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

_ Hear, hear)—but if he had been of the same opinion with
• other of his friends who "still voted for the maintenance of free
trade, what I ask eould have induced him to make any ex-
periment in free trade ? Why, because his ideas were more
enlarged than e'nose of other gentlemen who sit on that side of
the House, and therefore it was that the divisions arose in re-
spect to iris Canadian commercial policy, the corn-laws, and
the Maynoeth question. What can he conclude from this
That in the union to put an end to the late Government there
was no party united on views of public policy, and therefore I
think it was far better that the Right Hon. Baronet should go
en in those views which he himself entertains of public policy,
and that those gentlemen should act on those opinions whch
they entertain, and should vote accordingly. The Hon. and
Learned Member has spoke of the association which exists
under the Anti-Corn-law Leagne, and of that other associa-
tion which exists across the Channel for the repeal
of the Union. I beg that lion. Gentlemen to consider—as he
dilikes the line estrich those associations take—as he dare not
approve of the nourse of policy which has been in agitation for
many years, send as he does think that improvement should
comment:a in Parliament instead of emanating from the
people--instead of coming from the public themselves.—l beg
the lion. and Learned Member, that he will consider
the' experience of late years. For many years we contended for
'.ne question of Parliamentary reform, and I remember saying'
in this House, that if we did not yield to popular opinion
while it flowed like a river, we should afterwards find it rush
upon us like a torrent. I Wp3 afterwards laughed at for that
expression, but when that popular demonstration reached this
Howse, then it was seen that the wiser measure would
have been to have made concessions previous to
that agitation. ( sear, hear.) And with regard
to this question of corn, and also with regard to the
question of Ireland, I pray the House to consider whether it
would not be wiser that those questions should be settled
before it will, be dictated to by popular agitation. This
ought to 1.,e done. I feel that if we mean to give a great
example, to all the nations of the world —if we mean to teaeh
them the way to live, we, in the House of Commons, ought
deeply to consider which of our institutions, which of our laws,
are founded in truth, in reason, and in justice,—(Great
cheering.) You found fault with the Right Hen. Baronet
because he declared that the corn-laws were unjust. Why are
these laws not restrained? If they are not founded for the
benefit of the people the laws are unjust. If other laws are
stamped with injustice, do you wait until Ministers tell you
they ought to be done away with ? Take example by what
has been done in the case of the Catholic qaestion—by
what has been done on the question of reform of Parliament,
and by what will be done with the present corn-laws. I in-
sist only on thole laws which can be maintained . Stand onlv
by these institutions which are good, and give up those ques-
tions which are altogether unworthy of your support. In
this way I feel convinced that Government will show a
worthy example, and prove to all other nations that this
couinsry contains a wise and intelligent people.--( Cheers.)
;ifr. DISRAELI said that his Hon. Friend, the Member
ior Dorsetsbire, had vindicated his Noble Friend, the Mem-
ber for Lynn, from the imputation which had been cast upon
him by the first Minister. He was surprised indeed that the
motives which influenced the Noble Lord on that occasion
should have been misinterpreted. He came forward to pro-
pose a remedy which he thought was necessary for
the state of Ireland. He admitted and appreciated the
exigency which existed, and he proposed a measure with which to
meet that exigenny. That was the position of his Noble
Friend. It was true that his Noble Friend offered more, but
that was obviously an argumentum a i absurdum- He said,
m " You sraggest a remedy which pleases the passions of the
ultitinde—which may be misinterpreted, and which has been
misinterpreted in our multifarious debates." He said that he
wintild prove, if they had recourse to the proposed remedy, that
'st would be inefficient ; and he wished to guard himself and his
friends from being accused of deceiving the people of Ireland'
with a measnre which he believed to be worthless. Now it nnest
be admitted that his Noble Friend had a right to seinn upon a
point like that, whih he (Mr. Disrali) consideeee a most judi-
cious point, and which had had the tendeney to clear very much
the debates in thP.t House, and it was he thought hardly worthy
so practised a Parliamentary orator as the Right Hon. Baronet
to
shown take scch an adenetage of it as that which he had
had been In The P.lnnt Hon. Gentleman had said that he
smed for his precaution. Now he, (Mr. Disraeli
conle "nardly believe that any gentleman in that House, where)
ever he might sit, could blame the Government for the
preeautiobs they had taken. They had been blamed not for
the precautions they had taken, but for the policy they had
recommended. Tbey had not been blamed for establishing
hospitals, they had not been bhwed for importing maize.
They had not only not been blamed for such conduct, but they
had expressed their willingness to support any measure that
was
was nec
thatessary to meet an emergeney. What they objected to
, on amount of this emergency they should be called
upon to construct a new commercial
—that new co policy—(Loud cheers.)
principle wki commercial policy being absolutely opposed to every
Theme which the Government had hitherto professed.
time was but short between the last protection speech
made 1-y, the Right Hon. Baronet, at the termination of the last
sess;.on of Parliament, and the commencement of the present,
senen he met them with a new profession of political and eco-
nomical faith. Out of respect to his late supporters, he might
have detached the emergency from his new system. The
Noble Lord who had just addressed the House had assumed that
the argument which had been used was whether they were pre-
pared to oppose that which was for the interest of the multi-
tude. He (Mr. Disraeli) wasnot prepared to oppose any mea-
sure that was for the interest of the multitude. That was
the real question before them. He thought the point which
had been taken by his Noble Friend was not only a legitimate
point but one which was most necessary to take. He (Mr. D.)
was not prepared for a debate, but he could hardly offer that
as an excuse, for not answering the speech of the Right Hon.
Baronet. It was not a speech that he had heard for the first
time. He had heard it in other places, in different localities,
and lee might be allowed to add from master hands. That
reeech, he thought, had sounded in Stockport, and he
thought it had been delivered in Durham. It had been given
in another House, which had alw
n y
as en thrivileed seat
of the draw and he supposed that the b
i enferiore copmpanyg had at
length adopted the popular performance. When he had heard
that speech he said to hienself, in the language used in railway
committees, " This must be the member for Stockport's line."
(Laughter.) n'ith respect to the efficacy of this measure,
he should be prepared to argue on a future occasion. If the
measure of 'he Government had not a tendency to occasion a
great displacement of labour—labour of that kind which was of
the most permanent character—if it was not calculated to
create social suffering, then he would say that the measure was
a good measure, and one which he was not prepared to
oppose. That was the real question. That was the
question which, at the right moment, he should, with
the indulgence of the House, be prepared to meet ; and if he
did not meet it, then he hoped it would not for a moment be
supposed that he admitted the justice of the series of assump-
tions which bad been used by the Right Hon. Gentleman. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded to the state of Ireland, and
the 530,600 farmers without capital, upon which he said, " See
what protection has done." Who was to say that but for pro-
tecton these 530,000 farmers would never have existed ? They
might take any case of wretchedness—even the Wiltshire la-
bourers, with their 6s. or is. a week—and they might say,
" See what protection has done." Why, he had been in Lin-
colnshire, and he had found the labourers flourishing there,
and why could they not say, " See what protection has done
there." The Right Hon. Baronet said, " How can you jus-
tify your system of protection, even if it does benefit agricul-
ture ? Can you justify it to the manufacturers?" He (Mr.
Dn,raeli) could justify it to the manufacturer. He protested
against the inference drawn from the assumption of the Right
Hon. Baronet. Unless it could be shown that the manufac-
turer were benefited equally with the agriculturist, he ad-
mitted that protection could not be maintained.—(Hear. )
Take the case of manufactures. He had taken some pains to
trace the origin of manufactures in most countries, and he
found that all the flourishing manufactures at present existing
in Europe, and in the United States of America, had sprung
from capital, arising from a system of protection—capital de-
rived from landed property, protected by the Legislature. It
was that capital which had fostered and formed the manufac-
tures; and the industry, the noble industry of the north of
England, which was so often the subject of discussion in that
House, was as much owing to the agricultural capital of
England as it was to the genius of its great mechanical inven-
tions, and its many local advantages. In the early state of
the cotton manufactures, about the commencement of this
century, it was the capital of Lombard-street that produced
the means for the development of those fabrics. Now,
what was that capital? Whence did it spring ? Take the
case of a great house like Gurney's. The capital intrusted to
them fed the manufacturers of Lancashire more than probably
any other capital in England. And what was the means that
allowed them to discount a manufacturer's bill for half a mil-
lion sterling? He knew the instance to which he referred,
and he had no doubt it was familiar to many gentlemen around
him. Why, it was the capital of the farmers of the county of
Norfolk, of Lincoln, and other counties that allowed the Lom-
bard-street house to supply the capital which was the princi-
pal developement of the industry of Lancashire.—(Hear,
hear.) True, the industry of Manchester had outlived the ne-
cessity for support in this way, but do not let it be forgotten that ,
it was once supported by capital, derived from protective pro-
perty; and. that brought him to another point of the Right
Hon. Baronet's speech, who had inferentially said, " If manu-
facture require no protection, how can agriculture require it ?
—With what justice can agriculturists claim protection ?" As
an abstract principle he protested against it—it was not sonnd,
nor was it argumentative. It was not for the state to inquire
what interests had protection, and what had not—they were
to inquire what interests required protection.—( Hear, hear.)
Peculiar burdens he never thought was a sufficient argument
in favour of protection to agriculture. But manufacturers had
peculiar advantages which agriculture had not. No gentleman
could deny this, for they_ were always getting up and telling
they that with their peculiar advantages of soil and 't ng
they required no protection. These advantages, it wslasuastaTd-
did not exist in any other country in the world. But the
farmer had not these advantages. He did not picture his soil
us the best in thewas world, or that there was any peentiar blessing
in it. There no argument in the assertion of an abstract
opinion, that one interest ought net to be protected because
another did not require protection. It was not argument ;
it nothing more than a mere sentiment
that as
Was
very well the hustings, but did not be-
come the walls of the Senate. He was not asserting
that the farmers of England required
protectionof but if it were
this question
necessary he would enter into a consideration
without reserve, if an oppertunity w
nerengt a caseivenhim
of
'1 he case they had to deal with was
supported sbo by
petty views and slender arguments,forhe admitted, that un.
less they could make out a complete and overwhelming case,
they would not have a foot to stand on.—Hear, hear.) They
had heard something about the aristocracy, but he for one de-
nied the existence of a territorial aristocracy. There was an
aristocracy of wealth, and he thought the measures and pro-
ceedings of Government had a tendency to increaseits power
—a power in his mind not in general very beneficial to the
people. He protested against the rhetorical position taken up
by the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of
the Government, and the Noble Lord the
Illember for the City of London. when they argued
the case as if the aristocracy, of England were a privileged
aristocracy.
"Take warning,' said they, "tram what betel
the aristocracy of France, and do not be too hardy in main-
taining these privileges." What were the privileges? . hat
wa
s the aristocracy? No aristocracy existed but the arato-
craas cy of wealth. He himself had often upheld the cause of
what was called the territorial constitution of the country, but
in usuing ,net words, he was not to be understood as simply
maintaining the interests of
barons and baronets, for certainly
he should never have risen to defend it had the territorial con-
But
But
really of the country been of so trivial a character.
really this territorial constitutionn
had obtned for this country _
public liberty and the blessings of local government and of
self-government. L applied to all classes and bore no
limitation—it was spread out from the peer in Parlia-
ment to the constable of a village, and was applicable
to every class of ter community. He had often taken upon
himself the duty of guing the necessity of a preponderance
in the agricultural interest ; and he remembered, on one occa-
sion, somebody got up and said nothing could
be more im-
proper than holding out the necessity for a preponderance of
one class of the community over another. He did not assume,
however, that the agricultural interest consisted merely of the
proprietors of land. The agricultural interest was that great
body of the people who were connected with the cultiva-
tion of the earth ;
and if they materially changed the
balance between the population depending upon the two great
Industries of the country, they shook the territorial constitution,
they destroyed the security of local Government, they subverted
the guarantee of public liberty, they changed in. fact the cha-
racter of England, and brought about an extensive social revo-
lution. There was nothing excessively restrictive in the
principle of this territorial constitution, or he was sure it weuld

not have been tolerated for a single moment in England. He
had taken the trouble to examine into the history of all the
Families that had sprung up !ince the time of Horace Walpole,
and who had formed great seats of industry both in
Lancashire and in Yorkshire. With the exception of one
instance there was not an individual who bad accumulated great
wealth who had not depeeited that accumulated capital in the soil
of Englandy and become the founder of a powerful and dis-
tinguished family.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, these privi-
leges, which attach to the territorial constitution, were open
to all ; and the fact that ever family invested itself in the
soil, proved that there was noting in our laws alien to such
an investment. There was no difficulty in buying land in
the country, for, during the last twenty years, in the county
with which he was connected, more than one-third of the
soil had changed hands, and, in some instances, the purchasers
were subscribers to the Anti-corn-law League,—(Hear and
laughter.) Then away with these false views about a terri-
torial aristocracy. They were not a body distinguished
from other classes ; it was nothing more than an hereditary
right taking that position which property and intelligence de-
served. He would not trespass further upon the time of the
House, and he should reserve himself for the more favourable
opportunity of the third reading to discuss thelargermcigubesttiobne
involved in the incidental debate. His arguments
weak, but he would not shrink from meeting the question. He
should here have resumed his seat, were it not for one
e Thent
w which
joßight
taathHkdh
feoirnlnenHe.
long
goßuars
been
go Baronet
pt
the
rhnatdi
other,
nted made
observation of the Right Hon. Baronet, which he would not
aulsleowoftoaparsosiituincaniotairegendm.
andnamely,k
nie kst
uhe kicked
ht 40bafillosueutebtjifEgtmhvoeOsntntieul er test:
man-
gecould
nGeernwtlietmh
ernesoppeotstioteththenfingrshtttdreadbonnaiHree
Minister
that the o f
pointthe Cwaroswlnn
quite
ebut
certain. Hon.
It was one of the most abstruse, one of the most complicated,
and one of the most difficult political questions that could be
argued. —( Hear, hear.) He had ventured once in a popular
assembly to speak upon such subject, he had ventured once to
express some opinions of his own, and he observed the next
day that it was stated that he had entered into a commercial
case about the balance of trade. Now he entirely dissented
from the idea that they could fight with hostile tariffs ;
and duties upon imposts, in his opinion, if they were not met
by countervailing duties, were a tax upon the industry of the
country.---( Hear, hear,) If they did not meet hostile tariffs
with hostile tariffs there would be a transmission of gold. He
had not the slightest doubt that if they did not do so they
would pursue a policy which would be a poison to this country.
The Right Honourable Baronet had turned round and sad that if they did not adopt his policy they would be met by the hos-
tile tariff of France. Of course he could net suppose that the
commercial transactions with that country could produce:any ef-
fect upon the currency of the country, which was at this
moment in the least describable position of any in the world.
The Right. Hon. Baronet had said that the reciprocating
policy would benefit these counties in a considerable degree.
Now he (Mr. Disraeli) was perfectly willing to admit to any
indignant economist who might rise in defence of low prices,
that high prices certainly produced great inconvenience. Who
said there was any advantage in high prices ?—(Hear, hear. )
But the effect of low prices would act injuriously upon a
country that was at present hum ensely involved in public debt,
and whose private debts were scarcely less considerable.—
: (Hear, hear.) New, he was only noticing—he was not pre-
tending to argue the question at the present moment.—( An
Hon Member on the Opposition benches " Hear.") Well, he
was quite ready to enter into the question then, if they
wished ; but he was merely alluding to some observations of
the Right lion. Baronet.—(Hear, hear.) He really thought
it too cool a pass for the Right Hon. Baronet, not only to
change his opinions, but to meet every thing that was opposed
to his arguments with the cry of " absolutely absurd."—
( Hear. hear.) Now he remembered—he was not going to
quote a protectionist, nor even a conservative, in fact it was
very difficult to quote the opinions of a Conservative, for a
Conservatism was so indefinite a term—( Hear, hear, and
laughter)—but he remembered a gentleman some years ago--
a really ingenious economist, and even a Member of
that House, and one who had produced the budget
of the Noble Lord, a budget which had been so willingly
accepted. His (Mr. Disraeli's) attention had been called to
this subject, and although it might be said that the argument
had died away amongst popular assemblies, it had not died
away amongst students who were free from the passions of
either France, Italy, or England. The greatest economists of
the day still considered it a moot point, and it was one which
furnished an opportunity of the most elaborate analysis. Why
it was only the night previous that he read " the interchange
between nations," a very recent publication not, written by a
man, who was attached to any particular politics, but one who
was free from the influence of party passions ; he was
a man too of a high order of intelligence, and his name
was highly respected by the other aide of - the
House, not only as an absolute free trader; and he had an-
nounced
himself to be an hereditary economist. He alluded
to Mr. John Mill. He believed that that gentleman's opinions
were not influenced on the question on which he had written
by a political bias. And what was the conclusion to which he
had come on the subject of commercial interchadge between
different nations? That it was impossible for any country to
meet hostile tariffs by any other course than that of adopting
similarly hostile tariffs. He thought he heard an Hon. Member
say, no. Now, it was rather inconvenient to make a speech
when one did not expect it, because had he but known
that the accuracy of the quotation would have been de-
nied he would have brought the book with him.—( Hear. )
He was of the same opinion as the writer from whom he had
quoted. He believed that this country could not carry on her
trade with other countries that adopted hostile tariffs without
adopting similar tariffs. He contended, that under the pre-
sent restrictive system, they would furnish more labour to the
poor of this country; and that if an opposite system were
adopted they would be afflicted with a depression in wages
—(Hear, hear)—and an accompanying diminution of pro-
fits. Now, he was very sensible of the late hour at which
he was addressing the House.—( Hear.) The discussion had
been brought on most unexpectedly as regarded himself. He
was very glad that the Noble Lord had made the observations
which had fallen from him. The observations which had
fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet could not in his (Mr.
Disraeli's) opinion be anything more than a random flash of
rhetoric.—( Hear, hear.) When another opportuity occurred
for meeting the great argument, he was sure that he would not
shrink from fighting that great battle in which they were en-
gaged.--( Cheers.)
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
No division however took place.
On our re-admission into the gallery, we found that the
House had resolved itself into a Committee.
Upon Clause 1 being put from the chair,—
Lord G. BENTINCK moved that the Chairman do report
progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, ' when there appeared
In favour of the motion B5
Against the motion
illajority 96
On our re-admission into the gallery, we found
The CHAIRMAN putting the question, that the blanks in
the first clause be filled up.
Mr. LAWSON then moved that the Chairman do report
progress, and not sit again.—(Laughter.)
The Committee again divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ....55
Against it ..
Majority
—lll
Mr. PACKE moved that the Speaker do now leave the
chair.—( Cries of " Divide, divide. ')
Mr. CHARLES BULLER thought it but just to the
House to come to some understanding as to the mode of con-
ducting this debate en the clauses. He thought it was not
necessary for Hon. Members on the other side of the House
to resort to this system of dividing, without it was real), neces-
sary to their case. He understood from the Hon. Members
that they would not adopt the mode of opposition that was not
directly necessary, and he hoped the House would come to
some regulation on the matter.
Colonel SIBTHORP said that it was not for his side of
the House to know what was the understanding of the
Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down. It was
not because the other side of the House did not consider it
interesting to them that they were to give up any line of policy
they might think proper to adopt.—( Cries of " Question.)
He had moved for some returns, and they were not produced
by the Right Hon. Baronet—( Question, question.) They
were on the question, and it was for them to divide, and they
would see who was right.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
returns would be furnished the Hon. and Gal!ant Memter ;
but they required some time to make out.
Mr. ROEBUCK said, if they were to go into Committee
they had better do so at once.
Sir R. PEEL said he proposed that the Noble Lord, in
moving that the Speaker do leave the chair, meant that no
further progress should be made with the measure to night.
Now be would ask why should they not go on ?—( Cries of
" Go on, go on.")
After a few words from Messrs. Ewart, Packs, and Dr.
Bowring,
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said be could not see why any
objection should be raised to-night to his moving that the
debate should not be proceeded with, when he remembered an
instance very recently, when a Minister of the Crown, under
the very same circumstances, moved the adjournment of the
debate at three minutes past twelve o'clock.—( Hear, hear.)
Now, he had a motion before the House, in respect to atoatit,
for tomorrow; but he would not give way now unless be
should be assured that he would have Thursday for that dis,
cussion.

Sir R. PEEL said, that as far as the Government or him-
self were concerned, he was perfectly willing to oblige the
Noble Lord by a postponement until Thursday, but he could
not control the decision of the other Hon. Members.
Lord G. BENTINCK said, that if Thursday was allowed
to him he was perfectly willing to give way to-morrow.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON made a few observations which
did not reach the gallery.
Mr. MILES said that he had collected some information as
taltAom thot.t i
impressed with a beliet that
11°11°1ormat : azi
letter circumstances,
. he was
After an observation from Sir
Canada, from a Cana-Han newspaper,
t might affect this colony.
PhouElLt, which did not
fe
investigation
of
any
inessomp.etuame should lb. given for a
reacuhrdthGe
Gallery,
aBnEeryNTINCK said that he t
or beforemo nr.
tßh proceedingeAN partKE osf withhsaiisd tt kh ea t Corn
Hon.
entitled to have ;he Poor-law Removal BM readtha,t they
were
Removal Bill. The only
was that it did not go far enough.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that it
im-
mediately.
Mr. BANKES said it was nececostas
there
Frißnwdilas,l7noo( Ooipnhpotenosehti.2tnhse°orZistirp.mariaetw,
complaint they had to find with it
be offered, as the Bill gave a considerable
powers of the Poor-law Commissioners.
' ction to the principle of the Bill.
je
After some further conversation, ardyntobtabte brought on
so.me time should
_ increase to the
There was no ob-
jection
BANKES thought there could be no objection to
allow the second reading of the Poor Law Settlement 8111 to
be taken as a matter of course, and take the discussion on the
motion for the House going into Committee on the Bill.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM bad no objection to an arrange-
ment of this kind, providing that some time would be allowed
between the discussion and the going into Committee, so that he
might be able to make use of any suggestions made that might
be considered advisable to incorporate in the Bill.
After a few words from Mr. J. ABEL SMITH, the Chair-
man reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again to-
morrow.
___ _

POOR REMOVAL BILL.
On the motion of Sir JAMES GRAHAM this Bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday next.
POLLING PLACES (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. MACARTHY brought up the report on this Bill, and
sad he had prepared a clause to the effect that each voter
should vote in the township from which he derived his qualifi-
cation.

The report, with the amendment, was received and agreed to.

MR. CHARLES. BULLER.

Mr. HAWES moved that Mr. Charles Buller have leave
to attend as counsel before the House of Lords.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that it would be expedient that some precedent should be had
for such a practice, because it would be derogatory to the dig-
nity of the House if an Hon. Member were to appear u counsel
for a Bill in one place and to vote for that Bill in that House.
Mr. CHARLES BULLER thought it was rather hard that
Members could have a vote on matters affecting, their direct
interest, when, he as counsel, would be much less interested.
In his case, however, the Bill had already passed the House of
"'mons, and he did not, therefore, see why he should be pre-
eluded from
exercising his profession of a barrister in another
place.