The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-27 00:00:00

r'!1411JOITillg rI,V(_,

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 1846.

On the resumption of the adjourned debate yesterday, in
the House of Peers, no less than eleven of their Lordships
addressed themselves to the consideration of the greatest
measure introduced to Parliament since the memorable Bill
of 1832. Anxious, however, as the majority of the Legis-
lature, both aristocratic and representative, has shown itself
to limit the discussion simply to the abstract merits
of the question, seven out of these eleven speeches
Were altogether irrelevant, and singularly rambling. Of the
remarks uttered by the Duke of CAMBRIDGE, and of the line
of behaviour which his Royal Highness has voluntary
chalked out for himself, we could speak in lar.guige of
panegyric, notwithstanding that that behaviour will consist of
the reservation of his vote upon the division. Conscien-
tiously believing that by abolishing protective imposts the
commercial prosperity of England will be jeopardised, and re-
solved, at the same time, not to interfere with the wishes
of the people, or to embarrass the intentions of Government,
his Royal Highness announced his determination to abstain
from voting upon the measure. Such a resolve is, to say
the least of it, worthy of a Prince of the Blood Royal;
it is consistent with those principles of liberality by
which her most gracious MAJESTY has, throughout her
reign, ever shown herself to be actuated ; and, though
the public may regret that any member cf her
illustrious family is not impressed with a sense of the benefits
which must accrue from the acceptation of a free-trade
policy, no supporter of that policy can refrain from enter-
taining the deepest sentiments of respect for the avowed
motives of the Duke of CAMI3RIDGI. A diversity of protec-
tionist fallacies were paraded in an after period
of the evening, as very conclusive reasons indeed for
the rejection of Sir ROBERT PEEL'S scheme ; but
those fallacies were so preposterously threadbare, and yet
tinselled out and bedizened to such an extent by the various
idiosyncrasies of the speakers, as occasionally to assume an
appearance of novelty. On examination, however, the new-
ness resolved itself into mere rhetorical lacquer, and
the harangues of the Peers proved to be re-
vivals of those enunciated by the Commoners. A hand-
full of obsolete arguments, a plentiful sprinkling of
impossible statistics, a few slices of sarcasm, seasoned with
personalities, and garnished with sippets from HANSARD,
and HusicessoN, and ADAM SMITH, form the ingredients of
these agricultural dishes—hot in the Lower House, luke•
warm in the Upper House. And such is the kind of intel-
lectual banquet with which their Lordships and the
general community were favoured overnight. But the
diversity of opinion among the opposers of the measure has,
throughout the discussion, lent it the charm of variety. One
protectionist is such from a conviction that the Bill will
annihilate home agriculture, another because it will not
cheapen bread, another because it will render us wholly de-
pendent upon foreign nations for our subsistence. The
Earl of Wierow maintains that free trade is proved to l e
logically and radically wrong from the circumstance of his
(the Earl of WILTON'S) actually opposing the Duke of WEL-
LINGTON in its regard. His Royal Highness the Duke of
CAMBRIDGE cannot dream of altering his original views
upon the matter of international commerce because of his
advanced years. The Earl of WINCHILSEA, in like manner,
is a bitter antagonist of the Ministerial policy because
in it he recognises a perspective of destruction to Church,
State, and mercantile affairs, somewhat less picturesque, but
quite as mournful as Mr. MACAULAY'S renowned idealism of
a traveller, a thousand years hence, " seated upon
the broken arches of London-bridge, sketching the
ruins of St. Paul's." Almost as various, we
are ready to acku owledge, are the ideas enter-
tained upon the question by an infinitessimal few among
the supporters of the Bill. Thus, for example, after all that
has been adduced in the Commons and elsewhere to prove
that free trade will materially benefit the labouring classes,
by rendering provision stores more accessible, the
Marquis of NORMANDY " believes that the intrinsic
effect of the measure, either for good or evil,
has been overrated ; " affording another illustration
to the classic adage—quot homines tot sententice. These
things, however, are the mere excresences and exuberances
growing out of a discussion of such incalculable importance.
They serve, nevertheless, a good purpose, even in their
very inanity ; they sift the whole merits and
demerits of the measure most thoroughly ; they carry
it through an ordeal, tedious, without doubt, for the time
being, but wholesome and generous in the end—seeing that,
by such an exceeding filtration and analysis, the precise
nature of the scheme is exposed, its bearings are severally
recognised, and the existence in it of anything deformed, or
deleterious, or baneful, is inevitably brought to light.
Looking back upon the dreary months during which the
Corn and Customs' Bill has been thus scrutinized, and turn-
ing to the conclusions which are alone derivable by common
sense from that scrutiny, our inferences from the past, the
present, and the future, in their relation to free trade and
protection, are a triumphant vindication of the former, and a
withering exposure of the latter. As to the actuality of this
fad, the popular voice has already sufficiently pronounced,
while another, and almost as conclusive, evidence is the
unanimous acquiescence of the greatest statesmen of the age
in. the necessity of the proposed alteration. And,
much as we regret the fallacious view of the Prime
Minister's character taken by the Noble Lord, we
have a peculiar satisfaction in numbering in that catalogue
of illustrious free-traders the name of the Marquis of Non-
3LANBY ; the more so, perchance, because of our consciousness
that individual eulogiums or individual vituperations
will not ultimately influence one jot the estitnation of
Sir ROBERT PEEL as a man, as a patriot, and as a states-
man; and because we appreciate the justice of that eloquent
tribute uttered by Lord BROUGHAM, that Sir ROBERT "may
scorn the sordid attacks, the wretched ribaldry, with
which he has been out of doors assailed, because
he knows he has entitled himself to the grati-
tude cf his country, and will leave his name
to an admiring posterity as one of the greatest statesmen
that ever wielded the destinies of this land." Feeling this,
we can forgive all observations to the contrary as harmless,
and turn with sanguine feelings to the adjournment till
Thursday.

We on Monday urged upon the attention of the Govern-
ment the great and imperative necessity of some prompt and
speedy legislation taking place for carrying into effect the
recommendations contained in the report of Lord DEVON'S
Commission. A fearful tragedy has recently been enacted
at Bird Hill, in which two lives were lost, which would in all
probability have been spared had those recommendations
met with earlier attention. We are rejoiced to find, from
an answer on Monday night given by Sir R. PEEL to Mr. S.
CRAWFORD, that the subject has occupied much of the at-
tention of her MAJESTY'S Government; that the delay has
been principally occasioned by the late change in the office
of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, and the recent illness of
Lord LuccoLx ; and that three measures have been prepared,
eb
which will forthwith be introduced to the House, having for
their objects-Ist, the making compensation to tenants for
improvements
eto eie effectedtment y
and them
distresses tiN, ;2d ly;and, for amending3dia Bill
the law
elpre-
scribing a short form of lease, and reducing the stamp duties
thereon.

Although these do not by any means comprise all the re-
commendations of the Commissioners, and still less the several
matters which loudly demand legislative interference and
redress, yet they certainly include many of the most pressing
grievances, and will be gratefully received as a large instal-
ment by the people of Ireland.

thninh:Beatplhnorseoslomf the wretchedness of the country is owing to the
bad cultivation of the different farms. As we on Mon-
day pointed out, the person procuring a farm generally
receives it in bad order and condition, without suitable build.
ings or offices for carrying on the necessary works on the
land. In the great majorityof
lol3,tfi,seacbarsse,einsgthhejewhole of the avail-
able capital of the incomingtionenant is devoted to putting it
proper
sufficientlyorde and s
tcootnkdiin g
or, andoltihe is left without the
vating the soil. Had
power of registering his uee improvements,a sooh
aarsgtoo makeupupon
properly expended ereoen.
necessary
wouldor the
easilyre iit
,thien the event of being
rtahiesedlanduiinthituhe etsh-
einrtty
tosecurbituyr-rtnowoffer
deprived of the land, the possession of which would, in
atlbrd a guarantee for him while he retained it in his
hbaevingenaabtalendgible
hands. He would also be encouraged to expend his capital in
these improvements, as lie could be certain of obtaining a fair
return, either in the time during which he might be per-
mitted to occupy the lands, or as a money payment on his
being driven from the farm. There is no other measure by
which so large an amount of benefit will be conferred upon
Ireland generally, or so likely to promote substantial im-
provement throughout the country, and to remove the most
fertile source of discontent and outrage.
The second subject is also a vastly important one—the
amendment of the laws relating to distress and ejectment.
The entire of the landlord-and-tenant laws in Ireland have
justly been designated from the Bench as class•legislation—
each succeeding statute strengthening the former one in
favour of the landlord, adding to his power, and casting
additional difficulty upon the tenant. We do not desire that