The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-16 00:00:00

4111

amendment, if airy se-eased to it, it weuld involve a cemplete
alteration in the principle of the Bill beeause it would give
permanence to the principles of protection which was sooeht
to be got rid of by this Bill. Those who think the principles
of the Bill correct cannot therefore support the amendment of
the Noble Duke. The amendment was objectionable even as
it regarded the object sought to be obtained. It was proposed
with the object of preserving a remnant of protection, when
they said almost in the same breath teat such a remnant was
not worth having. Protection of such a sort, he believed,
would turn out most inefficient •, it would not be worth anything
to the agricultural interests. He would at present confine his
remarks to these general observations on the amendment,
giving the grounds on which he thought it ill advised to make
the alterations proposed.
Lord CLANCARTY supported the amendment. When
they looked at the present flourishing state of the country, they
could not avoid coming to the conclusion that they were in
debted to protection for it. That protection was at the bottom
of all their prcsperity h.d been proved by conclusive
arguments in the admirable speech of the Noble Lord the Secre-
tary for the Colonies, which, however much it hail been cavilled
at, had not been answered.—( Hear, hear.) They were told
that the Government had acted from the force of circumstances
—not the pressure from without or the pressure of the Anti-
Corn-law League, but from the growth of the population. On
that point, though he was as desirous as any one to see the
people supplied with an ample amount of the nece,saries of life,
he did not think the measure in question would yield that result.
He believed if they removed protection from native industry it
would leave the condition of the population worse than it was
before. He had heard it stated that the landlorils would
be either very ignorant or very good-natured if they allowed the
corn-laws to be repealed. To that he would only say, that what
was for the general good of the people would also be for the in•
terests of the landlord, and the principle of protection he held
to be of that character. He thought that the Irish landlords
had been hardly treated in the present question, as the measure
would press on them with peculiar severity. Ihe effect would
not be confined to them, but it would be brought home to the
great body of the occupiers of land in the country. It was the
tenant farmer that would principally suffer by the passing of
this measure. He had read with delight a most able speech
delivered by a Noble Lord whom he saw opposite ( Lord
Monteagle) some time age, when he was a Member of the other
House of Parliament, on the subject of the rep of the leisis-
lative union between England and Ireland. Now the first paint
on which that Noble Lord insisted, on the advantage to
Ireland of a maintenance of the union, was the privilege it en-
joyed by trading freely in corn with this country, an advantage
which was increased by other countries being deprived of
that privilege. Now, according to the Noble Lord's own show-
ing, this measure would have the effect of ruining Ireland,
which was mainly an agricultural country. If the price of
corn fell, so must their incomes and remuneration for labour
and capital expended in the production of that article of food.
In conclusion, he would remark, that all he asked tor on be-
half of the farmers of the United Kingdom was the minimum
of protection, compatible with the interests of them and the
country at large.
The Earl of STANHOPE, in rising to oppose this Bill,
said that the Ministry did not dare to appeal to the country on
this question. They would, however, be compelled to do so
before the lapse of twelve months. He denounced many mem-
bers of the Cabinet, as base, pusillanimous, and perfidious, for
the part which they had taken on this Bill. They had acted
as base sycophants and servile adherents of a Minister—had
acted like filthy reptiles, and ought never to have been taken
out of that obscurity in which they hart formerly been. He
assured their Lordships that he ever had been and ever would
be an honest, consistent, and firm advocate of all branches of
native industry. 'though their Lordships were not elected by
constituencies, they were yet responsible to their God and
their country fur their conduct.—(Hear, hear.) He con-
tended that even if the present corn-laws were per-
mitted to remain untouched, the British farmer
would not then have sufficient protection.—( Hear. )
Could it be believed that the same persons that had brought
forward the sliding-scale in 1812, on the ground that it gave
additional protection to the British farmer, should now intro-
duce a measure to abolish protection altogether ? In voting for
the amendment of the Noble fluke on the cross-benches (the
Duke of Buckingham) he should not consider himself bound to
support the sliding-scale. He should consider himself per-
fectly free on this question to vote hereafter as he should
please.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord BEAUMONT supported the amendment because they
Were about, after the experience of three years only, to abandon
a most important source of the public revenue. The second
ground on which he should support that amendment was. be-
cause he believed, quite contrary to the opinion of the Noble
Earl opposite, that instead of it being an advantage to the
farmers to have this delay and allow the principle of free trade
to enter into operation gradually, it would be serious and
dangerous to him. The third and, perhaps, the strongest
reason for his vote in support of the amendment was this, that
whilst they had no right whatsoever now to legislate on this
subject this year, for another Parliament which would sit before
the time came on for their Act coming into operation—whilst
they had no right this year to adopt a principle which they durst
not and would not attempt to put immediately into force,
but which they saddled upon others—another Parliament would
be elected which would be called upon to settle this question
Again, at the present moment, things were in such a state
that they could not know how long they would last. If they were
tight, why not carry out the principle ?—( Hear, hear.) It
certainly did not savour of courage on the part of the Ministry
to act in the manner in which they had done, and he did not
not know whether it was quite honest on the part of the pre
sent Parliament to carry such a measure as the present in the
Manner proposed. Why, what were they doing ? They were
diffusing the great and paramount evils which they themselves
knew would be attendant upon it, and they were thrusting
them upon a future Parliament. It was also a fact that they
Were giving an opportunity to foreigners to be prepared at the
Cad of three years to overflow the market ; and not alone that,
they gave opportunities to bad tenant to exhaus their
and. Again, they would prevent persons, theyear before the
measure came into operation, from solving corn, and there
would be a great deficiency in the home market. He felt cer-
tain that such would be the effect of the measure of the GI..
vernrnent. If the Government considered they were right in
their principle, they should have gone on with it,
out of mercy to the British farmer. Whoever had framed the
Bill was the greatest enemy to the British farmer that could
le•--( Hear, hear.) But if they passed the Bill as it at present
:stood, he would tell them that they would be making the
Armes a free-trader. What right would they have to tax his
molt, or prevent his growing tobacco, and the thousand other
resVictions which had been imposed upon him by their statues,
and svNich would not be removed by the present measure?
They had no right t o continue those restrictions, and pass the
corn-law. It was not just, nor ought it to be borne.
He considered that giving up a fixed duty was a gross sacrifice
of revenue ; and, by carrying this principle out revenue would
suffer, while no one would be benefited. On these grounds,
therefore, he would support the amendment of his Noble
Friend on the cross benches.
The Marquis of BUTE said that if the Bill did not offer
such a protection as was necessary to the farmers, it was his
opinion, and that of all the farmers with whom he had ever
spoken, that it was better to have no protection at all. In
thine branches of commerce in which he was engaged he had
found protection to fail ; and he had his doubts whether pro-
tection would be really beneficial to agriculture. His expe-
rience enabled him to say that the farmer did not participate in
the fears expressed in that Howe ; nor did he believe the
measure would have the injurious effects predicted.
The Earl of OA RDWICKE said he would not have again
risen, did he not feel the great importance of the subject. He
'lid not agree with the Noble Marquis who had just sat down,
an the opinions he expressed with regard to farmers, who he
believed were strongly in favour of protection. Much was
said about stability with regard to these laws, but he believed
that if they went on as they did they would have no stability.
(Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend roust have a bit of land
Which no one else could produce—that no land should be culti-
/Wed for wheat unless it could produce thirty-two bushels an

Lord KINNAIRD—I said thirty bushels.
The Earl of HARDWICKE—WeII then that was lowering
".again, and that was an important admission from the head
15i the Loague.—( Laughter. ) He would like to see all land
_Produceut twenty bushels an acre. Not to cultivate land with-
° produciog that amount required by the Noble Lord would
indeed be to starve the people. ( The Noble Lord
then proceeded to read several statistical documents in
,Support of his arguments.) He lived himself upon
land of a heavy clay soil, which produced but twenty
bushels an acre ; it was just that soil which would be thrown out
of cultivation by the introduction of the present measure. To
make that land produce thirty bushels an acre would be to
expend an immense capital which would never, with this Bill
passed into a law, bring an adequate return. Mr. Cobden
said to the landlords, you will raise your rents—to the farmer,
you will increase your profits—to the manufacturers, you will
lower your wages.—(Hear.) This gentleman was the Pro-
metheus of the day.—(Laughter.) He had something good
to offer every one, not, however, forgetting the manufacturers.
--(Hear, hear.) When they came to the poor clay soils of Eng-
gland, after the passing of the Bill, they wild find nothing
but a ruined tenantry, and a barren land. What would the
county constituency of this country say—would they have
Confidence in the measures of their Lordships' House? They
were a loyal people, but they were like all people, they were
not dead to au injury, and they would demand to have ever
every-
thing wiped off in the shape of taxation.—(
Hear, )
With the prospect of a plentiful harvest, and the amount of
grain which this measure would let in, there was the strongest
season to believe that a great reduction would take place in the
price. lie was persuaded that if the Bill passed, a feeling
would be excited throughout the country, which would lead to
a general change in the mode of collecting the revenue. He
felt certain that with the withdrawal of protection, they would
have to transfer to tl.e trading and commercial Classes a fair
share of the burdens which were now placed upon the land.
There would have to be an equalization of tithes, the tax to
relieve the poor, and the other burdens that were male to bear
% present so severe on landed property. Before sitting down,
he would refer to a petition, from an important b•:dy, on the
present question. He referred to the Bedford Corporation,
the members of which were greatly alarmed at the proposed
withdrawal of protection. The land of the level was entirely
kept inits present state by artificial draining, principally
!through the steam engine, and after the expenses of preserving
it were met, the returns were so small as only to yield I Is.
an.aere. They took this low rent, as there were holies that
thei ultimate) the land would be preserved by natural draining, as
course of things was tending to that Point. If they allowed
the Bill to pass, they would be doing that which would, he was
Persuaded, inflict a most serious injury on the cultivators of the
soil. Still, whatever might be the operation of the Bill, he
considered thw measure ought not to be carried without an ap-
peal to the people. He was against any change of opinion in
the Government leading to Bluth a m
the House, until such time as the constituencies
being carried by
of the empire
were appealed to —( Cheers. )
Lord KINN AIRD rose to replr to the
iNoble Lord, and to
cthbe eB tiellr
support the Bill as it stood, as he thought toJiwterei
iuldthe
benefit of the farmers themselves. Ile au
cause he believed its adoption would lead
removal
protective duties. Noble Lords should consider that her
of all
was a great difference between a protective duty andatdutye
for the purpose of raising, a revenue. From twenty years, es
-
perier.ce he felt certain that land could not be profitably culti
vated unless they could raise thirty bushels an acre on it; and
if that were done, it would enable them to sell it at a mode-
rate price. He admitted that some danger might arise from
the sudden importation of a large quantity of foreign grain,
but he did net think it would be so great as apprehended.
Tie would mention a fact on this point. A friend of
his told him that there was corn now in bond that could not
be nld profitably at less than 60s. a quarter. This was wheat
that bad been introduced at the early period of the session—
( Hear, bear)—this, therefore, need not alarm them. A Right
Ptev. p,-elate the other night said the reduction of price would
be met by a reduction in wages ; but that he (Lord Kinnard)
did not thin .k would be the case. He believed it would be the
interest of lan'elords to pay good wages to ensure efficient
service, and he further thought, with efficient farmers and a
proper system of .cultivation, that they could easily compete
with foreigners. It the farmers of Scotland by a regular
system of cropping, a I'd a skilful system of farming, could, in
the face of an adverse climate, compete with English farmers
who had better land h.'t a superior climate, surely, they in
England could compete with the foreigner who only raised
10 bushels of wheat per a ere, and had to bring it 2 000 miles
distance. He knew, that t as far as this country was concerned,
that though the measure
had taken place in was in progress, a rise in rent
3 great number of farms.
That was the ease in Scotia tad and England. It was the case
even ef the tenants of some Noble Lords then in the House.
The great estate agent, Mr.
the majority of their Lordsh ignsowphoniawdho must be known to
been till recently a

thorough-goire: nroteetioniat, and who had toad erenaive ex-
perience in landed property, stated, at a public meeting a few
dais ago, that ho was free and proud to confess that the sliding-
scale and all other scales had fallen from his eyes—(Laughter)
' —the result of which was that he was now a thorough-going
abolitionist.—( Hear, hear.) Being anxious to know en what
grounds Mr. Simpson had changed his opinions, he (Lord
Kinneird) wrote to him for an explanation. In reply, Mr.
Simpson stated that the result of his experience was, that any
restriction cm the importation of corn was injurious to the
tenant-farmers of this country. Ile (Lord Kinnaird) had al-
ready quoted an instance in which, instead of rent falling since
the determination of the Ministers on this subject, estates were
let at considerahly higher rents than before. He believed
that the tenant-farmers did care about this Bill. He believed
too, that in many instances their fears had been excited by
Members of the Legislature who bad advocated the cause of
protection. Their Lordships would have themselves to blame
if any depreciation of rents were to follow the passing of this
measure, and his advice to them was as a landlord that they
should not listen to any claims for reduction. He might state
that in many instances, however much it might be in accordance
with their feelings, they were doing great injury to the
farmer by letting land to him under proper value, because
when they did so, the farmer, instead of exerting himself to in-
creme the produce of the land, was willing to rest, and
had rested for many years, believing that he was safe
with what was called " the protective principle."
He should have wished to have gone extensively into this
question, but as many of their Lordships were anxious to ad-
dress the House he had curtailed his observations. In conclu-
sion he wished to call their Lordships' attention to one point.
He thought that whatever might be their feelings with regard
to that body tith which he was connected, they at least would
give them credit for having remained perfectly quiet; indeed
to such an extent had they remained silent at this crisis that
some Noble Lords believed that the people in towns bad said
that they would not get up an excitement on this subject.
( Hear, near.) He believed that a Noble Lord said the other
night that they could not do so.—( Hear, hear.) Now. he
(Lord Kinnaird) could assure them, from all the applications
to the members of the Anti-Corn-law League, begging of
them to move at this moment, that the neople in the towns
were anxiously waiting for thepassing of this Bill. The Anti-
Corn-law League had, instead of conforming to those repeated
applications, thought it more wise, and more respectful to Par-
liament, and to their Loadships' House, that they should re-
main quiet, so that they might not be considered to have moved
for the purpose of intimidating their Lordships.--( Hear.
That might have been said of them had they moved on this
question at the present moment. He was glad to know that,
although it had been said by Noble Lords that her Majesty's
Ministers had been intimidated by the League in bringing
forward this measure—( Hear, hear, and laughter from
the Protectionist benches)—their Lordships had greatly
mistaken the feeling of the country—they greatly mistook
the feelings of Scotland, with which he was more intimately
connected—because he would say that if this measure were de-
feated the greatest disappointment would be felt throughout
the breadth of the land, and all he would say was, that he hoped
that this amendment of the Noble Duke might not be adopted,
as it would have the effect of dereating the Bill.—(Hear.)
Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
For the amendment
Majority in favour of the clause 33
The House then resumed, and

The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave to sii
again to-morrow (this day).
The House then adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 15.
SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
Mr. RICE having consented to withdraw his amendment,
The Bill was then ordered to be recommitted to the former
Committee.