The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-27 00:00:00

on the subject. He (Mr. Villiers) listened during his speech, and all
that he heard was the reading of a speeech of the Attorney. Ge-
neral's—at least that was all he could collect. These persons would
go any length, at any rate they would go great lengths, in throwing
the Right Hon. Baronet from the head of the Government, though
they were unable to give the House a single motion o: the way in
which it would benefit agriculture. Mr. Wawn says that the farmers
must take as their text low prices, and trust to an improvement in
agriculture. That they must not look any longer to high rates, but
endeavour to produce a larger quantity, so as to meet the reduction
in the price of grain,— (Hear.) He would ask the Hon. Member
for Norfolk how it was that, in discussing the merits of the protective
system, so little reference was made to the fanners and labourers,
However much they might be referred to out of doors, he did not
find the farmers and labourers brought forward prominently in that
House. There was hardly a word about the farmers there, though
there was no lack of reference to them out of the House. He thought
that a farmer who had prospered under the protective system during
the last thirty years, would be a strange animal—an extraordinary
bird, that from its rarity ought to be catched and stuffed, in order to
be placed in. British Museum.—(Laughter and cheers.) It was,
indeed, a rare occurrence for the farmer to thrive under this protec-
tive system. Again, had they heard any evidence respecting the
condition of the labourer. He was aware that it had been said of the
Goatacre meeting that it had been got up by the Anti-Corn-law
League—(Hear, hear, from Conservative benches)—but he. knew
well that the Anti-Corn-law League had had nothing to
do with It.—(Hear, hear.) He knew it to be one of a
series of meetings that had been held for some time in Wiltshire, at
which the labourers assembled to express the miserable and deplor-
able condition in which they were placed. If they would look at all
the reports on the agricultural districts that had appeared for many
years—from 1824 to 1843—Hon. Members would find the same re-
presentations of the extreme distress and degradation of the agricul-
tural labourers. It was evident from all these that the condition
of the labourers was as bad as bad could be—(blear, hear)—par-
ticularly in the most agricultural counties. He would call the atten-
tion of the Hon. Member for Suffolk to this statement, as the county
he represented specially merited this charge. He (Mr. Villiers)
knew of no comity that contained more gentry and clergymen, and
yet the people of it were sunk in the lowest state of degradaion,
demoralisation, and misery.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The
Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Disraeli) had stated that the
country had thriven wider a protective system, but he (Mr. Villiers)
would meet him with these facts, which could not be gainsayed. A
Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) had stated once in another place, on the
hustings, at his election, he (Mr. Villiers) believed, what the pro-
tective system was. That Noble Lord said that it was a system to
raise rents, and keep up the price of food, but it did not raise the
condition of the farmer. That was what they had been fighting for
for the last eleven days, in the present debate, and on which they
were going to a division. That being the case, was he not justified
in saying that a prosperous farmer was a rare bird, that ought to be
stuffed and placed in the British Museum, and that the labouring
population were sunk in the lowest state of degradation
and distress? The Right Hen. Baronet, the Secretary at tire head
of the Home Department, hart made a statement which they had no
reason to disbelieve. He had shown the effects of the system on the
people at large. And what he stated the other night, he also stated
last year. The case the Right Hon. Baronet had placed before
the House was such as fully justified the Government in the course
they had taken ; and, instead of railing at them, Hon. Gentlemen on
the opposite side of the House ought to have supported them by
every means in their power. The Right Hon. Baronet stated the
effects that seasons of scarcity and abundance had upon the people
—how that a season of scarcity, misery, immorality, and
disease extensively i►tcreased, while a period of abundance
brought a mitigation, of all these evils ; and that
therefore he could no longer, in face of this conclusion, support the
system that kept up an artificial scarcity, and therefore perpetuated
misery.—(Hear, hear.) To the present moment no answer had
been made to the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet. The Right
Hon. Baronet, last year, in reply to the speech of the Noble Lord the
Member for London, in proposing his resolutions, stated the same
doctrine he did the present year, and yet no one on behalf of the
system of protection got up to answer him.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
When they said that high prices in provisions were good for the
poor, and when they heard the Right Hon. Baronet rise and say that
it was time this artificial system was abolished, because it militated
against the comfort of the working classes, why was it that no one
on that side of the House had arisen to deny It? He thought that
before the debate closed some of them should answer the Right Hon.

Baronet. They ought not only to look at the "price Current," they
ought also to look to the mortality among the lower classes,
and to trace the effect of high prices there. They would
not then, perhaps, have to charge the protectionists with
the misery that existed with the spectacle of a people willing to work
yet wanting employment.—(Cries of "Oh ; oh !" and cheers.) He
maintained that the Right Hob. Baronet had stated last year, and
the Noble Lord the Member for London had reiterated the statement
in a letter addressed to his constitueuts, that the consequence of high
prices were co-existent with low wages. He wished to know how
they were to get out of that difficulty ? They wished to keep up high
prices, and the purpose of this law was to do so, otherwise there was
no meaning in it.—(Cheers.) It was all very well for a Noble Lord
on that side of the House to say—" God forbid that we should keep
the prices high at the expense of the people," but how did the
Noble Lord vote ? Corn had never been at a low price in the market,
but they had Members coming to that House to complain that the
agriculturists were being ruined. In the year 1822, the Hon. Member
for North Devon might remember that it was a grievance of county
Members that the prices were low. Some Hon. Member —he be-
lieved the Hon. Member for the West Riding—had said, in the course
of this debate, that this made no difference ; bat let them look to the
years 1822, 1825, and to the last year, when the prices were low, not
arising from importation, but from the blessing, of God in sending
them good harvests, than they complained that they had been
deceived. Lord Castlereagh came down to that House and proposed
a scheme for raising the prices of food. He proposed a vote
of money to buy up what was called the surplus
food. In the years 1835 and 1836 there were no grounds
of complaint but what proceeded from a good harvest,
yet the Marquis of Ckandos came down there and proposed a repeal
of the malt-tax and a Committee of the House to inquire into the
distress which pressed upon agriculture. What was the speech
made last year by the Hon. Member for Somerset ? He said that
the Right Hon. Baronet had broken his promises, because the prices
of corn were low, there being a too great abundance in the home
produce. The Right Hon, the Secretary for Foretgn Affairs had,
however, said, that lie could not resist the conviction that low prices
were a blessing to the working classes. But they wanted also pro-
tection to domestic industry. 'Mat was the meaning of the word
" domestic industry? Did it mean something that the working
classes were interested in ? Did the working classes agree
with them in their admiration of the corn•laws ?
Had they the authority of any working man
to quote in favour of their schemes, or to acknowledge that they were
benefited by these laws? He would venture to say that they had
uo such authority from any town in England. He keld in his hand
a communication sent by a working man since this debate had corn-
menced. A resolution was agreed to at a meeting at Sheffield, an
open air meeting, that this law had deranged their whole mercantile
system ; it had made numbers of merchants and manufacturers
bankrupts ; it had checked the natural currents of trade ;
reduced thousands of families to misery and starvation ;
neither did the good to the great mass of the agricultural
population, those who tilled the ground under these laws
receiving but the slightest share of the blessings they
produced. There was another meeting at Liverpool—a meeting of
respectble artisans whose characters were avouchad by the leading
merchants of Liverpool;; and they stated that the manufactures were
in a state of great distress—that, things were getting worse, and that
crime increased in proportion as food diminished. They stated that
the working classes were unable to purchase articles necessary for
their existence, because they found that as wages were low prices
were high, and they affirmed also that when wages
were high the price of food was low.—(Hear, hear.)
There was another argument used by an Hon. Gentleman opposite,
who, from his position in the country, would be looked upon as an
authority, he meant the Hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Hudson).
f hat Hon. Member was very much alarmed at this measure. He
was afraid of the effect of a free importation of corn upon the ex-
changes. The Hon. Gentleman quoted several papers to terrify the
country gentlemen and the Agriculturists, and he stated that he him-
self had imported grain fit for human food at 255. per quarter in the
year 1837. It was impossible to doubt the truth of anything the
Hon. Member for Sunderland said ; bat when he stated a fact of that
kind, lie intended something, and he wished country gentlemen to
draw the general conclusion Cleat wheat could be imported at 255.
He thought the Hon. Gentleman should leave stated where he im-
ported his corn from, and what were the charges attending the im-
portation.
Mr. HUDSON made some remark which we did not hear.
Mr. VILLIERa continued—He believed that the Honour-
able Gentlemen would admit that we could import corn in
considerable quantities from Poland and Russia. We could get a
million, or two millions, or four millions of quarters of wheat an-
nually. Now it so happened that he (Mr. Villiers) had an authority
as to the amount of corn imported, and the price in the year 1837.
Now, the price of grain at Dantzic in that year was not lower than
295.--(Cries of "At Odessa.") The freight was never lest than

4s. 9d. per quarter, and yet the Hon. Gentleman said he had pur-
chased grain at 255. The price at Dantzic was 295., the freight to
Liverpool and London never less than 4s. 9d., and in one case 65.,
and other eharges 35., and yet the lion. Genteman said he purchased
grain at 255. Another peculiarity in that year was, that a very large
portion of corn went from the Baltic to America. The Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Sunderland was one of that school who had an
objection to free trade, because they thought the imports
would have to be paid for in bullion. Now he (Mr.
Villiers) would tell the Honourable Member what was the
state of the money market during four years in which we imported
corn, namely, from 1839 to 1841. After 1839 we had 4,000,0001. in
the Bank of England, and we imported 2,700,000 quarters of wheat;
and during the year the amount of bullion in the Bank fell to
2,000,0001. In 1840 we imported 2,6015,000 quarters, and by the end
of that year the amount of bullion had risen to 3,100,0001. In 1841
we Imported 2,800,000 quarters, and at the end of that year the bul-
lion in the Bank amounted to 4,580,0001. In 1842 we imported
2,600,000 quarters, and at the end of that year the amount of bullion
had reached 10,000,0001.. What were the exports to corn growing
countries? In 1837 our exports of manufactures amounted
to 12,800,000. ; and in 1842, after four years of im-
portation of corn, the exports were to 16,800,0001.—(Hear.)
The argument of country gentlemen was, that the home trade was
better than the foreign. That was their case, and they maintained
that nothing affected this market so much as the high price of corn,
The lion. Member for Sunderland appeared to be of this opinion,
that the home trade was better than the foreign. That lion. Mem-
ber was well acquainted with the midland counties, and he would
just read to him the opinion of an extensivs manufacturer in Lei-
cestershire upon this question. His correspondent stated that the
wages of the artizan were extremely row ; the distress and suffering
which prevailed in the town of Leicester had never been known to be
greater than it was at present. This distress and suffering was attri-
buted to the high price of provision, and his correspondent added
that when provisions were high the Leicester manufacturing market
was depressed; but when provisions were low, trade became brisk
and flourishing. No. The fact was, the agricultural labourer, as
well as most other labourers, were paid so low that when food
was dear, he had nothing to spend on stockings andsuch like articles.
' Hon. Members opposite appeared unwilling to listen to this matter ;
I but they might depend upon it that the surplus population of the agri-
cultural districts could never find employment in manufactories,
unless the price of food was diminished, and the home manufacturing
trade improved. The Hon, Member for Northemptoi sie ,
the leader of the protection party, and senor y proweliaime(ft
their views to the world in that House, declared that the pr ce
food should not be cheapened, and stood up forlia slyistemidwhibcch prod-
on. em ran
duced tbree-fourths instead of eve-fourths. 7 e
his party objected to increasing the foreign trade, and called loudly
for a diminution in the business of the manufacturer. With the aid
of their Quarterlylleriews, their Standards, and their Heralds, they pro-
cities/4d to the world that if some of the manufacturing towns were
razed to the ground, this country would be more moral, diminished oteuted, and more happy. With an increased population and
employment, they wished to have fewer manufactories, and told the
House anti the world, that if this measure was abandoned, theywould
provide for the surplus population, and diminish the prevailing dis-
tress in the manufacturing districts. Now he wanted to ask them a
simple and plain question—how did they propose to do all this ? Upon
what did they depend ? From what had fallen from some of them,
he was led to understand that they depended upon the present distri-
bution of the constituences and the House of Lords. Now that was
the position of this question at this moment, and that was the nature
of the intrigue that was going on with some Noble Lords upon this
subject. They hoped to throw out this measure, and to form a Go-
vernment, and they hoped by the influence they could exercise over
dependent voters to get a majority for the purpose of maintaining
the present corn-law system. Now he wanted to know,
whether Hon. Gentlemen had considered the position of this
question? These corn-laws e must either be supported by force
or by reason —(Cries of oh,
oh," from the protectionists,
followed by Opposition cheers.) They had tried force when
this law was introduced and carried by force.--(Opposition
cheers.) Four 3 ears after it was carried it was maintained by force.
The people lied been cut down for the reirpose of maintaining this
law. The people were cut down inManchester for resisting this
corn-law in 1819, and they were attempted to be put down by force
in 1830, but that was found too difficult a task. In 1839 they found
the people discontented with the results of former years, and the Go-
vennuent was not able to persuade them to give up their opposition
to the corn-law.' It was that agitation that first gave rise to the
Anti-Corn-law League. Their protection societies were created for
the express purpose of deceiving Use people, and those societies gave
rise to the Anti-Corn-law League, which was induced to exhibit
itself in the extraordinary manner that it had done, to circulate, net
its own doctrines or views, as had been ascribed to it by
Honourable Gentlemen opposite, but the deliberate convictions
of the most enlightened men that ever wrote or ever existed
in this country ; and by their extraordinary exertions, the members
of that body brought about the opinion of the country in favour
of the emancipation of trade, and the removal of the restrictions on
commerce, and the abolition of the corn-laws.—(licar, heal.) And
he maintained that that was the state of the question at this mo-
ment. They could not support the law by force; they could not
support it by deluding the people, or by inducing them to quarrel
with a minister who had conseicntious'y come forward with the
present measure. Ile would ask them whether they had made any
security for a period of scarcity; or if the people were to call for
universal suffrage, or were to rise up in arms against the law, what
position would the protectionists be in? He would onty ask them
to imagine such a Government as they hind described with a Noble
Duke at its head.—(hear, hearr) The country would be in a state
of tumult, and Hon. Gentlemen opposite would. be responsible for
the peace and order of the country.—( ilear, hear,) The state of
the country would really be in a miserable position. And what
would they do? They would do what they did in 1831. (Hoar,
hear.) They would come upon their knees, praying Um Right
Honourable Gentleman at the head of the Government to take
office again.—(Opposition cheers.) Theta the Hon. Gentleman the
Member for ltntiandshire quarrelled with the Right
and Hon
la. ughter.)
13arone
because he did not stick to his gnus.—(Hear, hear,
w a
Would the Right Mon. Member himself stick to his gu
n"n"fthbe"eaople
starving people before him? Would he attempt o
down by force ? They dare net. That wee their po
hestihter ft was rea-
p ion, therefore,
at the present moment. He would ask them w
sonable to resist the demand of the pe..ple to rervineetthiolisi cowrna-slaeown?.
The Right Hon. Baronet, in br;iu,igingnsfuor:vibarrdit
suiting the Interests of the agr.c—tuw.t.ch
they would have the effect
sought. It seemed to
of giving them the protection for i
him (Sir. Villiers) that the IlighuldHotzhi;sEtaHroctinte. t
Wu 31timbe.raintfaoirnedDotirleirt
iiiteresta.—(llear, hear.)
,reckar to get into the Goverament ?
Knish
Fsrue'r;!Cha )ntlialollstt;-r-, 'Tourgot, in 1775, repealed the corn
laws ae s°°ll '135 e went into office.— (Hear, hear.) That
things to be •
-Minister said " There are two avoidedin every (*mail-
it% and ii tier are not
voluted in this country we should have na-
ii-t;;;;t1 bankrtietcy and revolutiotk." That wa6 arteen IX-