The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-21 00:00:00

I will endeavour to show this House that the system of pro-
tection is not the odious system it has been designated. and has
been long assumed to be. I pledge myself to meet the argu-
ments against it on their merits ; and though I may not be
able to meet. those arguments with the talents that characterise
them, I shall not shrink from the endeavour to do so.
But while l presume to offer this consideration to the House,
in support of that system, it would be more convenient to
notice the arguments that have been offered by her Majesty's
Government favour of the changes that are proposed. To
clear the course, to illustrate the way ; help me to that end
which I aspire to reach, and you will thus facilitate the discus-
sion very much.—( Hear, hear.) We have been addressed in
support of the measures of Government by no less than three
ix the Ministers of the Crown ; arid it is but due to the Right
H9r. Gentleman at the head of the Ministry—from
his position, as also from the more comprehensive
statement he made—that perhaps I should in cour-
tesy, first notice what he said. ( Hear, hear.)
The Right Honourable Gentleman affirmed that the greater
part of this discussion had been wasted in party and personal
attack. I have no wish myself to enter into the subject, nor
should I have noticed it had not the Right Hon. Gentleman
seemed to entertain ideas different from thus < which influence
the gentlemen who sit on these benches. Sir, we have indeed
heard from these benches many comments on the conduct of
party : but, for my part, I associate different ideas with the
rd "party" from those which the Right Hon. Baronet seems
to entertain. I do not understand party as anything more
than the embodiment of public opinion—( Cries of " Hear,
hear.") There are, to be sure, distinctions between political
opinions and embodied opinions ; but the embodiment of pub-
lic opinions, whi they the opinion of the majority or the
minority, represented a great section of the community. —( Hear,
hear. ) In this country, Sir, where the nation is divided into
parties, where great results are brought about by public dis-
suasion, and by the organisation of material interests, by those
agencies of reason and probity, we arrived at a solution of the
controversies. This is a beneficial consequence of these
agencies ; and however the question may be agitated, the nation
yet will find, when the question has once been ' settled
by the legitimate exercise of what the Right Honourable
Baronet calls " party," but which, in reality, is the national
organisation—the nation is content and satisfied, and the ques-
tion is not again opened.—(Hear, hear.) We do not com-
plain that the Right Hon. Baronet has changed his opinions—
what we complain of is not that he has deterred too much to
public opinion, but that he has outraged public opinion.—
( near, hear, cheers, and laughter.) That he has prevented
that legitimate action and settlement of the question by the aid
of party—that he has aimed at and may achieve a result that
may not satisfy the community- is complained of with reason
by the great mass of public opinion which we represent, and
by whose aid the Right Hon. Baronet was raised into power,
arid by whose aid a Parliament was elected that supported him
in such power. —(Cries of " Hear, hear," and loud cheers.)
If the Noble Lord who represents another section of public
opinion—if he and his friends had succeeded in being in the
majority, and had settled this question, public opinion would
have yielded, because they would believe that the legitimate
and constitutional freedom of expression of opinion had been
carried into effect. But what they complain of is this—that
the question is not settled, nor can it be settled, in a constitu-
tional manner.—( Hear, hear.) For though we have the
spectacle of the Premier surrounded by a majority, who,
while they accord him their support, profess in their hearts an
aversion to his policy, the public opinion which he
professes to represent has not been fairly dealt with.—
( Loud cries of" Hear, hear," from the Protectionists, mingled
with " No, no," from all parts of the House.) Sir, when we
complain of the Right Hon. Baronet not treating his party
fairly, we do not speak of the three hundred gentlemen who
sit on the benches at this side of the House.—( Cries of
'• Hear, hear")—but we allude to the great party which
they represent outside the House.—( Hear, hear.) Now
that is the only observation I will make on the subject.
I canceive that the Right Hon. Gentleman, in his description
of what should be the proper subject of discussion, at once
described and indicated the fallacy of his position and the future
character of his policy. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said
that they were not met to discuss a party question, but to meet
an emergency, and to construct a system, if it could be con-
structed, more complete than it had hitherto been. That is
at once the position of the Right Hon. Baronet. At the first
step he counsels us to a course which, if we
consider it as the policy of a Minister for
a foreign country, we could not look upon other-
wise than as a great mistake. I think if the Noble Lord
opposite had to deal with a national emergency, it would have
been unwise in him to have said that he had temporary mea-
sures to meet the emergency, but that he came forward to
make a permanent measure to meet it. What shall we say to
a Minister who asks us to re-construct our commercial system,
and says that we must do it in opposition to what we consider
our duty. Will you second the Right Hon. Baronet in such
a proposition ?—( Loud cheering from the Ministerial
benches.) As regards the present emergency, viz..
the state of Ireland, that is a subject on which
I have never spoken without attention or with any
levity. What I have spoken of with levity is the feeble policy
that has been adopted with regard to it. The great course of
policy proposed by the Right Honourable Gentleman is had.
That. and some other points I will paws, as will some Members
of the Cabinet. I believe that there is no other free-trade
Member in the Cabinet—( Hear, hear)—and if there is,
perhaps we may be favoured with the opinion of that
Member. It is a remarkable circumstance in the
present anomalous state of affairs that we have
at the same time a protectionist Cabinet and a
free-trade Minister. The point 1 wish to press on the at-
tention of the House is the fallacy under which the Right Hon.
Baronet labours in his proposition of changing our commercial
system. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that he had
wished that the measure should have been proposed by other
parties ; but at the same time he informs us that he proposed
this measure to the Cabinet long before he felt it necessary to
break up that Cabinet.—(Hear, hear.) He states that
he proposed this measure, and in consequeuce of
the opposition he received, he was induced to break
up the Cabinet. How does he reconcile this statement with
the assertion that he wished that this measure hadbeen brought.
forward by others ?—(Cheers from the Ministerial side.) I
will notice the commercial principles on which the Right Hon.
Baronet seems to have founded the measure to which I have
adverted. With regard to an emergency, the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was right to do that which would he considered proper
by the constituencies, and which Parliament would recom-
mend. I am prepared to assist in doing for Ireland all that
human .judgment can do, but I do not understand
the position of the Right Hon. Gentleman with respect to the
subject. It is involved in great obscurity. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman says that he was for opening the ports, and then, taking
a rapid review of the commercial state of the country, he says,
that whenever the ports have been opened the results have
been beneficial. He then turned round and told them that it
was very well to cheer him for his resolution, he certainly was
prepared to open the ports, but he was not prepared to shut them
again. The Right Hon. Gentleman was spite preparedtooperi
the ports, but he had resolved, in the bottom of his heart, that
the present system of the corn-laws should cease.—(Cheers
from the Ministerial side.) Compare this fact with the state-
ment and declaration made by an Hon. Member, not on the
hustings, but before the constituency of the Midland Counties.
What is the declaration of the Secretary for Ireland? He
said that he wished this proposition should be made through
another party that was to say that the present Par-
liament might have gone on and might have had a re-
newal of its seven years' lease of the Conservative
majority, but now his own declaration was premature. .1 am
making no charge-1 am throwing out no hints to the Pro-
tectionist member of the Cabinet, who may rise and express
his opinions in the course of the debate; but I want to know
whether it was not the foregone conclusion that the Secretary
for Ireland was not authorised to make this charge until Par-
liament was dissolved. The Right Hon. Gentleman, when he
first proposed this measure to the House, seemed to found it
on the last returns, and took the position which
he seemed to adopt in his last speech. He said, " I don't go

tion of one branch of industry, the silk trade, all the other
branches of industry in the country are flourishing. I have yen-
tured these remarks on the silk trade of the country, which 1
will be so seriously affected by the proposed commercial
system of the Right Hon. Baronet, and with the impression
that it will bring on those engaged in it indelible misery ; and
what I have stated is borne out by those who have had ample
opportunity of acquiring knowledge, and who are persons of
authority and well informed on the subject.—( Hear, hear.)
I make these observations, because I think they deserve the
fullest consideration from the House; but I am also perfectly
willing to admit the principle which the Right Hen. Baronet
has established in his last speech. The Right Hon. Baronet
says, " We have for the last three years reduced taxation,
we have relaxed protection, and the country is in a
Opposi-
tion.) I
flouribsehliinefestthaatet thanthis
isevtehre."c—as(eC.
—(Cheers.
tiheiOsapypotshie-
country is flourishing—( Continued cheers)—because you give
us a just, a judicious, and a moderate protection.—( Great
cheering from the protectionist party.) But the Right
Honourable Baronet has, not only in his last, but
in all his speeches, and particularly in the late
exposition of the Government policy, admitted that
it was by this just, this judicious, and this moderate protection
that England has flourished. But now he turns round and
very calmly says, " I feel bound to acknowledge that I have
changed my opinion on the subject of protection—( Cheers
from the free traders)---I am no longer in favour of the
principle." (Continued cheering.) But in the whole
speech he admitted the advantages of protection—
he proved the advantages of a moderate protection.—(Cheers
and counter cheers.) Well, perhaps the Right Hon. Baronet
contended that the present flourishing state of the country had
grown out of free trade and distress.—(Laughter.) Now, Sir,
I want to ask the Right Hon. Baronet a very proper and a
very important question. Does the Right Hon. Baronet be-
lieve that he can fright hostile tariffs with free imports?—
(Cheers.) Hear, hear, say the disciples of the school
of Manchester—a most just cheer. They always maintain
they can, and if their principles are right, as I believe they
are not, I can easily believe that, their premises being assumed,
they have arrived at that conclusion. They believe so; they
say, " Let us take care of the imports, and the rest will take
care of themselves." But is that the conviction of the Right
Honourable Baronet ? For, if it is his conviction,
why all his diplomatic annoyances with respect to commercial
treaties ? Why does he speak with so much pique and rancour
in his speeches of these commercial treaties ? If he believes
that he can fight hostile tariffs with free imports, why does he
trouble himself with these treaties at all.—(Protectionist
cheers.) But if he does not believe that—if his convictions
are not those of the school of Manchester, ho is inconsistent in
proposing this measure. How can he believe in that principle ?
How does he attempt to appear consistent when he tells
us, by way of recommendation, that he hopes
great things from a good example? But if he
believes this thing, a good example is of no
u'e whatever.—( Hear, hear.) We must have a clear declara-
tion from the Cabinet en this important point, because of the
principles on which it hinges. We may conclude that the
Right Hon. Baronet is not satisfied, for if he is, where is the
necessity for the influence of a good example. He tells you that
Prussia is already shaking, and he reads you the report of an
American Minister to prove the advantages of free trade.
Now. I cannot presume to offer an opinion on these Cabinet
secrets, after this declaration of the Right Hon. Baronet. It
may be possible that America intends to introduce a change
in her tariff ; it may be possible, as the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet tells you, that Prussia is shaking
—(Hear)—nay, it may be possible that the French
are votaries of free-trade; butj think it my duty to offer the
House some facts, from which shall allow you to draw your
own conclusions.—(Cheers.) Now, in the first place, we have
first the report of Mr. Walker, who has written
upon the subject of commerce and the trade of America.
Within the last few years this question has excited great inte-
rest in America, but it is a difficult matter in that country to
draw the line of demarcation between conflicting inte-
rests. But before you can calculate on any modifica-
tion of the tariff of America, it will be necessary to examine
the numbers employed in agriculture and in manufactures.
An American gentleman at Liverpool has sent me the last
census of the population-1 mean the census of 1840, which I
suppose is the last. Now what do you believe—what do you
suppose, is the number of the manufacturing opera-
tives in the Uuitsd States? In 1840, the year
in which there was the greatest development
of manufacturing energy in that country, the number of opera-
tives exceeded 800,000—(Hear, hear)—a population exceeding
the manufacturing population of the four great staple manu-
factures of England. Mr. Walker, who is the Secretary to
the Treasury, says in his report, that the only in-
terest concerned is the interest of ten thousand
manufactures. But the importance of an interest is
to be estimated by the numbers employed. I am
not informed what number of persons may be dependent upon
these 800,000 operatives, but there is an agricultural com-
munity situated in the vicinty of those manufactures that is in
favour of protection, because that protection gives them
the incalculable advantages of this home market.
You have to encounter the best organised, and the most nu-
merous influence in the United States.—(Cheers from the
protectionists.) And, unless you are aware of peculiar cir-
cumstances that influence society in the United States, it is im-
possible to comprehend what is going on in that country. The
other clay, I met a former Minister of the Crown, a most dis-
tinguished man, and he was much troubled about Oregon.
( Hear, hear.) He remarked upon the changes that were
taking place in American opinions, and instanced the
speech of Adams, as a furious war speech. All the manufac-
turing interest in America had become warlike. I am now
quoting the language used last night from that report,
.• The fact is, after all, that war is the only protection.
to manufactures."—( Hear, hear.) In exact proportion as
you consult the western community of America you will lose
the affections of the great northern States—( Hear, hear)—
the states of the coast —the most powerful in that country. I
put this to the consideration of the Noble Lord, who has
lately visited America, and who favoured us the other
night with an account of it.—( Cheers and laughter.)
I mean the Noble Lord the Member for the West Riding ;
and although he is in opposition, 1 am very glad to see him
returned to us.—( Chests ) He entered into many details
respecting America ; he gave us pictures of the landscape—
(Laughter)—and all I wished more was that he had entered
somewhat more into other details, and particularly of that
transatlantic melody—(Laughter)—fixing the manner in '
which gentlemen jumped from one side of the table to the
other.—(Roars of laughter.) I cannot say a word when told
that Prussia is already shaking.—( Hear, hear.) I have been,
however, reading a book published in that country, evidently
written by a man possessing great influence on public opinion.
" We can export, and are ready to export," and he quotes the
language of Mr. Baines, and speeches of the Hon. Member
for Durham. "We can export at a loss." This wonderful
nation can go on exporting at a loss, and s xamp
all the markets with which they are connected. Until
I hear more detailed accounts of Prussia I shall be
extremely sceptical. I am sorry to say that I
have read a most melancholy representation from the
little state of Mechlinberg and some little states in its vicinity,
who have been asked over and over again to join the Zollve-
rien, who say they have not joined it in consequence of the
representations of the English Minister. They now say, after
ali our sacrifices, the Zollverien are to have a free import to
England, and we are to have no advantages
whatever, having been misled by the representations
of the English minister, and the best thing we can de
is to join the Zollverien, and use what measures
we may think calculated to advance the cause of native in-
dustry. Now, Sir, I turn to t ranee. I must say, that I
never in my life listened to anything—even when the Right
Hon. Gentleman confessed that he had given up the princi-
ples of protection—more astounding than the announcement of
the Right Hon. Baronet. The prospects he held out are those
of a powerful Minister, and not a Manchester
party, who say they will fight hostile tariffs by free
industry. There are a great many gentlemen who do not
ht hostile tariffs by free im- .ts. I say

convictions drawn from certain economical principles, when
they trace the evils of the country to the restrictions on trade,
appealing to the House under a sense of injury for a change
in the system ; but the Right Hon. Gentlemen, I confess,
ought not, nor, in fact, ought the Right Hon. Baronet himself
to have addressed us as if they were martyrs, when after
all, they were only converts.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) I
forgot however that the Right Hon. Baronet was a disciple of
the free trade system in the year 1641, but free-trade princi-
ples in those days were applied from the opposite side. of the
table, and that makes a very material difference. Now the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War declared, that in
discussing this question, the fallacy of cheap bread was entirely
discarded by all parties. Now the Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary of State for the Home Department, who addressed
us the following night,
in answer to a very proper appeal, said
that unless the question before the House was one for giving
the people food in sufficient quantities, and at as cheap a rate as
p tssible, there was no
question for them to discuss. How do
you reconcile that with the Right Hon. the Secretary at War's
statement.? But lam not surprised at a slight difference of
opinion of this sort prevailing in a confused Cabinet Council.
'I hen came forth the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at
War. Ile said, in the first place, "as regards the most im-
portant interest, this is a comprehensive scheme, and to which I
shall myself particularly advert, and that most, important interest
is that of agriculture." He said, " What de you fear from free
imports—where is your corn to come from?" Now I avoid as
much as I possibly can making a corn-law speech, which I dare
say many here have already done.—( Hear, hear.) I wish,
however, to meet his argument, and deal with comprehensive
measures on comprehensive schemes. But at the same time
I do not wish to let observations of that kind pass, because
I observe there is a coolness of assertion very prevalent on
this subject.—(Laughter and cheers from the protectionists. )
I recollect a speech which wee made on this subject by a Noble
Lord a Member of Parliament, and that Noble Lord said that
if the corn-laws were repealed there would be a rise ef 10a.
per quarter in the price of corn. Now I wilt say to
the Right Honourable Gentleman the Secretary at War
I avoid a discussion in detail, for which we shall have
a better opportunity—l say, I speak from as much
investigation as I can give, arid more personal eeperience,
believe, of those foreign countries than most persons—l mean
the corn countries ; and I say there is not the slightest doubt
that you may have, when this system is established in this
country, any quantity of corn that you may like.—( Hear.)
It is ridiculous to tell me—but you may tell me—that these
people have no capital. The gentlemen
of Mans ester will
say so.—( Cheers and laughter from the protectionists.) It is
h
perfectly idle to tell mo they have no road. I dare say the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Durham will persist in
saying so ; but this I will say, that there is no fallacy so great
as to suppose that the Price of corn will rise when there
is an established market in proportion to your demand. The
price of corn will fall according to the supply. Certainly at
present there is a very limited supply now prevalent in England,
and the reason is that the price is high. It is an inevitable
rule, however, that corn falls according to the amount of supply.
( Cheers from the protectionists, and expressions of dissent on
the Opposition benches.) Nothing pleases me so much as
those sneers of Hon. Members opposite, but I am prepared to
meet their arguments with reason. If they confute me the
House will decide.—(Protectionist cheers.) Now I take the
article of tea, which we get only from one country. The
increase has advanced from year to year, and from year to
year the prices havo fallen. ( Protectionist cheers.)
Now look at cotton, I take cotton because there
is a great analos y between cotton and corn. I re-
member—at least I have read a speech which was made
during some diseussion on this subject in America, particu-
larly with respect to the supply of cotton as well as
corn the Manchester gentlemen maintained that if
the prices in America were greater in the United States,
it would be impossible for Lancashire industry to
compete with the neutral markets there. It was proved by a
pamphlet written by a very distinguished Member of Con-
gress, that under any circumstances the prices of cotton were
less now, 12 cents lower, than they were some years ago.
And, as I have seen in a treatise upon political economy—
written with as much demonstration as if it were proving a
case in mathematics—ever since you have established your trade,
with scarcely any interval, the price of cotton has diminished,
diminished, diminished, and the price of cotton has been as
low as three cents per lb.—(Protectionist cheers.) You can
object to my reasoning with respect to corn ; can you refute
me about cotton ? When you can, you will have a right to
sneer at me.—(Protectionist cheers. ) Well now, Sir, 1 turn
to the Right Honourable Gentleman the Secretary at War.
In his speech he asks you what is the agitation about the pro-
posed repeal. What is it ? He quite forgot that it was called
a social revolution. Why, the agitation, at which be is sur-
prised, isabout the repeal of the import duty. Then comes to
the House the Secretary of State the night after.
He says, " continue to oppose the measure, and you will bring
upon England anarchy, misery,_. and ruin.—( Laughter on the
Opposition benches). The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secre-
tary of State was very much alarmed at the end of last year, in
consequence of the deficiency of the potatoes in Ireland. He
thought so, however, if we were to believe him in speech. lie
also said in consequence of the expected deficiency in the wheat
harvest of England. The Right Hon. Gentleman also told us
that he was particularly alarmed about that, because he thought
it possible that it might bring about a state of affairs similar to
that of 1842, in which he assured the House he was much
more alarmed than they could possibly anticipate at the
time.—(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I observe that ever
since the Right Honourable Gentleman has been
a minister of a Conservative Cabinet, he has failed to bring
forward the very expensive measure which has so regularly
produced great alarm and great odium in the country.—
(Laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman has been alarmed,
and withdrawn that measure.—( Laughter and cheers.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman appears to be overscrupulous. It
seems characteristic of the Right Hon. Gentleman that the
responsibility of office brings to him, not prudence but panic.—
( Loud laughter and cheers from the protectionists.) And
these are the Ministers who turn round to us and say, " You
are alarmed at our measures, but you won't suffer at all except
from your own panic."--(Laughter.) But they act upon
nothing but panics. It is an alarmist Cabinet.—(Load
protectionists cheers.) I know not what they may be most
like to, but I may say fright is stamped upon their
foreheads.--(Loud protectionist cheers)—and it arises either
from a deficiency of the food in Ireland, or a superabundance
in the suffrages in Lancashire. —(Loud laughter and cheers.)
And now, Sir, if I may be permitted, I will meet the question
of protection.—( Cheers.) I have not departed from my en-
gagement.—(Cheers.) I was bound to answer those main
arguments that have been offered in favour of the new system.
The Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, in his
address the other night, the tone of which every one present
felt to be equal for the occasion and the subject, touched upon
the question of protection in the abstract. He expressed in
very classic language the u-ual economical theories upon the
subject, which were no doubt very valuable in them-
selves—(Cheering and laughter)—but never having
ever exerted any influence on the conduct of individuals, and
being totally destitute of the power of doing so, all that
we can admire in it is the evidence which it offers of the Noble
Lord being well read. —( Loud laughter.) Now, Sir, I
do not know what Honourable Gentlemen opposite mean—
dealing, as we are, with England, and with its particular
existing circumstances. Ido not knew what they mean by
the term protective system. I do not find in England such
protection ; if protection be as they define it, a protection to
every branch of native industry, such a system never existed.
There was once a commercial system founded upon these prin-
ciples, defined in all its details, and extremely beneficial in its
operations. I mean the colonial system. That was a
system which went as far as it could to effect the protection
of native industry, and tend to develope its great
Power. There was a protection to native industry in
England, but that was ancillary to this. I refer to this, in
order to see if I can arrive at the point. We always had in
England in these good old days a very liberal system of com-
mercial policies. We have had since then propositions which
were not carried into practice. Here was a very general
system of commercial intercourse with the whole world at
a moderate duty of 10 per cent. This proposal was, however,
swamped in the year 1818, by a system of protection called
colonial system. The range of our commercial transactions
was curtailed by the merchants of England, when compensated
by larger profit and more secure markets, which they speedily
obtained. I do not say whether this was right or wrong ;
but at any rate, the result was that you lost your
principal colonies. You were then obliged to lay down
principles for your future commercial dealings, but you were
too late ; and a large system of commercial policy, having the
advantage of being founded upon principles of reciprocity,
was then introduced by the first Minister of the Crown.
He came down to this House and said to Honourable
Members, " You must not adhere to your old principles.
We have no longer any great colonies left. You manufacturers
of England—and they are by the way the most obstinate, for
country gentlen.en are far more facile—(Cheers and laughter)
you must come forward and give up your protection." After
that, what did Pitt do? He came down to the House, and
said, " Gentlemen, I give you a new tariff." He said " Here
is a new tariff. Here are terms of interchange and commerce
with all the countries in the world. I have entered into
treaties with all the great Powers, and have just concluded a
commercial treaty with France." Then came your revolutionary
war, that upset all ; but Huskisson again brought forward the
same measures. Now, Sir, I gave my votes to the Corn Bill
of 1842, which was only a part of the tariff then introduced,
embodying a moderate system of just protection, which was
in complete harmony with the true principles of the universal
policy of England. We know what a contrary course would
have done in this country, because we have always Spain be-
fore us as an example and a warning. There is another
country, also, where such principles hare been in operation—
I moan Turkey. In that country there were some of
the finest manufacturers in the world. Up to the year
1812 there were a considerable number of manufacturers
still lingering there; they have beon destroyed by the spirit of
cimpetition, which has existed in hostile tariffs. Now what
was the consequence? There have been the same pernicious
results as there had been formerly in Spain. They have had the
same aggregation of capital, and the same impoverishment of
the people.--( Hear, hear.) The system of moderate pro-
tection in England is not founded upon abstract principles.
I propose now to deal with this question of protection, and I
shall look at it from two points. I consider, first, that it is
the duty of the Government to legislate in such a manner that
the people shall be fully and amply employed. Secondly, that
in affording these means of employment you should not give
too great a preponderance to any one branch of native industry
against protection, for there
iidnenacrgeniinngfavour of it. So far as lam
above the other. There is, Sir, a great dculty in dealing
t care one farthing about their prima
with this question. An Hon. Member had also stated that there
was
f iceaewas al'engvpeird'r ea' nntSL
evidences. "le
Idel don't
. Members on this side might also take
Right np this same argument, and reply that it was useless to argue
in favour of protection, because there was a prima facie evi-
dence admitted to exist in its favour.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Noiei t
other Members of the Cabinet, had officially announced that
these principles are to be for ever relinquished by them. We
so. Ido not attempt to prove it, but I call upon you (ad-
dhhnghSejirhe that these principles are beneficial. I say, we
ig Hon. Baronet ( Sir Robert Peel) and several
free-trade party) the onus probandi rests upon
r hvuato prove that these principles are not bene-
ficial listened to the speeches which have been
you—le.
ttr ,
iitnNisshofewor'eourse of the debate by Hon. Members, who are
also Hon. Members of the League to the speech
of the Honourable Member for Manchester (Mr. Gibson.)
1 had not the pleasure to hear the last speech made by
the Honourable Member for Durham (Mr. Bright.) I took
care however to read it, as I always do the speeches of a gen-
tleman who takes so prominent a part in the agitation as he
does, but I cannot extract from either, or any of them, a
single principle to guide me in this maze.—(Cheers from the
against the principle. They have, however,
protectionists.) I cannot find oae solitary, reasonable, ra-
tionalmade so many many occasions, that per- '
objection
haps it is not fair to draw conclusions from the speeches
with which we have been favoured, during the course of this
speeches, upon se
.
debate, upon so important and knotty a subject as protection.
I have great difficulty in :icing so.
The difficulty is this, that
the case of the Anti-Corn-law League against protection has
signally failed. It was a very curious thing that they
had been working for the last seven years, and that
they commenced their agitation with promising cheap
bread to the labouring classes, and they have ended
that agitation by promising high rents to the landlcrds.—
(Great laughter from the protectionists.) 1 cannot certainly
understand such promises. I firmly believe that the Anti-
Corn-law League, while they thought they were instructing
the people, that they were actually educating thorn-
, selves.—(Great cheering,) I can give sufficient tea
suns from reading the manifesto of the Chamber
of Commerce in Manchester in the year 1829. I turned the

on the returns for the last three years, but, taking a view of believe-you can fig'ports.
the commercial state of the country for many years, it will be without shrinking, and I declare most solemnly that it is my
seen that a relaxation of the protective duties has effected an conviction, and do speak from as much knowledge of public
increase of the imports and exports. It is very agreeable to men in France as generally falls to the experience of any indi-
hear that fact stated, and if the Right Hon. Baronet was vidual not a Minister—l say that, excepting an occasional
making an income-tax, I would not object to the statement of Minister who pleases to conciliate and humour the English Go-
it, but when a great commercial measure is vernment, Ido not believe that there is an interest or an indi-
founded on it, it becomes the duty of the House vidual in France that is not in favour of a high restrictive policy.
to be very cautious, and to endeavour to trace the probable There is no country in the world where parties are so fierce
cause of these measures. There is one cause which has never and so violent as in France. It is not merely a change of Go-
been mentioned in the course of this debate, and which -would vernments that they look for. There are national parties who
account for the increase of trade. I will throw aside the brea•he revolution in their common talk, and who anticipate
exuberant harvest, the magnificent railroads, and all works of changes which would make an Englishman shudder. Yet we
that nature, and go to one thing that has never been referred find a curious circumstance that not only what are
to. It has been acknowledged by every person that the basis called the Conservative party, the commercial aristo-
of the Right Hon. Baronet's argument was too limited :at first. cracy, but the ultra-republicans— that party whose
There was an important agency omitted by the Right Hon. great object—whose struggle is to terminate a dynasty—
Baronet in relation to the commercial prosperity ,ef this not to get rid of a Sovereign or a Minister, but entirely to
country. Nothing effects the imports and the exports of this change the tenure of property, if possible—thatl party is more
c
•ountry so much as the seasons. I will call your attention opposed to what you call free trade than even the commercial
to a case relating to our exports and imports, and aristocracy. There are two interests in that country,
such will illustrate the principle I am endeavouring working against each other; but both entertaining the
to impress upon your minds. Look at the-exports and the im-
conviction that their interests would be injured by
ports of the past year. There was a great increase irk the • whatN they call the fatal principle of competition.
portation of sugar from the Mauritius and tLe East Indira;
Taxation
can bßearborno,eputlgohmtaaneabout in France, nor can a re-
ono
withoutublic principlee, or public. policy be obtained
re-
ports. It is impossible to attribute this great increase in the :
traffic to the alteration of the sugar duties. It is to in France yd. contend that the
by these means; but neitherovernmheentnorhahvies
be accounted for by the abundant crops of sugar Right Hon. his
Government has in the Mauritius and the East Indies, and which led to greater had ample opportunities for bringing about a
cargoes of that article being imported. Now, while there cGhoavn
had been a great abundance in the sugar crop in the ever availed themselves of it. France has
and the Indies, there was a total deficiency of sugar it, nothingh now to get from you, because you have given her as
the Havannah. I will now trace the important influence of mue of free trade as she wants; and I maintain that the
the seasons on our commercial relations with other measure of
of theßight lion. Baronet, like all his former
countries. In Russia, sugar refineries depended measures liberal policy, will have no effect of producing
a change in France. We have tried this free policy long
enough, and if the Right Hon. Baronet i! not prepared to
for their supplies on the. 'Hadvahanathhe. What then
ocfcußrursesdia?,
An Imperial decree was issue y
authorising the importation of sugar from England. The adopt hostilertealraixffast,ioanndofa sFrenchystem ocommercial
c y ,i
principles.ishopelesßs to
practical effect of this was, that while there was a large impor. expect any
ration of sugar from the Mauritius and the East where do you expect to extesmlooyoouorootreaidgeubarytetrhsiseffreceorpnolmiceyre?
Indies, on account of the deficiency in the Ha. You will import, you say, ,
vannab, from which Russia was mainly supplied, from places abroad, and you will get billstoy
ethuaptrhapmeos,uentet,syehoud
there was as great increase of exportation from England to say, from the Brisails, and to meet those bills,
Russia. The imports and exports were thus increased by the out additional supplies of manufacturers' goods, but you
forget
influence of the seasons. No one can say that this increase was that you have already supplied the Brazilian population with as
in consequence of the tariff I know that these details are dry much goods as they require, and if you want to sell more to
and uninteresting, but lam bound to enter upon the question them, you must sell more at a great sacrifice. For instance,
though I represent a fallen party.—( Hear, hear.) I. -trust I shall if you send a cargo of goods worth a million and a half to the
gain the attention of Hon. Gentlemen while I make these Brazils, the Brazilian, people will take as much as
statements. Suppose that there had been a deficiency in the they want, and they will take no more without
cotton crop of the United States of America, from which we you reduce your prices. Over-supply must always reduce
mainly derive our supplies, do you mean to say that the paltry prices, and when prices are lowered by a system of this sort, it
reduction you have made in the import duty imposed on cotton will naturally lead to reduce the wages at home. Now, the
wool would have led to the great increase of importation system of the Right Hon. Baronet is a comprehensive one. It
which has taken place in the present year ? Do you mean to say will not be confined to only one market, and you will find that
that there would have been an increase of half a million of this accumulation of supplies will be going on in six or seven
bales? No. But that increase must be attributed to the markets, and I want to know if you are prepared to
favourable season alone In the wool trade we can also trace meet the effect upon the general distribution of the
the influence of season. In fact, in all our great .colonial and precious metals. I confess that I can find nothing
foreign imports, cotton, wool, sugar, and caffee, you-will find that in the currency bill of the Right Hon. Baronet
season is a most important consideration.—(Hear .) At the that is calculated to meet this change, for that, in my opinion,
risk of wearying the House I wish to make another statement. was a measure got up and framed by the dictates of caution
The Right Hon. Baronet referred to what he called the battle rather than experience. How can you meet your
of the silk trade, and said that whenever the advocates of free- fixed charges—how can you meet your fixed taxa-
trade advanced their principles, w e brought forward the case tion—how can you meet everything that is fixed in this
of the silk trade. The Hon. Member for War wick alluded country, if there is a general failure of prices abroad,
to this subject, and I will make reference to what the Right and a reduction in the value of labour at home? I maintain then
Honourable Baronet stated in reference to it. As an illus- that this system of endeavouring toforce sales abroad will have a
tration of how the relaxation of the protective system ope- material effect upon the precious metals.—(Cries of " Oh.")
rated against it, I will not include in my calculation the I dare say lam wrong, but %ou must recollect that the policy
refuse or waste silk imported, and averaging from 6d. to 10d. of a Minister is one thing, and the mode or principle of car-
e pound; but only the best silk, averaging from I rying it out another. Now, for example, suppose, in carrying
155. to 255. per pound.—( Hear.) I will contrast the out this policy, you send a cargo of goods worth a million and
importation of raw silk last year with what lit was in 1824. a half abroad, and receive back a proportionate quantity of
he amount imported in 1824 was 4,164,0001b5.; that was foreign grain, what would be the effect ? Why, from
under the protective system, twenty-two years ago. In 1844, the causes I have already stated, the labour of England would
twenty years after that period, and under a system of relate- receive considerably less than it did before, and as the
tion, we imported 4,260,0001b5. This differs from the state- foreigner will not take your goods without a sacrifice on your
Inents of the Hight Hon. Gentleman, but I make it upon the an- part, either you will have to make a sacrifice or to pay in
thority of those well conversant with the trade. The specie for part of the imported grain. This is the effect of
statement of the Right Hon. flaronet is, that under the protec. your comprehensive scheme, an effect which I maintain is
tive system, or the former period I referred to, the importa- I inevitable, and I want to know bow you are to fulfil your
tion of raw silk was 3.000,000 lbs., and under the system ofl public contracts? Now, Sir, if the Right Hon. Baronet is
relaxation, 6,000,000 lbs. ; the Right Hon. Baronet endea- I not prepared in some cases to adopt hostile tariffs
vouring to make it appear that an increase had he is not justified in acceding to the claims of the political
taken place from 3,009,000 to 6,000,000 per annum. But school of Manchester, and if he is not prepared to adopt hostile
supposing an increase had taken place such as described, l tariffs, but nevertheless accedes to the claim of the Manchester
cannot the Right Hon. Baronet trace it to the enterprising school, he will create a convulsion in this country which it will
energies and perseverance of the people, instead of attributing be difficult to subside. Now, Sir, before I address myself to
i• to the principle that regulates commerce?—(Hear, hear.) the principle of protection, as a matter of courtesy lam bound
If the country has prospered, and I believe it has prospered, it to allude to the speeches which fell from two other Honorable
is attributable to the activity of the people, and inde- Gentlemen. Now the first speech is that of the Right
pendently of either the protection or free—trade prin. Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War, the speech that
ciple.—( hear, hear.) 1 believe the countra not only would, had it been made at the regular time, and under proper
has prospered, but will prosper, whatever commercial circumstances, have been received with much' applause. Now
principle be in operation ; arid I believe that, with the eacep- I can easily .understand some Gentlemen, who have adopted

THE SUN, LON DON, SATURDAY MORNING, FEBRU AR Y 21, 1846.

leaves of that document, and found the panacea was not what
it is now stated to be, and the parties who drew up that cir-
cular are the principal members of the Anti-Corn-law League.
—(Loud cheering.) Let them read the evidence of some
of the most distinguished members of that League,
and they would find that Mr. Cobdea's evidence
was opposed to his present principles, but he belonged to the
school of Gemini.—(Laughter.) 1 consider that the prin-
ciples we advocate are not entirely hopeless, and therefore
it may be useful to prolong this agitation. lam stating a case,
and I take that case from their own speeches. They say that
protection has two objects, to feed the people and to employ
them, and that as protection has failed because we are obliged
to import foreign corn we are bound to remove protective du-
ties on that article. Now, we say, in reply, that we can feed
the people and employ them also. That is my answer ; and
the question is, have we failed in feeding the people? Now,
Sir, we have what we call great facts. We can show, for ex-
ample, that fifty years ago the people of this country were not
much more than one-half its present population. I say, we
can feed the population, although it has increased so much.
And whilst that is the case, protection cannot be the bane of
agriculture, unless the agriculture of England is inferior to
the agriculture of other countries.—(Cheers.) Now, I want
to know wherethere is a superior system of agriculture
to that pursued in England?—( Hear, hear.) Russia
had been quoted; but I believe that agricultural
mprovement remains in much the same state. Do you mean
to eay that the agricultural system of Germany is superior, Or that
of Belgium or Tuscany ? It is true, if we take a a small district,
there may be a greater amount of produce, but I deny, taking
any country, that we are not equal to it in agricultural produc-
tions. No country with the same breadth of land can certainly
support a. popalation of a first-rate state compared with
England, I ant sure you will not say it is done in Russia
or in Germany—thine miserable struggling states—so
much inferior to the real wealth of England.
I need not allude to Spain; but I will pass to a country which
is nearer to us, and which, in fact, is our rival. 'there was a
country with an exuberant soil, blessed by nature, and
labouring under none of those disadvantages which pressed
upon England. They had no law of primogeniture, no en-
closures, and no game.—(Loud cheers.) We, under the favour
of protection, have contrived to go far beyond that people in
agricultural science, and have been able to give them corn at a
cheaper rate than they could possibly buy in their own
markets, although they were double their number. But
then, you say, I want to meet all your argumen's—
that there is a deficient application of capital to land.—( Hear,
hear.) We moat nage researches, end from s number of
facts make our inferences. I say that it is totally impossihle
that there is a want of the application of capital, when
there is not a man in the colonies, either in India or America,
the great event of whose aspirations is not that be should re-
tiarn to England to spend his hoarded treasures, and become a
justice of peace or a deputy-lieutenant.—( Loud cheers. ) Yes,
there was not a rean of them who did not dream of quarter ses-
sions.—( Laughter.) England was, in fact, thegreat metropolis
of the world, and all other countries were paying tribute to
her. There are two facts which I am afraid we have a right
to assume they have clone.—( Hear, hear.) The one, that the
corn-law will be repealed, though we will endeavour to pre-
vent them—( Hear, hear)—and the other, that after the re-
peal has endured a certain number of years they will be in-
volved in a foreign war. Now I want Hon. Gentlemen to
consider what would be their position if matters should be as
they were at the rupture of the treaty of Amiens ? At that
time you had a free trade, and for a number of years you
received large supplies of corn from the Continent, but when
the wit broke out you found the greatest difficulty in obtain-
ing a supply. It was true that, in the year 1812, we received
some corn from Holland and France. But are we to construe
that such always will be the case? If we do, we shall fall into
a grievous error.—( Hear, hear.) I consider that a reference
to those facts is a sufficient answer to the assertion that they
would be independent of their colonies should a war break out.
Remembering all this—even that a very small quantity of corn
was brought from France and Holland—that in 1812 the
quartern loaf reached the price of Is. 7d.—when all these cir-
cumstances occurred, I warn you not to depend on foreign supply.
Yet with all this increase of population, England is able to sup-
ply herself with food.—(Cheers.) I now meet the gentlemen
of the League on the second point. They say the system of
protection has failed to employ the people. The Right Hon.
Gentleman the Secretary of War has touched upon a delicate
subject. He says, only cultivate the hills of Wiltshire, and
there is sufficient employment for the labouring population. I
ask the Right Hon. Gentleman why are the hills of Wiltshire
not cultivated ?—( Hear, hear.) It is a legitimate question to
ask one whose proudest boast is that he is the representative of
that county, and who is the descendant of a family who have
long dwelt upon that soil.—( Hear, hear.) You tell me of the
sufferings of the people. It is not for me to attempt to diminish
the sufferings ; but when you come down with your cool
assumptions and daring statements, I call upon you for facts
in proof of them.—( Hear, hear.) I ask you to compare the
state of the country, before protection existed to what it is under
protection, and I say that with an accumulated population
we are not in aiworse:conCiition now. —( Hear.) I have read the
details of the period of the last revolutionary war, when you had
free imports of corn from all the world, and I see nothing dif-
ferent in your condition then from what it is now. I see no
difference but the poor-rates, and less responsibility of pro-
prietors. You have brought forward the Goatacre meeting in
proof of the distress which prevails in the country. The Right
Hon. Gentleman also has compared an Hon. Gentleman on
this side of the House to Anaaharsis Clooty. Anacharsis Clooty,
it is well known, stated at the National Convention that he ap-
peared there as a deputation from the nations of Europe. The
deputation appeared in appropriate costume, and produced a
sensation throughout Paris. Now I think the
Goatacre meeting might be considered in the same
light as the deputation before the National Convention.
But it is not my wish to call the attention of the House by
an allusion to the Goatacre deputation that would call the at-
tention of the House, for it is not my wish to do so, from the
state of the people of this country. The gentlemen opposite
are very fond of painting the wretchedness of the agricultural
districts, but if they would come with me into the manufactur-
ing districts, I could show them such scenes of wretchedness
so would throw into the shade the scenes which they have so
pathetically described to this House.—( Hear, hear.) Let them
come with me into the manufactories at Stockport, and I will
*how them the poor heartbroken slaves there.—
( Hear, hear.) I will show them the heart-broken
the despairing men—those who, in the depth
of their despair, curse the toil-worn life which they cannot
quit.—(" Hear, hear," and cheers from the protectionists.) I
could also take them to Lancashire, and show them the same
state of the manufacturing liberality of this country.—( Hear,
hear.) But 1 know that the industry of Lancashire is a noble
industry, and I do not wish to underrate it. The manufac-
turers of that place are fully sensible of their responsibility, but
I cannot assent to their assertion that they can alleviate

their condition by the diminution of their wages: I should like
to know how they will respond to that.—(Hear, hear, and eries
of "No, no," from the free-trade side of the House.)
The Hon. Members cry " No;" well, then, I will take them
on their own ground.—( Hear, hear.) I had some respect for
this hour of the night, but the challenge having been thrown
200 years,
loelftnshhdateoll
out to me, I shall accept it.—( Loud cheering from the Hon.
Member's party.) Well, then, I will test that position.
Why, you say that the wages of labour was not dependent on
the price of corn. How is it, then, that you say, the higher
the price of corn the higher was the wages of the labourer ?
If your position, which is the position of the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet, because be has borrowed it from you—( Hear, hear)—
if your position be, that the wages of labour depend upon the
price of corn, I will just ask you this—Suppose you have an
importation from the Baltic of four millions of quarters, then if
wages be not increased by the price of corn, why should the con-
sumption be greater ?—( Hear), Why should more corn be con-
sumed then than now ? And what effects will the importation
of these four millions of quarters have upon the price of corn,
or upon the amount of consumption ? Why, the only effect it
will have will be, if the consumption be not greater, to dis-
place a certain amount of labour ; that labour will leave
the agricultural districts and go to your districts—the
manufacturing districts—and there a fall in the amount of
wages must follow.—( Hear, hear.) There is another point
to which
.1 would wish to allude, if it had not appeared that I
was abusing the patience of the House—( Hear, hear)—but I
shall endeavour to condense the few remaining observations I
have to make as much as possible. You say if we had a regu-
lar trade we should have a regular supply. Well, I entirely
agree with you there. But suppose the ease of a deficiency in
England, then you must get a supply from other countries,
which you must pay for in gold—(Hear, hear)—
the only difference being, that you must give a
bonus for granaries under the present system.—( Hear, hear. )
I have nearly concluded my observations ; I have never been
one of those who vindicated our agricultural policy. But now,
Sir, I maintain this, and I wish Hon. Gentlemen to bear it in
mind, that their cause is not to be attained in this way.—( Hear,
hear.) I venture, feebly and slightly to be sure at this hour
of the night, to maintain this great principle of high policy in
which our system ought to be maintained. I say, without
reference to England, that it is the first duty of every Minister,
and the first interest of every state to maintain an equal balance
between the two great parties—manufacturing and agricultural.
0:
onpi
:sot
the
rdt tetheahernaatt
order
, State.—(i
robdnbalyra
nt
acho
sefe affecting
the
heer
aneec
raet
,itcnyeehgsos
hear.)
aaurrslt
.ytahaitefe:s
rmlh
aoea
gnnpa
do-r.
—(Hear, hear.) That principle bad been recognised for the last
ppaWeb:nlohievtysi:sc a' we
should mod
stabilityepomi
people,
otia pi nl i
ecint
further than that. We are bound in England to do more ;
and I now repeat what I before stated. I say there are special
reasons why you should not only maintain that balance, but
that, further, you should give a preponderance—l repeat a
prepoderance—( Hear, hear)—to native agricultural princi-
ples.—( Hear, hear.) I say preponderance, for this reason,
that in England you have a territorial constitution. You
have thrown upon you the burden of the land, the mainte-
nance of the Church and State, and the protection of the poor.
—(Hear, hear.) You value this territorial constitution, not
that it pampers the luxuries, but because you, and those who
preceded you, found it the only security for self-government.
—(Hear, hear.) My constituents are not of the landlord
class, nor are many of them capitalists; they are of the in-
dustrial class ; and they believe that their material interests
are maintained in the maintenance of this system, that will
favour native industry, by ensuring at the same time
real competition. They believe their political interests
are involved ; and I entirely agree with them.—( Hear.)
The meaning of this great movement is not only the repeal of
the corn-laws, but the transfer of power from one class to
another—(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches)—
class, distinguished for their intelligence and their
wealth—l mean the manufacturers of England. My con-
science assures me that I have not been slow to do justice to
the intelligence of that class, and I do not envy
them their deserved prosperity but I do regret, that
in this age of political regeneration, when all social
class to sink under the domination of another, I for one—
if this be the end of all struggles—if this be the. great result of
power trusted to class interests is only to be rescued from one
the efforts of this enlightened age—protest against the igno-
the foundation will be deep, and the scheme comprehensive,
instead of allowing us to fall under such a thraldom—the thral-
dom of capital and of those who boast of their intelligence
minions catastrophe. If there is to be a change, I hope that
and are proud of their wealth. If you must find a new force
to maintain the throne and the immemorial monarchy of
England, I would prefer to find. these invigorating energies in
an enlightened and an enfranchised people. (The Hon. Mem-
ber sat down amidst immense cheering.)
Mr. EDWARD BULLER moved the adjournment of the
debate until Monday next.—Agreed to.
The House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'cloek.

THE LATE FLEET PareoN.—The whole cf the outer
walls of this once famous prison will to-morrow be pulled
down ; the bricks, stone, &c., will be sold this day by auc-
tion by Pullen and Son, the auctioneers ; but, whether sold
or not, the. walls will be pulled down. It is not known for
what purpose the site will be used, although it is expected
that it will he privately sold.
WEST INDIA. MAIL.—SOUTHAMPTON, THURSDAY
NIGLIT.—The Royal West India mail packet the Tay, due this day,
has nut yet arrived ; she may be hourly expected. The weather is
very thick, which may prevent her coming up the river to-night,
even should she be off the Wight.

SCALDED TO DEATH WITH WATER GRUEL.—On
Thursday an inquest was held before Mr. Payne, at Guy's Hospital,
respecting the death of John Coates, aged seventy-eight years, a pour
man, lately living in Little Lant-street, Mint-street. Deceased was
taken into the hospital on Monday last, front a lodging-house in the
Mint, by two strange men, for a severe scald which he had received
by a quantity of gruel falling on his stomach whfle sitting in bed.
He gradually became worse, and died on Wednesday morning. Mr.
Bills said that he had no doubt the deceased was iu extreme want
when he was taken in, and he !was also in a state of great filth, and
covered with vermin Death was the result of the scald. The jury
returned a verdict, " That the deceased died from a scald, but how
recelTul there was no evidence."

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
EPSOM SPRING RACES.
The liberality of the Licensed Victuallers of London has
enabled the Steward to increase the bonus to the Great Me-
tropolitan to not less than 3001. The horses must be named
on the 2d of March.
NORTHAMPTON AND PYTCHLEY HUNT RACES.
Handicap of the Great Northamptonshire Stakes of 25 sous.
each, 15 ft, and 5 only if declared on the 2d of March.
Lothario, 6 yrs, 9st Sib My Mary, 4 yrs, ist
Corranna, aged, 9st 3lb Elemi, 5 yrs, ist
Discord, aged, Bst 131 b Laird O'Cockpen, 4 yrs,
Inheritress, 6 yrs, Bst 131 b 6st 131 b
Trueboy, 6 yrs, Bet 81b Best Bower, 5 vrs, 6st 131 b
Red Def.:, S yrs, Bst 61b Javelin, 4 yrs, Est 11Ib
William le Gros, aged, Sat 4lb Nike filly, 4 yrs, Est 101 b
Rowena, 5 yrs, Bst 31b Frill colt, 4 yrs, Est 101 b
Yardley, 6 yrs, ast 21b Marian Ramsay, 4 yrs, 6st 101 b
Needtlil, 5 yrs, 8A 21b Princess Royal, 4 yrs, Est 81b
Refraction, 4 yrs, Sat llh Flawkesbury, 4 yrs, Est
Queen of Tyne, aged, Bst Zela, 5 yrs, Est 81b
Ma=que, aged, Bst Slipshod, 4 yrs, 6st 81b
Miss Elis, 4 yrs, 7st 131 b Arthur, 4 yrs, Est 71b
Intrepid, 5 yrs, 7st 131 b Stream, 4 yrs, Est 61b
Godfrey, 5 yrs, 7st Illb Dulcet, 4 yrs, 6st 61b
Rose ofeashmere,4yrs, ist 111 b Nereus, 4 yrs Est 51b
Nautilus, G yrs, 7st 10lb Timbria, 4 yrs, Est 41b
Example, 5 yrs, 7st 101 b Secutor, 4 yrs, Est 41b
Joe Lovell, 5 yrs, 7st 10Ib. !Jack Cade, 5 yrs, Est 41b
What, 6 yrs, 7st 91b Dexterous, 3 yrs, 6st 41b
Patriot, 5 yrs, 7st 81b Sir Harry, 4 yrs, 6st Sib
Morpeth, 5 yrs, 7st 81b Wild Roe, 4 yrs, Est 21b
Extempore, 6 yrs, 7st 81b Correct Card, 4 yrs, Est 21b
Is by Velocipede, out of Fair Blackbird, 3 yrs, Sat 121 b
Jane, 5 yrs, 7st Blb Mermaid, 3 yrs, sst Illb
Roderick, aged, 7st 7111 Astonishment, 3 yrs, sst 101 b
Pugilist, 5 yrs, 7st ?lb Marquis of Conyngham, 3 yrs,
Young Lochinvar, 6 yrs, ist 71b sst 81b
Roper's Daughter, aged, 7st 41b Repeal, 3 yrs, sst 41b
Dr. Husband, 5 yrs, 7st 41b Outcast, 3 yrs, Sat 41b
Lord Saltoun, 5 yrs, 7st 41b Crmera Obscura, 3 yrs, sst 21b
Films, aged, 7st 4th Buttress, 3 yrs, sst
Judex, 6 yrs, 7st 41b Tit Bit, 3 yrs, sst
Teetotaller, aged, 7st 41b Red Leg, 3 yrs, sst
Pythia, 4 yrs, 7st 21b Killi Krankie, 3 yrs, 4st 11lb
Mount Charles, 5 yrs, ist 21b Muscatel, 3 yrs, 4st Illb
Maynooth, 4 yrs, 7st Ilb Brother to I3eaumont, 3 yrs,
Giantess, 4 yrs, 7st 1111 4st 111 b
Cataract, 6 yrs, 7st ]lb Peasant, 3 yrs, 4st I Ilb
Clumsy, 4 yrs, 7st Amazon, 3 yrs, 4st Blb
Jenny Wren, 4 yrs, 7st