The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-17 00:00:00

T
TuEspAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 17, 184&.

• :•ieive a supply in that nsaueer is almost Impossible. It
is therefore necessary thOt we should look to save a supply of seed
from the present crop for the ensuing year.—(Hear.) lint to do this
it is necessary to encourage saving from the pt esent crop by the
substitution of other supplies of food.---(Hear, hear.) Unless this is
done the danger of the corning year may be forgotten by the people.
The Government must endeavour to prevent famine and at the same
time to preserve a stock of potato-seed for the next year by substi-
tuting other articles of provisions under wise arrangements, taking
potato-seed in exchange.—(Hear, hear, and cheers) If we asked
you for large votes of public money, or were we to recommend ap-
peals to Roman Catholics or to the Established Church ler charitable
assistance in order to meet the ease —if we asked you for a vote of
from 200,0001. to 300,000/.—how could we stand before you while at
the same tune we maintained the duty on corn?—(Cheers.) Such a
proceeding on the part of the Government I am sure would not have
been tolerated by the House.—(Hear, hear.) How could I have
blinked the statement that in Ireland, in 586 electoral districts,
seven-tenths of the potato crop were destroyed, in 600 more the crop
halt gone, and in some the crop eight-tenths destroyed,
and yet have maintained the corn-laws inviolate? Under
these circumstances, supposing the persons anxious to
ageep up the present system, I do not believe that the conduct
of the landed aristocracy would warrant the Government In not
proposing that the corn-laws he repealed.—(hear, hear.) Fidelity
to the landed interest leads me to that supposition. I would relieve
you of the odium of' supposing you would maintain the duty on corn
in the lace of such a state of things. In Holland and in Belgium
stepsilad been taken at an early period to provide for the coming
scarcity. The Belgium Executive Government had taken the pre-
caution of opening the ports. The Goverotnent of Holland at the
beginning of the season, by an order, repealed the ditty on foreign
corn, and the Legislative Chambers of that country immediately on
meeting (though Belgium is an agricultural' country), unanimously
indemnified the Government for what they had done. The report
which I have brought betbre your consideration shows that the state
of Ireland is worse than any of those count lies; under such circum-
stances then what course was open for us to propose to the Par-
liatnent of England, interest ed though it was in agriculture? What but
to appear before you, and ask you to support a similar remedy? In
every view of the case nothing remained for us but to propose a
pu:ilountyit as an unanimous assent, or at least an aPPa-
on corll.--(Lotal cries of " Hear, hear," and
cheer
-1 of ,t'
look the
cheers.) I come to that part of the question now—l rejoice in that
rently unanimous assent to the course I have propees)l.—(No, no,
from the Conservative benches.) If not, I recognise it at least as a
very general assent to the policy of a free importation of food to
meet the wants of the people.— (Hear, hear.) If so, I ask you to
expedite the pasting of those Bills the Government has introduced,
so as to enable us to meet the difficulties of the country by every
means, by deciding that the duty on every article of provision shall
henceforth cease.—(Cheers.) I am only asking you to do that which
has been done in other countries, and if I did not do so, I should be
culLaie•goeuanbilreym;,i,tiht
otautr tit
ntact
ri telsifttst I,llle,shsi
cht ot
trielaiacl:eer)s-ot oortt heen
citinat ergreesdtsmoef
with. A great deal had been sa id about my t reachery to the canoe ofpro-
tection, about my flinging protection overboard ; and a great deal
had bean said about rousing the British Lion—( Loud laughter)—in
maintenanee of the corn-laws,—(ficar, hear.) To all this I can only
say I have been guided solely by a sincere desire to advance the
best interests of the country, having not only the interests
of the many of the people, but also the landed interests steadily in
view. If such a measure had not been proposed, would it have
been stipulated that no objection would have been made to the
present duty ; that maize, and oats, and barley, should not have
been admitted duty free, and that wheat would have been
maintained at 17s. per quarter? In 1765 there was an ap-
prehension of famine, and the very first - act of the House
was, I think, a foolish one—they preserved a duty, but
by the second act they admitted the importation 01 foreign corn duty
free. We also were apprehensive of famine, and we determined to
admit corn duty free. In 1791 the old law was ab•lished and a new
corn-law was established. In 1793 there were apprehensions of a
second famine, and notwithstanding the new corn-law the first act
on the statute book was to remove all duty on the importation of
foreign corn. In 1795 there were again apprehensions of famine,
not so severe as we have now reason to dread, but measures were
taken to meet it. In 1796 the same remedy was applied,
namely the removal of all duties on foreign corn. In
1799 the same course was again pursued, and with these
precedents before us, would it be wise ibr Government to pursue a
different course than that which was then pursued? Would it be
wise to determine on the maintenance of protection? If Govern-
ment maintained the law as at present enforced, I will ask what de-
gree of odious would attach to us if we were doing so ? Could we
offer any defence for our measures ? It would be impossible. It was
on the very same grounds that Government had universally acted in
every period, not only when corn was at a 100 s. or 80s. a quarter,
but when it was only 60s. The remedy was then, as now, to open
the ports. Let it be remembered that there was then no other re-
medy ; there was no sliding-scale then. When corn was 645.,
foreign grain was admitted at a duty of 6d. • how, wily did
Parliament interfere then? It was in order to give a
guarantee that a high duty should not attach to any
sudden importation. Well, under those circumstances, I advised,
as did three of my colleagues, an immediate suspension of the law.
But you ask, what Is it you recommend now ?—boy your measure the
law is not merely suspended. It would be die reputable towards Par-
liament to recommend a suspension. It wouhl be impossible to eo it.
It is not in the power of the Crown now to do that which I invited
you at one time to do. lint it may be true that the most fitting
time hiss passed away—that may, indeed, be true. It may be true
that when we were first informed of the progress of the evil it would
have been the better time to avert it. But admitting the necessity
for doing so by an order in Council in December, is It not a greater
Why
it should be done on
r," and great cheering.)
True, the supply might have been greater then, but we have six
trleiaesolGnt-11 iosfitt,enborut
aaryn c?—(rceraiseesd.fr,e,aisisl—,
months yet to , come. But you may come to this, you may say
maintain the existing law, and make some other provision by in-
creased facilities for supplying the country, If, therefore, on account
of this temporal and unfuncen necessity, we are obliged to refer to
precedents, they are in our favour. Reason argues that we should
suspend the existing law, bnt it may be said, suspend the existing
law for six mouths. What are you then to do? This is a question
which any man, having to examine the subject, would be required
to consider. But our conviction is strong, that it is utterly impos-
sible, after establishing perfect freedom of importation for the pe-
riod of eight months to permit the corn-laws to come into operation
at the end of that period. I repeat that my conviction is perfectly
strong that such a course would be impracticable. But you say
further, give us a temporary suspension, butt give us a guarantee
that at the end of eight months the present corn-laws shall be re-
newed. I say it is impossible to do so. It Is an utter misrepresen-
tation of the state of public feeling, to suppose it to be probable that
after this country for the period of eight months should have tasted
freedom from all duties on the importation of food, for Government
to renew those restrictions, either by its own principles or by the
enactments ef foregone statutes. When you refused the admission of
maize in the course of last Session itwas a matter of consideration
to my colleagues and myself, whether we should at once suspend
the law or rather bring some modified measure. I ad-
mit that some of you were of opinion that maize
should he admitted, but that protection should be kept up upon other
things. Do not disregard public opinion on those things --do not
slight that feeling—for, depend upon it, that when a question of thiv
character is involved, public feeling cannot be disregarded. By the
present corn-law, the duty on maize varies with the ditty on 'corn.
1t was desirable to admit maize free of duty, bin as the prices of con)
rose the price of maize rose also. Yet it is remarkable that in the
last session of Parliament it was proposed by some o: you that maize
should be imported duty free, because it was desirable to have it for
the feeding of cattle. You think it advisable not to
recommend the repeal of the corn-laws, and yet
you admit the principle that maize should come
its, because such admission will lie for the benefit of the farmer in
the feeding of his cattle. But you forget that there are other
articles necessary for hman sustenance, upon which you say protected
ditties ought to be maintained. - What do you advise us now ? I
may assume that it is necessary new that this law should be sus-
pended. I will 'teatime it is suspended. Would you deliberately advise
us, to give:you on the ground of any public or private necessity, a
guarantee that the cern-law, at the expiration of eight months should
be renewed. Do you not feel that the fact of the suspension would
constitute a sew element in the consideration of things ; that the
fact of the suspension would give tentbld energy to the agitation at
present existing. Would you invite us to fight the battle? What iv
the state of the feeling you invite us to oppose, by asking us to gram
this renewal? I ask you to look to the public expression, and of the
sincerity of which Honourable Members have give,
ample proof. Did the Noble Lord, the Member foi
Dorsetshire, vacate his seat from any unnecessary motive ?
Did Mr. Start, did Mr. Wilson Patten avow their change 01
opinion from any dishonest motive?—(Cheers.) Did Mr. Egerton,.
the Member for Cheshire—did Lord Henniker entertain any
other than a real change of opinion, and a real conviction that the
time was come for a settlement? Did that young Member of tin,
House, Sir. Charteris, who has shown as high and noble a spirit as
ever animated the breast of an English gentleman, combined with
great acuteness, with great promise of excellence—did Mr. Charter's
abandon his seat for Gloucestershire from any dishonourable or cor-
rupt motives? Did Mr. Downey resign his seat through corrupt
motives? Why, are not these conclusive proofs that that Minister
who had undertaken, after suspension, to guarantee the existing corn-
laws would have had numerous difficulties to contend with ? But,
let us take the course of the present debate— let us take the admis-
sions, the expressions of opinion of those who have been the loudest
in their condemnation of the Government. The first instance is
the Member for Huntingdon.—(Cheers.) Well, I confess that I was
surprised at some of the opinions maintained by the Hon. Gentleman
with respect to the policy of the government.—(Cheers.) Will that
Hon. Gentleman follow me in a defence of the existing corn-law
after suspension?— (Hear,:hear.) So far from that, the Hon. Gentle-
man thinks that this is just the time for making a compromise with
respect to the corn-laws. That means a new corn-law. He nook
abandon me if; after suspension, I sheuld undertake to guarantee the
existing corn laws. That is quite clear. He says the time is just
arrived ibr a compromise. Why, if ever there was an unfortunate
moment for a compromise this is It.—(Cheers.) What is the mean-
ing of a compromise but a new corn-law ? Aud what is the security
for the maintenance of that?—(Opposition cheers.) What could be the
security? What says every thin. Gentleman who has appeared on tilt
part of the agriculturists ? Why it is this—" What we agriculturist,.
wish is permanence as to cont." Well then, can any one who thinks
the agricultural interests will be promoted by a permanent system
of corn-laws advise a mere alteration of the corn-lasts to take effect
after a period of suspension ? I am uow considering that gustier
after suspension, and it would be impossible for a prudent man,
having the res
Pouseoully of Government, to advise the contiouance
of the corn-laws. What would be the state of parties? I will only
take the loudest and most vigorous advocates for protection. Now.
I am truly convinced that it would be impossible to restore the corn
laws after a suspension. What says the Hon. Member for Rox-
burglishire ?—(Citeers.) Ile was the loudest In Ills denunciation.
The Hon. Member for Roxburglishire has a curious notion of the
relations between the country and its Ministers—and the Minister,
the Sovereign. The Hon. Gentleman likens me to a
hired advocate a partiettlar counsel who had thrown
up his brief. Perhaps the Hon. Gentleman is net aware
that the Minister takes an oath, and that constitutes the
material difference between his position and that of an advocate.
The Minister takes an oath that in all matters to be debated and dis-
cussed in Council he will truly and unreservedly deliver his opinica
according to his heart and conscience—(Hear)—and I apprehend that
that obligation constitutes a material difference between his position
and that of un advocate.—( Loud cheers.) I will ask the lion. Gen-
tleman who says he stands here to advocate the old corn-law, ant
that I had made a terrible breach in 1842, but that I was hound, at
any rate, for considerations of consistency and honour, to maintala
the corn-law of 1842—1 will ask what was the admission which the
Hon. Gentleman made before he got to the close of his speech ? He
said, " I must admit that in my own county-, within the the lase
three years, there have been such improvement: mad&
in the roads—such introductions of science, and indeed
such facilities for producing cheap corn, that my opiniot,
1: that the tints is come when the present cern-law should be al-
tered."—(Lond Opposition cheers.) Well, I said to the Hon. Gen-
" Whom are you counsel for ?" Of course, the Hon. Gen-
Heinen was perfectly indignant at being supposed to be an advocate
for:and one, and he claimed for himself that motive which animated
Anchara's troops—lie was the Attorney-General for the human
race.—(Cheers and laughter.) Both the Member and the Ministet
were counsel, and when I asked him for whom he was counsel, the
Hon. Gentleman said, " Counsel ! That is an implitation on ins
honour. lam council for the ogriculturists—l am counsel for the
commercial interest—l am counsel for the whole country-1 am coun-
sel for humanity."—(Loud chess and laughter.) All I claim is to be
counsel for all the great interests of the country. 1 have obliga-
tions superiot to any which party engagements impose—namely, to
give that advice which is required of rue according to my heart and
conscience, and which I believe to be the best for the conntry."—
(Cheers.) Well, then, there is the Member for Newcastle-under-
Lytle. He Informs me that hereafter, and for ever he must with-
draw his confidence from nue, and on this ground, that 1
establish no great principle in respect to the corn-laws.
Ido not know whether the Hon. Gentleman has shared in my ItilS.
fortane,
ft read the pamphlet of John Colquhoun.—(Great
laughter.) lis ill now refer, whit greatrespect, to a Noble Lord who
has not yet spoken. I mean the Noble Member for Newark.—
(Hear.) But would it be possible for the Government to rely on his
support if they had taken the course of adopting a neer and modified
system of corn-laws ?—(ilear, hear.) 1 know not what course he
will Mite with respect
to this measure, for. though be says he is in
favour of a repeal of the corn-lairs, yet he thinks that the present
no
Parliament is t the one to enact it, igurely that it no satisfactory
—(lean) The Hon. Member for Maidstone said lie would
reason.—(Bear.)
ask
whether the measure was right or wrong, butt that he
would quote extracts from my speeches to show that I was not eon-
g4, . •
' tent Sire the question fyr the country is this—ls the measure
right er Is,rolig If it be. right end necessary I call on you
to pass •
it. if ft be wrong, then withdraye • your confidence
from the Government.—(Cheering ) VMS canned justify au adverse
vote if you believe that we are rlght.—(eet
oieers,) The lion. 31ember
the • •
Huntingdon is in favour of eontinuation of the
for
present measure; and Ile further gave me notice that henceforth I
cennet colculote op hint as a supporter. I implore of him to visit all
ceneeppenes3 •
the Mi 1114117 which be !nay think we merit, but
, ore now offer to ti II
not Mini'? qleAsPI _, 0 e tide country.—( eat•,
hear.) if yon believe ilie nle4Oilre he ceo4ry, pass it at the
pretest crisis ; butt take any onwrtuilify that rangy !sitar for punish-
ing the introducers of it.—(ilear, hear.) LI the crone of last year
I proposed that a certain duty should be laid on grease, when up rose
the same Hon. Gentleman, and insisted there should be a stop-gap—
!' pevp! avOont and quit this holy ground I" exclaimed the Hon.
1411ITSP4—(
Me. MILES— t qui net 4104 from dlity.—(Offier, order.) I
wanted to get another day appeintea
Sir R. PEEL—I do believe that the Hon. Gentleman, by taking
his stand on grease —I do believe that lie has shown eminent quali-
fications for the position of a leader. He says "he did not shrink
fora the duty ;" certainly, for he was absent on the night
the dlOcuselins on (lie 911e1Iiqg tzxis. laugh.)
4.`ow Wit hs'egitial to'tattlei amliiiMt;'t he Oen. I)ltefither oimosed the
intiodtiction of foreign cattle'; tkeetuse lie sari it wonia.t'end to -red wee
gm Mice of home produce, but the fact is the pride has increased
tkeKear,^44, pull set tV hien. Gentleman voted for the
corn-law of 1841; blit'Sti•eituotisly opposed the
In
T ereiasion of foreign
cattle.—(Hear, hear ) And what is hi. the 'lteln:"Vsentlem'ati &we
now ? Why, while exulting in having opposed the prohibitory duties
Imposed on the admission of foreign cattle into this conntry, lie says,
ti) the year 1841, we suffered severely from a defective supply of meat,
andlif! con) se pt the ittot silt 111011(tis so 13141: qupthypf sheep
haeiogot Saptliqlel hae !Seen ;50,0, 'less than tlfelfaitoyear'nnY-
eeditio—that the average 004 stiPPIY of ShOp' in the (.onion
• markets is 16,500 less, and that the cattle bought in Stilitlifield in
consequence of deficient food weighed from 7 to 10 lbs less than in
former years, and were extremely lean and ill favoured.—(ilear,
hear, and laughter.) Now, in the course of the last six months this
efleiencee of 250,000 sheer had been supelied from abroad, and with
. „

this fact staling in the face ,ought he not to regret lowing opposti
the carrying out of this anti-protective principle:—(hear, hear.)
But bow does he think it is now possible for him or me to maintain
that law, when from diseases and defective fodder we are often
compelled to go abroad for our supplies.—(Hear, hear.) Was it
not a strong fact against the motion which the Hon. Member
brought forward some time ago to restrict the importation of fo-
reign cattle, that from the defective food produced by the laud of
this country, 250,000 head of sheep were prevented from coining
into the English market? Did this not show that it was against
the interest of the landowner to restrict the free importation of
wholesome and healthy fodder?
' Mr. MILES—My motion was not to prevent the importation of
grain. My motion relative to cattle was to tax cattle by the weight,
and not by the head.
Sir R. PEEL—Whatever the motion of the Hen. Member might
have been, his words were that he was disappointed with the work-
ing of the corn-law, and he wished to Impose a further restriction on
the importation of cattle.—( Hear, hear.) Now the Hon. Gentleman
must excuse me if I refer to flax ? And what do we learn from the
history of flax ? When there was a duty of 10! per ton upon the im-
portation ef flax, there was a certain parish in the county of Somerset
which grew flax, and let us take that parish for drawing our compa-
risons. In the parish of Cbiselhorough there were 100 acres of
land devoted to flax, and the lion. Gentleman says the growth of
flax on that land was abandoned.ln consequence of the withdrawal of
protection. Now, I ask the Hon. Gentleman at what period was
that ?

Mr. MILES—At the removal of the last duty.
Sir ROBERT PEEL—WeII, then, the last removal of the last duty
was oely 2s. per cent. ; the higher duty on flax having been removed
in 1824. The duty upon foreign flax in 1821 was 101. per ton. It ,xas
reduced In 1894 to the nominal duty of 2s. per cent., and in
was removed altogether. Now, by the removal of this duty you say-
-100 acres of land In the parish of Chisleborough were thrown out of
cultivation, and that is what you call withdrawing protection from
native industry. But let us see what has taken place in other parte,
of this great empire, in censeqttenc, of this withdrawal of protection
of native Industry. You will find that the growth of flax in Ireland
has become a very flourishing trade since the with-
drawal of protection. Some _Honourable Members are very
fond of taking particular twenties, • and saying, wh.t has
been the consequence of your polky. here; and the Hon.
Member for Somersetshire had done the same to Chiselborongh, but
let ut look at Ireland and see what has taken place there. What Las
been the consequence of the withdrawal of protection in that country
where manufactures were very much restricted, why you will find
that the growth of flax is much more profitable than wheat. IMX
without protection affords a better return than wheat with it ; so
much for agriculture.—(Hear, hear.) Now what hat become of the
manufactuces in Ireland since the withdrawal of protection. Previous
to the withdrawal of - protection the importation of cambric
into this country from Ireland was is 6,000 to 1,000 from France,
New, since the withdrawal of.protection, has there been any increase
or not? In the year before the withdrawal of protection, the num-
bers were 10,000 French, 110,000 Irish.. In the next four years the
increase of the Irish importations in London was 300,000. In the
next four years from 1838 to 1842, 400,000. And what said the great
manufacturers of cambric, in Loudon, who waited on me the other
day, when they said ten years since three-fourths of the
cambric handkerchiefs introduced into the Loudon market,
came from France and four from Ireland ? Since the reduction
of the duty, -they state • that three-fourths come from
Ireland, and the remaining fourth from France.—(Cheers,)
Then, whatever that parish of Chiselborough may have suffered in
consequence of this alteration, the culture of flax in Ireland has
prospered, and the linen manufacture in that country has long had a
degree of prosperity which the most sanguine friends could hardly
have expected.—(Cheers.) Well, now, will you restore this duty upon
flax?— (Hear.) This debate has chiefly turned on the corn-laws;
but it is not necessarily a corn-law debate.—(Hear, hear.) I pro-
pose that we should go into a Committee of the whole House for the
purpose of considering the principles of our commercial policy—
(Hear, hear)—and no doubt the corn-law will come before that Com-

inittee. But it is perfectly open to you to reject the measure for the
corn-law and yet to consent to these measures. Sir, so much has
been said on the subject of the corn-laws that I cannot pass it by.
tier Majesty's Government have proposed, after the lapse of three
years, that the duties upon corn should be repealed, or at least re-
duced to a nominal duty. I proposed that measure on the part of
the Government from a sincere belief that it would be more ac-
ceptable than any other to the agricultural interest. I proposed it
from a belief, not merely chat it would be more accptable to them,
but that they would prefer it to immediate repeal. We combined
with the measure of the corn-laws—we combined, I say, for en-
couragement in the improvement of land by advancing money for
the purposes of such improvement.—(Cheers.) I certainly thought
it would be more probable that with respect to many parts of this
country we should be in a much better position to compete with
foreigners if the corn-law repeal were postponed to the end of the

- „
next three years. I thought there would be more opportunity for
arrangements between landlord and tenant.--(Cheers.) BM, above
we seriously considered what could be done with respect to
hainage, and what advantage could be taken of that proposal of the
Govermnent. I certainly also thought that the consideration that
Canada has at present, the advantage of a repeal in the admission of
her corn compared with the corn of foreigners —I thought that it
would be much mere like to be acceptable to Canada and more for
the interests of Canada, and that some time should elapse
before • their corn came hits competition.— ( Rear, hear.)
ft was for that purpose bona fide, and believing the ar-
rangement upon the whole much better, believing also that it would
be more for the advantage of the agriculturists, that, on the part
of her Majesty's Government I make that proposal. L'e'ieving it to
be the best, it is my intention to adhere to it —(Loud cheers)—that
is to say, it is my intention to propose it—(Cheers)—And to use all
the means—the legitimate means I can, for the purpose of giving
effect to it. But it was intimated the other night by the lion.
Gentleman, the Member for Suffolk, that he greatly preferred
(speaking en the part of the agricultural body) that he greatly
preferred immediate repeal to the measure wtich I have proposed.
—(Protectionist cheers.) And .when he uttered that sentiment he
turned round to his friends, and it received apparently their general
concurrence.—(Cheers.) Now, as I stated before, it is the inten-

Hon of the Government to adhere to their proposition.—(Cheers.)
They have stated the reason why they Propose it, and why they
are inclined to prefer it.—Considering the advantage of the oppor-
tunity that there will be afforded for an improvement of the land.
But I stated this that if the agricultural body are not of opinion
that it Is for their advantage—(Protectionist cheers.)—and if they
think that immediate repeal will be preferable to the deferred repeal
—(Great cheers and laughter on the Opposition benches)—and if
they place me in the minority, then the only consideration that I
shall bear in mind will be this—What course can I best take to give
effect to the law as amended upon your instance?—(Loud and re-
peated Opposition cheers, and laughter.) I will do all that I can to
carry the proposition of the Government.—(Cheers.) I prefer it,
and I will persist in believing It to be favourable to the ricultural
interest. I do not say what course—speaking for myself
I sun to pursue. Sly opinion with respect to the final adjust-
ment of the corn-laws will remain unaltered, and I shall decidedly
prefer immediate repeal to the confusion of the country.—(Cheers.)
Sir, it is right carefully to consider what course we should pursue
on this question. This I do believe, that the final adjustment of
this question has become paramount to all other questions.—
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Now, Sir, I was asked in the course
of this discussion what price I calculated for corn in the year
titer the proposed repeal.—(Hear, hear.) I thought it, too, natural
to say that it would be very difficult for me to give a positive answer
to that question—that 1 thought the price of corn must be affected by
seasons, and by other considerations, and that therefore I could not
undertake to give an answer, and I am afraid that past experience
induced me to avoid giving any guarantee to any price whatever.—
(Laughter, and cries of "Oh, oh.") But this I will say, that I think
aothing can be more ruinous than to suppose that the interests of
igriculture are necessarily and intimately conitectt,el with the price
of wheat.—(Cheers.) Now I will own that I do not anticipate that
when the HOU. Gentleman talks of countless miles that are ready to
ae cultivated, I will only ask th.p Hon. Gentleman to consider that in
Germany there has long been a free trade, and that corn from Egypt
smut Odessa is plentifully admitted, subject to a nominal duty.
rise price of cora is dependent upon its quality. Corn brought to
Haiti front Egypt and Odessa, bears what is there called a fair price
of 31s. per quarter. It is stated that the saute corn will bear a
?rice of 10s. less iii the markets of England, on account of Its infe-
riority ; and, therefore, it is impossible to draw an inference from the
merely nominal price of corn, or to ascertain the real value which
should be fixed upon that article. I entertain the hope that a re-
Mellon in the prise will be caused by a store extended importation.
What I want to show, however, is this, that agricultural prosperity
:s not necessarily connected with the prices of wheat. It is ad-
mitted upon all hands that there never was a time when science has
teen so much applied to agriculture, or the cost of production so
much reduced as for the last three or fou:, years. Now what
;las been . the prices of wheat? We shall sec that it has a
natural tendency lo decline inprice.—(Hear, hear.) Now we will
just take the decennial period commencing with the year 1805.
In 1805, the price of wheat was 81s. 2d. ; 1815, 975, lid. ; 1825,785.
id. ; 1835, 565, 7d. ; 1840, 575. 11d. And during the last four years,
which have been years of great improvement in agriculture, the
price has been only 51s. 10d. So that the price of wheat has fallen
:rout 975. 6d. to the comparatively small price of 51s. 108., and yet it
IS generally admitted that persons employed in agriculrure are in a
slate of greater prosperity than at any period before. And if there
should be a still further reduction in prices it will be
the result of scientific improvements. The price of wheat,
therefore, cannot be taken as a criterion of agricultural pros.
derity. There is another circumstance to which I will idso
allude. The rental of land. As taken from the returns made to this
House, makes the gross rental of land in England, in the year 1815.
the sum of 32,500,0001.—the price of wheat for the five years ending
1815 was 102 s. 2d. Now, this is very remarkable, for in the five
years ending in 1842 the price of wheat had fallen to 62e. 7d., and the
gross rental of England had increased to 37,000,0001., so that, coin-
cident with price has been the increase of rental.—(Hear, hear.)
Wow, I am perfectly ready to admit the benefit which you might
with reference to the difference of currency; hut, remember
that if you take 10 per cent. off the price of wheat (102 s. 2d.), you
must also take 10 per cent. off the amount of rental (32,000,0001.)
and still it will leave no question but that concurrent with the great
reduction, and since there has been a great increase of agrieulttual •
trosperit; .—(Hear, hear.) New I must refer to the speech of tire
Hon. Member for Northampton (Stafford O'Brien). No w, what
were the arguments he adopted S " Now (says the Hon. Member)
lifter these corn-laws shall have passed, the tenant farmer will come
so his landlord and he will thus address him. Ile will say to the
landlord " I cannot afford to pay the same rent which I have paid
hitherto—the bones of my forefathers have been collected in the

churchyard of this ancient parish—it is most paintbl for me to think
Afquitting the residence of my ancestors, the church of my fore-
:ethers, and the home of my family, and seek my fortune in a strange
place." And it will he remembered that the Hon. Gentleman made
A great impression on the House in consequence of the pathetic tone
in which the speech was delivered. The Hon. Member then pro-
posed that the landlords should make a speech to the tenant. He
makes him say, "My good fellow"—(roars of laughter) "it is quite
rue that your forefathers have lived in this parish, that there has
been an intimate relationship between your ancestors and mine, that
the principles of free trade are prevailing. I can purchase articles of
consumption at a cheaper rate, and I must deal with you upon the
same principle. It is quite true that the laud you now occupy pro-

- -
luces only three quarters, whereas by the application of a little
capital and skill it might be made to produce live quarter ,;" and thee
is a gentlemen close by who is connected with the Anti-Corn-law
League."—(Cheers, and cries of "No, no," from Stafford O'Brien.)
It I have not correctly quoted the landlord's speechr
E wish the Hon. Member would make the landlord's speech again.
(soars of laughter.) The Hon. Member says the gentleman alluded
to was not necessarily a member of the League. Well, at any rate,
he meant a person with large capital. The landlord proceeds in his
speech to the tenant to say he must sell in the dearest market, and
must, therefore, give the preference to him (the capitalist). sow,
sir, if the Hon. Member will allow me, I will suggest a better speech
for the landlord.—(Hear, hear.) "My good fellow"--(Roars
woven with the fortunes of my ancestors. It is possible that
Istughter)—" your liirefathers have been buried the churchyard

a.ijoining your fvrerathers have had their fo;tunes interwoven
t afranger may overbid you in the market. Under this protecting
law your land, which should produce live quarters, produces only
and public opinion will hardly tolerate this, or accede to our desire
that no foreign cattle shall be imported. We must therefoee take
some measures to increase the production of the land ffom three
quarters to five. I have the advantage of the new tariff, and I pro-
pose to apply that advantage to your assistance.—(Rear, hear.) I
will not turn you out; I won't let the manufacturer come in to re-

place you. It is my interest as well as yours that the produce of tke
land be Increased from three quarters to five. I will lend you ca-
pital, I will assist you, and let you and your son, to whom this land
will descend, keep out this foreign invader, I, by my

. _
capital, and you, 1 y - your industry, will remain by the land,
and let it be handed dawn to our postertty with all the
improvements which we respectively can give it." But if the tenant
should say this is a labourers question, I should make hint say in
reply to that —" If we make this land produce five quartars instead
of three surely more employment would be created, and all this by
the application of that saving which the rich shall derive from the
ad-
dressed. This was the questition her Majesty in her speech had said
" I recommend you to take into your P4rIY eonsideration whether,
benefit of the laud so improved, That was how he should be
altera-
tion might not be made so as to benefit the agriculture and the com-
mons of the country." The address was so worded as to give no
after taking a review of the laws relating to protection, some
it would not be advisable to make such further
sideration whether
pnliotest einntuelleitii)troletdectotiotinictior
reductions in those laws as might be compatible with the interests of
pledge en the subject. It said that the [louse would tithe into eon-
thej n to question at all. I e xpeeted front the early notice which the Hon.
Member gave of his intention to move mi amendment, that it would
at all
the country. How then doyou fulfil that assurance? You refuse logo
ehfilidbeetemnee,
ttawkaes
industry. Now what was the amendment? Why, not a great
into consideration. Do you dep;de then agqinst tile admission of
lt
orl °Uri atht4ntot
priMeiple was involved in it. You refuse to %Ice the question
foreign brandy? yott decide Against the admission of foreign
icti2ig"e4stmuelint
silks? Tlds amendment preceetis so far. The ctqestioll for you to
consider, with regard to our coMniercial policy, is, will you advance,
or will you peed 9--(Loud cheers.) You perhaps say, you will stand
still, which is the' etreet of the amendment—to postpone the consi-
deration of the subject for the next six months. I sky to thit, that
there is no stationary point—to StAn4 04 14 to retrograde.—(Cheers.)
I do hope that this Parliament, Which passed the law of 1842,
which simplified the Cnetoms, Which consented to a change in the
tariff, which passed the Canada Corn Bill, which assented to the
tariff of last year. I hope that this llouse will not accede to the
proposition got this question lte pestpohed for six months.—;Loud
cheer:,.) (14,4icttl iasue siru,ply was, whether there should
be a retaxatien.o.l ditties and of protection, or whether they should
restore prohibitory duties and 'increase protection.—(Cheers.) I
offer this challenge—l never said that it was upon the experience of
the last three years that I was induced to propose the alterations
now under consideration of the House, What I said was, that
onrieg the last three ITilf4 t Kaye aeon coluchKot IoW prices
gret prO4p3.`ity, treat eb.fttel#4lnt,'ditattiatloti'in crime, improved
health, increlisffig ceitatnerce, and that experience of three years
has convinced me that cheapness and plenty were the
concomitants of relaxation in our prohihitory duties, ant
were the foup4tiou of our commercial greanese.—(Loud cheers.)
I did not take cpedit to myself fog the tariff. 'What I eald Was, that
It was a measure 'Ohicii has eenduced to the general interests of the
country. .This is the challenge which I throw out with respect to the
tariff. Show me a taxation that on removal did not create some
unnecessary approliensipn. I will gp further ; shew me any removal
of a taxation that hat not ctintilbeted to thegerieral interest of the
country. yfliy; was 'eihamed When I heard of many Of these
petitions :wiliest the present nteaSn're, Why, here is a petition sent
from the snlpowners. They invoke the wisdom of Parliament to
support the general interests of the community, and to
prevent all further rash experiments on the mercan-
tile interests iandl above mil to continue the timber

duties.—and this is a petition from the shipowners—the builders of
ships.—(Hear, hear.) Yon reduced the timber duties from 4sts. to
235., and the reduction did not work that injury which the opponents
of that reduction would have made out. There is one branch of the
timber-trade which required to be improved, and to which good
timber ought to be supplied. So trifling was the supply, that, at the
present moment, there was not, in one of the greatest maritime
ports in the kingdom, a single block of foreign wood of that descrip-
tion which was the most valitablefor sltip-building. I propose increased
facilities for procuring Uinta r, in order that good ships may be built.
i relaxed the duties on timber, and with that relaxation ac enormous
increase of Canadian timber had taken place, in the same manner as a
red uc t ion on the duty on wool caused a vast iiicrea se of the importation
j of that article. That reduction Increased the demand for Canadian
I limber, in which we are so defficientand which is 50 useful in the.
building of ships, that in the port of Liverool was none to be found.
no much for that. The Noble Lord the Member for Liverpeol made
a long speech about the colonies. What am I proposing? lam not
proposing an immediate repeal of everything. lam not proposing
that you should sweep away the customs' duty on spirits
and oilier artieles.—(Hear, hear, and cheers) I am net for
doing away with all protective duties for revenue. With respect to
the colonial interests, I know that very great interests are involved.
Il'he Noble Lord the Mentber for Liverpool proposed that discrimi-
nating duties should be at once repealed, but it was not his policy to
diminish protection, where it was necessary. That was the prin-
I eiple of the policy of my Heaourable Friend. What. did we do in
11542? We permitted the colonies to get the produce of this country
at a trifling' cost. We said with respect to the colonies, that the
pine was come forretaxing those principles of restriction which had
marked our policy for many years, and which could not any longer
tie maintained, with the sustainment of the liberties of th'e country.
Has it injured the colonies? You are wrong to say that the affection
to' the colonies for the mother country depends on the, amount of
supply. Look at Australia—what is the peat benefit derived from
her: I propose to proceed on the path that leads to prosperity and
abundance, by gently reducing the protective duties. My Hon.
Fnend who spoke on the first night of the debate was very
carriages..—(glean)
optiortipnt;eieer removalpnlpit,t;., of t Ile protective ditties on fore le it
carriages.—(lfear.) I really do not know anything in this.
lankier that there wain duty of a farthing per
proposed th t there should be a ette-
,,oii,duty of 2d. per yard en Ibreign paper. Why is it that we can-
hat,
- ' b competea i illitieVrdliee competitioni poe,r, wouldjoile hanging—the
7 —thtel I terapea.ettnernsare stimulusnPat and
consti-
tution of an Englishman that wouldmlith'u'ingi
the talent would increase,
properpa Hera. The Hon. Oentleman had g;tid him
mt
Is
inh
.the physical consti-
rizeigit-e ttovotsild
out, of the window or his fbreignmenbie• fromh drawingl I looked a
e;vopalfersiet,aidnsdirshate,baeentili :Alevigeodu
to
sacrifice
1011. see a number of
he en as alteration made in any protectivetatte drift-eailtliltettil tiasil'actialiolraiTc;:titiiiiate7iyet
has not been used—(Laughter)—
not been indulged in? In the tariff of 1842, I proposed' tol let in
potatoes at 2s. per cwt., and the prattle, growers of
Yorkshire came to me in a body, saying i hat the
potato cultivation would be ruined. With regard to hops, in 184 e,
I reduced the duty from 81. les to 41. 10s. All Kent and Susse-x
were in arms, saying that the trade would be injured. What is the
fact? Since that time only two cwt. of hops have (wile in, and yet
the hop growers had feared the, influx would be so great and inju-
rious as to throw a great many persons out of employment. Mr.
Ituskisson let down the protective duties on silk, and Mr. hiring,
the present Lord Ashley, resisted it. to the utmost of his power. He
said that hundreds of thousands of poor honest men, knowing
nothing whatever of political economy, would be thrown out of
employment. lie had said that a duty of thirty per cent. was net
'sufficient protection against foreign competition, and that an admis-
sion of silk at that duty would drive all the workmen from the trade.
Mr. Huskisson said, in reply to the clamours raised against his course
of proeeedings, " I have been assailed by ungenerous appeals to my
feelings, appeals calling on me to commune with my feelings, and
asking me if lam not open to the visitations of sorrow. I hope lam
not wantingin the duties of a man or a Christian. But at the same
time that I entertain these feelings, I have a duty to perform as a.
alinister." That was the language of Mr. Huskisson.—(Hear, hear.)
He, however, persevered and removed the prohibitory duties. What
has been the result? Have the hundreds of thousands of silk manu-
facturers been thrown out of employment ? Have the poor-rates
heefi -burthened further for their support?—(Hear, hear.) Have we
net been able to compete with the foreigner?—(Renewed cries of
" Hear, hear.") In ten years ending in 1823, the import of raw silk
was 19 million pounds, in the ten years following it rose to
30 million pounds, and finally increased to 52 million pounds.
Now which was the true phitantropist—he who said, " Keep out
French silk, their patterns are superior to ours ; you will never be
able to compete with them ; yon will ruin thousands of workmen;"
or the Minister who said, " Good God, do you charge me with
apathy? I anonot insensible to the miseries of any fellow-men. I
have ascertained that Spitalflelds is threatened with devastation by
famine. Let me try-whether or net, by brining in the free air of
competition, I may not improve the condition of my
country." (Great cheers.) Have we been enabled to
compete with foreign powers ? Why you have sent
more silk manufactures into that country which is said
to be the head of the manufacture you have sea in
the last year more silk manufactures into France than you exported
to the whole world in any year under the old system.—(Cheers.)
Now, I can go over the whole of these articles. I can enumerate
tholier, silk—l can even refer to inferior articles, and I may men-
tion one reduction in 1842. In that year we reduced the duty on
foreign feathers.—(Laughter.) It seemed to me a small article,
made up by an aggregate of small articles—(Contintied laughter)—
but a manufacturer came to me and said, "Oh, this is the moet
hard-hearted measure you could have passed. It will ruin the fleet,
farmer—(Laughter)--I have a house of call for feathers ; the Eng-
lish farmer is very careless of his feathers, but the Irish farmer duds
his profit In their trade. He added, " I take all my feathers
lions Ireland. I use 200 tons of feathers, at 20s. a stone. This
trade Will- be destroyed. The duty was reduced. Another letter
was received, stating that there never was such a stimulue given
to their trade as by the reduction. He had been able to import
300 tons from foreign countries, and 150 tons from Ireland, and in-
stead of 20s. per stone, he had been obliged to pay 225. 10d. He
said also, that the greatest demand had been from Cornwall, and
the Cornish miner had been enabled, by these feather manufactures,
to rest lehnself from the labours of the day, without being obliged
to expend the greater part of his earnings. I offer you that chal-
lenge, that you cannot show me—l won't say some small mann faeture,
there may be some which will he injured—but I offer this chal-
lenge that, looking for the last thirty years, to the re-
laxation of your Colonial policy—to the relaxation of your protec-
tive policy at home—l challenge you to produce an Instance In
which the consumer has been injured—l challenge you to produce
an instance in which the producer has suffered. You have to make
your. choice, and vote on this question. It is a question of
confidence in the Government. It ought not to be. Reserve that
for a separate motion. The question is, will you advance In the
path you have hitherto pursued, or will you retrograde.—(Cheers.)
Just look at the amount of force you use for the pnrpose of prevent-
ing smuggling, and don't refuse to consider whether it may not be
right to reduce protection on spirits. Reduce the ditty on foreign
spirits. I only ask you to reduce the present duty on French
brandy to Ids. On English spirits the duty is 9s. lam only asking
you to cut up the trade of the smuggler by the roots. I ask you to
permit French silks to come in at a duty of 15 per cent. Is it net
possible for a beuefleal result to follow this? Thirty per cent. le
now levied, and smuggling Is going on. A further reduction in the
duty en silk would cruise the manufacture to increase. Vivify your
manufaeturers by a spirit of free competion, and see if a beneficial
result will not follow. But then you will have to decide by a vote
upon this question. Will you advance or will you recede ? What
is the policy best sußea to this great commercial empire ?
I ask you to look-at the advantages that God awl nature has given
you. Look to your geographical position on the confines of
Western Europe, the connecting link between the North of Europe
and the great continent of America The improvement iu naviga-
tion and the application of science have brought. you within ten
days of St. Petersburgh on the one side, and ten days of New
York on the other. Look to your physical advantages. The nerves
and sinews of manufactures, iron and coal ahound in this country.
Look to.. your acquired advantages—yeti have, ten Hulce the
amount of capital possessed by any country in the world.
Look to the advantages derived partly from the inert tendency of
your °wit character, and partly from a constitution reconciling per-
fect libertj, with an absence from licentions rules.—(Cheers.) Look
to all these things, Look to your physical—your geographical 1,(4.1..
tion. Your physical resources, your capital, and skill, are Immense.
You have every advantage. Your powers are beyond any of the
ether nations of the giolte.—(Bear, hear.) Anti will you allow it to
be said that ether countries on this question are in advance otyoa.
There are countries that are so, from whom 1 least expected sueb
conduct, an Ito whom I did not refer. I did not refer to Sardinia,
where the duty on the importation of foreign graiu has been re-
pealed. Naples is stated as likely to follow.—(llear, hear.) Prussia
is shaken in its present course, and France was desirous of following,
the only objection to that course being from the aristocracy of ma-
nufactures and commerce. The Executive are fully alive to the
queetion' rr
but at present are restrained by the parties I referred to
in the Chambers ; but the opinion of all sensible men
is, that before long, the question will lie settled in favour of a_me'Se
liberal system,—(Hear, hear.) The leading men of the 'tallied
States give us great encouragement to proceed, anti by cierrylng the
measures of the Government we will be strengthening the hands of
the party in that country who are desirous of establishing com-
mercial freedom. But whether these countries act in a liberal com-
mercial spirit or not —whether or not they relax the principle of pro-
Hon, do not punish yourselves because others choose. to do so, For
the sake of your country, and to show a good example to other
countries ; let the decision of the present debate be in favour of corn-
inereial freedom.—(Loud cheers.) Let your vote be fir a
principle, based, not on three years' experience, but on
the experience derived from every relaxation of protective
duties.—(Loud cheers.) Set the glorione example to other nations,
and you will force them to follow in your wake; but if even there is
an uncertainty in that, pass the measure, and believe me that in at
doing you wild be taking- that step winch of nil others will be most
conducive to your own security—(l;ear, hear, and cheers)--anti at
the same time by doing that, will settle a question that will lead to
the contentment and happiness and willing obedience of the grest
body of the people.—(Loud cheers ) It mast be clear to all, that
after the measure is passed, there will be no certainty that pros-
perity will be generally scoured, or that periods of-distress in the ma-
nufacturing or agricultural districts may not arise, It will not makes
a state of prosperity certain, though it will do much to
prevent the recurrence of distress. We shall have no doubt, as before,
seasons cf scarcity followingon seasons of plenty, or it may be that
a return of manufacturing distress will be coincident with a season
of agricultural scarcity. You alt recollect the times of MI and 1842,
those are periods that may occur again.—(Hear.) Lee me revive
the recollection of those sad years. The memory of the Winters of
1841 and 1842 never can be effaced from my recollection.—(Cheers.)
Recollect the course that we pursued on every occasion on which the
Sovereign met her Parliament when there was go expression of the
deepest sympathy with privation and suffering—recollect that ex-
pression of the warmest admiration fbr the patience and fortitude
with which those sullbeings were borne by the people.—
(Load cheers.) Those times may hew gone, the years
of plenteousnees may come, and the years of adversity may also
come. And if they do come, and If it be our ditty again to express
sympathy with suffering, and again to exhort the people to patience,
Ido ask every mashers to commune with his own heart, and to ask
himself this question:—lf these calamitous Hines do come--If we
must express sympathy with suffering—lf we must offer exhortation
to fortitude—will it hot he a consolation that we have relea-ed ore -
selves, from the heavy responsibility of regulating the suppilies of
food of the people.—(Cheers.) Will not our expressionoosytnomfath
the
,ili.
be more Consolatory ?—(Cheers ) Will not the exhorta o.
Tile, betiTtoreorgimcoprebes, impressive,
ii,efetteseelat.tt.:ll:nsdanty
jootaitingnl e;‘,i•a',i,:ie':di.'::?3!._r,ej,go:;et_e:-
- '
—(hear,hear, .
tannetiitctipatotedtltiici•osferedoitilecli•eittlirattet hoefer'seanld,ottructiine°svecorl efleerycri'Doill'itolel.
end loud cheers.) . Will if not be 5 tlrcai and lasting

coilsolation to us to be enabled to say to 8 surieilitgpcople, these
are the chastenings of en all-wise and beneficent Providence, sent
for soma dreadful slue to ills ho our pride possibly, and convince us of
mr nothingness—to awaken us to a sense of our dependent.° ou our
God; they are to be borne without murinuritiZt and the dispensations
of Providence have not been aggravated by hlmum institutions which
prevent the supply of food.—('he Bight Bon. Baronet resumed his
seat amid the loudest ebuering, which lasted for some minutes.)
Lord J. MANNERS moved the adjournment of the debate, which
was at onee agreed to.

COL: NTT WORKS PRESENTMENT DILL (IRELAND).
The House then went into Cumulate on the County Works rye.
stntinent Bill.

r BILL.
aitt
i'L.4. t
sl ,
werel . o r
in which -Mr. Redington, Mr.' F. French,
Sir J. Grahadm,ottierrlitioFti.erzmueszer!itro;.)lkiSilampairrti:
Nantphee)
Clements, an
to, and the Bill ordered to be reported.
Atter some discuesson,
agreed THE FISHERY PIERS, Re.
On the motion of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, that the Fishery Piers
and Harbours (Ireland) Bill be read a thipi time.
Mr. WYSE said, that at num Of the harbours the people were so
poor as to be unable to get boats to pursue their trade. He suggested
that loans slizatid be allowed from the Government for that purpose.
Lord CLEMENTS asked why the 5,000/., grouted in 1822 for teat
purpose, had not.been applied to that purpoee ?
Sir J. GRAHAM made some observation in rep y, which we' quite
inaudible in the gallery.
The third reading of the Drainage (Ireland) Bill was then
postponed.
The report of the County Works Presentment (Ireland) Advance
of 'Money Bill was theh read and arced to.
The House adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'clock.

WESTMINSTER ELECTION.
MEETING OF THE FRIENDS AND SUPPORT-
ERS OF CAP PAIN ROUS.

. - - -
I4lst evening a Meeting was held in the British Coffee-Louse,
Cockspnr,strest, Piccadilly, of the friends and stipporters of Captain
Rous, for the purpose of making the necessary preparations for the
contest which commences this nay ; but very soon after the ap-
pointed hour for owing the business of the evening had arrived, it
was announced that the meeting would be held in Willis's Room, and
thither the assembled crowd rushed, and in a very few minutes the
room was crowded to exeess. At about eight o'clock the platform
became tilled with the supporters and friends of Captain Rona, who
arrived about the same time, and was loudly cheered on making his
appearance.

Upon the motion of Mr. C. J, Wood, M.P., seconded by Lord E
BRUCE,

Lord ruNcis EoEwroN, M.P., was called to the chair, amidst
loud and general cheering. He commenced his Adilies, to
the meeting by assuring his auditors that be bad no
wish to occupy their time i.y malting si lengthened speech.
Neither did he vvi.%4 i ju be understood that he litood there
with any view c. 47 el;erosing any influence he might pe,44ess as a
Ntember dr Parliament. Ile merely presented himself now is the
capacity of an elector of the borough of Westminster, to can upon his
brother electors to return to Parliament his friend Captain
whom he could reconmaerid to then.' as a representative wc,11:1Y...b,r.
their choice, though ne'had not the ability or the desire eitileit:„lo,,,,,,,or
or to bully.—(Cheers.) His Hon. Friend belonged to aaPr:oved
which he Was an ornament ; a profl:l;sion hi which beail,i;
of the learned
professions; him-
self as useful to his country As Atty man belongi%
te%lled into the professions; and the fact of his now having
trr
dditionsi ser-
vicerecommend:l-
- the Crown in a new capacity. was ase..,, icy._ (Cheers.) lle
Lion in his favour before an Englisho,ci,o4Ltu.aei:idy.
and fairly upon
(Lord F. Egerton) would state his
„,01_1w. ,c, !!„,
Main nous was a sup-
those measures of the Goveriinnz,nen.
that he was not in any
porter ; and here let
iGovernmeni, and. Old tied hold any office
way connected with the -
whatever under the Crown, and therefole it was a matter of perfect
the Government measures should
Indifference to hint wAtetper.
teed or not, ext.,pg in so tar as he regarded them as beneticial to the
best wteives of the country ; but thli he would say for his UOll
. - -