The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-04 00:00:00

actions ?

Sir R. PEEL could not say exactly what course would be
pursued. He knew that medals were in preparation for the of-
ficers of the army, but did not know what the medals would

consist of for the other mem of the service.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The order of the day having been read,
Mr. G. BANKES said that he was anxious to make a state-

ment to the effeet, that farmers wished that there should be an

immediate repeal of the corn-laws. He could not understand
—if any advantage would result to Ireland from opening the
pots--why tha Government did not proceed to open them at
once. If it would be for the great benefit of Ireland, why was
not that course pursued. If the opening of the ports was for
the relief of that country as was said, why was it not done, when
it was well known that every gentleman in that lluusu was in
ravour of such a measure. tie tnougnt tne measure ztioutu not
be sanctioned by that Parliament if sanctioned at all, because
it would be carried by a majority of 112, who had pledged
themselves to vote a different way. If it passed that house in-
stead of a new one, the Noble Lord, the member for the city

of London, considered that it stood more chance of
passing the [-louse of Peers. He denied that this
argument was tenable, because,_ when the Peers looked
over the votes of that House, and found that

those who for five years before had voted in an exactly opposite
direction to the way they had latterly done, he wished to
know what influence their opinion would have on the decision
of the other House of Parliament? Surely a fresh Parliament

was necessary, because the sentiments of the people might not
be altered. Why was he afraid to appeal to the country?
Because the decision would be en adverse one, for, in his
erinion, the House of Peers would pay more respect to a new
Parliament than to the present one. Suppose, if after they had
confirmed the measure of the Right Honourable Baronet, the
House of Lords were to throw it out, and that there was an
appeal to the constituencies afterwards, and if they decided
against the measure, what then would Honourable Gentlemen
say who were now supporting the Ministry without consult-
ing the feelings of their constituents? He thought, however,
that a preference ought be given to the measure propounded
by the Government, which he was sure would never have been in-
troduced by them but for the unnatural coalition which had taken
place —a coalition which he never recollected without regret.
He, however, would be perfectly satisfied when the motion was
carried ; but he denied that the Governmen t had any right to
suppose that the feelings of the people were changed on that
question, and if the elections which had taken place
were referred to, it would appear that a contrary
opinion was entertained. With respect to the details of the
measure heewould have an opportunity of speaking hereafter,
and he would not therefore make 'any further observations
except as regards one part of the measure which was of a most
important nature. He did hot think that he entirely under-
stood the provisions of that measure, because, at one time, he
, had been told that it would not confer a right to settlement,
and at another time he had been informed that it would provide
only for a claim to relief. He trusted that the Government
would lay on the table, in a few days, the proposed measure in
its perfected form, He would not at present go further into
the question of the general policies of the Government, being
aware that at the second reading of the Bill he should have a
more convenient opportunity. There were at the present
moment two propositions before the House, viz., that which
had emanated from the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, for
a total and immediate repeal of the corn-laws, and that of the
Right lion. Baronet, which proposed their abrogation in three
years time. His own opinion was, that before the question
could be ultimately and properly adjusted, it would be necessary
to appeal to the constituencies of the country. He had recently
received two letters from his own constituents, in which they
expressed their resolution to maintain protection as long as
possible, and he should feel it his duty to support them in that
resolve.
Sir R. PEEL had understood from his Hon. Friend (Mr.

131niesi-thaitl; Hon. Member for Somersetshire had 'inti-
mated an opinion, that he considered the total and immediate
repeal of the corn-laws would be preferable for the interests of
those engaged in agriculture, than a protracted delay of three
years. lie ( Sir R. Peel) had assumed that it was so, ©n the
previous night, because he had heard the statement with his
own ears, and he thought it had been assented to. That state-
ment was now contradicted. He had made the observation on the

last night of the debate—he had repeated it two nights after-
wards in the presence of the Hon. Member for Somersetshire,
who had allowed him to speak without any correction what-
ever, and new he beard from his Hon Friend (Mr. Bankes)
that he made a complete mistake as to the Hon. Member for
Somersetshire's real opinion.
A short conversational explanation here ensued between Sir
B. Peel and Mr. Bankes, but was carried on in so low a tone,

that its purport was not audible in the gallery.
Mr. 1411.1GHT intended to explain a misconception which
the Hon. Member for Somersetshire had fallen into with
respect to what he (Mr. Bright) had stated about the
game damage on an estate near Bigswell. The estate con-
sisted of 3,000 acres, a great portion of which was not culti-
vated. The valuation was made, and had been made, for years
past, only upon that portion which was under grain cultivation.
He found that the sum of 9161. had been paid in the
year 1841 by the Duke of Rutland for damage done by game,
and the valuation was made on no other part of the estate but
on that which was under grain cultivation, consisting of about
339 acres. He would show his Hon. Friend indisputable proof
of the fact, out of doors, if he still felt inclined to doubt it.
Mr. HOWARD was of opinion, that the proposed measure
would cause more capital to be employed, and better wages
given, in the cultivation of land. The farmer would find in
the soil much better protection than any that the Legislature
could give. He regretted that the Right Hon. Baronet had
not listened to the advice of the Noble Lord the Member for the
city of London. He (Mr. Howard ) thought that the present was
a very good time for the immediate repeal of the corn-laws.
The Noble Lord had told them last night, that there existed

no very large stook of corn in foreign torts. Would it then
be wise to wait three years to give foreigners an opportunity of
increasing their stocks, so as to flood this country at the ex-
piration of the period, with their produce. It was
not fair that the farmer should be suddenly called upon to com-
pete with a large influx of foreign corn. The Right Hon.
Baronet had asked for the opinion of the country gentlemen on
the subject, and he for one had given his advice. He should
support the motion for the total and immediate repeal.
Sir JOHN HAN MER would support the Government
measure, which provided protection for three years, rather than
the motion proposed by the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton.
If he could look at the question merely as an abstraction, he
should be inclined to recommend the entire repeal, but the
Government had to consider the general effect of this measure
in all its different bearings, and it was necessary to this end
that they should provide against every contingency. The
Noble Lord opposite had expressed a desire that the settlement
of this question shoulel be definitely accomplished. He mild
assure the Noble Lord, that were he in office, he (Sir John
Hanmer) would have still retained the same opinions as be now
held, and should have voted in the same way as he now in-
tended to vote. He would support the measure of Govern-
ment as far as his humble capacity would go, whether as a
landed proprietor or as a Member of Parliament.
Mr. MOFFATT thought that the debate had taken a most
extraordinary turn. The heath of the three contending par.
ties seemed to be agreed on the point, that after all immediate
repeal would be for the best, but when his Hon. Friend had
plainly put the question to them, all three seemed to
shrink from it. The Right Hon. Baronet had set the example,
and he must say, that the Noble Lord the Member for London,
seemed very eager to follow in his steps. He (Mr. Moffatt)
had no explanations to make. He had always supported the
relaxation of duties, and the repeal of the corn-laws. He would
advise those gentlemen opposite to consider how deeply they
were endangering the whole property of the country by their
factious opposition. Let them look at the different corn mar-
kets. Let them go down to Mark-lane, and see how the un-
certainty occasioned by the three weeks' debate, had paralysed
the corn market there. The country markets were in a
similarly paralysed condition. Did they consider their tenants
interest they would endeavour at once to pet an end to the
anxiety which agitated the agricultural districts of the country.
The Honourable Gentleman concluded by urging on the protec-
tionist party the necessity of succumbing to superior numbers,
both fur their own interests and for the good of the country.
Mr. FINCH would prefer having protection for three years,
or as long as the Right Hen. Baronet would allow them to
enjoy it. In the event of the measure proving injurious, three
years would allow time for the Government to retrace their
steps, and guard against the evil. The country had, since the
year I>il6, made great improvements in agriculture in souse
places; indeed, it had almost arrived to a state of perfection.—
(Hear, hear.) He considered it therefore very unjust in the
face of this improvement for the Hon. Member of the League
to describe the farmers as lazy drones, ignorant, bigoted, and
indisposed to adopt any modern improvement. The Hon.
Member for Durham (Mr. Bright) had stated that if her
Majesty's Government would immediately repeal the corn-
laws the agitation of the Anti-Corn-law League should cease;
and also that he would not inflict upon the House at a later
period of the session another debate un the corn-laws. He
(Mr. Finch) considered that the agitation of the League was
perfectly harmless. It had net been attended by any tumult.
At their one-sided discussions, to which the public were ad-
mitted by tickets only, even at Covent•garden Theatre, had
been attended with no more disturbance than when upon alter-
nate nights at a neighbouring theatre the public attended to see
Harlequin Gulliver or Don Quixote. He was sure that the
agricultural interest had no objection to their agitation, and if
they proposed to call a meeting of 5,000 for the purpose of
agitation, he bad no doubt but that the same number might be
found among the agriculturists, who would make equally as
much noise and clamour as the partizans of the League.—
( Hear, hear.) As to his promise that he (Mr. Bright) would
Lot inflict upon the House another debate on the corn-laws, he
could teal the Hon. Member that there were at least fifty Mem-
bers on his side of the House who were suffering from all the
agonies of suppressed speeches.—( Hear, hear, and laughter. )
It had been said in the course of this debate that the present
was a landlord's question. He denied that it was so, but if it
were so, lie maintained that they had an equal right with the
merchant or the manufacturer to press his gr►evanees.—( Hear,
hear.) He could but smile at the simplicity of the Right Hun.
Baronet and the Noble Lord the Member for the City of
London, who seemed to consider that the present would be a
settlement of the question. fle could assure them that the
question would be again opened at the general election. The
present question was treated in an entirely erroneous manner.
It was a petitio przncipia—it was assumed to be fugood ques-
tion. He believed, however, that it was not so ; he believed
it to be injurious to the agricultural and manufactur-
ing interests of the country. He believed that it would be of no
benefit to our commercial relations with America, and t hat it was