The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-23 00:00:00

Majesty's Speech is one in which I feel great interest— •
the recommendation that some endeavours should be
ased to suppress the system of assassination in Ireland.
I should be the last man to propose any coercive measures
to affect the general liberties of her Majesty's sub-
jects, but I do think that something beyond
the ordinary efforts of the law is necessary for Ireland.
Ido not wish to be misunderstood, for Ido not refer to
the whole of Ireland, but only to those districts where
the system is carried on ; and in those districts it is well
known that such is the impunity with which the assassin
escapes, that the price of blood is brought as low as
three or four pounds. Under these circumstances, I
do think that the state of Ireland requires
your Lordships' serious consideration.—(Hear, hear.)
I now refer to the scarcity in the potato crop. It has
produced, and may be expected to produce, a great deal
of misery. All who visit that country can speak to the
unbounded hospitality in Ireland; but I think there is
another virtue not sufficiently apppreciated, and which also
prevails to a most unbounded extent upon all oc-
casions of national distress. This charity, exerted
in so praiseworthy a manner, will, I think, pre-
vent the worst evils anticipated by the approaching
distress. We also know that there is great room
for employment in that country, and a great
latitude for the outlay of capital. There was access to
the interior of Ireland by water, there being no part of
it more than fifty miles from the sea. With respect to
the relaxation of the prohibitory duties. it is a subject
far beyond my experience ; so I will content myself by
sa) ing, that what has been done in this respect has not
produced that evil which was expected. The importa-
tion of foreign cattle has not, I believe, been pro-
ductive of any injury to the British farmer,
—(hear, hear.) I da not anticipate that any
injury whatever will follow the other contemplated re-
laxations. All I will do is to draw the attention of your
Lordships to the measure which may be proposed, and
I venture to say that no measure will be produced that
will not receive your just and dispassionate considera-
tion. It only remains now for me, my Lords, to second
the motion which my Noble Friend has proposed.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR then put the question,
and declared that the Contents had it.
After a few seconds,
The Duke of RICHMOND rose and said—l am not
at all surprised to see the desire which has been evinced
to suppress discussion upon—
The LORD CHANCELLOR—I beg the Noble Duke
will not state that. I waited deliberately for a few
minutes, and finding that the Noble Duke was not in-
clined to rise, I put the question and put it slowly.
The Duke of RICHMOND—I am perfectly
in order. I should have listened with satisfaction
to the speech of the Noble Lord who moved
the Address, if he had not in part of his speech re-
marked that we should wait until we heard the statement
of the Minister. I have heard, my Lords, enough in that
address to know what the Minister intends to do.—(Hear,
hear.) He intends to withdraw protection.—(lnterrup •
tions.) I should like to have heard a more manly speech,
and that he had mentioned the corn-laws at once. I defy
Noble Lords to say that the Speech just read does not
relate to the corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) This is
getting rid of the compact which Sir Robert Peel
made in 1842 with the agriculturists, and which
Mr. Gladstone, the Secretary of State, said removed
difficulties, and was mado for the purpose of securing to
the agriculturists a permanent law. It was to secure
that permanent law that the agriculturists acquiesced in
that sacrifice.—(Hear, hear.) My Lords. I wish to draw
your attention to what Mr. Gladstone said in 1843. He
then said it would be unjust to the agriculturists, and dis-
honourable to the Government and to the Parliament, if
they made a charge in the laws which protected
British industry without a great and adequate cause.
Where is the cause? Decidedly not the potato
disease in Ireland. No, my Lords, it was
not so. The potato failure was assigned as the reason
in the first instance, and promulgated in the Anti-Corn-
law League.—(Hear, hear.) I cannot for my life see
why Mr. Cobden should not be made a Peer and sit on
these benches.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) I wish to
ask the people of England and those persons who disagree
with me in opinion on the question of the corn-laws
whether they approve of the course taken by the Anti-
Corn-law League?—(Hear, hear.) I say their course
has been unconstitutional and that they are the authors
of this change. I hope this house will not so far abandon
its duty as to permit itself to be intimidated by the Anti-
Corn-law League, or by the money that body has raised.
But what is the time the Government asks us to make
this sacrifice to popular clamour ? We find that Sir
Robert Peel has not produced tranquillity in Ireland ;
but that, ou the contrary, murders and assassinations con-
tinue to take place every day.—(Hear, hear.) In this
speech, Sir Robert Peel comes to us, and asks us to give
way, and alter those laws which every man knows are
for the benefit, not of-the agriculturists alone, but of
every class in the community.—(Loud cries of " Hear,
hear.) I shall now call your Lordships' attention
to the statement made by Sir Robert Peel in the
year 1839, when he wanted office from the
agriculturists. He then said, "If you take away pro-
tection the farmers will ask you to get rid of all protec-
tion on every other article." Upon that occasion Sir R.
Peel stated what would be the effect if pr otection to
corn were abolished. The effect must be that all protec-
tion on other articles must be abolished.—(Hear, hear.)
Are you prepared to destroy your Custom-houses,
and by that means destroy the revenue that
now goes to support the liabilities of the nation ?
If you are, where will you get revenue sufficient
to pay the public creditor ? If protection to corn is to
be got rid of because it is a great monopoly, are there
no other monopolies in this country ?—(Hear.) What
do you think of the East India Company ?
what do you think of the Bank ? and what
do you think of the hundred others? If you consent to
make a further inroad into and get rid of protection,
you will have to pull down the house and rebuild it from
the commencement.—(Cheers.) I will ask whe-
ther the Civil List will remain. I will ask if a
single salary in this country will remain if you
at once destroy the protective duties of this
country. My Loros, I for one will not give your
Lordships the trouble of voting upon an amendment
upon the present occasion ; but I enter my protest, my
solemn protest, against that clause in the Speech, which
is contrary to every principle which the present Govern-
ment has ever brought forward from the Speech of 1839
up to the present moment. I know 'lathing of what
their measure is, but. I have a right to speak strongly,
because I happen to be one of those who are
of opinion that no relaxation of the corn laws should be

made. What have we said respecting these little mea-
sures brought before Parliament by the present Govern-
ment, against which I and some of your Lordships
voted? Only that they were steps towards free trade.
We, fortunately, voted against them; but Sir Robert
Peel has contrived, by his eloquence and by
his soothing speeches, to get a large number
of Members of both Houses of Parliament to place con-
fidence in him. My Lords, that confidence may exist
still in some quarters, but I beg to say that it exists not
in the large body of the middle classes of this
country. What is the fair, open, honest, English
manner in which the farmers of this coun-
try have come forward on a late occasion ?
They do not ask you to reject the measures to be pro-
posed. No ! But they come to you, ..trid they say to
the Government, " You came into office pledged to pro-
tection ; you have thought fit—we know not why—we
care not to impute motives—but we say you ought not to
carry out these measures without appealing to the coun-
try."—(Cheers.) It must be a bad case indeed when a
Minister does not dare to face what is called a popular
question on the hustings.—(Cheers.) We ask foe
more. We ask for a clear stage and ne e
ask you to appeal to the - We
whether or not these - country to lvnow
be admitted, a- ' modern ittnocra,;OtlS lute to
be made to know ofhiAtler we ought to
of dependatt upola foreigners for a supply
that Which we can produce ourselves.
I thi!ikt the House has a right to demand from her Ma-
! le-sty's Government the reason of their sudden changes.
I know not what to call them. These reasons are only
known to some dozen individuals on the opposite side.
I think the country has a right to inquire why they
threw up their offices, and if the protective duties were
in any danger.—(Hear, hear.) My Lords, I feel that your
Lordships will take this question into conside.ation) and
will do your duty to your Sovereign end your country;
and that you will banish from your minds the Minister
who proposes these measures. My Lords, Ido not on
this occasion intend to offer any factious opposition to
the Address, but I do intend, and I do trust, your Lord-
ships will aid me, to offer every fair opposition to
the proceedings of the Minister. We have heard a
great deal about the disease in the potatoes, and we
have suffered in England as sell as in Ireland. There
will be plenty of opportunities for discussing this ques-
tion. But I beg to enter my solemn protest against that
part of her Majesty's Speech which threatens the ruin
of the agricultural interests, and this House, I think, is
entitled to know the reasons why they hare come to such
a decision.

The Duke of WELLINGTON—My Lords, the Noble
Duke states that he will not offer any amendment to the
Address, as proposed. Ile has complained of the omis-
sion of all allusion to the corn-laws in the Speech from
the throne. My Lords, it is not necessary in this
House to follow my young friend in his observations on
the conduct of the Ministry.—(Hear, hear.) Nor do I
think it necessary to make any allusions to the Address
moved by my Noble Friend, as I beg to in-
form your Lordships those measures will be brought
before the House in a very few days.—(Hear.)
I entreat your Lordships to consider whether now it is
right to expect me to make any explanation such as that
which the Noble Duke requests.—(Hear, hear.) I
hope it will not be insisted upon that any such
matters will be entered upon ; but I entreat you
now to adopt the Address, and leave explana-
tions to another time. Respecting such a ques-
tion as that which has been put by my Noble Friend,
regarding the resignation of her Majesty's Ministers ;
the Noble Duke who has put it, has been a privy coun-
cillor himself, and knows that a privy councillor of the
Sovereign must keep the counsels of the Sovereign
secret. I cannot, therefore, state here what has passed
in that privy council, without, obtaining the previous per-
mission o`' the Sovereign.
asked the question,ei my Noble Friend had
tore
iie,lsinoukl have given notice
so
of his intention of doing
order to afford an oppor-
tunity of the necessary permission from her Majesty
preliminary to such explanation being given. Had I
known that such a question would have b
should have obtained permission to make aeenb asked, I
statemente in
answer to it. But why should the question
on the first night of the session ? Such a course
is not usual. The public interests require that
the counsels of the Sovereign should be kept secret. It
is no doubt convenient that sometimes what takes Oaf
.e
should be revealed, but as a general rule the secre, of
the council cannot be revealed without obtaining t/
pin-
re-
rious permission of the Sovereign. This is the
firs t '
stance in which such a question has /seen P 4 without
previous notice, and no one present can de Are that the
secrets which it involves should be at pre,...eot.stated.
The Duke of RICHMOND ialdli e f ,youid hA glad to

givepotice of his intention to ask the question, though he
could not but wonder that his Noble Friend had nut ex-
pected that such a question would have been asked, and
therefore have been prepared for it by obtaining the
awskoutlhdenoqwuegsitivoennoo-f
previousliee thnt ct
oo
_nms
his Noble Friend.
eonrtr oowf tnhieg night uheee nw. o de
Lord STANLEY said,—Although he had the per.
mission of her Majesty to make any statement in refer-
ence to the subject that was under the consideration of
the House, in reference to the circumstances connected
with his resignation, be thought the present time was
not a proper one for going into explanations. Still,
without going into details he would state briefly the rea-
son why he had separated from those colleagues with whom
he had acted for the last four years. Althongh dif-
ferences had existed which led to his separation from
the Ministry, he still entertained for those with whom
he had hitherto co-operated the most unfeigned regard
and esteem.— (Hear, hear) He could not state all
the grounds that had led to his retirement, without
also stating the measures that were then under
the consideration of her Majesty's Cabinet. At
the present he not go into details, and
therefore he could not vindicate his conduct, or afford all
the explanations necessary why he had abandoned the
position he had held. Since that time those measures
may have been altered and modified, or others may have
been introduced in their stead ; but, in reference to
them as they then stood, he would only make the state-
ment that on one measure, and one only, there
was a difference between himself and his colleagues.
On all the others they were agreed. The
measure to which he referred had relation to the degree
and nature of protection that was to be afforded to the
agricultural interest.—(Hear, hear.) The measure pro-
posed could not meet with his approval without a sacra
Tice of his consistency and convictions, which he was not
prepared to make. The opinions of his col-
leagues during the past few years had undergone
considerable change, but his own had not done
so ; and he could not make himself responsible with
them for the changes proposed. He therefore separated
from the Ministry, being certain that to remain would
be to sacrifice his personal character and consistency.—
(Hear, hear.) Such he believed to be his public duty.
He would not go further now than to state that on one
ground alone, that which he had just explained, he had
dissented from the rest of the Cabinet. The details of
the measures under consideration, at the time, as he
before observed, need not be gone into at present, as
other opportunties would be afforded for that purpose.
Those questions would be explained on a future occasion.
The Earl of HARDWICKE said, he could not agree
with every part of the Address, still he thought that.
from sentiments of loyalty and good feeling, it should
go without an amendment. He was glad that be had sat
down and had given the Noble Lord an opportunity of
making the explanation he had done. He
wished to follow in his footsteps, and to enter
as little as possible into the discussion at
present, reserving such till another time. His feelings
he could only say, at the present moment, were in uni.
son with that Noble Lord, which was to give an opinion
without any mental reservation whatever ; and that
opinion was, that he thought that the measure agreed to
in 1842, respecting the duty on corn, was at least for
a considerable time a final measure. He con-
sidered the question settled, and in conse-
quence with it the wants and exigencies of the country.
But, they had it in the same Speech that there
never was a period in which the people were better off,
better fed, or more cheaply supplied. If this
be so, what should we do when we come to
a time of difficulty ? He was desirous not to be
led away upon this occasion, and, therefore,
He was desirous to control his feelings, but he would
rather stop short, that he might not give any offence to
those with whom he had been associated for ten years.
He deeply regretted that anything should have occurred
which should have led him to differ from those Noble
and Honourable Friends whom he looked upon as better
fitted to guide the country than any men he knew ; but
there was a change come over the spirit of their dream.
He stopped where he was ; but it appeared to him that they
had gone on in a course which, however right it might
be, or proper it might turn out to be, appeared to him to b 4
wrong, for he did not know where it might
stop. He would say no more about this. subject, or an,
reasons which led him to dissent from those friend:
who had put into the mouth of the Sovereign the Speech
which they had heard from the Throne; but he felt it
incumbent on him to give expression to his sentiments
on this occasion.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE observed that ht
was induced to rise for the purpose of saying,
that on this subject he entirely agreed with the senti-
ments expressed by the late Secretary of State foe
the Colonies. Like him, he expected that an explana-
tion would have been made that night on the motives
which had led to the resignation of the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Government. He was
delighted at the course taken by her Majesty's
Government with regard to the question of America.
Lord BROUGHAM rose also to express the great
gratification which he experienced at the course
which Government had pledged themselves to
adopt with regard to America. He did nee
wish his observations to take from that re-
spect which he, in common with all who had observeo
his Noble Friend's public conduct, felt for him; but still
he might express his regret at the course which his
Noble Friend had adopted. There were some matters
on which he differed from his Noble Friend, and there
were some on which he agreed with him ; and he felt
bound in fairness to take that opportunity of setting his
Noble Friend right, if he thought anything that
ho had said came within the scope of his
observations. In 1839 he (Lord Brougham) had
made a motion, in which he failed. He had made
motion that evidence should be called, and that they
should examine the whole of this question by means of
testimony. It was his opinion that an alteration in
the commercial policy of this country with regard to
corn was necessary, but not for the purpose of lowering
the price of corn, which he never expected it to do,
and which he had endeavoured to shciw it had no ten
dent), to do, any more than the corn-laws, against which
he had argued, had tended to keep up the price of food.
But it was for the purpose of remodelling the whol,
commercial system of this country that it might assume
such a position with regard to foreign powers as would
enable and make them open their markets to our manu-
factures and produce ; but in that attempt before.
their Lordships were aware, he was so entirely defeated
that he did not try again. He hoped, however, that h,
had lived to see better times, and greater ihanges it,
opinion, and he hoed and trusted that before he had
done with that subject seine of his opinions would be
more favourably received. They were, however, quite
uncertain what the Minister's policy would be with
regard to the corn laws. It would be folly to
say that, because they had taken one course
in 1842 they should not alter or change that course in
1846. Such was the doctrine of his Noble Friend, but
it was no part of his policy i he had learned a different
lesson. He must, however, express hiss disapprobation
of the manner in which his opinions—important as the)
were, and sincerely as he held them—had been received
and supported. He had said to their. Lordships—and
they knew well the grounds on which he wished to re
peal the corn-laws in 1839—could he hate said to the
public as an honest thahh that the repeal
would make bread tAtep t Could he say
now that the teem—laws, against •.-yhich he argued
so strongly Were, the
the cause of P.
in te .
muse of scarcity in the country 1
. .nine in the country, the cause of disease
country? the cause of trimn in the country? or the
cause of mortally in the teutitry Ile would rather put
his tight hand into the tire, and see it consumed, than
put it to any document which purported that the corn- '
laws caused famine, crime, disease, and death. He had
sat for four years in her Majestis Councils.
never saying a word to prevent crime and
famine, disease and death, knowing that these
things were the fault of those laws, and that
their removal would be the advantage of • their
repeal or alteration. He differed from his Noble friend
and with many persons on the question, and hi
was as much at issue with, them tin the one aide
of the case as he was With his Noble kriend on the other.
But there Was another class of persons connected with
the question—he meant the agitators—for whom he en-
tertained no respect whatever. His Noble Friend might
ask him if he were the friend and abettor, or perhaps
the accomplice, of the Anti-Corn-law League. He said,
God forbid. He differed infinitely more, ten thousand
times more, from the conduct pursued by that hod)
than he did from the corn-laws, and those who advo
cated them. After long observation and much reflec-
tion, he was deeply convinced that a representative Go
vernment was the form of Government which was best
adapted to confer the greatest amount of happiness and
freedom on the human race. New the nature and

essence of that kind of Government was, that when power
was delegated to representatives, the representatives
spoke in future, and not the constituency, and this led
him to answer the Noble Lord in reference to
what he said as to appealing to the people. It
was not a wholesome thing to appeal to the people
when they were in a ferment. At that period
it was wrong to call upon them to pronounce
upon an exciting subject.—(Murmurs.) He did not
mean to say that there were no exceptions to that prin-
ciple. He did not mean to say but that there might arise
conjunctures when it would become necessary to
make such appeal.—(Heal, hear.) When differences of
opinion arose between the two Houses of Parliament, the
only means of composing the different% Was to appeal
to the people, but 12 on every question that interests
Parliament they were to appeal to the people they
ceased to be a representative Gov'ereitlent, but were
entirely influenced by the Multitude, and even
by the mob, Ira did not see in the whole
circle of political questions one more objection
able for such an appeal as that wbietk *Re at
that moment occupying tbeit ittehlion. A continuance
of such an agitation would expose them to the same
dangers tts those which followed the agitation which was
now being pursued in Ireland for the repeal of the Union.
With respect to these agitators, he was about to state
the course of conduct now in great vogue w;th that
body, some of whose members were highly respectable,
while on the contrary others were quite the reverse, as
was customary in All large bodies. He found they
were raising an iP:,mense sum of money with an avowed
object. He 'admitted the object was lawful, and he ap-
pealed
n the
ot,hoickesallob. le Lords opposite clustering so thickly
o yq —(Laughter.) These agitators broke
no Act
-of Parliament in thus collecting a large sum
for',natter what pricise sum it might amount to)
the purpose they had in view. Now, he
"would ,ask, what was that purpose ? Their ob-
ject in collecting the large sum was to purchase votes
in different counties.—(A. Noble Lord, "No, freeholds.")
When he said to purchase votes, he meant to purchase
the right to vote. This party of agitators boasted that
in one county they had obtained two thousand votes,
and that for the future they would be successful
in securing able champions for their cause. They said
they were now about to add' 2,000 "Vtitersiwthe Ybit for
the county of Yorkshire, and a similar number for South