The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-16 00:00:00

IMIIERJ A 1., ,t 1
I.IOt;SE OF LOTUS, June 15.
Their Lordships rnct, to-day at Five o'clock.
IMESSAGY_; FROM THE COMMONS.
lilMise.ssengers from Pae liouie of Commons broaghb up several

CORN-LAWS.
The Duke rt; BUCKINGFIA NI presented petitions from
Cornwall and several other places against the corn-laws.
The Earl of ELDON presented petitions front Lancashire
and other h,laces to the same off-et.
Lori
FREE CHURCH SITES.
'C AMPBELL presented petitions from Ayr and other
'"aces in Scotland, respecn ng the omitting of sites for the
a„
-ise'.:ion of places of worship for the Free Church of Scotland.
NEWRY AND ENNISK.D. LEN RAILWAY.
The third reading of this Bin having been moved, a discus-
sion ensued.
• In reply to a question,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said as securities were given by
the parties promoting the Bill that the harbour should not be
Injured by the railway, the eor;ent of the Admiralty was aiven
to its passing in the way complained of by several Noble Loi ds.
Lord STANLEY ronshiered that there was no ground for
postponing the decision of the Committee.
Some confusion prevailed here, and after a few words from
locale Noble Loras,
Lord CAMPBELL said that he hoped that they would read
the Bill a third aime.
Strangers were ',hen ordered to withdraw.
On re-enterir,g we found that the amendment bad been
Withdrawn ataa the Bill had been read a third time.
CREAIARE AGRICULTUn AL PROTECTION
SOCIETY.
Lod, DELAMERE repeated that what he had said the other
blh'c as to his never having subscribed to the Cheshire Agri-
co/ntaral Protection Society,' or any other association of that
Sort, Was perfectly true, notwithatanding what had been said by
the Noble Duke on the cross benches athe Duke of Richmond).
At the time when the Anti-Corn-law League sent its emis-
saries throughout the cauntry distributing pamphlets to alienate
tenants from landlmals, and interfere with the registrat'on,
arid not only with that but many other things, at
that time he with many others attended a meeting at
blorthaich, with a view to taking measures to counteract the
operations of the Anti-Corn-law League. It was true that he
contributed his poor pittance, only '25!., that the committee
*light have funds to pay for legal advice, for advertising, and
inch like. The .Noble Earl denied, however, having been
either before or after a member of the Central Agt-icultural
Assoanation. Had he known at the time that the Noble
litete made his statement, that he was making such a state-
Wtent, he would have risen at the time; and he did so now, at
the risk of delaying important business, only that he might
'vindicate his own character.
The Duke of RICHMOND said it seemed that Noble
Lords in Chester did not hear or did not remember much.
Ile did not charge the Noble Lord with any offence beyond
What had been committed by many other Noble Lords—the
changing of their opinions on the question of protection,
and that the Noble Lord had been a member of
hprotection society. He (the Duke of Richmond) had
ad in 11. s pocket since the commencement of the discussion
" the corn-laws a list of Noble Lords who had belonged to
rote.ction societies—( Laughter)—and before it had concluded
"Would in all likelihood read it, when it would be found very
turious and instructive.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) In Inas&
tallere was a large meeting in the county to which the Noble
Lord belonged. It met in the Market-hall, and it
:Is Se large that it had to adjourn elsewhere.—(Hear,
,:ears) The first resolution which was proposed at that
Feting, and then had heard from the Noble Lord that he
Was present at it, was to the effect that " the society be
f"'Med for the protection of agriculture, to be called the
Chester Agetcuitural Protection Soociety, and that
the society be not only formed to protect the landed interer
tegsinat the destructive proceedings of the Anti-Cern-law
a_agoes but also to oppose all measures that may be brought
'"rward having a tendency to deprive the agricultural inte-
ta_ie.t of such protection as they are so justly entitled
suca society anot fere with any
Nit. I b*
ect except That those haying )referenceinter
to agriculture,
"batsu J
that every endeavour shall be made to afford the tenant
ltreturn for his capital, and his labourer a fair day's wage
Rightfair day's work.' " This reso:ution was moved by the
ight Hon. Lord Delamere.—(Cheers and laughter). It is
,1° that paper (continued the Noble Duke), that I rest
jutlY‘ justification. I agree with that tesolution, anti was
E°Pea the Noble Lord did also?
bELAM ERE was pr. sent at the meeting, which was
olda_anomerously attended, so numerously that: they we ,e
Lace to adjourn it; but that adjournment did not take
a•ce from the large numbers that attended, but took place from
!ing ousted by the Anti-Corn-law League.—( Laughter.) The
nsoltitioo was moved by him as the Noble Duke had stated.
for
it was with many others in connexion with the the subject
ffr Which the meeting had been called together; but then the y
ast recollect that it was moved at a time when the Anti-
-law League first introduced paid emissaries into Che-
rea-it was when these persons introduced themtaslves into that
otinty, and endeavoured to separate the fat mers from the land-
owners, and the labourers from the far.ners, and to create
general disunion in the county—that this meeting was eon-
vetted, for the purpose specified, as well as to promote the
Itegistration of votes; but he never considered that he be-
tbßed to that society ; and he could prove by two of the
;"'rgest landowners in the county that he had been frequently
'Wilted to attend their meetings, but that he had refused to do
sch, And, besides, he never paid a halfpenny to it, except 25'.
'(Rear, hear, and laughter)—which he subscribed to coun-
teractt. in some measure the machinations of the Anti-Corn-
dnite League.
ani,aOrd COAIBERMERE read the letter from the Secretary
--‘,.;°13 Agricultural Protection Society, in Cheshire, in which
139eav stated that Lord Delamere was a vice-president of the
tety•---(Great laughter.)

CORN-LAWS.
kne confusion here ensued I,om the fact of several Noble
yird_s not understanding the position in which the question of
the Cornlaws then stood.
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated that it arose purely
'ura an accident that on the last n'elit of debate they did not
w°, into committee on the Bill. Theirs Chairman of the Com-
rtee not having been present, it was agreed by their Lord-
IPs present that they should go into Committee that day
'Without any further debate.
Lord STANLEY confirmed the statement of his Lord -
Chip, and hoped that he would not be deemedi rreeu
ofl a r
their
hreei
r-
tenting a petition, which was every wayworthy
attention. It was a petition from certain bankers and merchants
in London. They had not petitioned their Lords, nor would
they have now done so, had it not been for the petition which
Vas presented, he believed, by his Noble Friend the President
of the Board of Trade, purporting to represent the general feel-
ing of the bankers, merchants, and commercial men of the city
of London, in which it was stated that, in their opinion, the
Passing of this measure would lead to the progressive prosperity
"1 every class in the country. If there were any class for whose
.1,4 e
te rese, this Bill was supposed to be especially designed, it was
r, mercantile and commercial classes, and no doubt a con-
serable impression was produced on their Lordships' minds by
_M
‘statement corning over from his Noble Friend, who
"Id himself a high official situation. It was the
presentation of that petition, and that alone, which
eTught them from their private and important con-
c.lll3_ to present the petition which he had the honour of
Wt eng before their Lordships. After adverting to the petition
t nn humbly
been presented by his Noble Friend, the petitionees
f►enTarnished humbly to state (and the signatures to the petitions
ed statements that were correct) that they doubted very
7
17. n whether that petition could be considered as representing
tt:ls!n '
general opinions of the merchants, bankers, and traders of
th City of Londen. The petitioners humbly desired to leave
e consideration of this mist important measure to the delibe-
rate wisdom of their Lordshaipcst,urrieperre.senting that, inasmuch as
the commercial and menu' neinttehreeets of this country
Were_ in a state of activity and prosperity,
pairselng that the said measure wase ssntiarletwoattenopgrro7ressdsifvoer
th PP, of any clessin the community. or even for maintaining
esent active state of commercial prosperity. The petitioners
humbly,3„, believed that the Bill in question was an experiment
~11"._'ne most vital branch of national industry, involving conse-
?_ 'Pees the magnitude and extent of which it was impossible
to foresee, and calling for the most deep and anxious considera-
tion on the part of their Lordships' House.—( Hear, hear.)
Now he hoped he should not be told that this petiti did
Pray their Lordships to reject the Bill in question. He had
already stated that it did not do so. But they protested
against its being supposed that it was the general feeling of the
mercantile gentlemen of London, that it was essential to the
interests of this country that this Bill should pass ; and
they prayed their Lordships not hastily to adopt so hazardous
and so great an experiment. Now, he felt that the importance
of this petition depended upon the signatures attached to it—
(Hear, hear)—and he should not, he hoped, be deemed
to be trespassing unduly on their Lordships' time—(Hear,
bear)._ if he stated that the petition was signed
hY the Chairman of Lloyd's, by the Chairman and
Deputy Chairman of the London Dock Company.
by the Chairman and Deputy-Chairman of the East India
aeook Company, and by a very considerable number of bank
directors.
A Notsee Loan—How many ?
Lord STANLEY believed six—( Hear, hear)—had signed
this petition. Perhaps the Noble Friend who asked that
question would like to know some. of the principal names at-
tached to the petition. Among the merchants were some of
the greatest firms in the City—Sir Frederick Puiives, Messrs.
Co. Messrs, Baring Brothers, Messrs. Frederick Tooke
Cad Co. Among the shirwners were the Messrs. Tindal and
the Messrs. Saames, two of the largest shipowners in thy City.
Among the shipbuilders were the Messrs. Curling, Young and
CO., the largest firm in the City. There were thirteen firma
whiett were connected with the foreign trade; several in the
silk trade, and several in the iron trade ; all without ex-
ception who were engaged in the Canadian anti Australian
trade...-( Hear, hear)—besides many others engaged in the
foreign and colonial trade of the country. These had signed
the petition with no intention of interfering with the decision
of their Lordships' House, but they prayed that their Lordships
would not believe that the feeling of the commercial and
mercantile classes universally called for the measure which
had been introduced into their Lordships' House, and only
Sought to provide against the opinion of these classes being
their
misrepresented. By laying, therefore, that petition upon
their Lordships' table, he (Lord Stanley) meant not to stay
view
Lordships' progren with the measure, so much as with a
1. that their Lordships might hesitatebefowreerme eking the
vast experiment wind) he as afraid. the y
make, and that, they might enter with caution upon alterations
so 30 important in the affairs of theseoustry.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE _
oatd, that it would be in their
Lordships' recollection, that he hthehma:daanbklheea
rdsofthe honour of
laying another petition
sigued by the merchants and efthethellocuistey,
of London, in favour of the
his Noble Friend to
aware that it was the, intention of
might
He was not
present such a petition, otherwise he
He
did "
mean to
statement
pared with an analysis of the signaturesattachedvtobtebeatst pprreel
viously laid on the table, as a set-off against
which their Lordships had just heard.
detract from the weight due to the petition just
This petition of the merchants, bankers, and traders, it wuted;
said by the Noble Lord( Stanley), did not represent the generala
feeling of the community. What he (Lord Dalhousie) then
wanted, was, that the two petitions should be placed against each
other, and let their Lordships weigh their relative numbers and
respectability. Let them not come forward with false pre-
tences. It was but just that he should mention that the peti-
tion he presented contained the signatures of 24 or 26 bank
directors. The directors, he believed, on the other side, were
six. It was sleeted by 14 other bankers, and appended to it
were the signatures of 267 merchants and traders. Let them
plate the petitions side by side, and he was not afraid of the
reeule.
Lord STANLEY said he had no intention of charging the
Noble Lord with misrepresentation. The fact was, he slid not
know •he nature of the petition referred to by the Noble
ord, till it was brought to him yesterday—he meant the day
before yesterday. The petition when it was presented, pur-
ported to be the petition of the bankers, merchants, and
traders of the City of London, and be believed it was then
stated the petition did not represent the general opinion. The
answer was, if it did not represent the general opinion, why
had no contrary petition being presented against it? He had
been instructed to state, that if they would compare the signa-
tures of the two petitions, they would find that they repre-
sented more than three-fold those from whom his Noble Friend
(Lord Grey) presented a petition.
Earl GREY said if they would examine the petition as
originally drawn up, they would find that it had contained
these words, and that they had subsequently been erased :
"And 'Cite
—0 &road if there, in Ow view Qt the petitioners, tut