The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-13 00:00:00

support—(Laughter)—and begging them to lose no time
in canvassing the county, so as to anticipate those who might
be disposed to vote against him.—(Hear, hear.) He reel I
assure the Noble Lord that this was the first intimation he 'sad
of the %hole proceeding. lie had also been in the county of
Nottingham for the last few days, and had seen a gentleman
who said that no such canvass had taken place, and that if it
had they would have voted for him (Mr. Hildyard), and not
for the Noble Lord.— (Hear, hear.) Now he must say that
he hoped he had now refuted the assertions of the Noble Lord
to the satisfaction of the House.—(Hear, hear.) He must
say at the same time that he thought that the charge was most
uncalled-for, and most ungenerous on the part of the Noble
Lord, particularly as he (Mr. Hildyard) was absent in the
country. The Noble Lord must have known that he (Mr.
Hildyard) had, during the whole of the election, done every-
thing, on his part 'to secure his election. He had not said a
single word which could be construed into a personal hostility.
He did not even retaliate the charges, or indulge in the person-
alities which were then iie..de use of by the Noble Lord.
These personalities were regretted by the Noble Lord's
enemies, and they were not denied by his friends. He
only trusted that his fate, which was so regretted by his
Noble Friends, would be the fate of many others at the
next general election.—(Cheer; from the protectionists. )
The Earl of LINCOLN said, he regretted taking up the
time of the House on anything personally interesting to him-
self. When he addressed the House on Friday last he was
not aware of the Hon. Member's absence from his place in
Parliament; in fact he thought he was then in the House.—
(Hear, hear.) With regard to the charge which he alluded
to on Friday night, what he (Lord Lincoln) said was, that
the Hon. Member had charged him, through his friends, with
a lavish expenditure at the election. He did not say that the
Hon. Member had charged him with bribery ; what he had
said was, that his friends were charged with lavish expendi-
ture. Now he could assure the Hon. Member, that friends
were not so easily to be found ready with a lavish expenditure ;
and as for himself (Lord Lincoln) be had not expended
more than the legal sum for the purposes of the elec-
tion.—( Hear. hear.) If the Honourable Member had stated
before what he had stated that evening, he would never have
heard a word about the matter in that House. The Hon.
Member, when applied to about such charges, refused to
explain anything about it. He could assure the Hon. Mem-
ber that he had no ill-will against him. However, as he was
unwilling to lay under the charge of having stated a falsehood,
he should say a few words more. The Hon. Member had
stated that he did not take the county by surpsise, and that
it had not been canvassed by him, and that he was not aware
that an election was to take place until he had heard of it from
him (Lord Lincoln). Now he (Lord Lincoln) was aware that
the Noble Lord did not start for the county until the Monday
after the Saturday upon which he had got his (Lord Lincoln's)
letter; while he (Lord Lincoln) should say that the
county had been canvassed two months before he had
vacated his seat, for an unknown candidate, and
for a gentleman who it was intended should be his (Lord
Lincoln's) opponent, but that he was obliged to be absent.
Well, then, upon his (Lord Lincoln's) arrival at Newark, on
the Monday morning, he was told it was known that he had
been appointed Secretary for Ireland, and he found the whole
of the election machinery at full work, by which means he was
defeated ; and the only additional expense he was put to in
consequence was the employment of an increased number
of solicitors. In conclusion, he had only now to say that the
Hon. Member was mistaken if he supposed that he (Lord
Lincoln) had the least ill-feeling towards him, and that he
(Lord Lincoln) was perfectly satisfied with the explanation he
had given.—( Hear, hear.)
COMAIUNICATION WITH NEW YORK.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, in
answer to a question, that he believed it was intended to have
weekly instead of fortnightly communications between Liver-
pool and New York.
On the order of the day being read,
Mr. DISRAELI thought that it was but right that the
House should be put into possession of the facts on which his
Noble Friend (the Noble Lord the Member for Devon) had
stated the circumstance on which he had acted. The Noble
Lord had not made any specific charge, but the statement
which he had made was founded on the fact that the Noble
Lord (the Member for the Falkirk Burghs) had engaged every
professional agent in the county.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The order of the day was again read.
Mr. NEWDEGATE regretted that on this'important ques-
tion he was placed in the prominent position he now occupied ;
but it should be borne in recollection that the Noble Lord the
Member for the East Riding of Yorkshire was in the posses-
sion of the House, and made a speech which reminded him of
the spirit of the days of Pitt and of Canning, rather than of
the spirit that pervaded the debates of the present day. He
must take permission to speak to the Noble Lord's arguments,
on whose authority, toe, he was quite ready to rely, on the state •
ments of the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home
Department (Sir J. Graham). That Noble Lord had
stated that twenty millions of bushels of corn were grown
annually in Prussia, but to this opinion he could not assent.
He had been at some pains to collect the prices of wheat at
New Orleans, the outlet of the Western States of America,
and during the last three years the average price of wheat was
245. Bd. per quarter; and, according to the best information
he could get on the subject, the expense of transit and car-
riage was 10s. per cwt. They might expect, therefore, that
wheat would be introduced into this country at an average
of 31s. ; and how, he would ask, could the British farmer
contend against prices like this ?—( Hear, hear.) He would
now refer to the statements of the Right Honourable
Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment, which appeared to him to have been particularly
directed to the Members of the protectionist party.
For his part he could see no reason for apprehension, but if
there was any danger which might have acted upon the appre-
hensions of her Majesty's Government, it was probably a
stagnation of trade.—( Hear, hear.) Now he was much of
the same opinion, but he considered that they would have a
stagnation of trade, whether these measures were carried or
not. He could not help thinking that certain measures, intro-
duced by the Government in 1044, were very much the cause of
the depression. When they remembered the speech of the Noble
Lord the Member for London, and how he warned them on
that side of the House, that unless they yielded in favour of
public opinion, when expressed in such combinations as the
1M:16-Corn-law League, they could not be surprised at
the course which had been adopted. The Noble Lord
quoted to them the course of events on the passing of the
Reform Bill, of the Catholic Emancipation Bill, when public
opinion overcame her Majesty's Government, and even when
at a later period the monster meetings and agitation in Con-
ciliation Hall had again caused the firmness of the Minister to
yield.—( Hear, hear.) He told them that success was ine-
vitable. If that were so, the Noble Lord was prepared to
yield to another agitation in another country, and its chance
of success stood in all respects equal. Upon this subject he
would allude to the opinion of the Hon. Member for Cork,
whom he did not then see in his place, but he trusted that he
might ba allowed in his absence to allude to these opinions.
The Hon. Member then quoted varirus extracts from the
speeches of Mr. O'Connell, made about the passing of the
grant to Maynooth, which augured favourably of the repeal
movement, in consequence of the passing of the Maynooth
grant, and other measures of a popular character. Were not
the present circumstances such as to jnstify the anticipations of
the Hon. Member? When the present corn-laws were re-
peated, what could prevent the Right Hon. Baronet from con-
ceding to the Hon. Member for Cork what he did not refuse
to the Hon. Member for Stockport?—( Hear, hear.) He be-
lieved the greatest loss which would be sustained by the pass-
ing of the present measure would be the loss of character and
the want of confidence in public men.—(Hear, hear.) He
fully coincided with the Hon. Member for Huntingdon that
the greatest suffering to which the public were subject
in these times was from the dearth of statesmen.
The Hon. Secretary for the Home Department had stated
that he thought the nature of the present currency system in-
consistent with the maintenance of our present state of com-
merce. Was it unreasonable of him (Mr. Newdegate) to sup-
pose that an alteration, such as proposed by the Right Hon.
Bart., was only the precursor of more serious alterations, which
it would be better for the country if they had never been
adopted. The Right Hon. Baronet said that he thought that
the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury had said something about an
exportation of bullion as soon as these measures had paFsed. In
order that he might not misquote the Right Hon. Baronet, he
would read what he had said. The Right Hon. Baronet
ageeed with the Hen. Member for Shrewsbury, that in the
present state of the monetary system an exportation of bullion
would be injurious. How did that egree with the opinion of
the Right Hon. Baronet at the Head of the Government, who
said that he did not care if an exportation of bullion took place,
and indeed he rather wished it? But main the Right Hon.
Baronet had admitted a little more than the Right Hon.
Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Ile
said, that after this panacea of free trade had been enacted,
when the time of peculiar emergency and scarcity arrived
there must be a large exportation of bullion. Who could
doubt that that would be the case ?—( Hear, hear.) He
would ask the House, knowing the effects of an
exportation of bullion remembering the prices of
1825—(Hear, hear)—and the prices of 1839, whether after
they had reduced the wages of labour in this country, which
he contended they must do, in order to gain the extension of
trade which they desired—( Hear, hear)—whether such a com-
mercial crisis would be felt more or less ?—( Hear, hear.) But
then the Right Hon. Baronet went on to explain how, in the
ordinary course of trade, the opening of the ports would pre-
vent the exportation of bullion. The Right Hon. Baronet had
said, "he cculd not separate the question of the foreign from
the home trade, and that as soon as the consumption of our
manufactures at home would not be equal to the demand, those
goods would be exported to the foreign market, which would
soon be glutted, and in that case it would be necessary to take
payment for those goods in'corn." Well, now, supposing that
was the case, all that would be effected, and the manufacturers
would have the opportunity of shifting the loss, which would
be entailed upon them, by the reduction in the prices come-
quent upon the glutted state of the market. There would be
a forced importation of corn into the home market, and the
manufacturers would relieve themselves from the loss in the
first instance, by causing a glut of corn, which they would take
in exchange for their goods. But how would that act upon
the country? Every one who knew anything of forced ex-
changes of goods would know that it was quite clear that
bullion would be brought back as well as grain. They would
then have a forced exportation in payment or the
goods they sold in the foreign markets, and they would nut be
able to recover from that glut, because the remittances would
be in corn, and all their ordinary imports, which did not de-
pend upon the exclusion of the foreign trade, would be, dur-
ing the whole time abstracting their bullion. The conic-
quence of this state of things would be distress to all classes
in this country. He believed that when Adam Smith and
Ricardo recommended free trade, they contemplated a different
system of currency to the present system ; and, in fact, the
Right Hon. Baronet had admitted it. He thought this coun-
try would have bitterly to regret the determination of the
Right Honourable Baronet. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman at the head of the Home Department had talked
much of the fall of prices in agricultural produce.
He would call his attention to the opinion of Malthus,
in his letters to the landed interest. He had abandoned 111iec
cere
principles; but were they good in 1826 and bad now? v
circumstances changed, or the pressure of the national debt less?
Mr. Malthus said that if the price of wheat were to fall to
50s. there could be no doubt the stockholder would be bene-
fited at the expense of the industrious man, and instead of the
interest paid by Government being five per cent., according
to the present monetary system, the result would be that they
would in reality pay seven, eight, and nine per cent. The
price that was contemplated was not, however, 505., it was
355. lie would now turn to the question whether the corn-
laws were just or unjust. ft was a novel position for the Right
Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State when he call' d thecorn.
laws unjust. It was in fact a virtual confession that
ofthis
he had
been unjust for a period of thirty Nears to the people
country. He (Mr. Newdegate) felt assured that the effect. of
these laws would be to drive seven or eight millitn quarters
of erain out of the market. The home markets would be in-
undated with foreign corn. He maintained that this country
would never be rendered independent of foreign countries by
free trade. lie had expressed reasons which induced him
to believe that the corn-laws were not unjust. He would
advert to the statements which had been made by the Noble
Lord the Member for London. He had advised the Members
of the Upper House of Parliament, as they would per-
serve their position, to succumb to the popular
feeling.—(Hear, bear.) He, however, as an humble
individual would recommend them to convince the people of
this country that they had the honesty to act in accordance
with the dicates of prudence and wisdom. The Upper House
was a court of justice as well as an arena for legislation.
Grievous misstatements existed as to whether the population of
this country were dependent or not on agriculture, He had

analysed
inaccurat
tvofp--

the statements of
e. He had tested
1.! Hon ,e an anal;

M. Guizot and h,
their veracity. and

lad found
he would

„e. es. eeaen to iieeottralae
Members on bails sides of the House, art.! he proved, by hie
account of the census of 1841, that the majority of the popula-
lation of this country were engaged in agricultural pursuits.—
(Hear, hear.) The same gentleman proved that the census
had been taken upon an erroneous data, and this Mr. Spack.
man contended would be manifest, if the instructions
for preparing the census were laid before the world. He
(Mr. Newdegate) believed that it would, and it was his inten-
tion to avail himself of the earliest opportunity of moving for
those instructions.—( Hear, hear.) The census, in fact, had
grossly misled the public, and he would endeavour to find out
how it was, or for what reason so palpable a fraud had been
practiced upon the woild.— ( Hear, hear.) Why, in many
countries that were purely agricultural, and carried on little or
no trade in manufactures, the majority of the population were
stated to be engaged in manufactures. He believed, however,
if a proper return were obtained, it would be shown that there
were 771,689,engaged in agriculture over the number engaged
in manufactures. The real number, he believed, would stand
thus :-16,949 000 of the inhabitants of this country were en-
gaged in agriculture, and 9,837,000 in manufactures. This,
in his opinion, was sufficiently conclusive against the present
policy of the Government, and he therefore would not detain
the House further, but, thanking them for their attention, he
would sit down, regretting the course Government were pur-
suing, and declaring his intention to vote against the third
reading of this Bill.—( Cheers. )
Mr. PALMER said it was only of late that free-trade no.
tions and opinions had made any way, either in the House or
the Cabinet, and he dared to say, if every Member could put
his hand upon his heart and vote conscientiously for this mea-
sure, two-thirds of the House would be opposed to it.—(Hear,
hear.) He could boar out the opinion of the Hon. Member
for Warwickshire, that the population, like many other returns
bearing upon the subject, could not be relied upon, and he for
one had long ago protested against the fallacy of these returns.
—( Hear, hear.) They were prepared by officers under the
thumb of the Government, who well knew the inclinations and
opinions of the members of the Executive ; and these returns
were prepared, not with a view of putting the public in pos-
session of correct information upon the subjects upon which
they treated, but of pandering to the opinions and inclinations
of those who constituted the Government.—( Hear, hear. 1
He repeated, then, that these returns were falacions, and he
hoped, in future, no reliance would be placed upon them,
without it could be shown that they had been fairly snd cor-
rectly made.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to the measure it-
self, he was firmly convinced that it would prove ruinous to
the majority of the inhabitants of this country ; and if this
House did not throw it out, he trusted the other would.
An How. MEMBSa moved that the House be counted.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but forty Members
being present,
Mr. PALMER proceeded. He contended that the repeal
of the corn-laws would not extend our manufactures, because
as the manufactures of other countries increased the less those
countries would require from us. In all those articles which
they could not do without he thought they ought to depend
upon themselves for. Corn could not be done without, and
therefore its growth in this country ought to be protected.
'lhose who would first suffer by the measures of the Govern-
ment would be the small farmers, and from them distress would
spread to all classes in the country.
Captain POLHILL believed that this measure would very
materially affect the interests of the tenant farmers. In-
deed so strongly was his impreosion upon that subject that he
tl ought it necessary some time ago to press upon the attention
of the House the necessity of introducing into this measure a
clause which would enable that class of agriculturists to claim
such amounts as they should prove before a Select Committee
to have lost by the operation of this measure. The Right
Honourable Gentleman in the chair had however informed
him that it was out of his power to propose any
such clause. An article in the Times stated that if such a
Committee were appointed, they would have no less than
300,000 applicants for relief. Now, if he were of opinion that
so large a portion of his fellow-creatures would be iniured by
this measure, he should moat decidedly give his vote against the
third reading of the Bill before the House. The progress of
this measure had been delayed, to the great injury of the agri-
cultural, as well as the manufacturing classes; and he trusted
that the Legislature would speedily settle the question either
one way or the other. He trusted that, after the passing of this
measure, those gentlemen who had formed the association called
” The Anti-Corn.law League," would do everything in their
power to dissolve that association, which might in itself be
legal, but which at the same time he considered unconstitu-
tional. This great measure had been introduced as an experi-
ment, and he sincerely hoped that it might realise the most
sanguine expectations of its promoters. He hoped that their
cheering prophecies would be fulfilled. He could not sit down
without expressing his sincere thanks to the Noble Lord the
Member for Lynn (Lord G. Bentinek ), for the very able man-
ner in which he had advocated the claims of the agriculturists.
He had certainly done great credit to himself and the party
which he led. Considering it of the utmost importance to the
well-being of the country that this question should be speedily
settled, he (Captain Polhill) would give his vote for the third
reading of this measure, in order that the excitement which at
present prevailed might be allayed.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. BENNETT wished to address himself to a point in
which he had for the last fifty years taken the greatest interest,
viz., the interests of the labouring classes of this country ; and
he wished to know from the members of her Majesty's Govern-
ment how they could prove that this measure would effect that
object ? The lion. Member proceeded to quote from a speech
delivered by Mr. Charles Buller, on 7th March, 1844, in which
that Hon. Gentleman said that the condition of the manufac-
turing labourers was far worse than that of the agricultural
labourers. It was contended by all that this measure
would tend to increase the prosperity of the mane.
lecturers at the expense of the agriculturists; the
labouring poor of this country would consequently be brought
more into large towns, where, as had been shown by the Hon.
Member for Liskeard (Mr. C. Buller), their lives would be
shortened fifty per cent.; and yet that same Hon. Gentlemen
now came forward to give his support to this measure. If the
wages of the agricultural labourer were low, it was owing to
their employers having imitated the example of the manufac-
turers, by buying in the cheapest market and selling in the
dearest.—( Hear.) Who could blame them ? It was human
nature. Even if this measure would increase the wealth and
greatness of this country, he wished to know whether the hap-
piness of the community at large would increase with the in-
crease of wealth and greatness ? And if it did not (which was
his firm opinion), he contended that no sufficient case had
been made out for the adoption of this measure. He contended
the Government had not acted with sufficient foresight in thus
proposing a measure the result of which they did not know.
Mr. PLUMPTRE also considered the experiment about to
be made by her Majesty's Ministers was a very rash one.
They had thrown everything into confusion, and divided a
great party, and destroyed the confidence of a large
party, and, how matters would finally be settled
he really could not tell ; and he thought the effect of these
measures on the question of
_tithes had not been sufficiently
considered ; and he maintained that it was necessary that the
price of corn in this country should be kept up to 51s. per
quarter, in order to enable the corn-growers of this country to
cope with the foreign producer. The injury which would be
caused by the passing of this measure, would be one which
would extend to all classes of the community, and poverty.
ruin, and misery would spread far and wide ; and he hoped
the evils he anticipated from the passing of this measure, would
not take place, and that the good providence of God would con-
tinue to watch over the country, and preserve it from these
evils. He had no selfish feelings in the matter, and it was
with regret that he felt himself bound in his conscience to give
his vote against the third reading of the Bill.
Mr. HASTIE thought it would be desirable to know the
proportion of the rental of the United Kingdom which was
received from corn.
Sir JOHN WALSH said that the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Secretary for the Home Department, when discussing the
subject on the previous night, passed over the arguments of the
Honourable Member for Somersetshire with the same careless..
ness as he threw aside his osi n previous opinions—( Hear, hear)
—but he did not consider that his Hon. Friend had made out
an unanswerable case that the free importation of corn would
be most disadvantageous to the country, and to the agricultural
interests in particular. He would ask, was it not an admitted
fact that corn could be grown and transported from the northern
parts of Europe at a less cost than it could be produced by the
English farmer, and it could not be too generally known that
that corn was about five shillings a quarter better tban that
ordinarily grown by the British farmer.—(Hear, hear.) It
was well said that there was no royal road to learn, mathematics, but let them depend upon it there
was no cheap way to improve land.—( Hear, hear. )
Another branch of the subject to which he would allude, arid
which was lost sight of entirely during this debate, was the
operation of these laws on the price of wages. The Right
Hon. Baronet (the Secretary for the Home Department) said
that the price of the food lead no connexion with the price n!
wages. That might apply to such a country as America. In
Jamaica also the theory might be applicable, but the cave of
England was totally different. This country was densely
populated, and there was a rapid increase in the population
constantly going on. The Right Hon. Gentleman has referred
to the experience of the last three years to justify the proposed
measures, but he (Sir J. Walsh) feared that such a space ot
time was not a proper criterion to form a correct judg-
ment on this point. There might be many circumstances
to operate so as apparently to justify the conclusion come to,
but he did not believe that the theory would hold good i.
applied to a longer period. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir
R. Peel) said that he was actuated by the most disinterested
and purest motives. It was not necessary for him to make suet.
a declaration to him (Sir J. Walsh), for he avowed his implicit
confidence in the purity and integrity of the Right Hon.
Baronet's intentions.--( Hear, hear.) But while he gave him
credit for disinterestedness of purpose, he could not avoid
stating that the course which he now proposed to pursue was
an enormous error—an error which shipwrecked statesmen
and shipwrecked states.—(Hear, hear.) What he said he
said with the utmost respect to the Right Hon. Baronet, but
he deeply regretted the course he had taken, though he couli
no' help expressing his belief in the integrity of the motives by
which he was actuated.—( Hear, hear.) The argument of the
Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, as to the melt:users:,
causing a fall in the price of agriculturaliprnoduce,
opinion, that .
upon a fallacy. He wished to remind the I o . Gentleman,ife
those who held that eaffse e a nodf
that argument would operate in two ways. If
it caused a fall in agricultural produce,reduction would go to the benefit of the labourer.
He wotuhat
m,
a wasr gu m ea n t
awnodud l
or
dg.o
strengthens
to
therefore, imprethsse utprnpuontltseetmie,nt,hatthasut
chthains
'
question, and not one in which the labourer was concerned. If the
prices fell, the labouring classes would be proportionably benefited
He would, therefore, impress upon the Hon. Gentleman not to
place his argument on such a foundation. The Hon. Gentle-
man also referred to the question of capital, but he would ask
were not the labouring classes the origin of all the wealth and
prosperity of the country ? The Hon. Gentleman also re-
ferred to the prices of wages bearing a relative proportion to
the price of food, he denied that such was the case, for it had
been over and over again proved that there was no
such dependence, and it had been shown
that the labourer was much better off when
food was cheap, and his wages were proportionably higher than
when it was dear. —( Hear, hear.) The principle reason why
he rose was to allude to the arguments which had been made
use of with respect to the condition of Ireland. It had been
said theie was no distress in that country. This was an erro-
neous statement. The markets did not furnish a sufficient
pricesi
nr ser iro neb
up:pi; eft
sr
an
nbiartgou Irelandfmo argument
awn a sa potatoesc
fcouurwnaedt accurate
ejf
nodmogtm
that
ttr
extremely
circumstanceel], this sh paint,igh ii)
in favour of the condition of the people, it was an erroneous
one, for the reason why the food was cheap was because
the people were not in a condition to purchase it
Where the people were in a condition to purchase food, it hed.
risen to a very alarming extent. Corn had risen, and oats had
risen beyond the means of the people to purchase, and this was
good proof that distress really did exist to a most lamentable
degrees. From the causes which he had stated, the markets
had not shown the distress in its real bearing. He maintained
that it was for the interest of the aristocracy to give to all
classes of the people food at the very
cheapest rate. The
people could not be contented without such a state of
things were brought about. He might be told that
reducing the price of food would also bring dowel
the rents of the landlords. He
did not care for that as sal
Irish landowner—as an English representative he felt bound h.
meet so great a change when it was demanded for the good ot
the people. He would bear his share of the injury, as it was
his duty and every landowner's duty when the wants of the
country required it,—(Hear, hear.) For such reasons be felt