The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-27 00:00:00

which he feared not to assert were the opinions of nine-tenths
of the farmers of England.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Mem-
ber for Finsbury, in the course of the debate, had been pleased
to state that what the farmers required for the advancement of
agriculture was not protection, but the shield of the ballot to
protect them. Nose he should inform the Hon. Gentleman,
and other members who supported his views, that they could
not labour under a greater mistake in saying that the
farmers were not in favour of protection.—(Hear,
Le ir, from thel Protectionists.) He looked on
the assertion as a R ailical shot fired at random by a gentleman
who might be qualified to represent a metropolitan constituency,
but who knew nothing of agriculturists.—( Hear, hear.) There
were a few circumstances connected with the Dorsetshire elec-
tion which could not fail to prove that the farmers were in
favour of protection, and which he begged to trouble them
with._( Hear, hear.) When the requisition calling on him
and his Honourable Colleague to come forward for the repre-
sentation of the shire was in progress of signature, some
of the tenants who held under free-trade proprietors—three
or four of whom held the largest properties in the locality—
naturally held back and refused to sign the requisition until
they knew what the wishes of the landlords were.—(Hear,
hear.) He believed it was notorious that English tenants
always wished to consult the opinions of their landlords; and
in that they were not, in his opinion, to blame. They con-
salted their landlords, who, he was happy to state,
did not interfere, the question being solely a farmer's
question, and the moment the will of the land-
lord was made known, they, without exception, came
forward and signed the requisition.—(Protectionist cheers. )
That was a proof of his assertion that the farmers were in-
clined to protection.—( Hear, hear.) Another statement made
was, that she small farmers alone were in favour of free trade ;
or in other words, that class of farmers who, from their indo-
lence and ignorance of political matters, did not deserve to be
farmers at all. Now, as far as his (the Hon. Gentleman's) ex-
perience went, he should say the very contrary was the fact.—
( Cries of " Hear, hear.") In his opinion all classes of farmers
were protectionists, particularly the large farmers, the em-
ployers of labour and capital, and who, moreover, had leisure
and inclination to master the details of political affairs.--( Hear. )
In the course of his canvas he had heard strong language used
with respect to the Right lion. Baronet at the head of the
Government.—( Hear, hear.) Farmers were plain men, and
consequently used plain words, the introduction of which in
that House might not be deemed Parliamentary.—(A laugh.)
He had heard these observations made use of ; yet, though he
bad been much amongst the farmers, he did not observe an
atom of turbulence, or a single jot abatement of their usual
loyalty arid peaceable demeanour, which could not be said of
the gentlemen composing the Anti-Corn-law League.—( Hear.)
Indeed, it was his firm belief, that if the farmers of England
had been more seditious in their bearing and expression they
would have had more weight w ith the Right lion. Baronet.—
( Loud cries ot," Hear" from the protectionists.) If the
Anti-Corn-law League should at any future period be inclined
to attack the ancient institutions of this country, they would
find that the loyalty of the farmers would meet them in the
spirit of opposition dictated by the loyalty for which they were
proverbial, and with far more effect than they had opposed
them on the present occasion. Having said thus much, he had
nothing more to say than to thank the Howe for the patient
lea ring granted him, and to declare his intention of voting
against the measure before the House.—( Cheers from the Hon.
Member's party.)
Mr. VILLIERS had some difficulty in rising to address
the House after the speech of the Hon. Member who had just
sat down ; more especially after the manner in which they
had been used to the course of Gentlemen addressing them
on both sides of the question, for, if he was not mistaken, the
Hon. Member, who had last addressed the House, said he
was in favour of a repeal of the correlaws..--( Loud cries of
" No, no," from the protectionists.) If the cries on the op-
posite side were correct, then the Hon. Member was greatly
misrepresented by the papers, for there was not a paper
which did not state that, if there was to be a repeal of those
laws, he was for an immediate repeal.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. SEYMOUR wished to explain. What he had said on
the hustings was, that he was against the proposed change in the
corn-laws; but that if there was to be any change at all, he
was for an immediate repeal in preference to the measure of
the Right Hon. Baronet; and such was still his opinion.
Mr. VILLIERS was most happy to find that the accuracy
of the gentlemen of the press was not called into question.—
( Cries of " Oh, oh," from the new Member's party.) He be-
lieved the Hon. Member was in favour of this measure.—
(" Oh, oh.") He took the lion. Gentleman's own explana-
tion. He had stated that the farmers were in the habit of
going to their landlords and asking their opinions, and it was
really- wondrous how they had preserved their loyalty.—
( Cries of " Oh, oh.") The Hon. Gentleman had given proof
that the farmers were generally loyal and well affected, and
that was a proof that they were not under the influence of
their landlords.—(Great laughter and cries of " Oh, oh.") lie
believed they were loyal and not disaffected because they were
not affected by the disloyal views of their landlords.—(" Oh,
oh," and cheers.) He believed that the farmers
were men who did not believe the stories of
the interested landlords. As far as he had
understood the Hon. Gentleman, the farmers were in
favour of an immediate repeal of the corn-laws.—( Groans
from a section of the House.) The point of the Hon.
Member's speech was to show that the farmers were not under
the influence of their landlords. The Hon. Member for
Rutlandshire had said the same thing. The Hon. Member
who had spoken last was like the gentlemen who spoke the
chorus in the Greek play, which stated all that had taken place,
and all that was to take place in the drama.—( Laughter.)
He had told the farmers that they were to be ruined by the
present measure, and all gentlemen on the protectionist side
of the House had told them the same thing. He (Mr. Vil-
liers) felt great difficulty in rising to address the House after
the speeches which had been delivered on the question, for
there was nothing that he or any other lion. 111em1 er could
say, which had not been already said by the Right
Honourable Baronet at the head of her Majesty's
Government. He could not help contrasting the attention
shown to the Hon. Members who had addressed the House on
the present measure, to the scenes which, on a former occa-
sion, when he (Mr. Villiers) brought forward the same ques-
tints at a former period. The groans and cries of parties in the
house at that time still tingled in his ears.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") At that time, however, the country was in a
state of areat suffering, and much disorder was the consequence.
The gentry were crying out for time, soldiers surrounded the
House, and the people were declaring that time had not been
afforded them to present their petitions against the measure;
and again, he would repeat that the measure passed the
House with greater rapidity than any measure had been
known to pass it before.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
Notwithstanding this, they were now to have this question
postponed in the present session for a longer period than any
measure that had been known before. For three weeks new
had they been discussing the merits, and during the whole of
that rinse they had heard nothing but the same arguments over
and over again.—( Hear, hear.) What then was the conclu-
sion the public were to come to, but that a distinction was
made in this House between the interest taken in the affairs of
the rich and that of the poor.—( Hear, hear.) However, as
the time was to be wasted—(Laughter)—in those discussions,
he would proceed to express his sentiments, and he would say
that he did not think he would be doing justice to his own feel-
ings, or the opinions of those whom he represented in that
House if he did not declare that he hailed with joy and sa-
tisfaction the present measure, which he looked upon as one
dictated by feelings of honour arid justice.—( Hear, hear.) It
must, of course, be gratifying to every Hon. Member in that
House to,have observed the number of Hon. Members who
had become advocates of this cause, from a conviction of its
utility, and many of those Hon. Members occupied positions
which rendered their motives perfectly free from suspicion.—
( Hear, hear.) When the Noble Lord the Member for Lon-
don delivered his sentiments on this subject, in a letter to his
constituents, he (Mr. Villiers) sincerely believed that the
Noble Lord did so from an honest conviction that an imperative
sense of duty called upon him to declare those sentiments, and
that he was not in the slightest degree influenced by party
feeling.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Villiers) was also at a loss
to understand how it was that the Right lion. Baronet oppo-
site deserved the reproaches by which his introduction of this
measure had been received, because the Right lion. Baronet
had not introduced this measure under the influence of any
private or personal feeling, but solely because he believed it
necessary for the benefit of the country ; and he (111 r. Villiers)
did not think that the Right Honourable Baronet had
any reason to be discontented by the manner in
which the measure had been received by the public,
because it was quite evident that 1-a had thrown
insolent
domination.—( and utterly disregarded the importunities of an
domination.—( Cheers.) The Right lion. Baronet had been
told that if he persevered in carrying this measure to a division,
that he would deeply regret it; but the Right lion. Baronet,
with a characteristic perseverance for which he was remarkable,
disregarded all those remonstrances, and he (Mr. Villiers)
really did believe that the public were delighted to see the
Right lion. Baronet throw off with so much determination
those party trammels.—(Cheers.) An Hon. Member opposite
had asked him how it was possible he could show his face to
his constituents after giving the vote he intended upon
that occasion ? But he would ask the Hon. Member
in return, how he intended to act at the next election ?
(hear, hear.) He was aware that some Noble Lords, mem-
bers of the Opposition, had declared opinions upon this ques-
tion as contradictory as any that had been assailed in that
House.—(Cries of " Name, name.") He (Mr. Villiers)
could have no hesitation in naming the parties ; one of them
was the Earl of Essex, who had declared that the free
gim-
portation of Indian corn into this country would be of the
greatest possible benefit to it.—(Cheers and laughter.) Hon.
Members might shake their heads at that as-
sertion, but it was nevertheless true. hear.)
He had heard, in the course of that debate, that it was for the
purpose of raising a question as to a great principle, viz., the
system of protection ; a s) stem of policy long. believed in this
country, and which was now about to be abolished. Its friends
were about to resist its abolition, and the object of their
motion was to resist that abolition. This was the 11th day of
the discussion of the system of protection, and. now he would
ask, what was the system ? Had anything fallen from
the Gentlemen en the other side of the House as
to what the principle was—whether it had any rule, or whe-
ther anything would result from it? \Vas there anything to
be dignified by the name of a system ? The House had not a
single idea on the subject. Ile had asked on his own side,
whether the system of protection could be universally applied?
The answer was, certainly not ; it would raise the prices
.of
food and diminish the price of labour. There was no definite
test by which protection could be tried. Was it opposedi that
protection principle of protection? No ; for Lord Stanley hail r
protection was competition subject to regulation- ,(Laueh liter.
The
protec)They hail no idea of what the system was. 1
that free trade might give. At least, so said the He l
in. I.
ked,
leer for Shrewsbury. He (Mr. Villiers)
dtv.
d as
ow
tionists say that they did not want to oppose. all the advantages
whether the system of protection had riot e
speaking
Member who had spoken on the subject had hardly been s
five minutes before. he began to discuss the horrois. of tree trade in
food. The question was whether Wiry should
.continue the system
n
of the sliding scale—and that they call protection. Had there. been
to an attempted continuance of the sliding
hardly
e. Every
to, show that the system -of
gNi,vieL:iibporuottpecrtoitoenci tiaesnit,,otcagd r;urlitetutrien?l—rehla
ttliireeysliiglekatred any way is st
quoted.
'afghiar,illita,;co.nlynhee,a,rodutlldi
abdesTn tagco us N o such quotation had been
y
e calamities n bleb free
given—there was not a single man who had given any
tradecapi ta
Nlvoo
lodt hce
explanation at all. Many. persons on the other aide of the
House said that the principle of protection to agriculture de-
pended upon none of the causes he had stated, and that it did not
uwsieseto?
ash, had any agricul-
prote
ropiire to be assisted or explained by an Act of rarliament. For the
etinounth,o,raist y
last two nigli;s there had been in the gallery of the House a gentle-
man said. to be ono of the largest occupiers of land in the kingdom--
man wao was s;-oken of as being a great author:ty on the subject
of agriculture. That gentleman was in the House in order that he
might give some answer to the silly statements which had been put
forth. 'That gentleman occuptAl 3,200 acres, extending into six
counties, and he received rent in eight counties. No wonder that
they wsre so adverse to any inquiry by way of a Connnittee
embodied by the House, for they knew that this person would
come forward and give evidence against their views.—(Hear,
hear, and cheers.) They never wished to refer the question to
a Committee for fear this person should come and demolish all the
arguments of their side.—(Cries of " Oh, oh I" fYom the Ministerial
benches) They cried out " Oh, oh 1" but why did not they go be-
fore a Committee ? They were on their trial before their country,
and they could not find any person in favour of their views. He
(Mr. Villiers) would venture to say then what he had said before,
that if they went before a Committee of inquiry they would find
farmers from every part of the country to give evidence against their
principle. They would thud land agents whose opinions were
hostile to them. There was a society of land agents in this town,
and the majority of that society were of opinion that the total and
immediate repeal of the corn-taws would uo no barrio if it dt.t
no
eootir What wits the ease with the honourable Members for Essex.
mid Suffolk—they both plumed themselves on their knowledge ot
the subject, and they both spoke. The Honourable Apouringt. or
Essex, After uttering some very questionable
,jokes, ended by quo.ting.
t chapter of Mr. Arnold's work. The Honourable Menibe.ifo
6401 k, who was returutd to the House as the farmer'S lriend v
, 1.0 l