The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-10 00:00:00

confidence. When the Right lion. Baronet resigned the post
he held, the funds fell, but the instant he resumed his official
position they rose. In these times it was important to have a
Government in which the people could place confidence; and
this should not be overlooked in a discussion like the one be-
fore the House ; but they must not forget that there were
parties in the country whe had no confidence in the Govern-
ment, or in the measures which they had brought forward.
This was ably urged by the Noble Lord opposite (Lord John
Russell) in his' addresss to his constituents, and said there
should be no surrender of those principles which the present
Government had pledged themselves to support. If the Hon.
Baronet, in bringing forward this measure had talked of the
clamour which had been raised against these duties which be
proposed to reduce, or abolish—had he steeled that he had
given way in consequence of the agitation that had been
carried on in the country—that :act he had
been obliged to surrender his conscientious opinions
to the pressure from without, he could have under-
stood his position, and aided in extricating from the difficulties
which environed him, but he did not state anything of the
kind. He only stated that his opinions had undergone a great
change, and that he founded the measure he had brought for-
ward on this alteration. Let them take any person unbiassed
by party feeling or by prejudice, and if they told him that all
the wealth and greatness of this country had grown up under
three institutions, which every other country envied, but
which none had successfully imitated—if you said it had grown
up principally under the reign of Tory Ministers, all in favour
of the relaxation of commercial restrictions—under the go-
vernment of such men as Lord North, Mr. Pitt, Mr, Hug-
kisson, and Mr. Canning—he could scarcely be brought to
believe that such changes had been proposed by a statesman
who had stated that he was a supporter of the principles advo-
cated by these great men. Mr. Pitt, in bringing forward
his commercial treaty with France in 1787, spoke in similar
language to that used by the Right Hon. Baronet the other night.
Who could accuse a man of inconsistency because he said that
he could not see why there should not be a kindred spirit be-
tween a free commerce and a free country ? When the present
measure was brought forward, in 1842, by the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet, what he (Mr. Cochrane) said was this—that he thought
that any state in the agricultural interest was better than a
state of uncertainty. Now, he would ask the House whether
there had been any confidence in the country since that period?
The farmers had entertained differences as to whether the
corn-laws would be repealed in five or ten years; but on this
point they were agreed, viz., that the corn-laws could not be
maintained. Now, Hon. entlemen around him might say
that the reason was that the farmers had no confidence in
her Majesty's Government. —( Hear.) There had certainly been
of late a great change in the policy of the country; but he
knew that in Scotalnd the farmers had openly said that they
were totally indifferent about the corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.)
In Scotland they gave nineteen years leases, and he believed
if they did the same thing in England there would be much
more indifference among the English farmers than there now
was with respect to the corn-laws. —(Heer, hear.) In all
times of excitement, the people considered the Prime Minister
either the greatest saviour or traitor of his country ; as in
ancient times the people of Rome pronounced the chief of the
Senate to be either a lord or a tyrant. He (Mr. Cochrane)
considered the Right Hon. Baronet to be neither the one nor
the other—(Laughter)—but he did consider bins to be a Mi-
nister who had done his best for the good of his country in her
emergencies.—( Hear. hear.) In 1830 a case exactly parallel
occurred—the Right Hon. Baronet lost his office, and we had
a Whig Goeernitent. He (Mr. Cochrane) would vote for
the present measure, because he had confidence in the financial
policy of the present Government. He would vote for this
measure, on precisely the same principle as the Hon. Member
for Newcastle had laid down before the House a few nights ago
—that was, because he had confidence in her Majesty's Minis-
ters. He went for this measure, because he preferred wise
legislation to agitation, and freedom to protection. He protested
against protection to one class, in preference to another; if there
were to be protection, let there be protection to all classes and
to all interests in the British empire.--( Hear, hear.) Protec-
tion in the hours of darkness and of trouble, which he trusted
to God were far from us. He would vote for this measure
principally because in doing so he should show that he did not
entertain any partial feeling toward, or prejudice against, any
particular class. He was determined to be guided by no pri-
vate interest or prejudice or partial views, and he would do
(humble though it might he) as much as he could towards the
lowering of the burdens of the people of this great country.
He would contribute his humble mite (wrongfully it might be,
but at all events most sincerely) to increase the welfare of his
country, and especially of the poor, though not less loyal, classes
of his fellow subjects.—( Cheers. )
Mr. DEEDES was aware that in rising to address the
House upon so important a subject, and at so early a period
of the debate, he was laying himself open to the charge
of great presumption. But when he considered the great im-
portance of the question with regard not only to the subject
itself, but also with reference to the interests* of all classes of her
Majesty's subjects—when he considered this, nothing but an
imperative sense of duty would compel him to offer himself to
their notice at this period of the debate, and he hoped that he
should be favoured with the attention of the House—(Hear,
hear)—and at the same time with a liberal. portion of that in-
dulgence which was wont to be bestowed on all who, like him-
self, laboured under the disadvantage of addressing this
House for the first time.—( Hear, hear.) He was
much tempted to* offer his opinions upon a previous
night; he, however, refrained from so doing on the
ground that it appeared to him to be understood that
no discussion upon the merits of the question was to be
entered into, and also because he was desirous of removing
from himself all imputation which might be cast upon him for
having formed a too-hasty opinion upon so great a subject, or
that he had arrived at a conclusion which a more mature con-
sideration would not have warranted him in doing. He was
glad that he had thus abstained from speaking on a former oc-
casion, because he had had the opportunity since then of
meeting, in the county for which he was a Member, a very
large body of his constituents, and of hearing their opinions
upon this important subject. He was therefore at this period
fortified by the unanimous opinion of a large portion of his
constituency, who had met for the purpose of deliberating upon
the matter, and expressing their opinions upon the same.
Under these circumstances, he trusted that the opinions
he might now express would receive a more favourable recept ion
than if spoken only upon his own authority. ..4 Hear, hear. )
He assured the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley),
who was kind enough upon a former occasion to give a cau-
tion to Hon. Members upon that side of the House as to the
mode of employing the intervening time between that and the
present occasion, and warning us that we should take care how
we stirred up the anger of the people, and what would be the
effects of having recourse to agitation. He was happy to
assure the Hon. Member that he would have seen, had he
been present at the meeting to which he alluded, that his
friendly advice had been followed to the utmost; that nothing
but the most decorous conduct had been evinced, and that
there was a total absence of everything like angry feeling in
the discussion of the subject. The Hon. Member for Fins-
bury told them he never attended the meetings of the League.
He would say that he was sorry he did not, for it might have
had the effect of repressing thee(' violent and angry
discussions which so frequently took place. His ex-
ample might have had a salutary influence on that
body in discussing a measure which he acknowledged to be of
great importance. He would venture to say that the Hon.
Gentleman opposite looked on the measure as one of the
greatest importance, and that it involved nothing more or less
than a complete and total wiping from the Statute book of the
country all protection to native industry which the wisdom of
their forefathers had instituted. Sir, let it be remembered,
that under the very operation of these very laws this country
arrived at a position in the scale of nations which has been
long her glory and her pride. It was reserved for the present
rulers of this country to prove that those laws ought to be ex-
punged from the statute book, and that they were only bound
to legislate in such a manner as would do everything to open
the doors to foreigners and drive the corn of this country out
of the market. He considered that the extent of the
changes which they were now called on to make
were of a description which should only be come to once in a
hundred years; for seldom could arise circumstances which
would justify so complete a revolution as an alteration of this
law would create.—( Hear.) Now would the House think it
possible that so late as the year 1842 these very laws received
the deliberate sanction of both Houses of Parliament, and that
at that time the principles of protection were fully acknow-
ledged by the very parties who were now for removing all re-
strictions from corn imported into this country.--( Hear. )
What can be said when they found that the same gentlemen
who in 1842 sanctioned the laws which we now find
on the statute book are the same gentlemen who
in 1846 seek to erase those laws. It would be
for the gentlemen who now advise this measure to justify
theiechange of opinion, and he doubted not that in their own
convictions they were doing what was right.. He was the hist
man to uphold the doctrine that public men were not at liberty
to change their political opinions. But that change must be
made with caution, it should be made with care, lest public
confidence would be shaken in them Pie could assure the
Right Honourable Baronet. that on this, as well as on every
other occasion, he believed that the Right Hen. Baronet had
been actuated in his course of public conduct by the convictions
of his own conscience. In early life he (Mr. Deedes) had
always been in the babitof looking up to the Right Hon. Baronet
as his political leader, but, in the mean time, he had never
hesitated to oppose those measures which he brought forward,
which he believed not adapted for the interests of the country.
As long ago as 1829, when he brought forward the Catholic
Emancipation Act, not being able to approve of the course
taken by the Right Honourable Baronet, he, as a member of
the convocation, felt it his duty to oppose his return. In the
last session of Parliament he opposed his measure with refer-
ence to Maynooth. He mentioned these facts only, because he
desired to state that on those great public questions he never
doubted that he was actuated by any other than honest and
proper motives.—( Hear, hear.) With reference to the potato
failure in Ireland, he was of opinion that the agricultural pro-
tectien meetings, though much abused, would have been ready
and willing to have assented to any measure calculated
for the relief of their fellow-subjects.—( Hear, hear.)
But he could not go further, for he could not see
why the corn-law of 1842 was to be altered.
He believed that that measure exceeded the most sanguine
expectations of even its framer. The producer got by it a
fair remuneration for his industry, while the consumer did not
pay an extravagant price for the articles of his consumption.-_
( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet in his speech re-
ferred to the thriving state of the country for the last three
years. Now it should be understood that this state of things
took place under the operation of the amended and revised law
of 1842, brought on by hireself.—( Hear, hear.) In the next
session, therefore, it was strange that he should call upon them
to exchange that very law ; and, anxious as be (Mr. Deedes)
was to give the Right Hon. Gentleman his support, he could
not, according to the best
bestof
his judgment,
support him on the
.1
present occasion,
Right Hon. Baronet intimated also
that foreigners would time their manufactures in exchange
for the corn which they would supply. He (Mr. Deedes)
was not quite sure that such a result would follow, and he
asked the Right Hon. Baronet if the alteration was
not an experiment on the native industry of the country—
(Hear, hear)—and supported though it might be by the influ-
ence and the arguments of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he
would not give way, from an apprehension of the danger which
if
would accompany it. He feared that these measures were
adopted, the country would be made dependant on foreigners
for a supply of the very first article of their food.— ( Hear, hear.)
He deprecated such a state of things, and the very first argu-
ment brought forward by the Right Hon. Gentleman a few
in
evenings ago, reference to the failure of the potato crop, con-
firmed him in such an opinion. Belgium, Sweden, and other
places, he stated, had placed restrictions on the exportation of
that article, and prevented this country from obtaining any sup-
ply. He (Mr. D ) required no further argument to induce
him to refuse his assent to the measures brought forward by the
Right Hon. Baronet.—(Cheers.) The Eight Hon. Baronet
had also stated that no material change would take place in the
price of corn in the event of the contemplated measures becom-
in e law,—(Hear, hear.) Did the Anti-Corn-law League say
so?—(lronical cheers from the Ministerial side of the House. )
Their argument with respect to the abolition of agriculture /
protection was quite the reverse. They said that it would re-
duce the price of corn.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman
then read an extract from a letter which he had received from
one of his own friends confirmatory of the views he had ex-
pressed, and proceeded to say that the Tiestion before the
House was w' Cher this taxation should bear entirely on the pro-
ducers or on e consumers by the present effect of the corn-
laws. He en rely concurred as to the propriety of calling this
to
question a landlord question. He was of opinion that the plan
of the Right Hon. Baronet would have the effect of throwing
the poorer sort of soils entirely out of cultivation.
He would give his best attention to the measures
before the House, but he could not think that the

ocofrnth-ilsawcosunoturgyh:outlod
behecarirniteedrfoeuretdof wit:tahn Hhae. t
thfeisardeedfatlheaat
if we have to purchase corn from foreign countries, the specie
ton in the amount of the specie which went out of the Bank
d t
of England, combined with the limitation of the paper money
issue, would occasion great confusion,- in fact, ruin both in
commercial and . agricultural pursuits. Looking with these
views on the subject, and bearing strongly in mind the lan-
guage of the Right Hon. Baronet and his colleagues in 1812
on this question, he could not consistently with his own con-
victions follow him ( Sir R. Peel) and give his support to the
measure. He desired to thank the House for their kind atten -
tion on this his first attempt at addressing them, and would
sit down trusting that Divine Providence would
enable them
so to shape their measures with moderation and justice that
the issue would result in benefit to the whole nation.
Sir J. WALSH thought that the party to which he was
attached must be admitted to be the organ of opinion of a
great multitude of the population of this country, and he thought
they might come forward to defend themselves from imputa-
tions of a personal character which had been showered
upon
them throughout the country. The Honourable Gentlemen
opposite had held them up as the weak and impotent advocates
of a base and selfish monopoly. They bad been represented as
acting by no other method, and impelled by no other aim, than
that of maintaining the rent of the landlords. He thought that
they appeared before the House under circumstances of great
disadvantage, as they had been deprived, by the sudden change
of opinion of the Right Honourable Baronet, of the able advo-
cacy of their case, on which on former occasions they were ac-
customed to depend. The Right Honourable Gentleman had
accompanied his measure with some proposals of compensation
and alleviation to the landlords. They (the landlords) were
bound to give their opinion, and to defend their character from
the charges which had been brought against them. He would
deny that they considered this matter as a question of rent, and
of rent alone. But before he entered on that subject, he
would ask, whether, if they were to argue the question on that
narrow basis—whether, if they were to consider it on the Cir-
cumscribed circle of rent—if, even on that ground, it was not
a question which might not well engage the attention of the
House ? From the return of 1843, which had been moved for,
by the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, it appeared that the
amount at which the rental of land in England had been
assessed to the income-tax was 45,750,000/. This was the
amount in Great Britain alone ; and he thought a further sum
of from 15,000,000. to 20,000,000/, for the, rental of Ireland
was only a fair average. This was a question of rent", involving
the consideration of a sum amounting to 60,000,000/. of yearly
income. He would ask, how was this income divided? When
Hon. Gentlemen opposite talked about the rents of
the landlord, which had been published in their
addresses throughout the country, immediately nothing else
was suggested than the territorial revenue of some great pro-
prietors, of some Duke of Northumberland, Duke of Bedford or
Sutherland, or some of those wealthy commoners whose
estates and possessions rivalled the most ancient and extensive
domains of the peerage itself He would however remind the
House that there were entire counties in England in which
there was no such thing, comparatively speaking, as an estate.
There were counties in which small plots of land were owned
and cultivated by yeomen—by farmlsrs, to whom the lands
had descended by a long ancestry, who themselves held
and cultivated the soil. Another most numerous
class was the small retired tradesman, who with that love of
rural life which characterises an Englishman, had invested the
fruits of a life of industry, strict and successful enterprise, in the
purchase of land. Mr. M'Cullock had estimated the number
of landed proprietors, small and large, of Great Britain, at
200,000. Thus 200,000 persons, with their families and do-
mestics, dependent upon them, were interested directly in
that question of land. He would say, on that ground the
question should not be considered as a mere narrow class in-
terest. The land interest was one on which depended the well
being of a great proportion of the people. The question must
necessarily involve in it the interest of the tenant-farmer, and
of all connected with agriculture. The Right Hon. Baronet
who had brought forward the measure, had stated that the
great relaxation which would be given to the duties on articles
of consumption, would form a counterbalancing equivalent to
any loss which the farmer might sustain—that the greater
cheapness of many articles would be an equivalent for any dimi-
nution of rent, or for any injury that might accrue fromjhe want
of protection. The theory ofrent was a simple one. It depended on
the state of cultivation of land. Good soils were more profit-
able than poor soils. The profits of the farmer enabled him
to pay proportionably. But what would be the result if a
great quantity of foreign wheat were brought in, so that the
farmer's profits would be diminished. Why, his capital would
be wasted, and the poorer soil of lands would be thrown out of
cultivation. He would no longer be able to employ his capital
profitably, and the whole agricultural population would feel the
evil effect. Many causes conspired to render protection neces-
sary for the farmer. There were fluctuations in the currency
to which the farmer was exposed equally with those engaged in
commerce and trade. He had also to contend against the will
of Providence as regarded the elements; the vicissitudes of the
weather were fraught with danger to him. Since the year
1815, the population had increased by upwards of six millions.
and what had been the history of commerce and manufactures
since the year 1815 ? Hon. Gentlemen opposite said that re-
strictive laws cramped commerce, and yet, since the period he
had mentioned, a most extraordinary and rapid increase had
taken place in all our staple manufactures. It might, however,
be said that the agriculture of the country had reached its
utmost limit of improvement, and therefore they must look to
other countries for supplies. So far from that being the case,
there never was a period when agriculture was more calculated
to take a great stride in advance. Never
was there a period
when capital was more ready to be applied to the improvement
of agriculture than now, if they would but give it security.
So far from agriculture in this country having reached
its utmost limits of improvement, he believed that it
was at present only in its infancy. Much had been said about
the peculiar burdens on land. Those peculiar burdens had
been denied by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. They were first
denied by the Hon. Member for Montrose and by the Hon.
Member for Sheffield; and it had been asked by those Hon.
Members and others what the peculiar burdens upon land
were. The peculiar burdens upon land pressed as heavily
upon agricultural, as the metropolitan police-rate would anon
the shoemakers of London, if that rate were imposed upon
that body exclusively, and he considered this an apt illustration
of the position of the agriculturists. He could not but look
upon the proposed change as a leap in the dark. The
repeal of the corn-laws would cause corn to come
from quarters from which it was not now expected.
Corn would then be grown in Spain, and sent to this country.
When he was at Hamburgh, in 1813, a merchant informed
him, that it was perfectly practicable to purchase corn in any
quantity at 365. per quarter, and to freight it over to. this
country at 4s. per quarter. Indeed such was the competition
between the Danish, the Hanoverian, and Hamburgh ship-
owners, that corn might be sent to Hull or London at Is. per
quarter. If that were the case, how severely would the pro-
posed measure be felt in this country. The Right
.Hon. Gen-
tleman took the state of Ireland as one cause for this change.
He (Sir J. Walsh) was too well acquainted with that country,
net to be aware of the appalling consequences that would follow
a failure of the potato , crop and lie was perfectly ready
to admit that there was no practicable measure
which they ought not to adopt to alleviate such a great calamity.
But he could not conceive how a calamity of this sort, which,
however frightful, must, in its very nature, be temporary, could
be made a pound lighter for the proposed change. Was the
present state of Ireland a sufficient cause for a permanent alte-
ration of the law ?—( Hear, hear.) The general state of Ireland
was one of the strongest arguments that could be used in
favour of the present law. Ireland was purely an agricultural
country. There was a denser population in that country than
in this, and they were entirely dependent upon agriculture.
The trade in agricultural produce between England and Ire-
land was one of the greatest links and bonds of union that
could possibly exist between the two countries. There
were two great links—one was the trade in agricultural
produce, and the other was the Protestant Church
of Ireland. They were going to destroy the one, let them
take care to defend the other. The Right Honourable
Gentleman based his measure on the experience of the
last three years. He ( Sir J. Walsh) was sure that public
opinion, and that posterity, whose suffrages the Right Hon.
Gentleman was so richly desirous of obtaining, would consider
that another cause had been in operation in England some two
years past, which had had a most powerful effect in producing
this result. He believed that the efforts and funds of the Anti-
Corn-law League had produced the change which that House
had been called upon to sanction. The Anti-Corn-law League
Association was the seeond joint stock agitation company which
had produced so important a change in the policy of this coun-
try. Let them.read the history of the first, and then jet. them
solve him this problem: '.-1-loa..Stitiy'amoilb of theichtepealt
alll-
- would it take to crush the independence of Parliament?
—( Cheers.) This was an evil that some day er other
the Minister would have to grapple with, and this
was a system which could not long co-exist with
the representative Government, but must sooner or later prove
the distruction of its independence. He opposed this measure
because he believed it to be a dangerous experiment upon the
resources of this country, and he opposed it doubly because he
believed it had been brought about by the influence of an asso-
ciation which he considered every lover of order and a regular
Government was bound to oppose.
Mr. B. HOPE wished to say a few words upon this im-
portant measure. He would discuss the question upon the
simple ground of whether or not the present Parliament was
morally as well as equally bound to maintain protection.—
( Cries of " Oh," from the Opposition benches.) Who were
the Parliament that were elected five years ago, and who was
the party that elected them ? In 1841 there was a great
struggle—whether it was right or wrong was not the question—
the Right Hon. Baronet led that struggle against free trade,
when the Noble Lord, the then Member for the city of Edin-
burgh, made a last effort to maintain the Whig Government
which had existed since the year 1830, and which in
the national course of events had become a great fete.
The Noble Lord, the Member for the city of London, brought
forward a measure for free trade, but the opposition of the To-
ries compelled the Noble Lord to appeal to the country upon it,
and then in the teeth of the cry of " cheap bread" they were
returned to the present Parliament, pledged as protectionists,
and pledged to crush repeal. The people returned the Right
Hon. Baronet as the leader of that party, and now, in the year
1846, they were called upon to pass the very same measure—
nay, a stronger and more sweeping measure, if possible, which
they had pledged themselves to their constituents to oppose,
right or wrong. This had now become a matter of principle ;
and by what measure of political expediency any change could
be_ justified, he was at a loss to understand.—

(Hear, hear.) To be sure the Right Honourable Baronet
was elected in 1841 by his party, and he is still their leader,.
but the Right Hon. Baronet should recollect, neither himself
nor the Noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, nor
the Hon. Member for Stockport, nor any other leader of any
political party, was such by hereditary right. He was the leader
of his party simply and solely, as being she exponant of their
principles, and of course he maintained that po,ition as long as
their principles agreed ; and it could not be a natter of sur-
prise to him it his party, finding that he has altered or de-
serted the principles by which they elected him, should again
retire to chose th<ir own leader, or each to take his own line
for himself.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) Such ought to be
the case now, for the Right lion. Baronet has brought for-
ward a free trade measure, in a speech abounding in the
same glowing eloquenee as that which he used while tram-
p
ling under his feet, in that House of Conimons, or that
Parliament, and during the early debates of the present Par-
liament, the very principles of which this measure was to early
out.—( Hear, hear.) And upon what ground was this chanav
to be made? Last Tuesday week they wet e 'all present, and
heard the grounds, and what were they? They had a long
and very clear exposition of the Right Hon. Baronet's views ;
but what were the arguments which the Right Hon. Baionet
advanced to show that the measure, which in 1841 would have
been the destruction of the kingdom, should now be its salva-
tion. What did the Right Hon. Baronet mean by true Con-
servative policy, or what was true Conservative policy ? To-
ryism was a tangible thing—Whigism was a tangible thing—
Protectionism was a tangible thing—and so was free trade.
All these things have their meanings, but what meaning was
there in the new word Conservatism?—that word which he heard
in 1832, at a time when the old Tory party, finding a difficulty
in gathering together under their old banner, ventured to rally
round and support—what ? Toyrism ? no ; Whigism ? no ;
but Conservatism. Toryism and Whigism was now no more;
and, in his opinion, Conservatism ought long ago to have been
sent to the catacomb of all the hoaxes.—( Laughter.) The
Right Hon. Baronet came down to that House ih the end of
1841, to advocate protection, and for what reason ? Why, he-
because it was consistent ; and now, in the beginning of 1846,
the same Right Hon. Baronet came down to that House to
advocate Conservatism ; and what did he say was his reason
for doing so ? Why, because it was consistent with the
principles of true Conservatism. This might be true Con-
servative policy, but it was not the policy to serve the intention ,

of his own party. There was a minister once of great power,
who lived before the days of the House of Commone, and when
the power of En land was exercised by the Crown, and not by
the people. This minister ruled with strength for a time, but
he became a little too arrogant, and adopted as his motto,
" Ego et rex mews,"
and it ultimately proved his downfall. Let other ministers
beware lest they meet their fall in the cry of " I and my
party."—( Hear and laughter.) Honourable members who
were elected strong protectionists, were, upon this principle of
following their leader, brought down to the House of Com-
mons on last Tuesday week without the common courtesy,
which in former days was resorted to in measures of minor im-
portance, and called upon to do that, which in 1841, they had
pledged themselves not do. In 1841 he knew some-
thing of what was going to take place. The West
India Sugar Bill was then an important question, and
the Conservative party was called together to consider what
might be its effect and operation, but now when the old com-
mercial system of the country was to be revolutideized, they were
not called together to consult on the subject—this would have
been contrary to the principles of true Conservative policy.
This would have been a bold measure for the consideration of a
new Parliament, but now they were going to consider it in a
Parliament which was nearly extinct. Protectionism had
been the policy of England for upwards of a century, but now
they were going to do away with it, and when the measure
reached the House of Lords, it would be moved by the Lord
Chancellor from that memorable emblem of Protection to
British Industry, the Woolsack ; which, ever since the
time of Edward the Third, had been placed in the
House of Lords as the seat of its highest and most
honoured officer of the state, and probably as a
memento to warn the Parliament of England of what
and in what its true policy should be.—( Hear, hear, and much
laughter.) Whether that policy
was right or, wror:g, it does
seem strange that they should be called upon by a Minister,
who, in 1841, advocated it in the strongest terms, to abandon it
altogether.—( Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Baronet might
say there was no other course open to him ; but he
thought, as
he had done on former occasions, that there were two or three
courses open to him.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) The Rig ht
Honourable Baronet might have dissolved the Parliament, and
that, in his opinion, would have been one and a better course ;
or the Right Hon. Baronet might have come boldly forward,
and told them, as the Noble Lord the Member for the City of
London—whose great openness and straightforwardness, he was
willing to admit, entitled the Noble Lord to great credit—had
done from the city of Edinburgh—that he had supported pro-
tection till he could do so no longer, and that as he was now
satisfied that the principles of all his former life were erroneous
he was prepared to give up the Government, and tender the
Opposition his warmest support in carrying free trade.—
( Loud Opposition cheers.) That would have been a policy
which they would have commended, whatever their
private views might have been, and looked upon it as a
magnanimous attempt on the past of the Right Hon. Baronet
for the well-being of his country.—( Cheers.) The Noble
Lord and his supporters opposite had a right to have the credit
of passing their own measure. They had a right to demand
that the conduct of a measure in which they spent all their
lives should be left to them, and the Right Hon. Baronet having
been placed in power in 1841 by protectionists, he called on bins
to give it up to them. These were the views which had
led; him to the determination of supporting the amendment,
but he supported it the more, because, by doing so, he recorded
his protest against a system and policy which he was sorry to
see being adopted as being one that must diminish the expedi-
ency, if any, and add no lustre to the very best system of ab-
stract legislation.—(Cheers.)
Lord SANDON was one of those who would support the
measure, although it did not meet with his approbation.—
( Laughter.) He was sorry that the arguments of the Right Hon.
Baronet in its favour were so flimsy, and thought those argu-
ments would not justify a sudden changing of opinion which
had prevailed for years.—(Hear, hear.) He insisted that
the wages of the labourer depended on the price of corn,
and declared that experience both at borne and abroad proved
that the rate was varied by the fluctuation in the prices of
grain. He had yet to learn that it was an established
principle of political economy that increased consumption pro-
duced high prices, and protested that the experience of
three years in some minor articles of commerce
did hardly justify so extensive an experiment as the present.
During the present state of uncertainty the farmers were in a
most helpless state.---( Hear, hear.) He knew he should be
told by Hon. Members on the other side of the House that
this was not the farmers but really the landlord's question.—
(Hear, hear.) Abstractedly speaking that was no doubt true.
If there was a bad harvest farmers would expect the landlords
to make abatements in their rents ; abatements were made,
and consequently so far the landlords suffered. All their capital
was embarked in land, and year by year they found that that
capital was dwindling away, till at last they were compelled to
take refuge in some other profession. But he would lastly
take the case of the farmer and his laboJers. Those of
all others suffered the most in times of agricultural
distress.—(Hear, hear.) The first struggle which the farmer
made to meet the distress was by diminishing the number of
his laborers. That step of course added to the number of
paupers in the country. Those were the reasons then why he
would vote for the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet at the
head of the Government, although he disapproved of it.
Though he (Lord Sandon) disapproved of his proposal, still he
felt that the Right Hon. Baronet must be supported, because
he felt convinced that by the Right Hon. Baronet the country
must be governed. He felt that unless questions of this
nature, were settled by very great masses of enlightened opinion,
a country ike England could not long be properly governed. He
felt that when opinions hostile to protection had been enun •
dated by the great leaders on both sides of the House—( Hear)
—they ought to be supported by tlio great body of the people.
He had now arrived at this position—viz., that all the
members of her Majesty's Government, with the exception, he
believed, of two, had expressed themselves in favour of free
trade—all, with the exception of the two Hon. Members to
whom he had alluded, had given their sanction to the proposal
then before the House. He confessed that the question
seemed to him to be no longer a matter of discussion—it was
merely a question of time. For his own part, he believed
that the sooner the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet was
passed into a law, so much the better would it be for the coun-
try at large.--( Hear, hear.) The measure, he confessed,
would entail some difficulties upon those concerned in
the agriculture of the country; but their difficul-
ties could not last more than a few months—
certainly not more than twelve. But it was better that the
question should be decided without further delay, for it was
only, as he had before said, a matter of time; postpone the
matter as the might, they would have to come to the sense result
at last.—( Hear, hear. ) He believed he had spoken at some
length of the peril of the experiment, but he could not say that
peril would extend so far as was apprehended by lion. Mem-
bers opposed to the measure. For the sake of the millions of
the country, he believed that it would be well that the present
uncertainty on the question of food should be removed. But
he could not see the process by which those advantages antici-
pated by Honourable Members ssho advocated tree
trade would be realised. He had seen in the course
of his life the price of corn down as lo
e
as 555., and that was termed by the agriculturists a paying
price. If the present proposal were carried into a law, he really
believed that instead of land going out of cultivation, it would
he much more cultivated, and, of course, more labourers would
be employed. He could not think that Hon. Members need anti-
cipate the risk, which they appeared to do, of the land going out
of cultivation. He did entertain a hope that, although much
individual misery would have to be gone through in the event
of this measure being passed into a law, the vessel of England
would sail much more safely and smoothly than it did at pre-
sent.—( Hear, hear. ) Those were the general reasons why he
had determined to support the Right Hon. Baronet's proposi-
tion. He saw in that measure great wisdom, and although
there was involved in it a perilous experiment, at the same
time he did not share in the amount of apprehension that was
entertained by Hon. Members in favour of protection. Under
those circumstances, he felt bound to give his support to the
measure, nd he conceived he was right in doing so.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose and said, I believe, Sir,
I am about the first to speak, upon this side, upon the impor-
tant question before the llonse.—( Hear, hear.) And while
1 shall give my vote on the same side with the Noble Lord
who has just addressed the House, I cannot help saying that 1
shall do so with better heart and hope.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Sir, I will not attempt to deny the importance of
this question. Hon. Gentlemen en the other side of the House,
whom I have heard, and who assent to the proposition of her
Majesty's Ministers, say what is quite true, when they say
that the system of protection has been a system of legislation
adopted for one particular class.--( Hear, hear.) Sir, I am
not at all terrified by that enunciation.—( Hear, hear.) I
know very well that for centuries religious disability was the
system of this country.—( Hear.) I know that for centuries the
want of security and liberty of the person was the system of
the Legislature of this country. But I am happy to acknow-
ledge that great benefits have flown from the destruction of
the system, and I hope we are now at the commencement of
the destruction of another system which has been injurious to
the country, and that we shall hereafter be proud of having
participated in the foundation of a new and a better order of
things.—( Cheers.) It appears, sir, that the question with
respect to the corn-laws, which in former years had been
almost confined, has been of late, but especially in meetings
and discussions in the country, widened to the whole principle
of protection, but those who have defended the present cosro.
and n-
laws wish in maintaining them to avoid all appearance
they of
fishness or legislation for a particular class,
have said that they wish all native industry
to be protected. (Hear, hear.) But, Sir, the
Honorable Gentleman who seconded the amendment to-night
seemed to confess—or at least appeared to have said so—that
all native industry was not entitled to protection. When we
come to the question of protection of native industry we find
various branches of industry—the great cotton manufactures,
the woollen manufactures, and the great linen manufactures of
this country, which are sent abroad to compete with the pro •
ductions of nations at the greatest distance from this country—.
such as America and Asia. These interests are not benefited
by any protection which yet .emains upon your
statute books.—( Hear, hear.) It is obvious then
that the protection you now seek to maintain
for agriculture is a protection for one particular class of indus-
try—c Hear, hear)—and an advantage for them alone. We
find, Sir, a' great argument, which is the argument of all
writers on political economy, applies to that particular protec-
tion ; that, in the first place, it is an interference with the due
current of trade and labour, and is in behalf of one particular
class. In the next place, that it is a tax upon the rest of the
community for the benefit of that class. In the third place,
that the class which you seek to benefit loses by the pretended
protection that you afford it.--( Hear, hear.) Sir, these arc
the propositions which are so true that they have become axioms
in political economy.—( Hear.) I was induced the other day
by the Honourable Member for Norfolk to read a pamphlet
which has been published on this question, and also
another pamphlet by Martin and Co. on the subject
of protection. These gentlemen state that a quarter of corn is
raised 17s. in price by the protection which is afforded to it.—
(Hear. ) I thought as I read that statement, and I now believe
it, to be a great exaggeration ; but if that were so, if the price
of corn had risen to such an enormous amount by that pro-
tection which you give to agriculture; supposing there were
20,000,000 quarters of wheat consumed in this country, and
that on each of those quarters there was a tax of I7s , there
would be some millions sterling imposed on the food of the
people of this country. I believe the statement is most
egregiously exaggerated, but still I believe that while you give
protection such as is afforded by the present law to a
particular class, which I believe to be an apparent
benefit to it, that protection is an injury to the rest of the corn-
muuity.—( Hear, hear.) The lion. Gentleman the Member
for Hampshire, who seconded the amendment, and who did so
in terms as temperate as could be desired—( Laughter)—the
Hon. Gentleman stated that a difference was to be made be-
tween those occupations in which mere manual labour was em •
ployed, and those in which machinery was brought, into requisi-
tion. Now I cannot see the value of that argument, I cannot
see what are the grounds of that argument. Suppose there are
five millions of people employed in works of machinery, and
others in which little machinery is employed, I cannot see any
good ground why the one should have the protection of the
Legislature, and the other should not enjoy that protectins .
Well then, Sir. if it be the case that the system
so, then the question comes—What is the course you oughto
of protecti to
take in order to get rid of this particular protection?upon political
And here
a and Mr. I must say that those writers who hay;rdo, written
Ricardo, science, even Mr. Adam Smith, Mr.
Hus-
kisson, all speak of the caution that tug
the
l.t to be
particularusedindemalielat.g
with this question. But what should be
sure, and what should be
the. protective system in these
matters? and what way should you deal with the quest ion
that is not a subject upon which we really have very little
light, and it is impossible to have much light from theoretical
writers.—(Hear, hear.) 1 confess with the Noble Lord, who

~.

has last spoken. I confess that Ido not think these grea
transcissions can be made without incurring risk at least, and
considerable suffering.—( Hear. hear.) The circumstances of
the country may be so far so fortunate that suffering may be
avoided, but I certainly think that if you wish to get rid of
protection you will run the risk of some hazard,
and incur
considerable suffering.—( Hear, hear
Some .)
Tehis;pek Sair'of isfaa-
confession and admission that is made by all persons
who have reflected on the subject.
mine, others speak as the Noble Lord has
spoken, of the difficulty of arrangements between the different
classes of persons who are concerned in trade, but all admit
that there is considerable danger of losing capital and diminu-
tion of trade.—( Hear, hear.) But, Sir, I come to the plan
of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, the. first Minister
of the Crown. I agree with the Noble Lord that I do not
think he has laid down the grounds of it largely enough or ex-
tensively enough in point of time.--(Hear, hear.) He has
alluded to measures about which he would have no difficulty,
because I believe he is the Member of the Cabinet by whom
those measures were introduced. I mean, Sir, the measures
of Mr. Huskisson—( Hear, bear)--which measures might
have been quoted by him to show the advantage of moderating
duties, and the doing away in a great extent of prohibitory
duties. I will not make any statement in figures, hut I can
say that I think, in consequence of the reduction of the duties
on silk, the importation of the raw material during the years
1837 and 1838 had increased over the years 1835 and
1836 (during the existence of prohibitory duties)
more than one hundred per cent. In the article
of wool a reduction of one penny in the pound,
produced an immense increase in the price of that article,
foreign wool was then introduced at a low rate of duty, and the
exports increased to a great extent. These, Sir, are instances
of many others, which show the benefit at least of 'reducing
duties. But, then, the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of
her Majesty's Government, has proposed a plan which goes
beyond the mere reduction of duty to a moderate amount, and
thereby increasing the imports and prices. He has proposed
with reference to the duties upon corn that after the expiration
of three years, the duty upon that article shall altogether
cease. Now, Sir, lam of opinion, that if the Government had
undertaken this task in 1812, and made far greater -reduc-
tion than they then did, it would have been better for the agri-
culturists as a body, and for the country at large. As the
matter now stands, I am ready to say, seeing the contest now
going on, and the struggle that would continue to go on if no
attempt is made to stop it between the intermediate steps of the
sliding scale or a small fixed duty. I am prepared to repeat
what I have before stated in public, that the struggle will con-
tinue unless some efficient measures are taken by her Majesty's
Government to prevent Hear, hear.) I must say, I
consider the plan of the Right Hon. Baronet as a great measure
—a measure which will lay the foundation of a complete new
principle as to commercial legislation—a principle which will
have the effect of leaving both agriculture and manufactures
entirely to the energies and skill of the British people. I must
say, Sir, believing those principles to be sound principles, I am
prepared to give every support to the plan brought forward by
1 her Majesty's Government.—( Hear, hear.) But I think it 21
incumbent on me to say that, with reference to the mode he
has adopted of introducing a new system of corn duties for three
years, that the opinion which I had formed in my own mind in
the month of December last, has been more and more strength-
ened by everything 1 have seen or heard since the Right Hon.
Baronet made known his plans.---( Loud cries of " Hear,
hear.") I have heard from all parts—from Devonshire,
from various parts of Scotland, from the midland counties, and
from varioustither parts of England, that the opinion of the
farmers was to the effect " That if we are to have a system of
tree:trade instead of protection, let us know what that system
is to be at once—( Hear, hear,)—let the ditties be repealed at
once." I consider there was great reason in that remark.
In the first place I think the farmer will be better able to
arrange with his landlord as to the particular sums he has to
pay, and the sums he will have to pay, if he knows at once the
state of the law, and has not to wait until the end of the
month of February, 1849, and take the chance of what may
then be the price of corn. I think also there is some danger
to the farmer in adopting the proposed plan. In 1848 the
prices may be low, there may be a considerable accumulation
of corn in the country, the glut which would not happen in
the spring of 1848, may happen if there is a sudden reduction of
, the duty from ten shillings to one shilling per quarter in the spring
of 1849, not owing to the price of corn, but to the effect of the
previous legislation. I think, Sir, that the danger will be
greater after the lapse of two or three years, than it would be
if the alteration were total and immediate.—(Hear, hear. )
The present would be a favourable time for removing these
restrictions, for in consequence of deficient harvests in most
of the countries of Europe, there is now little stock remaining
on hand in Dantzic or Hamburgh. There is no reason to
suppose that there is any great stock in the United States of
America ; there is no apprehension on the part of the farmer,
with reference to a reduction of the duties upon corn, and I
consider these together as forming a pretty conclusive proof
that there is actually no danger at the present time.--( Hear,
hear.) If they had any danger to encounter, it was when on
the continent of Europe and in the United States, prepara-
tions had been made, the ground had been oultivated, and the
seed sown with a view to send large supplies of corn to Eng-
land. I consider, Sir, that the policy of the Government is
like furnishing a farmer with a great coat to wear only
in the summer, and which he was to take off when
the winter arrived.—(Hear hear.) But, having said this
much, I put it to the Right Hon. Baronet if he will not re-
consider that part of his plan which had reference to the corn-
laws.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet has often
alleged, in bringing forward his measures for the reduction of
duties upon subjects of much less importance than the one now
under consideration, that it was almost impossible to know the
effect of such duties till they had been tested by experience.
Now, Sir, it does appear to me, that with reference to the
proposed measure, we shall be labouring under this disadvan-
tage. I hope that the Hoe. Baronet will reconsider that part
of his subject. I wish that his plans may succeed. . I wish to
see this measure successful, not only in this House, but also in
the other House, and I would not be one to oppose the progress
of that measure.—( Hear, hear.) When, therefore, this sub-
ject comes into Committee, if the Right Hon. Baronet tells me
that he has reconsidered the subject, and that he still considers
the three years' duty to be au essential part of his plan,
I will then support him to the utmost of my abilities.
Sir, I have stated thus much with reference to the plan as it
affects the article of corn ; it is not necessary that I should say
much as to the other parts of the plan. With reference to the.
article of sugar, it will not be necessary for me to make any
observation; as regards the articles of manufactures, and the
taking off the duties upon them, I consider that you are bound
to do ss, you are bound to show that you abandon protection
altogether as a principle, vicious and injurious, and not for the
sake of subjecting them to any experiment to which you would
not expose the manufacturer.—( Hear, hear.) There is
another part of the subject, and one which I certainly cannot
approach with great satisfaction, I allude to the question of
burdens upon agriculture. The Right Hon. Baronet has pro-
posed to make certain relief as to local burdens, the expenses of
prisons and prosecutions ; these amendments in the law I con-
sider to be just, and they are improvements in the existing
law. These measures are offered as compensation to the landed in-
terest. I do not think any compensation could be properly offered.
I ant not sure that as regards the general burdens of the
country, that the occupiers of land have not more than the
share which belongs to them.—( Hear.) It is a point upon
which I feel a difficulty, because I have found that whenever
a proposition was made by the Hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr.
Ward), to inake a statement adverse to that opinion, and ask for
a Committee to inquire into this point, none were so ready as
those agricultural gentlemen to oppose that inquiry.—( Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Member for Radnorshire ( Sir John
Walsh) had draw a comparison, of shoemakers, who were alone
compelled to pay the police rates. They might complain that
they could not sell their articles so cheap as others who were
not so taxed—they would complain of the injustice practised
upon them. But if the shoemakers, who formed the majority
in this House, had always strenuously resisted the proposal to
inquire into the subject of their grievances, I certainly
should suspect the shoemakers of thinking there was something
in their case which would not bear to be sifted.—( Hear,
hear.) There is another difficulty in the question. When about
two or three years since there was a large surplus of about
three millions in the Exchequer, I thought it might be worth
while to the agricultural interest, with a view to their obtaining
some relief from their burdens, to remove the taxes of several
articles—the malt tax fcr instance. They would not hear of
such a proposition, and when the Right. Hon. Baronet dis-
tributed this large sum of three millions and a half, he did net
seem to have any particular regard for this interest. I freely
state that Ido not feel any sympathy with this class.—( Hear.
hear.) Nor can 1 see why any relaxation of bnrdens should
be made towards those whose burdens were shared equally by
their fellow countrymen. I do not consider that that they
have any claims to a relaxation of their burdens.—(Hear,e..3ercial
hear.) Had I brought forward any scheme of
some respects from
policy, although it would have differed in
much
relief
have given
not think I would
thenot planthi broughtnk that forwardshould by the Hight iH osno.tmhßae
mronaeot .
relief as he has done. _
600,0001.
500,0004 or
much es
have given
to propose an increase of Were they to laysohur
asdeans
oofntathe a
taxation
mwehriecehof
wouldthe coeuxnptorsye, and
Government to great and to deserved unpopularity ? No ! and
for these reasons I will therefore say at once that I concur in
the Government scheme as proposed by the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of her Alajesty's Government.--(Loud
cheers.) I wish that the repeal had been immediate, but, in
the present state of affairs, and the strong desire that exists for,
and the advantage that will accrue by, getting rid of the com-
mercial system with respect to corn, even at a remote period,
it is too great an advantage to the people of this country gene..
rally not to support the measure.—( Hear, hear, and cheers. )
But, Sir, I cannot forbear from taking notice of one remark
which fell from an Honourable Gentleman, the Member for
Finsbury (Mr. Wakley). The Hon. Gentleman stated (and
he thought he had no particular motive for doing so) that he
thought the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of her
Majesty's Government was more able to carry this measure
successfully than I was That is an observation that compels
me to state, that a measure of the same kind would be equally
successful, if I had received the same support from my political
opponents which they now receive from me.—(Great
cheering.) This measure of free trade the protec-
tionists say, and they say what is correct, was loudly
opposed by the Right Hon. Baronet. When Mr. Huskisson
brought forward, in his place in Parliament, a measure of free
trade, many of us gave him our support ; but the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite, the Secretary for the Home Department,
stated, when he was in Opposition, that he could not give him
his support. In 1839 the Secretary of State and the Chancellor
of the Exchequer proposed going into Committee on the corn-
laws, but they were met then by the party in Opposition.--
(Cheers.) In 1841, when we came forward to propose a re-•
duetion on the importation of corn, of sugar, and
of timber, we were met by a party, many
of whom represented commercial constituencies.—( Hear,) •
But, Sir, I am bound to say the Hon. Member for Wakefield was •
an goli.urahle• exception—(Great cheering)—and he did not
join the then opposition, nor did my Hon. Friend the Member
for Wolverhampton. But., Sir, I think that the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet, and those who have introduced such a sound principle of
commercial policy as that which is proposed respecting
is
the
corn-laws, could not be ignorant of those principles; and it
to be lamented that they did riot manfully come forward and
propose them. My opinion is, that if they then did_ent sol,cmthaet
would not be defea! cd.—(Hear. ) The Hon. Gentleman
would have avoided, for himself and his p
odium and reproach which
now
and laughter.)
cast upon him by somebody or other.—
compared the course the
Right Hon. Baronet had nowparty,
much,
generally oft that
odium t
How inconsistent it was when they
with that which he pur-
sued in 1841.—( Cheers.) But, Sir,
taken,
the lion. Member for
nlownr.eßsaurcocneesstfualt the head o:
in carrying
Wakefield tellsG
her Majesty's
would be. I tell linn again, that it is with"
pursue that the
this measure than I
aao._(
Great cheering.) And it is in
eshall
our aid that he can d.
oinvee,rntlniawfntht evioßuit,d,libt
progress of these measures shall attended with
(Renewedsuccess.--
ne chers.) I believe that I am bound to say so
consequence of the conduct whichbew
i justice to my friends—Meer, hear)—and if the '
Right Honourable Gentleman has the glory of having adopted
and carried out a plan of commercial freedom, which will have the effect of conferring great benefits on the countr)—by
which the poor man would get a better reward for his labour
by which all branches of the trade and commerce of the"'
country would be extended, and the interests of all elaseei --
would be promoted—l trust that while it thus operates thatit
will be made instrumental to the moral improvement of the people of this country, which the want of adequate means of
providing for their physical wants has hitherto prevented— •
( Hear, hear)—and if the Right Honourable Gentleman
has the glory of introducing and carrying measures leading to
such beneficial results, let us have the satisfaction of feeling;
that we, although out of office, have mainly assisted in produc...
, ing this triumph of the Minister of the Crown.--(Loud
continued cheering.)