The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-18 00:00:00

CORN LAWS.

Mr. W. WHITMORE then rose for the purpose of
bringing forward his motion relative to the corn laws.
He would state as concisely as possible the object of the
motion of which tie had given notice in the early part
of the session, for a consideration of the present system
of corn law& He was exceedingly anxious to bring the
subject under the consideration of the House, because he was
fully convinced that all Honourable Members who
had seriously considered the subject, would find it highly
deserving consideration. It would be in the recollection
of the House that in former years he had brought the
subject under its consideration, and if be had abstained from
pressing his views on the subject latterly, it arose from two
reasons ; one, that he was anxious to give an oppor
tunity of seeing how the law of 1828 would work ; and
the second, because he felt that he had but little chance of
claiming the attention of a House of Common, constituted
as it then was. A change, however, bad now taken place
in the representation ; interests that before might
be considered as net being fairly represented, had now
a share in the representation of the people. One of the
interests which had been admitted, and of which he
was the humble representative, was the great marital-sic
turers of the kingdom.—(Hear.) He could assure
the House that if the question that be was now about
to bring forward, affected solely the interest of th,
manufacturers of the kingdom, and did not deeply affec'
every class in the community ; however anxious be might
be that the House should adopt his views on the subject.
he would not be the individual to bring it forward.
He would confine his observations to as email a compass
as possible; but he hoped that the House wools
feel that he was not justified in calling the atten-
tion of the House to the subject, unless he stated
the grounds of his opinion for the necessity of sonic
alteration in the corn laws. He would, however, consult
the convenience of Hon. Members as much as be
consistently could, and would endeavour to class
his subjects under four heads. He would first,
then, consider the application of the present law as fat
as it might be expected to attain the abject for which it was
intended. He mainly objected to the principle of the
law enacted in 1828, because there was a certain
price stated by it, below which nn foreign corn would be
admitted. To a certain extent this law bad been founded
upon the enactment of 1815, when the importation price
was 90s. per quarter. In the year, 1816, by a lamentable
visitation of Providence, the failure of the crops was se
great, that the markets were opened for the recep-
tion of foreign corn, even at that high limitation.
nor were the crops of 1817, 1818, and 1819, suffi-
cient for the purposes of the country, although the prices
were not sufficiently high to admit the full operation
of the law. The Hon. Member here read details of the
prices of corn for several successive years—of the state o
the harvest in different seasons—of the comparative pro-
duce and pi ice of different years, to show the " oscillatiot
in the price of wheat, ' but they were read in so thick a
tone of voice, and in so confused a manner, that we shoul,t
perhaps only do injustice to the Hon. Member were we to
attempt to give them. He wished particularly to impress
upon the House the fact that in the last week of
August, and first week of September, 1830, wheat was
seventy-two shillings per quarter, and the duty con
sequently two shillings per quarter, and, although it was
the middle of the harvest, not less than 1 200,000 quarters
of wheat and flour were imported. The object was, b)
importing at a low duty, to keep it in bond until it coul
be admitted into home consumption. Had the harves
that year not been deficient, the large importations woul
have pressed upon the markets, and the price might have
been reduced as low as in 1822. If country gentlemen,
thought that the existing law produced equality of price.
they were never more mistaken ; the supply would always
be regulated by the demand, and that alone would be suf-
ficient to preserve as much equality as it was possible in
such a commodity to obtain. It, then, the present law
were ineff ctual for its purpose, why, he asked, should it be
continued ? The fact was that it encouraged gambling
and speculation in corn to an enormous extent, to the
injury of the home grower and to the destruction of
regular wholesome trade. Sometimes much more than
was wanted was thrown upon the market, and anything
but a regular supply was the consequence of the Bill as
it stood. The Honourable Member made some further
remarks upon this part of the subject, but he spoke in so
low a tone and in so indistinct a manner, that it
was impossible to follow the train of his reasoning. He
then adverted to the number of Enclosure Bills that had
passed the House before the Corn Act was adopted, in
order to show that the amount of duty previously esta-
blished had not had any effect in decreasing that number.
From 1771 to 1791, 869 Enclosure Bills had passed—
making an average of 43 per annum. From 1791 to
1804 the number of Bills was 900, or 69 per annum;
and yet the duty in the former period was 2s. 6d. per
quarter, and in the latter period (as we understood) 4s.
per quarter. The Hon. Member also adverted, in some
detail, to the comparative prices of wheat at different pe-
riods ; but all we could distinctly catch was, that from
1790 to 1799, the average price had ascended from
45.+.4d. per quarter to 51s. per quarter.—(Several Mem-
bers opposite here requested the lion. Gentleman to speak
out, as they did not hear half he said.) lie called tin
attention of the House to the extraordinary fact that in
1810, during the war, not less than 1,500,000 quarter-
of wheat were imported from France and the Netherlands,
showing that, under any circumstances, even the moe
unfavourable, a supply might he obtained, since the
rancotous hostility then carried on against Great Bri-
tain could not prevent the importation. In the year
1815 commenced the wretched system of le4isla-
tion, by which the corn trade was now regulated,
and which produced far greater evils than had ever been
anticipated by its most determined opponents. All his
feelings, all his convictions, were in favour of a free trade
in corn ; be was satisfied that that system was by far the
best; but, looking at the various interests that had grown
up under the Act of 1815—looking at the condition of
some of the southern and western counties of England—
considering their over population and the maladministra-
tion of the poor laws—(Hear)—reflecting, too, on the
temper and disposition of the people, he was not prepare('
to carry his principle fully into effect. He was aware or
the extensive injury that must unavoidably b. produced
by a sudden change, and for that reason he wished it to be
gradual. On the subject of importation, it was highly
gratifying to remark that the quantity obtained from
Ireland had of late years increased to an unprecedented ex-
tent. From 1815 to 1819, the average annual importa-
tion from thence wets 150,000 quarters, while in the las
year, ending sth October, 1832, not less than 800,000
quarters had been admitted from Ireland.—(Coeers.,
Wnile contemplating the fitness of an alteration of th-
existing law, he felt bound to take into account tip
burdens exclusively pressing upon agriculture. He di
not think that upon any occasion enough het been said on
behalf of the landed proprietors of the heavy tax
statute I,bour on the roads. He was aware that all
changes were in themselves evils ; and if a system wee,
tie be altered it ought to he altered as little as po- i ale
The proposition of Mr. R cards, in 1822, was, that th,
f dlowing scale of fixed duties should be applied to thi
different kinds of grain:—
Upon Wheat los. Ott.
ltye
Barley 5 0
Oats 3 4

4
if that plan or anythiae ike it were adopted, he (Mr.
Whitmore) win convinced that it would remedy most of
the evils belonging to the present system ; and he thought,
moreover, that the farmer would realize, if not quite,
nearly the prices he had obtained during the last five
sears. The duty should not be lelt to Orders in Council,
nor should Government be allowed to deal solely with the
question. He differed with those who were for fixed
prices, and objected to a varying and shifting scale of
duty. In his resolutions, be did not state that he would
be willing to consent to a fixed duty on extraordinary oc-
casions, though he would on ordinary ones. It was his
opinion, that if the ports were thrown open, and a free
trade in corn established, it would not lower the prices
mote than to about 455. or 471. the quarter. On extra-
ordinary occasions only would he have recourse to the
system of averages. His object in proposing a fixed duty
in ordinary times, was to keep off those periods of cala-
mity and scarcity which periodically afflicted other coun
tries. When such calamitous periods arrived as that of
1816, there should be, to meet them, a supply of home
grown corn. The next point he would allude to was,
that by his plan great good would be done to the
manufacturing interests, and, therefore, it was with that
belief that he proposed that alteration in the present corn
laws. The more corn was imported, the more the ex-
ports of the produce of this country would increase.
Within the last four years the imports of corn had in-
creased, and our exports had increased in the same
ratio. He would take the value of our exports to Russia
and Germany. To the former country, in 1821 and 1822,
the annual average value of our exports was 6,000,0001. ;
in 1828, 1829, and 1830, the annual average value was
3,000,000/. To Germany, in 1821 and 1324, the annual
average was 1,226,000/. ; and in 1529 and 1830, it was
2,132,0001., thus showing an increase of about
2,000,0001. in a very short period. He cited these calcu-
lations in order to prove that the necessary consequence of
increasing our imports of corn would be to increase our ex-
ports. Those imports would vastly tend .to remove the
difficulties of manufacturers, to increase the wealth of the
country, and, consequently, to augment its population.
They would also benefit the agricultural interest; for the
consequence of an increase of trade, wealth, and popula-
tion, of course, would be a proportionable augmentation
of the consumption of agricultural produce. The Hon.
Gentleman concluded by moving two resolutions to the
following effect That the present system of laws,
founded on a never-varying scale of duty, could not fail
to cramp the trade of the country, and impair its pros-
perity. That an alteration should be made in those laws,
by laying on a moderate duty, fixed at all periods hut in
Limes of dearth ; that such an alteration would benefit the
general prosperity of the country, relieve the agricul.
turist, improve and increase manufactures ; would pecu-
liarly restore the relations of the kingdom with fereiget
countries, and render more equal the prices of the produce
of the country." (From the low tone in which the Hen.
Member spoke, it was utterly impossible to catch the com-
plete substance of his observations.)
The resolutions having beeu seconded,
Mr. HUME had one principal question to ask of the
House; whether they would warrant that a monopoly
...mild be granted to one particular interest, to the preju-
dice of any other interest ? He wanted to know whether
they wished to place the manufacturing, commer-
cial, and shipping interests on the same footing with
the agricultural interest? If they did, the same
iurdens should be placed on land that were placed
en all other property. Every species of property was
heavily burdened except landed property.—(Here an
Honourable Member remarked, that land paid several
,axes, the highway rate and the poor rates.) So did
every other species of property, and other taxes from
,vhich land was exempt.—(lt was again remarked that
funded property was not burdened with taxes.) It would
tie very strange if it was. It was a debt, and those who
contracted it, could not justly tax it, for that would be
,sorrowing with one hand and paying with the other. He
would now proceed to prove the injustice of the laws that
existed at the present moment. He would do so by stating
tile amount of corn imported since the July of the year
the pi esent law passed. In every year of tie five that had
elapsed since, this country imported neeily a million of
iluarters of corn, fir the whole quantity imported was
very nearly five millions of quarters. Now that proved
:hat this country was an iniportirtg country, and that it
'lid not grow sufficient corn far the consumption.
Whether a portion of 1-20 or 1-30 was requited to
tie imported to complete the whole quantity required
for the consumption of the country, he wi uld not
stop to inquire. But certain he was, that what-
ever portion was required, it was excluded on a
;navy duty, and thus a monopoly was granted to the agri-
culturists, which monopoly, whilst it I.oliefited them, wai
Highly injurious to all the other branches of trade. Foe
hat reason he considered the present laws unjust. If
there were burdens on land, let them be taken off, and let
burden of taxation fall equally upon all species of pro-
perty. He had made inquit ies as to the burdens on land,
but he had never yet ascertained what proportion of the
burdens of taxation was borne by a quarter of wheat. He
wished to discover that specific burden, and then he
would, when he discovered it, say that there could be a
.trotecting dory on corn in proportion to its burdens.
Until then he was for a free trade in corn, unities emrr.
4rncies might rise when the Government would be forced
to raise a revenue on corn. They had always seen that
vhatever the price of corn was, the landholders contended
to have it maintained at that rate. When the price was
305., they contended that they could not live if it were
e-e, and now that it was 60,. they were afraid of any
reduction of the duty for fear of reduction in price ; but
to (Mr. Hume) was of opinion that a duty of a few shil-
lings would give ample security. As long as the present
variable rates of duties were maintained, it was impossible
that so regular a supply, or regular prices could be mair.,
rained in the markets, as if the markets were left open
and as a proof of that, they had seen the price of corn vas
-ying front 70s. to 50,. within the short period of three
months. It was impossible that any prudence, foresight,
or experience could avail against such variation. Yet this
was the result of the present system, which, as soon as the
prices rose admitted such an influx of corn as brought the
markets immediately down even below the former p: .rots..
What was most wished for was, a steady price, and steady
supply of corn, and he opposed the present varying scale,
in the ground that it did not afford this deaideraturn. It
was on these grounds that he (Mr. Home) proposed in
1827, that a fixed duty should be laid on all corn imported,
He at that time proposed that a fixed duty of 15s. should
tie laid on all wheat, which should be reduced to 10s.
when it could have been ascertained whether that amount
would be sufficient to meet the burdens of the country,
He had afterwards proposed, instead of the varying scale
of duties adopted in 1828, that a free trade in corn should
be allowed, on payment of a fixed duty of 10s. per quartet,
on wheat. And what had been the result of the experi.
inent then tried of having a varying scale of duties ? It
had been this—that instead of realizing a duty of 10s. on
every quarter imported, as be had proposed, there had
been no more than 61. Sd. realised by the syetern adopted
—(Hear, hear)—while at the same time it had been
fund that the markets ware subject to such gluts and
iecasional scarcity that they could not be depended
411.1. The duty which be at that time proposed on
barley was Ss., yet the average amount realised by '11,3
varying system had only been 4s. Sd., and the duty which
he had proposed on oats was 65., while the amount realized
had been ss. Ild. From this it would be seen, that in,
stead of ab iut 2 300,000/., the total amount of dtedes
realized under the varying scale, the amount which would
have been received under the fixed rare of duty proposed
by him (supposing the same quantity of earn to have liven
imported) would have been 3,260,0001., so that not only
',ad the public lost the advantage cf a steady market bi
the rejection of his plati, but a million sterling had been
lost to the Treasury. Nor was that all ; the country had
iost also the advantage of the improvement in commerce,
end the increase of the manufactures, which would have
taken place, and the landlords themselves had had to pay
large additional amount in poor rates, which could not
have been required if the country were nourishing. He
este firmly of opinion tthat the detriment to the country
by the measure of 1828, bad entailed an additional burden
•tn the public of five per cent., without a proportionate
advantage to the agriculturist. He thought it a very ma-
erial question to inquire whether or not an additional
number of agricultural labourers could be employed in
agriculture by the exclusion of foreign corn. He con
',ivied that there could not ; and the question then coma
(a) be, how employment could be given to the unemployed
I ilmurers? His position was, that they could always find
tnployment in the manufactures; for it was evident that
tiere could be no limit to employment in manufactures
iut want of demand, and what, he asked, was the e iuse of
vant of demand ? Nothing but the r, filed of this
rountry to take the raw m aerial, of other countries in
xchange for our manufactured goodoThe price of the raw
twenties imported, was to the manufactured goo_r_i'
us
inly ten or fifteen per cent, of the whole cost. Allnilte
ey
est went in wages, cost of machinery, a"
tlixrp% sej
tight therefore to use every entteavutir
:zineu,fifacthrueres;
trut Of :he a4llCll,tip
f .ttiring
lases likewise; for when the (nano ta were
they immediately had iecour-e to !Ilea.
ut of employment,
for relief. and the burden c.ine ultini itely
gintry p iri+hes
He thotte,ht It would, therefore,
ti the agrieulturin •
all,i.ved that the agriculturist fitly as see increase-we,,,is not onlyt''t t the edvee-
nterest in manufacturing Thi
the increase of our manufactures, an :l the wet..

P had only expressed his doubts if the
tageous to the landed interest as

satisfactory.
Aly ftri:l4,_. L_T ,
.41,..
an
I'l4/ r. .0 • • I-, ... 'ed.
r-11., L, • ~ t,-
.k A.,

that the argument of the Noble
Vito untavouraole to the protec-

fare of our manufacturing labourers, as the mattufaatalers
themselves. The Hon. Member then contended, that as
food was higher in this country than on the Continent of
Europe, and as wages were consequently higher, our
manufacturers went into market at a disadvantage. At
present ths average price of corn in Britain was 30 per
cent. higher than on the Continent; but if the ports
were opened, the average price in both would be the same,
with she exception of the expense of transport, which would
be against this country. How, then, could it be expected
that the manufacturers of this country could compete with
those of the Continent? He had no doubt that the Com-
mittees which the House had lately appointed to inquire
into the state of our manufactures would find, before their
labours terminated, that in Belgium, France, and Ger-
many, very formidable opptesition was already established
to our manufactured articles ; and that those countries
now exported all the kinds of manufactured articles, to
different parts of the world, which were once exclusively
sent from England. It was not to be expected that mer-
chants (in South America, for instance, which is one of
the great outlets for British manufactures) would take the
manufactures of England, if they could get the same
articles at a cheaper rate from other countries. If,
therefore, food was 30 per cent. higher in England—if
the same qt.antity which cost 503. in England, cost only
30s. on the Continent of Europe, the consequence was,
that the manufactures of England were put in a worse
situation by 30 per cent. than those of other countries ;
and the rate of profit was, in consequence, ground down
to a mere trifle. All that he asked was, that they should
place the workmen of this country on a footing with the
workmen of the rest of Europe. If that were done, the
consequence would he an increase in our manufactures,
ard in our commerce, and additional employment for our
labourers in proportion. He denied that the additional
importation would hurt the agriculturist. The quantity
at present imported was not sufficient for the wants of
the country. The people were not three-fourths fed, a
proof of which was to be seen in the manufacturing dis-
tricts ; where it was evident, from the appearance of the
people, that they were nut properly fed. The result of
free trade would therefore be, not that the corn of this
country would remain unconsumed, but that a larger
quantity wou'd be consumed. He denied that the effect
of free trade in corn would be to bring down the price of
corn in England to the level of the present prices on the
Continent. On the contrary, they had various proofs
which showed that the price on the Continent would be
raised to the level of the prices of corn in England, and
that, in fact, England would regulate the price of corn
over the whole world. It was lamentable to find that, as
they heard last night, only 3s. 6d. a week was given to
able-bodied men in some of the parishes in the South; and
he thought that fact was sufficient to show the necessity of
ao alteration in the present system of the corn laws He was
convinced that such a change was the only means of meet-
ing the difficulties of the country, and obtaining employ-
ment for the population. The Hon. Member then went
into a long calculation to show the great advantage to be
gained by the country by the great increase in the expor-
tation of manufactured goods. At present 25 per cent.
of the price of manufactured articles was paid in taxes to
the Government, and the other '75 per cent. wentifor mate-
rials and wages. But under the system of free trade in
corn, the quantity of manufactures would be, he had no
doubt, quadrupled ; it was evident that the sum paid to
the revenue would be increased in proportion. The con
sequence, therefore, would be, that instead of a falling off
in the revenue, there would be a considerable increase. He
objected to the system proposed by the Hon. Member for
Wolverhampton, because it retained the system of ave-
rages, which he (Mr. Hume) thought highly objection-
able, and he should have liked to move that a Committee
of the whole House should be appointed to take into con-
sideration the state of the corn laws, and instead of the
present varying scale, to appoint a fixed rate of duties
upon the importation of foreign corn, and a bounty on the
exportation of corn, with a view of ultimately establishing
a tree trade in that article ; but in the present circum-
stances lie would content himself with moving, " That it
was advisable that all kinds of corn, grain, and flour, at
present admissible into the British dominions, should in
future be admissible at a fixed rate of duty."
Lord NEWARK said that it was by no means certain
that the supply of corn under the system proposed by the
advocates of free trade would be regular, abundant, and
chetp. That was an important view of the question,
and it was one in which those gentlemen were not fund
of dealing; and he could not consent to a change in the
present system till he could be assured of that fact.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR was decidedly of opinion that an
unrestricted importation of corn would have the effect of
throwing all the agricultural population of Ireland, and
the greater part of the same class in England, into the
greatest distress. Though he might insure popularity by
voting for the abolition of the corn laws, yet he must
avow that he could not do so consistently with that which
he should always have first in view—the interests of those
he represented.
Captain HEATHCOTE regretted extremely that the
Member for Wolverhampton should have brought forward
this motion. He should decidedly oppose it; for he thought
that the manufacturing interest, especially the cotton
trade, was in an extremely prosperous condition, while
the gricultural population were in the deepest distress.
The price of coin at present was several shillings below
what had hithetto been conceived to be the minimum
price. The proposition was injudiciously brought for-
ward ; for while it was not at all likely to lead to
any practical results, it occupied the time of the House
to a most serious extent, and it was most grievous that
such all valuable time, peculiarly valuable at the present
period, should be wasted, as it now too frequently was,
with those speculative motions, to the detriment of really
practical and beneficial subjects. The present motion, in
his opinion, was calculated to reduce the price of corn,
and for his part he should entitle it " A Bill for lowering
the price of corn 20s. a quarter."—(Oh, Hear, hear.)
The most equitable way would be to let the price of corn
be kept up as it was. The system pursued by Gevern-
onent latterly on this point had had the effect of rendering
ghee occupation of the farmer as uncertain as that of a
geouLtiee in the stocks. There had been a great alteration
in public opinion on the subject, for those who last year
hid wished for a change in the scale, now universally lie-
sired to have the present scale fixed. All they wanted
was to be let alone.—(Hear, hear.) The proposition
;seemed to be to have a low rate of duty when corn is low,
and no duty at all when corn is high. There was the
greatest state of distress prevalent among the agriculturists,
and more particularly in his own county, as he had found
out from a personal canvass ; and here he could not but
ni;.serve, that a personal canvass, so far from being objec-
tiouable, as was attempted to be made out, was eminently
proper, inasmuch as it gave every representative the requi-
site knowledge of those whom he represented. The corn
laws were not a monopoly, but only a fair protection for
the landed interest ; which !rarely was as well entitled to
protection as the other interests.
Lord ALTIIORP said, this was undoubtedly a matter
of very great importance, and one which would excite
the most intense public attention when it was dis-
cus-ed ; but lie would appeal to the House—(Cheers)—
whether this was a proper time to bring it forward,
when questions of such vital importance and intense
public interest were before the House, about to be
brought forward?—(Cheers.) Indeed, he would say that
a time more inopportune for the production of this ques-
tion could not be conceived ; for, as lie had said, the
Reuse was completely engroes,d already with several mat-
ters of the greatest importance, on which public excite-
wait was at its highest, and surely it was not advisable to
ad,4 this to the others.—(Cheers.) In fact, the propo-
sition ‘,f the Hon. Gentleman seemed calculated to embar-
rass Governs, ruts—(Cheers.) He did not stand there as
:
the advocate for the present system of corn laws. He did
not think that they ;;,ed been so very advantageous to
the landed interest as some persons supposed. He
hoped that on a subject of such national importance,
even were he in a private station, private motives
would not bias him ; but he must say that he
did not think the landed interest bad benefitted so
much by the existing system as was generally imagined.
To enter into the question, at the present period, would,
however, be the most imprudent thing that the House
could do. He should have wished, therefore, to move
the previous question on the motion of the Hon. Member
for Wolverhampton, but as the Hon. Member for Middle-
sex had snuved an amendment to that motion, the forms
of the House precluded him from doing so. He was,
consequently, reduced to the necessity of either supporting
or rejecting the motion. For the reasons, therefore, which
be bad stated, he should feel it his duty to vote against
the amendment of the Hon. Member for Middlesex, but
with the view, when the main question came before the
House, of voting against it. He was convinced that it
was quite a mistake to suppose that when the ports were
open tor the corn of other countries, our own corn must
necessarily fall ; the contrary had often been witnessed.
Mr. BARING thought that the most alarming ch._
cumstanee in the consideration of this question was, the
view which the Noble Lord took of it. When a Minister
of the Crown said that the state of tbe law was as bad as
it could possibly be—(" No, no was bad and un-

tion of the agricultural Interest. If that was the Noble
Lord's opinion, he might be assured that it was the opinion
of at least three hundred persons in that House. If the
Noble Lord thought that the law could be improved,what
time could be better than the present? They had been
sitting for three months, and nothing had been done ; and
now the Noble Lord, although he disliked the system,
thought that this was not the time for attempting its im-
provement. Was the Noble Lord aware of the inconve-
nience which resulted from the uncertainty in which all
classes were as to the proceedings of Parliament with
respect to them? The shipping interest, the Bank of
England interest, the East India interest, ought all to
have been brought under the consideration of the House,
instead of having been hung up as they had been. And
now to these victims of uncertainty, the Noble Lord
added the agricultural interest. In proof of the evil
which resulted from a state of uncertainty on the subject,
the Hon. Member here referred to the evidence before the
Committee of last session. It would have been much
batter had the Noble Lord taken some decided line, in-
stead of making the speech which he had made. The
question of protection to agriculture was a question of
degree, and ought to be narrowly watched. When
he stood for the county he had the honour to re-
present, he bad stated that ; and that the protection
should be sufficient for the purpose, but no more. The
duty of the Legislature was to watch how the protection
worked. He should like to know what injury any gen-
tleman sustained from the present state of the corn laws?
He had not heard from any quarter of such an instance ;
nor did be conceive that the manufacturing interest suf.
fered from it. As far as he had the means of knowledge,
notwithstanding there was much misery in some quarters,
the manufacturers of the country were upon the whole as
prosperous as in any former years. If it were said that
agriculture was distressed ; could any sophistry prove to
any one that he would be benefited by an addition to an
article in which he dealt ? The two objects of any pro-
posed alteration in the corn laws must be to lower the
price of corn, and to prevent fluctuation of price. But,
with regard to the latter, there had been no fluctuation
which required interference. In all countries and in all
ages, food, and especially corn, was subj-ct to greater or
less fluctuation. It would be advisable also to look at
the state of the world, and see if any circumstances
might not shut us out from the corn-growing coon.
tries on which we relied. On the other hand,
with respect to our manufactures of iron, cotton,
woollen, potter's ware, &c., would any one state that
they were in any danger from the competition of
other countries? He contended that there was no
necessity for altering the corn laws, and if they
did alter them, they would only be tampering
with their present prosperity. The manufacturers were
not suffering from the high price of food, but from the
fiscal regulations by which foreign countries sought to
protect their own interests. The Noble Lord (Althorp)
had contended, that if the English ports were thrown
open, the prices of continental corn would rise, and in a
great measure meet the prices at home ; but although
this might be the case in times of scarcity, when corn was
occasionally admitted, yet it we took their corn habitually,
the rise would be so trifling as to cause a ruinous depreci-
ation of prices in England. He thought that without
much better arguments than had been adduced this even-
ing, the House would not listen to such a motion.
Lord PALMERSTON complained of the manner in
which the Hon. Gentleman had misrepresented the obser-
vations of his Noble Friend Lord Althorp.—(Hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman had himself frequently remarked,
that his speeches and votes not uncommonly varied—
(Hear)—and probably he was so intent upon retaining
his own sentiments, that lie forgot to pay sufficient at-
tention to those of his Noble Friend.—(Hear.) His
Noble Friend had not, as the Hon. Gentleman stated,
promised to take this subject into consideration in a future
session, with a view to the alteration of the corn laws ; for
his Noble Friend had expressly guarded himself against
giving any promise or pledge one way or the other.—
(Hear.) His Noble Friend certainly did say—and be con-
curred with hint in opinion—that the corn laws did not
tend so much to the advantage of the agricultural interest as
they were inclined to believe.—(Cheers.) He did not feel the
force of the argument that it would be dangerous, politi-
cally speaking, to depend upon foreign countries for our
supplies of food, since an exporting country, whether it
exported manufactures or food, must necessarily suffer
from a diminution of food by any diminution in the means
of purchasing corn, arising from cutting off the market for
its exports.—(Hear, hear.) He concurred with his Noble
Friend that it was inexpedient at the present time, and
under present circumstances, to agitate this great question,
it being at present impossible to arrive at a result satisfac-
tory to either party.—(Cheers.) He hoped, therefore, the
House would settle the question by negativing the amend-'
scent, and then proceeding to the previous question.
Colonel WOOD expressed great surprise at the conduct
of the Noble Lord opposite in relation to this question.
If the Members of Government in this House had met it
in the same decided manner as it was met by Ministers in
the other House, the agricultural interest would have had
touch more reason to be satisfied with the result. He
wished a more decided line of policy bad been pursued.
The Gallant Member then referred to the state of agricul-
ture at an earlier period of our history ; and contended
that, allowing for the variation of circumstances, there was
not a greater degree of protection afforded to the agricul-
tural interest now than in 1670.—(Question.)

Mr. C. FERGUSSON said, that neither the original
proposition, nor that of the Hon. Alember who moved the
amendment, would afford the slightest relief to the indus-
trious classes ; indeed, both Hon. Gentlemen had admitted
that their plans, if carried into execution, would not re-
duce the price of wheat Is. p,.r quarter. The propostion
was totally valueless, and when compared with that which
for five years Lad worked well for all classes in the coun-
try, would not, he was sure, be entertainc,' for a mo-
ment by that House.--(Hear, and cr.es of " C,j stion.")

Mr. ROBINSON would tell Ministers ti were la-
borring under a great fallacy if they suppose:. the present
system would remain without the fullest discussion, at the
proper time, by the Parliament, as then constituted. He
perfectly Rat eed with the Noble Lord (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) that it was not at all judicious to press
the subject at the present time, ivhen so many other im-
portant matters were waiting their decision. What he
principally rose for was to protest against the assertion
that the decision of that night would be taken as a final
one by the country, for next session the subject must
again come h,fore them, ashen be felt satisfied there would
he no difficulty in showing tl:,.t the present system of corn
laws had completely failed to answer the purpose for
which they were enacted.
Mr. CAYLEY, amidst the strongest expressions of im-
patience from every part of the House, said a few words,
which were inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. BENETT, amidst vehement cries of " Question,"
contended that as long as taxation remained so heavy upon
the land, protection must, in fairness, be continued to
ia—(Cries of " Question !")
Mr. O'CONNELL said it struck him, as peculiarly
strange and peculiarly unjust, that this question was al-
ways discussed as one of protection to agriculture—thus
leaving the interests of the entire body of the people com-
pletely out of view. Now, what was meant by this
word protection—what was the plain English of it? Why,
to be sure, dear food—enhancement of prices to keep up
the landowner. He would tell them that there would be
no magic in a reformed Parliament, unless they gave the
people cheap food.—(Great uproar.) Now, then, -as was
always the case, when he said they ought to give the
people cheap food, Hon. Members expressed gre it dissa•
tisfaction at any such proposition.—(" No, no," " Shame,"
and tumult.) It had been said that his countrymen had
a monopoly in corn ; but such an assertion, he could tell
them, was absurd. Did the people of Ireland eat bread ?
He cculd tell the House those people could scarcely
set potatoes ; and they got no kread, for the corn
all went to enrich the pockets of absenteeo.—(Hear,
bear, and Question, question.) He only objected to the
motion because it did not ga far enough. The first duty
of every Government was to allow every in ividual of the
State to have bread, if he chose honestly to labour for it ;
and he, therefore, would, on every occasion, use his ut•
most exertions to take off every tax which enhanced the
price of the poor industrious man's loaf. —(Question,
question, and cheers.) But what would the country
say to such proceedings as these? Would they not say,
" You, the gentry of England—the men of fortune—
having the power to make laws, heed not the poor man's
claim, but at the expense of that very poor mall make
laws which add to your own riches, whilst they aggravate
tenfold his poverty."—(Loud cries of " No," and cheers,
some of which proceeded from the strangers' Gallery.)
Sir DUNDAS, from the Gallery on the Opposition
aide of the House, addressed the Speaker in a loud tone,
to the effect that cheers had several times proceeded from
the strangers' Gallery.
The SPEAKER directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to
clear the Gallery, which was done.
[The cheer, we understand, came from a Member, Mr.
Lalor, who was seated in the strangers' Gallery, and who
probably conceived there was no impropriety in exercising
the privilege of cheering there. Mr. Dandas was evi-
dently not aware of this circumstance, and took the
proper course to check an irregularity. In the absence of
strangers the matter was explained, and the Gallery was
then reopened.]

Mr. O'CONNELL contended against every species of
corn law as enhancing continually and improperly the price