The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-16 00:00:00

a sad alternative was that. Let me tell you
that although for a time you might rely on
those faggot votes, the interval would not be long before the
weapon would break short in your hands, and you would find
that these additional votes, formed for the purpose of combat-
ing the League—though brought up at the first 'election—it
would be the institution of a permanent evil for a temporary
benefit. It was the consideration of all these circumstances
which strongly induced me to believe that it was for the bene-
fit of all classes, and the benefit of the agricultural classes, to
make a permanent and equitable system.—( Cheers.) I know
the penalty to which I must be subjected, but even after the
continuance of these debates, I am more impressed with the
necessity which there exists for this measure. The Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Sunderland said there was no ex-
citement about the Corn Bill, and he undertook to give it his
opinion that the Bill was received by all classes with less of
excitement than any, public measure generally excited. and
with a greater disposition to confide in the wisdom of Par-
liament.—:( Loud cries of "No, no.")

(Mr. Hudson rose, but, being below the bar, he was
called to order, and the Hen. Gentleman made his way to the
middle of the House amidst the greatest laughter.)
Mr. HUDSON— No, no; what I stated was, that there
was no excitement in favour of the Rill, bat there was a deep
feeling on the part of the agricultural community against the Bill.
Sir R. PEEL—I consider that the explanation fully justifies
my observations.—( Cries of "No, no.") If there is no ex-
' eitement in favour of the Bill, it only proves how favourable
the opportunity is for discussing it, rather than wait, until
unfavourable harvests and depressed manufactures might bring
about a state of things which would render it to you not very
easy to exercese due deliberation in your opinions. Ido not
rest it upon that ground alone. The scarcity, however. has
made it imperative Ott you to.
consider what is the course i f
policy you must pty-sti.. referee
that it ;s for the general interste,e to this question. I repeat
apart from any temporary
consideration, that some rent. arrangement shook! be
Made for the removal of thorsit:rrneo'ntertncttsive laws. will
facts from you who are the opp sake the
take the speech of the Hon. Memb'roff the
meataure
; will
or ?xfordshire.
will have no dispnt s about the faets, IWe
you ; but it is with the inferences cfras7n I take those from
which V em witho
which we she I have to do. That Hon. Gentle athn:!id that
looking at the last 30 years, our trade had been 07
and our commodities had become cheapened. but no increase,
talent had taken place in the social conditieu of the
people. What was it that was calculated to ehe.
' vale them from the degradation into which they
were sunk? What was calculated to raise the condition
and elevate the moral character of the millions that subsist by
labour ?—(Cheers.) If the Hon. Gentleman's statements he
correct, they suggest matter for grave consideration. He said
that trade had increased, and that commodities had been cheap-
ened, but that there had been no corresponding increase in the
social condition of those who were the basis of society. Let
sat go back to the last thirty years since—to 1815, and let us
examine the matter attentively. It was then that the system
of protection to agriculture first began.--( Cheers.) 'What
was the preceding period, excluding of course the time of war,
with which you compare the then condition of the people ? Let
us compare the state of the people from any period from 1700
to 1791 with the period referred to by the Hon. Gentleman.
For the first 66 years of the last century this was an importing
country. Why, let me ask, were not Croatia and Hungary
sending us corn then? The law in 1773 admitted it at 6d. a
qr, and for 6 years after this was an importing country. There
were sixteen hundred and sixty inclesure bills passed in that
year, and the state of the people was better in point of em-
ployment, in p tint of prosperity, and in point of happiness
than since 1'415. Well, in that year, a law was passed, which
at id that corn should not come in unless it was above
80s. in the home market. In 1828, they made
the price 705., at which corn should be admitted, and at that
price a duty of 16+. Bd., and it was only by the alteration made
in 1840 that the beneficial change was made. It was in 1815
that we made this prohibition of foreign articles of consump-
tion. We increased the duty on butter to 2s '6d., and on
cheese from Is. 6d. to 2s. 6d., and therefore we did that which
almost amounted to a restriction. Such, then, was the result
of thirteen years. I now come to the facts of the Hon. Gen-
tleman the Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire, and
regret that indisposition prevented that Hon. Member ad-
dressing the House in his usual audible manner.—(Hear,
hear.) I followed the Hon. Gentleman very closely.
and I took down his account of the state of agricul-
ture. He said that in 1815 we had great distress, and in that
year you will remember we had the protection duty. "We
had great distress in the agricultural districts." said the Hon.
Member. This was the historical fact of the Hon. Gentle-
man. Well, in 1819, we had a speech from the throne on the
great distress which prevailed, and it was so great and alarm-
ing in our agricultural and manufacturing d stricts, that we
passed the " Six Acts," and a Commmittee was appointed, and
aetually employed in devising a remedy. There was in 1822.
the greatest difficulty in getting employment, and the labouring
classes felt that &stress most severely, but still we had protege
tion. We advanced to 1832 and 1833, and it was found neces:
sary in that year to appoint a Committee to supply a remedy
In that year, in the north of England, there were 300,000
persons almost unemployed. The Preston weavers presented
a petition to thatliouse. praying that something might he done
to relieve them from their wretched condition. In 1835, it
was also as bad. In 1836 and 1837, we bad a change; these
were years of comparative prosperity, but, in 1839 and down
to 184 ), there was a great depression. Well, that
was the state of trade under protection. --(Hear, hear. )
Well then did that lowering of prices arise from competition
in foreign corn ? No, the lowering of prices was caused by
the suspension of the national dealings in corn, occasioned by
productive harvests, their being no outlets fa this abundance ;
and this it, was which occasioned the prosTiation in the corn
trade. But the Hon. Gentleman having detailed this suffering
on the part of the agriculturist, I was surprised to hear the
Hon. Gentleman conclude wilh a quotation, the effect of which
was to preserve the tree which had shaded them so long.—
(Hear, hear.) Had be not better have said—

"Ille et nefastoieposttitdie,"
* * *

* agro qui statuit men
Te, tristo lignam, to caducum
In domisi caput immerentis."
I think it would have been a more appropriate quotation-
-(Loud laughter.) Is there no exception to be made
from this period of three years? Is the latter
part of the thirty years exempt from the stigma which the
Hon. Gentleman cast upon the preceding year, ? There had
been three years, 1843, 1844, and 1845 during which you had
from some eau,ta or other, many benefits. The average price
of what had little exceeded 51a., and let us see whether
during the last three years there has been no increase .of com-
fort, ro improvement in the moral condition of the people, no
abatement of fictitious dealings in corn. I care not what may
have been the cause of the abun ance which has prevailed
during the last three years. You do not attribtee the cause to
the tariff, but to good harvests. It is enough to know that
there have been goad harvests, and the people have bad to
apply less of their earnings to the purchase of food.—( Hear.
Do you believe that if the price of wheat had been 70s. in-
stead of 50s. there would have been the same amount of
capital expended. But granted that the tariff of 1842 had
nothing to do with the abatement of prices in 1844 and
1845. I concede that to you. It has been the favour of
Providence, it has been good harvests. There has been
abundance; and what has been the result of that abundance?
( Hear, hear.) I take the test of the Hon. Gentleman. He
says, " the facts and figures show there has been no increase
in the consumption." Well, I will show you that during the
last three years, that trade has flourished and that capital has
accumulated. But during, it is said, the last three years
there has been a greater deterioration in the social condition
of the people than during the preceding 27 years.—( Hear,
hear.) Well, now, first take the consumption of articles that
are used largely, which I take from the statement of the
undermentioned articles in the United Kingdom, and which
gives the average consumption of those articles in the
three years ending 1839, 1841, 1843, and 1846. Well, in
the first three years, when the prices of provisions arc high,
and the average consumption of sugar for the three years
ending 1841 was 3,826.000; this average, for the last. three
years ending the Ist January, 1846, rose from 38,826,000 to
43,460.000.—( Hear, hear.) The average consumption of tea
in the first three years was 34,360,000, and the average con
gumption of tea in the last tnree years was 42,000,000 instead
of 34,000,000.—( Hear, hear.) In coffee, the average con-
sumption, in three years of high prises, was 27,941,000, and
the average for the' last three years was 81,833,000. In cocoa,
the average consumption the first three years was 1.859,000,
and the average during the last three years was 2,595,000.
( Hear, hear.) taking other articles of smaller amount, but
which entered very largely into the consumption of the poor,
and added very much to their comfort—during the first three
years the consumption was 175,000 cwt., and in the last two
years 185,0, 0 awt. So far I take, then, the test of the Right
Hon. 51erraber for Oxfordshire of these great articles of con-
sumption, and I show him that comparative plenty
has produced this change, and enabled the working
classes to purchase those smaller luxuries of life.—( Hear.
bear.) Well, I came to a more important point —the statement
of crime, You have got an official record presented within the
last few days, which gives the statement of crime within the
last three years. In the third year I have mentioned the e was
an increase ; but in the year 1843 there was a change in.:
most important feature in the state of the country. In the
sears I have mentioned of plenty. there followed a proportionate
_
decrease of crime and commitments. In the thr,et.:,.
.y
ac
high prices the number of commitments wr:rs_77.l):_ L.l!,
.amt
cording to the return- I hold in my band, 21.°""2 (
00,'
)0.1
31,000 ; .hi'e in the last three years they were 9,0 t
and 24,006. Now, ask, can we resist conviction that from
the existence of plenty followed the diminution of Crime
the gentleman who drew up this return adds, that during those
same three years of plenty there was a total absence of
ditiou3 riots; and I a4c, can you have a stronger proof of the
fact than this, that the progressive diminution of ommitments
for seditious riots has been owing to the cheap and piety iful
supply of food ? - ( Hear, hear.) hay then that in the three
years of the reduced pricer of the pr,,visions of life, as com-
pared With the twenty-seven years previous, the inference is
that the increased command over those articles which consti
tote the principal food of the poor has been the cause of this
diminution of crime. But then, you ask if all those happy re-
sults followed from those coro-laws of '42, why now come
forward to disturb them 7 I say, in answer to that, if you can
show me that such has been the cause of it, thin
will say they ought n t to be disturbed ; and, no doubt, if we
could calculated that this law of 1842 did e,,nfer such
benefits it would be desirable not to disturb them. But then,
apt n, it has been urged that this happy state of things has
been owing to a favourable harvest; if so, then I say that
there is no reason at all for not introducing this law.—( Hear,
hear.) But suppose you have a cycle of years of Unfavourable
harvests, what guarantee have you that there will not also
be a depression in the manufacturing districts, and what then
will be the state of the country?—( Hear, hear.) Let me
ask, how short a time has elapsed since the dis-
tressed state of the people of Paisley, and of ITheffield,
and of Stockport. was brought before us ?—( Hear.) If
that state of things should return, do you think it would be pos-
sible to maintain a law which imposes a duty of Os. upon a
principle article of food?—(Hear. bear.) ,iiy firm belief is,
and I say this without yielding to the dictation of any party.—
( Cries of " Oh, oh.") Yes, I say, I believe it to be perfectly
consistent with prudence and good policy, and the real interests
of the territorial aristocracy.—( Oh, oh.) I say I do
entertain the firm conviction that it is consistent with
prudence and good policy to pass this measure. —( H-er, hear.)
I have attempted to defend the exists :rice of the corn-laws. I
have attempted it up to the present period. I have refused to
acquiesce in their abolition, but when I am told that I am
acting inconsistently with the principles I laid down, by being
an advocate for the principle of free-trade, I give it little atten-
tion. During the last three years I have subjected iny
many taunts. It has beers said that
policy to out
to
Lord Grey found_
something of me. Did I not say that the true gel
which
you should conform, was not to disturb the country
entrusted
to you by any rash legislation, on principles to which
economy
d o
not conform ? It was the principle of
politicalasubiect of
which suggested my interference
en
such importance. Did I not say that I thought
nothing in the world was so well calculated to be ex-
posed to this principle as agriculture, which
, was so often a;-
plied in other cases. I have heard you taunt me with
a change of opinion in respect to corn, but
when you
I
say that when I adopt the principle of free trade act in con-
travention of what I have avowed during all my preceding life,
the charge is destitute of foundation. I will not enter, at this
late hour, on any discussion of any other question. I foresaw
tito oonsequenee which would result from the measures I pro-
posed. I was charted with the heavy responsibility of taking
security against a great calamity.—(Hear.) I did not act
lightly—l did not form an opinion on merely local
information, or on local 'authority likely to be influenced. I
an thota who agreed with me in my opinions same to the eon-