The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-25 00:00:00

PORTATION BILL.

Lord POLLINGTON said he rose on the the present oc•
casion to express his opinion in opposition to the measure of
her Majesty's Government. He had given them, during the
last five years an earnest and truthful, but not a blind sup-
port, as witness his vote on the occasion of the Maynootb
grant. The last vote that he had given in favour of her Ma-
jesty's Government was on the occasion when the Hon. Mem-
ber for Hull (Mr. Hutt) proposed to admit corn from the
colonies at a nominal duty. To that question, in as far as it
related to the present measure, he would address himself. He
had never belonged to a protection society, nor attended a pro-
tection meeting; and the reason of that was, that he did not
agree in all things with the principles or policy of these who
constituted such societies. In last session of Parliament the
Noble Lord the Member for the city of London proposed a
series of resolutions, one of which was on the subject of the
corn-laws, that he (Lord Pollington) opposed at the time;
and he would still tell that Noble Lord, that if he called for a
total and immediate repeal of the corn-laws, he would not
place himself under his guidance. They had heard a great
deal about compensation to the landed interest; and, in an-
other place, a Noble Duke had given the assent to the expe-
riment of a repeal of the corn-laws on account of the compen-
sation afforded. But he (Lord Pollington) said, that if they
removed all restrictions on foreign grain, they should, at the
same time, remove all burdens that pressed upon the landed
interest. This they were bound to do. If the farmers went
to great expense in acquiring chemical skill and scientific ap-
pliances, and had to give a good education to their sons, it was
but right that they should be placed in a position to meet them.
Rather than repeal the corn-laws, and give the farmers com-
pensation for doing so, they ought to promote as much as
possible the colonies, so as to make them integral parts of the
British empire; and then, when they could not produce suffi-
cient supplies of food for their increasing population at home,
they would have the colonies to fall hack upon.— ( Hear, hear.)
By considering those countries as integral portions of this
empire, this Government admitted that they were bound to
take their produce. He denied that this mode of dealing
would have the effect of creating any feelings of jealousy.
With regard to Russia, his opinion was that that country
would follow the example of this by dealing with their import
duties in the same way as this country had dealt with the
duty on French brandy. There was another reason why he
was opposed to the present measure, which was this—he pre-
ferred relying en his own country to any other for a full sup-
ply of agricultural produce.—(Hear, hear.) He had taken
his course, and no man on earth should make him swerve
from it,—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. PLUMPTRE (after a few words which were lost
in the confusion occasioned by Hon. Members leaving the
House) said, he believed the measure to be rash and un-
just. Hon. Members had changed their opinions, and 'the
reasons they had given were not sufficient. The Right Hon,
Baronet had said, that because he had changed his opinion,
he felt himself at liberty to consider all the speeches which he
had made when holding different opinions as disposed of. It
might be very easy to dispose of declarations, hut it was not
quite so easy to dispose of facts. In the county in which he
resided, and which be had the honour to represent, it was in-
variably found that low prices producad low wages, and that.
in fact, according to circumstances, and the range which
corn took, there was neither more nor less actually than a
sliding-scale. At the time when corn was low labourers'
wages had been about 10s. a week, when it became very
depressed indeed in price wages sunk to 7s. a week, but
when the price of wheat rose the wages of the labourer rose
to as much as 13s. 6d. a week. These, he thought, as they
were facts, were unanswerable arguments in opposition to the
Right. Hon. Baronet's measure. If he looked around, he felt
compelled to say, that he could not find one public man, who
had been connected with the Government for the last three
years, in whom he could place the smallest confidence. The
Right Hon. Baronet had assured the House that the year
1840 had been a year of great trouble and deep anxiety to
him, owing to the Chartists having established themselves in
large bodies, and occasioning great disturbance. He (Mr.
Plumptre) entertained no doubt, that it was a year of great
anxiety and trouble, but those days had gone by. Yea, those
days had passed, but he would ask, was not the course which
was now being pursued one of the most likely means to bring
about a repetition of the scenes of violence which had char-
acterised those times ? The failure of the potato crop was put
forth as the ostensible cause of a repeal of the corn-laws,
but he must say that it appeared to him to be a very insufficient
cause. The present movement seemed to have been brought
about almost entirely by the agitation of that unconstitutional
body the Anti Corn-law League, and he would ask when that
body had accomplished their purposes, was not the country ex-
posed to having other leagues formed, and thrust upon it,
which would not be satisfied entirely until their requirements,
however extravagant, should be satisfied. Perhaps, before very
long, it will be found expedient to coincide with the opinions
of the Chartists, with respect tol the extension of the suffrage,
and by thus going forward in the dark, in consequence of such
miserable expediency, the golden reign of a wise and prudent
limited monarchy might be translated into the wild and ruthless
rule of an iron democracy. He thought, most sincerely, upon
his best judgment and conscience, that he should be promoting
an injury to the country if he did not oppose the present
measure, and, therefore, under these circumstances he should
most strenuously oppose it.

Mr. HAWES said that the Hon. Member who had just
sat down had been pleased to characterise the present measure
as a dangerous measure, and that public opinion was not
thoroughly enlisted in its favour. He would refer the Hun.
Gentleman to the numerous petitions presented to that House
from London, Manchester, Liverpool, and other large manu-
facturing districts, all of which prayed that the proposed
measure might be passed without any unnecessary delay, on
the ground that it would promote the general prosperity of the
country.—( Hear, hear.) He must take the liberty to
say that there never had been a great question can-
vassed in that House the opponents of which had met
with so little sympathy from all sides as those who had
undertaken to obstruct the progress of the present measure.
He was not aware that any sympathy had been shown in the
opposition to the silk question; and, then, Kish r<speet
imber, were there any petitions presented from persons deal-
ing in that article in opposition to her Majesty's Ministers?
kle Ham) repreavated a yery large eonstitueuoy con-

nected with various trades, and he had not received a single
remonstrance, nor a single representation to induce him to say
one word in opposition to the course proposed by the Govern-
ment. On the contrary, all that he had heard had tended to
confirm his previously conceived opinion, that the measure
taken as a wholewas wellcalculated to promote the best interests
of the country. He felt glad that none of that acrimony
of feeling which had characterised the previous debate on the
subject had been shown on the present occasion, and he did
hope that the lion. Gentlemen opposite would give her Ma-
jesty's Ministers some intelligible arguments to deal with and
answer, instead of endeavouring to cover them with obloquy
and shame. Ile expected that the Hon. Gentlemen opposite
would have furnished s ome tangible reasons to induce us to
believe that protection was necessary to be upheld for the
maintenance of the agricultural interests. They had shown
us that the price of corn was high, and had proved at the same
time that protection had effected that object. He (Mr.
Hawes) would undertake to show that since the date of 1815,
when the great experiment of the corn-law system of England
was tried, the Agricultural Committee had isevariably con-
demned the laws and the principles of those laws which the
Honourable Gentlemen opposite now sought to uphold
One of the most important advocates of the alteration of the
law in 1815 had supported the measure, because, he said, that
it was absolutely necessay to els something to prevent the
diminution of the price of corn to such an extent as would
throw the land out of cultivation. The corn-laws were not
originally intended to uphold the price of corn, but the object
of the introduction of the law 1815 was to prevent the price of
corn from diminishing below a certain moderate standard.
Such a measure would not have been necessary bad there been
no legislative interference in matters of trade. If encourage-
ment had been given to every species of manufactures, there
would have been no necessity for any Parliamentary inter-
ference in regulating the price of corn. Manufactures, and
every kind of staple trade, had repudiated protection altogether.
Notwithstanding the law of 1815 was passed ; he would ask
Hon. Gentlemen opposite, if it had been successful and useful
to them as agriculturists ? The Hon. Gentleman then re-
ferred to the report of the Agricultural Committee of 1821,
1822, and 1823—in the drawing up of which Mr. Huskisson had
taken a part—to show that protection had not tended to benefit
the agricultural interest,but, by keeping out foreign competition,
dad been influential in depressing the property of agriculturists.
They would find the labourer much better off when the Trice
of corn was low, and food abundant, than when it was other-
wise. The Committee of 1836 was largely composed of the
landed interest, and the result of their labours showed that
the condition of the labourer was greatly improved when
prices were low, as compared with what it was when they
were high. He would now ask the gentlemen opposite on
what principles they intended to proceed ? They had not se-
cured steadiness in price—they had not secured high prices.
All they had done was to introduce uncertainty, doubt, and
dismay.—( Hear, hear.) Protection very clearly had not been
productive of benefit to the agricultural labourer. He thought
that the protection hitherto granted had failed. The law of
1842 had failed—its authors admitted that it had failed ; and
the very fact of Gentlemen opposite calling for the opening of
the ports showed that they condemned that law.—(Hear,
hear.) That very act was the condemnation of protection.
He would ask, had they any experience of the working of free
trade? He thought the law of 1773 was one which bore
closely on the point. The commerce of this country at that
time continued to flourish. The late Lord Sydenham had
strongly expressed his opinion on that subject ; but, before he
woull allude to that further, he would just call the
attention of the House to the period to whirls he
alluded, when there was partially a free trade in corn. From
the year 1773 to 1795, the imports into this country were
4,100,0001., while the exports were 2,400,0001., showing a
balance of imports over exports of 1,600,000/. The population
increased during the same period from 7 to 8 millions—popu-
lation increased, trade increased, and agriculture was thriving.
—( Hear, hear.) But the period to which he especially alluded
was from 1781 to 1792. The highest price of corn then was
425., 375., 365., 445., 455., 545. The lowest price was 415.,
345., 365., 42e, 475. The greatest difference of fluctuation
luring the one period being only 75., and the lowest 25., and
there was no period when the commerce of the country in-
creased to the same extent in so short a time. All this oc-
curred during the partial operation of free trade. He would
now remind the House of what prices were from 1742 to 1748.
The price of corn was on an average about :303. ; what was the
eoedition of the people during that time? Adam Smith said
that there never was a period when the labouring population
was in a more thriving condition. This surely proved then, that
under the operation of low prices the condition of the
labouring classes had not deteriorated, but had improved.
Between the years 1773 and 1793 there had been a controversy
as to the price of corn, and the connexion of the country banks
with farmers. In that controversy Sir Francis Baring had
taken a part, and the opinion of that great authority upen
commercial affairs was, that the lowest price of corn was not
sufficient to fix a remunerative price for agricultural produce.
He (Mr. Hawes) was of opinion that, from the great improve-
ments which hail taken place in cultivation, the farmers would
be enabled to grow more wheat than they had hitherto done,
and therefore they would be able to compete with the produce
of the foreign markets.—( Hear, hear.) It was seen that
when wheat was at 1255. and down to 565., there was no one
mint at which a remunerating price could be fixed. The.
English farmers had derived, and he hoped they would con-
tinue to derive, remunerative profits at even the lowest prices
of corn. He was of opinion that the effect of the corn-
law upon the social state of the people of this country
was most pernicious. The farmers, in try'ng to meet the
demand for food, were obliged to have resort to artificial
means to raise the necessary supply, and hence was it that
every foot of ground, which was intended for the recreation
of the people, was taken for cultivation; and the result of all
,his was, that they were unable to meet the wants of the
country.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") The corn-laws pre-
vented the supply of food from abroad, and the neces-
sary consequence of the continuance of these laws would be to
introduce the manufacturing principle into the agricultural
.)stem of this country. Now, he did not agree with such a
state of things; he did not think that laws which required the
Torturing of the land into something like a produce could be
upheld, when it had been so clearly proved that there was not
sufficient corn grown after all to meet the wants of the people.
--( Hear, hear.) He was glad to find that this state of things
was about to he remedied by the measure of her Majesty's
Ministers, and for the reasons he had stated, he would give
the Government his most cordial support, in the hope that it
would benefit the country generally.
Sir JOHN TROLLOPE said he represented a large con-
stituency, and he must say, in answer to the Honourable
Member for Lambeth, who, in the opening part of his
speech, had said that the measure of her Majesty's Mi-
nisters was one upon which all were unanimous in
its favour—with regard to that certainty, he could
inform the House that so far from his constituency being
unanimous in favour of the measure, the feeling was quite the
other way.—(" Hear, hear," from the protection side of the
House.) He attended a large meeting in South Lincolnshire,
called to consider the expediency as well as the general bearing
of this measure upon the country, and at that meeting there
was but one landowner who held up his hard in favour of it.
He had heard the Right Hon. Baronet state to that House
that he had come to the conclusion that such a measure was
necessary to meet the wants of the country ; but the Right
Hon. Gentleman said also, that he had formed his views upon
the experience of the last three years of certain experiments
' in the reduction of duties. He did not think so great a ques-
tion could be settled upon so slight an experience as that of
three years. —( Hear, hear.) An allusion had been made to the
law of 1815; ho would admit that that law was the law of
monopoly, and he was glad it had been amended in the year
1820, for it was one which prevented corn from coming in till
it had risen to an exorbitant price. The law of 1820 had
however amended this, and he (Sir J. Trollope) considered
the law of that year a good one; and such as was required for
the protection of native agriculture. The lion. Alemlser then
quoted several authorities in support of his views of the
subject. He considered that there was nothing like
correct statistics regarding agriculture in this country,
and thought it rather a blot upon the character
of England, that it did not, like France, have a proper statis-
tical return of the amount of her agricultural produce.—
( Hear, hear.) Had there been proper statistics of the agri.
cultural production of this country, it would be found that the
farmers had made great exertions to provide food for the
people. In his own county there had been an increase of 100
per cent. of corn and wheat, and the increase of the popnla-
t ion was not more than 20 percent.—(" Hear,bear," from Lord
G. Bentinok.) Did it not f.,110w, then, that the same result
would be found in other parts of the country ? and, if the
ar-
gument was good for anything, it went to prove that the far-
mers of England were able to supply the demand upon them.—
( Hear, hear, and No, no.) He had heard it said that the
Church were a consenting party to this measure; but he did
not think that the working clergy would so much neglect their
own interests, because it would be the working clergy who
would be effected by it. Then, as to the malt-tax ; that tax,
he believed to operate against ; he farmer, and amounted to 70
per cent. per annum upon the raw material ; and if it were
removed, the famer would be enabled to give his labourers ale
at I id. per quart. He could go on enumerating many other
such matters. He would ask, would not the effect of tree trade
be the means of introducing the growth of the beet-root, and
many other :products from which this country now derived
large taxes. The legacy duty also operated against the owner
of land, and added to the grievances of free trade ; for instance,
be bought a piece of land lately, and had to pay nearly five
years' rent for the cost of conveyancing. In Ireland also, he
did think this measure would have a most injurious effect, by
lessening the value of land, on which the people of that country
depended entirely for their support. He was in Ireland during
the whole of the summer of 1822, when a large sum of money
was made up to relieve the people from the famine that then
prevailed. The late defect in the potato crop had nearly been
fatal ; and, therefore, this was not the period at which to les-
sen the value of the produce of land at home. He did not
think that foreign countries would give this country the benefit
of the proposed reductions, for he heard that in France they
were raising the price of brandy ; but they did not at the
same time say they would admit British produce upon the
same advantageous terms ; while France might still contend
that their wines also should be admitted at the same reduction
as that made upon brandy. He did not see that in America any
reduction of the tariff was proposed, at least not such
a reduction as would meet the free-trade measures of this
country; and, therefore, from that part of the world they had
not much to expect either, while the hopes raised in Canada
would be dashed to the ground. He had heard imputations of
"Abandoned Monopolists" applied to those who entertained
views on this question like his own ; but he would say he would
rather abandon all his property than act in any way that would
make such imputations applicable to him. But he could not
avoid saying that it appeared to him that these epithets were
more applicable to Hon. Members at the other side, because he
would contend for it that the first class of persons who would
be affected injuriously by this measure would be the agricul-
tural labourers, whose wages would be lessened, and many of
whom would be thrown out of employment by the quantity of
land that would be cultivated into pasture.—( Hear, hear. )
Why should not this country have the power to do in the pre.
sent day as the ancient Romans did, namely, to keep up a
store of corn to meet a period of scarcity?—( Hear.) He re-
gretted to have trespassed so long upon the attention of the
House ; he seldom did so ; but so long as he held a seat in this
House he would ever advocate his principles honestly and
independently.—( Hear, hear. )
Sir JOHN HANMER said he could point attention to acts
passed in 1670 and other early periods, in which protective clauses
were passed for the express purpose of keeping down the
price of corn. And from 1689, for several years after, the
effect of this protective system was in fact to raise the price of
corn, though it was intended to keep it down. In 1791, came
the revolutionary wars, and if the price of corn was then raised,
that could not be said to be attributable to the corn-laws
Let them come to the corn-law of 1828, which they all at
present concurred in, and he would ask what had been the
effect of that? Had they not seen corn stored up in bond never
brought into market, yet exercising an influence on pricesoutside;
Looking, therefore, on these matters, he should confess himself a
sceptic on the score of protection. A great deal had been said
with regard to the effect the present measure would have on
foreign nations; now, he should confess that in that point of
view it possessed its greatest recommendation in his eyes. He
had been informed that in Russia it would have a very bene-
ficial effect, as an alteration in the tariff of that count,
highly valuable to England, was certain .
.to. result.
Therefore, in his opinion, it was In.glL _time
that the present measure should be brought forward (Hear,
hear.) 'Viewing all these matters, then, he implored of Hon.
not
.1 0
Gentlemen
to cease
hadas aver g
their et7,,,fn ~, appsorpretet
ion, when they had
perry. He entreated of them to look to the substance rather
than the shadow. if they wished for a fixed duty, his vote
should be recorded against it, as be believed it would prevent

prices ranging in such a way as would alleviate the pressure°
competition.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord EBRING TON was anxious to address a few °b'effral
tions to the House. He had no intention of following UP of
spirit of the debate in the way in which it had opened, 'sent
preferred taking a different course. As to the crinunesee
and recriminations that hail taken place, he left the course
by the Government to be attacked as it might by their frae4e,
and defended as it best could by the Government theses'', re
It must not be forgotten that they bad in prospect the tot•etto
peal of the corn-lows, and yet they were cursed wit%
sliding scale fer three years. The Hon. Member for tee
bi
of London had, in the year 184'2. predicted the state in* or
the corn trade would he, and remarked, that though ore„fe
then at a low price (61s. 2d. ), bread was not a bit cheaereso
the consumer. The Hon. Gentleman who had just sa"spe
had seen his error, and he trusted that he would irnPrresese
the Government the necessity of repealing this pernietelt
-
tern, which had nothing whatever to do with protectilefig
was doubting_ the absurdity of the former system by ren
it uncertain at what price corn could be sold. What thel tel
done they should hate done well, so as to put a stoP teo is
agitation which had existed, and which was so ralisehilsoet
it' effrcts. The season was favourable for the adoption 001
a measure. The unprecedented accumulation of coent sod eel
feared by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, was not to be fete tee
the scarcity of food, and the peculiar circumstances dives tle
would protect the farmer from any sudden increase i fee
competition in corn. The farmer expected, with the did
Gentleman, that there would be a great increase in corneetiog'
osualdy,nwoitththrveegilaurdpotne. thethe hvpeifgr,Ooli)nec'ehtra'healalle.lets►er:
believed there would be a great diminution in the eldn'esel
and at the end, of three year,' the farmer would fiodb'sroed
unnrotected and exposed to foreign competition. ID Gee'
not discuss all the burdens on land alleged by the flenhetel
rpphoesiwteo'uldlioenlwy
&c.
tiem
;enbuo
county-rates, the burden was left on real and,legitirrol
perry. It fell as heavily upon houses as it did uPeeeeet
There was a burden on land which he had not heard Or
alluded to in this debate, although the Hon. Member fl'cliO
colnshire had alluded to it. It was one which put verilid
money in her Majesty's Treasury, and yet fell
the landed proprietors. It was the property duty-
fer or mortgage of small estates, and rendered tbeir traeso
tremely difficult. It fell very heavily on the change °ree't ne4
of large properties. They had a right to demand t'
fie
should be a Bill to enable them to sell their land '
dearest and to purchase in the chearest market:.
thought that the law of real property wouldle",`
be found to be a burden on land, but social:feel
politically mischimous. He denied that the scheme sea; fesii
and comprehensive which proposed to relieve Scotland
the burden caused by the maintenance of one large Prneess.,
yet left this master grievance untouched. He did not in fee
say that nothing had been done since the report ot dewy
Property Commissioners, but he did think, that according id St
recommendation of the Commissioners, some Bill 'Meet,'
brought in to alleviate the present system. A very r Ise
able proof might be given of the supposed effect of the veal
real property on the value of land. In this ceuntry,
much social importance was connected with the posse" the
land, land was sold at fewer years' purchase than nee r
Continent. On the Continent land was worth 45 yeariett
chase in some cases, arid in England from twenty-'site
thirty years' purchase. In thd sale of an estate in Sae at',
shire, it had cost the vendor 4,600/. and the purchaser 'siee
The same evils relating to property that existed in lot
were to be found in Scotland. In the Highlands of oe#,
there was found the same want of employment and tueseter
absence of a middle class; and though these evils were mire
present aggravated with religions contention, that state fe'
soon be brought about by the treatment which the,
Church was likely to receive from the landlords of that's, Atry.—(Hear, hear.) Wales, like Ireland and Scotian° r
td
also suffering, not from the oppression of the poor-lawlstli
operation of the " Bastiles," as they were called, but is
circumstances in which the holders of property were Pel,
Unless the burdens imposed on real property were remelt eell
would be impossible to get rid of this state of things. toll
therefore, absurd to call the measure of the Govern./ tett;
great and comprehensive one. No measure was entitle s,
called such unle:s it grappled with this state of thh,;gpe
made a final and satisfactory settlement of the difficeert's,
surrounded personal and real property. The G°le
were bound to suggest some plan to meet the evil ; er's
were not prepared with a plan, then they ought t° re-s-uspsee,
the Real Property Commissioners, to inquire into the e,
and to report to the House, that it might legislate uponteeter
Mr. RASHLEIGH said he could not remain sflen ssf
present occasion after what had been stated. He had Ts
tation to say that if this measure passed it would esratbiln
giving a bonus to agitation. He asked the Right o°ll-0f r
Baronet how he could consistently support the agitatllesiti;l
Anti-Corn-law League—( Laughter from the °Pd to
benches )—seeing that from his position he was bounty ors
down agitation ?—(Laughter and ironical cheers frog nueet
position benches.) The Member for Stockort might ri
what he stated, but he (Mr. Rasbleigh) was net 'eerie
down by_ him and the crew that sat behind hims-ekiitll
" Order.") He was astonished at the course the gig geld
Baronet was now taking, seeing the opinions that be 44,00
longer than about twenty-one months ago, in July, 180ekh
speech he then delivered. That speech so well esef,fhe Ifs
( Rashleigh's) views, that he would read it. 'tl
Member then read the extract, which was to the e,"flerfeee
it was impossible to carry nut the rigid principle 0! ; asere
economy, and that a repeal of the principle of protectedr,
interfere with leases, derange the labour market, n're (tr ,
established interests in a most injurious manner. ; testi
Right Honourable Baronet) was then again*/ of
thing like the repeal of the corn-laws. nets'
(Mr. Reshleigh) would ask that Hon. Gentleman it°e7.odese
House the reasons which in such a short time had To
this monstrous tergiversation. He called on hint esseued
faction on this point. If the present measure e 5; f]tity,:ii,
a that House, he hoped the other House would do its
save the country from the ruin that threatened it>
ticgoll
oh !" from the Opposition benches.) He cared ire e
their contempt. He lived far enough from theo., SI)
region. lie knew both them and it, and he also reit,
exact strength in the affections of the operatives. It,„ ale
known that these Leaguers dared not call open meetinfli (Tr
a manufacturing districts, as they would be sure of de.e Sowse
the poor people over which they tyrannised so severetehisg elf
tiling was said the ether night of the state of the Inwhe ery
tricts. He represented one of these districts, and esel
asked the Hon. Member for Stockport to come down' beidi,
would find the people comparatively well off, end thef ,t
truck system among them. With regard to the naini°°o4,o
he would only say, that respecting the duty on coPP;rd 16,
the Government proposition was carried out, it woneseeje
the ruin of that branch of mining industry. He had tslvse
ral letters on this subject, and they all gave expressioiLlethi
an opinion. The Hun. Member then read extracts 1r;.4
letters, we ~,
ich were strongly condemnatory of the ftte
alteration in the tariff regarding copper ore. Gren, refoe
was from a party in Cornwall, that employed 3,u!wrtof se
Such were the general opinions he believed in that P,°.e dee
country. the feeling being decidedly against the roasio 1;01
Majesty's Government. It was with great 1),,o,
`sit
he must vote against the Right Hon. Bare_ine
still he was not to be dragged through the wh'tieelt.ss
him, and must act up conscientiously to the,setieeeir
upon which he had been returned to off tee r'ne
He was elected in 1841, not as a pledged advocate 0 , jeteets
laws, but he was expected to advocate the agriculturatsd feto
of the country. He could assure the House that be J:iceP
his duty to maintain the fixed principles which bed ,
now seemed to abandon, and he was determined, weisoe
tamed his seat, that, however others might falsifyrA
ciples he would preserve his own consistency. sge
Mr. BARING would have bsen much disinclinee;
come forward on this subject, but as it seemed a settleotioet,
ment that the question should be debated in a glee? nog ee
felt some little anxiety that the debate should en yore'eil
until he had expressed his cordial support of the me°,,e be of
troduced by her Majesty's Government. And, altheeeeresiese
not mean to deny there were many points in thepr to te did
the R:ght Hon. Baronet which might properly lead, °elitist
sion ; yet, looking at the question as a whole-1000;',0
. it as giving so much present good, and as he 110
, the seeds of so much future benefit, at. r for
give the measure his utmost seerqetebr.te
thought that, after hearing the speech of the Hon. 'fa b W;011
Lambeth that evening, it was quite unnecessary "'Ay
notice the observations of Hon. Members on theoesil
until that speech had been replied to. Nothing ne it!Al
developed in the course of the debate, unless, indeenpre:e
be the formation of a third party, diametrically ;Wel;
their leading principles to the two great parties d oriel/
been wont to divide the House, and which now stlr•
fectiv independent position. But to that party he (I', didptdi
would be inc fined to put the question—what Onere-eseee,e4
intend to follow on the present occasion ? "rePee,
his Hon, Friend the Member for Liskeard, thathafee ire
ought to have some great guiding principle ; re's
dered, further, that that party were bound to Weed hsref
House the course they letended to follow. He trane rem o<
unnecessary to assure Gentlemen opposite that in
et One
he should be obliged to make, re: personal disreseeueotee,
to any of them. He admired' the spirit and the e' etre',
they had evinced under peculiarly diffietns`bouit.e
stances ; and, therefore, if any expreseien prsVl
from him, which might be deemed offidle
severe, he hoped it would not be attributed to anYreesrd
or hostile feeling. It was very well to create a 0400;1
the Government measure—very well, indeed, toe rn;"0
ferent course ; but he would remind Hon. Gentleoeeresppe's
public and the country received the proposal of fbetfrorette sbee
with acclamation, and he thought that when gent' vibe; t‘hrf
site had taken it upon themselves to form a PartY--oeel porji
expressed their disapprobation of the policy 0°490.044,
Right Hon. Baronet—when they stated that hew g e09'04
of further confidence, surely he (Mr. Baring) 'cat Olekt,
ask, when they thus disapproved of the presenliee,y-se F
heatwht was the one they themselves
with prepared togetteehooeit
ountry? He had listened considerable, oil tbe4
the long debate which had taken place, and he ban arty 04-e
to fathom the future course of the protectionist pf-oe Senn
rejected the present measure. The Hon. Member wooleli
had said that this battle was for all, and that ther or.-
of no compensation. He should be glad to eeold be 9
opinion was the opinion of the party; he 'lithe cOO
Ri
to learn what they proposed to lay before
ee the
if they rejected the proposal brought forwurd food rope;
Hon. Baronet. Let them recollect the adrnissi°d"tbiqersrel
Right Hon. Gentleman, when bringing forwarceiyee soros
tion on a former day. He stated that he Cetnake preepellse
sary, as early as the month of November, to by is 6 dt td
to meet the scareity anticipated in 'he country',
Order in Council for the suspension of the corniseinst'3o eqP be
now admitted by all, that the Right Hon. Genet
hire esie,
have issued that order. It was objected againstthetas I:jece A
had not done so, and with that admission before ,
any isjeci;
asked Hon. Gentlemen opposite why they delayolring)dot3,
tion as to their future intentions ? He (Mr. do elf
had heard of the British lion, he had heard of nea ie Lor thie
and he perfectly admired the spirit of the I\ "'Sewer` 01'4
speaking on this question, asked them whate tijogoiS4
were prepared to bring forward—was it dr', bevisJo
that they were prepared to substitute? Pe !tryng sotiiee
in favour of the sliding scale? They were it" there ask what arguments they were prepared to n,a 1:11,0%ed
that if they did not give to protection a fixed dteetiee; thy ellseet
be no reliance placed upon it. They
• the"( of
Gentlemen opposite were quite read., to meeth
,es 0
hos
,i,
corn-laws.—(Cr —( ur' the es°
Ireland by a suspension of the c
r, 4
duty was better than any other mode wofernerotentilOrl, 419
eo ese
to defend the sliding scale, when they had express
.opeiet e
no.") He would like to know how they would go t 9 tee roof
ness to support the Right Hon. Gentleman in a nolo., pro
the corn-laws.—(No, no.) Then he had .01'00111e;
)
teen-twentieths of the House shared.—( Cheers.'; Iry
es
them, but it was certainly a misunderstanding in 11040;
Member for Somersetshire had stated that noise Itiette
ready to support suspension, and he stated than, Genost
were ready to do so too. Was it a fixed duty gufraid
opposite were prepared to support ? He was 3,,,eStil: bid
time was passed for such a settlement of the, esetieesee
thought that Hon. Gentlemen were perfectle eskreeoee
circumstances in changing their opinions• rl geyeeteel
again, did they believe that they were prepared teey 'rerscelee.4l
country on the question of a fixed duty ? If seeiefti
mined to adhere to a sliding scale, to what
they propose to attach themselves ?
nest te ele
to know whether they had settled auto b tO• 010
scheme which they were prepared to adhere 0 „„rty ,
a,lc the Noble Lord who had led the proteetto
to the ete'" bet of
(Lord George Bentinck) to state
.ed ° ld tif
hieing'' scheme he was sou' 00.0
and go to the country with ? Ther io
..911
The countrlesstlelloool
was
doubt that the majority of that
the measures of her Majesty's Goveruniell. sopp
Muse
of Hon. Gentlemen gyrate was tkal
_PQ

be throe
cost of
lortable
should
.Hon. C

Klidicult.~

melch ot}

'The qu
:saeter.
:people—
they trek
What w

e presOre,`