EARt OF CARDIGAN.

Mr. MINTZ gave notice of an -alteration he pur-
posed making in ,the motion 9f which he had
given notice for to-morrow, relative to the Earl
of. Cardigan. The motion which he should
bring forward would be, that an humble address be
presented to her Majesty beseeching her to cause an
inquiry to be instituted into the conduct of the Earl
of Cardigan during the time he ' has been in
command of the 11th Hussars, with a view of ascertain-
ing how far such conduct had rendered him unfit to be
continued in her' Majesty's serviee.
PARISH CONSTABLES.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL moved the second reading of
the Parish Constables' Bill.

Mr. F. MAULE said that the Right Hon. Baronet was
aware that he objected entirely to the principle of the Bill,
and could not allow it to be read a second time. He was
placed in this difficulty, that an -Hon. Member, sitting on
the same side of the House with himself, had introduced
a similar Bill, and he had induced the House to throw
it out.

After a few words from Sir E. KNATCHBULL, the
Bilr was withdrawn.

The intervening Order of the Day was then disposed
of, a: d the House resumed the
ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Mr. CHOLMONDELY said he should not go into the
great commercial details connected with the measure
that were under the consideration of the House. It was
admitted by the, Hon. Gentleman on the other side
of the House that those measures would have a ten-
dency to encourage the slave trade, and would injure our
West Indian interests. But they said, "Do not waste
your sympathy upon the West Indians. We have already
done a great deal for them ; leaVe them for
the present, and turn your sympathies to the suffering
artisans of your own country ; above all, support
this measure, which, besides increasing the reve-
nue of the country, will confer the benefit of cheap
sugar upon the labouring classes."—(Hear, hear, from the
Liberal benches.) The Noble Lord the Secretary for
the ' Colonies, in his speech on Friday night,
had .drawn an affecting picture of the poor
man being obliged to turn away from a shop
because his scanty means were not sufficient to purchase
one of the necessary, articles of life. God forbid that he
(Mr. Cholmoiidely) shoiddiriew with any degree of levity
any statement. of the sufferings of
.the lower
classes,' or `any Measure bronght forward to relieve
those sufferings.—(Hear, hear, hear.) But in this case
what was the amount of relief which would be adminis-
tered ? Why he believed that according to the Noble
Lord's own calculation the reduction in the price of sugar
would not exceed. Is. 6d. per cwt. Could the 'consumer
be benefited by such a reduction ?—(Hear.) •• The only ,
class that would benefit by it was the intermediate' link
between'the great merchant and the &eat iiiiporter—,
the retail dealer: ,As in the case _of .the.. reduc-
tion of the duty on leather; the man' Coth-
plained that the retail dealer gained, and that he
did not get his shoes cheaper. Let the House
strike a balance between the good and the evil
which would be derived . from these measures. Even
the increase in the revenue was a mere matter of asser-
tion. It was simply stated that in some way or other,
there would be an increase of 700,000/. a-year from
that. Even assuming that to be • true, they were called
upon to render almost nugatory the enormous payment
of nearly fifty millions of money expended in putting
down the slave trade ; and after all the exertions which
they had made, they now called upon them to hold them-
selves up to the mingled astonishment and derision of the
world by retracing their own steps, and passing a measure
which even its
,promoters confessed would have
a tendency to re-establish that accursed traffic.
There was one more point to which he wished to allude.
The Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) had characterised
the amendment introduced by his Noble Friend (Lord
Sandon) as the most factious step that could be resorted
to, and as a merely party movement brought forward
to serve a party purpose,--(Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
(Cholmondely) thought a more unfounded accusation was
never made, nor one more easy to be retorted upon those
who made it. When the heat and animosity of
these debates had passed away, and • these event-
ful days had become matter of history with
what feelings would an unprejudiced observer review
these transactions—to what party would he be most
likely to apply the term " faction ?" On whom would he
cast the accusation of having acted from party pur-
poses 'I On the one side he would see a Go-
vernment involved in difficulties, with a deficient
revenue with adverse majorities in both Houses of Par-
liament, and with the feelings of the country, if he
might judge of the result of recent elections—(Cheers)
—but little in their favour, come down to the
House and bring forward hastily and without notice
three great measures striking at and involving three of
the largest interests of the empire, while on the other
side he would see a body of men condemning such
sweeping measures as productive, not of good, but
of evil to the country, and standing- up to prevent
the State being shaken to its centre by the rash
hand of innovation. He thought under such cir-
cumstances there could be little doubt as to his decision.
Upon these grounds, and objecting as he did to the mea-
sure brought forward by the Noble Lord opposite, first,
its provisions would damage the West Indian proprietors ;
secondly, because it would be an additional stimulus
to the slave trade ; lastly, because it would damage the
national prosperity—he should give his strenuous oppo-
sition to the Noble Lord, and support the Noble Lord
the Member for Liverpool.
Lord HOWICK hoped he should be pardoned,
considering the interest that he had always
taken upon the question involved in the dis-
cussion now before the House, if he was un-
willing to give a - silent vote. It had been as-
serted that this measure would have a di-
rect tendency to injure the national prosperity,
but upon this subject he must first observe that he
was not aware that any Gentleman had ventured to as-
sert that the introduction of the produce of slave labour
was to be objected to. That argument had not been
put forth. Those Gentlemen who had argued it
had not taken the high ground that if a great
fundamental principle was involved in the ques-
tion, they should be bound to admit slave labour.
They had not pushed their argument further than
this that the abolition of slavery and the slave trade
was the object of the policy of -this 'country, and that
it ought not to be interfered with by a measure
like that proposed by the Noble Lord. But it was
said that the consequence of the course to be adopted
would be encouragement to the slave trade.
Now, on that point he was entirely at variance with his
Right Honourable and Learned Friend, who said that
if sugar produced by slave labour were allowed to
be consumed in this the richest . country in
the world, the necessary effect of that would be to raise
the price of such sugar, and therefore to offer an
encouragement to slavery and the slave trade.—(Hear.)
That assertion appeared to him (Lord Howick) to rest
on a most unsound foundation, and the policy which his
Right Hon. and Learned Friend recommended seemed
to him erroneous, because that policy, and the
arguments which had been addressed to the
House in support of it, went entirely on the
supposition that it would be vain to hope that
free-labour sugar could successfully. compete with that
produced in Cuba and the Brazils ; and that they
ought consequently to give up the market of Europe,
and of the world, to slave sugar, and remain passively
content with excluding such produce' from their own
markets. That was the assumption' on which the
argument of his Right Hon. and Learned Friend rested.
But if that, assumption were correct—and if it
were really hopeless. to think that free labour could
compete with slave labour sugar, he should say
that that was a most mortifying conclusion,
.and one which he should only admit upon the clearest
evidence, and with the greatest reluctance. Bit he to-
tally denied that that assumption. was supported either
by reason or experience. He remembered well the
debates on the measure for the abolition of sla-
very, and he had often listened with approbation
to his Right Honourable and Learned Friend, and
another Hon. Friend, now no longer a Member of that
House, who took so distinguished a part in the agitation
of the question ; he meant, of course, Sir T. F. Buxton.
He had frequently listened with approbation to those gentle-
men, while, by the most elaborate reasoning and enume-
rations of facts, they had endeavonred to proye thatslavery
was not only.a crime, but an error and a mistake ; and that
slavery was not only iniquitous, • but that in
the end it was the dearest and the most expen-
sive labour that could be employed. For his part he
still believed that if free labour was duly encou-
raged it could carry on.. a successful competition
with the labour of slaves ; arid however other lion. Gen-
tlemen might be disposed to think that they were tbrmerly
in error, and that they had now reason to change their views
upon this subject, he not only believed that such compe-
tition could be waged, but that if due means were taken
to encourage the production of sugar in our own pos-
sessions in the East and, the West Indies, the free
labourer would be found more than a match
for , the others. He did not, on the
contrary, think that they could hope for
any success while they leant upon the broken reed of
protection and monopoly.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
He believed with his Noble 'Friend (Lord John 'Rus-
sell) who had spoken so eloquently on' Friday night
that trade when nursed by protection and restric-
tions never could attain a healthy and vigorous growth.
What reasons were there for despairing of the success of
our own possessions in the race of competition ? Hon.
Gentleman opposite talked of the -climate:of Brazil
and Cuba, but he would ask where better soil was
to be found than in Demerara and in Trinidad ?
(Cheers)--nay,. even in our old colonies, lie be-
lieved that the soil was not exhausted naturally;
but that it was w0rn.....0ut by the great want
of a proper system under the old system of slavery. He
would ask whether there was more capital, more intern-
gence,,.or more energy among the planters of Brazil or
Cuba, than there was among the planters of our own
colonies.—(Cheers.) It was said that the great cause of
the shortcomings of our colonies arose from the deficiency
of labour.. There was no doubt but labour was
far from plenty, but that he thought had been caused by
the.mistaken measures taken, House,.
partly in that but
greatly by, the ;local authorities in fact it had been
caused by a reluctance to conform to the new' system,
a strong . desire to retain as much as pos-
.sible .of the system which prevailed before 1833.
He believed it was impossible that yroprietors residing
in that country, and carrying on their business by means
of paid agents in Jamaica, would be able to do so. It
was clear that the profit would be considerably reduced-
Let the House consider what would be the effect of at-
tempting a similar system in that country. The ma-
4avipmat Warms bygeljukFArsk tit often a prolt4lke