The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-29 00:00:00

duce of the British possessions in America, computed from
the returns made in the week ending May 26, 1846, is
355. 91/L.d. per cwt.

IMPERIAL VARLIAMENT.
(THIS EVENING.)

HOUt4E OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the chair at POUT o'clock.
GREAT LEINSTER AND MUNSTER RAILWAY.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to he com
mitted.

WAKEFIELD, PONTEFRACT, AND GOOLE RAIL-
WAY (AIETHLEY, ASKERN, AND OAKENSHA W
BRANCHES.)
On the motion for the third reading of this Bill
Mr. M. AIILNES opposed it, because the great majority of
his constituents had expressed their disapprobation of the Bill
owing to the promoters having sought to take away ten acres
from the race-course at Pontefract.

Mr. BERNAL said that the Company proposed to take
away four acres of the waste part of the course, and to indem-
nify the inhabitants by giving them ten acres of superior land.
A discussion was about to ensue, when Lord G. SOMER.
SET moved the adjournment of the third reading until Mon-
day week.
The motion was agreed to.
STAINES AND HICEIMOND RAILWAY.

Colorel THOMAS WOOD moved that this Bill be re.
committed to the Committee on Group 20.
Mr. SOTHERON. the chairn an of the Committee, sa;d
that when this Bill was before the Committee, the solicitor to
the Woods and Forests came before tlem with two eluuses ;
the first gave the assent of the Crown to the Bill, and the
second contained conditions which it was impossible
for the parties to fulfil without exceeding their esti-
mates, and deviating from their levels. The Committee
tharefore threw out the Bill. On the 4th of May the parties
came before the Committee and stated that the Commissioners
of Woods and Forests were ready to accede to conditions which
the promoters could adopt without infringing their estimate or al.
tering theirlevels, and they, therefore, wished the case re-opened.
The Committee, however, refused to accede to their request, but
stated that they would make a special report to the House.
In this case thousands of pounds might have been saved to the
promoters of this Bill if the Commissioners of NVoods and
Forests could have made up their minds before the 20th of
March or the 29th of April, instead of the 9th of May. Would
such a course be a just thing to either the promoters or the
opponents of the Bill? Supposing they allowed justice to
those parties who opposed the Bill, and who, having
overcome all_ objections, the promoters would be injured, and
supposing that they allowed justice to the parties promoting the
Bill, what was the condition of those -opposing the Bill. By
recommitting this Bill, they would do great injustice. He
wished the House to consider whether it was right to allow
parties to make such an application to the House ? He wished
to ascertain what was the intention of the House with
reference to this subject ?
After a few words from Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET, Mr.
BA RCLAY, and Mr. ESTCOURT, which did not reach the
gallery,
Mr. WA KLEY said, that if in this case the House should
decide against the re-committal of this Bill, he must say that
it would be the most unjust decision it had ever come to—
( Hear, hear) —and that was saying a great deal.—Hear, hear.
and laughter.) Would the House for one moment attend
to him whilst he stated the facts of the case. What was the
case ? That parties promoting the formation of a railroad
from Richmond to Staines, ten miles, went before the Com-
mittee of their House, and after being before that Com-
mittee a few days, or a certain length of time, the
Committee gave in their report. And what was the
report ? That the consent of the Commissioners of the
Woods and Forests was tendered, and that the surveyor of the
promoters of the Bill in his examination, stated that he was
prepared to make a line in conformity with the recommenda-
tion, when it became analogous that the promoters could not
form such a line, as it must be contrary to the plans laid down
and deposited in the Board of Tral.e. The Committee there-
upon closed their proceedings on the Bill without
hearing the whole of the evidence in favour of it.
It would appear that this matter had been considered ; but he
must say that it had not rightly been decided upon by the
Woods and Forests. To this he had no objection, but it be-
came a material question when the public convenience was
concerned. Cries of " Order, order.") There might
be an outcry, but still he must assert, that if this were
a question of 40, 50, or 70 miles of railway, there might
be a matter for consideration; but he must assert
that the case of the promoters had not been properly
heard, and when the question was whether ten miles or railway
should be made, at an expense of 150,0001 , or whether a Bill
should be oteained without any reference to public convenience,
he thought that the necessities of 150,000 people had not been
sufficiently attended to.
Mr. BERNAL thought that great negligence had been
exhibited on the part of the Commissioners of the Woods and
Forests.

Mr. WOOD (Brecon), hoped the. House would give the
motion a favourable consideration, as the promoters had been
treated with much injustice.
Colonel WOOD considered as the promoters of the line had
expended a large sum of money in prepairing their case for
Parliament, that they ought to refer the rule again to the Com-
mittee, in order that the disputed question might be settled.
Mr. TANCRED said this was the second session the Bill
had been before the House. It was thrown out last session
by the Committee of Selection on account of some informality.
He submitted that from the first moment of its pro-
jection it was quite obvious that the Woods
and Forests would not consent to the passing of the line through
the property of the Crown. When they came before the
House this year they were in the same position with respect to
the Woods and Forests, as they still refused their consent. The
Committee to whom the Bill was referred found it impossible
to proceed with it under such circumstances, and they there•
fore negatived the preamble. After detailing the proceedings
of the Committee, he concluded by expressing his opinion
that, in eases in which the consent of the Wocds and Forests
was necessary to the construction of a railway, that the fact of
such consent having been obtained should be shown before the
Committee of Selection.

Sir G. GREY must say that if the promoters of the Bill
were not able to produce the assent of the Commissioners of
the Woods and Forests before the Committee in consequence
of the delay of the Government, it would be a great hard-
ship to prevent their Bill from proceeding through the House.
It, on the other hand, the non-production of that
assent was caused by a want of due diligence on the part of the
promoters, he could not see any reason why the decision of the
Committee should be reversed. Now, what he wanted to know
as, whether the delay rested Government; and he should not
like to give his vote on this occasion without some explanation
on this subject from a member of the Government.
111 r. HODGSON said that the reason the Committee re-
jected the Bill, was because they had deemed the estimate in-
sufficient.

Colonel WOOD said the Hon. Member was mistaken as to
the facts. Tne fact was, that, in the prosecution of the works,
the Woods and Forests required that the railway should be
made not only under the park but under the river.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said, that previously to giving any vote
on this subject, be thought the House ought to be in possession
of the whole of the correspondence which have passed between
the Commissioners of the Woods and Forests, and the pro-
moters of the Bill. They would then be enabled clearly
to understand the position in which they were placed. He
would beg leave to move, therefore, that the present discus-
sion be postponed till this day week. The amendment having
been put,
Mr. P. VILLIERS said that he would believe that his
Honourable and Learned Friend, the Member for the
University of Oxford was very anxious lo have further
information on the matter before the House, bat he was just
as sure that the parties more immediately interested would
rather have a decision at the present moment. He begged to
say, before they came to a division, that the Select
Committee had, as yet, pronounced no decision on the Bill.
The Hon. Chairman of the Committee had made no complaint
against any person or office. He stated the case very tempe-
rately and fairely, and, as the case would be establishing no
precedent, lie trusted that the Rouse would consent to the
motion.

Lord LINCOLN said that, judging from the circumstances
he bad heard since he came into the House, he felt inclined to
support the amendment of his Hon. and Learned Friend the
Member for Oxford. He (Lord Lincoln) was connected with
the Board of Woods and Forests in the last year, and he recol-
lected that precisely the same line was laid before them, and the
Board then intimated the determination to resist it to the
utmost. They had commissioned an eminent engineer to re-
port as to the effect the line would have upon the Crown pro-
perty, and he had reported that the line was very objectionable,
but that no other could be carried through the same country.
The line waa dropped last year, and was now
brought forward in precisely the same shape.
He should not be disposed to vote against the Bill. He was
astonished to hear the charge brought against his Hon. Friend
at the head of the Woods and Forests.
Mr. WAK LEY rose to explain.
Colonel WOOD hoped that the House would accede to the
proposal of the Hon. Member.

The fie4atp
AND
tilt Mond4Y week.
NORTHER AND SOUTHERN CONNECTING
On the motion that this Bill be read a second time
M. WAICLEY moved as an amendment that the Bill be
read a second time that day six months,
After some observations from several Hon. Members,
The SPE A Kgfi, having put the question that the Bill be
read a second time,

The motion was negatived without a division.
(LEFT SITTING.)

IMPEAJAL IeARLiAIVIENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 28.
CORN-LAWS.—ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Earl GREY (in continatiun froni----mit7 Third
Editiop of last night), propeeded to say,-Thp fi.ilt observa-
tion I 1140 b4yei to addxess ' to your Lord-
ships is,. that through the whole course of the
debate it bits struck Ter)? forcibly that those Noble Lords
who have been opposed to the Bill have all ayoldeg explicitly
reviewing and defending that which 1 take to be the main
point and hold of the existing corn-laws, as well as of all other
laws upon the same subject. It is clear that the real
aim of these laws and the object of all law; intro-
duced; is that of spewing a rempfrative price f
cern, or in other words to raise the price of food to the
people by an artificial supply l<t appears tope that, .as I have
ventured humbly to submit to your Lordslt
which
11118: !PO
intention and object ofa4l these; 41y; it is coo requires
to be proves by argument, and
unless cogent returns in the absence of all argument,
can be adduced in favour of so artificial
a restription of q)p qupply, it most by concltided that lawn which
will give cheapness of !boll to the people ;re Inlie)• (fesii:o-
They represent that the repeal of those laws will accomplish
other than those which ; think are its real objects. In
particular, most npble Lords who'have spoken, assert that the
great object el toe presak iaw, '"was to pounce h certain Supplb
to protect us from the great danger of dependence upon foreign
nations for a supply of that food which is necessary to the
existence bf the people of this country.--( Hear, hear.)
these ate the arguments which many Noble lords 114 Ye pelt
forward' r(1) •withont"foeitiing anY'offende, itittY
be perrnitfid td that it is quite O4tt f power to !Cora
this in any other liOtt thair as a colourable argument—
not the real object for which the continuance of the law
is supported. Let• me just ask you this? Suppose a
give implicit reale' to. hi
similar argument, and under similar circumstances,
were urged by us, would those ~ubleoppose the repeal of tho cornts Lords wiia now
for the sincerity tenni: tit° I will suppose that
the cotton manufactures of thii 'country, initead mnufac-
cdociumnetirtykA:L4rer(itligthratthlaline price
rest of manufac-
turing for the whole world, rriznUf.tett;re only eiNr R'A'n
and that the goods produced elsewhere were excluded
coot' t
theU world, this
from our markets by the high protective duties —now, my
Lords, if under such circumstances the question befqrP I.IF
dutt" were,
whether we should repeal such High protective
'and !Hippos'. the ce'ton -niandfactuters
of tins countr'y yore ;cline't`p iii apcl @aye4.ell6 niit be
so rash as to repeal those duties, as you will leave
yourselves dependent on foreign nations, and your
population will be without shirts and gowns, and )0.11
lament your great rashness." I want t know whether we
should feel perfectly convinced that it was tats disinterested
feeling for the 4 ,•• • dictated inith 4otirsi;. and I
consureers that

want to know whether if this were done, if high duties were
created, if a body of manufacturers were to meet and no other
persons were present, they would not discuss the grand topics
of high rates charged to the British manufacturer, and the cer-
tainty, if those protective laws were repealed, of the evils that
would ensue, that bales of foreign goods would rush into our
markets, and that certain destruction of our manufacturers, and
others would be the result. Should we under such circum-
stances believe that it was a mere regard to the interests of the
consumers that dictated their prayers ? My Loris, I mast say
in the same manner that I sin a little incredulous whether that
which has excited the enthusiasm of protection societies—
that which has drawn such large crowds together at Willis's
rooms that the two Noble Dukes who sit on the cross benches
were obliged to divide their forces and to preside over different
meetings—l say I cannot entertain a doubt, when that which
has excited such a feeling among the producers of corn, and
when 1 do not find such a feeling among the consumers, I say
it was a mere apprehension at some future time our supplies
from abroad might fail, and as a consequenee that prices
might rise to an extravagant height, I cannot help
thinking that the apprehension of having too much
corn and also too low prices will not be verified.
If I were to refer to a sufficient answer to that, it is to be
found in the argument employed by the Hon. and Learned
Lord (Brougham) the first night of the debate, when
he referred to the fact—the indisputable fact—that Napo-
leon, in the heighth of his power, and during the most
exciting period of the French revolutionary war, was
unable to exclude corn from being imported into
the English ports. If that one fact is riot conclusive, and
if you wish more, I need only refer to what was said
by the Noble Lord the late Secretary for the Colo-
nies, when he stated, in the course of his address,
that competition was the cause of certain articles not rising in
price. He stated, in the boldest and most authoritative
manner, that of all the paradoxes that ever were
conceived the doctrine that competition did
not lead to the making of articles cheap
was the worst.—(Hear, hear.) It is just as well a paradox to
assert that the best security to the receiving of a plentiful and
cheap supply of food is by the imposition of artificial restrictions
on national and commercial intercourse. It has been argued,
that the measure before the House should be rejected on the
consideration that this subject is not one for legislation. If
there be one question more than another on which I entertain
a strong opinion, it is that the present question is a great and
proper object of legislation.—( Hear, hear.) What is the effect
of this rai.ing of the price of corn by the operation of a re-
strictire law? It was well put by the Noble Earl that spoke
the last night of the debate (Lord Clarendon). He showed, nn
the calculations of the Noble Earl opposite (Lord Stanley),
and from a calculation taken from correct data, that the
amount in the fall of price and the amount in the increase of
consumption that would take place if the existing corn-laws
did not exist could not be less than ten millions of money.
Double the amount of the income-tax, and double the amount
of the malt-tax,— a tax not a farthing of which goes into the
exchequer for national purposes ; but a tax imposed for the benefit
—I will not say the benefit, but rather the injury, or at least
the imaginary benefit—of a single class of society.—( Cheers. )
But, my Lords, I know that it has been said that this is an
unfair representation of the circumstances. I know that it
has been admitted that the price of corn has been
raised by the corn-laws—it has been admitted that the payment
of a highs r price for their food is in itself a burden to the
working classes. Still it is assertea that no real injury is
done by this system of protection to agriculture, be-
came the fects which result from the existing law
show that its effect is to keep up wages in the same proportion
that it keeps up the price of corn. This was the great argu-
ment of the Noble Lord who spoke so ably on Monday night.
I cannot help remarking that it is perfectly clear, in
the first instance, that the increase in the price of food is
in itself a heavy tax on the working classes, a
large proportion of whose income is expended in
the purchase of food. But it is asserted that the effect of the
corn-laws is to keep up the wages of the labourer. We ought
to be sure that this is the fact; it is net one which ought to
be taken for granted, without the fullest and closest investiga-
tion. But that that lies at the root of the matter was lightly
glanced over by the Noble Lord. He argued that if the price
of corn was low, competition in labour would bring down wages
in the same proportion, and, therefore, that the industrious
classes would be no gainers. This is an easy way of disposing
of the question, but it is not by any means a satisfactory one,
and it was the less satisfactory because his Noble Friend made
an admission which would lead to a directly opposite conclusion.
He admitted that you by your legislative measures did not in-
terfere with the rate of wages. He told us that wages did not
fall in the same degree as corn did, and, therefore, ho really
admitted that when the price of wheat rose the working man
was exposed for the tirae to a considerable pressure. lam
sure your Lordships will admit that I have not unfairly stated
this argument of the Noble Lord. lam sure that the experi-
ence which we have had in the last few years is perfectly satis-
factory upon this point, if we compare the state of things in this
country in the dear years as compared with the cheap ones.
If you compare the state of things in the years
1833, 1834, and 1835, when wheat was low, with the years
1939, 1840, and 1841, when it was dear and scarce, you ea!
find that in the first of those years there was a great demand
for ]about, and wages were high, while in the last of those years
you will find, on the contrary, that trade was slack, that there
was no demand for labour, that wages had fallen, and that
numbers of persons were thrown out of employment. The ca-
lamitous slate of the country during these years is a matter so
recent, and it has made such an impression on every person
who knew what the condition of the people really
was, as to render it unnecessary for me to dwell upon it.
But, my Lords, the reason of this state of things is obvious.
There can be no doubt at all that the difficulty of these unhappy
years to which I have referred can be easily accounted fur,
When corn rose to a high price, very family throughout
the kingdom was compelled to expend a very large por-
tion of their income to obtain a supply of loud,
and there was, of course, a less available income for
other things. There was less available income for clothing, for
tea, for sugar, and other articles of that nature. There was
less demand for manufactured goods, fur the articles of the
small shopkeepers, and the merchant. '1 here was, therefore,
a general diminution of their power of employing labourers,
and a general eiminution in the consumption of the producing
classes. This explanation is quite sufficient to account for the
sufferings of that year. I ask what possible reason there is for
believing, if these prices are low, the price of food become s
permanent. I see no reason of the kind, I believe permanently
as well as temporarily, if the price of food is high, there is a
small proportion of national income available for other pur-
poses, and therefore a comparatively small demand for labour,
anii a larger proportion of persons seeking employment. Upon
the other hand, in seasons of plenty and abundance, and low
prices, the population consume other things in larger quantities
there is a great demand for labour, and consequently a
prosperous state of things takes place. I presume the
correctness of this course of reasoning is strongly borne
out by fact, because when we look to other countries where there
is this state of things—permanent low prices of food—in these
countries we invariably find wages high. The Noble Earl,
who spoke last night, admitted the fact. He said it was per-
fectly true that wages did not appear to be governed by the
price of food, because, he said, in America and Australia, where
the price of corn is low wages are high. In Poland, the price
of corn is high, and the wages are low, being kept down by
the mis- government of that unhappy country, the restrictions
upon industry, and the want of employment. I challenge my
Noble Friend to mention any country in the world, from Ca-
nada to Australia, where there is a small population, with an
extended territory, whore food is cheap, and where there is
good order and good Government—l defy him to mention
any such country where wages are not exceedingly high.
I believe that is an acknowledged fact, and I further contend
that the reason for these high wages is to be found in that abun-
dance of food, for while food is abundant there was a competi-
tion amongst employers for labour, whereas when food was
scarce, and in a thickly peopled country, the competition was
amongst labourers to find employment.—( Hear, hear.) If you
apply restrictive laws upon the trade in food, you increase the
disadvantages under which a fully peopled county necessarily
labour, because if you interfere with or restrict the trade of a
large corn-producing country, you increase the proportion of
your unemployed labourers, who otherwise would be engaged
in manufacturing goods for those corn producing countries—
( Cries of "Hear, hear")—while, on the other hand,
if you encourage the mutual interchange of products
with such countries as Hungary, Poland, and America, you
are increasing the inevitable disadvantages to which the la-
bourers of a thickly populated country are necessarily sub-
jected.—( Hear, hear.) After, however, what fell from a
Noble Friend beside me upon the subject of the interchange
of the commodities between a fertile, though a thinly populate;]
country, and a thickly populated country, I should be ashamed
to trouble your Lordships with a single word further upon
this part of the subject.—( Hear, bear. ) It is this interchange
of commodities which keeps wages up in both countries. But
I see a Noble Marquis opposite denies the justness of my eon,.
elusions, and I hope in the course of the debate he will point
out to me where my chain of reasoning is defective.
If I am right in this argument, that one fact ought to be con-
clusive, anti there ought to he an end to all future argu.
ment—if we are once satisfied of that fact, no other argument,
in a Christian country, ought for cne moment to be used
against the measure.— ( Hear, hear. ) Vhen I look at the
condition to which the lehoering elassus have been subjected,
when I collside; how frightful has been shown the condition of
tho agcicult4ral labourers in Dorsetshire and Wiltshire, wheel
know how much they are below what we could desire, eve? ee Lee
most favoured countries, and when et the stile time I know
that the effect of the corn-laws, -tthinh are still working, is to
depress wages and ;cis;: the price of food, it seems to me that
it is utterly useless to argue the question further. Thmo
who, in the year 1842, ca led themselves the farmers ift4nds, did
a most serious injury to those who were so gqii;hic
as, to believe.
They rushed into the markets to gat ri,d of their property, but
they very soon found out, I belice, tow great hid been their
mistake; and it is ply c.onvietton that the country has not yet
*Teamed iron} the effects of their folly. lam happy to find
notwithetanding the agitation and the prophecies
which have been made as to the effect of this IneAsu-ce, that
land never let better, never sold setter, anti 4,at a greater spirit
of agriculture never existed irt tees eeentry._.(Hear;hear.)
I belieee the etteumiol see diaining tiles is much increasing—Se
111.1C11 so, that the moment a kiln of draining tiles is knoven to
be ready, there is a struggle amongst the feerreves of the neigh-
bourhood as to who shall be first snppliad with those necessary
grtisties feet the iieproecemeni of their land.--( Hear, hear.)
Illy Lords, I think the farmers and occupiers of land need mit
fear the passing of this measure ; and 1 think that, (ream what
I have stated, it will be seen ;het there is no
ground for the calculations end fears of my
Noble lieieeo, apd I think that his statement that corn can
now be sold ip this country much cheaper than formerly is
entirely groundless.—( Hear, beer.) illy Lords, I do not
want—even if it were the fact that the price of corn would
grgatly fall in consequence of the passing of the Bill which is
now under consideration--I do not walla to go to aev Ingth
on this portion of the question, but at the ;Aisle time'] cannot
help adverting to the stetereient W2Bmade with very great
conedeeete, bX esy Noble Priend, who spoke on Monday night,
es 'hiving been previously made by what seemed high practical
authority. My Lords, he told us that there werg cargoes
of wheat at this moment in this con,ptry. which had been pur-
chased it the Palt;c :iaa at 14i., and had arrived in this
country, and was offered at 235. the quarter. Now, my Lords,
I was told by a gentleman, with whom I am certeiele not ac-
quainted, but who describes himself as largely intrested in the
corn trade—thoy,,h r,seanl not to. tretible your Lordships
with soy figures, hope you will forgive me if A tread a very
4tritte froln the letter' to ivhiCh 4 liars adverted. This
letter is dated'`.t yosterday." He says it is perfectly
teee that 'Lord 'Stanley's correspondent has two cargoes of
wheat imported into this country, which cost him (mind ]tins
the price named in this letter. Nothing "*1 era more
falla-
cious than the state:T=4 was made era' thatmed.
eat whets reale he deed in' this &dentatenamed.
The' 'the price t
The'oeigitial eost is about 335. per quarter, including •eeess •
ard all other charges that arise fro Ist t ft
a Stanley'sin t Yof
the sliding-scale. ees eegerfis thehaelaatteirn.
statement
country, I yen.
corersiSerseerit es to the price of see purchased at less than 455.
•
rota to say that wheat cannot b
the quarter at W ; eimarand when 10s. is added to ththat,freight and all charges,etca .nnl be sold endes-Lee. per quarter.'
Taking into consideration r t e risk aseregards the quality o f
co7n, ao ail tee disadvantages which it could be In ought
intothis•eountey, bef. ere the •peice of their corn is a't,ecetedejy
the opening of -our p'ort's, theirveodece Cased'eut he introduced
issto this country at dowse pr ice than that which the British
.
torn is now bearing in the market. I think that the result of
protection of some kind to the farmer ought to teach those •
at
the
.ntroductioM' of foreign
terested in laud, how little foundation there way tin"
present expressed with reeere t
eerie Sty friend, in the :Teeth to ishidtilhave
toldus that the manufacture of wool was a strongadverted, has
My Noble Friend has endeavoured tomake„ Out that the fail

in the price of wool was in consequence of the removal of the
protection duty. What were the real facts of the case with
regard to the wool trade ? The duty on wool was repealed at
the time of the great panic in 1825. After that panic the
SA hole trade of the country was affected for a long time. The
value of wool went down like the value of other articles for two
or three years before they recovered it. An injury was dune to
the matiufacturers by the existence of high duties at
that time. In the year 1828, when a Committee of
this House was moved for, the evidence was brought by a
number of gentlemen and persons connected with the wool
trade, for the purpose of proving that wool at that time was
at a ruinous price, and the manufacture of it was not sufficient
to pay its expenses. They went on to say, according to the
proofs they had on that subject, that the maintenance of the duty
would be of advantage to the foreign grower ; ar.d they said
the depression which they then experienced was nothing to
what was coming, and that they should have bales of wool at
prices which it was folly for the British grower to attempt to
compete with. They stated that the same land which was
valuable for the production of corn was valuable for
the production of wool, with the same labour, soil,
and industry; and in the course of a few years the cheap cern.
growers would apply themselves to the growth of cheap wool ;
and that wool, in proportion to its value, was of smaller bulk
than corn, could be transported a greater distance at less ex-
pense. Therefore that free-trade would cause the price to
rail to a ruinous extent. The House was fortunately wise
enough to refuse this committee, and what, he asked, was the
result? In the course of a short time—in one or two }ears—
the price of wool recoveretittnerderfudy. The wooden menu-
factures were greatly improved, and from that time to this
wool has been one of the best articles of manufacture
and of profit to the farmer. There was no article on
which their profit was greater. The Noble Duke may shake
his head. I kno,v something of the price of wool, and what-
ever may be the price of wool in Sussex, I can inform him that
in Northumberland the price of wool on the average of years,
from 1828 to this time, has Leen considerably higher than the
prices during the existence of the prohibitory duties. That
was a strange fact. We are told that the competition in wool
was more dangerous than that in corn, and that the removal of
protection will destroy the woollen trade. The experiment
of removing the protective duty had turned out well, and was
it not reasonable that the same principle should be applied to
the corn-laws ? There was another article of the same kind.
At the time of the reductien in the tariff it was adverted to
with the greatest possible apprehension, as being likely to in-
troduce cheap corn. My Noble Friend in some portion of his
speech, says :--" That in admitting foreign stock, it was
actually repealing the corn.laws, for then corn would be im-
ported in the shape of fat cattle, and the foreign agriculturist
would thus be saved the expense of carriage." I believe that
my Noble Friend was right. He has been very careful in hit
arguments to show that the present high prices of stock were
owing to the tariff; and so far 1 am bound to say that 1 concur
with him. We have had four years' experience of the tariff,
and if any great alteration has been made in the market by any
supplies from abroad, we have seen from the state of the mar-
ket last year, that tar from it causing any re-
duction, the supplies from abroad have been unable
to check the rise in the market, while at the same time the in-
troduction or the small cattle imported from Germany has pro-
dueed a material effect in that country, and the cattle in many
places, in proportion to their size and quality, fetch very nearly
as high prices as in this comatry. I could go on to show that
the same thing occurs with reference to the produce of other
States. All these things are grown on the same land, by the
same labour, and by the same means that are available to pro-
tection ; and they were all more valuable in proportion to their
bulk than corn ; and yet in this article in which the trade is far
less, we have found by experience that the British grower has
nothing to fear. My Noble Friend has turned round and said
to us, " If you deny that you expect a fall in the price of corn,
what is the advantage you expect from a reduced duty upon it?"
He thought that by that question he had reduced us to a
dilemma from which there was no escaping. That was the
sort of argument he had taken, and it requires very little con-
sideration to perceive that we do not expect to have a fall in
the price of corn, but we expect it will be much more even.
We do not believe that we shall have such variation under free
trade as we saw when, in 1836, in December, the price of corn
was 355., and in 1839 it was 81s. per quarter. We shall have
neither of these extremes. We expect that we shall have
the average prices lower than they have been during the last
dozen years, arid reduce the amount of fluctuation. The
Noble Lord has denied that it will render the prices more equal,
but I believe that there will be no difficulty in showing your
Lordships that the prices will be more secure. What is the
invariable regulation of prices? What is it that lowers the
prices in dear years, and heightens the prices in cheap years ?
It is commerce which bestows this upon us, and which puts us
in that superior position to which we were in those barbarous
times, when we had at one time a plentiful supply and great
distress to the grower, arid at another time scarcity of
corn, and famine and distress to the consumers. In
a civilised country this is the operation of commerce ; a man is
been for his own interest. He buys in the cheap year arid
sells in the dear year, and in this system of social organisaation,
when not interfered with, regulates the prices so as to check
that extensive suffering of one party or another. The opera-
tion of the tariff has rendered the dealing in corn a gambling
transaction, in which a great part of the merchants hesitate to
embark. So strong is that fact, that it was proved before an
agricultural Committee of the other House, that the course
pursued was such as to render any trade in corn so hazardous as
literally to hinder any merchant from embarking in it. There
used to be at one period a stock, such as would always carry on
the country for six months, but since the trade in corn has
been rendered one of so hazardous a nature, the stock in the
country has been reduced to just enough for a fortnight's con-
sumption. That was a proof of the injurious effect of any
corn-law. What was the reason that prices fell so low in
1839 ? Was it in consequence of the competition with foreign
corn ? Was it to the competition of any foreign country
that we owed that ? No. It was our own succession
of good crops in this country. The high prices and
low credit of a few years before had artificially
stimulated the prices of corn, and, in consequence of that, a
great effort was made to increase the gro.vrh of corn, and a
large quantity was then produced, at a time when the consump-
tion was not sufficient to take it off the hands of the growers,
It was the excess of our own produce; and so long as we
adopt only one source of supply, we must be exposed to
want in years of scarcity, and excess in years of plenty. How
different the case would he if we tOO% the same proportion of
supply from abroad. If that were the case, and you had a re,
guitar trade in fereign corn—enough for home conserepiee,_
the foreign corn would be quickly supplied in the dear years
and in scarce seasons ; ane, n consequence, the price
would be higher in comparison that year than in other yoers,
The trade would bear a larger proportion in its prices of ocrn
than it then did, end therefore it would be less inducement to
the merchant to introduce foreign corn, and the country would
thus be able to take off all of its own growth by a slighl ree
striction on the quantity received from abroad, The le oeld
be the natural operation, and the farmer, by sciling a larger
quantity of corn, would be compensated for file fall ii, its price.
I do not deny that, in plentiful years, the produce would be
cheaper than in scarce years, and it would be the foreign
grower, and not the home grower, who would reap the benefit
of this measure. There is another advantage winch we shall
derive from the repeal of the law, an advantage of great im-
portance. The advantage would be a greatly increased con.
sumption of corn. Will any man attempt to argue that the
people of this country consume as much corn as they desire—
that they do not desire any more. In Wiltshire and Dorset-
shire, the consumption was far less than what the labourers
desired. He believed that the peasantry do not wish to live on
less bread than they do at present, and to supply the place with
inferior articles of food ; and the effect of repeeliag the re-
striction on the statute book, would be to cause a greatly in-
creased consumption of corn. There would also be a greater
consumption of cattle; the consequence of an impreaved de-
mand would he, that the farmer would take even a larger
number than at present; and, I need not toll your Lordships,
who are yourselves landowners, that every attempt to improve
agriculture, is commenced by tha taking of an increased num-
ber of stock. There will be a greater crop in consequence,
and cheaper poen. The direct tendency of the system would
be to authorise the gradual improvement of agricul-
ture ; and in my belief, it will offer a stimulus to
competition, and an encouragement to trade. Un-
der the increased demand and consumption, agriculture
will make far more progress than it has hitherto done. We
shall see that the science is but in its infancy. It has been
said that a removal of the cld tenantry would have to take
place. I believe that 'inch a thing will be unnecessary, A
change of tee eetee 1 shouldaal
rtcor alteration
srolelngo
saierndd t
hat
cos ae
improvegtrn:etatit
ym i st (Fe
s-ru
notne andne
pessary—the thae"feareminenrgs
Condi-
tion and those under them. (al eourse, foreign countries had
riot prepared corn to the. extent we require, arid the intreed
tion would only he felt by degrees. In my opinion, the chaneg;
should gradual, and as the cultivation gradually extended, so
seosild the consumption of the country extend in an equal
ratio. The means by which the facilities of
would be increased weeld be by adopting the re:toll:la' e°nytelzanjorint
of my Noble Friend's Committee, with regard to the transfer
and conveyance of landed property. Let me remark, also,
that improved farmer; would ereplo.y mere agricultural la-
bourers. In that farming, called the higher farming, the
owner employs more hands, and employs them more continually
on the land, In the evict nee adduced before the Committee
of my NoVle I~:vic4id, we were told, that the farmer of the
iketh of England was obliged, in order to prevent their being
thrown on the poor-rates, to employ more hands than he re-
quired. When it was said, that the land would go out of culti-
vation, it was a wrong calculation of the probable effect of the
law, Sea far from it, it will be better employed. I, for one,
do not expect to see any fall even in the rents. The land in a
populous country would always be used in some way. I would
have entered upon a very important point, in reference to this
question, but 1 trusted to have the opportunity at another
stage of the 13i11.—( Cries of " Hear, hear," and cheers. )
The Noble Lord who spoke last night considered that it was
impolitic! to narrow the means of employment by letting in fo-
retee goods in competition with our own. But let me observe
with reference to the colonial, that there is no smelt difficulty
as to the means of finding profitable employment for labour
and capital. The difficulty there is to lied sufficient labour and
capital for the profitable development of the natural resources
and wealth of their country; and the effect of your protecting
duties is to divert their industry and capital from its natural,
and therefore moat 'legitimate, channel, into a eourse of opera-
tion of on artificial and unproductive character. No man
doubts that Canada is poorer than she would have been had
you not given her protecting duties on her timber. Let any
man say the vast amount of labour and wealth which has been
expended in consequence of your absurd and impolitic system.
It has had the effect, of importing a vast amount of bad and in-
ferior timber into this country, This is the same with respect '
to all the other colonies. l'hey gain nothing at all by your
protective IT:teens. They would have full employment under
eey eireumstances for all the capital wh'toh
they possess. But,
u.
at the same time, while they gain nothing by these protective
duties, they are serious leers by them in consequerie
i
protection which we elaim from them in returoe Protective
they have suffered greatly in not blies( to
send
duties have been highly injurious to our NhYleesoioubdtiaainnctohiooinrievss..,
their pro-
duce supplies from differees markets, end
that
to
tmostnothing
t h gadbvyanytnaogreoduosti
duties,
amns4.
pointdlnuce
West India colonies, is
this principle which appliesthe other colonies; examine the esliele
etas tc'hia v gaited t the
o
you
.will find my seatement enseees,
oeilsroci:opfpltichaelemle,
atzsall
• • -y eons nestrictive duties,
11 I sers e
but that they are actua 0., eeessequence of the reci-
aeeleatutd w t the history of this ;Gentry,
net
that
do they not gain anything 1.
•ty which we claim
.trom in return. Is there any lain
prom
ka American
inaaoreilY'see that it was the desire to fes - '
the hoetero of the et
a el':
American war,
'commercial dependence news
twhhaot isct.
1..1;
terse o
involved
this conOvi It was this commercial policy
nies that was really at
and what resulesel 'se the less of those
tettr
enormous debt.
batn.d plitnirsaactfeadet,war, great colonies to
attempt to enforce this sySt€ll and bress4h4 on
°Oneli,atthia°tnthine
litTekrCiaelvdeeriyiendencys was
the
lteaf.,,,thi
jeottlis;iet,iir,edothis country from the United
]lave still remainedto say that these large pressinees
wooltt States.
aey
different manner,
Crown.
rrate ee. parted with us in a
They
at in the possession„ s 4 the British
mightand st.;ll es'eeerved amicable relations with
us, ov "groin degree of jealousy and angry feeling
which always seems to exist between Amer,; 'end this
country. I should have thought that the Noble Earl would
his have
ianldluded,tco:that topic, el might have produced in
ees' disagreeable recollections of a
::e hich' '''tO'ok I •
.ace . the Hon'se. of Commons on the question oflast m
the edinisiion of Aus-
tralian corn into this countre, yeat. was' the course of pro-
ceeding at that r eried s You granted them the privilege of
sendinl their coin ihtoehis country. You refused, that privi-
lege terall the other celQnies and rye tAk 4411-1. ads, toms.:
r ;

she had just before been in a state of insurrection, while at
the same time you refused it to those colonies which had ever
been loyal. My Lords, 1 for one think this was a course of
policy well calculated to rouse a spirit of disaffection. fhe
Noble Earl went on to say that it was your duty to
keep these colonies always in a state of dependence,
and alluded to the great military and naval expense
attending keeping these colonies. I must be permitted to :ay,
that this is rather a debt: five mode of argument. The paint to
be proved is the advantage of a protecting duty. That being
the point to be proved, you first say if you donut give protection
you lose the colonies, and that therefore is a reason for keeping
protection, and then you turn round and say do not take as ay
protection, fur there is no further reason fur maintaining the
colonies it you do ; that is, I cc nsider, arguing in a circle.
You say do not touch the protecting duties; having thus estab-
lished the necessity for protecting duties, you turn round snd
say, if you have not protecting dutiee, of what me are the
colonise? This was one of the most complete possible examples
of arguing in a circle which I ever knew. We have the ad-
vantages of a colonial empire, possessing friends in every quarter
of the world—of having a large population in every part of the
globe possessing great natural resources, ready to unite heart.
and soul with us, and prepared to defend our positions, to
support and defend our interests, and to take part with us
against all attacks which may be made against U 3 ; and, upon
the other hand, they have this inestimable advantage, and.
which, I verily believe, they prise and value—they have the;
glory and security derivad to them from being part of the'
greatest, the mightiest, and most civilised nation on the face of
the earth—the have the glory of calling themselves British.
subjects, and the proud satisfaction of feeling that in defence.
of their interests and the protection of their just rights ; the
power and might of this great country is ready in a moment to
be called forth and be exercised for their defence. I believe
that they are fully sensible of these benefits ; and I believes
if t base benefits, you extend a liberal policy bath political
and commercial, and extend to them the clearest and mast'
indisputable right of Englishmen, the power of self-govern'
ment, and avoid vexatiously meddling in their international:
affairs, you will bind them to you with a chain which no
powers on earth can break, and that connexion between the'
parent state and the colonies will be extended till their p_ol'"'
lation far exceed that of the mother country. The Nubia
Lord next proceeded to show how unjustly this measure won't°
operate if passed into a law upon Canada. He proceeded to
say—you have encouraged Canada to extend large sums of
money upon the faith of your continuing to than
the protection afforded by the existing corn-laws'
and that it would be an act of great injustice
to that country if we were to alter the present law. He fur,
ther said that the Canadians have no chance of competing with
America, and if we passed this Bill in its present state wo
should ruin the commercial prosperity of Montreal and Que-
bec, and transfer the trade and commerce of these places tr
New York. My Lords, I think in the present case the opi-
nions of the Canadians are entitled to some weight from you
Lordships. What are the feelings of the Canadians upon the
subject? My Lords, I hold in my hand a newspaper pulp,
lished in Canada, containing a report of the debate which took
place in the House of Assembly of Canada upon that subject.
It may be as well to state that her Majesty's Government,
etas
mediately upon coming to their resolutions respecting
the alteration of the corn-law, made a communication to the
Government of Canada of their intention., and told them that,
they were at liberty to repeal the duty of 3s. a quarter uoma
American wheat, which they had imposed when the measure
was submitted to them by the Government at home, A mead
sure was accordingly introduced for the purpose of repeaint
the duty on American wheat. In the course of discussion oroe
that question a motion was made and carried in the Assembly.
for reporting progress. What turned out to be the fact ?
seems this amendment was carried in consequence of a miser,
prehension, some of the parties not exactly understanding each:'
other as to the effect of this vote. In a few days after
the consideration of the subject was resumed, and a'
vote was taken upon the subject. I have read the speecbet.
which took place during that debate ; but there seems to have'
been nothing of that desponding and hopeles feeling to
"'Lich
the Noble Lord referred. On the contrary, there was in
general a tone of more manly and hopeful nature ; and as
proof of the existence of the feeling, the measure seas
carried by a majority of 45 to 27. The Noble Lord went onto:
say, that the passing of this measure would shake their feeliege
of loyalty to the British Crown. I confers, my Lordsa
that I heard this language with great regrets'
as it seemed to imply that the Canadians would be almost
justified in manufacturing a spirit of disleyalty and disaffection'
Why, my Lords, the very same week in which they had bees
discussing the repeal of the corn•laws, in that same week
I.
Alike], Bill was under the consideration of the Assembly. *
will read to you an account of the proceeding,, in the As-
sembly. ( The Noble Earl ( Grey) then read. areport of the
proceedings upon this Bill, the tensor of which implied a feel'
of confidence in the Government at home.) The result, there'
of those considerations is, in my mind, to demorstrate lint"
the passing of this Bill, now before your Lordships, is inn'
peratively required by the great masses of that country;
—( Hear, hear)—and that, by passing this Bill, we cur no risk of any injury to our interests, c"14917n.
or domestic. None of the great interests of the empire 117
be exposed in my opinion to any injury. Upon the other Wu'.
by rejecting this measure, you will injure many great int.,e's
setting on the cross-benches, who at an early perido
rests. I ask you ; and I remind the Noble Duke (Riehnoon";
thi
evening, when the petition of the merchants of the City
London was presented by a Noble Earl opposite, asked sligni,"j
casitly how many signers of the petition are holders of bolwe''';
corn. I think your Lordships all know the inuendo coneeY"
in that observation ? Now, my Lords, I wish to a. k Oc'ne
and I will also remind the Noble Duke, that if we reject
this Bill, whether the Noble Duke's example will not
be followed by other parties, and whether it will not lead then!
to think upon the subject of your rejection of this measure, and
inquiring into the reasons which may have led your Lordships
to reject this measure ? I ask whether they will not begin is
inquire 'now many of your Lordships are owners of land? A.ll
Lords, I do not believe that, conscientiously, at all events, eni
of your Lordships can be influenced by these motives. Bu
after what has been said by the Noble Duke, I cannot
think but that a great many of you are influenced In yof
decision by the facts that your Lords-hips are owners of laud.
believe my Noble Friend felt himself justified in asking that
p ef an whaast eewo:buildy,
question. But thins it would have been much better if,
eaitiatgu
producedes !non hhee had l
c mind,remembered
bw n h
eh
the
e
offsetof landowners rejecting a Bill imperatively calk.
for by tire people of this country. 1 trust,
my Lords, that before you take a course which seems to me SO
full of danger, you will reflect upon the practical consequences
of the rejection of this measure. I trust your Lordships will not act upon mere passion, nor gratify any feeling of indifo"`.;
tion which you may feel towards those whom you think
rosy
have deceived you ; or that your Lordships will not act upon,
the principle of punishing the Ministry, or certain Members of
the House of Commons who gave opinions upon this measure
contrary to your Lordships, but that you will consider fall!
and fairly before you determine upon the rejection of the
measure, what will be the practicable effect upon the pe(,)P;
of this country, and what may be the probable oplOw_s
which the people of this country will form upon the motives
which guided the decisions of your Lordships. For what_;
the fact ? De your Lordships believe that vote can maintain
the existing corn-law ? Is there a Noble Lord iti
thio
House who now hears me who believes that
the Government of this country can, looking
that
the events of the last few years, and the great change tr...
has taken place in public opinion, think it is possible to orlaTo
Lain the existing law for a period of any length. I sok
three Noble Dukes (Richmond, Cleveland, and Buckiugh""
if they believe it possible, by any combination of circunastancees
for two years to maintain the existing corn-laws?
The Duke of RICHMOND—" Yes."--( Laughter. )
The Duke of CLEVELAND—" Yes, yes."—(lncresoe
laughter.)
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM—" Yea, yes, yes."—(ll.ldird
of laughter.)
Earl GREY—The Noble Dukes say " Yes, yes" be
I can only say that the Noble Earl who spoke last niglat
with
great animation, and at considerable length upon the subjee"
seemed to expect some alteration in the existing lat
But if it is likely to tend to the same result, then no man T. his sober senses will recommend a dissolution of Parhamet, When we consider the injury which would be inflicted on t"",
country, the absolute paralysis of trade which must ensue,
old
wo say that it is a thing to be desired that the country sh,na
be put in one universal flame, when the result wouldbe h;
passing of the same Bill ? But, my Lords, can they irnogin:
that by throwing out this Bill, that they can obtain even a ee'iool
promise, and that they could induce Parliament to pa" 50 e 4
less objectionable measure? My Noble Friend on Ingotto
night threw out many hints that those who voted for the t to
in the present stage, could have opportunities of altering i
another. However, I put it to you, do you think it advisable ter
ject this measure in the hopes of substituting another ofthoZ;a
It is a vain hope. Look at the spirit of the times, and tell
_of
do you think it possible of accomplishment ? If there
alteration it will he an alteration of free trade in a
more tended degree. My Noble Friends, it was a
great inconsisteller
in me to support such a measure as this, when I formerly r oe.,
ported a fixed duty. But I slid support a fixed duty, r
the principle of protection, but because I believed that hoe
tor
duty would be the best principle of protection; for I have ever
objected to the whole principle of what is called protectvit.
But at that time I thought a moderate fixed duty was ad
top
able, because I believed it would produce little perceptible
ference to the consumer, yet nevertheless be the means,i , it
greatly augmenting the revenue of the country. I thotio:__ne,
was a reasonable compromise, and that it world give "
years sooner all the advantages of a free trade, and that it
would avert a most injurious struggle which I foresaw
proaching. These were the grounds on which I maintains
that a fixed duty was desirable, for I took the liberty of as;__
ing those gentlemen who were then supporting the Gov uf
ment, that the measure would lead to an entire free tradeaell
told them that if they desired a fixed duty, that the days,,
even the hours, in which they could be secureclo,rewneerte
adopted
at by, and that I, for one, if a fixedduty
sucho a settlerrPe° at the time it was offered, believed, thatinable, and that the choice
would, at a future moment, be unattainable,
convinced that, had t" would never be propounded. 1 „
viaeiuin have been d by" accepte measure been adopted in 1842 it
firmly persuaded th •
at it would be
the country, but I am no lessn
would contiooe
n could diet no longer so. 'f he or
such a compromise.
I am deolito,7
interested in this clueesrtels°ted. As a philosopherlandowner
enougoirt
deny that I am so interested.
List be affected, rin this cou
and I am most env on'
my pecuniary interest_
ld be done to injure my feet*
that nothing; should
Property ; and f
I should deprecate
is nothing which
ld t d more than the passing o I
measure which wou en to keep agitation alive, woich
believes would be the effect f
o• a fixed duty. I.3sua.
how can such a measure receive the sanction of Parliaanent, 't
roy Lords, we cannot exclude from Our co me re'
nosseratioas so ,
Bard to public Opinion, and the pnc•• • ff irs Of
country. By what party, by why 't ion of the a a
t set of men in this " te can
of the
you effect it ? We know that it
Governnaeot. We know that cannot be by the party of jot
week to nothing of the kills', they are pledged withi the
a fixed duty is quite ineaSeir thl
for them. The alternative .'
language held by I, tue protect-is protection, but rero,,elf werdt
tonists, that free-trade, "_:.eage
preferable to protection And what has been the la""
to set
the
party with whom •
N I have had the honour hitherto
_t fee
oble Friend, who is at the head of that party, stated
ttedefs
commencement of the session that he repared to " sos
take the duty of Government .‘"s
P ;a" Is
on the principle of relies'
,0 ,eels
all know that my worthy friend is the best man to listen
Go to
k suggestion, and the best person to come forward to 11°P bird
• fixed duty after what has passed. Well, then, there is the t
Is
party as they call themselves, are they prepared to doi26,
my Noble Friend who represents their °pa vti,inioioto
this House, or the Noble Dukes who coincide in
__ors tb-s•
with torn, are they prepared to form a Government
Lure!) LOW
principle? I think, alter the very severe language w",ojoion
have held on the subject of inconsistency--of changee he jot-%
and of eating words—l think they, of all, shouldotb weuf_o•
and would be the last—to propose a fixed duty ; f they
be then demonstrating how far the inconsistencyt., "oo
nature was possible.—( Laughter.) At all events, eY
till
never listen to such a proposition.—( Hear. hear.)
there is nobody to take the charge of such a c 0.700. tiny
the idea of a fixed duty may be consigned to oblivion. !so roasting;
opiaion it would have been the bust settlement by the
had it been adopted when it would have been acw.l:`toao,rinti;
country. We have now to choose whether we
more
otaple
the law es, it at present exists, or consent to a n_s.ylorj,, nay_
acknowledgment of the principles of free trade. Aul
ably ad
Noble Friend on Monday night who addressed )0.2:0, the Anti.
verted to a speech delivers d by a leading Metoba
out alterl"r
Corn-law League, in which the Speaker pointed
con.
:treasures which were contemplated by that associat Logue.
Lord KINNAI RD.—The speech was out madeat
,tne% 410 e
Earl GREY—I am told that it waa oot made at t.n. .;40
it is a matter of little conseittuce, awl to 114" F

i

f

to admit with my Noble Friend, that the existence of the
Anti-Corn-law League is a great evil. Do not let it be sup-
posed I mean to pass any blame on those Gentlemen ta ho are
at the head of that association—far from it, I have no hesita-
tion in saving that this country, and that even those in that
House, owe a debt of gratitude to the leaders of that party, and
more especially to Mr. Cobden.—( Hear, hcar, and a laugh. )
Yes, to Mr. Cobden. It is to his genius—to his indefatigable
energy and perseverance, and not to Sir Robert Peel that we
owe the present position of this measure. But to my llon.
Friend, Mr. Cobden, we are all indebted for the achievement
of this measure, which I believe to be one of the most import-
ant which has ever come under the consideration of a legislative
body. I say we are indebted to him for the method
in which he has conducted his triumph by means legitimate,
nay, unexceptionable—no attempt to overawe the deliberations
of Parliament by the assemblage of vast multitudes.
The Marquis of SALISBURY—Because he couldn't.
Earl GREY—I say that we are indebted to him for this
course of proceeding on this occasion—a course which has been
dictated to him by high constitutional feeling. He has been
able to convert the opinion of the nation—to show what the real
interest of the community is opon.this subject ; and considering
the time in which this great change of opinion has been
greeted, his success and triumph have been most miraculous.
But, nevertheless, I still admit that the existence of the
Anti-Corn-law League is an evil-it is an evil, because
such a holy never can exist, except it has been first
created by a sense of wrong and injury existed. And, my
Lords, it is only a grievance which could have created so for-
midable an organisation—but when once created, the removal
of the grievance will not remove the desire to remove the
organisation.—( Hear, hear.) And I fully agree with the sen-
timents so eloquently expressed by my Noble Friend in his able
speech, that the crop of political power is too sweet, when
once tasted, to be readily relinquished. Such a sentiment is
perfectly true, and I have no doubt that there will be a great
auxi.ty, even after the removal of the evil, to keep up this
formidable organisation. I have no doubt that such will be
the fact. It is consistent with past experience. But what is
the inference you ought to draw? Is it that you ought to
keep up the grievance which first created this Franken-
stein? Do you not consider that the sense
of the injustice which they have suffered, aggravated as it will
be by its continuance, by the feelings that their hopes in re-
moving it have been disappointed, will greatly increase the
power of such a body ? I say, on the contrary, that we ought,
without the least possible delay, to repeal the law which has
given rise to their complaints ; and that, my Lords, is my great
objection to one portion of the Bill, by which we are going to
enact its continuance, though even for a modified time—it gave
an excuse for the keeping alive of agitation. I should like to
do away with all that part of the measure which will give an
excuse or a ground to those parties who may be desirous to
.keep up the organisation; and, therefore, 1 look forward to
the power which is vested in this House to amend the decrees
pi the House of Commons, and I hope that we will amend it in
this particular. But my Noble Friend, almost in the same
beenth, went on to describe, in language most refined, the
power of this House. He said that we were constituted
for the purpose of placing a salutary obstacle to rash
and inconsiderate legislation, and that it was not the

practice of your Lordships to liberate public opinion.—
( Hear, hear.) That was the language his Noble Friend
had expressed in his usual felicity of language—that we are
placed as a restriction upon hasty legislation. but that we are
not to oppose ourselves to a continuous and deliberately formed
stream of public opinion. It is, therefore, of the deepest con-
sequence to us that we should distinguish the difference of a
hasty and inconsiderate expression of opinion, and of a calm
and deliberate conviction on the part of the public, before we
set ourselves against it. It is perfectly clear in the one case
that we must give way, and by so giving way we must sorely
lWpair our proper authority. My Lords, in this case, there-
ore, it is our duty to endeavcur to determine whether the de-
sire of the people—of the House of Commons—as ex-
Pressed by their votes, is a deliberately formed
Public opinion, or whether the voice of the court-
-117 has been expressed in favour of hasty legislation,
awl what are the symptoms which lead to the inference that
Übe desire of the nation rests upon hastily formed opinion.
'Mae principles on which this Bill is founded were brought be-
fore` the public 80 years ago, when the petition was signed in
fay/we of a free trade in corn. Adam Smith, in his work, has
laid divan, with a force of reason which cannot be contested,
the great principle of free trade. That principle had found its
Way amot,:qat the philosophers of every civilised country in the
world
l and it had found its way to the closet, but it was long
before statesmen and merchants would consent to its
validity. By degrees they began to do so. At first
the authority of the principle which had been received
as infallible by the philosophers, began also to he received
and admitted in a hesitating and doubtful manner; but as dis-
cussion went on—as the good effects of it were experienced
day by day, new converts came over to the justice, and to the
a
eknowledgment of the justice, of the principle. My Lords,
in my own memory how great has been the change on this
subject. Nineteen years ago, when I first voted upon this
question in the other House of Parliament in favour of the
principle on which this Bill is based, I voted in minorities,
sometimes as small as 15, and never exceet,ing 50. My Lords,
VI flow see year by year how great has been the progress of
the peineiple of free trade ; within the last few years we have
eeetao evidence how deeply the sympathies of the people are
wound t;tt in its ultimate triumph, and we see that the prin-
ciple of restriction cannot be much longer maintained, for we
stow see her tlajesty's Ministers at last coming forward and
Manfully avo wing a complete change in their opinions.
1, for one, my Lords, give them credit for the manner in
Which they have avowed their opinions upon this question ;
and I regard it t.'s an earnest, and sincere, and a candid
avowal. And when t find that that avowal has been the re-
sult of the inability of that party to resist any longer the ex-
pression of public opinion in reference to this measure, I do
say, my Lords, that I cantaot but regard it as a strong proof of
,the policy and good sense of
yielding to the expression of pub-
lic opinion. It may be said y some Noble Lords that there
were not sufficient reasons for some persons changing their
opinions, and becoming advocates of this measure, or that the
reasons which had been adduced afford anything like a fair
justification for that change. Now, my Lords, I beg to say,
that it is not my purpose, nor is it my wish, to make any in.
Inquiry into the reasons by which others were led to hold the
views and entertain the opinion, they now do upon this qu •s-
Hon. I do not wish to know whether they have taken into
consideration what may be the consequences of this change of
opinion in the year 1839, as compared with the year IS4I ; but
Whatever their opinions may have been upon the subject,
it is quite apparent that circumstances have occurred
of late years, which render it impossible for any rational man
to entertain the same opinion now. I can tell this House that
this sacrifice of opinion has been well considered out of doers—
cost of doors men are of the same opinion, in reference to the
c aenslaws, as those entertained by the majority of the other
110.e6e. There was a time when the manufacturers of this
eottn,al were of the same opinion as are the protectionists at
present, and, let me ask, were not those very men amongst the
majority of those who originated this very measure? I say
that theglaSiat mistake of our commercial policy, as is apparent
in this cort.`•4avi'owing to them. When I first
has been
entered upon Itiblic life,the ••
in favour of
so strong was feeling .
protection that wion Mr. Huskisson introduced his measure
for the repeal id. tigs duties on foreign shipping, he was re-
garded as a traitor td' tbe interests of that branch of the corn-
turree of this country.
tion of Liver h Yet, strange to say, the corpora-
pool , t e con,
oration of that very town of
Which Mr. Huskisson was the representative, are the
forward with an almost
People who now come
unanimous demand for a total repeal of the corn-laws. There.
fore I do say, my Lords, thit the propoition for the
inconsi repeai of
those laws has not been the result of any rash, or de-
rate, or hasty measure of legislation, but is one which has
been the result of rational and well-considered public opinion.
And that your Lordships will pass this Bill by an overwhelm-
ing raajority is no less my firm and constant expec-
°lion than it is my most firm, carnest and anxious hope.
Lord ASHBURTON said he could assure their Lordships
that he bad not risen for the purpose of making anything like
a long speech upon this most important subject, for the best
Pofsibise reason, that though he considered it important beyond
any other measure he had yet seen introduced into this House,
yet he did not feel that he possessed the power of addressing
their Lordships at any length upon it ; he would, therefore,
endeavour to be as brief as possible in the few remarks he had
to Make, and he begged to assure their Lordships that he
would cautiously endeavour to avoid bing betrayed into any
observation which should in the slightest degree partake
of a personal character. He would endeavour to confine him-
self, in the few observations with which he would trouble their
Lordship!, to what he conceived would be the general political
position of this country as the results of the passing of this
measure. The Noble Lord who had just sat down, asked what
would become of this country or of the present Government if
this measure should be rejected, but he (Lord Ashburton)
legged to remind their Lordships,
.that_it was not upon
Ilse result to any Government that this House was to deal
It was not the business of
Itich this measure.—(Hear, hear.)
this House to consider whether any change,
_or wh..it change
party, as the resultge, of the passing or the
was .na sake place in any
.ther.efore het. would say that their
rejecti.'sn of this measure, and
Lordship; would disposed of iTt,hilarrneisiplechatvde
coomaenyhesfuocrhe
theircon-
siderations.--( Bear'
Loriships in what hear.)
he should call a very humble shape. and had
been designated as nothing more than a Bill to regulate the
trade in corn ; but whets it came to teonebewwheiellhcoNnesuidhetreeffde,ahevbeery
lieved it would be found t
great chaages in this . After all the attention he had
1 after the speech of his
oi ar y
been able to give ciorrtpryar.ti,
sidering also the present
night—
Noble Friend on Tuesday possessed of paying
position of this country, and the pocw°
elbirutitd Acuity and danger
Its debts, he should say that nothing
g h mistaken in the
aptneared to him as the result of tlie pashstingeof this measure to
the Country.—( Hear, hear.)
that he had
it was, View. he had taken, but, as hetileiaradi-said before,
had been able to give . the result of
all the attention he
been cGsespelled to came to no other
.
this question were
had ake.viy mentioned. His views upon .
conclusion than that he
the result of forty. years' experience, during which time
.he
unities of judging of the results of great legis
had ample o,vpotat
lative experireenta• In the year 1815 he was a strenuous op-
Portent of any' great alteration in the corn-laws, at a time
. when the protecting price of corn was at 80s. He
then opposed d it was rather remark-
it because he considered it as a
wild and ill-consist:red measure ; an
able that his Noble Friend, who had introduced this measure
to the House, was one of the most strenuous advocates the
Hear,that hhear.is Opposition then had, and the re'llit Of which
house had actually beers plundered by :he tads were upon which
)
Now just let them examine what the groi:
this measure had been advocated. Some Noble Lords had
ed in-
stated that the passing of this measure had been render
, dispensable by reason of the great distress that'
Ireland, but he should ea had I.;:en very
greatly aggravated-- say that that distress
prevailed in
41-lear,hear)—and should confess
conviction that this
thing like a remedy faos, not a measure which would afford any-
also say that lt was perfeCtlat "il. los .0"
Hear, hear.) lie would
of the ports would have joarltlesurd to suppose that the opening
dththe necessary relief. On the
other hand it had been stated
,of the ports would be a very at the result of the opening
alarm in the country ;
that was met by the advocatelfr
zhetneheeed for a very short time.
Government measure
declaring that the ports would be
Now, let him ask what reasons h
had bee
The experiment of ope:i
state one occa•
adduced against such
a proceeding?
tried half-a-dozen times before, and ports had been
ceHin
the
was Ashburton)
he wouldngte
sion upon which that measure
__.resorted(L to, namely,
under the auspices of Mr. Huskissoprila.
of what took
was now speaking year 1825. I
that year a strong apprehension was entertained that there
would have been a scarcity of provisions, and corn the
725. ; and the result of this apprehension was, that. then
s at
Nissen brought in a Bill by which to enable the Government
to let snit the corn then in bond free of duty, and he believed
a would not be disputed that that statesman was one of the
wisest, ablest, and best of those England ever possessed. in
the month of May, 1825, there were 400,010 quarters of wheat
In bead, and Mr. Huskisson proposed to let that quan-
tity into consumption to meet the apprehended scarcity, but
in doing so he had adopted the precaution of
letting it out only in such quantities as would meet the appre-
hended scarcity, while no mischief would be sensibly felt as to
the result. But what was the present Government going to
do? They had now nearly 2,000,01.0 of quarters of corn in
lli end , and the result of the passing of this measure would be
to let that enormous quantity of grain in upon the count, y, at
a tcsne too when there was a fair prospect of an abundant har-
vest.--(Hear, hear.)
.The Noble Lord then proceeded to
read es:tracts from the evidence of a Mr. BanfielJ, in reference
to the pr,asent position of the agriculture of this country, in
which ;he. Noble Lord contended that there were strong
Proofs of the inspeliey of this measure.—( flea; hear. )
But now as to ;he future. Suppose they came, in the ceorse
Of three years, to a system at entire free trade—must, not
this country then be dependent 'upon foreign countries for its

supply of food ? And the prices might be wholly independent
of the cost of producing the article. Corn was a perishable
article.—( Hear, hear. ) It suffered very much when kept for
any great length of trine ; it must, in point of fact, be dis-
posed of without any delay. Flit could wish to have an
answer from his Noble Friend who was sitting at the table—
(Lord Mouteagie, we believe, was the Noble Lord alluded to)
—and who would, very probably, speak on this question
before their Lordships went to a division. The question which
he wished to ask his Noble Friend was this—What, in his opi-
nion, would be the conduct of foreign countries towards Eng-
land when the principles of free trade came into operation ?
Belgium, Dr ince, and all the other countries of Europe, have
hitherto invariably shut their ports against the admission of
foreign corn when they had had an abundant harvest.--( Hear.
hear.) England was now called upon, by the promoters of
this question, to admit freely all foreign grain, whilst no other
country in Europe would imitate our example,—( Hear. hear.)
If they were living amidst independent nations, whoeisegs,
prepared to act upon the same principle, the plan of free Were
would be intelligible.— (Hear, hear.) If the principles laid
down by those Noble Lords who had spoken in favour of this
measure were carried, he firmly believed that the people would
be completely deceived and the country deluded. The princi-
ples of political economy, as laid down by those Noble
Lords, were completely fallacious. They speak of people as
if they were mere machines. He would new quote the
opinions of a writer on political economy, which he was sure
would be received with the greatest respect; and although
Noble Lords who had spoken in the course of this debate had
quoted the speeches of statesmen, he was not about to do so—he
was about to quote the calm opinion of a man penned at home.
The writer to whom he had allude was Lord John Russell.—
( Hear, hear.) He knew that the opinions of that Noble Lord
would ihe received with the greatest respect.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord John Russell, in his treatise on political economy, stated
that "political economy" was an awful expression—( Laugh-
ter)—and that the Legislature was often called upon to decide
questions which involved the immediate I appiness—perhaps the
very existence—of millions of people, by the rules of a science
which changed from doy to day.—(Hear, hear.) Notwith-
standing those awful 'differences of political economists, their
Lordships were called upon to pass this measure, and to regu-
late the affairs of this great country in such a way as, in his
humble opinion, would bring thousands of its people to irre-
trievable ruin.---( Hear, hear.) He would take the liberty of
again quoting the printed opinions of Lord John Russell on
another part of this subject. That Noble Lord said that if all
nations were at peace, if they had tile same currency, the
same weights and measures, it would then be easy
for the Legislature of this country to act upon theoretical
principles, but the frequent occurrences of war, the breaking of
all national treaties which have taken place from time to time,
render such a subject much more difficult than any problem in
the range of mathematics. For instance, it was very easy to say
that corn ought to be admitted free, or any other article of com-
merce. and that if our farmers could not grow corn as cheap as
foreigners, they ought to let it alone.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) But the Legislature could not deal with a question
of such vast importance, on those principles. But those were
the principles on which the promoters of this measure hail
called upon the Government to act.—( Hear, hear ) They had
been told that m,ny millions of capital had been laid out by
thousanes of people in the improvemert of the land of this
country, and yet they were called upon to adopt this measure,
which would deprive those people of the benefit of all the capital
thus expended. They had been told, too, that the taxes im-
posed on the proprieters. of the . soil of. England were heavy,
whilst on the other hand they were exceedingly light, and yet
it was contended that the British farmer should be compelled to
compete with the foreign farmer, under such disadvantageous
circumstances as these.—( Hear, hear.) They were called
upon to ciecide the fate of this country at the mere
caprice of a few speculating politicians.—(Hear hear. )
As he had before said, this was not a mere question of
a few shillings being paid for corn either less or snore,
but in it were involved the happiness and the social relations
of almost every family in the United Kingdom.—( Hear, hear.)
Our colonies would feel the shock, and he thought that if their
Lordships revolved these facts in their minds, they would find
that the dangers with which this measure would be attended
werel incalculable.—( Hear.) He ventured to predict that
the consequences of entire free trade would be the ruin of this
country. Their present supply of corn was quite enough, and
it so happened that the very time when corn under this mea-
sure would be imported in abundance into this country, would
be when we least of all wanted it—when, in fact, we had
abundant harvests.—( Hear, hear.) The price would no doubt
in some instances be as low as 255.. per querter, and such
cheapness would, he felt convinced, be attended with great
danger to the country. He maintained that by the sliding-
scal the prices of corn had been preserved in a very steady
condition. During the three years that it had been in exis
tence, the price of corn per quarter had been 505., 515., and
51s. 10d.—( Hear, hear.) There was, therefore, no reason to
say that the sliding-scale had acted prejudicially to the interests
of this country. He advocated a reasonable protection to agri-
culture in 1818. Since that period their Lordships
might be aware that he had been no advocate of any
extravagant or absurd system of protection to agricul-
ture ; on the contrary, his object had always been to
regulate the admission of corn into this country on
such principles as were reasonable, and calculated to further
the interests of the people at large. He had in fact voted for
a mitigation of the corn-laws many years ago. He voted for
a reduction of the prohibitory duties in the year 1842. He
voted for the Canadian Corn Bill, and in fact every reasonable
relaxation and mitigation of the corn-laws had received his
warmest support.—( Hear, hear.) But he could scarcely call
the present corn-laws protection to agriculture, and he could
not vote for this measure, because by it they would be over-
stepping the boundaries of reason and justice. The present
was a case of a totally different description to those to which he
had just alluded.—(Hear, hear.) The object of this measure
was not to regulate the affairs of this country on reasonable,
prudent, and just principles ; its object was in fact to deprive
the country of that happiness which it had hitherto enjoyed
under the system of protection. . The measure militated against
that which had existed at all times and in allconntries.—( Hear,
hear. ) Their Lordships might be aware that there was no
period in the history of this country when there was not some
regulation with regard to the admission of foreign corn.—
( Hear, hear.) The British Legislature had always thought—.
even from the time of the conquest—proper to deal with that
subject ; and they must recollect that during the last 150 years
much capital had been invested in the great business of farming.
and that by the aid of that capital the land of this
country had been much improved. All that capital had been
expended for the worthy purposes of fertilising the English
soil ; bat if this measure were passed, the thousands and thou,
sands of pounds that had been so expended would be rendered
useless and lost. Of all authorities on political questions in
this time, he had always been mere disposed to pay the
greatest respect to the opinions of Mr. Huskisson, and particu
larly on the subject of free trade and protection to agriculture.
Mr. Huskisson said—( A Noble Lord—" What is the date?")-
1844. He stated that nothing could be more dangetous to the
safeguard and tranquillity of the country than to admit foreign
corn free from all regulations. Almost all had changed their
opinions on this subject, and yet they were called upon to adopt
such a destructive measure as this at the suggestion of men
who had themselves changed their opinio is on the subject ot
free trade.—( Hear, hear.) He did not know when Mr. Hus-
kisson died, but he thought it was in 18..:9—( A Noble Lord—
" In 1830" )—Mr. Huskisson' however, at that time advocated
a reduction'in what was called the protective duties, and he said,
" It has, I understand, been quoted against me, that I hold an
opinion that England ought not to depend too largely upon
other countries for its supply of corn I maintained that
opinion in 1815, and 1 maintain that opinion now."--(Cheers.)
He also said, " I am anxious to render this country, corn
mercially as well as politically, independent of foreigners, anti 1
therefore think that it is not prudent to suffer the free ad-
mission of foreign corn into this country." Every wise states-
man, in every nation of the world, maintained the same opi-
nions, becaase they well knew the danger of allow-
ing their country ever to be dependent on
foreigners for the supply of food. ( Hear, hear.)
Then as respects the objection of the Noble Earl, he might ask
whether the cautions were at all likely to be effectual with
respect to the foreign countries to which he had alluded, and
in eelling in the licensing system of Napoleon, he thought that
a due regard ought to be paid to the effects of that system.
And what was that system ?—(Cheers.) It should be recol-
lected that at the period to which allusion had been made' this
country had been labouring under a heavy debt, which debt
this country had to pay. That system of licensing had in the
first instance been imposed for the period of three years, but
it should be recollected that Napoleon had issued a command
that the restriction should hold for five years.—( Cheers )
Let there only look at the variations of prices which had oc-
curred during the several years in which this licensing system
had prevailed. In 1809, the price of a quarter of wheat was
945. ; in 1800, it was 1003. ; in 1802, it was 925. ; in 1813,
it was 106 e, per quarter. The average of those years was
3s. 10d. a bushel. What.
then was the object of this system ?
Was it to put money into the pockets of the Frenchmer? No
such thing, for it was evident that notwithstanding all these
restrictions, corn had beencontinued to be poured into England
from the French territories. What then was his object,
for it was evident that on these terms no
efficient benefit could be wrought for the Ex.
the e
chequer.
hoyn,
hereth e awnansoaguncreernatenotutocy
of the ftaoc t,
whetherwha th
what
was
e
supply of cord would be equal to the necessities of the time.
The manufacturer; were up in arms. His Noble Friend miss,
remember the diseu,sion which took place when they were both
Members of the House of Commons The motion was met
with a cry of universal laughter.—(Laughter.) He would
merely show the state of feeling which existed at that period,
and he merely adduced the instance to show what was the
opinion of the country at that period, and of showing to the
Noble Lord what was likely to result feem a free importation at
the present
.period, and what would be the effect of an allow-
ance of foreign countries to introduce their corn free of duty
into this country. But, did they suppose that this would be a
safe scheme ? In his opinion this could not be the case, and
he believed that his Noble Friend would be totally wrong in
the supposition that the supply of foreign countsise would at
all satisfy the necessities of this country. They were going to
diminish the rights of the population, end to reduce the returns
in the production of future years. Whetirer they did this con-
stantly or not alt was not the consideration, Let them
look to the case of Ameriza; for in whatever way they looked
upon the statesmen of the present day, they would have e speci-
ally to look to the (condition of the cours4Ty,—( Cheers.) Then if
they were to look spec} this simply as a mattes of gpance, their
Lordships would recollect I;yhat was the state of the ceentry
during the war,
when the country, to e great extent, was de-
id
e o
off foreignutltre
de-
priced ,upplies. He might, indeed, adduce the in-
the corn trade during last eptember.
this example, because it had a
in-
stance
weah rightstate
to e f
adaneP
and because it was
of
material reference to the question band,
showing what yes really the case as
an important means
t
respects corn, and he might adduce
—but thus much tie adduce the case 4 Sprig as a cor-
reteseration of hid Inews—e
ay tha
the cakesi sloe was perfectly 40drrec,t in stating that
the average -as 105 shillings a Quarter ware exclusive
s) stem. .theirLords4li's
question.—
..-ould excuse his being
ti which he intro aged this
desultory in the way i
tr,' ,the would attend t.e 4.t:Als smother •
(Cheers ) The first thingal
He to
V. The Noble Earl went on :he es-
theory of the Noble E.
truth in the Sou that prosperity
sumption that there was fii3 ii4,l stated that
es of food.
always attended on low Vic
of food the labouring popoletion
when there were high prices This reminded
of prosperity.
were generally in a state
the war, when the
him of the state of thin sduring
sufficient reiai;:: for •
want of money was alleged as
aould be recollected that
the dearness of provisions. But it F.h
the money borrowed during the war had to be paid when
the prices of the war were not only reduced in name, but ab-
solutely obliterated from the commercial cote. This reminded
him of the railway schemes which had lately engaged so much
of public attention ; he meant the railways in which the least
skilled labour of full benefit of
the country was to enjoy the
protection, and to
enjoy a full share of the prosperity which had
been reaped by the other what
classes. But, see from this
prosperity arose, and what were the symptoms of that pros-
perry en which the country -
In his opinion it wag so earnestly congratulated?.
.was like prosperity
of the present day," Where ma ty of thti railway manta
or 10,0001. a year—when many many men made their 8,(
comforts and the luxuris de Ibevea
were now enjoying the
railways, and advancing an artificial eh their direction ot
soundness in it, notwithstanding the pert,,,orcrpter.orftyl,
awhich had no
It appeared, then, that there were three cases t ATN,el,:ie Lord.
question might be considered. There was, firstly, this
the protection of native indust;y ; there was, ae'eonie,,,casethoef
protection of home-grown corn against foreign countries and
there was, thirdly, tho protection of the cotton manufactures.
Then, again, there were three Pbargses on the land. There
were, first, the charges on land whipis bee a particular refer-
enc,e to this question. Now, there were certain gesartiee which
Putic,4o,4 geeted the laud, the truth of which cow Actly

ascertained by experience. That experience he believed he had
attained, and the truth which resulted was, that the land had I
"been bought with the perfect understanding that it was
bought with the incumbrances upon it. ( Hear.) But
the argument was as to what was the amount of the
charges upon the land, but he must at the same time state what
his feeling was respecting these various declarations. For him-
self, he allowed that he was dazzled with the declaration of Mr.
Maculloch. He would adduce the evidence of Mr. Islaculloch,
than whom no higher authority could be adduced. The Noble
Lord then read a statement from MacullUch, to show that the
facts were as lie had stated.
The Earl of CLARENDON—What is the date?
Lord ASHBURTON—The date is 1814.—( Laughter.) A
mistake had evidently been made, but as Lord John Russell
stated, that mistake was fatal. Cheers.) Lord John
Russell had proposed a fixed duty of ss. a quarter. Whether
that wee right or wrong, it was perfectly evident that the agri-
eesiCeig Ought to be prtitected, and that the demand ought to be
'FeriFffel independent of the supply from foreign competition.
But it was thought that by a little stimulation the parties would
be made to provide the supply. Now the question was, whether
the farmer could be stimulated to provide the supply, without
foreign interference, and the rule used was, that as they knew
what could be got out of a bad horse by a pair
of spurs, they should use the stimulus of the spur in
order to ascertain what they could obtain from that source.
From what he could understand, he would venture to assert
that the returns would give the valid price of the produce, but
it appeared that the prise depended on the value of the produce,
and that when the returns were below certain amounts the
number inclined to obtain farms was such that there was no
reduction of rent when the farms were let. He thought that the
minister was a bold man who would venture to assert that corn
could not he produced on the continent at a cheaper rate,
when of equal quality, than it could be produced in this country.
From a return of the several markets, it appeared that where
there were equal charges en the land, there were also equal
prices. And when the Noble Lord cited this principle, he
nalght well adduce the supply of food from Norfolk. But there
was another from Prussia. But what was the statement?
Why, that Prthsia and England were on equal terms, although
an attempt had been made to place England and Ireland on
the same level. The Noble Lord had said that what was a pro-
tection to England was a protection to Ireland also. In the
latter country it appeared that the charges were laid upon
the land, amounting to 2d. per acre. This included the land-
tax, the poor-law, and every possible charge. Yet he was
bound to acknowledge that there was only a problematical
statement to this effect, and it should be recollected that it was
a general understanding that the manure produced on a farm
should be consumed upon it, and that by this means the whole
of the advantages obtained from the farm would be expended
on the soil of which it was composed. It should be recollected
that this land could not be improved, or the land preserved,
without the value of the stock it had upon it being taken
into account. This was the great deficiency, and no law could
possibly provide :a remedy, as be would contend. The next
popular error to which he would allude was that which would
make the price of labour to be apparently independent of the
price of food, and that as bread was cheap the price of labour
wonld be low. To this he would only adduce the information
of the Parliamentary reports, and to these he might add the
advantage of his own knowledge. It appeared from the reports
of the Parliamentary inquiries that the Labourers in the north
of Europe were in the habit of enjoying meat once a weak.
He had heard that there was a report that in Ireland eggs
were sold at sixpence a dozen, but the grand difficulty was to
ascertain where thesixpence was to come from. The consequence
was that eggs were scarce.—(Cheers.) Now, it appeared by
this simple allusion that the price of food did depend upon
the price of labour, and that the elements of food, population,
and labour are the main elements of income, and that on in-
come the price of food depended. If they were to take a
purely agricultural district, as for instance the east of Lin-
colnshire, they would have a clear reason for the grounds of
their conclusion. He was aware that some objection might be
effered to this, but thus much he would assert, that where
the lands were cul'ivatcd by manual labour there the
price of labour might be readily ascertained.—( Hear,
hear.) If a gradual means were used he believed that
there could be no difficulty, but where the price of labour was
dependent upon the produce of the soil, the price of wheat
was a main element of the consideration before their
Lordships, and that the remuneration of labour would
be ruled for some years to come by the reward which
industry was able to &stain for its exed tions. What
would he the immediate consequences of this measure?
Why, that the landlords of the country would suffer, and that
immediately through them the farmers, and ultimately the
labourers would be injured. That was the kind of language
that those who were oeposed to this measure held out ; adod
supposing, as he apprehended, that would be the result, he was
of opinion that the language was completely justifiable. The
tenant first of all began to suffer a little, and then began to
apply the screw, and the labourer, not understanding this sort
of political economy, and being sanctioned by the Parliament,
would naturally resist any reduction of his wages, and resist
any attempts to deprive him of any portion of his necessaries.
That would be the operation of this Bill, always supposing that
the House sanctioned the proposed alteration of the duties upon
corn. He wished to address a few observations to the Right
Reverend Bench, that the clergy would be affected, and their
incomes would be reduced—at least those of not a fixed tenure.
What had been stated ley a Noble Lord on a former occasion was
quite tree. That nothing could be more critical than the poli-
tical conduct of the parochial clergy of this country on the pre-
sent measure. If this measure was not intended to diminish
the price of corn, what then was the meaning of the Bill ?
(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Very little foreign corn was ad-
mitted except in times of scarcity. Every clergyman of the
Church of England would be reduced in his income, in the
porportion of two-sixths, so that the man with 300!. a-year
would have his income reduced to 2001.—( Hear, hear.) And
even supposing the position of those who advocated this measure
to be trite, and that no diminution in tithes would ensue, why
the clergymen would be no better of.—(Hear, hear.) Their
Lordships must be perfectly well aware, that if they let the
daff go out of their own hands, they virtually exposed them-
selves to the attacks of those without and left themselves com-
paratively defenceless. It was a mischievous thing to set up the
cry of cheap bread, and that mockery of the poor man's coin-
fort, when it was backed and supported by the advocacy of a
Ilember of the Crown.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") If
the Ministry make experiments at all, let them trifle with the
protection of things of comparatively inferior import-
ance, and if they found the removal of protec-
tion on minor articles were attended with advantage, then
their Lordships' House would be more justified in
coming to a resolution which would sanction the
operation of the present measure. It was his belief that
distress in the country would always be found, mainly attri-
butable to some difficulty in the means of circulation. When
the currency got into any difficulty it would cause nine-tenths
of the distress that might abound. He could show, in fact,
that the distress which has existed in the manufacturing dis-
tricts could be distinctly traced to circumstances which had
directly to do with the direction of the in-onetary system. He
would call the attention of the House to the probable effects
which this measure would have on the colonies. The people
of the Canadas were ready at a moment's notice to throw off
the English yoke. Their Lordships knew what the French
feelings were, and all that feeling of nationality the people of
Canada possessed. They were all ed to France by ties
of blood, and by a long formed connexion, and if the measure
were carried, it would, by rendering England dependent
on them for a supply of corn, render them
independent of us, and give them an excuse for
annexing themselves and their interests to the power of
France. That was the opinion of two French gentlemen,
NI. le Capitaine and M. Paphen, who were high authorities.
In the Lower Canadas the French influence was predominant
over the inhabitants, and the British Government had no more
right to that country than the French or any other continental
nation possessed. It might, perhaps, be well to argue that this
measure would be a benefit for all the world; but were they
to become the advocates of the human race, and to be con-
cerned with the affairs of all mankind? He thought the more
prudent course would be to be concerned with only our own
affairs.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl who proposed this
subject told the House that all Europe was going to fol-
low
the example set them by the free-traders of England.
The measure met with great praise and admiration,
but every one said that it did not exactly suit them. It was
not in the nature of things that every country was to assimi-
late and hold the sante opinions with regard to these points.
And even let all the world be of one opinion with respect to
their free trade operations, he questioned very much whether
all the world would be any better for those opinions.—( Cries
of " Hear, hear.") The entire if the civilised world was
divided into states, provinces, and kingdoms, placed under dif
frrent governments, and it was very desirable that, as far as
possible, they should have mutual opinions on different points,
and a general amalgamation of interests, as it were, to pre-
vent war, and conserve the good of mankind. What would
be the result if the principles of free trade could be universally
established ? This country might become a large manufac-
turing shop, brit its agricultural interests would be neglected,
and foreign countries would laugh in their sleeves—this coun-
try, being dependent on them for the supply of food—at the
threatened destruction of boasted British independence and the
dissolution of its interests. That which was desirable for all
countries was, that they should have every description of in-
dustry and of international commerce, so that each in its own
resources would not. be left wholly dependent upon another.
The aristocracy of that. House, and the great gentry in the
country, would be interested in preserving the protection in
which they had so long and so eminently flourished. If
however their Lordships should be of opinion,notwithstanding
the great prosperity which had attended the system of protec-
tion, that the interests of the country require the concession of
their cherished opinions they would yield it, although, perhaps,
with regret, yet with the hope that it would be for the
benefit of the country. But do not let their Lordships think
that any such anticipated benefit would be derived from this
measure or that its consequence would tend in any way to the
general interests. It was a great mistake to suppose that any
measure which had for its object the di-truction of those prin-
ciples-which had raised the country to its present paramount
position would result otherwise than in universal dissatisfaction

and contempt for the authors of the measure. (The Noble
Lord, who throughout was almost inaudible in the gallery, sat
down amicht loud cheering from all pares of the House.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he rose in that stage

. ..
of the debate, which was now the third, and he hoped the last
night of the cichate—(Cries of " No, no," and " Yes, yes")—
to express his sentiments on the measure now under considera-
tion. He should promise them that he would not .retain them
for a long time in the observations he was about to make, and
he should be extremely sorry that any Noble Lord should be
prevented giving bia opinion before their final decision was
taken. The Noble Lord who had just sat down need not be
very conch alarmed that he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) was
going to enter into any exposition of the " awful subject" of
political economy, which he asserted had been so described by
Lord John Russell twenty years ago, when a young man, and
before he held office under the Crown. That Noble Lord
was repiesetiii-4 Rs describing political economy as an awful
subject then, and the }„roh)e Lord who just sat down
represented it to be an awful' subject now. He (Lord
Ashburton. ) 2ssured the Noble Lord that he need not be ala.rined
now that he was aiotit to enter into any consideration
of that subject, except in as few as it was connected with the
present question. In rasing, however, he twonld not profess,
in answering the Noble Lord (Lord Ashburton), to follqw his
precept rather than his example in abstaining from entering
into Ley subject that did not enter fully into the present ques-
tion, and eipeeally the consideration of the burdens on land.
He would leave that suNeet.„-that most imprtant subject—
hi
tie
s;cou!sidrt view it in any other sense than as a ques-
tionthe proprietors of land. Ifis Tr;oble friend
t h o u g
ofil
must be aware of thn opinions he (the Marquis of Lansdowne)
aecledinnegvaercomrtioerectesdtronwgitlyh
hpar ohc
asserted than when
c advisingtlteii Lordships.' House.—(Hear,
thleliasr.)que"l" before
the subject, h •
always held—opinions witih
their etienticl from it now, and
im-
plored them to draw.
House,
.1: • t-',. N . le
before the w nen .1,, h
But, important g,s was e ;En-
I described as one of the greatest, if not
Friend had sc norrect y
r fed their consideration.
subject tit ti, c:icr gemrria_,,
the greatest
~
h-f- ro tberr 14d been the
• which was nu Af ~, o , ,
~
But the question
~ .
n for many ycars past to t,-,-,11
suticet of debate and discussion . .
blies in every district, town
out of Parliadoent, q,nd by assemblies .
fix it on that question
t d t^ tl,s,ir Lerd-
tresen ,7 I.! I,'
SuMe somewhat of a new. aspect, as i .
e_oro
and village in the country,
ships' House. The question at the present time came be tor,;
f
sanction o
them In the s'o;aL4 of a Bill that had receiv.td the
b
her Maiesty's Goverrimeiii, ,;,ntl. likewise sanctioned
ay a)
!, lc itestion„, therefore, did toasty
majority of the other lisiu4e" of Parlitmeni,—,C.lfS4r, he r:
life ' Voble Lord (Stanley), who has been .abSent front the
,kte
House this eVenin until now, told them that that decisiOn on
the Corn Bill should not operate on their Lordships' mint's,
and he set the decision of the same House. in 184'2 against
it de
, .cision now, _ .. .• The House of Commons of 1842 against

the House of Commons of 1844: But unless they were to
suppose that the House of Commons had become servile and
infirm in four or five years, he did not know why the decision
now come to, which had resulted from matere deliberation
and inquiry on the subject,
should be set aside. He knew,
a'so, that another Noble Lord, who had spoken on the previous
evening, and whose sentiments were entitled to be heard with
every attention and respect, had told them that, though the
decision of the House of Commons had been arrived at by a
majorities
elearmjomritoyroe ict.leaavnas
oi:aont
tahisc? N
leara majority.—(
a,jorhie would dl
ty.—( Hear, hear,
from the cross henchas.) He would ask them, Were former
there ever been a decision coma to that was more free from
Al
the exercise of authority and extraneous influence than the
decision on the Corn Bill in the other House?
had been in the practice of leading and guiding the delibera-
tions of the other House—and it was not for them to
acl, had
who
question
their motives when by a large majority they had sent up this
Bill, with the object of settling a difficult and most importan
question. He knew some Noble Lords on the cross besche
had stated that sos.ne of the public declarations of the leading
parties who supported this measure was different from that
which they entertained in private; but he did not profess to
drag these parties to the confessional, or to drag their sup-
porters there.----( Hear, hear.) It was sufficient for him that
they had altered their minds, and, having so altered, sup-
ported the present measure.—(Hear, hear.) He took the oe-
cisine of the House of Commons as he found it on this mea-
sure, as the declaration of the representatives of the people.
Before entering with his Noble Friend (Lord Ashburton) into
the commercial phase of the question, he would say a few
words on two points, which required to be consideredth as n'
t-
question. The first point was the political aspect cessary and preliminary to the consideration of the general
raques-
tion, e et
of
er th
which was referred to by the Noble Lord th ~.
the Noble Lord who last addressed
Secretary
the Colonies, and also
the House. The importance of being independent of foreign
nations for the supply of food, and the political dangers of that
th Lansdowne)e
Noble would notea r rneead• e iit
Lardto whatycho
followed the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, and
which also had been referred to by the Noble Earl behind him.
dependence.
so f
forcibly
b l He
e He must observe, however, that that striking fact which had
y stated(Lord by
been so strongly put forward had not been met. The gigantic
influence of Napoleon extended all over Europe. He employed
every commercial means to ruin this country, and prevent a
supply of food, but human interest was stronger than the power
of Bonaparte, and his policy was defeated.—( Cheers.) Look at
the price of corn then, and contrast it with what it might have
been had that policy been successful? But corn was coming
in all the time. Ile power of Napoleon, great and paramount
as it then was, did not succeed ; had it done so, corn, instead
of selling at 105 s. a quarter would have been 1505.--( Hear,
hear.) If no corn had come iu, ruin would have overtaken,
not only those engaged in Manufactures, but the farmers also.
That importation of foreign corn was necessary to save the
labouring classes from starvation and the farmers from ruin.
But what said the Noble Lord, and the Neble Lord opposite,
following him in the same line of argument, in talking
of the danger of depending on foreign countries for a
supply of food? They rested their case in respect of
this point on the present sliding-scale. Now, in his
opinion if there was one law so contrived more than another to
create this danger it was the sliding-seals—( Hear, hear.)—
because, under the operation of a fixed duty, or free trade,
they could regulate the quantity of corn from foreign countries
that might be required, and what corn-growers in those
countries might readily expect in regard to the supply. But
with a sliding-scale, they proclaimed their danger, as far as
scarcity was concerned, to all foreign countries, and if those
countries, as had been represented, were disposed to conspire
against this country, they could easily do it, for at the very
moment when the sliding-scale proclaimed the scare*, of corn
in this country, they esuld easily cut off the supplies, and reduce
the country to starvation.—( Cries of "Hear, hear.") He was
persuaded there was infinitely more danger in the sliding-
scale than in any other system of law that could be adopted.
Yet ;his system had been proclaimed by Noble Lords on the
other side. The Noble Lord (Lord Ashburton) had in illustra-
tion of this subject, referred to the cotton trade as showing the
danger which would arise in any rupture with America on sic-
count of our being dependent on that country at present for sun-
plies. Some Noble Lords were alarmed at the thought of giving
the f *reigner a control over the supply of corn, but in his opinion
quite as much mischief, misery, and starvation would follow a
sudden refusal on the part of America to suply this country
with cotton as with corn. ( Hear, hear.) And yet the very
last act of the Government, on which the Noble Lord also had
last addressed the House, was:to reduce the duty on the importa-
tion of cotton from America. Upon the subject, therefore, of
rendering themselves dependent upon foreign- countries, they
ought not to trouble themselves for a single moment.—Cf-lear.
hear.) Now there was another point connected with this Bill in
a preliminary point of view, to which he must direct their Lord-
ship's attention. A strongopinion prevailed amongst some Noble
L, rds that the passing of this Bill would be attended with con-
sid srable alteration in the social state of the country. He kne w it
had been very much the fashion, not merely amongst Noble
Lords on the cross benches, but amongst eminent persons both
in this and other countries, to say that this measure would pro-
duce a great alteration in the social condition of this country ;
and he had heard very conspicuous persons in neighbouring
counties pronounce a sort of panygeric upon the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Government for having under-
taken to work out a revolution in the social system of England.
Now nothing he thought was further from the Right Hon.
Baronet's mind in bringing on this Bill than working out a
great revolution in the social condition of England. Nor did
he think there was any reason for troubling themselves with
such an apprehension, for landed property would always
have attached to it a large degree of importance, while
the possession would always exercise some control over
the decisions of the Legislature. Even in countries of a pure'y
commercial character, such as Holland, which was described
as a country which could extract nothing it wanted out of its
own soil, the possessors of landed property exercised a certain,
indeed a high degree of influence on their particular legislators.
—( Hear, hear.) He did not at all apprehend, then,
that this Bill would diminish the power or influence of the
aristocracy, or of the country gentry, who were described by
the Noble Lord, the late Secretary of State for the Colonies,
as being an essential part of the aristocracy of the country.—
( Hear, hear.) Having disposed of these two preliminary
points, he now came to the consideration of the commercial
principle involved in this measure, but here he must stop to
remark that he did approve of the Bill, because he altogether
approved of its provisions.—(Protectionsst cheers.) In sup-
porting the B:11 they were acting as practical men, relying
upon the experience they had had of protection, while those
who opposed it were not supporting practical, hut purely theo-
retical views, for most of the restrictions which had been
placed upon trade were intended to be experiments, and the
corn-laws as an experiment had failed. Now, hitherto all re-
strictions which had failed had been abandoned, and what.
strongly indicated the expediency of their abandonment was the
fact that those parties who were supposed to be most interested
in them had never made an attempt to induce the Legislature to
restore them. It was not as if they were now called upon to
resist a change in a system which had for ages proved successful,
but they were asked to do away with restrictions which were
passed as an experiment, and which experience and observation
had fully shown had failed.—( Hear, hear.) While, on
the other hand, the experience of the last thirty or forty years
had sufficiently served to convince them that changing the re-
strictive system invariably resulted in benefiting the country
and improving those trades which it was thought it protected.
Look, for instance, at the experience they had derived from
the change which Lad been made on silk, hops, and kelp. His
Noble Friend who last addressed their Lordships bad told them
that Mr. Huskisson had once given an opinion in favour of
the protective system. Now, in his opinion, one of the greatest
benefits Me. Huskisson conferred on this country was doing
away with the duty on silk.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr.
Huskisson was terribly reviled for that act, but
Mr. Huskisson said he would persevere, notwith
standing he might be called hard-hearted, and
the result proved most triumphant, for at the time the charge
was made these were only 200,0001bs of silk manufactured in
this country, while now there were 600,0001bs.—( Hear, hear. )
His Noble Friend the late Secretary for the Colonies hail
boldly declared that the abolition of protection had proved
highly injurious to the shipping trade, but they had never
heard of an attempt on the part of interested parties to re-
store the whole system. His Noble Friend, however, must
have looked at a wrong paper, or he would not have made the
statement he did. His Noble Friend had stated that there
had been a positive diminution of English tonnage in the year
1845, but he found from a very carefully prepared and tole-
rably accurate paper, which had been lately laid upon their
Lordship,' table, that in the year 1832 there was an increase
of 2,618,000 tons, as compared with the period
1 when the duty had been reduced. But th, re was
a subsequent reduction of duties, and yet with thas
reduction the number stood thus—in 1832, the tonnage of Eng-
land was 1,936,000 tons, while in the year 1845, it was
3,660,000 tons. —( Hear, hear.) Hs could hardly believe then
that the shipping trade was suffering under the relaxation of
protection, and nothing, he thought, could be more conclusive
in favour of this Bill than the figures he had given.—( Hear,
hear.) But it was said the shipping trade of foreign countries
had increased since the abolition of protection. Well, he ad
mitted it, and gloried in the result, lie WPS rejoiced to hear
that these measures had been conducive to advance the in-
terest of other countries as well as their own, and God forbid
that it should ever be objected to any measure tl at it
was calculated to lead to such a result.—( Cheers. )
In the year 'B5, Mr. Pitt, in his statement of Political Eco-
nomy, did not consider it as strange to his principle ; when he
endeavoured to avail himself he did not see any great success
liable to result from its application. He entertained a com-
mercial proposition for a free trade with Ireland ; that was
founded on a principle of improvements in commerce. There
were not wanting persons of high authority, like him ; and
people out of doors, who then, as now, saw in the adoption of
this proposition the ruin and destruction of England. A near
relative of my Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies
(Colonel Stanley), whom he had the honour to know,
came forward on that occasion, and presented a pe-
tition enforcing it, in which he stated what the peti-
tioners stated—that they desired to be heard by counsel,
for that was about to be done which would put the finishing
stroke to the cotton manufacture of Etlgland. It was the ad-
mission of Irish fustians and sio.tons which caused this alarm,
and they stated that the working people, manufacturers, and
their children, would be sacrificed. The petition was not
adopted, and what was the event ? These cottons were ad-
mitted, and he certainly regretted to say, that Ireland did
s
not now produce enough for her own consumption ~ for
that time the cotton manufacture of England was
greatly increased. They next came to another extension
of this system ; for, anxious to get at the root of the
protective system, a commercial treaty with France was
proposed. It was debated in that House, and he would
say with the concurrence and approbation of the Noble
Bill.
House They o
n
paroerrt
of making
Were
unity
Lord, who was sitting on the cross bench. The measures
came before the House in the form of resolutions', instead of
fboerionig
n placedorde irnto the placed in that
'
a
same views
any alteration in that Bill. The treaty was debated in that
o
House, and a person of scarcely inferior authority to Mr. Pitt,
tgivefo rm
that f a
though in a different walk of life —a friend of the ,
tate Secre-
tary of di,: Colonies—he meant the Bishop of Llandaff or Dr.
his Noble
Watts—took
Friend.
Inc ettoi
lode,: h oo f
Houseprotection
that thethey were throwing
over all the experience of their ancestors. In that op--
nien be f.:,llowed, or rather preceded, the example - ofl
his Noble Friend, and read the preamble of an Act of
Chat les 11. The preamble of this Act set forth, that as it had
become universally known that •the wealth of this country was
disappearing altogether in consequence of the
money sent out
of the country to purchase French wines---( Laughter). The
experience of the ancestors to which the Noble Lord had re-
ferred might be very gOod, and be revered the experience of
their ancestors, as they founded the great principles and con-
stitution of the country. He believed they had laid the go-
vernment on the sorest, foondation, and contributed much to
the prosperity and happiness of the country. But he would
say that his respect did not extend to any of those nostrums
which 01.1 applied from time to time by Act of Parliament, They
applied all those nostrums, and invented various schemes founded
on the principle of protection, which uniformly failed in their
effect. If the Noble Duke who presided at the Egard of
Trade had leisure (4:4 k.e believed that he had not) to look
ct through all the papers inmemorials which had from time to
time been sent to the board, from those papers they would
f;nd th;:t fie commerce of the country had had more dangerous
and hair-breadth escapes than were even encountered in the
adventures or Sinbad the Sailor. The commerce of this
countt) bad undergone various iniproy'ements nod alterations,
vii e' ' it 'ere to have seriously injured it; .., • but they had a se4.
al-
ways ended by the commerce of the country finding itself,
after the lapse Of a few years, in a higher position than
it 6ha4 attained before. Therefore, he again said, that
lie thought that experience was rather against than in

favour of protection. He knew that it would be said
by many that they were prepared to abandan every-
thing if the principle of it were not for the farmers of England.
Nothing could be more erroneous than to suppose that the
farmers, with all the advantages of the wealth and prosperity of
this country—with a growing population—derived their sub-
sistence from the sickly atmosphere of protection instead of
their oven industry and labour. His Noble Friend had voted
l Ir. Huskisson as the wisest of commercial statesmen, and said
that he had agreed to the maintenance of the prohibitory sys-
tem. He thought, when his Noble Friend told the House,
when he quoted the opinions of Sir. Huskisson. as given in
1815, and also his last speech of 1828. he entirely suppressed
all mention of his opinions in 1815. His Noble Friend
had said that Mr- Huskisson was the wisest
of our commercial statesmen, and said that
he refused his authority to confirm these opinions. He would
beg
leavemr to read some remarkable passages in the last speech
of . Huskisson. Me (Mr. Huskisson) had said that to
whatever extent they attributed to other evils the present
state of the country, the corn-laws
were themselves burthen
and a restraint upon the manufaetures
.and the commerce of
the country. How was it possible for his Noble Friend, after
he had read that speech in 1830, delibeiratelLt_okeome down to
of i‘r.
the House and quote the authority
in
Huskisson as enter-
taining views coinciding with his own .
g
the corn-laws. He believed that there were not
among the natives of the kingdom a class of per-
sons better inrormed and more long-sighted in any
of business which referred to themselves than c ecotch far-
mers. He had a list in his band of six or sevenlargearms in
Scotland, in an important part of the country,
which f
had been
let lately, and one as lately as a fortnight since, when this Bill
had passed the House of Commons, and a greatmsry
0.5 f these
lettings had taken place at AnAdvance of from 10 to
and 40 per cent. Were these unfoitunate Scotehmen to'n 31efe
held up to public derision ? Were they to be handed down to
posterity as Scotch dupes ?—( Laughter.) Memorials were
presented by the Board of Trade—deputations of Members of
Parliament attended to represent the infamy which would follow
repealing the duty on flax. He would trouble their Lordships
for a few moments, and these were the last figures he should
trouble their Lordships with, to the effect that would follow
the withdrawal of the protectMn from flax. The produce of
Irifh flax in the year 1841, the year before the withdrawal of
protection, was 25,001 tons. The year after protection was
withdrawn, the quantity of flax produced in Ireland was
36,000 tons—so that it was clear that when protection was re-
moved, in spite of all the dreaded anticipation, there was a
great increase in the produce of wool. Lord Devon reports in
his Commission, that sat in the north of Ir land,
that they had examined a Mr. Blake, who stated that
the cultivation of flax had greatly increased
since protection was removed. Mr. Maculloch stated, in
answer to a question put to him, as to whether he thought flax
was a remunerative crop, that of late years it had become very
remunerative. Their Lordships had therefore the evidence of
persons residing in the country, the best evidence which could
he accumulated, to show that the removal of protection from
flax was followed by a great increase in the cultivation of that
article. But it might be said that this was owing to the in-
crease of the linen manufactures, that it so happened that protec-
tion to linen was withdrawn at the same time. He was
of opinion with Mr.'Huskisson, though not his earlier opinion,
but in his latter opinion, that the corn laws were an impediment
to the progress of manufacture. He contended, therefore, that
all restrictions when removed had been followed by an im-
mense increase in the production of those articles. If those
persons who fancied that the removal of restrictions would
have reduced this country from its proud rre-eminence to the
lowest state of degradation, and if they were to rush
to those scenes were desolation and ruin were expected, and
thought they wonld see nothing but ruin, desolation, misery,
and wretchedness, they would be surprised at seeing an im-
mense district in a most flourishing and happy condition. He
was told that they thought too little of the home market to the
agricultural interest. All fears with reference to the removal
of protection in the manufacturing districts anti the county of
Lancashire, have, according to accounts which he had lately
received, been entirely removed. He would call their Lord-
ship:' attention to the immense increase which had taken phase
in the value of manufactured goods as compared with agricul-
tural. In the former case, the increase hod been 6,300
per cent., whereas agriculture had advanced only
3,500 per cent. He therefore considered it very short-sigl ted
not to consider the manufacturing interests as part of the na-
tional prosperity of the country. He could never bring him-
self to consider the prosperity of manufactures as a sort of
morbid secretion which the State physician was to keep down
by a restrictive regimen. Ott the contrary, he considered that
the freest scope should be given to manufactures,
and that the workmen should be enabled to obtain their
food at the cheapest possible price. —( Hear, hear.)
He thought that a fixed duty was preferable to the alterations
now proposed, and he did so because of the advantage which
would accrue to the revenue of the customs ; and tecause he
wi.h d that in all great changes the prejudices and sentiments
of all should be consulted, and not suddenly interfered with.
By adopting it, the chance would be gradual and moderate,
and prove satisfactory to the agricultural interest. Those were
his opinions some time since ; and if he had the settlement of
the question now, those would be his opinions still.—( Hear,
hear.) The question which he had now to answer was, whether
he would adopt that principle when the Bill went into com-
mittee. He had no hesitation in answering that he would not,
because, though he might be nominally voting for such an
amendment. if it were possible, he would be really voting
against the Bill ' • and the consequence, he firmly believed, would
be, that instead of a fixed duty being eventually passed, their
Lordships would be called upon to pass a totally different
Bill.—( Hear, hear.) His hopes, as connected with the fall
or rise of provisions, in consequence of this measure, were
not up to the depression which was predicted on the one side,
nor to the exaggeration on the ctber. The way he thought it
would operate would be by a gradual and certain increase of
commerce which would be placed on a more solid foundation.
—( Elea-, hear.) He was confident that the effect would not
be injurious to the British farmer, and he would apply in re-
ference to its operation the lines of one of their most beau-
tiful poets.
" Trade's proud empire bastes to swift decay,
As ocean sweeps the laboured mole away."
He was willing to adopt the two following, lines in addition—
" A self-dependent power can storms abide,
As rocks resist• the billows and the tide,"
And with that confidence he would sit down and give his vote
for the second reading of the measure.
Lord Beaumont, the Earl of Eglinten, and the Earl of
Essex then rose together, and for several minutes the House
presented a scene of the most indescribable confusion, some
calling for one Noble Lord to be heard, and some for another.
Amidst the uproar, _ .

. .
The Duke of RICHMOND rose and moved that the Earl
of Eglinton he heard.

Earl GREY moved as an amendment that the Earl of Essex
be heard.

The LORD CHANCELLOR put the question to the vote
and declared that the "not contents" had it.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that the " contents '
had it.

Earl GREY—I say the " not contents " have it.
The Earl of EGLINTON at length gave way, and
The Earl of ESSEX proceeded to address the House.—He
was sorry that he should have occasioned such trouble ; but he
was desirous to express the opinions he entertained with regard
to this great question, and as he was so little accustomed to ad-
dress the House, he hoped for its favourable consideration
while he made a few observations on the subject. He had come
to the conclusion he had entertained with anxious de-
liberations of great doubt, and he did not found
them on the opinions of the Brights and
Cobdens of Manchester, but upon thorough conviction.
He had had much doubt as to the repeal of these laws, and he
should still feel much doubt in his mind were it not that the
opinions of her Majesty's Ministers had broeght forward such
arguments as they did in support of the repeal of the restriction
an the trade and commerce of the country. But whatever
doubts he had on his mind as to these laws they were removed,
and he now had none.—( Hear, hear.) But long before this
measure was brought forward, he was of opinion that the
cheapening of corn would be of great benefit to the farmers,
for it would allow them the means of fattening cattle at a much
more remunerative rate than at present.—( Hear, hear.) He
was also of opinion that this measure would greatly
improve the sale of cattle, and he was sure that they
should all live to see the benefit of the repeal
of the corn-laws to this country.—( Hear.) He was
not one of those who impressed upon the people that this was
a measure which would be of great benefit to the country. He
did not seek to be popular by using such arguments, but he
was not for making the people believe that high prices were for
the benefit of the people. He was for making the farmers be-
lieve that the new system of farming was the better ; and he
was for impressing on them the necessity of doing away with
the old and antiquated system of farming. He would take
that opportunity of doing away with an unfavourable impres-
sion which had been made with respect to himself at some of
the farmers' meetings a short time ago, where it was stated
that he ss as careless of the interest of the small farmers. He
had never said anything which could lead any one to so repre-
sent him. What he had said was, that the repeal of these laws
would do more injury to the small farmers, would injure three
who farmed land in a small way, and who had not
capital at all to enable them to make the nesessary improve-
ments in agriculture. He had so expressed himself, and he
was at a loss to know how it could be expected otherwise.
There was one thing to be very much regretted when consider-
ing this question, and that was, there was an impression
amongst those who were ambitious to rise and to
be of importance in their various parishes, that
it was thought by them to have large farms was to be the
mast respectable. This false feeling made many take more
land than they had capital to work to their advantage. This
taking of large farms they thought the most necessary to their
prosperity. Now what said the late Lord Leicester, the great
promoter of the agricultural interests, and the great authority
on all that affected the farmers' interests ? He said that he
would never let a farm to any one who had not at least 104 per
acre capital. The consequence of this was, that he had brought
round a class of farmers who were the most prosperous
and happy, and who reflected credit upon the country.
If farms were to be taken on a different system to the present
one of letting out small portions of land, they would find men
of large capital who would embark in agriculture. It was
the opinion of the Noble Lords on the cross benches
that it was not for the benefit of agriculture
for men of capital, who were acquainted with agricultural pur-
suits, to bring their capital into such a speculation, but such
was not his opinion. lie was not at one period in favour of
free trade principles, but he was now converted to such an
opinion. He could only say that his conversion was pure. He
had nothing to expect from her Majesty's Ministers—he sought
no reward ; on the contrary, be had made a great sacrifice ; for
it was a sacrifice to lose the good opinion of the
farmers of England. He had made that sacrifice,
because it was for the benefit of the country 'at large.
He could not sit down withdtit expressing his regret that
those who had brought forward this measure had not considered
more particularly the burdens upon the land with a view to
their alleviation.. He believed that the Ministry did not
expect that evils would result from these burdens, which
would make it necessary that they phould take them
into their particular consideration, He thought that
now they had an admirable opportunity of con-
sidering this subject, and of alleviating the burdens under
which the agriculturist was labouring, for he did not consider
that the continuance 'of protection for three years was an
equivalent for the injuries inflicted by these burdens. Believ-
ing as he did that a great change had taken place in reference
to this question—seeing that those who had formerly advocated
a 40s. duty had now reduced their claims to exactly eq-half
the amount—seeing, also, that tie-4e who bad formerly advo-
cated a small fixed duty were now contented with no duty at
all—and believing, as he did, that the period had now arrived
when these laws must be rescinded, he thought it
better that they should
adopt the wiser course
of at once yielding to the popular opinion, instead
of endeavouring to retain former opinions and former
prejudices. By the adoption of this peliey, they would restore
harmony where bitterness at present prevailed ; they would
extend commerce, and establish on a more friendly basis the
relations of foreign countries. In conclusion, he would state
that he had every confidencein her Majesty's Ministers, an.;
in.-ire particularly in the sagacity of that able and sesiomplished
Minister who presided over her Majesty's councils.—( Hear,
hear, cheer;, and eounter-cheering. ) He would ask their Lord-
ships to point out any one person who had been entirely con-
sistent on this subject.— ( A Noble Lord—" You were not.")
He saw few or none, around him, who had been so and he
believed only those could lay claim to coneistencY who had films
the beginning urged the propriety of a owl abolition of those
laws, He dici not, therefore, see, that those who
had become converts to these opinions, cold be greatly charged
with inconsistency. Until they could prove that this country

was not in a progressive state—until they could prove that the 7
wants of the population did not increase with their growing
numbers—until they did all this, be would rather trust tQ the
sagacity and foresight of her Majesty's Ministers, who had, in
his opinion, only introduced this measure at a period when it
was really required. For himself he would only say, that even
if be had not changed his opinion upon this subject he would
never have joined in the outcry which had been raised against
Perhaps the most eminent statesman who had ever rul•ol the
destinies of this great country. Whatever, therefore, ski: I:t he
the fate of this measure, whether it were to pass into s lax, or
whether it were to be rejected by their Lordships, this csto.; ry
still would be deeply indebted to that Minister for the series of
admirable measures he had brought forward, and for his endea-
vours to raise the country from the slough of despondency in
which he had found it.—(lmmense cheering.) The present
measure was admitted by all to he not a factious one ; :t pos-
sessed in itself all the elements of success ; and even if it
should disappoint the expectations which had been formed of it,
the country would acquit that Minister of any blame in conse•
quence. It would increase the comforts of the labouring
classes, it would extend the advantages of commerce, which
under the protective system had been paralysed, and when
time should have obliterated all party feelings, the name of
this Minister would be looked up to by all posterity with Bra-
t itule and admiration. Ile should give his hearty support to
this measure.
The Earl of EGLINTON said, that since he hail the ho-
nour of seconding the address to her Majesty's speech from
the throne, he had never obtrudetgoimself upon the notice of
the House further than by addres ne very few words to their
Lordships, and, therefore, he trusted they would excuse him
on the present occasion. Like the Noble Etrl, who
had just sat down, he ( Lord E Clinton) had no doubt of the
propriety of the course he was pursuing, but, unlike him, he
had not changed his opinions—( Cheers and counter-cheers)—
for he had adhered to those Conservative principles which,
from the very first, he had advocated. He doubted not that it
would be a wise and temperate course to modify opinions in
order to insure the unanimity of a party, hut there was
baae point
tst beyondobreedpieree
he which
reprehensible.
e .1 they yH dictumcou le
was
of
fo to
fa go,loepai,anbni.
opinion
where
they had never reached that point, and when they found the
leader who
ta gonetalents,
tpast,s, a e
desertinginculcated thosethus- ppr
ri
inncei
rpl el
es
s,
prostituting
and the party who held them, he considered that further
obedience to him would be most reprehensible.
He He did not wish to be personal, though e
like the present it was too much the habit to occasions
personality, and ascribe to those who might differ froth
them, all kinds of improper and dishonourable motives.
He would beg to say that he had to) much respect for
those who occupied the Ministerial benches, ton much respect
for their Lordships' House for one moment to indulge in any
observations of the kind. How much he might lament the
course which they had judged it expedient to pursue, how
much he might blame their facility in yielding to a line of
policy which be considered as pregnant with danger to the
country, vet he believed they were as much actuated for the
general good as the warmest and bitterest of their opponents.
And though it might appear very strange to him that out of a
Cabinet of 13 one only should have been found to have come
out unscathed from the furnace, still he believed that her Ma-
jesty's Government were not actuated by any love of office, but
that the party were influenced by an extraordinary want of
firmness of purpose and a more extraordinary admiration of their
leader, but he considered it a legitimate subject to inquire
into a change of opinion. In the first place, the failure of the
potato crop had been denied by the Noble Lord in his opening
speech upon the measure, as the influencing cause of the change,
but he ( Lord Eglington) must beg leave to differ from him,
and exaggerated statements of a failure was the reason for the
introduction of the measure. He did not mean to say that
those statements were entirely without foundation, He did
believe that there was a partial failure of the potato crop, but
it was not of sufficient amount to involve the consequence of a
famine. Some of the poorer inhabitants ran a risk of incur-
ring more than their usual quantum of suffering, and it cer-
tainly was the duty of Government to interpose to
the best of their ability ; and if he thought this
Bill would have the effect of relieving distress—if he
considered that it would prevent the suffering of one poor
family, he would support the Bill; but he did not think it
would have any such effect. A great many measures could
have been found to alleviate distress. An increase of the
income-tax might have been imposed, but how the present
measure could have the effect of providing against the famine
in Ireland was quite out of his power to comprehend.
There was no scarcity of provisions in Ireland ; the only
scarcity that was felt there was a scarcity of money, and he
could conceive no measure less calculated to benefit Ireland
than the present. Ireland was strictly an agricultural et untry,
and ;thousands of its acres were uncultivated, and if there was
anything more incumbent on them than another, it would be
to pass measures calculated to reclaim these lands. But he
put it to them was the present measure calculated to have any
such effect ? On the contrary, it put an end to all agricultural
enterprise. But then, forsooth, they were told that they had
been pampered into sloth by protection, and that competition
would infuse life into them, and that where they at present
grew three qrs. of wheat they would grow five qrs. But he
did not understand how competition, which necessarily
induced low prices, could have any such effect,
Could the landowners, who depended for their inc times on
the rents cf their lands, afford to lay out the necessary expendi-
ture, which would involve the probability of the produce of
five years instead of three.—( Hear, hear.) He was particu-
larly interested in the state of Scotland, and he believed that
the present measure would be most injurious to the farmers it,
the western district of Scotland, who lived in the manner of
labourers, he a!iould like to know how they would be able to
compete with the low-priced corn. They had laid out all their
money on their ground, and now, when they expected to
'reap some return, they were to be delayed by a sup-
ply of corn, at a cheaper rate than they were
able to produce it. Bad land could not compete
with the very low price, and it would be thrown back into
grass. which it could hardly produce. Then, as regarded the
principle of competition, suppose a new railway was to he
started in competition aeainst an old-established one, both
having the same termini, he would put it to them, would it
conduce to the prosperity of the old? And if they had
cheaper fares, even under a better mans ~temeni weal
it tend to make their dividends 5 per cent. 'n ti of 3.?
If after the ample discussion which had been given to thismea-
sure and after the deliberate opinions of the people, it should
be decided that the country must be governed on the principles
of free trade, he for one was not prepared to say that that
House should stand in the way of the avowed wishes of the
nation.--( Hear, hear.) As hereditary guardians of the people.
as the protectors of their rights, as Peers of Great Britain. he
called upon them to reject this Bill.—( Hear, hear.) He
besought the Noble Duke, without whose assent this Bill could
not appear before their Lordships, he besought him to stand
forth once more as the protector of that country which he had
so often saved. He called upon the Noble Lords opposite who
adhered to those principles of protection which they had al-
ways advocated in common with himself though they differed very
materially on other points. Laws might be re-enacted, statutes
might be repealed, but character once gone could never be
regained. He besought their Lordships not to share in
the degradation which this ill-omened measure had brought
upon the public character of British statesmen—( Cheers)
and which he feared would cast a foul blot upon them in after
ages.—( Loud cheers.)
Earl DALHOUSIE and Lord BEAUMONT here rose simulta-
neously to address the House, and contested their right to do
so for several minutes, during a scene of the greatest confusion.
The latter Noble Lord struck the table several times in the
most violent manner, and in the midst of most vociferous cries
of " Dalhousie" and " Beaumont" shouted " I move the ad-
journment of this House." rc.l Dalhousie at length gave
way, when

Lord BEAUMONT, in a m,)st excited stale—l am surprised
that the Noble Earl should persist in his attempt to prevent
me from addressing your Lordship, because I said to him
across the table that I would occupy but a few minutes of
your Lordships' time—(Cheers)—feeling anxious, as he is, and
all your Lordships must be, that this debate should conclude.—
(Cheers.) And when I rose it was for the purpose of confin-
ing myself to a very few remarks. Although I confess, my
Lord:, it is with rain I do contract my observations into a
small compass, because I feel much on the subject. I have
thought much on this subject.—(Cheers.) I have attended
to every speech that has been made on this subject, and I do
think that there are certain points which have not
vet been alluded to.—(Hear, hear.) But, my Lords,
notwithstanding this strong feeling, I will still keep
the pledge I should have given, and if your Lordships will but
lend me your attention for a few minutes—(Cheers)—you will
find that I will not detain vou long.—(Cheers.) If, my Lords,
in those few remarks which I feel it my (Icy to address to
you, I do not dwell on that portion of the subject on which so
much stress has been made in other parts of this discussion, I
mean that strange change of opinion which has come over cer-
tain Noble Lords,l trust you will not impute it, by any silence on
that subject, to any small value that I may be supposed to pist
upon the consistency of character in 'public men. I feel
as much as any man the shock which public morality must have
received by this uncalled-for and injurious measure. And
if the question of the conduct of the Government were brought
forward separately, I myself would move a resolution, the
object of which would be to reprobate their conduct, for on
such a subject I would feel • it my duty to vote for such a re-
solution as that.—( Hear, hear.) But on the present occa-
sion, my Lords, I would confine myself to the subject before
you, because it is my wish that this subject should be treated
on its own merits. I wish, my Lords, to come to a consider-
ation, Svhether or no, you are now to abandon that principle,
which for so many years as guided your commercial qualities ;
and supposing you to come to that resolution, w i.. ,lier the
measure proposed by the Government is the best niaie of
if:o
doing ?—( Hear, hear.) These were the grounds, my
11.ort ,
on which I hoped to have seen this measure discuss.s, and
thend cnlyof
th grounds.
e debate, t h t
m need
y vnootte, say,sha shall be
gLords,iven no
ng te s at t
thisthis
mleaat
e
sure. You have based this measure on Its real ground, for with the
exception or two Noble Friend., who sit together, the Noble
Marquis and the Noble Earl who spoke on the former occa-
sion' if any arguments have been brought forward in favour of
the Government measure. I am sure we have had none from
the Government themselves. What was the ease in regard to
tnh et
rNy
ionbgl et
oEa
bringr wh
foo
ropeneda tnheexdcenbs ae tfe:r l
wastedon
tahliosng question,period
He
vote
a long list of votes against his secretly entertained opinions.—
( Hear, hear.) The larger portion of the Noble Earl's speech
was to the effect that he entertained free-trade principles, but
he did not venture to vote in accordance.—( Hear, hear. )
The remainder of the Noble Earl's speech was a feeble attemp. t
at argument with regard to the grounds and principles of this
measure. After partially abandoning the cry of famine in
Ireland, he said, My Lords, I know that it will be
satisfactory, notwithstanding the (-Astress in Ireland, that corn
in immense quantities has been imported into this country.
The fact was, they were about
loseoutttoe thenha benefitncethe of thevalueope
of every
to
eba
nrethioacbinet
ca
eai nnetdhd
the
bepcyretstes heae royf of
food.life--to
competitiono
Suchf a singlemed to
marbke thetien
objectorde order
ot of
every projector of the Bill. He
wassee aware that a great at-
tempt had been made to show a deficiency in the oss,ll, of
potatoes in Ireland. This he drew froth thelast returns sent
to England; but a great deficiency Lad occurred in the potato
crop, and the natural acussequence was, that the peasantry
would neglect the culture of potatoes for white crops. What-
eves might be the eloquence employed upon the subject, no
charge whatever could be made respecting the points before the
House ; and when the halatree of trade was talked of, it was of
little consequeroo on which side this balauee was to rsst, but
certainly, when there was anything to poise, it might well
be asked on which side the advantage was tq be gained.
They were told that gold was to pay for the exchange
of goods, and gold was to be the grand maximum of faith in
exchange. When he looked to this
t radiosilaalanco otof
etareandeo,thehre,
thought that there were certain countries
and that the result was the difference in expense, the difference
being the respective value of manufactures in this country.
From the returns that had been made to Parliament, ho was
led to e!ieve that the principle they went, upon was the value
of iaboue.—( Cheers. 5
Lord BROUGHAM was quite sorry to interrupt his Noble
Friend.--( Great confusion. )
The Earl of WICKLOW really thought this was a grievous
interference with the order of the House.—(Great confusion,
and cries of Order, order.")
Lord BEAUMONT must really persist, though it was with
great pain, but it appeared from the returns, both from
Prussia, Russia, and America' that the price of labour,
and the price of wheat had been regulated by the price
of gold. This being the case, he trusted their Lord-
ships would look upon the question in the proper light.
Under the operation of the present system English goods were
sold at Trebizand, and other places, cheaper than in the Eng-
Rah market, Ile not oulx made this statements but he found,

on referring to the evidence of Mr. Gly before the Land
Burdens Committee, that that geetleutan stated that in the
China market the exports wets Felling et less and lesseend that,
many losses were in consequence so Wised. He believed the
exports must be met by imports, and put gold among the'
other articles that are to be estimated .in the calculation.
Grain entered comparatively little into the foteien trade, as
creniared with the home trade, which, ie regard to the exports.
they were selling year by year for less and less, while higher
prices were being paid for returns to be imported e•-( Hear,
hear.) If they reduced the price of labeur dn the home market.
to an equivalent extent, there would, however, be no loss. if tlie'
rate of labour in both countries we; eppreeitneed there would
be no lose. The great argument with regard to, tie eerg-lavrs.
was, that in order to increase the exports of the country, it was
necessary to increase the imports. • He believed iq that rekeet
that the imports were regulated in a great measure by the state
of the home market. Taking the population of England and
Wales, they found the population to be 16,000,000, consuming
each a quarter of corn. It seemed according to political
economists there were twenty millions of acres of arable land
in the country, of which fire millions of acres were tender
wheat.' Supposing that each acre yield three quarters—and
that eat less than was produced in many places he knew, but it
was the average amount of corn yielded—the amount produced
would he fifteen millions, being one million less than the whole
required for the consumptien of the population. There was but
one million of quarters which were male up from Ireland and
the colonies. Ile amount of deficiency was so small as to
leave but little to be made up by importation from foreign
countries. —( Hear, hear.) But the. lowest food at present
consumed by the people was wheaten bread. He made this
statement, and he made it advisedly. It had been proved that
When distress prevailed Leeds-erd Sheffield there was more
wheaten bread consumed than at times when trade was
flourishing; as at the latter period the consumption of
butcher's meat was so much greater.—(Hear, Lear.) At present
therefore, even in seasons of depression, there was but 1,000,000
to make up, though in many seasons the country produced
sufficient to supply its want,. But it was said that free-trade
would increase the quantity to 2,0:t0,00.1 quarters,e and that
the
great object of the change was to increase t exports
be
above the present amount
of 'English grown quarters, over a! ,
countryim,
orta
importation
encouraging c2o,uoroaog, ionogo largeif
so, imports.t.h
eymust
displ saveaeszoooo
to:(7.)
mwaonoulifiatice-
tse
be substituted to a glee.
too much, as butcher's meat would
consumed.
He
atunrderifs tolfietrhee wcoausnatnry,
extent for the wheaten bread at present
v.ho
slt
increaset
hen t
hoatt
r ttehres
prosperityl
fi , 00,00 a of among
Sears the
manyanydeathat it
nearrriu ttoterheimal,luadnedtowroatstfait,leldfletehmatthdeurNinogble Lord
produce of the country was equal to its demands,
this meet
would
beau great wouldbefoxrd,
dhthila,t injefhtihsisrewspeeece so
tthtehepnrehseorwit
would m
measure
s the expectations of those who expected that this measure would
brine a large accession of imports. There would be periods
if this were true, there would he seasons and periods in which
the large supplies exported would 'not be required, and then
away wouldea
go the principle of the manufacturing interest, who
expected from this measure a large, regular, and perma-
nent increase of trade with foreign countries.—( Hear.)
The Noble Marquis also said that if they adopted this measure
of free trade, the foreigner would regulate his supply, and
there would be a regular produce for each and every year, but
this was nothing more than what they had at the present
oe
ment ; for the rn
Noble Lord remarked, and truly, that under the
present system the foreigner had warning when they
were in distress, and when they had abundant harvests, This
was just what he required ; and he seas, therefore, strongly ,
favourable to the present system, but whether they had a slid-
ing-scale or not, the foreigner would always be informed as fo
the prices of wheat in this country.—( Hear, hettes)' If lleiy
were to have foreign corn, ;it was bell:eel:. he 'theirerhr,
that it ;Could come into the countrytraseteg tt eesiee
duty. But it wits argued !. tlr
having a knowledge of the state-cif titereatkete in'tlitscennteye
could easily stop the supplies during disturbed cited-Vitae+
did this agree with one or the'7teternen'irria,4l by fli4 Noble
and L, arned Lord Who later interrmittidlath?: Noble.
-
leae amnedriLd
meridian
Learned s statedoir,odo...e ivithitalif ';eNvattit)--16.
earl
hobiere
ITNia..-tall,'C,.-611r-?.A &Melee r6el
This "dtfileVe:4ll:kat'Aear.)
the world, and lead leve.ef h.i's lie ,coeld
not prevent coffi-C4elnele' info
"this
was antAtti 17M1461310-114t ;Tiudb-.7bels
fore he sat down.' The protectionists were asked nhv the
English faimer.could not compete with the foreigner, 'Now,
he contended, in the first place that the English farmer came
into the market not on fair terms with the foreigner. He was
as convinced.of this as he was living at that moment.—( Hear,
hear.) In balancing the trade of tare country, the English
farmer brought 16,000,000 quarters of corn into the market,
while the foreigner only brought 2,000,009,. or 3,000,000--
the one, however, came positively loaded with taxation, while
the foreigner came in free. The Enghih farmer had, perhaps,
foreignerquei t quarter o f hiswh
who
wheat,paid and
n yet
tax li e
rc.ompentee:e.aweif:.h the
s
to pay 4s. or Os., in the shape of direct taxation upon eve,ty
o
hwandatetov'e
Noble and Learned Friend knew little or nothiree of Russia, or he never would have made the statement ho did with regard to
it. Instead of Russia being in the position it was, the land
was already clear and ready for plough. It required neither
manure ear any thing else, and it only waited for the seed being
thrown on the land.—( Hear, hear.) Would this
,city then
compete with the British farmer on fair and equal terms ? He
would wish to knowewhether his. Noble Friend was a. German
scholar.—(Laughter.) Well, perhaps he was not—(Renewed
laughter)—if he were, he would remember the description of
the state of the corn soils in Russia. The description an
immense tract of land, ready to receive the grain, and .only
likely to give a return in case of a proper market being found.
Not long ago, he was at the port of Goole, in Yorkshire, and
he there saw corn which had been conveyed on board' a,
vessel there at Ili. 6d. per quarter. They might use their in-
formation as they liked, but he could produce a confirmation of
his statement, that the corn was conveyed on bird free, at
12s. Gd. per quarter. He referred to his auehority, as there
was a disposition to contradict his statement. It was not
probable that they could maintain that the price of
corn would remain so low as it was at present. He knew
that if a large trade was carried on in corn the prices would
rise, but they would be subject to an enormous fluctuation.
He had seen last autumn and winter in Germany that from.
Monday to Wednesday the price of bread had risen sit
kreutzers. When they did away with the bonding system
they would be exposed to these fluctuations, and acct unpro-
vided with corn gores. 'fhe garnering systetn Was adopted
all over the eantinent; in France, Austria, Germany, Turkey,
and even by the Facl-.: of Egypt, If ther-, was not sufficient
provision its the country, tho people c.ell back on these stores,
which as late as last winter had been the means of preventing
famine in many parts of the reountry. The b mding system rte
England ensured that pre:rective systene.—( Hear, hear.) We
had in bond a certain quantity of corn which was always a
provision, end it was pretty certain rot to come into tee
market until it was w/hterl, and it was certainly a safeguard
to the country, and it was more certain and more economical
than any other that could be arranged. They hail not in this.
country whit was seen at Constantinople, when the people
were clamouring at the arsenal dernanchig the surrendee of the
provisions contained in the bnildmg. Something' might be
done which would hinder the country beino eefiendent on
others, If they were to follow the sugge.
Q....10r; of his Noble
Friend near him, they would cultivate entire stock, instead of
having a proper quantity of arable land. His Noble Friend
said that stock was a great improvement in farming, but
they must have the stra.
for the stock, and must have the
land to supply that straw and receive in return the manure.
If this measure was passed they would he eomielled to make
up a suf.ni7ient number of quarters of foreign wheat, and having
no bonded system, you will then be driven to extreme distress.
Then would happen that grievous object for which they appear
to strive—namely, the market will be only supplied just with
what it wanted for the moment. Then; if anything sudden
were to happen to the country to check this system. so that tors
importation could not take place, what would become of the
country ? Under the present law there was always a sufficient
quantity in bond to supply the deficiency, in case tif an accident
of this kind.

The Marquis of NORMA NBY—Tiernember veer promise.
Lord BEAUMONT—The Noble Marquis had reminded
him of his promise. He had only to state that he bad a few
words to say with reference to the question of population in
extensive districts. There was no doubt that whatever the
population was, there must be a grew demand for labour. Li
this country, however, the population iv is v:ry dense, so that
there was a great supply rather than a deficiency ; therefore,
the whole argument drawn from the circumstanc•zs of America,
did not in the least appl3 to this country. Their Lordships must
bear in mind that this e •untry was the most densely populated
country in all Europe. There was another point
to which he must call their Lordship' atuntion, and
that was the question of freight. The freights were
greater from Selby and Goole to London than from
Hamburgh to London. He was sorry to detain their Lord-
ships so long, lie spoke from the fulness of his feeling. He
was extremely sorry to stop so short as he had done—he re.
gretted that he could not proceed at further length ; that.
wishing as he did that the debate should be concluded to-night,
and knowing that they yet must have a long and an able speech
from the Noble Earl opposite (Dalhousie). lie said a long
and able speech, because he thought the Government were
bound to show some better ground thin had }et been done,
r and
nnFi ndrwi
also
r tilntshi
in the article of
show what would be the diminution of price . .
duringsome
thisbetter
measure.reasons o n
Ilethe
considered
i ofde. r
eldh e
that Government.it
was t
h e i
ro for tunttyrn;
ti ; h
perthe
cent.,m a material a 1201 income, or
cent.or
whether
corn—w
from the income of this country. He would refer to one point—
htheethyeirntieindwertlod tadkiemi3n
thneer.ennttahleomf
olratnhd.RidiTnhgenfreynntarlksohfireth,isi3cl.ouinntrsywnweaspalr7t/s. an
f
tVraleis. There were two parishes in Lancashire in which Mr.
Ashworth's manufactories stood, where the rental was only 81,
an acre. This fact was given in evidence by Mr. Ashworth
before the Committee appointed to inquire into these matters.
lie would conclude by observing that he very much regretted
hlbhaeretienctghhoi could not
enbodofe tfttohhrreeee
their
retvrhLe
entoiornadogtstthehhinepetrsilovin,
01dtfh subjectsnet their
tekwi
ifrnuhdii
tnchheesrhs ed,Aew,
Lordships,it
taahsi
detain
whichdu tehts eirmaotti s o
thatf
'thane:
had heard him.
gi I Ot
the
GH
NobleA MLor d explained.w a
was
t 0
preventHLhiobject,asodrar.e arlHiys esothnaNetces:dabp,iltdei
and terLtuorpdtilln
rfoergatritiketocownhvaetniheene(te.mordf Brougham)
Nobleghai)
had entirely misunderstood his statements and his arguments in
reference to Russia and to Napoleon Buonaparte, and he
had entirely reversed the in'•erence which he had drawn. His
object in interrupting the Noble Lord was merely to set him right.
and to prevent his (Lord Brougham's) arguments from being'
misunderstood.

The Earl—of DALHOUSIE hoped that their Lordships
would do him the justice to believe that in rising to address
them in favour of the second reading of this Bill, he did so
under deep and unfeigned distrust of his inability to discharge
the task intrusted to him, but he hoped, from the continual
course of kindness which he had experienced from them, he
would meet with their indulgence, while he made a few obser-
vations on the important question at I)resent under their con-
sideration. Nothing should fall from him to increase
the feelings of discontent which prevailed among
their Lordships, but he would address himself to the
question without attemptingv to excite any irritatien on so im-
portant a subject, !he debate, as far as it had yet gone, had
divided itself auto two considerations—the one referred to the
measure itself, and the other to the conduct of those who had
brought it forward. It was, he admitted, hard to endure, and
painful to listen to the comments which had been made upon
those who were identified with the present measure; and
though he admitted the mortification, he felt, on finding him-
self in opposition to those with whom he had for..
Merly acted, still he must admit that there was some
cause for their comments which he had heard.
It was not from any disrespect for their Lordships who dif.
fered from him on this question, that he would not address their
Lordships at any length. His Noble Friend, the late Secretary
for the Colonies, had laid the case so fully beforo them, that:
he would feel it unnecessary to address them on the arguments
opleoaLftiol
spvrardtonsothcetiecipdi
tesi
obttnhy the r
aaldtveahseonNob
had
oattdhtliaoes
always been
maintained,
ns tbre3,e.nle should
l olfi()ep ihnfnaiorini
fttomhwuaenacteihnidoeno
stpthtroaiintnteiheir
oui
nion not upon any light grounds, but had formed it from att
examination of the history of the commerce and the legislation
of this country. That was the source from which his opinion was
formed—that which his Noble Friend said he had sought
for in vain—namely the history of facts. The tariff since
184'2 had placed the question of protection beyond all doubt as.,
to its effects and as to the necessity of its alteration. Int;
making the statements which he now did, he made ne state.-`
ment at variance with the principles and opinions which he had
advocated for years. Ever since he bad the fortune
part in the administration of affairs hc.h_ad ttasftil
said anything but that which he ,
well that when he expressed his eent,Tnia,

0, :ZZ 1;1 1q:

this question he observed many Nebl.e Lords who differed from
him, shake their heads and others express their dissatisfaction in
various ways. The opinions which he then expressed were
the opinion, which he maintained that night. He had for
the eleven years of his public life advocated nothing at
variance with those principles. in the other House,
when he had the honour of a seat there, his vote was always
for a restriction of the duties. The first vote which he gave
in their Lordships' House was for the Canada Corn Bill. He
felt that it would be imprudent of him, at that late hour of the
night, to proceed to express his feelings on this question at any
length. He felt that he ought to go into many of the points
of the speech of his Noble Friend the late Secretary of the
Colonies, but he would not go into it in detail.—( Hear, hear.)
Now, he had heard many persons complain of a tariff of 1842.
It reminded him of a Noble Friend of his own who complained
of the immense ieerease in the price of butter. There were
two reasons advanced in justification of this complaint; first,
that the slaty had been unnecessarily lowered, and secondly,
that the importation had been increased; but it was clearly
shown that the duty had not been lowered. and that the imnor-
tation had not been increased. He regretted that the Noble
Lord (Stanley) was not in his place, because it was ex-
ceedingly distasteful to himself to reply to matter which the
Noble Lord could not possibly hear or reply to. One of the
statements of his Noble Friend was, that his Right
Honourable Friend at the head of the Government had
made it his boast that the tariff of 1842, by lowering
the duties, had effected rise of pricea, and he asked
bow it was possible that competition should raise the prices.
But that had been met by his Noble Friend (Earl Grey) at
an early hour in the evening, but he (Lord Dalhousie) would
merely advert to the fact. That statement had never been
made by his Right Hon. Friend. All he said was that, not-
withstanding the alarm exhibited by the agricultural 'Mem-
bers aboat the tariff lowering the prices, the effect of it had
been to create a still increasing rise of prices. Then the Noble
Lord asked what had been the effect of the tariff on the price
of wool in the year 1834. during which there was a protective
duty of is 4d. ? He held in his hand a paper, which bad been
laid upon the table of the House, in which the quantity and
prices of the different' wools was set before their Lord-
ships. They extended from the year 1615 to the year 1845
inclusive, and it comprehended three different rates of duty.
In the year 1919 he found a protective duty of %d. per lb. In
the period ending 1835 he found 6d. per lb. charged, and he
found also that a protective duty of Id. was charges! after-
wards, which was finally abolished in the year 1844. When it
was proposed to impose fid. per lb., the House was informed
this would certainly be f Mowed by a lowering of the prices.
The result fully justified the expectation. In the year 1800,
when the duty of 34d. was proposed, the importation was
24,000,0001b5. and the price was 2s. 6d. Under the low duty,
ported increased to 39,000,0001 b,, and the
the amount of wool imported
price was Is. 30. He should like to have been permitted to
have gone through the various statements, bnt, at that late
hour of the evening, be would not trouble their Lordships with
the details. His Noble Friend, however, referred to the price
of timber, and he would take leave to mention to the House
one or two of the circumstances connected with the trade. The
number of their ships had increased greatly within the last
few years ; and on a comparison made with respect to the
number of foreign ships employed in the timber trade. he could
assure their Lordships of the fact that those were unfit for any
other purpose, and were kept afloat merely by the loads;
besides, they freighted themselves for the merest trifle.
He would beg to read an extract of a statement made at a
business meeting without any other object than business. It
was at a meeting of the dock companies in Liverpool. The
Chairman observed that surprise had been expressed at an in-
crease of one hundred thousand in the shipping in the docks,
but he had to inform the proprietors that they had then to deal
with hundreds of thousands, and that if there was a more
politic tariff instituted by the Government in place of the pre-
sent one, no one could be able to say to what extent they
should have to increase their accommodation for their shipping,
and that when the duties were further reduced it would not be
in the power of man to divine what accommodation it would
be necessary to afford. At present Liverpool was the only place
boasting of 200 acres under docks with but 15 miles of quays.
His Noble Friend had made some observations upon other
points connected with the one he was now discussing. but as
ne saw that his Noble Friend was absent, he would not fur-
ther allude to them. But his Noble Friend had made some
observations upon the subject in the reference to the laws
affecting the trade in cern, which he felt called upon to reply
to. His Noble Friend had laid it down as a general principle
that there were high authorities in favour of a continued sys-
tem of protection to corn ; and he instanced no less an autho-
rity than the late Lord Chatham. Now he (Lord Dalhousie)
begged to say, that though he entertained the highest possible
respect for the opinion of so great a man as Lord Chatham,
yet he should say, that neither that Noble Lord, nor the
equally illustrious Mr. Pitt, could in the present day, ender
the present circumstances, stand up in defence of these
protective laws ; nor did he think could any other man, capable
of taking a dispassionate view of the subject. He (Lord Dal-
housie) would appeal with confidence to the memorable work
of Lord Lauderdale, a nobleman whom he considered as one
who had admirably adopted the doctrine of the present day.--
(Hear, hear.) He might also adduce examples of
men equally eminent, and in more modern times.
So soon as those restrictions were removed the restrictions for
the protection of corn should be removed also.—(Hear, hear. )
Then the Noble Baron who sat near him that evening (Lord
Ashburton) repeated the statement which was made last night.
He said, " Yon are going to do that which no country on earth
has yet attempted; you are going to have free trade in corn ;
and solve me this question," said his Noble Friend—" what
.will you do in a cheap year, when the ports of this country
are the only ports that will be open for the importation of fo-
reign corn?"—(Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend on the last
night asked a similar question. Now he wished to remind his
Noble Friend that no country in the world except England
imposed duties on the importation of corn merely for the sake
of protection; and if their Lordships would permit him, he
would read a statement which had been very carefully drawn
up, showing the amount of the protective duties imposed in
each of the other nations of the earth. It appeared that the
duty on the admission of corn in the corn-growing portions of
Turkey was 3 per cent., and in the other portions 5 per cent.
Now,he begged their Lordships to observe, that theicorn-grow-
ing portions insisted en the duty being but 3 per cent. instead
of 5 per cent. Now, he wished to ask his Noble Friend what
argument be could draw from that in favour of
free-trade. In the two Sicilies there was a duty
of about 84. per. quarter. In Sardinia it was
about ss. In the small Italian states, the duty was
about 3d. In Tuscany there was no duty. In Greece it was
about 2d. per quarter. In Austria it was 3d., although Austria
bad been quoted as a corn protecting country. In Spain prac-
tically there was no prohibition. He would ask their Lord-
ships' permission to mention one simple fact which would show
the advantage or disadvantage of that description of protective
duty upon corn. It was a fact which was upon record, that
corn had been purchased in the pert of New York at 4s. 6d. per
quarter; whilst wheat was selling at Castile at Is. per bushel.
Such was the case with regard to Belgium. The sliding-
scale had tl3 place there. In Holland, the duty was 6s. per
quarter. In Oldenburgh it was sto 51, per cent. per cwt.
In Naples it was 3s. 2d. In France it was merely a protecting
duty. The other duties might be ascertained by the returns
which had been made to the House. The only correct method
of forming an estimate was by making observations from the
(actual state of things at various periods. He had a statement
of the amount of grain imported into the country from 1761
to 1844.' In that return he found that during the first fourteen
rare was the average about 94,000 quarters in each year.
That quantity greatly increased up till 1810, when the average
for the ten years following was 421,000 quarters. From 1831
to 1840 .the increase had taken place still further, to 928,000
en the average in each year. From 1841 to 1844, inclusive,
the amount imported in each year was 1,879,000 quarters, of
which a large amount was entered for consumption. If this
were true, how could it be made to appear that the produce of
this country kept pace with the consumption of the country.
He had shown that for a long period of years, the importation
of foreign corn had increased year by year, until it bad
"reached in the average of the last five years to
1,879,000 in each year. How then could they think they
could maintain themselves independent of foreign countries ?
( Hear, hear.) He would now proceed to consider this post-
'ion of being dependent on foreign countries. Why, there was
pot a single trade in which they were not dependent for sup.
plies from foreign countries. Look to the wool trade, in which
'they were dependent on foreign countries for large supplies.
Perhaps it was not exactly the same as the corn trade, but it
was analogous. It was the same whether they took away the
life or the means of living.—( Hear, hear.) In regard to the
wool trade, large supplies of foreign wool were used up every
year in manufacturing operations There was not a coat they
:were that was not dependent on foreign supplies. There was
pot a foatman in their service but what would give them
aetiee to-morrow, if they proposed he should wear clothing
without the employment of foreign wool. The same principle
applied to the cotton trade. A Noble Lord on the opposite
Aide had represented the quantity of cotton wool used at
70,000 lbs. annually, and for this they were dependent en-
tirety on foreign countries.—( Hear, hear.) So it was with all
articles that made up the necessaries of life. They could not
even carry on the art of war without being dependent on
foreigners far one of the principal means of carrying it on.
They had not a single ounce of sulphur in this country, and
they could not fire off a single shot without being dependent
upon a foreign country.—( Hear.) Now let him remind
their Lordships that they were not merely dependent
wpon the foreigner for these articles of use—they depended
through the medium of the exports for the revenue and main-
seeance of the credit of the country. But it was
esiec: what were they to do for supplies in time of war ? Let
them see if this were so. Take the case of cotton, In the
year 4:2 and 1814 this country was at war with the United
States of 4.merica, from whence almost all the cotton used in
this country tone. Now was there a stoppage in consequence
of the war? St, sgch thing ; for in 1812 there were 60,1(10,000
lbs. introduced; in JBl3, 50,900,0130 lbs. ; and in 1814,
53,771,000 lbs. But let them come down to a later period, and
s
take the case of China. They were at war a short
o time agc
with China, one of the most restricted nation
of the earth, and who it was supposed would have stopped
every export to this country. Did she, however, do ses?°-
she did not ; and in 1833 there were imported into this
country from China 32,000,000 Ibs. of tea, in 1e39, 55,003,000,
in 1840 22,000,000, and in 1841 36.000,000; and he main-
tained that the same principle as was thus applied to cotton
and tea in these instances would be applied to corn, Price
to do with this question, which was
gentled to have nothing
confined to the consideration as to whether in time of war this
of corn from abroad. Upon
country
he certainly thought ry' could get supplies
they need not trouble
that
themselves ; for even while they were at war with ;11
ecofernomfromFraabnrct4, and in
Europe there was always a supplycaomf
1810 the largest importations
of corn from abroad, it would
hear.) He maintained, then, that should it ever so happen
that this country wanted a supply
always be got.—( Hear, hear.) He l!'
Lord who last addressed their Lordships, callled on by the Noble
id by othre t?St4te
on the part of the Government what will be the price' of corn
*Osier the new system. He certainly was not prepared to com-
ply with any demand so unreasonable, and to say what should
he the definite and specific price of corn under the system now
to be pursued. He might be permitted to ask, with ..great respect
to their Lordsbips, whether they were entitled to demand that
information at his hands? Ware they who advocated the main-
tenance of protection on corn prepared to say that they could
predict what would have been the price of corn? He could say
one thing for the information of his Noble friend—hp weeld
ask, could there be a greater fallacy than to say that the
price of corn could be so much in fifteen years hence 7
Would it be any consolation to prediet any such price, when,
during that period, the prices might fluctuate from one end of
the wale to the other ? In the year 1832, the price of c rn was
58s. per quarter, and in the next year bat one it was 393. In
the year but one after that it was 645. ; and in the yelr follow-
iog it was 70s. and 575. Was it possible that when, under the
present system of protective duties, of which the object was
understood to be to prevent fluctuation, such great fluctuations
occurred, that they could, with any reason, ask him to name
the specific price of corn in future ?
The Duke of RICHMOND—Look at your last Bill.
Lord DALHOUSIE—The Noble Duke requested him to
look into the last Bill, if his m -mnry s'rved him so as to
carry him back to 1842, the Noble. Duke predicted the same
consequence as the result of that Bill.
The DUKE of RICHMOND said that he did not do
anything of the sort ; be did not much like it, and he did not

vote apcin it.
, Lori DALHOUSIE said that perhaps he was labouring
under a misapprehension, and he was sorry for it. He said
that the present law during the last six months had preyed by
,11,414,...irihMl
,radkla!nistratioa that the 731/3tolewasisttielnes oefuaelrage4:easi; il.
atildgd) at during the last three years of tbe
$ Auction is tilt) pricy had been

,;7;

•

,' 1

r .
yd

,

•