The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-24 00:00:00

THE ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Mr. E. BULLER rose to open the adjourned debate, but,
from the confusion that prevailed, owing to the
number of Honourable Gentlemen who, at the moment,
left the house, his remarks did net reach the gallery.
He would briefly refer to the arguments used by the Hon.
Member for Shrewsbury, with regard to the question then
before the House. Those arguments consisted not d any new
proposition, they were hackneyed statements always put forward
by the protectionists, viz., that an excess of importation would
lower the price of labour. The House would at once perceive
that the arguments brought forward were merely old
ones, which the talent of the Honourable Gentleman
placed' in a brilliant light. He had sent forth a jackdaw
in the plumage of the peacock. He ( Nlr. E. Buller) would
endeavour to show that those arguments used by the Hon.
Member were founded neither on a just principle nor on sound
policy. The Hon. Member had said that England could vie
with other countries. He told them to look at America, and
see if there was any greafparty there founded on either class
interest or politics that would advocate such a measure
ss the one proposed by her Majesty's Government, or
would they find any public man who would give
it his countenance or support.—( Hear, hear.) The
only way to induce foreign nations to adopt free trade was
for this country to set them the example. If they were to
show those nations the advantages that were to be derived from
adopting free-trade principles, they would not be slow
to follow our footsteps. He was one of those who believed
that it was wise to fight hostile tariffs by free imports.
The amount of imports from France, from the year 1833 to
1844, increased to 3,000,0351., whilst the exports of this'
country to France advanced to 3,340,0001. On the other hand,
every year proved the necessity of this measure. Instead of
sending English gold to Russia to purchase Russian goods,
which they would sell here to a disadvantage afterwards, they
would have the advantage of being able to get those goods in
exchange for English goods. He knew how much had been
said upon this subject already, and therefore he did not intend
to delay the House much longer.—( Hear, hear.) But the
Honourable Member for Shrewsbury had warned the
House not to pass this measure. Now he knew nothing of
the arguments of the Honourable Member, but he had
heard that the Honourable Member mentioned the Turkish
empire in connexion with the question. He would say nothing•
of the absurdity of comparing the two countries. One was a
country pre-eminent for its commercial prosperity, while the
other was one possessed of a people so proud and haughty as not
to be able to appreciate the value of commercial enterprise, and
who knew little or nothing of the steam-engine and power-loom.
,(E,lrTdhere Hon. Gentleman then quoted several passages from
ati
Sttarasffh,owPrtihm
e eit
MinisterAesoiofa the Grand Sultan, in
The greater the supplyb ef food to the working classes the) greater was the chance of elevating their moral and physical
:ondition. A cheap and plentiful supply of food enabled the
poor man to send his children to school and to give them a moral
education. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Shrews-
bury had been looked up to as the embodiment of a " great
idea," and he (Mr. Buller) had listened with much anxiety
and attention, on Friday night, expecting to hear the
enunciation of some great principle to govern the new genera-
tion, and which was to shed light and happiness on the
world. And what was it,that the Hon. Gentleman proposed ?
why, to give a preponderance to the agricultural interest—to
give power to one class. Now, he could not admit the prin-
ciples which had been propounded by the Hon. Member for
Shrewsbury (Mr. Disraeli). If those principles were to
be adopted nothing but confusion must arise. It was
neither more nor less than saying that for the
benefit of class interests the whole community
must be distressed. The neett question was that which
had been proposed by the Right Honourable Baronet First Lord
of the Treasury. The great question was, whether protection
was right or wrong, and what course they should adopt con-
cerning it. It appeared that the country was divided into two
great parties—the moneyed and the industrial, he ought to say
the agricultural interests. If they favoured one, they could
not but injure the other. It was evident, therefore'
th;t protection was either a delusion or a fraud. If they were
to protect one at the expense of the ether, it was making the
Sovereign of the country not the Sovereign of 'the people,
but of a faction or a party. He could not see how the dis-
tinction was to be drivrn. They had been told
that protection ought to be shown to the colonial interests.
If such were to be the case exclusively, what reason would not
they who have to do with foreign commerce have to com-
plain of the restrictions imposed by the duties on the articles
in which they dealt ? It was, in fact, giving a benefit to one
portion of the empire at the expense of the rest.
In conclusion, he would thank the House for the attention they
had bestowed on him, and he would merely state, that feel-
ing the necessity and importance of carrying the measure as
, speedily as possible, he should give the Government his humble
but most cordial support. They had, in circumstances of pecu-
liar difficulty, followed a course most eensistent with their own
honour' and with their duty to their Sovereign.—( Hear. )
Captain BATESON observed, that during the whole of the
protracted debate but one Irishman had spoken to the question,
and he ,therefore, rose to state that he would give his most decided
opposition to the proposed measures of the Government. He held
in his hand an extract from a report by Mr. Leonard Falk-
ner, a Factory Commissioner, in 1845, in which he states that
a vast number of accidents arise in consequence of the cogs of the
wheels of the " throstle break" not being properly " boxed."
The Hon. Member having concluded reading the extract, he
said that the recommendations contained in the report for the
amelioration of the condition of the working people in
factories had particular reference to the factory of
John Bright, Brothers, of Rochdale.—( Hear, hear.) And
he would now leave it to the House to say whether
the Honourable Member was sincere in his sympathies for
the poor, whether his regrets for their condition were not
feigned, and his philanthrophy spurious.—( Hear.) One
word more in reference to that Hon. Member, and he had
done with him. He had been asked what was the compara-
tive duration of human life in Wiltshire and Manchester, but
he did not think proper to answer the question. But he
( Captain Bateson) could tell the House that in Wiltshire
the average duration of human life was thirty-three years.
while in Manchester it, was only seventeen. —( Hear, hear.)
Having made these observations, he would now confine his
remarks to his own unhappy country. No man regretted more
than he did the failure of the potato crop in Ireland ; but
would it not be a mockery to say that the people of Ireland ,
would be benefited by lowering the price of the agricul•
tural prod'ece of a people, eleven-twelfths of whom
depended upen it for support ?—( Hear, hear.) The
Drainage Pill would be one which, under the fostering
*aro of protection, would much beuefft Ireland.