The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-27 00:00:00

flax was sold at 19s. 6d. per stone, and in addition to the
enormous price, it was of a beauty and quality that could not be
equalled in Belgium. The wages there did not exceed the wages
given in Wiltshire, Dorsetshire, and Hampshire. With
regard to the manufacture of flax, he had remarked
in what state the trade was during the existence
of protection on linen and on the raw material. The great site
of industry in that trade, at the present time, was in the north
of Ireland, where no less a capital than 5,000,0001. was em-
barked in it, and 500,000 persons derived their subsistence
from it. The wages paid yearly amounted to 300,0001 , and
yet it was only during the last twelve years that this trade began
to develop itself. 60,000 new spindles had been lately set in
operation. With regard to the linen itself, it was sold a few
years ago at 2s. 7d. per yard ; but it was now sold at 9d. per
yard, and the linen now sold was of a Liner quality than could
formerly be got for 2s. 7d. He (the Hon. Member) recol-
lected perfectly well having had an interview with a Lincoln-
shire farmer, who came to Belfast to witness one of their flax
exhibitions, and who stated that though he was in the habit of
.
raising flax himself, he slid not know what uv to convert ti
straw to. He would look at another article, butter for instance.
There were 6,000 firkins of butter imported from Holland every
week—scarcely a steamer arrived at London from Ostend
without being partially laden witL this article. Now were the
farmers of Limerick or Tipperary in,:ured by this importation
of butter? He did consider they were. He considered that,
with the natural resources of Ireland, arid the effects of the
stimulus which would be given to the native population of that
country, they would be able to compete with them as success-
fully as in the former article of flax they had done with ether
countries. They were told by the opponents of the measure
that they would be overwhelmed by the importations of the
foreign markets, and that the land would be thrown out of cul-
tivation by such a result. Now he was prepared to state that
the land would not be thrown out of cultivation by the effects
of the Government measure. It was said, that if they de-
pended on foreign countries for a supply of corn, in the
event of war they would be reduced to the greatest straits. He
did not believe, however, that such a result would follow, for

if that day should come when the horrors of war
would take place, the country would be able to
come off as gloriously and as successfully as ever.
As long as this novel supremacy existed—as long as freedom
and civilisation was cherished am,ng them—as long as the
sceptre of the kingdom was wielded with equity and muni-
ficence, so long would the country maintain its wonted superio-
rity.
Mr. B. DENISON regretted very much that the Hon.
Member for Knaresborough was not in his place. In his
speech a few evenings since he indulged in some tree observa-
tions as to the course which the Right Hon. Baronet proposed
to adopt with respect to the commercial policy of the country,
and chargedGovernmentwith having deceived thosewho had con-
fided in them. The Right Hon. Baronet, however, was the
last to deceive any one—(Cheers)—and he was bound to say
that in no way whatever, whether directly or indirectly had he
deceived him (Mr. Denison).—(Cheers.) And he must take
leave to say further, that he joined with other Hon. Gentlemen
who had addressed the House in expressing a wish that his
Right Honourable Friend the Member for Knaresborough—
( Cries of" Honourable Friend")—he begged pardon—his Hon.
Friend would be more cautious in future, both in his
addreses to the public, and Isis letters to private individuals.—
( Hear, hear.) If he did take that caution, he (Mr. Denison)
had no doubt that his conduct and language would be more sa-
tisfactory to the House and to the country. Having disposed
of that part of the question, and he hoped he had stated what
would he satisfactory to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head
of the Government—( Hear, hear)—he would proceed to say
that when he had the honour of seconding the Address to the
Throne, he certainly did expect that the Right Hon. Barone',
from what he had communicated to him, would have brought
forward a measure of the same character and description as
those which the Government, of which he was at the head, and
the ornament—( Cheers)—had propounded to the Parliament
for the last three or four years, and which, at the time he told
him, he thought he had acted in so successfully. He certainly
did think, from all that he had heard from members of the Go-
vernment, that they did expect that a discussion would take
place ma the subject of corn, but he would frankly own that
he was not at all prepared to expect that the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet would propose the total abolition of the corn•laws—
even accompanied with a new sliding-scale, which he brought
forward three years ago. And he would frankly add, that in
bringing forward his proposal the Right Him Baronet had
made a great mistake—(Cheers)—and committed an error
which he was quite sure many people would regret. He
(Mr. Denison) confessed that he hoped the Honour-
able Baronet might not live to regret it himself.
And now that he had propounded his measures, he (Mr. De-
nison) hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet might live to see
it act successfully, and promote the interests of the country in
the way in which the Right Hon. Baronet hoped. He ( Mr.
Denison) must say, that he did not expect that the Right
Hon. Baronet would have brought forward such a measure.,
He imagined that it was the duty of Parliament and of Go-
vernment to exert themselves as much as possible to promote
the employment of those living around them, and to furnish
them with an abundance of food. Now, in supporting the
corn-laws, as he (Mr. Denison) had done for several years,
he had done so without regarding the interests of the land-
owners in the first instance.—( Hear, hear.) He had never
advocated the corn-laws for the defence of the landlords.—
( Hear, hear.) He had advocated those laws in defence of
the tenantry of the kingdom, who vdere the most hard-worked
men in the kingdom. But he did say this, that that class
would not, in his opinion, be benefited by this measure.—
( Bear, hear.) He therefore confessed that he was opposed to
the repeal of the corn•laws. Until he was convinced that this
measure would benefit the working classes of this country, he
was determined to adhere to his original opinions. He would
now, with the permission of the House, give a short review of
the corn-laws since the commencement of the present century.
At the present time, though there is a much larger population
in the kingdom, there was no more foreign corn imported since
the commencement of the century, and during this period there
has existed, in one shape or other, corn-laws of a protective
character. The laws have, however, operated against
the landed interest, though professedly enacted in their
favour. He would now read a few extracts from a docu-
ment which he had in his hand, giving the quantity of corn
imported into this country from the years
Quarters.
1791 to 1800 inclusive, 470,000
1891 ... 1810
1811 ... 1820
1821 ... 1830
1831 ... 1840
1841 ... 1845

But during several of the years included in these decimal
periods importation had been very small in some cases, not
more then 100,000 quarters. So able was England to find
sufficient support for its population. He would refer to the
last two years, especially in the year 1844, there were 220,000
quarters imported, and in the year 1845, notwithstanding all
the clamour which had been raised, the quantity imported had
been only 136,000 quarters, and we are now told that it is
necessary to abolish the corn-laws, in order that the population
of this country may have foreign corn imported to supply their
deficiency. He maintained that if ever there was an interest
which bad been hard-driven and hard-spurred, it was the agri-
cultural interest. In the year 1815 there was a prohibitory
duty on the importation of corn, when the price reached 80s. In
the year 1822 the prohibition was lowered to 70s. In 1828, a
new corn-law, w ith the eliding scale, was adopted, which again
altered the duty. Between the years 1828 and 1842 that
sliding-scale remained in force, and in the year 1812 the duty
was then actually down fifty per cent. In the year 1846,
after the operation of the law for four years only,
the total repeal of the duty was proposed, but he did not consider
that they had made out any case. The improvement in agri-
culture had been going on at the same rate as the increase
in the population. He had no doubt that agriculture would
still improve. He believed that agriculture was only in its
infancy, and he had no doubt of the power of the agriculturists
to maintain an increase in the population. But in the mean-
time, they ought to deal fairly and frankly by the agri-
culturists, and they ought to give the agriculturists a
lease of the Bill of the year 1842. The Vice-
President of the Board of Trade had stet ed that in five years
the importation of foreign corn had been to the extent of two
millions a year. He (Mr. Denison), however, had shown that
this must be an error. He trusted that the house would
never lose sight that one general rule prevailed—that no ad-
vantage was ever obtained by the country by a depression of
the agricultural classes, and that whatever tended to reduce
those classes tendild just in the same proportion to reduce the
power of the nation, and to introduce amongst the people dis-
ease, poverty, and distress. He had voted for the great alter•
ation effected by the Right Hon. Baronet in his tariff of 1842,
and he had supported that tariff in opposition to the Hon. Mem-
ber for Somersetshire (Mr. Miles) because in that tariff the
Right Hon. Baronet had taken off the duty on animals and
meat. He did so because he found that meat was rising in
the market. Now the rise in the price of meat was not occa-
sioned by the extent of the consumption, but in consequence of
the scarcity which had been existing at that time.
An analogy was attempted to be drawn by some
gentlemen between the dtey upon corn and the imposition
upon orther articles, such as sugar; but in fact no such ana-
logy existed, for the duty on sugar was imposed for fiscal pur-
poses ; whereas the duty on corn was simply imposed with the
object of protection, and there was, therefore, no analogy in
the case. In the course of his journeys in different parts of the
country, during the last year, he had made it his business to
inquire into the position of small tradesmen of the small towns,
and he did so because he knew that they were chiefly depen-
dent upon agriculture for their chief support, his object being
to test the assertion that high prices were uniformly accom-
panied by high wages, and low prices by low wages. He
could confidently affirm that such was not the case. He had
found that, although the prices were reduced after good
harvests, that the farmers brought more money home
froth market, were enabled to pay more labourers,
and give a higher price for their work.—( Hear. )
But if they reversed this order of things, and if the result
were bad harvests, let them ask any shopkeeper what was the
state of business, and he would say " I cannot sell anything ;
the harvests have been bad." He (Mr. B. Denison) wished
to impress on the House the great importance of doing every-
thing to encourage agriculture. He did not want prohibition,
he did not want high prices, but he wanted that agriculture
should be encouraged in every possible way. He did not ima-
gine that any Member in that House was better aware than
the Noble Lord the Member for London of the value of a good
harvest. The bad harvests of 1839, 1840, and 1841, accom-
panied by distress in the manufacturing districts, went more to
shake the confidence in the Noble Lord's Government than
anything else. The Noble Lord would remember that in 1833,
1834, and 1835, when the harvests were remarkably
good, the manufacturing districts were fully em-
ployed ; but as the harvests became bad, so, in the same
proportion, the manufacturing districts felt the pressure
of distress. He would even go further back, for
in 1824, 1825, and 1826 the manufacturers were most flourish-
ing, and in point of fact, and he challenged any gentleman
to set him right, if a bad harvest intervened, the manufactures
were not right, but if they had a good harvest they revived im-
mediately. He would not trespass on the time of the House,
but the Noble Lord had made an observation the other night
to which he (Mr. B. Denison) must shortly refer. He said
that the case was a most difficult one, that many individuals
had written upon the subject, but that no one had shown him
a way out of the difficulty. He (Mr. B. Denison) would
show the Noble Lord and the Right Honourable Baronet how
to get out of the difficulty. He would accept the invitation
to act as their pilot, but he could not go out in the same boat
with them, for the total abolition of the corn-laws. Even if
the measure were right, the time was unfortunate. The
present course of the Government was placing 300 Gentlemen
in a very awkward position, forcing them either to vote against
their consciences, if they desired to keep in the Ministry, or
to go in opposition to their constituents. He must say he
would vete against the Government under these circumstances
—it was the only consistent course be could pursue. There
was another reason he would give before the Government. In
1841 he was induced to come forward in opposition to two of
the most popular men in the kingdom, Lord Morpeth and the
late Lord Milton. He (Ur. B. Denison) was put up for the
West Riding of York, along with the present Lord Wharncliffe,
on the principle of protection to agriculture. He recollected on
that occasion the cry raised against him was " Cheap
sugar, cheap timber, and cheap corn"—( Hear, hear)
—and the Honourable Member for Halifax declared
that the Conservative candidate had no chance of being re-
turned. He (Mr. B. Denison), however, had confidence in
their success, and they were elected —(Hear, hear.) If in
1846, without a single satisfactory reason for the sudden
change being advanced even by the Right Hon. Baronet him-
self, this abrogation of protection to agriculture is
.proposed,
how could he (Mr. B. Denison) support it, and justify his
opposition to the Noble Lord, who was now his colleague, in.
1841 ?--(Hear, hear.) If he under such citcuuz-