The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-12 00:00:00

THE SUN, _LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, M'AY' 12, 1846.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, May 11.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition from the
Rural Dean of Swansea against the union of these sees.
SELLING SPIRITUOUS LIQUORS ON THE
SABBATH.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a petiton
from the town of Canterbury, against the sale of spirituous
liquors on the Lord's-day, and praying that the law which
regulated the sale of those liquors in London on that day might
be extended to the provinces.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
The Most REV. PRELATE also presented a petition from the
Corporation of Deal against this Bill. He had heard that there
w a sno corporation in the kingdom which acted more consci-
entiously in the application of the funds entrusted to their care,
5 charitable purposes, than the Corporation of Deal.
SUNDAY TRADING.
The Earl ST. GERMANS presented a petition against
the sale of spirituous liquors on Sunday.
SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition, signed by
all the clergy of a rural deanery in Wiltshire, against the union
of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
Lord FAVERSHAM presented petitions from York, against
the Charitable Trusts Bill.
Lord Eldon, the Bishop of Winchester, and Lord Campbell,
presented similar petitions.
Lord CAMPBELL postponed his Registration Bill, which
stood to-night for the first reading.
CLERKS OF THE CROWN (IRELAND).
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that he
would, on Friday next, call the attention of the House to the
late appointment of Clerks of the Crown in Ireland.
The Earl of ORKNEY presented a petition in favour of
free trade.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the Rev.
Dr. Magee, of Harold's Cross, Dublin, praying the House not
to pass into a law a measure which had been introduced by the
Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, and which would
sanction the introduction of Papal bulls into this country, by
which he would be much alarmed.
GRAND JURY ASSESS RATES (IRELAND).
Earl GREY presented a petition from Basingsloe against
the rates levied under this Bill.

CONDITION OF RAILWAY LABOURERS.
The Nosez EARL also presented a petition from Glasgow,
praying their Lordships to adopt some measures to improve the
condition of the labourers employed on the numerous railways
throughout the country.
HIGH CONSTABLES' BILL. •
On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND this Bill was
read a third time and passed.
THE RELIGIOUS OPINIONS' RELIEF BILL.
The Bishop of EXETER then rose to propose that the ques-
tions of which he had given notice with respect to this Bill
should be put to the Judges. He said their Lordships would
readily believe that it was with the deepest reluctance that he
rose to move their adoption, and that he hesitated much before
he prevailed on himself to give the Learned Judges the additional
trouble, which, in the event of their Lordships acceding to
them, would be imposed upon them. He felt this the more be-
cause at the present moment they were much oppressed by the
additional amount of business which they had to discharge.
He did not think their Lordships need go further for an
opinion as to what the law actually was than their own walls.
He hoped that the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack
would feel himself bound peculiarly to look upon the
matter in a judicial point of view. The Bill be-
fore their Lordships was brought in by the Noble and Learned
Lord himself. By this Bill it was proposed to strike out of
the statute-book those important statutes or parts thereof
which have been ever considered as the main bulwarks of the
constitution of England—England, as an independent mo-
narchy. In the Bill before their Lordships, which had been
read a second time, and which it is hereafter proposed to
go into Committee upon, their, Lordships would be
invited to repeal so much of an Act passed in the first year of
the reign of Queen Elizabeth to restore to the Crown its
ancient jurisdiction over the state of England. Their Lordships
would see that the tendency of that Act was to make it no longer
punishable to assert the supremacy of the Pope. He needed not
to remind their Lordships that this supremacy had been claimed
by the Pepe prior to the reign of Queen Elizabeth. He had
claimed and exercised that power in deposing King John. The
same Pope (Innocent III.) claimed jurisdiction and power over
a succeeding King in the year 1215, in these words—" Is net
the King of England our vassal, or, rather, our slave ?"
This was the power to be restored by this Bill,
should their Lordships think fit to pass the same.
In these remote times Paul 111. deposed Henry VIII., and
released his subjects from their allegiance. Just before the
Act in question passed Faul IV. had acted with equal vio-
lence towards Queen Elizabeth. He declared it was the
height of presumption for Queen Elizabeth to claim the
crown of England without his permission. It was under
those provocations that the first statute of Elizabeth
was passed, and unless there was some inherent vigdur in the
constitutional laws of England, which would make it, in spite
of the statue which the Noble and Learned:Lord proposed to re-
peal, penal for any one to put forth the power of the Pope to
any such extent, we will no longer protect it from
the recurrences of such attempts at power. The
object of his motion was that their Lordships would
satisfy themselves of that inherent power in the constitution
to prevent such offences as those. He had thought it right to
propose these questions, because it was not directly in the Bill
before their Lordships, nor in the Act which they proposed, to
repeal any clause which made it punishable to write, print, teach
by express words, deed, or act, or maliciously deny the
Queen's supremacy. The express denial of the Queen's
supremacy was not made punishable by the Ist
of Elizabeth. It asserted the Queen's supremacy, but
it said nothing on the subject of denial, nor did the Bill
which he held in his hand. Of course the Queen's supremacy
was as clear, undeniable, and unquestionable as any part of
the constitution of this land, over things spiritual as well as
temporal, and to deny that supremacy must be a grave offence
against the constitution, and ought to be punishable at
common law. But it was absolutely necessary for
this House to know whether that was the ease or
or not before they proceeded to legislate with respect to the
penal enactments of the Ist statute of Elizabeth. On the sob-
jeet of Royal supremacy, he need not tell their Lordships that
they had the highest legal authority for stating that it was a
part—a special part—of the monarchy of this land.—
Hear, hear.) He need not say that Lord Coke and
Sir Matthew Hale had expressed their opinions on that subject,
on the strongest terms. He, therefore, hoped that the
Venial of that supremacy must be an offence against
the common law. He should be quite content if the
Noble Lord on the Woolsack would answer that question
decisively and say that it was punishable by the common law.
When on a former occasion he addressed their Lordships on
the second reading of this Bill, when his Noble and Learned
Friend on the Woolsack proposed the insertion of a declaration
of the Queen's supremacy, he declared that he should
have no hesitation in expressing himself satisfied with
that, if his Noble and Learned Friend would go one
step further--if he would consent to a punishment
being annexed for the crime of denying the Sovereign's supre-
macy. But his Noble and Learned Friend refused to advance
this step ; he said that this was what he could not do; that it
was contrary to the policy which had actuated them in
bringing forward the Bill ; and this was the reason why
Jae wished to extort from his Noble and Learned
Friend the inquiry whether the denying of the Queen's
supremacy would be punishable at common law
The Pope claimed a spiritual jurisdiction in f,ro exteriorum,
but if the claims advanced by him were allowed, it would give
a power to him which their ancestors viewed with great jealousy,
because they thought that it gave to a foreign power an essen-
tial authority over the Crown of this country. But he (the
Bishop of Exeter) must be permitted to say, that
thejurisdiction of the Pope in ford exteriorum
was of that extended character that the subjects
of this country could not allow. The Pope's claim
in tiro interior?, affected the: conscience, and was,
therefore, of a most formidable character. The Pope
had the power of deposing kings and governments,
by absolving men from their oaths of allegiance. It was,
therefore, he thought, necessary to protect this country against
such influence if they could do so consistently, and through the
medium of an Act of Parliament. The House would find that
the Pope not only still had that power, but that it was
justified by some of the most modern and liberal
Roman Catholic writers of this country. Dr. Milner and
Dr. O'Connell, than whom there was not a more liberal man,
for instance, justified, nay, advocated the power of the
Pope to absolve parties from their allegiance. The
extract from the work of the Rev. Gentleman went to
show the great danger of the power of absolution from oath
by the ministers of the Roman Catholic religion. An officer
of the army, for instance, professing that faith, might
be absolved from the oath which he had taken,
and disavow his allegianec to his Sovereign.—( Hear.)
The individual was' not allowed to judge for himself, but was
entirely in the power of those who were the heads of the reli-
gion which he professed, as they led him to believe that they
could absolve him from any indignity. Need he say that in
this consisted the whole danger to which he referred? He said
this power of abso‘ving from oath, which was admitted by the
highest Roman Catholic authorities, must not be set forth
in this Protestas it land—that such a power could not
exist without great danger to the country. —( Hear. )
Their Lordships would see that there was a wide difference
between entertaining an opinion, and extolling, putting forth,
and maintaining it to the world. Let those persons in com-
munion with the Pope believe, if they pleased, his supremacy,
and let them in the it conscience act as they thought the doctrine
taught them; but let them not feel at liberty to set forth to the
world those opinio: ns. They are immoral, and being immoral,
they are consequimtly indecent. Would the opinion of the
Anabaptists be tolerated in this country, who maintain that
everything shotnld be held in common? The remarks
he was making did not of course refer to those
Noble Lords present who were in communion with the Pope.
It was proposed to strike out these statutes from the statute-
book without .ant • practical evil having been brought forward
as resulting from their continuance on the statute-book. No ;
it was not said tl tat there was any grievance of that kind, but
they were told that they were put into an invidious
position. If the y were a people of that sort he had,
for his own • part, not the slightest objection to
extend to then s any privileges which were consistent
with the full si 'curity and enjoyment of the Protestant
Constitution of tl its country. He would now proceed to say
something with r ereect to the other question that he should
move their Lordst ips to propose to the Learned Judges—he
meant that which asked, whether independently of so much of
the said Act of the first year of the reign of Elizabeth
before recited, ant I also before the said Act passed in the fifth
year of the same eign, and also of the Act passed in the thir-
teenth year of the reign of Qneen Elizabeth as is above recited,
intituled " An A et against the bringing in and putting in exe-
cution of bulls, we itings, or instruments, and other superstitious
things, from the t See of Rome," it is an offence against the law
of England, and p unishable as such, to bring in or put in execu-
tion any such bull, writings,or instruments from the see of Rome.
He was not sure whether this question would receive from the
Learned Judges such an answer as would fully satisfy him in
this case. He was afraid that those learned persons
would hesitate- before they spoke of bulls generally
in such a main nor. He wished they might. He hoped
that they might. Bulls were matters known to the laws of
England. The y were mentioned in the Statutes and laws
of England. • Therefore the Learned Judges would be
prepared to pv it a construction upon the word " bull."
Their Lordsk ips would permit him to say that bulls
were instrume .nts that 4.4
were in fact such 'instruments es
passed as it were under
the Great Seal of the Pope of Rome. They
passed under the Great
Seal of our own Gracious Sovereign. " Briefs " were,
on the core trary, under the I.4eis9 Seal of Rome.
Bulls were so called (if their' Lordships would
a
forgive him whilst he made the explanation from
barbarous (Illectek word, " boula, which igni-
fied a leaden instruelent. There ‘were "balls of grace" and
"bulls of justice," tee seals'
the written docuirse t by
whilst those of
the latter consisted -1'
e3f Vo-gs dignified material.
In respect of these bulls he some
tbp Omer being attached to
,remind their Lordships
that it was not until a late would
lees absolutely compul-
sory on Queen Elizabeth to year that it
sliament and on Par-
liament to enact this propose to Pa 4i now about to
be statute which
expunged. Tha deli/ made it
high treason t statute not -h
bull such as
that which Pius Otis: • introduce a
Ff • Queen Elizabeth,
th issued against
deposing that Sover •
ant and call-
M' declaring her throne "C

ing on her subjects to disobey her authority. It was not for that
reason that this statute was enacted, but because it was found
impossible to define the bulls in such a way as to make it
safe to permit the introduction of any bulls at all ;
and therefore it was that this statute very wisely, as
he thought, prohibited all bulls whatever. He should
be very glad if they could possibly discover any
mode in which the introduction of these bulls
could be punished in a lighter manner; but the act
of introducing hulls into this land interfered with the
Sovereign power of the land, and was therefore
in itself an act of high treason ; and therefore
it was that those two great men, Sir Mathew Hale and Coke,
defended this particular Act as necessary for the best interests
of the country ; that very Act it was now proposed to rescind,
He should be glad if the Noble and Learned Lord, when he
proposed to strike out this statute, would propose to intro-
duce a something which would protect them generally from
the introduction of Papal bulls linto this country, and if they
found that the common law did not affect this object, then he
trusted that the Noble and Learned Lord would insert a
clause which would answer that object. Before he sat down
he felt it necessary to make one or two remarks, because it
was only that feeling the want of these laws he had
been compelled to ask the Noble Lord these questions.
They were called upon to acknowledge this Papal power which
had for ages been the bane of nations without the slightest rea-
son being urged in the Bill itself for their doing so.
Those who had introduced this Bill had not
taken upon themselves the 'peril to say that it
was expedient to repeal this power. There was scarcely a
single statute which did not give some reason, in the shape of
preamble, for its being passed ; and were they in this instance
to depart from the constitutional rules of the country, and
pass an Act, without saying why or wherefore, which
affected the supremacy of the Crown of England ? It was
remarkable that it was only two years ago since the Noble and
Learned Lord struck out of the Bill the very clauses he now in-
troduced. The Noble and Learned Lord opposite had, upon
the occasion to which he alluded introduced a Bill for
repealing these Acts, and he applied to his Noble
and Learned Friend to know how such an Act
was to be met, and to express an earnest hope
that it would not be permitted to pass, and he had the satis-
faction of finding afterwards that it did not pass. It was for
these reasons that he .theught it necessary to appeal to the
Noble and Learned Lord who represented the Government
in that House, and to the other Noble and Learned Lords on
the opposite Benches to apply their judicial minds to the ques-
tions which he should take the liberty of propounding to them.
The Right Rev. Prelate concluded by proposing that the fol-
lowing questions be submitted to the judges :—Whether,
independently of so much of the Act passed in the first
year of the reign of Queen Elisabeth, intituled, " An
Act restoring to the Crown the ancient jurisdiction
over the estate ecclesiastical and spiritual, and abolish-
ing all foreign powers repugnant to the same," as makes
it punishable to affirm, hold, stand with, set forth, maintain,
or defend, as therein is mentioned, the authority, pre-
eminence, power, or jurisdiction, spiritual or ecclesiastical,
of any foreign prince, prelate, person, state, or potentate,
theretofore claimed, used, or usurped within this realm, or to
put in use or execute anything for the extolling, advancement,
setting forth, maintenance, or defence of any such pretended
or usurped jurisdiction, power, pre-eminence, and authority,
or any part thereof, and of an Act passed in the fifth year
of the said Queen, intitled "An Act for the Assurance of
the Queen's Royal Power over all Estates and Subjects
within her Dominions," it is an offence against the law of
England, and punishable by the same, by writing, printing,
teaching, preaching, express words, deed, or act, advisedly
and maliciously to deny the Queen's supremacy, or to affirm,
maintain, and defend any such pretended or usurped power,
jurisdiction, or authority of the Pope, or any foreign prince,
prelate, person, state, or potentate within this realm ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he wished to offer a few
observations with respect to that portion of the Right Reverend
Prelate's address, which referred to some supposed inconsis-
tency on his part with respect to the Bill to which the question
he had just proposed referred. He was sure that when he re-
ferred to what took place on the occasion alluded to by the
Right Reverend Prelate, that their Lordships would at once
acquit him of the charge which had been brought against him.
The Noble Lord to whom allusion had been made, introduced
the measure referred to. That Bill had not been previously
communicated to him (the Lord Chancellor), neither had he
any communication with reference to it, but on referring to
the particular Acts of Parliament to which it had reference, he
saw at once that it was perfectly clear that every man of liberal
p, inciple and feeling must assent to a great portion of it.—
( Cheers.) But with respect to the other portions of it, clauses
might have been introduced on which inquiry was necessary,
and therefore the course he pursued was this--to that part of
the Bill to which he felt no reasonable objection could be made,
he at once assented. But he infor med that Noble
Lord, that if he would entrust the Bill to him
he would refer it to the Committee then sitting
on criminal law ; and that he would request them to consider
the subject, and make report upon it. It was for this reason,
and for this reason alone, that those parts of the Bill were
struck out, that he had thought or expressed any opinon
upon it. But as the subject was one of such great import-
ance, and involved questions of such great magnitude, the
Noble :Lord ought not to call upon him to express his opi-
nion upon it. He referred those Bills to that Committee;
they had made their report upon the subject, and it was in
pursuance of that report he had brought in the present Bill and
laid it upon their Lordships' table.—( Hear, hear.) Having
made these statements, he was sure that their Lordships would
acquit him of inconsistency as to the course of conduct be had
pursued. He felt most anxious that the Bill should pass with
the full concurrence of the Right Reverend Bench, and, if pos-
sible, with the concurrence of the Right Reverend
Prelate himself. He had been most anxious to
exclude from the Bill anything which could give
rise to any difference of opinion among their Lordships.
Since he had laid the Bill upon the table of the House a long
time had elapsed before he brought the Bill before their Lord-
ships fur a second reading. He did this for the purpoie of
receiving such suggestions from Noble Lords, Right Reverend
Prelates, and from other quarters. He had received a suggestion
from a Right Reverend Friend, for whom he entertained the
utmost respect for his learning and ability. He had adopted
this suggestion, and the amendment which he should in conse-
quence propose, he should introduce when their Lordships went
into Committee on the Bill. There was one satisfaction which
he had received from thesspeech of the Right Reverend Prelate,
he had directed their Lordship's attention only to two points
of the Bill, all the rest of the Bill he might, therefore, consider
as having met with his assent. There were two points only
namely, that which related to the statutes of the lit. and 13th
of Elisabeth.

The Bishop of EXETER here made some remarks, which
were inaudible in the gallery.
The Lord CHANCELLOR.—The Right Reverend Prelate
had confined his attention to the two heads to which he had
referred. He knew that upon former occasions the same
Right Reverend Prelate had stated that upon those points,
affected by the Bill before their Lordships, no difference
of opinion could be entertained. He concluded, therefore,
that the Right Rev. Prelate had no very decided objection to
the other portion of the Bill. Now the Ist of Elizabeth—the
Act of Supremacy it was called—expressed in the ful'est and
most comprehensive terms the authority of the Sovereign of
this country in all matters spiritual and ecclesiastical.
Nothing could be more comprehensive, distinct, or decisive,
than the terms of the Act. It is expressed in terms that no
persons on reading could entertain the slightest doubt upon
the subject. It afterwards proceeded to impose an oath, calling
upon persons filling certain offices to declare their adherence
to the doctrines therein set forth. It afterwards proceeded to
impose severe penalties upon persons, not who should deny the
supremacy, but who should maintain and defend the spiritual
and ecclesiastical authority of any foreign power, prince, or
potentate. Now it was perfectly clear that the abridgement
of those penalties in effect rested with this Act of Parliament.
But what was the state of the Roman Catholic Church now,

not in England alone, but over the world ? The Act
of Parliament inflicted the severest penalties,
high treason and mis-prison of treason it inflicted_
the forfeiture of all property on those who admitted
the spiritual or ecclesiastical supremacy of any foreign prince,
prelate, or potentate. Was it not a matter of public notoriety
__did any person for a moment doubt it—that any Roman
Catholic, in this empire, or in any other, did not look 'up to
the Pope as his spiritual and ecclesiastical head ? If there was
any doubt upon the subject, he would refer their Lordships to
the speeches of the Right Rev. Prelates who had spoken when
this Act of Elizabeth was in progress through Parliament. It
was by them admitted, in the most distinct, the most precise,
and the plainest terms. Their Lordships would find this prin-
ciple admitted in the speeches of the Archbishop of York end
the Bishop of Chester. But more than this, it they looked to
the canons or the Roman Catholic Church, they would find
this doctrine stated in the most distinct, the most direc• , and
the strongest terms. There can be no doubt of that. The Roman
Catholic clergy took their oaths to conform to these tenets. They
must therefore take it as part of the doctrines of the Romish
Church that they regarded the Pope as their superior--as the
person whom they were to look up to as their spiritual and ec-
clesiastical head. They had admitted this in their legislative
enactments. He would refer them to the oath contained in a
statute of Elizabeth, which was imposed on persons holding
particular offices. By that oath the parties declared that no
foreign prince, prelate, state, or potentate, should have any spi-
ritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within these realms. That
form was used—that oath was universally administered, until
within late years, when they themselves had altered it. They
had altered it in deference to the opinions of persons professing
the Roman Catholic religion. They found it impossible to
impose such oaths on their fellow-countrymen, and they had,
therefore, struck out the words spiritual and ecclesiastical, and
inserted the words civil and temporal. After having done so, was
it not clear that they admitted that persons professing the Roman
Catholic religion looked up to the Pope as their religious and
ecclesiastical superior? Then, when they allowed in this
country the free exercise of the Catholic religion, and when
they knew that this was a fundamental principle of that reli-
gion—when they knew that professors of that religion
discharged their duties by maintaining the principle, how
could they consistently with themselves visit them with the
penalties due to high treason and premunire? How could
they confiscate and take from them all their personal property ?
This was an inconsistency which he was anxious to remove by ,
the introduction of this law.—( Hear, hear.) He would say
that it was perfectly improper to retain the old laws. Their
had gone too far. They should not have taken the steps that
they had already taken, if they were not prepared to follow up
the subject by this final step, to be consistent with
themselves. But then it was said this law woule. lead
to a great deal of mischief, because they d',d not
know exactly what was meant by the term ‘, spiritual. "
And then it was said that it reight lead to the
absolving of subjects from their allegiance to the monarch
of this country, but in reply to the statement of the Right Bev.
Prelate he would again quote the case to which he had referred,
as it gave a distinct answer, which was this—that if any person
in the country circulated and inculcated immoral principles, he
was amenable to the law, and liable to be punished by the com-
mon law of the country. It was not necessary to have any en-
actment for that purpose. The common law was sufficient to
reach cases of that description, and if any such case were car-
ried into a court or justice, it would be properly animadverted
upon by the person who might preside on it. It had been
urged, bath in the House and out of doors, that if they repealed
the penalties of those old laws, they would in fact abrogate and
abolish the supremacy of the Sovereign of England.—( No, no.)
He was glad to find that that argument had not been repeated
that night, although on a forme,: (welling they had heard much
of that sort of argument. But supremaerrested upon a founda-
tion too solid to be so shaken—( Hear, hear)—and did not de-
pend upon the Act of Parliament to which he had referred.
It was part of the common law of the land.—( Hear, hear. )
The Right Rev. Prelate had admitted that it was so. The

law up-on that subject, he was prepared to show, if
it were necessary to do so—be was prepared
to show that it had been recognised by repeated
Acts of the Legislature, and that it had been laid down
by the judges of this country in all ages and at all times.—
( Hear, hear.) Lard Coke, in that macterly case to which he
(the Lord Chancellor) had referred, commented in an able
manner upon the law and the facts, and summed up the whole
by showing that, by ancient and continued decisions—by Acts
of Parliament, by long practice and usage, and continual ac-
knowledgment, and established beyond the possibility of a
doubt—the supremacy of the Crown in ecclesiastical mat-
ters was a part of the common-law of this country. There could
be no danger, therefore, in repealing those penalties, severe as
they were—there could be no danger to the supremacy of the
monarch. He felt that it was the duty of their Lordships, if
not to repeal, at all events to modify to a considerable extent
( Hear, hear.) The Irish Act to which the Bill had reference
.
was still in force. By that Act, if a party maintained the spiri-
tual supremacy of the Pope, for his first offence he was liable

to the forfeiture of his personal estate; for his second offence
he was liable to be punished by prentunire, and their Lordships
were well aware what an infliction that was; it deprived the
party of all his property, and at the same time deprived him of
all the benefit of the laws—so much so that, as he stated upon
a former occasion, it was once doubted whether a party
who had subjected himself to a prenzunire might
not be killed with impunity.—( Hear, hear.) For the third
offence ( and this was a part of the law of the land) he was
guilty of high treason. So that they tolerated the free exer-
cise of the Catholic religion, and they knew that it was always
a fundamental part of that religion that a party should main-
tain and defend the spiritual supremacy of the Pope. And it
was, therefore, incumbent upon tkem to do so ; and if they did
their duty the laws of England still declared that they should
be punished in the severe manner to which he had referred.
—( Hear, hear.) It was impossible to maintain such laws.
All these penalties were not in force in Ireland, and he only
now asked their Lordships to repeal them with respect
to England.—( Hear, hear.) But, said the Right Reverend
Prelate, how monstrous it was to introduce this Bill without a
preamble, Why, the Bill spoke for itself ; but he did not wish
their Lordships to repeal these Bills, unless they were satisfied
that they ought not to remain any longer upon the statute
hook. hy was it necessary to point out that which must be
obvious to everybody ? Was it necessary to point
out the expediency of repealing unjust, cruel, and
vexatious laws ? Was it necessary to have a pre-
amble to explain a purpose like this ?—( Hear, hear.) He
thought not, and therefore it was why he had introduced
none. The thing spoke for itself. —( Hear, hear.) But for
fear any one should imagine that they were striking any blow
at the supremacy of the Crown, he was prepared to introduce
a proviso, with the view of restricting the repealing power of
the Bill to those provisions which imposed the penalties.—
( Hear.) This, however, did not coincide with the wishes of
the Right Rev. Prelate. He wanted, it would seem from his
question, still to have some punishment for offenders against
these Acts.—( Hear.) Well, then, he would tell the Right
Rev. Prelate, that if any parties wilfully and maliciously in-
fringed the provisions of these Acts, they still would be liable
to punishment under the common law of the land. If any
person called in question the supremacy of the Crown of Eng-
land, that person was liable to prosecution by the common
law of the country. He now came to the 13th of Elizabeth,
by which the importation of bulls from the see of Rome was
declared to be high treason. That was a simple statute en-
actment, and therefore he proposed to remove it. Whether or
not it should be entirely repealed, or whether it should be varied
and altered, it was not for him at present to say. That would
be a subject for consideration. It :was perfectly well known
that bulls were constantly imported from the see of Rome, and
they were obliged to wink and connive at it. They declared a
particular act high treason, and yet when it took place they
did not attempt to prosecute. What a state for the law to be
in ; and how degrading was such a state of thit,gs. But it was
said that if they repealed that statute they would sanction the
introduction of bulls for political purposes, directed against the
Crown, against the authority of the Government, and against
the temporal interest of a private individual. He felt equally
indignant with the Right Reverend Prelate, at the insolent
assumption of power which had been exhibited by Pope Gre-
gory, in the time of Henry IV. of France, and of the Pope in
the time of Napoleon, but did that apply to the present case ?
The common law was sufficient to protect them from bulls
being introduced for improper purposes , was it necessary then
to keep this Act of Parliament in the statute book ? A question
had been raised as to whether they should qualify the repeal of
this Act, or whether they should leave the common law to take
its course. His answer was, that if they attempted to draw
nice distinctions they might do that which they slid not intend
to do. It was a dangerous coarse to adopt. Nothing could he
more important in a Bill of this description than its being car-
ried without haste through the House, and therefore if their
Lordships should be of opinion that the question of the Right
Reverend Prelate should be submitted to the Learned Judges, he
for one should not offer any opposition to that course.
Lord BROUGHAM was glad to find that the Right 'Bev.
Prelate had said that he wouli be satisfied with the opinion of
the law Lords. There could be no doubt that it was corn-
pe, ent for them to submit a question upon legislative matters
to the consideration of the Judges, but he would fain submit to
their Lordships whetht r it would not be better to confine such
appeals to the Judges to cases of eminent difficulty Now, if
this was a doubtful question, they would not be able to get an
answer this session, and if it was not a doubtful question, it
need not be referred to the judges at all. He entirely con •
curred with his Noble and Learned Friend in the answer which
he had given to his Right Rev. Friend. He had no doubt
upon the subject. Nothing could be more offensive than the
interference of a foreign prince, and this opinion was held in
France, for there no bull was allowed to go into the country
without being first examined. Yet the Pope called the King
of France the eldest son of the Church. There was no penalty
in this country, according to the common law, for the intro-
duction of bulls, rescripts, or other writings from Rome, pro-
vided they contained nothing that was blasphemous. seditious,
or immoral. If they contained such doctrines, they
were liable to prosecution, like all other papers with
similar contents, come from where they we uld. There could
be no doubt that that which gave rise to this statute of Eliza-
beth was an infamous overt tact of treason; but such an act
could be punished by the common law of the land. He had
further observations to make on this subject, but he should re-
serve them for the Committee.

After a few words in explanation from the LORD CHAN•
CELLOR,

Lord DENMAN said he had heard with great satisfaction
he Right Rev. Prelate state that he was willing to accept the
opinion of the law Lords in that House. An appeal to the
judges would draw them from those important duties which now
pressed upon them. He would, however, take the liberty of
saying, that he was quite sure that if any doubt could possibly
be entertained upon the question now submitted, they would
sacrifice their own convenience, and even a portion of the pub
lie convenience, rather than allow that doubt to exist for a sin-
gle hour. He had been surprised to hear the Right Rev. Pre-
late doubt whether the Crown of this country was imperial and
independent. Even during the time when the Pope bad most
power in this country, it was acknowle Iged that he had no in-
fluence over the Crown of England— that he had no power
above the supremacy of the Crown, and any per-
son who attempted to impugn or to endanger that
supremacy, was liable to the punishment of loss
of life, of banishment, and of confiscation of property.
He had no hesitation in answering the Right Reverend Prelate,
that nothing in the shape of a bull, or edict, or anything of the
sort, could be has,oduccd hut,, this country which could in any
way injure the supremacy of the Crown ; for the supremacy
of the Crown depended not upon the statute, but the common
law of the land.—( 'tear, hear. )
Lord CAMPBELL said he wished to add a few words to
whst had fallen from his Noble Friend who had just sat down.
It was a mistake to suppose that the Charch was higher than
the Crown, for the Crown had power over all authorities, whe-
ther civil or religious ; that it was this power which was under-
stood to be the supremacy of the Sovereign. That supremacy
was established by the common, and not by the statute law, and
any person who attempted to injure it—no matter howsoever he
did so—was liable, under the common law, to the severest
punishment. With regard to the first question of the Right
Reverend Prelate, be could state that the Bill applied to all
bulls, no matter at what time they were issued,
and nothing could be introduced cr published in this
country which could in any way endanger or
stigmatise the dignity or supremacy of the Crown. He re-
joiced exceedingly that the time had arrived when they could
repeal these obnoxious Acts, but he thought it was the duty
of Government to follow it up by taking steps to restrict the
influence of the Pope in this country. In no part of the
world could Popery prove more powerful than in this, and he
for one thought that some diplomatic intercourse should be
established with the Pope; for in consequence of the non.
existenee of that intercourse, the Pope possessed more influ.
ence over the people of this country than he otherwise
would do.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord BEAUMONT did not think it would have been ne-
cessary for him to trespass on their Lordships' time, but the
Right Rev. Prelate, instead of confining himself to the ques-
tions of which he had given notice, had entered into other sub-
jects, and had attributed to the Catholic faith powers and in-
fluences which he totally denied. On a former occasion he
attempted to explain to their Lordships the great difference
which existed between dogmas of faith and matters of disci-
pline, and declared that the Pope had no power over the su-
premacy of the sovereignty of this c.untry. Their Lordship,
however, did not feel satisfied with his humble authority for
this, and he would therefore quote to them Roman Catholic
documents in favour of his declaration. The Noble Lord
then quoted several answers to queries put by Mr. Pitt to the
faculty of divinity of Louvain, in which it was stated that the
Pope had absolutely no power or authority over the supremacy
of the Sovereign of any country out of his own domains. He
thought this was a sufficient answer to what had fallen from the
Right Rev. Prelate, but as a proof of these answers made by
the faculty of the divinity of Louvain he could state that there
was no connexion whatever between the Pope and the Roman
Catholic clergy of that empire, excepting through the Bishops,
who were answerable to the State for every thing they did,
and whose edicts and orders were submitted to the State before
they were issued. With regard to the Noble and Learned
Lord on the Woolsack, having struck out of the Bill, which he
had the honour of introducing, a clause repealing some of the
very Acts annulled by the present Bill, he begged to remind
their Lordships that the Noble and Learned Lord did so, be-
cause he thought that the Bill in its then form was imperfect,
but at the same time the Noble and Learned Lord promised to
introduce in a future session a Bill to repeal these obnoxious
Acts.—( Hear, hear. )
The Bishop of EXETER, in replying, remarked, that since
the answers of the faculty of Louvian were promulgated, and
even within the last five years, one Pope had exercised his
authority over the supreme power of the sovereign of Spain.
He had confiscated the property of several ecclesiastical divines
and declared some of the ts.cts of the sovereign of that country
to be absolute nulliti,p . —( Hear, hear. )—lt was very true that
Popery would be
other if this -0 more powerful in this country than in any
should pass. There was no country in
Europe where they would suffer the Remish bull to be intro-
ducedwit},_out the consent of the Secretary of State. He con-
sidered it absolutely necessary that these bulls should not be
introduced free of penal enactments. If the bill were passed
they would have no security against papal bulls. It had been
found necessary in every country to restrain the bullsof Rome.
He had always opposed the spread of Popery, and he hoped
they would continue to do so. He considered that to allow
the extolling of Popery, and to sanction the introduction of
bulls would be little short of treason. The Right Reverend
Prelate concluded his speech by impressing their Lordships
with the necessity of determining in Committee on some
measure which would ensure the tree exercise of
thethe
authorityopinions
of the Catholic:people without, however, extolling
of the Pope, and wprheiveehhtwothueldinsturpepdouretttethheefipnadpeaplenbdusi
the Crown, and intolnsce f

the country.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.

The Friendly Societies' Bill was advanced a stage.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
The consideration of this Bill was further postponed from
Thursday to Monday next.
Their Lordships then rose at half-past Seven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COAIMONS, May 11.

The SPEAKER. took the Chair at Four o'clock.

BILSTON GAS-LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY,
The report on this Bill was agreed to, and ordered to be en-
grossed.
DUBLIN, DUNDRUNI, AND ENNISKERRY RAIL-
WAY BILL.
This line was read a second time and ordered to be com-
mitted.

BURY WATERWORKS.
The report on this Bill was brought up and agreed to.
LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY.
Mr. GREENE moved that the London and Birmingham
Railway (Coventry to Nuneaton) Bill be read a second time,
notwithstanding the time prescribed by the sessional order has
expired, the agents not having obtained the breviate till the 4th
of May.—The motion was agrees to.
REPORTS.
The following reports were brought up, the amendments and
alterations agreed to, and the Bills ordered to be engrossed :
St. Austell Small Debts.
York and North Midland Railway (Whitby and Pickering
Extension).
Forth and Clyde Junction Railway.
Stirling and Dunfermline Railway.
Bristol Waterworks.
Wath-upon-Dearne Improvement.
Leeds and Thirsk Railway ( St. Helen's Branch Deviation).
Leeds and Thirsk Railway (Knaresborough Extension).
Dundee and Perth Railway Amendment.
Slamannan Railway (Bath ate and Jawcraig Branches).ScottishCentral Railway (Perth Termini and Stations).

Caledonian Insurance Company.
Hartlepool Gas and Waterworks.
Lincoln Waterworks.
Scottish Central Railway (Denny Branch).
Warrington Waterworks.
Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Dunfermline Branch).
Great North of England Railway (Boreughbridge Branch).
Great North of England Railway (Bedale Branch).
SECOND READINGS.
The following Bills were read a second time, and ordered to
be committed, viz.:—
Scottish Central and Caledonian Junction Railway (by order).
London and Birmingham Railway (Coventry to Nuneaton).
Goole and Doncaster Railway.
South Yorkshire Coal Railway and Canal.
Belfast and County Down Railway.
Earl of Blesinton's Estate.
Bury Improvement.
Exeter Great Western Railway.
Newcastle and Darlington Junction Railway (Durham and
Sunderland Railway and Wearmouth Dock Purchase) (by
order).
SOUTHPORT IMPROVEMENT.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY.
Mr. WILSON PATTEN roved that the following recom-
mendation contained in the Twelfth Report on Railway Bills
Classification be considered, viz.:—" Your Committee recom-
mend that the Lancaster and Carlisle and Lancaster and Pres-
ton be divided into two Bills; and that the amalgamation with
the Lancaster and Preston be included in a separate Bill, and
be referred to Group 59, and that the other powers
he included in a separate Bill, and allowed to remain
in Group 45." That the Report from the Select
Committee on Petitions for Private Bills pre-
sented Ist May, in reference to the Lancaster and Carlisle
Railway (Extension to Caledonian Railway), and Lancaster
and Preston Junction Railways Amalgamation Petition, be
read. That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amalgamate
the Lancaster and Preston Junction Railway Company and the
Lancaster and Carlisle Railway Company ; and that Colonel
Lowther and Mr. C. W. G Howard do prepare and bring it in.
The motion was agre,d to.
WEXFORD, CARLOW,

AND DUBLIN JUNCTION

RAILWAY.
This Bill was read a second time.
LUNATIC BUILDINGS' ACT.
Mr. YORKE presented several petitions from Cambridge
against the Lunatic Buildings' Act.
Mr. F. SCO CT presented a petition from Australia praying
that wheat maize and flour should be admitted into this king-
dom on the same terms as the wheat maize and flour of
Canada.

MR. S. O'BRIEN IN THE TOWER !
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Hull, pray-
ing for the release of Mr. William Smith O'Brien from the
Tower.—( Great laughter.)
CHELSEA PENSIONERS.
Captain L AYA-RD prc,cntr.l a petition from 660 Chelsea
pensioners, complaining that five per cent. had been deducted
from their pensions, anti that the periods of settlement had been
reduced from three to one month in advance.
THE IRISH COERCION BILL.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition against this Bill.
RATING OF SMALL TENEMENTS.
Mr. J. BLACKBURN presented a petition from the guar-
dians of a poor-law union (the name of which we did not hear),
praying that the owners of small tenements should be rated
instead of the occupiers.
Mr. WALKER presented a numerously signed petition
praying the House to restrict the sale of spirituous liquors on
Sunday.
THE POLICE AND THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES.
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY begged to put a
question to the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the
Home Department, of which he had given him notice. He
wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what were the regula-
tions with respect to the attendance of the Metropolitan Police
force on their religious duties ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said the Noble Lord was probably aware
that in the admission of privates into the police force no
inquiry whatever was instituted with respect to their re-
ligious duties. The force was open to all denominations.
With the exception of those on actual duty on Sunday, the
members of the force were at liberty to attend any place of re.
ligious worship they thought fit. Those belonging to the Es-
tablished Church had seats provided for them in almost every
church in their respective districts ; and with regard to the
others, they were left at full liberty to go wherever they pleased.
BRIDPORT ELECTION.
Mr. G. BANKES said he had a petition to present of
rather a peculiar nature, and he trusted he should have the
indulgence of the House if he departed from the general
rule which had been laid down, that no Member should
address the House on presenting a petition. The
petition, however, which he had to present on this occasion
involved a matter of privilege, and a matter upon which the
House would have to decide. He believed he might at once
state that there was no precedent to be found similar to the case
he had now to lay before the House, and he had some doubt
whether it would be considered a question of privilege or not; at
all events, supposing this petition to be true, and he had no
reason to doubt that it was true, it deserved the serious at-
tention of the House. He would state the substance of it, in
order that the House might judge fer itself t,f the degree of
importance to be attached to it. The petition was
signed by William Lockhart, an elector of the borough
of Bridport. The House was aware that the minutes
of the evidence of the Bridport Election Committee had been
printed. It would be seen from that report that the decision
of that Committee turned solely upon the question as to whe-
ther the vote of an elector—who was the Mr. Lockhart in
question—which gave the majority for the late sitting fslember,
had been erroneously placed in the return. The Committee
found that it had, and the decision caused the sitting of the
Hon. Member who now sat in the House for Bridport.
The SPEAKER intimated to the Hon. Member that the
question involved no matter •f privilege, and it was
out of order to speak on the presentation of the petition.
Mr. BANKES—It would appear, then, by this petition that
there were grounds of objection to Mr. Baillie Cochrane's elec-
tion, but it was also certain that 'here were equal objections to
the election of Mr. Romilly ; but during the last year
the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had
declared the determination of the Committees should be
satisfactory.
The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member must give notice of
a breach of privilege before he can introduce the subject in this
manner.
BANKES—Theo I must rest upon this position, that
the petitioner should be heard at the bar of the House.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
ORDERS OF THE DAY.
The Bill for the Northern and Southern Connecting Rail-
way was postponed.

_
HANTS POLICE CASE.
Mr. COLLETT wished to ask whether there was any
foundation for the statement that police-constable Hale still
remained in the police force of that county, and whether Sir
Charles Hay mood still remained in the magistracy ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
the question put by the Hon. Member, the House would see,
had been put upon an exparte statement.
Mr. COLLETT said that that statement was the founda-
tion of his question ; and he had every reason to believe it was
correct.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM hoped that some time longer than
four days would be given to make an inquiry such as that called
for by the Hon. Member into the character and conduct of a
gentleman of high character, and well known to them all.
Mr. O'CON \ ELL—Let the Hon. Member hand the state-
ment to the Right Hon. Baronet.
Mr. COLLETT said he would persevere in his notice to
ask the question, and begged to hand the statement to the
Right Hon. Gentleman.

THE CRN BILL.
heY star iuds,t
et hd a th
ei nri
wouldsingr
et oc
eai dv de address
the
hn es_
Sir J. GRAHAM movedO the order of the day for the third
i
readinguAopifoatrnhgekiihisCisootrqnGuetstiAlilo.Nn
Douse upon
dulgence of the House for a short time. He would oppose this
Bill, because upon it depended the fate of the poor man and the
labourer, and because it was a question of whether the Eng-
lishman was to he superior to the foreigner. Before be entered
on the question before the House, he wished to make a few ob-
servations on the manufactures of this country. The Noble
Lord near hint (Lord G. Bentinck) the other night said, and
said truly, that they did not desire to see the manufactures of
this country decline.—( Hear, hear.) They did not wish to see
the stream of its prosperity conducted into worn-out and useless
channels. They wished to see it, like the noble river outside
those walls, flowing in a continued and full stream, and not
like a rushing torrent, that at one time inundated the
country, and at another dried up to an useless
and unprofitable pool. They did not wish to see
the manufacturing interests decline, although they
knew the evils of the present system ; for when properly
conducted they were of benefit to the country. If any proof
of that fact were wanted, the Right Hon. Baronet the First
Minister of the Crown, whom he did not then see in his place,
had given it to them the other night. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had said that those counties in the neighbourhood of the
manufacturing districts were more prosperous than those
counties further removed. The inference that should be drawn
from that was, that they should endeavour to draw the two in-
terests closer together. They should endeavour to
create a better circulation of the blood in their
own veins, and should not assist other counties which
did not require it. These were the principles
which should be applied, and he believed that these were the
principles which had long been entertained by many of the
manufacturers. He did hope that they would show the world
that her Majesty's Government were not bound by the Anti-
Corn-law League, by not giving up their present principles.
The object of the corn-laws was much misunderstood. They
(the anti-protectionists) said that they starved the people. He
denied Hear, hear.) He said that their object was to
supply food to the people at a constant and moderateTt price.—
(agrefaetedprtihnecippe-eosplea vfrolovme d
this in
question.r, hear.) t
lee was that by the continuance
The There
first wereprin
principle
of protection they would be able to
produce of their own soil. Employment would be given to the
people of this country—healthy and manly employment—an
employment under which, if many of those gentlemen who sat
till a late hour in this heated and ill-ventilated apartment
would have recourse to, they would in a short time become
much more vigorous, and capable to discharge their duties
with more efficacy. The second principle was, that if
any deficiency took place in the supply
of their own produces
they would be enabled to have from their c •
would meet that deficiency,tc
eolomes as much as
a nd
wouldby tthis means
nt
thoe
oc oml op ne
ti
es
would be benefited; but if scarcity arose, and the corn-laws
c
i
were abolished, foreign prod
—(Hear.)tiowitthha their
hire
colonial produce, to the detriment of the latter.
capabilities Noble
of Lord nearthis
country
tr
y (Lordwe
reG.ableto
Bentinck)
proved
meet
the demands of its increasing population ; for from the recent
return of the averages he showed that there were 13•0°° quarters of increase of corn as compared with 1842.--
1 (" Hear, hear," from Lord George Bentinck). Another point
which, though not immediately connected with the corn-laws,
had yet an indirect reference Co them, and was of very great
importance. As it was much better stated in a book which
he held in his hand he would take the liberty of read:
ing it from a work of Mr. Allison "On Population.
The Noble Lord then read a passage, showing how corn had
been bought up by the speculators and bonded till a period or
scarcity. This he considered diminished the supply in our
markets, while it augmented that of the foreign market.
He would advise the House to pause and consider well
what effect such a system had upon the scarcity of corn, ands
therefore, whether it would not be better to reform such an
abuse, than to pass such a sweeping measure as that before
the House. The Right Hon. Baronet had informed the Hoese
that those laws which he once considered politic, were now
unjust. Looking at the amount of taxation in this country, a?d
at the amount of capital which had been spent on the
of those laws in improving land, he could only say thatotnt.esY
were not unjust, but highly politic and necessary t
e
state of the country.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord G. Bentuar k.,
But he went en to state that there was great distress undet
present corn law. lie feared that might be true in particular.
cases, but he thought that the farmer who threw off his good
act just as wisely as the farmer who threw o
They
warns great coat on a winter's day because it was cold would
pro-
tection because some distress existed.—(Cheers.)
were also bold that protection was the bane ofagri-
culture, and that it wanted competition to excite itt. He
faith
also be the bane of manufactures ? It was not likely
other.
denied that protection was such ; but if it was,
it should be bane of the one and not of the
Why, what a: great injustice—the lion. Baronet was fonddefenceless.
Of of
the word—to protect the one and leave the other defencel
Of course, the answer would be that protection was off
orded to
n": 1 it
that

A.

he former for the purposes of revenue ; and he would ask, had state before the House and the country the reasons why their
not agricult ere the same claim upon them. He had, he considered, I opinions still remained unchanged upon the measure.
a plan which he could recommend to the Right Pon IRaronet. i Had the intervals that had elapsed h..tvrepn the different stages
pion, and „„, „inch would anasser of thediscus. ion upon it admitted, he stoula have called ume,
It was a great commermal
all purposes. They might read in the first pages of almost his constituents to express their opinion upon it, and if they
all political economists, that moderate taxation did considerably differed from him, he would then have requested of them to
stimulate industrs.- ( Hear, hear.) Why, this then was find some other gentleman in whom to repose the trust con-
the very thing which they wanted. Let him adopt this fided to him.-( Hear, hear.) He should confess he was at a
plan and he would do away with the injustice and double loss to zee the validity of the argument that if the Torts had
the revenue.-( Hear, hear.) But, in truth, protection was a been thrown open it would be impossible to close them again.
benefit in one case as much as the other. He held In his hand If the ports had been thrown open, then the question as to
a letter, written by a Noble ancestor of his more than two ten- closing them should be legitimately tested.-( Hear, hear.)
tunes ago, and he considered that the cause of protection could At that period it was expected that the arrangemen s then ex-
be stated by few in that House in a clearer manner. The no- isting would never have been disturbed. He could not conceive
bleman to whom he referred was Lord Franc's Roos. how the experience of three years justified the sweeping
The letter was addressed to Mr. Carey. In this letter the writer changes which were contemplated by the Government. He
said that an importation of corn was an exportation of money, and believed that the free importation of foreign grain would have
that even in a case of necessity it was a hurt to the common- the effect of throwing the land out of cultivation, and the
wealth. lithe importation of corn was unlimited, the effect of it labourer out of employ. He would tell the operatives that corn
would be to destroy husbandry, and therefore the poor would could not be introduced into this country at a lower rate than
starve for the want of work, as tillage land would be thrown into at present. Mr. Al•Culloch had stated that it was impossible
sheep pasturage. What, asked the we iter, was the use of corn for foreign corn to be sold in this country under 525. perqr
been told qr.
being cheap if the poor man had no money to purchase it with? They had been told that the withdrawal of protection
would be
that
This was the opinion entertained in 1610 on this subject. He the dissolution of the constitution. They had .
now came to the most important point in the argument. It the proceedings of the League were intended as an attack on
was the relation of the rate of wages to the price of food.- the landed interest. He knew that a section of the party oppo
( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for site had acquired great influence out of doors and in that
Tamworth, said that he could no longer sup ort the corn-laws House. If those measures were to be successful either in the
because the price of corn did not affect the rate of wages. The present Parliament or in any other, he trusted that they would
Right Hon Baronet dismissed the manufacturing labourers at be attended with the benefits to the people which the Gentle-
once from his consideration. To that he (the Noble Marquis) men opposite anticipated. Whatever might be the result, it
would say he had heard it stated, by more than one Member would be a lasting satisfaction to them that they had not given
on the opposite side of the House, that the principal argument up a system founded on settled principles for
,a newfangled
why the corn-laws should be repealed was, that by the reduced doctrine. They (the protectionists) had this satisfaction that
wages paid the labourers they could better compete with they had never abandoned or betrayed the trust which had been
foreigners.-( Hear.) This was a point, however, in his ( the committed to them.
Marquis of Granby's) opinion that should not be determined in Mr. SHERIDAN wished to take the present opportunity of
such a summary manner. But he would proceed with the speaking on a matter of a personal nature, which was inch-
argument as it related to the agricultural labourers. rectly connected with the business before the House. The
The Right Hon. Baronet said that during the year Hon. Member for Lersetshire, in bringing forward the report
1837 the price of corn varied 38s. Between 1837 and on the Corn Importation Bill, had thought proper to cast some
1841 the variation of the price was 3es; whereas, imputation on the veracity of the statements which he (Mr.
during the same period, the rate of wages varied but Is , Sheridan) had made. He trusted that he might be allowed on
varying from 10s. to I ls. per week. Now, he (the Marquis of the present occasion, as it was a matter that affected his char-
Granby) must say, had this been the cases there would have acter, to occupy the attention of the House, while he endea-
been some show of reason for not maintaining the corn-laws ; voured to protect hinnelt from the unjust aspersions which had
but he submitted, the Right Hon Baronet had been mistaken, been cast. on his veracity by the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire.
in the argument. If the Right Hon. Baronet would go down He thought that that Hon. Gentleman would be better employ-
to Thetford, he would find it otherwise than he had repre- ing his time if he were tolook into the condition of his own poor
tented, and that though the money rates of wages might not in Dorsetshire than occupying himself with comparing
have much varied, the actual wages received in other modes the amount of destitution in Ireland with other parts of the
than by money had greatly altered. He ( the Noble Marquis) country. The Hon. Gentleman had asserted that the quota-
relied on certain returns furnished to the House of Lords by a tions which the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland had
Noble Relative of his, and these returns showed what had been made use of on a recent occasion were in direct variance with
the variation in the rate of wages in the neighbourhood of Bel- the truth. He would not go into any detailed statements with
voir. In 1638 he collected the average wages of forty-two respect to these accounts. They were made public on his au-
labourers near Belvoir, by going throughout the different thority, and he was responsible for their truth. He was satis-
cottages of the labourers. The price of corn in 1838, was fled as to the correctness of his statements. Since last Friday
60s. a quarter ;in 1839, it was 525. ; the wages of the labourer he had addressed various letters to persons in the country, and
in 1842, were 1 Is. 2d. a week ; in 1839, according to the in reply had received letters from clergymen which stated that
return which has been made to the House of Commons, they the rate of wages in their county averaged 7s. per week. The
had risen from 12s. to 13s. a week, so that the difference Hon Gentlest an then read a letter trim the Rev. Sidney
between the rate of wages in 1638 and 1839, was Is. a week. Osborne, with respect to the labourers of the Blandferd Union.
although the difference in the price of corn was not more than It was a document dated 1843 ; but the Rev. Gentleman was
a fifth of that arneunt. It appears by the same returns, during well p rsuaded that the description contained in it with
the year 1838, the labourer consumed on an average, during respect to the labourers of the Blandford Union was equally
the week, 31bs. 1 loz. of meat, while in the year 1839 the applicable to the present year. The labourers were divided
consumption was 31bs. 6eoz. So that the labourers abse- into two classes ; the first class received wages averaging from
lutely consumed as much as 42Ibs. of meat less in Bs. to 9s. per week; out of which they had to pay house-rent,
the Cheap year than they did in the dear year. If they were the other class received wages averaging from Bs. to
to take this calculation as the basis of their consideration, it 9s. per week, and these accounts tallied exactly with
would he conceived be quite satisfactory. If such the information he had derived from his own inquiries
were to be taken they might very well set the ques- The Hon. Member for Dorsetshire had stated that he did not
tion at rest, hut if they were to have recourse to a know of a case in which wages were so low as 7s. per week ;
further test, namely, that of the proportion of the labourer, it did appear to him a strange circumstance, that a gentle man,
they would find that those wages varied from 40s. to 50s. holding so high a position in the country, and so highly re-
per cent., and that the lower price prevailed during the years spected as the Hon. Member, and who was chairman of the
when there was a cheaper price for corn. This principle held beard of guardians, should come forward and coolly state in
throughout the returns which had been furnished by the corn his place in Parliament that he did not know of a single
markets,_ and as shown in the reports from the various towns in instance in which the wages in his county were so low as 7s.
which the corn markets were held ;so that no doubt could piss- per week, when day after day, month after month,
sibly exist upon the subject, where the competition of the labour and year after year, he was in the habit of
market came into contrast with those of the prices of the corn affixing his name to the reports in which
market. If the Hon. Members on the Treasury benches hose very cases occurred. He had written to the relieving
wished to convince him that the poor man would be better off officer of the Dorsetshire Union, and in reply he received a
for having the price of corn lessened. he would say to them, letter, dated the 10th of May, 1846. That letter contained an
let them give up their salaries for one year-(Laughter)-and account of the wages of the able-bodied men, who had applied
then tell him they found bread cheaper, and he would believe for relief at the union. It stated the average rate of wages in
them.-( Hear, hear.) Even if they did that, still they could the district did not exceed 7s. or 7s. 6d. per week. He had
not feel any effects from it, for they would have something to asked the relieving officer, and he would ask his Hon. Friend,
fall back upon, while the labourer had nothing but his employ- whether he could state a case in the county of Dorset where
ment ; and deprive him of that, and you deprive him of every- a man, who is paid by the day. received more that Bs. per week.
thing.-( Hear, hear.) He would now mske a few The relieving officer of the Dorsetshire Union, in answer to his
observations, and only a few, upon the Irish part question, had said tha- he did not know of a single instance of
of the question. He believed that all parties a man working by the day receiving more than Bs. per week;
in that House would agree that a great deal neither did he believe that there was an instance in that count..
of distress did prevail in that country. But he could not see Se much, then, for the statements of the Hon. Member with
why that shouid be made the foundation fora repeal of the corn- respect to his veracity with respect to wages in Dorsetshire. He
laws. It had been said that if the ports had been thrown open thought he was justified in saying that his Hon. Friend had
to relieve that distress, it would be impossible ever to close done him great injustice when he stated that his ( elm Sheri-
them again ; but he could not for the life of him understand dan's) assertions were not in accordance with the statements
that argument ; and he believed the Government were now be- . that had appeared in the public prints. The Hon. Member
ginning themselves to see that that was a bad argument.- had said that it migh. be true that in some places the agricul-
( Hear, hear.) They also argued that it would be better to total labourers received a very trifling sum per week ; out to
relieve the distress in Ireland by repealing the corn-law than ' explain the cause of his smallness of remuneration was, that he
to call upon this country to subscribe money every year, for a " was not up to his work." Why, how was it possible for a man
number of years, for that purpose. Now he should say that he that wt s compelled to feed upon horse-beans and turnip-tops to
regretted vet y much that the Government had introduced, with be "up to his work ?"-( Hear, hear.) The agricultural wages
the Coercion Bill, no better measure for the relief of the distress were scandal ausly low.-( Hear, hear.) He hoped the House
in Ireland.--( Hear, Imam ) He would refer to the observation would consider that he had fully answered the statements of
made by the Hon. Member for Lynn, who had said that by this his Hon. Friend. He firmly believed that the withdrawal of
measure they would throw out of employment 500,000 families, of all protection would not have th effect of improving the
and add to the two millions of destitute already in that country condition of the agriculturists. Wages did not vary with the
three millions more. He had not heard that observation con- price of corn. The Hon. Member having read the letter of
tradicted. They would have to ask the people of this country an agricultural labourer, which has appeared in the morning
to feed twice the number that they would otherwise have to papers, to show that the wages of that class were stationary
feed, and at the same time diminish their powers of going to and fixed, proceeded to say, that as long as the poor-law
the relief of the Irish people, although they would be still as was administered in its present state, so long
anxious as ever to do so.-( Hear, hear. ) He now came to the would those poor people remain in their present degraded
arguments held out to them to induce them to condition.-( Hear, hear.) The Poor-law Commissioners,
consent to the repeal of the corn-laws, and here he was met by when applied to far relief by an agricultural labourer who had
a head sea-a sea which, in nautical language, was called a a family, refused to admit him into the workhouses if he were
confused sea. He no sooner recovered from the shock he re- able-bodied, and only gave him a few loaves, or something of
ceivee on one side, than he recoiled from a shock on the other. • hat sort ; he was consequently to return to his customary
He had been told by some that the advantage of the repeal labour for any sort of remuneration. Notwithstanding the
would be the cheapness of the bread, and immediately after he present flourishing state of the country, there had not been
s-as told by others, and in some instances by the same people- the slightest increase in the wages of the agricultural labourer,
(Hear, hear)-that the people were not born, and the country during the last year, in Dorsetshire or the other argricultural
not discovered from which this great supply of corn was to counties adjoining--( Hear, hear)-and he therefore believed
come. In his confusion and distress he naturally turned to the that the adoption of free trade would not benefit the agricul-
prime mover of all these great measures, in the hope that he moral labourer.
should fired some consolation, and derive some entightment from Mr. FLOYER then explained some statements which he
him.-( Hems-, hear.) Alas, it was going from the shades of had made on a previous evening. The Noble Lord the Secre-
evening' he depths and darkness of night-( Cheers and tary for Ireland had stated, on the authority of his Hon. Friend
into t
laughter)-it was confusion worse confounded.-( Cheers ) Mr. Sheridan, that the average rate of wages of agricultural
The Right Hon. Gentleman would tell them nothing, because labourers in the county of Dorset was 7s. per week. But if
he said that he cou,'d not.-(Laughter.) When he asked him the public believed that statement they would be labouring
and the House if it mas about to vote for a great social alters- under an erroneous impression, the average rate being 95. per
tion hlte the present on such a fatal error-which would rend week. In his (Mr. Floyer's) own neighbourhood he believed
asunder the ties and assieciations now existing-which would that the common rate of wages was 7s. per week, but it must
increase the evil of the present day, instead of alleviating it, and be recollected that they were allowed a certain quantity of
unite the manufacturer with the foreign agriculturist, instead fuel (perhaps not as much as they were entitled to), a house
of rivetting those ties which aught to exist between him and rent-free, and some potato ground, which would make
their native brothers and friends-he received no answer. their wages equal to 9s. per week at the least.
He was not sufficiently acquainted with the subject himself to He did appeal to that House, whether he was not entitled to
be able to bring forward facts in proof of his position, but he stand up and make some remark when he heard the Dorset-
learnt from those friends around him that in the event of the shire peasant compared with the poor Irish labourer.-( Hear,
abolition of the corn-laws the price of corn would range from hear.) He had risen to address the House unprepared, and
355. to 405.-( Hear, hear.) If so, the statement which had he trusted that some allowance would be made to him if he
been made at one of the late agricultural meetings was per- spoke in a stronger method than he intended The words he
fectly correct. (The Noble Lord then read an estimate of a used upon the occasion referred to were, that the rate of wages
Mr. Everett as to the effect on the produce of 300 acres of land in Dorsetshire were from seven to eight shillings a week, but
by the abolition of those laws.) The price, at present, of certain the Noble Lord mis-interpreted the expression that the state-
produce of this farm was 1,9641., by the proposed alteration it ments made by him (the Noble Lord) led to an impression
would be 1,347/. 1(13. The Noble Lord could state that there which was wholly at variance with the truth. He (the Nobie
was a farm which now brought in 1,541/. 55., which would Lord) considered that he (Mr. Floyer) said that his statements
only produce 1,3001. ss. after they repealed those laws. were wholly at variance with the truth. Now be never said
-(Hear, hear.) He had endeavoured to prove to any such thing-he never meant to make such a charge upon
the House that the repeal of the corn-laws was most impo- his Noble Friend, who always weighed his words carefully, and
litic and unjust, and he would go further and say that spoke them with consideration. And now with regard to the
if there really had arrived a necessity for the settlement of present state of the Dorsetshire labourer. He believed that
them, there could be no permanent arrangement under the he had already stated, that it was quite as good and even better
present Government.--(" Hear, hear," from the protection than it was at almost any period. He employed a great num-
benches. ) The Right Hon Baronet had come into power by ber of them during the winter at certain task-work, anti the
the support of the agricultural body, and he would read to the earnings of these men varied from ten to eleven shillings a
House an extract from th e Quarter/y Review'
to prove that the week. The present winter he had
employed men
Right Hon. Gentleman had defeated the Whig Ministry upon in the same manner, and gave them thesame work
this question in 1842. The reviewer took the lan- to do, and of precisely the same quality; but some
gommuage of then Right
upon it
he iight Honorable ronet, and then of them, from the demand for labour
prevailing commented a,ad what raid that Hon. left off working and went to other employments,
and he ad -
He
He held the same langea, ze now as he did then, and he upheld ducedtehpartesaesntensetaotfe the
thereeaspotntrasewtshhictrhe
lcaabuosnerderhwimas to say
the principle of a graduated duty, but, if they asked him to that the
what amount, or the exact details, he could not pledge himself. than usual. As to the condition of the poor-house, it de.
Well, then, he considered,l by accepting. these
.conditions, the pended, as Hon. Menntlmematetnerswwerheicahwahraed, upon little reference
rdefiffereerneenet
Right Hon. Baronet did p edge himselt to maintain a corn- circumstances and o
law ; "and this remarkable and bold declaration," says the Re- to the state of wages. But he was able to state that very few
wasver which
sure
enfo nmd by lucid argument., was fol- able. bodied labourers, not above four or five at the most,
lowed "strongly
t Hon. Baronet, had the honour to preside as chairman. But he speaking usually, were inmates of the house'
lowed by a celebrated division, in whicihi. ti2Conservative
Members accepted the
the
proposition of the Right
y on what termsuphpenrwowualtsl
and called him to power by an
ldlunexpected majority of ninety- House would agree with him that the poor-house was not a
safeb ouring. poor.. And with regard to potatoes, they were selling,
criterion to go by, in judging of the condition of the la-
one. P.accepted; S t
1 en-we conditions were
Sir R. Peel decla red boldly
accept power. •hms ,
enthusiasm." But what was the pre- as he believed, at from seven •
given with unexampled ei
Hon. Gentleman ? Before those -(Hear, to eight shillings a bushel,
sent conduct of the Right.
the Parliament should be "over," nor hats •
hear.) The stock was by no means what is termed
measures could come into operation, H
Baronet, supposing fine he it. deteriorated since it was first stored ; in
did ask the
lobsigt on. might state in conclusion, that he believed the condition
dissolved, and }we
other Parliament, would of the lab • repealed no owing peasant was as good as he had known it at any
the corn-law should be
Nell, they had been set d •
measure ?-( Hear. ) . . _ lio since he had known anything about such matters • and
it be a permanent .
have discovered that at an earlier period, before he would sit down, he wished to state that he had ' no in-
buttold that they shot del
it, who was a tention to address the ,
had not I ,ord Grey discovered
of
" Hear.") called
bitter but an hi nest Cries
opponent.-( Cr
fupby the remarks of the Hon. Gentleman ; nor had he
the proceedings any desire to say that the rate of labour in Dorsetshire
He could not presun se to say what the effect o
was
presume sufficient, indeed it
to which he had anti fled might be, but this he would .
Members who supported but there was a mode of paying them their wages, which had
to say, that it did be hove the several.
next, been adopted '
Right Hon. Barg act to consider what he might say. in many instances, and which he considered liable
the
whetl vet. he might not ask whether the point to a great deal of unfairness.-( Hear, hear.) That mode was
and to consider
'
which he had propel traded might not be discovered sooner ? by paying so much corn per week- certainly which was certa
given
He would not say this of the
minority
of this House, but he at a reduced rate-with so much money. And what he
Right Hon. Ha- plained of was, the mere money part of the transaction was only
would appeal to the gi `c 'at 240 by whom that
toner's opinions had be en approved. He did not wish to depart taken into account by the House, when statement of the rate
from the facts before the House, but he could not help re- of wages were made to it. A bushel of wheat was often thus
minding the Members of that House,
that they were asserting paid per fortnight, or per week, at a rate of about five shillings
4
dictate.- the bushel, and the remainder of the wages was given in the
Minister chose tothe principles which Oa e Prime 1.
(Cheers. ) He and the friends aroundmhad
hi
b right, supported the shape of money. He considered that he had a right to place
and they these facts within the knowledge of Hon. Gentlemen,
refused to negative t hew i because they did e
not concorn-laws because they thought them to
ceive them and he hoped his Hon. Friend w uld forgive him
to be wrong,-(Cheers.:) He thought that what was right for for exercising that right.-( Hear, hear.) He was happy that
able to agree with him in the latter part of his speech,
of another.-‘ Cheers , fie im the Opposition benches.) he was
the benefit of one class could not be contrary to the interestshewas
for he did not see how an alteration in the duty on corn could
H
took better anxious to support the,. resent corn-laws, because the the condition of the labouring poor. In considering this
y
well as the landlord, of question, they should consider to what extent the people of that
care of the interests of tha tenant as
G. consume corn ; and with regard to this, he
the labourer as well a s tof those of his employer.-( Cheers.) country could
He would entreat then ito believe that they could not injure would allude to a below
return quoted by his Noble Friend
the roots of the tree N without at the same time doing a detri- hint (Lord
Beutinck), by which it appeared that in the
of remarkable agricultural pros-
ment to its branches ; tnd he would still further entreat those year len, which was a year
of quarters passed
the millions • d
Hon. Members who usandenergetically supported perity, that there were seventeen
finallyt most
the Government, to rt
through the markets of this country ; bread was at that
c rect that they could not injure the
interests of any other
to the poorest man-not one that had a
ass without affecting their own, and accessible
that they could not
but could get sufficient.-( Hear, hear. )
tm vr interfere with the • hts of those hillin to paY ri ,
classes without at the t same time all •s g le had as much as they wanted ; indeed,
owing that. there was The people
an equal claim to in te Hon, with their profuse that it was given to cattle. They
But even if the Right t H own rights also. corn was so
esent moment one million and-a-half of
on. Baronet was right, and the had in hand at the pr
landed interest would re it be injured, heefore the close of the year they would
but poor recompense for the loss of the e thought it would be quarters of wheat, and b....0ns
Now, could any person con-
-( Loud cheers.) He d'i d not believeYthoentry of England. have it amount to two milli •
profitably to the agricultu-
sanction the present mea s ore ; but, if they didgihslature would rider that corn could be introducedp
of dut 9 or did any person
anticipated evil would pr Iwe incorreet.-( Hear' hoed the rist at a rate below the present rate
1 ys
that the importa-
hoped the explanations o f the Right Hon. Baronet,
hear.) He consider that if they repealed the corn- aw
vacant, would be v erified. The Right Hon. however
Baronet said he tion would be limited to the amount ' hadalready men-
he
finding here a free
would not retain the helh nof state unless that helm al- termed? No, surely not. All other nations, ,
lowed to traverse fr eely. He (the Marquis of Granby )wfas red market, would pour in their surplus corn in their most
that, if the Hight thin. Baronet succeeded in alterieathe abundant seasons. The consequence would he to throw an =-
course of the vessel ot!.. stage from its direct and tried course mense quantity of land out of cultivation, and instead of seven
to the port of posterity, he would meet the fate teen or eighteen millions of quarters of wheat they would have
of many a some
mariner that had gon e before him.-( Hear, hear.) He would hundreds, In conclusion he would say that he would
be drawn aside by i ides and currents, until at last, tossed oppose to his utmost the principle of the Government measure
about by the winds and waves, his veasel would become a as
destructive to the best interests of the country.-(Hear.)
wreck on the barren and inhospitable shores of free trade.-- been Sir JOHN EAST HOPE said, so far the wretchedness had
(Laud cheers.) If the it -should happen, then he had no doubt inquire
aelloehedi, and they should not be much longer detained to
tie Noble Lord the e Ilene nber for Ls nn, with his crew, would sevienr
siet•alett whether those poor creatures were existing on some
come to the assistance. and do what they could to get the representatirviegsser
trinwseek, and they were told by some of the
Right Hon. Baronet off-- ( Hear, hear.) But his fear was, the life of them, how coaunntry, that they cannot understand for
that then relief wout Id come too late.-(Hear, hear.) He down the prices, can benefit importationate of corn, by keeping
thanked the House for the attention it had paid him, and he could not understand, he humblythese poor creatures. But if they
Would now sit down, ,by moving that the Bill be read a third that their luminaries would go t.theand most earnestly hoped
time that day six mot iths. (The Noble Marquis resumed his and if they had enough life left in theytheilmoorereatures themselves,
would answer the
seat amidst loud chee rot from the protection ben les.) question satisfactorily. They said it was amatte
Mr. GASKELL : !mid he rose to second the amendment, sequence to have bread cheap for poor crem urea livirnofneon-
and in doing so he fe; te it to be no small disadvantage to follow shillings per week, to provide for a whole family,g onodeven
that
the admirable speech o f the Noble Lord who had just sat down ; let bread be cheap or dear, it was all the same to thm an
howev it which he could not shrink, when wished to be sent to the country on the question. Ile. l'e•Y
ever, was a du' cy from
thanked
be considered the au spices and other circumstances under God it would go to the country, and their advocacy of the
which this measure ha d been introduced, and he thought that people would be properly understood. He availed himself of
this was the time wht ,r 1 Hon. Members were called upon to . the opportunity of expressing the obligations of those

labourers, who were not reduced so low as seven shillings,
and their unbounded gratitude for the fearless manner, regard.
less of all conaequcnces, in which the ATicistry 11,4 ,'ar.,l to
,:otoe lorwaro, and eunier upon the country One of the greates;
benefits which the country had ever experienced. He hoped
the Hon. Gentlemen would discover their mistake' but
let them be sure that the labouring poor knew
that they were in error ; they knew that it was not
the fact that the price of bread did not materially affect
them, and it would be a common waste of time—it would

be an insult to the common sense of the country, to consider
the question further. He did not intend to go into the debate,
for he considered that the question had been worn threadbare-.
( Hear, hear)-and he would conclude by once more offering
his warm acknowledgments to the Minister for the manly and
noble course which he had so generously adopted and so fear-
lessly pursued.
Mr. W. MILES would challenge all who conceived they
knew more of agriculture than those who cultivated the lands,
to go with him into the question of the effects of these contem-
plated changes, and he would prove to their satisfaction that
they would be injurious, not only to the landowners but to the
farmers and labourers. He would in the first place refer to the
law as it was in 1828. He would then glance at the present state
of the law, and thirdly, to the effect of the proposed alterations.
The Hon. Gentleman, after detailing alsonsiderable length,
and with as much gusto as if that were the first night of the de-
bate, what in his opinion the law of 1828 conferred upon the
country, proceeded to say that the law of 1842, as compared with
that of 1828, was good for the consumer as well as the producer,
and was equally beneficial to the state. During the law of 1828ithe
quantity of wheat imported into this country for the thirteen
years which followed was 13,626,315 quarters. This was im-
ported on an average at 14s. per quarter, and was productive of
a yearly revenue during this period of 255,4931. Since the
law of 1842 came into operation, the quantity of foreign corn
imported amounted to 4,944, 762 quarters. The average
price per quarter at which this was imported was 115.4 d., and it
brought to the revenue the sum of 690,3681. Thus it ap-
peared that by the law of 1842, as compared with that of 1828.
the price of corn was lower to the consumer while there was a
larger amount of revenue to the State. 'The inference deduci-
ble irom this comparison was clearly in tavoer of the law of
1842. He would now allude to the state of
things which might be expected in the event of
the • alterations which he had proposed being car-
ried into effect. His Noble Friend near him (Marquis of
Granby) had with great perspicuity stated what would
be the effect with regard to two farms, the statistics of which
he gave. But as these estimates referred to farms cultivated on
the three-course system, he (Mr. Miles) would show that th
same injurious consequences would take place to the agricultur-
ists. The Hon. Gentleman, after illustrating his argument, by
detailing the anticipated prices which, according
to his calculation, would be paid for the produce
of two farms by the new tariff, proceeded to say
that it was impossible for the English agriculturist to contend
with the foreigner. What, he would ask, were the prices at
Odessa in February last? In February, 1829, the price was
from 16s. to 17s. On the 14th June, 1845, the price was from
21.5. to 25s ; so that the fluctuation during that period was only
4s. Now if the freight be added, the price would range from
245. 9d. to 28s. 9d., as the freight could not be calculated
higher than 7s. 9d per quarter. At Stettin and Holstein, th
prices ranged from 255. to 265., while the freight was only
from 3s. to 45.; nor did it appear, from any of the return,
which he held in his hand, and which were carefully and accu-
rately prepared, that the average price of foreign wheat was
more than 345. 9d. from any place it might be expected. He
found that when the price of wheat in England was at 335. 6d.,
it was selling at Odessa for 265. Oid. ; and this would show the
effect of the importation of foreign corn on the markets of this
country. He should prove to the House how land
would be depreciated by free trade. He would take a
farm in Nottinghamshire and show how much it would
suffer under a free-trade system. The Hon. Member here
read several documents, to prove tr at when wheat was selling
in this country at 38s. and at 45% the quarter, it was to be
had at Odessa for 275. The Hon. Member then stated that.
with reference to a farm in Nottinghamshire, it at, present pro-
duced 2,355/., and under a free trade it would only bring.
under the most improved system of culture, a sum of 1,3231.
10s., making a reduction of about 1/. Is. 10J. per acre.
Was not that a consideration ? If they were to carry cult iva-
tion from the lowest valley to the top of the highest hills, they
could not make up the deficiency which would be csused by a
free-trade law. He would advise the House to pause before
they meddled with the agricultural interest. It was proved,
that if it required 100/. per acre for the purposes of a farm,
they would be interfering with two hundred and fifty millions
of agricultural capital. He would read statements
to the House which were on most undoubted authority.
Those statements, he would contend, for they were confirmed
by the accounts which had been received from the northern
dis riots. He found by some returns he held in his hand, that
the relative prices of labour and corn for the forty years from
1804 to 1840 ranged at about Os. sd. and 10s. Oid.
for labour. But in the year 1815, when prices were at an un-
usual price, the rate of labour was 155., while the price of
wheat went so high as 120 s. He had thus endeavoured to
show, in corroboration of the statements of his Noble Friend
who had spoken to-night, that in some counties in England the
prices of labour did not rise and fall with the price of wheat.
He now only wished he was able to show the differences of
prices of those articles between this country and other coun-
tries; but he would at least show the difference between this
country and other countries in regard to the amount of taxa
tion. He would ask the House to look at the amount of the
taxes per head in this country and in America. It
appeared that in the United States of America the land taxation
amounted to about 6s. 2d. per head, and what was called the
state taxes amounted to about ss. 9d. per head : while the
taxes in England amounted to about 11. 7s. 9d. per head.
Again, in America the payment of those taxes was made, atal
the revenue raised by the sale of land, which was generally at
the rate of about ss. per acre, or at the enormous rate, on thirty
years' purchase, of 2d. per acre. Then they had, in England
the fact that the sale of land brought 1/. per acre ; and they
had hogs amounting to about 1/. I ls. per acre; so that with
these facts before them, he would ask how could this country
come into competition with America? He would not now
dwell upon Russia, for he was aware that he wearied the
House when he last addressed it upon this question ; but this
he would say, that if that country wet e regarded with attention,
he did think that just cause would be found for alarm• because
it would be found from statistical works that had been pub-
lished upon the subjects, that there were parts of Russia 3 0
fertile, that that country would in time undersell all the world
in agricultural produce ; for even now, after Russia
had exported supplies to all countries, she still had
twenty-eight millions of quarters in store. He had
now endeavoured to call the attention of the House to the pos
sition in which this measure would place the landlord, the far.
mei% and the labourer ; and with regard to the latter, he
would say that the rights of the agricultural labourer had as
good a night to be respected as those of the manufacturer.
There was one point, however, which he had not beard alluded
to, and that was the effect which this measure would have upon
clerical tithes. It would be recollected that the Tithe Com-
mutation Act was passed in the year 1835, when corn was so
low as 395., and it was upon an average then taken that the
commutation was struck. But the effect of this measure on the
clerical tithes would be to reduce the income of a clergyman
having 3001. a year one-fifth. He would next ask the House
to consider their colonies. What reward would they give their
colonies who had stuck to them with so much fidelity? Were
they to be cast off in favour of hostile countries? He would
just show the House the state of the exports from this country
to America for a few years past. The Honourable Member
then read a long statement, showing the number of yards
of calico exported to America for the last five years.
If they would cultivate our American colonies, which took so
notch larger a qUantity of our produce than any other coun-
tries-if they would use those colonies, they would do more
good to the agricultural population, than they could effect by
throwing open a free trade with countries in the face of hos-
tile taritik. If they were mad enough to throw themselves on
the mercy of foreign nations they would endanger the safety
and prosperity of all the mercantile classes. They had been
told of compensation ; he wished that word had never been
used in the House of Commons. It was an insult to every
class of farmers which possessed sufficient knowledge of arith-
metic to do a common sum. He would refer to the compen-
sation to be given in the county of Essex alone. He would
take that county as a fair sample of all the rest, and by re-
ferring to figures which he held in his hand, he could show
that the proposed compensation was utterly inadequate. He
would show, that the actual loss to the farmer in Northamp
tonshire was 1/. Is. 10d. per acre, and in Lincolnshire
1/. 10s. He would refer to the opinions of the Hon. Alder-
man the Member for Stoke-upon-Trent, (Alderman Cope-
land), as lately published in a letter to his constituents, and
which letter at once indicated the course which the
Government ought to pursue with reference to this change
He would also refer to the pamphlet of Messrs.
Morton and Trimmer, in which the evils of the present course
were distinctly pointed out. He had also come across a state-
-1
m
e
i
nahetffbe,
beoecselnoptact tuutl
liberty
et
urseo2 eeandofd.l
opinionsfl
ytdtt
forrhh estNeeovha
rodoaaeidutnnfi
.el
reading
eghtt
phmoph wasopinionsaeruienyosiromh,
pi
had
coeohziarrfetudt Americatmeweecebri
were
tosexterhsusi
extract
etrl
permission
neasnotts tifoaemfftt ons free
u u tradep
those ; r if
opinionsh hadmore
vrrontmoeohapsmueett
promote
c lootoHohfmnufoeatpouthi
whtsei
eeenocrr, hk./1
policyf/in
litenystntu'
stated
tileai
in gt
taieykonasaeet
thatzert
al.
I
iirconmtwteri
which the
ti ert
ier
oe
sns
ot, ,
taesnce daf
uusl
sal
eyv ertmt
promotedph
let,yeea
dp i
in it.
t htf.e 3i (nT)
eroeyOs
weret)"o f theionf If( aal obv auu
rrr
se
ofr ; which
ro
thewe
interest requiring most protection. If the times were hard, the
money of the rich men became more valuable to them, and
allowed them to indulge in greater luxuries than they before
attained. But to the labourer prostration of work was a ruin,
and the protective policy would reward him, and give him his
rightful inheritance. lie (Mr. Miles) agreed with him that it
was a labourer's question. It would injure those classes who
have only interest on their side, and not capital, and who acted
as a medium to raise the labourer to a higher condition. It
was for these many reasons that he took the strong ground he
did, and stated at once he would give what opposition he could
to the passing of thw Bill. He thanked the House for the at-
tention they had shown t 4. him, on every point he had thought
it necessary to adduce. He thought that when they considered
the situation in which that question was, they had held out a
good moral lesson to those who had succeeded them in that
House. When deserted by their natural leaders they had not
flinched from the colours they first hoisted--they had shown no
self-interest in condemning the alteration of the system of our
commercial policy-they had evinced a willing desire to defend
the manufacturing interest, and had striven for the agricul-
tural interest. They were yet undaunted in their defence in
that House, and they were yet unshaken amidst the wreck of
principles and party. It had been said that they had delayed
this measure, but he should like to know when a
subject of such high and immense importance had
ever been brought forward to the House of Commons-
when an entire change in our commercial policy was deter-
mined, and against that commercial system under which
they had so long existed. They were going to new and
theoretical principles, brought forward by one whom they must
all admire. The talent he had universally displayed appeared
to 1 im to want the political firmness and constancy which were
the attributes of every great statesman. He might be told
that in this world difficulties and changes occnrred which ren-
dered it impossible to carry out those political principles. but
he should like to know what difficulties had occurred to induce
the Right Hon. Baronet tt us to turn his back on his
old friends? Difficulties they had alwa:'s been ready
g hTth el);
ocno. u
Rd
ahreoanre nt ohma
do rher
oaulagl;
lutt
,rte,lcaant Id
every'ttho they
y h meetar, e
mbe withdeyn
readyt him.h
eR
to assent to, and therefore Ireland could
not be thrown in their faces. He was still unchanged, and he
conceived that when sitting with those 150 Gentlemen who
prinelp
which, deserted by their leaders, all
backed Hon. Ho
ht
he admired
Baronet
dmiredanidn
deft riled,
when he advocated
nded,hefelthimteldt
placed in that situation
tofinthiet.cauTsielewreervbe,atso
afanl(lithoenrpoerrsdoenasi
through which the Bill must pass, before it became the law of
thev,.ho arguments
,
gaudmtaeknetnsl
iitstulepppoarrt
that the persons to
the land-( Hear, hear)-dud he hoaiwddttFheatletwtherenofthteheprwoohratbhiv
Alderman widely known and considered, e
effects of the Bill were calculated, r
whom this Bill be entrusted would, unawed by popular clamour
and unswayed by party feelings, justly
decide upon
who now held office nearly at the will of his former political
opponents.
merits, and would judge between the people anda Minister
opponents.
Sir J. GRAHAM-I have longed for the opportunity of
expressing myself on this important question, which now,
for nearly three months, has been the subject of discussion in
this House ; and having on several occasions before addressed
the House on this subject, I am most unwilling, needlessly, to
occupy the attention of the House; but, at the same time, I
should be unwilling to appear wanting in respect to the Noble