The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-29 00:00:00

YORK, MAT 27.

STOCK EXCIIANGE.—The sales are—Leicester and Bedford, 11. 55'.
6d.—Londdii and Y.:l.k, 2/. BR.—Newcastle and Berwick, 25% —North
British, Carlisle Extension, 2/. 55. 6d.—Ycrk and North Midland,
New (East And West Riding), 11%.
GLASGOW, MAY 26.

STOCK ExcaasciE.—The sale. 3 arc—Airdrie and Bathgate, 595.
Ayr anil Calloway, 22s.—BritIsh and Irish Union, 41s. 6d.—Calsdo-
nlati, 10%).,, Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Extension, 28s. 6d.—
East Indian Railway, iGs. —Forth and Clyde Junction, 38s.—Glas-
gow Genek.il Terminus, 9% —Glasgow and Belfast Union, 425.
Glar;gow xid Greenock, 16N—Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardros-
san, 233.-::Kitharnock and Ayr Direct, 37s.—Lanark and Lothians,
415. 6d.—Lesmahagow, 45s.—Manchester and Southampton, 323.—
Perth and Cried, 323. 6d.—Scottish Central, 15%—South Mid-
land, 291.

TIIE FATAL COLLISION ON THE
MERSEY.

LlvE :POOL, WEDxF..sD7t;.—Cpon making inquiry at the
Northern Hospital this morning we learned that most of the
Slitr,rers by the late collision on the river are going on as
well as can be expected. Three of them are so badly injured
and have had so many bones fractured, that little or no hope;
are enter rained of their
the mat twenty-four recovery.s. They can scarcely survive
The Itambler waserfliao'raoetunercdeacross the river last night, and
is now lying in the
Dock-basin, She will be hauled
up on the gridiron to-day,
lari.idete necessary repairs will be
done to her immediately.
Nymph has been hauled
up to one-of the southern gravin,,lcsotcks, where workmen are
ein. IC ias thoughtfortnim, t sheor
engaged in repairing her injured
will again be ready for sea in the cat:rse of
three weeks. The Rambler may probably be ready for sea
about the same time.
Many rumours are again afloat to-day as to the causes
which led to the lamentable catastrophe, but the public will
do well to forbear from giving credence to any of them until
the inquests in Liverpool and at the Magazines shall have
first taken place. It, is sincerely to be wished that the jurors
may be men of practical maritime experience, and that all the
evidence will be placed before them which can in any way
throw light on the melancholy disaster.
The inquest on the two dead bodies now lying at the
Northern Hospital will be held before Mr. Curry, the borough
coroner, but, as yet, no time has been fixed for commencing
the inquiry. We have already stated in our first edition that
the inquest on the thirteen bodies lying dead at the Maga-
zines will commence before Mr. Churton, the Chester coroner,
on Tuesday next.
It is probable, f oom what we have just heard, that the in-
quests on this and the other side of the water will be opened
on the same day (Tuesday next.), and that, in all probability,
they will last several (lays.—Liverpool paper.

[ADVERTISEMENT.] SIGHT AND HEARING. 39,
Albeit-) ; rle-street, Piccadilly. Newly-invented Spectacles, Tele-
scopes, Opeta Glasses, Microscopes, &c. Patronised by Generals
Sir Edward Paget, Sir Evan Lloyd, Sir John Beatings, Maiston,
Frederick Goodfello-,v, Clayton, Grosvenor Morrison, Dyott Robert-
son, Mackenzie, Galway, Biggs, Woolf, Murray, Walker, Fox,
Price, Liddsay, and Thackray ; Major Generals Sir 11. Elphinstone,
Sir John Rosa, Sir James Cockburn, Achinty, P. Eyers, I). Macleod,
Bouverie Sk J. ,Faedonall, Sir 11. Harlon, Sir T. Dallas, and Sir
Wm. Eustance : Admirals Lord John Hay, Sir G. Cockburn, Sir
George MandaY, Sir George Martin, Sir James H. Wilitsbeti, Sir D.
Gold, Ross, Alexander, Curzons, Tompkinson, Hollis, and Price,
Vie-Adiniral Sir F. Austen ; Rear-Admirals Brown and Ribouleau,
&e. Messrs. S. an 1 B. Soloinons, Opticians, have invented Spec-
tacle lenses pon a new construction. Immediately they are placed
ly:f.e. 2 nriperiect vision, that mist and dullness which appear before
the
that
is at once removed, every Object becomes clear and distinct,
so taat the iaost aged imperfect sight becomes bright and brilliant,
an is brought
S( youthful, natural, and original state. Also,'
Achromatic Telescops,, Opera Glasses, Microscopes Invisible and al
kln Is of _kanuatic li,iatruments, for relief of most extreme deafness.
Caa s tion - Messrs. S. and B. Soloinons, Opticians, are not in any way
con iected with a person of the same name hi their Immediate
neigh-
bourhood. To prevent mistakes be cautious, and Observe—ollyto
.
be had at 39, Albema 16.3 reet, opposite the York Hotel.
[ADVERTISEMEN'e.] —A DANGEROUS DISEASE OF
VIE LIVER AND STOMACH CURED BY HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND
PILLS. —Mr. Thomas Randall, 7, Cottage-place, Soloman's-lane,
Limehause, formerly a farmer, declares that his health for twenty
ye :rs past had been so very precarious, owing to a derangement of
the liver and stomach, that he was freonently set ed with violent
spasms, which so nearly choked him that Le often anticipated the
being found dead by his laboa-ers, but spite of such d tngerous
symptoms,- he was perfectly cured in the course of a month by rub-
bing Holloway's Ointment into his chest, stomach, and right side,
and taking his celebrated Pills, which are Sold by all druggists, aLd
at the Proprietor's Establishment, 244, Strand, London.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, 31-ay 28.

'I heir Lordships met at ten minutes to Five o'clock.
Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from the county
of Perth against the Nlinisterial measure.
Earl HAREWOOD also presented a petition, signed by
4,280 of the most respectable inhabitants of Dorking, praying
their Lordships not to pass the Bill for the repeal of the
corn-laws, as they conceived it was fraught with the greatest
danger to the country.
ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
Earl POWIS introduced a Bill for the disjunction of these
sees, which was read a first time.

CORN-LAWS.
Earl HARDWICK presented a petition from the Commis-
sioners of the Bedford Level, setting forth that they had,
by the expenditure of large sums of money in the
erection of steam enginos for draining the land
succeeded in reclaiming a perfect morass, and making it excel-
lent growing land that it was now flourishing that they were
interested in the maintenance of protection, and praying their
Lordships not to assent to a repeal of the corn-laws.
EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES BILL.
On the motion that this Bill be read a second time,
The Duke of RICHMOND rose and objected to the course
now proposed :o be taken. It was contrary to the usual prac-
tiee of the House to enter upon business of that kind until the
presentation of petitions was over, especially did he object to
any departure from the usual course when such an important
Bill as the Corn Bill was under the consideration of the
House.
CORN-LAWS.

The NOBLE DUKE then proceeded to present a petition
against the Ministerial measure, on the corn-laws, from the
landowners, tenant-farmers, and others, resident at Chelms-
ford, in the county of Essex.

• Petitions in favour of the Government measure were pre-
sented by Lord Radnor, by the Earl of Ripon, and by Earl St.
Germans.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM presented petitions from
the county of Essex against the Corn Importation Bill.
Lord BEAUMONT presented similar petitions.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE, in presenting a petition,
said that the petition which he had the honour of pre-
senting was numerously signed by the merchants,
bankers, and traders of the City of London. The
petitioners prayed that their Lordships would pass the mea-
sure which her Majesty's Government had introduced be-
fore the House. The petition was signed by
twenty-four of the Directors of the Bank of
England, by nineteen of the bankers of London,
and by two hundred and seventeen of the merchants and
traders of the City.—(Hear, hear.) He was sure that whether
as regarded the intelligence of the persons signing
the petition, or the material interest which
they had in the measure which was then before
their Lordships, their Lordships would give that
petition the consideration it deserved. He would not
enlarge on the influence which ought to attach
to that petition, but he might remind their Lord-
ships that a petition was presented in 1820 which
had given rise to the system of commercial policy which
had been from that period step by step pursued. In the same
way he trusted that this petition from the merchants of Lon-
don would cause their Lordships to sanction a course of policy
which would lead to renewed and extended commercial policy.
Lord ASHBURTON would venture to say that it would be
easy to obtain a petition as large, and t s numerously signed,
informing their Lordships that in Ca a.: ali is t a.s measure
was fraught with danger to the interests of the people of this
country.—(Cheers from the cress benches.) He thought it
necessary to say these few words upon the subject. The petition
merely expressed their individual opinion.
Lord BROUGHAM quite agreed with the Noble Lord, that
this petition was one expressing the opinions of individuals.
But. if it be true that such a petition could so easily be brought
forward by his Noble Friend upon such a question, he pro-
nounced the City of London to have totally changed their opi-
nion since his Noble Friend presented their memorable petition
against the corn-laws:in the year 1815.
Lord MONTEAGLE did not consider that the signatures
to this petition might not necessarily infer a perfect una-
nimity of opinion upon the subject. It did not follow,
that a petition of quite another effect might be presented here-
after. He hoped the Bill would not be disposed of by the vote
of to-night, he therefore invited his Noble Friend to use all
his influence with the merchants of London to produce a
counter-petition from them.
Earl DALHOUSIE did not intend to provoke any dis-
cussion on this occasion. He did not state tnat it was a pe-
tition of the City of London, but a petition, signed by mer-
chants and bankers of the City of London, and wished to draw
the attention of their Lordships to the respectable nature of
the signatures attached to it.
The Duke of RICHMOND —I should like to know, my Lords,
how many of these persons have got any of the bonded corn ?
—( Hear, hear, and laughter. )
Lord BROUGHAM must say that the Noble Duke had
made an ingenious observation in the form of a remark, but he
confessed he did not hear the same observations made when the
petition was presented in 1820.—( Hear, bear. 1
Lord ASHBURTON said the petition alluded to by his
Noble and Learned Friend contained an expression of the
opinion of the merchants of the City of London against re-
strictions in trade generally, and not against the corn-laws.
He doubted, however, whether even that petition was signed
by the majority of the most considerable merchants of the City
of London.

Lord BROUGHAM wished to ask his Noble Friend whether
the petition against the restrictions on trade generally contained
any exception as to corn ?—•( Hear, hear.):
The Duke of CLEVELAND presented a petition from the
landowners and tenant-farmersfof the county of Essex against
the Corn Bill.

Earl DALHOUSIE presented petitions from the mer-
chants and brokers of Liverpool, from certain operatives
of Stockport, from the merchants of Kingston-upcn-
Hull, and from the Commercial Association of Man-
chester, in favour of the Corn Bill.—( Hear, hear. )
Also a similar petition from the American Chamber of Com-
merce, Liverpool.—(Hear, hear.)
VENTILATION OF THE HOUSES OF PARLIA-
MENT.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he had received a
communication from Dr. Reid in some degree explanatory of
the intense heat which their Lordships had suffered on the
last night of debate. He had also received a communica-
tion from a Mr. Gurney, who cffered to ventilate the
House upon a new principle. He would not recommend
them to adopt any theory, but to resort to the good old prin-
ciple by which the former Houses of Parliament was venti-
rlB-F.l) —lneere"ivas One' fact which he 'would
state to their Lordships with reference to Thursday night. 1
The thermometer, brought in at 61, had, before the candles
were lighted up, risen to 75. He would ask that the letter
might be laid before the House.
Lord BROUGHAM had no objection whatever to make to
his Noble Friend's motion. He had experienced much injury
from the excessive heat en Monday night, and what he wanted
was not explanation, but air.—( Loud laughter.) He should not
care a straw for any explanation which might be offered to their
Lordships by the ventilation of the House —( Hear. ) It was a
hard thing that he was to be tortured like some low animal by
Dr. Reid, or any other doctor.—( Laughter.) He really
believed that at the bottom Dr. Reid was a heartless de-
ceiver.—( Laughter and cheers.)
, Lord CANNING handed in the letter alluded to by the
Noble Marquis.
CORN-LAWS.—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
Earl GREY—Before I address the House on the subject of
the order of the day, I beg to present two petitions relating to
that subject—one' from the Town Council of Hastings, beg-
ging your Lordships to pass the Bill now before the
House immediately and unimpaired; also a similar petition
from Wilts. Sly Lords, I am conscious that the subject
which is now before the House has been both in and out of
Parliament, by speeches and writings, so long and so fully dis-
cussed, that your Lordships may well be of opinion that no
new argument remains to be urged upon it, and that you must
therefore naturally be anxious to bring this debate to a
close. My Lords, I can assure you I should not have
contributed to the delay, I should not have ventured to tres-
pass upon your Lordships' attention on the last night that we
sat, with what, I fear, must be thought pertinacity, were it
not that, having for many yi ars taken a deep interest in this
question, I could not reconcile it to myself to stand about from
this, I trust, the final battle of that great cause, or to
allow this debate to conclude without showing the deep interest
I took in the debate. My Lords, I must further say, that one
strong inducement--one principal reason which urged me to a
strong desire to address your Lordships, was my feeling
that a great impression had been made up ,n your Lordships by
the speech which we heard on the first night of the debate, and
which was listened to with such just and general admiration—
of course I mean the speech of my Noble Friend
the late Secretary for the Colonies, for whose absence this
evening, from whatever cause it may arise, I very greatly
regret.—( Hear.) My Lords, I can assure you I listened to
that speech with as much delight as any of your Lordships
because, though I think nay Noble Friend made an ad.nirable
speech, he was much misinformed in what he stated to your Lord-
ships. His reasons were unsound, and his conclusions were
unjust; but still his arguments were so ingenious, and were
put with so much skill, and clothed in language of such ex- i
treme beauty—in fact, the w hole speech was so brilliant a dis-
plays of rhetorical talent, that for upwards of three hours it
received the attention of every Noble Lord who listened to
it, making it unlike most other speeches—not a labour
but a pleasure to hear. I know that some of
the arguments in that speech have already been answered, es-
pecially by the Noble and Learned Lord who followed him in
the debate, and by a Noble Friend of mine, who now sits
behind me, and who spoke on the subject last evening.
But it seems to me that there are still some por-
tions of that speech to which it is required that your
Lordships' attention should be called, I am not vain or pre-
sumptuous enough to suppose that I am fit to enter into
the lists with my Noble Friend, but I have such confidence in
thshhuerppsbo:seesehnr
dasnodf
that. truth,m .oyi
etslosi
Tnauteeel e believeossffhut
11,1 l
ely mstuhQarcete
eti,ei?
recommended.
rcausetant
ot. even in
oLf 0
mrmdyy.
NLlbdieshiFprsienthd.al hen' e ts I been wrong. The
tion I shall have to address to
Lord-
ships is, that through the whole satisfying, your
first observe-
co jsoeur
of
debate it has struck me very forcibly that those Noble Lords
who have been opposed to the Bill have all avoided explicitly
reviewing and defending that which I take to be the main
point and hold of the existing corn-laws, as well es of all other
laws upon the same subject. It is clear that the real
aim of these laws and the object of all laws intro-
duced, is that of securing a remunerative price i f
corn, or in other words to raise the price of food to the
people by an artificial supply It appears to me that, as I hay
ventured humbly to submit to your Lordships, this is the real
intention and object of all these laws; it is one which requires
people
anrcel umcl eutcl
ht h
ta:t
blbja.eewests.
desired. which
in
t , be proved by argument, and in the absence of all argument,
unless cogent reasons can b. e adducedt, in favour of so artificial
will give cheapness o
repeal of those laws will accomplish
a restriction of the supply,
toittmheuspte'Pep
other than those
Lords who have spoken, asert that the
They represent that
Particular, most Noble
whichthe I think are its teals
to proteet U 3 from the great (
foodl' which is necessary to the
nations for a supply of that
great object of the present lawia,nawearsotfo
dependencesecure cerutitn2 sfourPePirest n
L d have pat
many Noble or 3
These RTC the arguments which
existence of the people of this country.—( Hear, hear.)
offence, I may
forward Now, my Lords, without meaningany
be permitted to say that it is quite out of nay power to reseed
this in any other light than as a colourable e areumeat—
t
isn supported.
o t the re L
real objectet m
forejust whichst ask you this ? Suppose the
i)o s
ei a wa
similar argument, and under similar circumstances,
were urged by us, would those Noble Lords, who now
oppose the repeal of the corn-laws give implicit credittoth us
fee the sincerity of our motives? I will suppose
the cotton manufactures of this country, instead of menufac-
turieg for the whole world, manufacture only for our own
domestic cansumption—that the price of cotton in this
country was much higher than in the rest of the world,
and that the goods produced elsewhere were excluded
from our markets by the high protective duties—now, my
Lords, if under such circumstances the question before the
House were, whether we should repeal such high protective
duties on cotter', and suppose the cotton manufacturers
of this country were to some to U 3 and say, " Do not be
so rash as to repeal those duties, as you will leave
yourselves dependent on foreign nations, and your
1 population will be without shirts and gowns, and you
lament your great rashness." I want to kuow whether we
should feel perfectly convinced that it was this disinterested
feeling for the consumers that dictated such a course i and I

want to know whether if this were clone, if high duties were
created, if a bed., of manufacturers were to meet and no other
persons were present, they would not discuss the grand topics
of high rates charged to the British manufacturer, and the cer-
tainty, if those protective laws weie repealed, of the evils that
would ensue, that bales of foreign goods would rush into our
markets, and that certain destruction of our manufacturers and
others would be the result. Should we under such circum-
stances believe that it was a mere regard to the interests of rite
consumers that dictated their prayers ? My Lords, I must say
in the same manner that I am a little incredulous whether that
which has excited the enthusiasm of protection societies—
that which has drawn such large crowds toeetker at Willis's
rooms that the two Noble Dukes who sit on the cross benches
were obliged to divide their farces and to preside over different
meetings—l say I cannot entertain a doubt, when that which
has excited such a feeling among the producers of corn, and
when I do not find such a feeling among the consumers, I say
it was a mere apprehension at some future time our supplies
from abroad might fail, and as a consequence that prices
might rise to an extravacant height, I cannot help
thinking that the apprehension of having too much
corn and also too low prices will not be verified.
If I were to refer to a sufficient answer to that, it is to be
found in the argument employed by the Hon. and Learned
Lord (Brougham) the first night of the debate, when
be referred to the fact—the indisputable fact—that Napo-
leon, in the heighth of his power, and daring the most
exciting period of the French revolutionary war, was
unable to exclude corn front being imported into
the English ports. If that one fact is not conclusive, and
if you wish more, I need only refer to what was said
by the Noble Lord the late Secretary for the Colo-
nies, when he stated, in the course of his address,
that competition was the cause of certain artieere not rising in
price. He stated, in the boldest and most authoritative
manner, that of all the paradoxes that ever were
conceived the doctrine that competition did
not lead to the making of articles cheap
was the worst.—(Hear, hear.) It is just as well a paradox to
assert that the best security to the receiving of a plentiful and
cheap supply of food is by the imposition of artificial restrictions
on national and commercial intercourse. It has been argued,
that the measure before the House should be rejected on the
consideration that this subject is not one for legislation. If
there be one question more than another on which I entertain
a strong opinion, it is that the present question is a great and
proper object of legislation.--( Hear, hear.) What is the effect
of this raising of the price of corn by the operation of a re-
strictive law? It was well put by the Noble Earl that spoke
the last night of the debate (Lord Clarendon). He showed, on
the calculations of the Noble Earl opposite (Lord Stanley),
and from a calculation taken from correct data, that the
amount in the fall of price and the amount in the increase of
consumption that would take place if the existing corn-laws
did not exist could not be less than ten millions of money.
Double the amount of the income-tax, and double the amount
of the malt-tax,-- a tax not a farthing of which goes into the
exchequer for national purposes; but a tax imposed for the benefit
—I will not say the benefit, but rather the injury, or at least
the imaginary benefit—of a single class of society.—( Cheers. )
But, my Lords, I know that it has been said that this is an
unfair representation of the circumstances. I know that it
has been admitted that the price of corn has been
raised by the corn-laws—it has been admitted that the payment
of a high, r price for their food is in itself a burden to the
working classes. Still it is asserted that no real injury is
done by this system of protection to agriculture, be-
cause the facts which result from the existing law
show that its effect is to keep up wages in the same proportion
that it keeps up the price of corn. This was the great argu-
ment of the Noble Lord who spoke so ably on Monday night.
I cannot help remarking that it is perfectly clear, in
the first instance, that the increase in the price of food is
in itself a heavy tax on the working classes, a
large proportion of whose income is expended in
thee purchase of food. But it is asserted that the effect of the
corn-laws is to keep up the wages of the labourer. We ought
to be sure that this is the fact; it is net one which ought to
be taken for granted, without the fullest and closest investiga-
tion. But that that lies at the root of the matter was lightly
glanced over by the Noble Lord. He argued that if the price
of corn was low, competition in labour would bring down wages
in the same proportion, and, therefore, that the industrious
classes would be no gainers. This is an easy way of disposing
of the question, but it is not by any means a satisfactory one,
and it was the less satisfactory because his Noble Friend made
an admission which would lead to a directly opposite conclusion.
He admitted that you by your legislative measures did not in-
terfere with the rate of wages. He told us that wages did not
fall in the same degree as corn did, and, therefore, ho really
admitted that when the price of wheat rose the working man
was exposed for the time to a considerable pressure. lam
sure your Lordships will admit that I have not unfairly stated
this argument of the Noble Lord. lam sure that the experi-
ence which we have had in the last few years is perfectly satis-
factory upon this point, if we compare the state of things in this
country in the dear years as compared with the cheap ones.
If you compare the state of things in the years
18.33, 1834, and 1835, when wheat was low, with the years
1939, 1840, and 1841, when it was dear and scarce, you will
find that in the first of those years there was a great demand
for labour, and wages were high, while in the last of those years
you will find, on the contrary, that trade was slack, that there
was no demand for labour, that wages had fallen, and that
numbers of persons were thrown out of employment. The ca-
lamitous state of the country during these years is a matter so
recent, and it has made such an impression on every person
who knew what the condition of the people really
was, as to render it unnecessary for me to dwell upon it.
But, my Lords, the reason of this state of things is obvious.
There can be no doubt at all that the difficulty of these unhappy
years to which I have referred can be easily accounted for.
When corn rose to a high price, every family throughout
the kingdom was compelled to expend a very large por-
tion of their income to obtain a supply of food,
and there was, of course, a less available income for
other things. There was less available income for clothing, for
tea, for sugar, and other articles of that nature. There was
leas demand for manufactured goods, for the articles of the
small shopkeepers, and the merchant. There was, therefore,
a general diminution of their power of employing labourers,
and a general eiminution in the consumption of the producing
classes. This explanation is quite sufficient to account for the
sufferings of that year. I ask what possible reason there is for
believing, if these prices are low, the price of food becomes
permanent. I see no reason of the kind, I believe permanently
as well as temporarily, if the price of food is high, there is a
small proportion of national income available for other pur-
poses, and therefore a comparatively small demand for labour,
and a larger proportion of spaidaxion ta:ndTrov
prices, the population consume other things in larger quantities
there is a great demand for labour, and consequently a
prosperous state of things takes place. I presume the
correctness of this course of reasoning is strongly borne
out by fact, because when we look to other countries where there
is this state of things—permanent low prices of food—in these
countries we invariably find wages high. The Noble Earl,
who spoke last night, admitted the fact. He said it was per-
fectly true that wages did not appear to be governed by the
price of food, because, he said, in America and Australia, where
the price of corn is low wages are high. In Poland, the price
of corn is high, and the wages are low, being kept down by
the mis.government of that unhappy country, the restrictions
upon industry, and the want of employment. I challenge my
'Noble Friend to mention any country in the world, from Ca-
nada to Australia, where there is a small population, with an
extended territory, where food is cheap, and where there is
good order and good Government—l defy him to mention
any such country where wages are not exceedingly high.
I believe that is an acknowledged fact, and I further contend
that the reason for these high wages is to be found in that abun-
dance of food, for while food is abundant there was a competi-
tion amongst employers fur labour, whereas when food was
scarce, and in a thickly peopled country, the competition was
amongst labourers to find employment.—( Hear, hear.) If you
apply restr.ctive laws upon the trade in food, you increase the
disadvantages under which a fully peopled county necessarily
labour, because if you interfere with or restrict the trade of a
large corn-producing country, you increase the proportion of
your unemployed labourer', who otherwise would be engaged
in manufacturing goods for those corn-producing countries—
( Cries of " Hear, hear")—while, on the other hand,
if you encourage the mutual interchange of products
with such countries as Hungary, Poland, and America, you
are increasing the inevitable disadvantages to which the la-
bourers of a thickly populated country are necessarily sub-
jected.—( Hear, hear.) After, however, what fell from a
Noble Friend beside me upon the subject of the interchange
of the commodities between a fertile, though a thinly populated
country, and a thickly populated country, I should be ashamed
to trouble your Lordships with a single word further upon
this part of the subject.—( Hear, hear.) It is this interchange
of commodities which keeps wages up in both countries. But
I see a Noble Marquis opposite denies the justness of my con-
elusions, and I hope in the course of the debate he will point
out to me where my chain of reasoning is defective.
It I am right in this argument, that one fact ought to be con-
clusive, and there ought to be an end to all future argu-
ment—if we are once satisfied of that fact, no other argument,
in a Christian country, ought for cne moment to be used
against the measure.— ( Hear, hear. ) 'When I look at the
condition to which the labouring classes have been subjected,
when I consider how frightful has been shown the condition of
the agricultural labourers in Dorsetshire and Wiltshire, when I
know how much they are below what we could desire, even in the
most favoured countries), and when at the same time I know
that the effect of the earn-laws, which are still working, is to
depress wages and raise the price of food, it seems to me that
it is utterly- useless to argue the question further. Those
who, in the year 1842, ca led themselves the farmers' friends, did
a most serious injury to those who were so gullible as to believe.
They rushed into the markets to get rid of their property, but
they very soon found cut, I believe, how great had been their
mistake; and it is my conviction that the country has not yet
recovered from the effects of their folly. I am happy to find
that, notwithstanding the agitation and the prophecies
which have been n,ade as to the effect of this measure, that
land never let better, never sold better, and that a greater spirit
of agriculture never existed in this country.—(Hear, hear.)
I believe the demand for draining tiles is much increasing—so
much so, that the moment a kiln of draining tiles is known to
be ready, there is a struggle amongst the farmers of the neigh-
bourhood as to who shall be first supplied with those necessary
articles for the improvement of their land.—( Bear, hear.)
My Lords, I think the farmers and occupiers of land need not
fear the passing of this measure ; and I think that, from what
igrohun"de stated,for th
iet weialeulllbaetionseens atutihatfeatrhere is no
Noble Friend, and I think that his statement that cs oofrn canm
now be sold in this country much cheaper:lltha I do yis
not
want—even if it were the fact that the
entirely groundless.—(Hear, hear.)yprice onf Lords, fcoorrmn ewould
greatly fall in consequence of the passing ofrhe Bill which is
now under consideration—l do not want to go to any length
on this portion of the question, but at the same time I cannot
help adverting to the statement which was made with very great
confidence by my Noble Friend, who spoke on Monday night,
as having been previously made by what seemed high practical
authority.Cntr My Lords, he told us that there were two cargoes
oelhfwawsahesdeta:ltudat
bthtyheias moment in this country which had been pm-
BgaeltniteleSmeaanatwilt4hsw.,haorindi
Ihaa arrived
e certainly
t a inly
y, and was offered at 235. the quarter. Now, myninuLtotrhdis,
ac-
quainted,iii
but who descriue;himself as largely interested in the
corn trade—though I meant not to trouble your Lordships
with any figures, I hope you will forgive me if I read a very
short extract from the letter to which I haveli adverted. This
nt heastsahytiwo cargoes of
says it is perfectly
tlertuteertihsatdatLeudrd" Liverpooy's l,ey.ersrteesrpeloauy.Z
couldas him (m
(mmui
rned
fh )
:thhmiicrath c
made in that letter, that
all wheat could
wheat imported into this country
et hi
oeu ps rtihc
an
ntahmee named
tiant e
ut
ei sh
tl ewttheire.h
wNai
his sold in this country at the price named.
The original cost is about 335. per quarter, including freight
and all other charges that arise from the glorious uncertainty of
the sliding-scale. As regards the statement of Lord Stanley's
correspondent as to the price otf wheate inh this country, I vat a
ture to say that wheat cannot be purchased airdadadtedlent than 45.,
the quarter at Weimar
thebreisskoladsu ndersss.
pero that fur
;it
cannotallquarter.
regards the quality of
Taking into considerationtaaes under which it could be bi ought
corn, and all the disadvantages
before the price of their corn is affected by
into this country,
freight and all charges
than that which the British
into this country at a lower price
I think that the result of
corn is now bearing in the markea
the opening of our ports, their produce could not be introduced
there was for the fear at
present expressed with regard to
the introduction of foreign
.
ch I have adverted, has
protection of some kind to the farmer ought to teach those in-
terested in land, how lit t le foundation
corn. My friend, in the speech to which
My Noble Friend has endeavoured to make_ out that the f 1
told us that the manufacture of wool was a strong case in .poi_n,f.,