The Sun.
London, England, 1835-06-02 00:00:00

...------f
ly. Sull
would be
ny other,
,„_( Lou
a

se.
I be artneo
Hear.)
some Eibu,
e military'
1. Membe
)f the fur
ct was be'
nion, from
)mmanc?.g
erly, and to
atrocious
military
wished to
reports be
nilitary bad
istrates uu•

the Ruigl3„
131 both
astable, the
marked bY
tedlYt Sir'
on the T,
e I o°4
his tic'us e
.
,re thane thth
le U°a ":we
r, that "
itish
)1' this ale
violate
attasilt tke
n say to res;
what
..,
I will cal
e truth 0

awtha
E... are
ost
:al cln°4l
leeterS,;oj
'ere as bolo
Bi ear)
ili•
c—
h tbe
aSe at here
"
mavenAt all
,rotts
t dung:con-
out eza pCY
On tiwthat
aellObe, Of
ratoiasio
rily
louta a
0 611
et °
Peee a their
p be
Oela
W for.
the His s°l jet'
spa
ode up
he
town I
retusf,,„a Tice
)f 1:
too "rev-

PI
Pn
art!,oo. of
five rpecP4
Res were
soldiers 0;
horiestode4
iivocoocb
rib,
.4 fell
thomide
wentil it
ha"'

orst.
rusgi er
was I AO:
ed the
~0•6
g
be
Was,
c° nieri
of
L1R1151'1"

rltroilvororsee
r,ry, ested
er rot 1.
p Ivo
for toe
es
goou
tjt.
of 01'1t boi
„ that

ere fire.
.
ved Ato
et.
Oblig evil
ed an be r
o
me
tpa4
steel" oar
Wag r 6
croons vie
,
a that
"
is dog;

the House, and to the Hon. Member for Middlesex, if the
people came armed with weapons which were capable of in-
nicting such wounds, if they were not justified in calling the
thtilitary to their assistance, and if the military were not justi-
Rad in firing ? He had been witness on more than one occa-
sion to the conduct of the military when brought in collision
with the people, and they had always behaved with discretion
and propriety; and he had no doubt that, on the present oc-
tagon, they would come off with that honour which he believed
they really deserved. He would only say one word more
to the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord had agreed to
send down a Commission of Inquiry after he had pre-
'4°llBlY) almost—he might say completely—refused to
Vant a commission. The Noble Lord had given way
11,,,P011 the ex, parte statement of the Hon. Baronet the
Member for Staffordshire, and simply in order to
please that Hon. Baronet.—( No, no.) He repeated that the
Noble Lord had given way upon an ex parte statement, which
he had no hesitation in saying he did not believe.—( Hear,
bear.) If a Commission was to be allowed upon this occasion,
would beg to ask the Noble Lord if, on all occasions where
there was any special tumult or rioting, a Commission of In-
quiry was to be granted ?—( Hear, hear.) If a Commission was
tiot to be granted upon every occasion, he could see nothing in
the present case which required that an exception should be
made in regard to it. He was willing to leave the case entirely
1n the hands of the Noble Lord. He was willing that, as the
ttoble Lord had at first said, the papers should be laid upon
Lilt table, and he had that confidence in the Noble Lord, that
' Was sure means would be taken for the adoption of a full
latud efficient inquiry, without the necessity of a Commission.
A" hoped that the Noble Lord would still alter his mind as to
Propriety of sending down a Commission, and would act on
the principles which he had at first stated. In that manner the
allege inquiry might be made, and that without casting any re-
atetions upon the magistrates or on the military, who had done
nothing but their duty.
Member
BE AUCLE RK did not mean to follow the Hon.
member through the details of his speech. He merely wished
say, that if he knew anything of the wishes and feelings
his constituents—and a more respectable constituency could
sot exist—the resolution of the Noble Lord to yield to the
tea_tings of the House, would give them the greatest satis-
,Tion.—( Cheers.) Honourable Members on the opposite
"'"e had spoken as if justice ought only to be done to the
magistrates ; but he asked that justice should be done to the
;maple as well as to the magistrates or the military. That
malice bad been granted by the course followed by the Noble
, 7111 ; and he (Major Beauclerk) bad no doubt that if he were
put it to the vote at any public meeting, whether the Noble
440 rd was deserving of the approbation of the people for the
!nurse he had pursued, the vote would be carried unanimously
nt the affirmative.—( Hear, hear. )
After a few words from Mr. CRESSETT PELHAM,
Which were inaudible in the gallery, the conversation dropped.

CORPORATION REFORM.
GOULBURN then rose to ask the Noble Lord two
rastions. The first was, what was the course which the
Noble Lord meant to pursue in regard to the bringing for-
ward the question of Corporation Reform ?—and the second
Pestion was this :—He had been informed that a Report had
kleo given in by one of the Corporation Commissioners, se-
Parately from the Report of the rest of the Commissioners :
I'lloo the understanding that this separate Report had been
!attle, he begged to ask the Noble Lord whether it was the
Intention of Government to lay that Report upon the table of
the House ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that with respect to the
rat question, as to the course he meant to pursue in regard
the bringing forward his motion, on the subject of Corpo-
ration Reform, he had only to state, that as the Hon. Member
r the North Riding of Yorkshire had declined to postpone
the motion which he had on the orders for to-night he (Lord
i °III' Russell) meant to postpone his motion regarding the Cor-
poration till Friday night. With regard to the second ques-
n which the Right Hon. Gentlemen had asked, he certainly
4 received a paper, which was stated to be a separate report
by•• one of the Corporation Commissioners, but which did not,
as fact, appear to be a proper report, in as far as it was not a
port on a certain part of the Commission respecting which
Commissioner in question was desired to inquire. The
paper contained much of personal matter, and little that was
and he (Lord John Russell) had not yet determined
'tether he should consider it his duty to lay it upon the table
of the House.
to Sir GEORGE CLERK then asked a question in regard
4 report upon some Corporation in Scotland, but both the
Itlestion and the answer were inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. BLACKBURNE said, by the terms of the Commis-
ru issued to inquire into the state of the Corporations of
the and Wales, power was given to any three or more of
e Commissioners to make a report upon the subject intrusted
to
~_thete ; but no such power was given to any single Corn-
imioner.—( Hear, hear.) The report given in to the Noble
_eeretary for the Home Department by the Board of Commis-
,,,s7ters was agreed to by all the Commissioners now in this
7.4ntry except two ; namely, one whose protest had been
"'co in with the report, and another who had thought fit to
give in what he had no right to do—a separate report of his
°wo at the Home Office.—( Hear.) By the terms of the Com-
taission, any report ought to have gone, not directly to the
Commissioner
Office, but through the Board of Commissioners. The
'ilrarnissioner in question had gone the circuit in the same
roller as the other Commissioners, but had made no report to
Board, excepting in two cases, and these were of little im-
rrtance ; but now he had, for no reason which he (Mr. B.)
I-1°.,414 conceive, thought proper to make a report to the Home
which he had no right whatsoever to do. He had
!lade this report because ho supposed some wrong had been
rile him by the other Commissioners. He (Mr. B.) had
done all in his power to screen the gentleman in question ;
he had passed over a great part of the negligence of which he
had beers guilty, and had done everything he could lest the
,;ornmission should suffer because a Commissioner had failed
to do his duty ; but he had at last been obliged to send the
gentleman word, that if he did not send in his report, he should
consider it his duty to hold no more communication with him as
4 Commissioner. This happened five or six months ago, and
40 report was sent in ; but now he chose to send a report, not
to the Board, but to the Home Office, in which, as far as he
(Mr. Blackburne) understood, he endeavoured to criminate
"le, of the members of the Board, and probably, among
others, himself.—( Hear, hear.) That report had little or
.„
41thing to do with the subject into which it was his duty to
laquire.
Sir R. PEEL begged to ask the Hon. Member if the
deport upon the Corporations of Liverpool and London would
"ola be laid upon the table of the House ?
Mr. BLACKBURNE said that the Report on the Liver-
t3l Corporation would be laid on the table without delay ;
t With regard to the Report on the Corporation of London,
diftold not be ready for a week or two, on account of some
faculty in regard to the Companies.
I).Sir ROBERT PEEL—Was he to understand that the
port upon all the Corporations, with the exception of that
ondon would be laid upon the table of the House without
dela ?
stale which
; with the exception of
ctale which ought to have been reported on by the Commis-
:ler who had chosen to send his report to the Home Office,
aim had sent no report to the Board.—(Loud cries of
Name him l") He had no hesitation in giving his name—
be Con name was Hogg.—( Hear, hear.)
tz'r ROBERT PEEL understood then, that with that
iheePtion, the Report upon all the Corporations would be
°fitlY laid upon the table.
tll;4r. BLACKBURNE—Certainly. And those, though
• Were exceptions, were not of the greatest importance.
BAINE S begged to ask the Hon. Member, whether
is
,the
to„ Commissioner had refused to make a Report, he had
Laidered it his duty to stop the supplies ?—( A laugh.)
414rtr• BLACLBURNE certainly had not considered it his
Y to stop the supplies, because he had no supplies to stop
(4. laugh.)

IRISH CHURCH BILL.
kat°rd MORPETH, in answer to a question from Mr. F.
1,4. said the question of Irish Tithes would be brought for-
" Monday, scion
of
of June.
THE CURRENCY QUESTION.
1111 the House going into a Committee of Supply,
rt C AYL E Y, pursuant to notice, rose to move fora Select
tarnittee. (based on the Parliamentary declaration of agri-
,,ittia.ral distress), to inquire if there be not effective means
th Inn the reach of Parliament to afford substantial relief to
toll agriculture of the United Kingdom, and especially to re-
taend to the attention of such Committee the subject of a
lth er or conjoined standard of silver and gold. (At this time
14110 use being very full, the Members retired in great nun-1-
V, Which created some confusion for several minutes. At
lowgth the Hon. Member proceeded to address the House in a
,I,twle of voice, which was very imperfectly heard in the
W(arY.) When the question of agricultural distress, which
has too palpable to be denied, was before the House, the Right
114°11. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel) admitted that agriculture could
ti:rie. no relief in the remission of rates or taxes. and held out
on hopes. It was stated by the late Chancellor of the Exche-
tl4er, that since the peace eight millions of taxes had been
time Oft; and. no more could. be remitted.. The question then
-ta"' to this, that the agricultural interest could bear more
dies before than now. In 1833, he was a Member of the
Committee of which the Right Hon. Baronet opposite was
be n° That Committee recommended that there should
1c) interference. At that time Wheat was 545. a quarter,
47 in some places it was only 345. He held in his hand
?f Cement from which it appeared that in Lincolnshire
waa 365. 10d. ; in Huntingdon, 365. 3d. ; in Oxford,
for Hear. ) Fifty-four witnesses who were examined be-
koeh a Committee of that House, stated that the distress was
A as never before existed, and surely that was a state of
fotge that called for interference. In reply to the demand
(%relief it was stated by the Member for the Tower Hamlets
tor r* Clay) that agriculture was not in so depressed a state,
withbarley, and oats, and wool sold well. Every one acquainted
Ixtri agriculture knew that the rise in the price of oats and
ttr:Y which was prely accidental, was no evidence of the
wh. ere prosperity. For two years there were dry springs,
Awlell caused a failure in the crop of oats and barley—only
sh,°„ quarters of oats were produced where before four were pro-
he'ed• Then as to the rise in the price of wool, it was thus to
accounted for :—From 1828.t0 1831 the wet seasons caused
th'at among the sheep, which swept away nearly one fourth of
in the
It was •
estimated that of the thirty-two millions of sheep
the country eight millions were destroyed. ten millions of
poundsl;_. of wool were imported in 1831 and 1833, but there was
T:iincrease of export. It was said that while wool was high the
kje of mutton was low. But we co uld get sheep from Ireland
iScotland but could not get wool,—(The Hon. Member
Metedbarley'
into a comparative statement of the prices of wheat,
Itfte.eY' Oats, wool, meat, and butter in the Leeds and Bolton
1834 and i;'_'!_ls3
ts in to show that prices are lower this
ear•) As the motion of the .7:,71'1e Marqu6 (qhandos) was
tt:elhough he (Mr. Cayley) supported it, ha titc.l n
• t expect
itoutifr"n his. The question now was, how much O. 14°(1
go out of cultivation. He thought the Government

should issue a Commission which should go all over the
country, and see how much of the land would get out of cul-
tivation in consequence of the present rate of prices. His
opinion was not more than half the arable land could at pre-
sent pay rent by tillage. It was stated before the Committee
in 1833 that rents were reduced 25 per cent., and since that
time wheat had fallen from 545. to 365. When prices fall
thus, rents must be reduced in proportion. Ask the farmers,
and they will tell you that for the last few years three-fourths
of the arable land has not paid rent. To alter the currency
he (Mr. Cayley) had been told was a perilous experiment.
He admitted it. It was a perilous experiment. But was it
not also perilous in its consequences that wheat should be re-
duced from 80s. to 40s. a quarter, or rather from 645. to
40s. ? Objections were raised against making this experi-
ment ; but in the meanwhile the evil it was intended to re-
medy was permitted to exist. The Hon. Gentleman then
quoted the opinions of Lord Brougham when Mr. Brougham,
and of Lord Western when Mr. Western—in support of this
argument. He also adduced in his favour extracts from Mr.
Ricardo, who, among other things, said to the effect that the
mistake first committed was adhered to with perseverance, and
that the system had gone on blunderingly and carelessly while
distress was increasing, and it appeared as if they (the House
of Commons) would, with iron hearts, allow it to go on to
the end. The Hon. Member then said that in a debate upon
the same subject in 1830, arising on the motion of Mr.
Davenport, Mr. P. Thomson had stated that a silver standal d
was to be preferred to a gold one, and that he thought de-
priving the nation of a paper currency, as they had since
1826, was like driving them back to a state of barbarism.
Another reason why some change was necessary was the pre-
sent state of the Bank. Last Friday Exchequer Bills were
at par, an occurrrence which was unparalleled since 1825. It
might be said that this was an accident, but such an acci-
dent could never have happened had not the Bank been pre-
viously pushing Exchequer Bills into the market. Then the
bullion in the Bank at this moment was not what it ought to
be according to the principles on which the institution were
formed. The average by the return in May, 1835, gave
6,875,0001., while in 1796, 1799, 1800, 1801, 1805, 1806,
1807, 1808, and 1809, the average was 5,505,0001. That,
too, in a period when there was a greater demand for bul-
lion in consequence of the continuous war. The amount
which should be now in the possession of the Bank, instead
of six millions, should be at least ten ; but it was a con-
sequence of making gold the sole standard. One advantage
which a silver standard would possess would be that it would
place an obstacle in the way of such runs on the Bank as had
been practised of late. Gold being compact, and compara-
tively light in proportion to its value, offered a facility of ne-
gotiations on taking away, but silver possessed these pro-
perties in a very inferior degree, and therefore, being less
negotiable and less easily removed, would not be sought for
with such avidity in any panic or apprehension of a panic.
There were numerous and respectably signed petitions from
Warwickshire, Leicestershire, Sussex, and many other places,
praying for an alteration in the monetary system, and imputing
to it their distress. These petitions avoided alluding to the
repeal of the malt tax, the adjustment of county or poor rates,
or any other general or local burdens; or, if they did, they
only mentioned them incidentally, as grievances of no moment
compared with the other. It would be in vain for the House
or the Government to tell them that they could not relieve
them. He (Mr. Cayley) had now pointed out a mode of
granting that relief which was so much wanted, and which all
acknowledged to be so necessary—a mode which would not
interfere with the interests of any other class of his Majesty's
subjects; and it was for the House to deal with it as it chose.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving the resolution.
Mr. WO DE HOUSE seconded it. The question involved
the whole subject of the weight and pressure of taxation. It
was idle to expect that the agriculturists should be silent—
that they should desist from remonstrance ; their case was too
hard, and remonstrances would increase every day until some-
thing was done to obviate their necessity. He (Mr. Wode-
house) was one of the Committee which sat in 1821, and on
that occasion he was in a minority against Mr. Huskisson's ce-
lebrated report. He then differed with Mr- Huskisson on the
same grounds that that Statesman had differed from himself
when, in 1810, he published his famous work on the subject.
It had been always hitherto the policy of the House to reject
everything relating to the monetary system of the country,
which was not brought forward by the Government in being
at the time. The Hon. Member then read extracts from the
evidence of Lord Ashburton (then Mr. A. Baring) and Mr.
Horsley Palmer before the Bank Charter Committee in 1828,
in support of his view.
Mr. P. THOMSON—Previous to entering on the ques-
tion—moved that the Resolution of the Committee and the
report thereon, as it was confirmed by the House, in 1833,
should be read.
The Resolution and Report were read accordingly. They
were to the effect "That it was the opinion of the House that

it would be highly dangerous to alter the monetary system o:
the country as it now exists."

Mr. P. THOMSON should be allowed to say that any

Hon. Member making a motion for a Committee of Inquiry
was bound to show the House something like definitive motives
on his part, as well as by a general exi,lanation, to show that
there were grounds of necessity generally for its adoption.
Any thing of all this, however, he was very much at a loss to
discover in aught said that night by his Hon. Friend, and he
believed that he would be borne out in that assertion by every
Gentleman in that House who had had the fortune to hear his
Hon. Friend's observations. The intention of the motion was
to discover a silver standard. In the progress of his efforts
to prove the necessity of seeking that panacea his Hon.
Friend had gone into a long and a complicated history of the
distress of the country, particularly of the agriculturists, not
alone of the present day, but of the times past for a consider-
able period backward. No Hon. Member in that House
sympathized more than he (Mr. Thomson) did, individually,
with the distresses of that or any other class of his Majesty's
subjects ; and no party could feel more strongly for the
miseries of the people than his colleagues in his Majesty's
Government, or be more desirous to relieve them. But what
was the language held on the subject before the House the
year before the last by a Committee of' that House ? In 1833 a
Committee was appointed ; it sat, and, after hearing evidence,
argued the matter at length in a full attendance of Members.
What was the resolution it came to? It was to the effect that
more relief might be expected from the forbearance of Parliament
with regard to all legislation on the question than from any
interference in it whatever.—( Hear, and laughter.) And yet
that Committee was composed principally of gentlemen, friends
to the agricultural interest, and anxious for its relief ; and
their solemn decision was against interfering with the matter.
Last year another Committee had been appointed, and its in-
quiries had been carefully conducted ; and throughout the
first part of its sittings the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member
for Tamworth, had been in the Chair, whilst, in the conclud-
ing part, his Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the
Home Department had presided over it. That Committee
had sought out every means of affording practical relief, and
the Government was prepared to carry its recommendations
into effect. He would ask every friend of the landed interest,
whether it was desirable to have a Committee for the purpose
of inquiring into the distress which at present existed
amongst the agricultural interests, provided the labours of the
Committee were to be confined to that object and to the
silver standard exclusively ? He apprehended that the Hon.
Member opposite would say " No ;" and thus he (Mr. Thom-
son) disposed of that part of the motion ; and he now came
to that which was adjunct to the motion, namely, that the
Committee should have power to inquire into the propriety
of having a silver standard, or a silver standard con-
jointly with gold. He had 'entertained the hope that the
advice which the Right Honourable Baronet, the Member
for Tamworth, had so judiciously given would have been at-
tended to. He had been in hopes that the House would have
been told definitely what it was which really was wanted.
Had the Hon. Member connected his motion with the ques-
tion of agricultural distress, merely with the view of render-
ing it more palatable, and of catching a few more votes, and
that he did not want a depreciation of the standard ; or did
his coupling his motion with agricultural distress, imply that
his desire was to disturb the solemn resolution to which the
late Parliament had come—( Hear, hear)---and to depreciate
the standard to an extent of which he, as yet, had given no
idea to the House ? The Hon. Gentlemen had argued the
question of the silver standard. He had entered into long ar-
guments to show that a silver was preferable to a gold stan-
dard. He had quoted an opinion of his ( Mr. Thomson's) de-
livered in 1830 upon this subject. He still adhered to that
opinion, and was ready to pursue the same course now, that he
had pursued then. If now called unon to discuss the question
of the relative merits of a silver and a gold standard, he should
say that he was inclined to think that silver was the prefer-
able of the two. He had stated that opinion then, and he
stated it now ; and he thought that, if in 1816 silver had been
taken as a standard, it would have been the better course.
If, however, the Hon. Gentleman thought that this would
have made the slightest difference in the consequences that
had since followed he had greatly mistaken him. It was im-
possible to suppose that the Hon. Gentleman wished for a
change from one standard to another with the view of the one
being theoretically a better standard of value than the other.
He did it clearly to obtain an advantage, because he thought
it impossible for the present prices to continue. The Hon.
Gentleman clearly aimed at a depreciation. Why had he not
told the House what he did mean—whether he would wish to
take the silver at 605., 625., or go to the present rate at which
silver is calculated, namely, 665. the pound ? If he wished to
fit his own purpose be must take it at 665. But then the
Hon. Gentleman would open the whole question of deprecia-
tion, and he must show that the agricultural interests would
be benefited, and that there would not be produced a general
mass of confusion, and every debtor in the country would be
benefited, and every creditor defrauded.—(Hear, hear.) Oz,
what principle would the Hon. Member advocate the price
at 665. ? It would make a difference of 10 per cent. The
Hon. Member for Oldham had given notice of a motion upon
the subject of an equitable adjustment, and had said before
the House proceeded upon any measure he would show it
what was just and fair; but now the Hon. Member opposite
would propose at once to take an arbitrary standard of 665.
If the Hon. Member meant to take 625. this would make a
difference of 31 per cent., and for this difference would the
Hon. Member disturb entirely all the contracts entered into
ever since 1818, and all the agreements that had been since
made, and by which the property of the country had been set-
tled since that year? What benefit, he asked, could the agri-
cultural interest expect from such a change? The Hon.
Member had said that it would raise the price of wheat. He
would show him that his ideas were erroneous on the subject.
What had been the arguments used with respect to the prices
of oats and WIN/ ? They had been told that the cause of
their being so high was on account of the scanty supply, and
hp wenld ask whether the same argument that applied to oats
tQ wheat ? Was it not notorious
tahnadtbtharelpyriccleiaonC
f°oliP,Plihut as the ports had been for three
Y which had been grown
rice of two articles were
ciatilrsiu? trithouist
vcolvelpiternid?
slid op tihfethesurprpicl high
••-

it was because there was a less supply; whilst if the price of
the third article was low it was because there had been of that
article a more ample supply. Whom, he asked, did the Hon.
Member propose to benefit by his plan? Did he suppose that
if he could nominally raise the price of wheat —for it would be
but a nominal rise—he would not in the same proportion raise
the price of all other commodities ? The farmer might get
41s. instead of 40s. for his wheat; but he would have to pay
dearer in proportion for all the commodities he consumed. The
only effect, then, of the change would be to violate all good faith
between debtor and creditor, by enabling the debtor to pay off
his debts in a currency of a less value than that in which it
had been contracted. He wished to see the question tat once
boldly put upon these grounds. He acknowledged that the
Bill of 1818 had pressed very hard upon the agricultural
interests.—( Hear, hear.) He admitted this most fully, but
he was perfectly satisfied that Parliament never would have
consented to pass that Bill upon necessity. He was willing
to admit that the Bill of 1818 pressed hard upon debtors
of all descriptions, but this was not unjust, because he con-
tended that every contract had been entered into subject to
a return to cash payments. The hardship had at all events
been inevitable, and it was not for the House to turn round
now and inflict a tenfold hardship, and to restore to those
who bad suffered loss by the Bill of 1818, but to inflict a
new injury on new parties, and to give a benefit to those
who had received no injury whatever. His object in oppo-
sing the motion was to call to the attention of the House
what must be the inevitable consequences if they acceded to
the proposition now before them. Were a Committee to be
appointed, what hopes would be raised in the minds of the
agriculturists. They would be led away by vain delusions
that the Committee could afford relief which it was totally
out of its power to afford ; and what, he asked, would be
the effect on the money market but to unsettle the minds
of men on the question, whether or not the standard of
value were to be altered, and whether the depre-

•
ciation were to be ten per cent., three per cent., or no-
thing at all ? No man when he went to bed would know
whether his debtor who owed him 1001. was to pay him
1001. or 901., and this would be the state of alarm and con-
fusion into which all things would be plunged for the space of
two months were the Committee to be appointed. If it were
necessary to alter the standard of silver, let the Hon. Gentle-
man bring forward his plan, and state whether he would take
the standard of 60, 62, or 66. If the House should be of
opinion that there were good grounds to rescind the resolution
of 1818, and to alter the standard of value, let the question be
at once decided within the walls of that House, and let not any
that were concerned in the result be kept in suspense by the
appointment of a Committee. The Hon. Member for York-
shire had referred to the Exchequer Bills being at par, which
they had not been for years. Was not that an argument, he
asked, for not tampering with the monetary system ? The
House ought not hastily to adopt a plan of submitting to a
Committee a measure of such great importance. He believed
that were the Hon. Member's motion to be carried, it would

overwhelm with bankruptcy and ruin many opulent farmers.
Mr. CLAY was of opinion that the motion of the Hon.
Member for Yorkshire could not afford any relief to the agri:

cultural interest ; but that, if it could do good at all, it would
do good to the whole community. The Hon. Member for
Yorkshire appeared to wish to propose to the Committee
merely a return to the silver standard, which had prevailed
since the 43d of Elizabeth, and which coined the pound of
silver into sixty-two shillings.—( Hear, hear, hear.) This, in
effect, would be no change at all, for it would not make a
difference of above 1 per cent. The Hon. Gentleman had
gone so little into the nature of his plan, that he (Mr. Clay)
scarcely knew whether this had been his idea or not. With
respect to the silver and gold standards, he (Mr. Clay) agreed
with all that had fallen from his Right Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Manchester. He maintained that within the last five
or six years the price of wheat had not corresponded with the
fluctuation in the price of other things. In the last two years
the circulating currency of the country had increased from
10,150,000/. to 10,600,0001., and this had taken place concur-
rently with the alteration in the price of wheat. In connec-
tion with this subject, he might allude to a memorial presented
to Earl Grey in 1831, from the ironmasters of Staffordshire,
setting forth the then depressed state of that trade. They re-
presented that pig iron had fallen from 8/. to 3/., and bar iron
from 151. to 5/. ; that the trade had practised every species of
economy; but that still their profits were falling off, and that
it was the opinion of the memorialists that all their distresses
and difficulties arose from the attempt that was made to render
the engagements and obligations of the country convertible by
law according to a standard value of 3/. 18s. for gold. It was pro-
phecied at that time by the memorialists and many others
that the prices of iron could never again rise. Yet before
twelve months had elapsed, without any alteration of the cur-
rency, pig iron rose to 5/. lOs., and bar iron to 71., and he be-
lieved that no Gentleman would deny that at present the iron
trade was in a most prosperous condition. His own opinion
was—and he should set up his prophecy upon the point, in op-
position to any of the other prophecies that had been thrown
out—that unless some alteration was made in the corn laws,
the effect of those laws in the end would be to throw an ay

all the wealth and prosperity of the country. The reduction
in the value of the standard of currency would tend undoubt-
ecly to increase the wages of labour and the rents of lands,
perhaps ten per cent., but it was a most mistaken notion to
suppose that it would give any stimulus to trade. It might
mitigate for a time the pressure of taxation, but it would not
enable the Government to take off any taxes. He ( Mr. Clay)
was fixed in the opinion that the worst thing that could hap-
pen in and country, was a breach of faith with the national
creditor.
Mr. P. THOMSON said a few words in explanation. -
Mr. BENETT said that the ingenious speech which the).
had heard from the Right Hon. the President of the Board of
Trade would have been of much greater value bad it been de-
livered in 1816 or 1819. Nobody thought anything then
about the robbery committed upon the debtor, although so
much was now said about robbing the creditor. The poor
man was then robbed without remorse ; but now the rich cre-
ditor must not be touched. He denied that the present mo-
tion was calculated or intended to depreciate the standard of
value. By going back to silver currency no such effect could
be produced. If a silver currency were established there
would be no occasion for the Bank of England to keep such
large stores of that metal in its coffers as it did at present of
gold. The great evil of a contracted currency was that it
raised the value of fixed payments. He was not arguing for
a depreciation, but against an appreciation, and therefore in
favour of a silver currency.

Mr. RIC HARDS said that it was with extreme regre
he had heard the opinions expressed by the Right Hon.
Gentleman (the President of the Board of Trade) in oppo
sition to the present motion. The Right Hon. Gentleman
had expressed his sympathy for the condition of the agricul-
tural interests; but if he felt this sympathy, why did he op-
pose inquiry ? He expressed his sympathy, but he resisted
inquiry, because, as he said, the Hon. Member for Yorkshire
had laid no grounds for his motion. When he came down
to the House that evening he inquired what was the cause of
such a full attendance of Members that he could scarcely get
a seat, and he was told that it was the expected discussion on
the Wolverhampton riots. He had great deference for the
judgment and discretion of the House, and therefore could not
think of doubting the propriety of every thing it did—.
(A laugh.) He found that the inquiry demanded as to
the Wolverhampton transaction had been conceded, and was
the House prepared, he would ask, to refuse an inquiry to the
agricultural interests of the country, applying for some relief
in forma pauperis? Did not the Right Hon. Gentleman know
that the farmers were paying their rents out of their capital ?
He could not help thinking that there was something wrong
in the education of gentlemen- ( A laugh)— as connected
with this subject. Why else was all their compassion wasted
upon creditors, and none reserved for the poor debtors ? He
believed that when the present standard was adopted it was not
understood. Mr. Ricardo had told him he was sure the mea-
sure would only cause a change of three-and-a-half per cent. :
and before his death, having found that his view was erroneous,
he regretted the vote he had given in favour of the measure.
The Bill of 1819 was concocted by Mr. Ricardo and another
Gentleman, the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth being mi-
nisterial in it.—( A laugh.) The authority of Hume's Essays
had been referred to ; but if the Hon. Member for the Tower
Hamlets had read Hume as often as he had—( A laugh)—he
would have found that Hume was of opinion that the deprecia-
tion of the currency was beneficial to a country. The House
was bound to institute an inquiry ; Committees were granted
every day upon matters of not half so much importance, and
he should be greatly surprised indeed, it in an assembly of Eng-
lish Gentlemen, such as he then had the honour of addressing.
a Committee should be refused on the present occasion. He
was willing to attribute the indifference that Honourable
Gentlemen had hitherto shewn on this subject to ignorance.—
( A laugh.) He would venture to prophecy that, on an
average of years, wheat would ere long be at 4s. a bushel.
The next question was the causes of this dreadful state of
things, one of which was the mistake committed in 1819 by the
Bill then introduced, in which both parties of the State were
concerned, and relative to which they both committed them-
selves, though he attributed no blame to the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet the Member for Tamworth, whose high statesmanlike at-
tainments were now well known and acknowledged by that
House and the country at large.—( Hear.) When the Bill of
1819 passed, the public debts were enormous, and private debts
were still greater. He begged to tell the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the President of the Board of Trade, that all alarms
about the Money Market were so many cock-and-bull stories.
He, after nearly fifty years experience, would say that there
would be no alarm on that point, and that what was most
wanted was that the House should show a real and not an af-
fected sympathy with the distress of the mass of the popula-
tion of the country. They might talk or poor-rates, county
rates, church rates, and bills for amending municipal Corpora-
tions—all these subjects were very fine ones for Hon. Mem-
bers opposite to sustain a fleeting popularity : but unless
they brought forward measures that would really relieve the
agriculturists, they could not hope to keep their places, and
he hoped to God that they would not keep there.—( Laughter. )
Sir R. PE EL said, I feel it my duty to take my share of
any unpopularity that may attach to the refusal of this Com-
mittee. The Hon. Gentleman who has just spoken has made
a strong appeal to the feelings ci the House, and has expatiated
on, and attached great importance to, the distresses of the agri-
cultural interests, which distress I admit. The Hon. Gentle-
man also attaches great importance to the refusal of this Com-
mittee. Why, Sir, the Hon. Gentleman knows as well as I
do that the object of this motion is not inquiry alone into that
distress, but its object is the depreciation of the standard of the
country.—( Hear.) By every Gentleman who has spoken it is
admitted that, try what remedies you please, unless you give
relief to the productive classes, by diminishing their burthens, a
depreciation of the currency will give no relief. On a former
occasion I resisted the granting of a Committee of Inquiry into
agricultural distress, because I knew that no effectual relief
would result from it. Why, we had in 1832 a Committee,
fully and fairly appointed, on the subject. They directed their
attention to the state of the agriculturists ; every possible evi-

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JUNE 2, 1835,