The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-14 00:00:00

Ant

LONDON, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1846.

Lord DENMAN, in the absence of the Lord-Chancellor,
took his seat on the Woolsack in the House of Lords, shortly
after Five o'clock.
Earl SOMERS presented several petitions against any alte-
ration in the corn-laws.
On the motion of Lord DENMAN, the Administration of
Criminal Justice Bill went through Committee.
The Earl of REDESDALE presented a petition from an indi-
vidual complaining of the course pursued by many parties
with respect to railway Bills, and praying that their Lord-
ships would make it a standing order of the House that all
parties, before they should be permittted to introduce
railway Bills, should be bound to prove that the provisions
of the Registration Act had been complied with.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE moved the adoption of the resolu-
tions contained in the second report from the Lords Corn
mittee on Railways, which was agreed to.
The Public Works Ireland Bill went through Committee,
and was ordered to be reported •n Monday.
In answer to a question from the Earl of CLA RENDON,
Tlw; Earl of AnErtoxxx stated that he had no objection to
lay on the table of the House the correspondence that had
taken place between the Spanish Minister and himself rela-
tive to the duty on Cuba sugar.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice of his inten-
tion, on Tuesday next, to ask the Noble Duke ( WELLING-
TON ) the cause of the dismissal of Mr. GUNSTONE from the
Poor-law Commission in Ireland.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said he would take care that
the Noble Marquis should have the information he required
on the day he had stated.
The House then adjourned till Monday.

The House of Commons sat at Four o'clock.

The Sheriff of London presented a petition from the city of
London in favour of a repeal of the corn-laws. Several rail.
way Bills were read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.
A new writ for North Nottinghamshire was ordered,

room of Mr. G. KNIGHT, deceased.
Lord DUNCANNON brought in the Matlock, Manchester,
and Buxton Railway 13il1, which was read a first,

ordered to be read a second time.
Mr. STRUTT brought under the consideration of the ouse
an irregularity that had taken place in a petition for a rail
way Bill, which led to some discussion, in the course of which,
Mr. GREENE gave notice that he would move an order to the
effect that no petition for a private Bill should be received by
the House, unless it was regularly signed by all the parties.
Mr. FERRAND gave notice that on Monday he should ask
the First Lord of the Admiralty, if he should then be in office,
whether he proposed to fill up the two offices now vacant in
consequence of the resignation of two of the Lords of the
Admiralty : and if he were afraid to:appeal to the countryiby
nominating to the vacant offices, he should move that the
offices be abolished as useless.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD gave notice that be should ask
the Government on a future day if they intended to bring in
any measure during the present session to amend the law of
landlord and tenant in Ireland. _ _

On the motion of Mr. LIDDELL, that the petition of the
Shipowners' Society be printed,
Mr. HrME asked if it was intended to introduce any mea-
sure carrying out the recommendations of the Committee
with regard to regulating the merchant seamen's service ?
Sir G. CLERK said that Government were in communica-
tion with the Shipowners' Society on the subject.
Mr. FORSTER denied that the petition expressed the senti-

ments of the great body of shipowners of Great Britain.
Mr. LIDDELL, replied, and the motion for printing the pe-
tition was agreed to.
Mr. JAMES asked if the Government had received any ac-
counts of the dreadful affray which had taken place at Pen-
rith among the labourers employed on the Lancaster and
Carlisle Railway, and what measures had been adopted to
preserve the public peace.
Sir J. GRAHAM had received no official account whatever
from the Magistrates of the existence of any such dis-
turbance.

Mr. EWART asked if the Government had ever considered
whether it was necessary to make railway companies exer-
cise some superintendence over the labourers?

Sir G. CLERK said that the promoters of railway Bills
were obliged to provide a certain number of special consta-
bles to superintend the works.
In answer to a question from Sir R. INGLIS, as to the inten-
tion of the Government with regard to the rebuilding of
Westminster-bridge,
Mr. CARDWELL said the subject had been considered by
the Government, and that they had directed weekly reports
to be made as to the state of the bridge, and that when any-
thieg special occurred the attention of the Government was
directed to it, so that ample care was taken of the public
safety.
Sir R. Iscus considered that answer unsatisfactory. He
begged to ask when the Government considered the new
palace at Westminster would be ready for the accommoda-
tion of Parliament, and if it were not ready by 1847, whether
there would be any objection to the appointment of a Com-
mittee of Inquiry ?
➢lr. CA RDW ELL thought it possible that the expectation
of Hon. Gentlemen that Parliament would sit in the new
House in 1847 would not be realised.—(A laugh.) He, how-
ever, thought it would be neither necessary nor discreet to
appoint a Committee.
In answer to a question from Mr. Com-Err, of Athlone,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated, in conse-
quence of a decision of the Judges in the Exchequer
Chamber overruling a decision of the Court of Queen's Bench,
and deciding that certain parties were entitled, in conse-
quence of the enactments of the corn-law of 1842, the re-
venue would suffer a certain loss, but it was still under the
consideration of the Government whether an appeal should
not be made to a higher tribunal.
On the motion of Sir W. CODRINGTON, a new writ was
ordered for the election of a Member for East Gloucester-
shire, in the room of the Hon. F. CHARTERIS, who had ac-
cepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
On the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate
being read, an immense number of petitions en the subject of
the corn• laws were presented.
Sir HowsnD Doccf.As then rose to resume the adjourned
debate, and announced his intention to vote against
the proposition of the Government for removing pro-
tection from British agriculture. He had always
voted against a repeal of the corn-laws; be had fre-
quently spoken against the measure, and in reviewing
his past career on that subject, he found that he had nothing
to explain and nothing to regret, except the insufficient
mannner in which he had advocated the cause
of protection. His opinions were unchanged, and in
accordance with these opinions be should vote, for
he considered that protection was not only necessary for
British interests, but also for the interests of our colonies
which were unrepresented in that House, and which were not
properly understood. He considered that the experience of
the last three years furnished no correct data on which to form
an opinion ; and, therefore, he considered that the Right Hon.
Baronet had failed to give any just reason for his change of opi-
nion. The corn-laws had not caused the distress of 1840, 1841,
and 1842, neither had the partial adoption of free-trade princi-
plesioccasionedthe prosperity of the subsequent years,
which prosperity,
it should be recollected, had occurred
while the country was subject to a corn-law. Protection, he
believed, was not for the benefit of one class, but for that of
all ; and he would not expose the British artisan
unpro-
tected to competition with the protected labour of thefo-
reigner. He denied that the importation of grain produced a
contemporaneous export of manufactures; and a
comparison of the exports and imports of 1836
and 1341, and 1842, would prove the truth of his position.
He considered it would be good policy to open the home
market and the West India market to our corn-producing
colonies. He had supported the measure for the introduction
of Canadian corn, but he felt bound to oppose the opening
of the home market to the foreign corn producer,
The Canada Corn Bill was a solemn compact, entered into
between the legislative bodies of Canada and this country, and
this measure not only violated that compact, but extin-
guished the whole colonial system, and made all the colonies
for commercial purposes free and independent states, leaving
to them the entire regulation of their own commercial affairs
It was a most incorrect assumption to declare that Mr. Hus-
KISSON was a free. trader. He was a Protectionist, and his
colonial trade Acts protected British commodities in the colo-
nial markets by differential duties ranging from 10 to 70
per cent. All the colonies now imposed duties on the im-
portation of the products of other colonies. It could only
be by the formation of them all into a league to establish
perfoct free trade. The United States and the Zoarereirl timid

such a union of sovereign states, with perfect free trade
among themselves, with stringent protection against all others.
We might form such a league with our colonies and our East
India dependencies, and such a league as that would conduce

to the power and the prosperity of the empire; but the esta
blishment of the proposed system of free •trade would
render the formation of such a league impossible. By

his machinery they had destroyed the manufactures of
[ndia, and had forced the Indian manufacturers to become

sugar cultivators, and now by the introduction of free-trade
they were about to ruin these Indian agriculturists. The
Hon. and Gallant Officer then read several extracts from
the works of Mr. Huskisson to prove that it was most im•

politic to depend upon foreigners for a supply of corn.
After apologising for having trespassed so long on the House,

the Hon. and Gallant Officer concluded by stating that,
giving the Prime Minister all credit for honesty of purpose,
so strong were his convictions as to the mischievous nature

of the proposed measure, that it was his duty to vote against

t as an experiment perilous and unnecessary.
Viscount VILLIERS gave his.support to the measures proposed
)3, the Government, because he hoped it would prove to be a

permanent settlement of this much agitated questhn.

Mr. Scow had hoped that he should have, been enabled to
afford the Right Hon. Baronet that support which he
had always hitherto afforded him ; but it was! with pain

and regret, that, after a careful examination, of the sub-
ject, he felt now bound to vote against the Government.
He had always looked up to the Right Hon. Baronet with
respect, but he mus' say that this sudden change of opinion
on the part of the Right Hon. Baronet had come upon him
with most stunning effect. But acting upon his
own conscientious convictions, he felt bound to declare
that he felt it his duty to oppose the Government measure
The Right Hon. Baronet was in the position of a counsel
who, having received a brief and a fee on one side, went into
court and agreed on the other, recommending his original
clients to abandon their cause altogether, and who was fol-
lowed by his juniors, while the only reason they would con_

descend to give was, that they had changed their minds.
The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read various quota-

tions from the speeches of the Members of the present Go-
vernment, for the purpose of showing that their opinions
had been a series of contradictions ever since they had aban-

doped the principles of protection. He believed that the
measures now proposed would produce most cruel and disas-
trous results. The proposed measure was wide and bold ;
but he doubted whether it was wise and politic, and he feared
it would not prove successful. He was no ultra-protection-

ist,—he was no advocate of any unalterable law,—he was
opposed to monopoly,—he knew how liable a tax
upon grain was to be called a tax upon the bread
of the people; and, therefore, he thought the dut3
upon corn should never exceed the amount sufficient

to give due encouragement to home cultivation ;
and he should have been fully prepared to have gone with
the Right Hon. Baronet in reducing the amount of the pre-
sent protection to agriculture, for he felt that the expenses
of the farmer had been considerably reduced.
Sir R. PEEL asked the Honourable Member for whom he
was counsel?
Mr. Scorr, under considerable excitement, declared that
he was counsel for no one but his own opinions. He was
the hired advocate of no one—he was the delegate of no one.
fie would have followed the Right Honourable Baronet if he
had remained true to his colours; and if he had differed with
his constituents on this subject, he should have felt it his
duty again to appeal to them. The proposed measure woul
inflict a heavy blow and a great discouragement to the agri-
cultural interest ; would diminish the supply of food, create
great fluctuation in price, and lower the wages of the
labourer. It was said that this measure was but a mere
fiscal regulation ; why, it was a mere fiscal regulation that
cost this country the United States. He considered
this measure an innovation on the Constitution of Eng-
land, and it should never become the law of the land with
his consent. It was said that it was not necessary to con-
tinue protection in England, while it was admitted to be
necessary for the colonies. He couldnot see why any distinc-
tion should be drawn between the two. He could
not agree with the Right Hon. Baronet in the -propriety
of adopting his mode of atmospheric railway legislation.
_ _

Mr. WARD considered the Hon. Member who had just sat
down was extremely difficult to follow ; for there
was not a single sentence that he had uttered
which he did not contradict in the next. They
had waited long enough for the landlords to decide on
the subject of protection, and he thought it was now high
time for the people to have a voice in the matter. .Negotia-
tion had been triedon this question and it had led to nothing ;
was it, he would ask, too late to try example ?
The first vote he gave in that House was in favour of the
corn-laws ; but his views on that subject, like those of the
Right Hon. Baronet and the Noble Lord the Member for the
City of London, ;had changed, and that after ma-
ture deliberation. If there were burdens on the
land, was it not monstrous to be talking about
them, unless they could be shown? He had for three
years moved for a Committee on the subject, and every time
he had been defeated. He would give the extensive propo-
sition of the Right Hon Bart. his hearty and cordial support,
believing it to be the means of salvation for the
agriculturists themselves. At the present moment such was
the excitement of the agricuiturists that they were unfit and
incompetent to manage their own affairs. When a class
arrayed itself against a community, it would soon lose its self-
respect. All that he had in the world depended upon land,
but still he was convinced that protection to agriculture
ought no longer to exist. Protection was at variance
with the intelligence and just demands of the country.
He trusted that the majority with which the proposition of
the Government would be carried in this House would be of
such a nature as to induce it to meet with that reception in
another place to which it was entitled.
Mr. Wm. MILES supported the amendment. He could not
consent to any compromise ; things must either remain as
they were, or they must adopt the proposition of the Go-
vernment, or that of the free-traders. They were now
attempting to legislate against the experience of centuries,
It was the height of madness to take away protection at
once. It appeared to him astonishing that the failur eof
the crop in one article of food, should have caused such
changes in the minds of public men. If the question
was between the plan of the Right Honourable
Baronet and that of the Noble Lord the Member for the
city of London, he as an agriculturist must confess
that he should prefer the immediate abolition of the corn-
laws to the termination of it in three years. He believed
that less misery and wretchedness would be caused by the
Noble Lord's plan than that of the Right Hon. Baronet.
He contended that the country was not prepared for these
changes—that, instead of gaining adherents;the Right Hon.
Baronet was losing supporters ; and that, if the operatives
and labourers understood their own interest, they would one
and all rise against these measures, and with curses execrate
the time that even a free-trade Minister sat upon the Minis-
terial bench. He believed the Right Hon. Baronet had acted
from Conservative motives, but he believed he was pur-
suing a course of policy destructive to the country ;
but if they were to have free-trade, he much preferred that
open, manly, straightforward conduct of the Noble Lord,
the Member for London, to the temporising, cautious policy
of the present Minister.
After mutual explanations from Mr.BAILLIE and Mr. MILES,
The Earl of 31Ancii moved that the debate be adjourned.
Lord NORTHLAND considered the measures would be ruinous
to the agricultur.•.l interest; but he feat bound to vote for them,
because he had confidence in the Rig ;ht Hon. Baronet, but he
had none in the Noble Lord. He thought the question must
be settled, and that it had better be settled by the Right
Hon. Baronet.
Mr. FERItAND would like to ask the Noble Lord, what con-
fidence he bad in the Right Hon. Bart inet, when he was drag-
ged out of the coal-hole to vote for liberal education ?
(A laugh.)
Colonel T. Wool), considering The measure absolutely
necessary for the maintenance of the prosperity of the coun-
try, would vote in favour of it.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN complained of the extreme in-
convenience of the Members availinz themselves of the motion
of adjournment to discuss the question in debate. He had a
perfect right to make a new speech, on the subject, which he
was not going to do. This was not a question of party, and
he protested against the precedent which was set of raising a
debate on the main question on the question of adjourn-
ment.

The debate was then adjourned witil Monday.
The other orders of the day having been disposed of, the
House adjourned.

Rumours, to which full credence is given in several quer-
' ters, lead to the belief that a mutiny has broken out in the
Admiralty, and that it will require all the tact and courage
of Sir R. PEEL and Lord ELLENBOROUGH to subdue the
rebels. One report states that Sir GEORGE COCKBURN and
Admiral BowLEs have both resigned on the ground that
they have insuperable objections to Captain Rous as a col-
league. This is extremely prsbable, for the Gallant Officer
is a well-known Reformer—l.te has denounced the crying
blood in his veins,
aa
ob s ems inust th e
therefore navy ;he
be regarded
ardedm weityhorhegutmost jealousy and
suspicion by.a disciple of the old school, like Sir G. COCKBURN.
In our opinion, however, this is net half the truth. Lord
ELLENBOROUGIL is the great bugbear. ; strong qualms were felt
on his appointment, the old rotten system was in danger
from a man who had created such alarm at the India House,
and Captain Rous' accession was only the feather which de-
cided the balance. During the whole of Sir R. PEEL'S ad-
ministration Sir G. COCKBURN has had everything his own
way ; Lord HADDINGTON, never vsiy resolute, and latterly
labouring under infirm health, yielded his own convictions,
perhaps, to those of the first naval Lord, and the junior
Lords were kept in such excellent and severe discipline, that
they were very cautious in b awarding an opinion adverse to
the venerable Admiral. Thee Admiralty has hitherto exer-
cised a sort of imperium in imperio ; it has the power
of appointing, or what comes to the same
recommending, all officers to ships and stations; it re.etiate.,
its internal economy with the most wonderful independearee
and self-satisfaction, and B. ;ems not at all dis,posed to rec vise
such a body as the Cabi net, or such a personage as Prime
Minister. It was natural, therefore, that a tremendous com-
motion would be excited its the decayed tenement when the
old crew were invaded by mu ch radicals as ErzawnonouGit
and Rous, and the sacred .fabric was touched by the un-
hallowed hands of a thoroug h Reformer, like the First Lord
of the Treasury. But what is this commotion to the public?

A new system of manageinent for the navy Las for

tmany years been demanded, not by the press only, but
by some of our most diiti;:istgthcci naval officers,