The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-12 00:00:00

that 11r. Bright got a seat for the county of Durham. He
thooght it was a most unwarrantable personal attack upon his
personal character.

CORN-LAWS.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from For-
far in Scotland, against the proposed measure of the Govern-
ment.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—The Noble Lord
said I belonged to the protection society, but how long ago is
that ?—(Laughter.) It is more than two years ago..-.( Great
laughter.) The question has undergone considerable change
since that period.
The Earl of WINCHEL SEA said, if a constitutional course
was proceeded with, and if there was an appeal to the people
made, they would find that the great body of the people had
not changed their opinions upon the subject.
LoNDON AND YORK.
The Earl of LOVELACE moved the discharge of the
Committee of the London and York Bill.—Agreed to.
The Duke of RICHMOND then moved, that the Bills not
cowidered by that Committee should be re-committed.
LUNATIC ASYLUMS.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented several petitions
from Gloucester and Hereford against the Lunatic Asylums
Bill. The Noble Duke also presented a petition from the
board of guardians of the Chichester union against the pro-
posed law of settlement.
The Duke of WELLINGTON requested the Noble Duke
to put off the question of which he had given notice.
After a few words from the Earl of Winchilsea, the Earl of
Radnor, Lord Abinger, the Earl of Wicklow, and Lord Redes-
dale, the subject dropped.

CORN-LAWS.
Earl GREY presented a petition numerously signed by
persons residing in the county of Staffordshire in favour of the
corn-laws.

THE SMOKE NUISANCE.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE wished to ask the Noble
Viscount, the Commissioner of the Woods and Forests, what
was the reason that the report of the Commission, appointed
to inquire into this subject, had not before that period been
laid upon their Lordships' table ?
Viscount CANNING stated that the report would be ready
tomorrow. It was quite an accident that the report which
bad, two months since, been sent to the House of Commons
had not been laid before their Lordships.
CORN IMPORTATION BILL.
The Earl of RIPOS moved that the order of the day, for
going into Committee on this Bill be read.

The Earl of STAN HOHE rose for the purpose of opposing
the motion of the Noble Earl, and moving as an amendment
that the Bill be committed upon that day six months. He
had not either the vanity or the presumption to think that
any observations he could make to their Lordships
could affect the course which their Lordships intended
to adopt.—( Hear, hear.) He was aware that after the
Many able and eloquent speeches which had recently been
delivered by several Noble Lords in that House, and more
especially after that admirable and unanswerable speech of
the Noble Lord, whom he then saw in his place (Lord Stanley),
a speech, whether from the arguments which it contained, or
the eloquence with which it was adorned, or the valuable in •
formation which it contained, appeared to him superior to any
thing which he had ever heard upon the subject. He was,
however, unwilling to give a silent vote upon the question.
He 'would consider it in some degree a dereliction of the duty
which he owed to his country, if he did not make some obser-
vations upon this question. They were then arrived at a crisis
far more important than any to which their Lordships had
hitherto arrived, and which must be so regarded when their
Lordships considered the amount of interest involved, and
above all the social as well as political results which would
follow this measure. Such a measure as the present had never
before been before a Committee of their Lordships, had never
been introduced by any party, and there never was
a proposition, in whatever quarter it might originate,
which was so feebly and so miserably defended
by so many false assumptions and false arguments. It was in
the .
first place assumed that there was imminent danger of
famine in Ireland, because there was in some districts, not in
all, a deficiency, not a failure, in the crop of potatoes. But it
Was at that time satisfactorily proved, in a manner which ad-
mitted of no possibility of doubt, that there was even then, and
still was, an abundance of sustenance for the people of that
Country, and especially of that sort which formed the principal
articles of snstenance to the poorer classes. The crop of pota-
toes had beedmore than usually abundant. He did not deny—on
the, contrary, he deeply deplored, the distress of the people of
Ireland. That distress arose, not from the scarcity of food,
but unfortunately in this year, as in many others, there had
been a lamentable state of destitution to which all the labourers
of the country had been reduced in consequence of the want of
employment. He believed that the reports to the
F,reeat autocrat of the Cabinet,in November last, upon
cheat
failure of the potato crop, had been both er-
roneous and exaggerated. He thought that if
there
had been a scarcity of food, the then existing corn-laws
had the power of adjusting themselves to that state of the
country. The Government had acted very unwisely in giving
Publicity to these reports. They had had the effect of raising
e price of corn in the foreign market, and had induced those
Parties who had a stock by them to hoard it instead of selling
it. Sir Robert Peel, for reasons best known to himself, had
encouraged and fostered this panic. If the order in council
Was necessary, it should have been made only for a short pe-
riod, and there was no necessity for the present measure; but
the Prime Minister said he was not prepared to make such an
order unless he brought forward some settlement of the corn
question ; and such was the origin of the question they were
now discussing. The old fable of the mountain in labour
which brought forth a mouse was reversed, for it was a mouse
Which had conceived and brought forth a mountain—
(Laughter)—for they had a Prime Minister who was raised to
eminence by the hopes and expectations which his party enter-
tained that he would be true to his colours, and that he would
Antllesert the principles which he ha uniformly professed.
measurepromise? which would throw the country into confusion,
Bence brought discredit on the nation, and ruined the confi-
en of the people in the faith and worthiness of all public
• Could the Minister be misled by party, any who had so
n *
aeceived his ow Could they repose confidence in any man
ho could act in 7
such a manner? And what confidence could
they repose in Sir Robert Peel ? In his opinion, as soon as he
t180.2.,e.ed the good effects of free trade, he should have refused
„I!, for which, by his own confession, he was wholly in-
P""a- —( Hear, hear.) But they were told that there was
no ineonsistetiey in Sir Robert Peel's conduct.. by another Noble
Lord, and that ever since 18-42 his principles wrappedh in
obscurity. He himself was appealedprtomel
expressed his coot,, on the sineeritv nafnthr. Mir:latt rtPr:
had, with his usual frankness, done so, when measures were
brought forward which he considered would be dangerous to
the country. But that was an assertion which he
could • never admit to have truth in it.—( Hear, hear.)
They had been told that this conversion in the Minister was the
result of his experience ; now he would say that there might
be some truth in that assertion, and that a great change had
taken place when he saw the exertions of the Anti Corn-law
League, and the sluggishness of his own sepporters, and that
he considered that the active party was the stronger ; but he
(Lord Stanhope) wished that he would discover his mistake.
But he would ask, why change a system which had been at-
tended with such beneficial results? They were now called,
upon the mere ipse dixit of the most rash and presumptuous
Minister, to change that line of conduct which had raised them
to eminence. He trusted that they would not do so, and that
theywould reverence those institutions which had conferred
beneficial effects upon the country. If the principles of
free trade were those of common sense, they had a right to
have them applied in the fullest extent, but they were not,
they would have a measure of that kind before them, for to
"c• such a measure would be less objectionable than the pre-
tlsent. But had any person on the other side of the
i_ouse the hardihood, the temerity, to offer such for their adop-
um He dared them to do so. They could not do so, as they
Would ruin the commerce of the country, and effectually restore
all its force the protective system of their ancestors.
'(Hear, hear.) He conjured their Lordships not to
pass the Bill, as it would ruin the interests of thousands of
oftheirthe
fellowir
countrymen, who earned their bread by the sweat
brow, and who were not properly represented in the
ether House of Parliament. If prices were to remain the
_same after the passing of this measure, he defied its most
anexious and ingenious supporter to show its utility.—(Hear,
a
) If the prices were to remain the same as had been re-
Prusented, what became of the cry of cheapness ? Where
would the large loaf come from ?—( Hear, hear.) He feared
very much that the large loaf would dwindle into something
like a penny roll. It was perfectly apparent, that it was only
by a considerable reduction in the wages of their working
People that the manufacturers of this country could com •
pete with foreign countries. The first Minister of the Crown
introducing this measure, had said that its main object was not
to produce cheapnessof food. It was plain, therefore, that he
was a mere instrument in the hands of the Anti-Corn-law
Leaguers to aggrandise themselves at the cost of their fellow-
Countrymen. No free discussion of the subject of the corn-
laws had been permitted at Covent-garden, or any other places
where the members of that League had held their meetings--
if any one attempted to oppose them he would be speedily
ejected.—( Hear, hear.) This was not merely a landlord's
question, as had been represented ; the tenant-farmers of
England were vitally interested in it, and he felt, that if it
Passed into a law, they would be ultimately ruined. It had
been said that this country couH not produce sufficient corn
for the people it contained, but he felt satisfied, that if it were
properly cultivated, it could feed many millions more than the
present population. He challenged any man to produce any
country in 'which the prices and profits of labour were uni-
formly low, and at the same time it was found practicable
for any the most despotic or oppressive monarch to raise a
large amount of taxation. It had been said that the farmers
of this country had proved themselves to be deficient in skill
and industry ; but he repelled the charge as a gross calumny.
a•-•( Hear, hear.) If this Bill passed into a law, what was to
become of the occupiers of small plots of land ?—( Hear,
hear.) They formed a most valuable, important, and meri-
torious class of the community. They occupied an inter-
mediate position between the labourers and large farmers, and
they had declared that this measure would comptl
them to leave their homes, and give themselves up to desti-
tution -and Were their Lordships
despair.—( Hear, hear.)
prepared to act thus harshly towards millions of their fellow-
eititens and subjects?—( Hear, hear.) And not only would
that portion of the community, but even those who so cla-
mourously cried out for this measure at the meetings of the
Anti-Corn-law League would be ruined by it, for when the
small tenant- farmers were ruined the manufacturers would lose
all the advantages of the British home-market.—( Hear, hear.)
Even if no land were thrown out of cultivation by this roes-
sure, the farmers of this country would be compelled to dis-
pose of their produce at a price which would not remunerate
their toil, in consequence of the great influx of foreign pro-
dose. In the year 1842 their Lordships saw the calamitous
effects of reducing the wages in the manufacturing districts,
and that distress might be consideredifast;.; very faint outline of
the affects of the present measure.
measure had be-
come inevitable it had become se fromitithteehe;rerevile conduct of
conscience they
those who supported a course which
condemned. A Noble Earl, connected with the count of
York, seemed to anticipate with
‘-tal comfort which would be thegreactonsequence oef ease
Was the Noble Earl so prejudiced
meas' ae. as to
believe that the working classes of the country would submit
to be plundered without offering the most determined resist-
ence—not the resistance of force, but that passive opposition
which would necessarily tell on a measure against their inte-
rests? At the time of the Reform Bill a question was asked
by the Noble Duke sitting near him which seemed to surprise
the Opposition, viz., how is the Government to he conducted?
The Noble Duke might ask that question now, and the answer
could be best given by those who had brought on this measure.
Did Sir R. Peel know the position he stood in, and was he net
aware that the present Bill had been forwarded by many who
had meanly crouched to others ? It was wise and politic on
the part of the great Irish agitator to give his most cordial and
unqualified support to this measure, for he was well aware that
it was one of the best means which could he adopted to for-
ward the objects he had in view. If he had not already too
long occupied the attention of their Lordships he could pro-
ceed to show that such would be the effect of this measure,
and could adduce the latest intelligence from Ireland, which
would fully bear out the assertion he had made, If their Lord-
ships were to sanction such a measure, a measure which had such I
an evil tendency, that House would at once be considered an j
Unconstitutional incumbrance. If they were to give the coun-
tenance of their authority and names, once illustrious, to the
measure, the general cry throughout the country would be for
the abolition of the House of Lords, which had forwarded a
measure of such pernicious tendency. When measures not
unlike the present one were brought before that Hoese
ip
1842, only five peers were found to vote for it and now with-
oat °Y nevr arganaent—without any essential difference in cir.

curnstances of any nature-211 peers were found to vote for the
adoption of a course which, by their silence, they had rejected
a few years ago. That the count:y was not universally in
favour of this measure, was evident from the fact that when
even the advocates of the League and its principles had stoo:1
forward as candidates to represent the people, the elector, in
every case where he had a choice, had given his suffrage in
favour of the candidate who was in favour of supporting the
corn-laws as they then existed. Try the result of the vote by
ballot in the House of Lords, and he was satisfied that not
twenty Lords would be found to vote for the measure. A party
had been formed for the agricultural body which was power-
fully unprecedented, because founded on public principle.—
( Hear, hear.) There was at the head of that party, in the
other House, a Noble Lord who had distinguished himself in
the defence of the agricultural interest, and he would say of
that Noble Lord, that he deserved the thanks of the country
at large.—( Hear, hear.) It was the duty of Parliament to
reject this measure, as calculated to inflict a lasting injury on
the industry of the country. It was their duty to reject it, as
the beginning of an attempt to uproot the ancient institutions
of the land, and as one which would bring ruin and desolation
on the agricultural body.
The Earl of ESSEX said he had a few words to address to
their Lordships upon the Noble Earl's concluding remarks.
The Noble Lord had said that if the question was tried
in that House by an appeal to the vote by ballot, that not
more than twenty of their Lordships would be found to vote
for it. He would say there was not a vote given in favour of
the measure but what was an honest vote. The Noble Earl
had attributed base and sordid motives to those Noble Lords
who had voted for it. Now, if they were to appeal to the
ballot upon t!.;s measure, he would say for himself, that he
would, so help him God I be one of the twenty who would vote
for the question.
The Earl of STANHOPE having explained,
The Earl of RADNOR said that he would address such
arguments to their Lordships as applied to the question. He
was sure that the measure was one which should not be de-
layed. There was no ground for attributing base and sordid
motives to those Noble Lords who had voted for this measure.
They had voied in accordance with the dictates of their con-
sciences for a measure called for by the exigencies of the
times.—( Hear, hear.) Many motives had been attributed to
Hon. Members of the other House who had voted for the
measure, and charges of the most unfounded character
had been brought against them for their votes
with respect to the question. He did not stand there to defend
Sir Robert Peel ; that Right Hon. Gentleman had many
Noble Lords in that House who were able and ready to defend
him should it he required.—( Hear, hear.) He could not,
however, but regret the ill.feeling which had been displayed
against the Right Hon. Baronet, for it was well known that he
had made many sacrifices in taking the course which had been
so much condemned by many Noble Lords. He would not
have taken that step had not the necessity of the times called
for it, and it was too bad to find that for obeying that necessity
he should have been attacked, and the worst motives attributed
to him by persons whose characters stood high and whose
opinions had weight.—( Hear, hear.) The Anti-corn-law
League had been attacked, and a Member of that body, having
used an expression at a meeting held in Drury-lane Theatre, it
was laid hold of and perverted into the worst possible meaning.
It was made out that the League and its machinery was not to
cease with the passing of this measure. The Noble Earl who last
addressed the House, said that the League had ulterior mea-
sures in view. This might or might not be the case. If
their ulterior measures were consistent with reason, what had
that to do with the present measure ? If those ulterior views '
were inconsistent, and such as ought not to be sanctioned,
then they would be resisted, and the anticipated evils would
not result.—( Hear, hear.) The farmers said they could not
get the price they ought to receive for their corn if there
were no corn-law, and therefore it was they ought to be pro-
tected against the foreigner. It was owing to this argument
that the sliding-scale was established—a very pretty thing, he
admitted, as a theory, hut totally useless in practice. In his
opinion, those who argued in favour of this system were the
wildest theorists he had ever met with. One Noble Lord,
whom he did not see in his place, had told them that he had
experienced the working of free-trade principles in the east of
Scotland. The Noble Lord told them that the removal of the
duty on marilla proved a very serious injury to people
residing in that part of the country; but the
Noble Lord forget that the people injured by the removal of
the duty were the minority, while the majority derived benefit
from the alteration in the law. I f the position the Noble Lord
took upon this point was good, they might just as well say
that a railway should not be made, because it would inflict in-
jury on an existing turnpike road.—(Hear, hear.) Then,
again, they were told that the removal of protection would go
far to annihilate agriculture in this country ; but he, for one.
did not believe it would produce any such effect. Another
argument used in favour of protection was, that owing to the
existence of low wages, and the people living poorly in Poland,
the farmer of this country could not compete with the foreigner
without it. Why, the people of Ireland lived as poorly, and
received as low wages as the labourer in Poland,
and yet the English farmer found no difficulty
in competing with the Irish produeers. This incon-
testible fact, he thought, was a sufficient answer to
that argument, and he would, therefore, pass on to another
branch of the subject. It was urged by some Noble Lords
that protection had always been the policy of their ancestors,
but he by no means admitted this, for during several reigns
importations of corn were expressly invited by the Legislature.
In the reign of Edward IV. protection certainly did exist.
In fact it commenced in this reign, but even then the protec
tion preponderated more in favour of manufactures than agr.
culture. Previous to that reign, Acts were passed invitim,
importations and prohibiting exportation of corn ; and even
when the protective Act against importation of the reign of
Edward IV. was passed, it was strongly denounced by large
bodies of the people.—( Hear, hear.) In the reign of Elizabeth
the landed interest became very powerful in Parliament, and a
protective system was established in favour of agriculture, but
it created a great stir in the country, and was strongly resisted
by the Commons.—t Hear, hear.) At a subsequent period of
the reign the outcry against the dearness of the bread became
so great that the Legislature was compelled to reduce the
amount of protection, and from that time down to the present
the people had always showed themselves to be decidedly
averse to monopolies of every description.—( Hear, hear.) He
need scarcely say anything more he thought i 3 refutation to
the argument, if argument it could be called, that their ances-
tors were favourable to protection.—( Hear, hear.) He
wished that feeling had continued ; but the landed interest
prevailed in the House of Commons from the time of Charles
11., and protection was regarded as necessary for agriculture.
The ennfessed object at tire time or the resun anion of protection
was to keep up the value of the rents of land. Again, in eh...
time of William and Mary, an Act was passed which had con•
fessedly for its object the prevention of any deterioatien in the
amount of rents. Bounties upon the exportation of corn were
afterwards invented, and were paid to the amount of 6,000,000/.
to the owners of land. This was an injustice, and while it
raised the price of food to the poor it put money into the
pocket of the landowner. On the average, for every five year.
there had been two Acts of Parliament ; and a system which
required so many alterations, must be manifestly improper.
The Noble Lord entered into a long statistical account of the
quantities of corn imported into this country, as compared with
the increase of the population, and applied it as an argument
that restriction en the importation of foreign corn should be
altogether rescinded. The advantages of protection were greater
when the population was smaller than it was now when the
population had so greatly increased. If the present measure
was beneficial to the manufacturing interests alone, it ought
to meet with the best support of the landed interest. By the
population returns it would appear—
The Duke of RICHMOND—Those returns are incorrect.
Earl RADNOR—Don't interrupt.
The Duke of RICHMOND—SureIy the Noble Lord will not
proceed in an error when he could be shown his mistake.
These population returns included all the blacksmiths, tailors,
and others in the villages, as employed in agricultural pursuits.
Earl RADNOR—These returns were the only guide they
had to go by, and he was justified in applying them to his case.
The agricultural population were increasing, and at, increase c
food was wanted to supply their necessities. If, therefore, fc
no other reason than to increase the best interests oft h
agricultural population, the present measure ought to be allowe
to pass. The Noble Lord proceeded to state what he though
were the equitable duties upon different articles of foreign
manufactures at the time when English duties were in force.
Lord STANLEY said he alluded to the difference between
the Baltic timber trade and that of the Canadian trade, in the
statement he made.
Lord BROUGHAM said that nothing could be more proper
or well-timed than the interruption of the Noble LordPe pn-
site, though he (Lord Brougham) had been called to order f,or
an interruption of a similar nature, a few nights ago.
The Earl of RADNOR then resumed, and quoted the
quantity of sugar and indigo imported from the West Indies
in several years, and contended that they bore no comparison
with what would be the amount of these exports, if restrictive
duties should be removed.
The Earl of WICKLOW said he rose to address a few ob-
servations on the question, as he was the only Noble Lord con-
nected with Ireland who had yet done so. He did believe that
agwdo.osd high,
been int
witinicmter oepdautrnedionengoendt
Sir Robert Peel could have had no object in view other than
,stlhaiyienPti
,hutabi.tyl it. was shifdiosermrthtehaeissure. But he should
andHe didaie
there
were
e that s
some
hee
who,ho i
no fpart tmeasure,hey hadaf t teark thee n .
tunities afforded them of refleetth'lnal restitution was not far distant,
tgnhpoounr,
itarulHde hthavoeugohptptohr-,
principle of protection was not y and fairly carried out in the
present measure. The yeomanryn f and farmers of England
of Poland, or the labourers of otherneXtrieetsitiwetai
should not be placed in a situatio witht, thet serfs
of
o
pay such high prices for articles on which customaY' duties
were paid. Ho did not think a reciprocity of trade would be
established between other countries in their dealings with this
nation. They were benefited at the expense of the people of
this country. It would be proved that by the proposed mea-
sures the people of England would pay the income-tax in order
to keep up the revenues of other countries.—( Hear, hear.) He
defied any person to place his finger on any page of history in
which both parties had voted as on the present occasion to sup-
port this Bill.—( Cheers.) Why was it, if the measure was so
good, that the public were to be deprived of the benefit of it for
three years. He thought it was only brought in as a sop
during those strange occurrences which took place in the
month of November last ; but in their giving the sop they
forgot the original arguments upon which the Bill was founded,
What were these argument? It was the potato panic.
And it was absurd to think of remedying that state of
things by a provision to come into operation three years hence.
With regard to this potato panic, he would say that the Go-
vernment had been grossly misled. Their Lordships and the
public were told that the worst had not yet come, and they
were told to wait till the end of May or beginning of June.
They had now arrived in the month of June, and he was happy
to say that there were no grounds for these fears.—(Cheers.)
The only benefits to be derived by this country from the f
commerce. This was the opinion of Mr. urke, and he
colonies was of a twofold nature—taxation and monopoly of B
•
might, perhaps, be ridiculed for quoting such an 'authority by
the new and superior light of the political economists of the
so far as regarded Canada (the mo-t
present day. With reference to the monopoly of commerce,
important of all our
Colonies), it appeared from a letter of
Cathcart that that notion was to be altogether abandoned. The
result of Mr. Gladstone to Lord
such a measure, he positively believed, would be the
dismemberment of Canada from this Country within five years
diminution of
from the passing of this measure. When the question was put
to the Minister, what
would he do with respect to t
; if ,ehear. ) tithes when a
d"imWineutwioilnl make
eriees would take place, the answer given was,
question turns Hear'
change, because we do not anticipate any
would be the tinfrae is to be no diminution in price, what
hear.) The Government Well, it is upon this the whole
of passing the measure?—(Hear,
answered one argument by cutting
another from under their feet. It was a lamentable instance
qcuaesraesteinottil Catholic
sanctioned by repeated Parliaments, legainsdlatethat of
great difference between this
of the ignorance with which states
There was a
Emancipation. In the one
and
measure had been
could not for ever oppose the wishes oftii tehHouse of Lords
members of the Anti- Corn-law League' weeril:eople. The
men he admitted, but they must not, like the g7rearsysh clever
mentioned by Mr. Burke, consider themselves the on7yPP"
habitants of the field, because they were the most noisy.
Such a measure as that proposed was never carried the fits
time it was brought. forward. The House of Lords was created
as a drag upon the vehicle when it went too fast. It was their
office to obstruct, and not to push the vehicle down the pre-
cipice which led to destruction. He would, therefore, con-
jure their Lordships net to sanction a measure which would
infallibly lead to the worst results,

Lordi-NiTELTOl\F;aid7as representing the colonial in-
terest in that House, he would wish to offer some observations
to the House, The only COOIIiC9 interested in the question,