The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 15, 1850.

he would take the Noble Lottl' own county: That
was fair, surely. In the county ot: Leicester, in the
second week of February, 1849, the numbers relieved
were 18,731, and in the seine week of the year 1850
the number was 15,742.—(Hear, hear.) In North-

amptonshire, the numbers relieved in the second week
of February, 1849, were 15,855, and in the same
week of 1850 the numbers were 15,530. In the small

county of Rutland the numbers were, in the former year
1,410, and in the latter 1,292. He contended, therefore,
that. according to the returns made to that and the other
House, the diminution in these three counties was plain
and evident. He would take the county of the Hon.
Member opposite—Suffolk, and he found that in the
same period, the second week of February, 1850, as
oompared with 1849, there had been also a diminution
in the number return( d. But he would take the year in
which the price of corn was high—the year 1847, and he
found in that year the numbers, in the second week of
February, were 30,329, while in the same period of 1850
the numbers had fallen to 29,320.—(" Oh," and cheers.)
The returns that bad been received from Ireland were

down to a more recent date than those from England—
they came down to the middle of April. He found, in
the year ending the 14th April, 1849, the total num-
bers relieved in Ireland were 815,829, and in the year
ending the 15th of April, 1850, the numbers had fallen
to 338,000. The diminution in the present year
as compared with the former one was not less
than 476,933, or more than the whole number
rscieving relit f in the present year. The decrease
of employment was also alleged ; but he found
that iu the week ending April, 1849, the number re-
lieved was actually 6,000 more than in the correspondicg
period of last year. Now, he thought it important that
they should have facts to bring forward to meet the
statements that were prepared by deputations for the
occasion.—(Hear, hear.) They would not meet them by
counter assertions, but by facts that were undisputed and
indisputable. His Right Hon. Friend bad furnished
the House with a still more convincing proof of the
effects of the Government policy in the diminution of
crime. It appeared from his statements that the number
of persons committed fur trial at the assizes and sessions
for Epiphany, 1849, was 4,443. and fer 1850, 3,980.
The next was Lent assizes, and he found that the number
of persons committed for trial in 1846 was 2,805, and in
1850, 2,558. The number in the Easter sessions 1849
was 2.334, and in 1850, 2,oo7.—(Hear, hear.) Surely
that was a most satisfactory statement to make to the
House as regarded the diminution of crime. To a cer-
tain extent the revenue of the country was a fair test ef
the well-doing of the country. He found, comparing
the months of April 1819 and 1850, excluding corn,
that there was a slight diminution in the customs. The
excise, which was the best test of the prosperity of the
country, showed an amount in the lastyear of 14,025,000/.
as compared with 13,932,0004 in the previous year.
There was also an increrse on the taxes, and in the in-
come-tax; and he could not possibly give a better proof
of the general well-doing of the country than the im-
provement in all those branches of the revenue. And he
was still more happy to state that, taking the month
since the sth of April last, the same improved appear-
ance was maintained; and that under all the heads of re-
venue, except taxes, the improvement in the last month
corresponded with that of the preceding year.—(Hear.)
As a test of employment, he would compare the exports
of the first three months in each of the three last years.
They were as follow:—In the first three months of 1848.
11,684,0001. ; in 1849, 12,822,0001.; in 1850, 14,950,0004
—(Hear.) How were these exports produced? By the
labour, by the employ meat of the people.—(Hear, bear.)
They must have been earning wages; it was known that
they had been well paid; and with good wages they had
had the additional advantage of cheap food.—(Cheers.)
He would only mention one article of those exports
connected with the agricultural interest; he hoped
it would be a source of comfort to the gentle-
men connected with that interest, for he should be
most happy to afford them comfort in every way in which
he was able.—(Hear, hear.) The exports of British
wool in the first three months of each year bad been-
-1848, 975,0001bs ; 1849, 2,080,0001b5. (more than
double) ; in 1850, 2,l62,ooolbs.—(tlear, hear.) That
was an indication of an improved demand for agricul-
tural produce; there was also an improved demand fur
corn and stock. The price of stock had been kept down
by an increased production of stock in this country.
The reports of the Newcastle market showed that the
quantity of stock brought to market had been gradually
increasing, week by week; for the last four years; and
the increase upon the whole was very considerable in-
deed; while the importation of foreign cattle and sheep
had been steadily diminishing.—(Hear, hear.) He re-
joiced that they had at last come to a broad point at
issue. Lord Stanley bad characterised the policy that
had been pursued as mistaken and insane; those where
his words—(Cheers from the Protectionists)—and they
seemed to be adopted by Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—
(Cheers.) He took issue with them upon that; he believed
that policy to have been both wise and just; by that
policy the Government was prepared to stand or fall.—
(Loud cheers.) He believed that, so far from sowing
the seeds of dissension between two classess, that policy
was essentially necessary for binding together all classes
of the community—(Hear, hear)—and he be-
lieved that by the adoption of that policy peace had been
hitherto preserved.—(Loud cheers.) • lie did not mind
the violent language that was used in public meetings—
(Hear, hear)—he was not afraid of gentlemen mounting
their horses and riding into the towns.—(Loud cheers,
and laughter.) It was well known that gentlemen got a
little heated at meetings of that kind, and'talked them-
selves up to a fever heat.—(Laughter.) He did not
attach much importance to what was said on such occa-
sions, though he (lid not think it was very wise language
to use.—(Hear, hear.) But he did believe that the policy
which had been pursued was essential for the mainte-
nance of good feeling and tranquillity, and for binding
together all classes of society, and that no other policy
contributed half so much to the permanent stability of
those institutious which they were all anxious to up-
hold.—(Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI said, though it might not be very
agreeable to take advantage of the opportunity then af-
forded him to address the house, still he hoped that
after the observations and criticisms which the House
had heard from the Right Hon, Gentleman on the policy
that be assumed would be pursued by him (Mr. Disraeli).
and those with whom he usually acted, that the House
would allow him, before the division took place, to set
before them a more accurate conception than the Right
Hon. Gentleman had presented of their views and in-
tentons. He must begin by saying that the motion now
under consideration came upon them somewhat unexs
pectedly, and, when he said, that he believed that he ox-
pressed the general feeling of the House. The motion
upon which they were required to decide was this,—
" That this House will resolve itself into a Committee of
the wh le House, to take into consideration the laws re.
latng to the importation of foreign corn." It was not the
first time, of late years, that they had been called upon to
take into consideration the laws relating to the importa-
tion of foreign corn. It was not the first occasion that
they found such a motion on the table of the House. Not
four) ears ago that identical motion came before the
House of Commons, and the object with which it then
came forward was, if the House should resolve itself
into Committee, that then the repeal of the laws affect-
ing the importation of foreign corn should be proposed
to Parliament. He would not remind the House of the
language used at that time, of the lengthened debate
which then took place, of the ample discussion which the
whole question underwent. He bad then the honour of
voting in the minority—a minority which, though not
successful, was very far from being contemptible, for its
numbers. In the majority which voted upon that oc-
casion there was to be found the name of the Hon.
Member fur Gloucestershire. the mover of She present
motion; that gentleman, a Whig Member, a member of
a Whig family—a county Member—supported a repeal
of the corn-laws, and formed one of that triumphant ma-
jority before which the present opposition fell.—(Hear,
hear.) After the lapse of less than four years they found
themselves called on to pronounce a decision upon the
same proposition for a Committee, though with an ob-
ject different from that which was now set forth, and
with a purpose the contrary to that which was at pre-
sent felt, and acknowledged. When they found a Mem-
ber for a county bringing forward such a proposition,
and when they found him seconded by a Member for a
town, what were they to think? In that he recognized
this fact—that two Members sitting on the Ministerial
side of the House —one representing .a county, the
other a town, moved and seconded the proposition.—
(Hear, hear.) When such a motion was made, and so
seconded, all that he could rm,gniza in it was the act of
two repentant Free-traders.—(Hear, hear.) He could
not for a moment imagine that any light or temporary
consideration—any mere caprice—could tempt those
Hon. Gentlemen to take :such a step as to solicit the
attention of the House in such a manner to
so grave a subject—a subject the gravity and
importance of which had been acknowledged by
several Honourable Members in the course of
the present discussion, and so important did the subject
appear to some Gentlemen, that in the course of the
evening the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Marylebone,
thought proper to taunt them with the emptiness of the
Opposition benches, observing how scantily they were
filled; he believed he might point to them now as not
being so empty. A painful and laborious experience in
that House had informed him that at the moment of the
evening to which that taunt referred the benches at
neither side were usually very full. But, to pass from
such points in thee early part of the discussion, he would
remind them of what they had heard from the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, who repeated much that he had fa-
voured them with at the beginning of the session, and
they had in addition to his observations the speech of the
Hon. Member for Westbury. They had from the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer the statements and inferences
which he drew from the poor-law returns, from the cri-
minal returns, from the Customs, the xcise, and the
taxes, to show the condition of the working classes; but
he begged to remind the House that there might be very
great distress in the country without its having yet
reached the working class. The intense suffering of the
middle portion of the agricultural body could not be &nth:of
—it could not be disputed successfully by any one, and least
by the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, who once told
the House that more millions had been lost than Cali-
fornia would produce. There was great and general dis-
tress—distress amongst the middle portion of the agri-
cultural interest; was there not also great distress in the
towns, in Manchester, in Liverpool, in most of the pro-
vinces, in the great towns of the north? But they were
told that much of that proceeded from the vast invest-
ments in railways, a fact which afforded another speci-
men of the data through the influence of which those
laws were repealed which consummated the ruin of the
agricultural interest.—(Hear, hear.) If the middle
class of the agriculturists suffered losses almost unpa-
ralleled, what must they suppose would be the near con-
s( quences of that distress upon the most unfortunate
and depressed portion of the agricultural class ? What
must soon be the effect upon those labourers Who, for
the present, were factitiously employed, and to which
were
ftotitini eruploym latl eni MeS OP *or aide.

obligt d to refer as evidences of the prosperity of the
country ? He wished frankly to express his opi-
nion of the motion. It was not one which,
had he been consulted, he would have recom-
mended. If he had thought such a motion ought to
have been made, he would either have praposed it him-
self, or asked some person mere competent to do so.
His objection to the motion was, that it was of a partial
character; that it asked the House to take into con-
sideratio❑ the interests of one class; and however just
the claims of that class, if it were suffering, he would
rather that they should at the right time be called upon
to take into consideration the state of every class than
inferentially to legislate for the advantage of one.—
(Hear, hear.) Much had been said to-night on %hat
was popularly called protection; and the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, assuming that those who sat on the Op-
position benches meant by the word " protection" what
they in fact did not mean, had delivered himself of a
violent invective against a phantom of his own creation.
—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) would tell the House
what he and his friends meant by " protection;" for
he had no wish to change the word now popularly ac-
cepted. He looked upon it as a fact that the legislation
of 1846 was the foundation of a new commercial
system. He knew it was an inconvenient fashion
in the debates on these economic subjects to treat
the legislation of 1846 as the completion of the legisla-
tion commenced in 1842. lie found in the two systems
features of a most contradictory character.—(Hear,
hear.) In the legislation of 1842 he recognised a wise
effort to extend the commercial relations of this country
upon scientific terms of interchange, so that the labour
of this country should not be brought into fatal compe-
tition with the labour of other countries; it being re-
solved, however, that there should be no longer protec-
tion to any particular class at the cost of the community;
and at the very moment thlise measures were brought
forward the great feature of which was that commercial
interchange between countries should be balanced by
countervailing duties, efforts were made in perfect unison
with that wise policy to induce foreign nations to enter
into commercial treaties and tariff regulations with this
country. That very policy announced that while this
country was ready to open its ports to the world, it was
resolved that the stranger should not come and enjoy its
market unless his was equally open to it.—(Hear,
hear.) All those principles were entirely discarded in
the fatal and insane (he quoted expressions thrown into
the discussion by the Chancellor of the Exchequer) mea-
sures of 1846.—(Hear, hear.) The Government then
commenced that struggle which had ensued on allowing
free imports into this country from countries which met
them with hostile tariffs. They then took a step most
injurious to the rights and interests of labour in this
country.—(Hear, hear)—that is to say, the English
producer was not only to give what he produced in ex-
change for the foreign article, bat to pay the amount of
duty they placed on his article of production in addition
to what he gave. In fact, he paid, and did now pay,
tribute to the foreign country to the amount of the duty

they imposed.—(llear, hear.) He, and those who occu-
pied that side of the House, maintained as the real prin-
ciple of protection, as a general rule extending to every
producer in this country, that free imports should
not be received from any foreign country which
by hostile tariffs refused the offer of an equally fair in-
terchange.—( Hear, hear.) That he called the principle
of protection to native industry—one which could be
supported not only as a matter of high policy but be de-
fended as of scientific truth—(Hear, hear)—and the
motion, as preliminary to the proposition of a fixed duty
on the admission of foreign corn, so far as that principle
was concerned, was justified both in policy and in econo-
mical science. There were exceptional circumstances
which solicited attention. If the principle of their com-
mercial code were that every foreign country should
send its imports free here which received the produc-
tions of this country free, were they prepared to let any
country send corn here free which should receive Bri-
tish manufactures free? He was not prepared to do that
unless he found the question connected with agricul-
tural produce met by Hon. Gentlemen opposite in a
fairer spirit. There were burdens peculiar to the
soil from which other producers were free. It had been
calculated by men of great eminence, and whose works
were continually cited, that a fixed duty of 6s. to Bs.
should be imposed on foreign grain as countervailing
the burdens to which the agriculturist was liable.—
(Hear.) He was not one of those who wished the agri-
culturist so compensated. He would rather see the
question of the peculiar burdens settled as he had indi-
cated it ought to be, by a fair adjustment of taxation; so
that they should no longer go on as they had in this
country, one-third paying for two-thirds who went scot
free. But if the Legislature persisted in the system
which made the tiller of the soil maintain the roads, sup-
port the poor, build magnificent establishments for the
reception of lunatics—out of his hard-earned gains, the
agriculturists had a right to say that, having been placed
in competition with the whole world, they could not
longer postpone the question whether compensation
should be given for these burdens, either by their taking
a share or by their giving a countervailing duty.—(Hear.)
A tax for the benefit of a class was not protection; it
was plunder.—(Hear.) What he asked the House was
to protect the native industry of this country, the rights
and interests of labour; first, by allowing no
free imports from countries which met them
with countervailing duties, and secondly, in re-
gard to agricultural produce, he maintained
that they were bound to give an additional
countervailing duty or to take a share of the burdens ex-
pended, as much for the advantage of other classes as
fur that of the agricultural. A commercial system
founded on such principles would very much tend to in-
crease the prosperity of this conntry, to terminate the
misery which was allowed on all sides partially, at least,
to prevail, to change for the better that perilous position
of the great middle class which more than one Member
had admitted to exist. Such a protective policy would,
he believed, ere long be recognized by Parliament.—
(Loud cheers.) He had thought it but justice to those
with whom he co-operated to make these remarks; for
to be told that they were the advocates of a system
which had no resemblance to that oa which they were
prepared to act, was a statement too monstrous to be
allowed longer to remain uncorrected. There was an
important corollary. If the first principle he had stated
were followed out, a greater portion of the revenue
would be raised by Customs' duties. There might be a
question as to the degree in which the foreigner might
pay a portion of a Customs' duty, but nobody of a tem-
perate order of mind who had given attention to the
subject would maintain that the foreigner paid no
portion. What portion did ho pay to the revenue raised
by inland taxation? Their lamented leader, Lord George
Bentinck, laid it down as a great principle of policy,
that in all their attempts to relieve the great body of the
community they ►hould attack the Excise; and not that
external revenue, which, under all circumstances, must
be partially contributed by the foreigner.—(Hear, hear.)
Had the same fiscal intelligence which in 1842 dwelt
with the Exchequer of England directed the power of
this House with reference to the inland revenue, it might
so have been diminished that, with the exception of one
or two taxes, the English people would have got quit of
that burden which was entirely contributed by them-
selves. The people of this country always connected the
rights and interests of labour with a revenue raised
from Customs' duties. The revenue had been founded
upon a principle favourable to their interests—namely,
that in every country where taxes were raised, and es-
pecially in Great Britain, with its vast national debt, the
revenue that was raised from the foreigner was more
welcome than that which was absolutely wrong from
the native producer.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Disraeli)
thought that foreign grain, like all other productions of
foreign labour, ought to contribute to the Treasury, put
he should deplore any partial or limited legislation on so
important a matter as the reconstruction of our com-
mercial code—that, bit by bit, they should recon►truct
it, and that the first article dealt with should be that in
which many Members of that House were interested.—
(Ironical cheers.) He wished that such a reconstruc-
tion should go upon the broadest basis, but when he was
taunted with not bringing forward a motion on the whole
subject, in which he should be told he had consulted the
interests of parties, the chances of a good division, and
the getting up of a temporary cry in the country, his
reply was, that he never would be a party to such con-
duct.—(Cheers.) However he might differ from the
policy of 1846, he respected the gravity of that policy,
and of the great contingencies involved.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not wish to see the Legislature pass laws, and
then, like a capricious woman, within a year or a year
and a half, turn round and repeal all they had
done. No; he had said before, and he repeated now,
that no vote of that House, full as it was at the present
moment, would decide with any satisfaction the great
question in which were concerned the rights and inte-
rests of labour. It was by sharp experience—by the
distress which, according to the Hon. Member for West-
bury (Mr. Wilson) " universally" prevailed among the
middle classes, and which was now descending to those
who depended upon them; it was in the terrible travail
that he knew awaited them that the salvation of the
people was to befound. The House were called upon I 3•
night to vote for a motion, limited in its character, par-
tial in its results, but, inasmuch as it was founded
upon scientific truths, and conducive to the general pros-
perity of the realm, he could do nothing but register
his vote in its favour.

Mr. COBDEN would not delay the House more than
a very few minutes, and, indeed, he confessed that he
really did not know whether he quite understood the ,
mystical delusions propounded by the Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down. He had endear oured
to follow him, and he would try to put clearly to
the House what the Hon. Gentleman had just stated
relative to the principles he had advocated. The
Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) had laid it down that
the policy pursued by their legislation in matters of
trade in 1846 was quite different from that which it had
pursued previous to 1842, in regard to the enforcement
of reciprocity. But since 1823, when Mr. Huskisson
commenced the intreduction of free trade, down to the
conditional clause in the late Navigation Bill, there had
never been a stipulation with any foreign country for
any reciprocity. The Honourable Gentleman, it ap-
peared, was a Free-trader, if we had reciprocity with
foreign countries. Now, the Honourable Gentleman's
definition of free trade and protection differed very
much from that given by the Right Honourable Mem-
ber for Stamford (Mr. Herrie3), and wool f not be
found to harmonize with that given by Lord Stanley
the other day—(Loud cheers)--and the silence which
prevailed upon the benches behind the Honourable
Gentleman when he was speaking just now showed
that Honourable Members opposite had penetrated the
mystery of the Hon. Gentleman's declaration, and
that they saw the danger of the position which their
leader was taking up—(Cheers)—because the Hon.
Gentleman, as the advocate of reciprocity, was advocat-
ing competition between foreign and domestic labour as
much as he (Mr. Cobden). The Hon. Member made an
exception with regard to the agricultural classes, but
with respect to the needlewomen, of whom they had been
told so much, the glover, the shoemaker, and all the
other industrious classes, the Hon. Gentleman said
there muss be a special exemption of agricultural pro-

. ,
duce; " and thea,7' said he", " I will be a Free-trader like
the rest."—(" No, nu," and cheers.) Why, the Hon.
Gentleman was in favour of free imports with the excep-
tion of agricultural produce, provided that our gouda
were taken by the foreign state. But what advantage
was it to the needlewoman, the glover, the shoemaker,
and the rest cf oar domestic industry? What compen-
sation would it be to them to allow the free impor-
tation of foreign goods such as they made, because the
French, Germans, and Belgians agreed to take the
manufactures, the cotton, and iron of this country,
free of duty?—(Hear.) Ile (Mr. Cobden) would ad-
mit the advantage of reciprocity in a direct trade. The
Hon. Gentleman said, let the agriculturists have com-
pensation for the special burden; on land. But what
said the tenant-farmers at the Crown and Anchor the
other day. They resolved that no remission of taxes
could be a substitute for protection, and that the Legis-
lature must maintain a protective duty upon foreign
grain, or the farmer could not carry on a competition
with the foreigner.—(Hear.) The farmers were nut so
blind to the incidence of taxation as not to know that it
was one thing to tax the raw material, which was land,
and another thing to tax the produce of that capital
which belonged to the farmer.—(Hear.) Now the Hon.
Member for Bucks proposed to remit the taxation upon
land, and then he would admit foreign corn. But the
farmer was for protection, and they were much mistaken
if they thought he would allow that to be taken away
from him as compensation because they chose to remit
the taxation upon land. And the farmer would see also
the clumsy process by which these burdens upon land
were proposed to be remitted, because the Hon. Gentle-
man took off the tax froze real property of all kinds—
houses, mills, railways, and the rest. He (Mr.
Cobden) did not see how that would be a com-
pensation to the farmer.—(Dear, hear.) The Right
Honourable Gentleman (Mr. 'lorries) told the House
they could not protect the manufacturers, for they
had arrived at that point, and by the absence of protec-
tion too—(Cheers)--that they were able to send their
produce to Germany, and pay 30 per cent. duty, and to
America, and pay 20 per cent. duty; and yet, after pay-
ing these duties and transit charges besides, they were
able to sell cheaper than the foreign manufacturer. But
the lion. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) differed from the
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Herries), for the Hon.
Gentleman objected to the motion, because it did not
include manufactures of all kinds.—(Cheers.) He found
fault with its partiality. But Mr. Herries, with more
candour, said, "Yon caanot be impartial, and the protec-
tion you enact must be for that interest which cannot
compete with foreigners at the expense of the manufac-
turers who can compete with manufacturers abroad after
paying 20 per cent. on the cost of transit."—(Hear,
hear.) The proposal of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dis-
raeli) was to exempt the land from taxation, and then
to bring in foreign agriculture into competition with our
farmers at home. And then, is order to make that ac-
ceptable to the country, he included in his speech some
claims to protection for the Bradford stuff manufactu-
rers, a branch of our industry of which we might well
be proud, and which had no rival in the world.—
(Cheers.) But these manufacturers would laugh at and
repudiate such a proposaL They would not listen to
this offer to take them into partnership with Hon. Gen-
tlemen opposite, when in return lion. Gentlemen oppo-
site proposed to tax their bread.—(Cheers.) The in-
dustrious operatives of Lancashire, Yorkshire, Scotland,
and Ireland were laughing at such a proposal as that
which the Hon. Gentleman was making. The Protec-
tionists had gained a convert in the Hon. and Gallant
Member for Gloucestershire (Mr. G. Berkeley), and he
wished them joy of him.—(Much laughter.) Why (con-
tinued Mr. Cobden), if you had given me
the pick of
this House, and had said to me, " Make a present of one
of your colleagues," I would have presented you with the
Hon. Gentleman.—(Continued laughter,) The Hon.
Member for Gloucestershire had dune right in coming
forward frankly and boldly, as be was sure to do every-
thing, for he was a bold and gallant man in his very
looks—(Laughter)—and saying, " I aria for putting a tax
upon your bread," and he did not attempt to mystify
the thing by talking of cotton all the while.—(Hear,
hear.) They had been talking all night about the price
of corn as if they were in Mark-lane, or sitting in a
counting-house. They were indebted to the Hoc Member
for Paisley (Mr. Archibald Hastie) for givitig this turn
to the debate, which he regretted, and the Hou. Member
had been followed by the Lion. Member for Wakefield
(Mr. Sanders). I would vote on that side (continued
Mr. Cobden, pointing to the Opposition benches and to
Mr. Sanders) if I were he. His speech was on that
aide. Take courage! (said the Hon. Member, pointing
to Mr. Sanders, and addressing that gentleman in a
taunting and ironical tone) and vote for the motion.—
(Cheers and laughter.) The Honourable Member had
been followed by others, who had taken pains to show
the price of corn, and the whole discussion had been a
pure waste of time and wholly beside the question. Nay,
more; he would say it was discreditable and derogatory
to that House, when they had gentlemen there who
were supposed to be interested in the price of corn and
cattle, that they should be spending a whole evening in
discussing whether the price of corn should be 365. or
565. a quarter. What would be thought if his Honour-
able Friend the Member for Manchester, who was
a great spinner of yarns —(Much laughter and cheering)
—were to produce his list of prices and say, " see how
my yarns have fallen in value" ?—(Laughter renewed.)
Would that not be thought derogatory to the character
of the House ?—(Hear.) The case was precisely the
same as regarded the complaints of the agricultural
Members, and that they did not perceive it was only a
proof of the inveteracy of the habit in which they in-
dulged.—(Hear, hear.) In that House they had nothing
to do with the price of corn. As far as he was concerned
he did not regret that the price was so low. The people of
this country had a right to obtain corn at the market
price of the world, and as long as they could get it at that
rate he was satisfied,let it be 355., 405., or eas. It had been
said that the present prices were exceptional, and that
a great experiment was going on; but for his part he
did not look upon the existing system as an experiment,
nor did people out of doors so regard it. If a Cabinet
Minister in another place had dropped the word " ex-
periment," it would meet with no response from the
people, who held that they were entitled to the cheapest
supply of corn the world could furnish. The advantage'
of a low price of corn must be tested by experience, Bed
the Chancellor of the Exchequer in hie able speech said
all that could be urged upon that subject.—(Hear.) Those
who wished to re-enact a corn-law should endeavour to
invalidate the facts which the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer had stated. If Hon. Gentlemen opposite were as-
sured that they had facts and experience on their side,
they should court discussion. Was it true that, With a mo-
derate range of prices fur the prime necessaries of life,
pauperism—that curse of the country—had greatly
diminished ? • Was it true that crime had de-
creased in gravity mai amount ? That question
did not refer to the manufacturing districts only,
but was equally applicable to the rural dis-
tricts. A considerable diminution of crime was apparent
in 'the counties .of Mirka, and Hants. At the
Easter Quarter Sessions held in the rural towns of
Devizes, Salisbury; and Winchester, there was not a
single prisoner to be tried—(Hear, hear)—and at Ando-
ver there was only one. Was it true that the revenue
had increased during the prevalence of a moderate price
for food? Was it true that our exports had increased
concurrently with an augmentation of the quantity of
gold in the coffers of the Bank? If these things were
so, then he was justified in saying that the advocates of
an increased price of corn wished to augment pauperism,
to diminish exports, and to reduce the people to misery
and want.—(" Oh, oh," and Hear.") But Honourable
Gentlemen did not dare to propose another corn-law in
that i
House.
the House was not prepared to
reverse
Defective as the represen-
a:inn& third year of its existence
y jhgde y
h
endeavoured to escape from their
er
d et c
usually followed pretty closely any change ot public
opinion. But if there was no
.change in public opinion
upon this question, bow coultLa change be produced ex-
cept by discussion? Could Abe advocates of a corn-law
speak from a more lofty pedestal than that House? Their
t ol nnma its
war, bfyo
thers andam
house
speeches would be advertised, in every journal, anti
their arguments addressed at once to the whole com-
munity. Why did they not avail themselves of those
advantages? The Hon. Member for Sumersetshire said
it was useless for them to talk because they were in a
minority in that House, but when a general election
should take place they would carry their object. But if
they had a majority they would not want discussion.—
(Hoar, hear.) Ddsjoritiea could only be created by dis-
eussion in that House, but Hon. Gentlemen avoided dis-
cussion because they knew that argument, facts; and
experience were all against them.—(" No," from the
Opposition.) \ Then, ' said the Hon. Member, " if
arguments, facts, and experience are on your side, what
miserable debaters you must be." (Cheers and
laughter.) It had usually been his lot to talk to mi-
norities during
• the ten years he had sat in the House,
and if the Hon. Gentlemen opposite were in earnest in
i
what they sad out of doors, thoy would not shrink
from addressing a minority in the House of Commons.
—(Hear.) You allege that • the farmers are suffering
distress, and yet you advise them to sit with folded .
arms and calmly await a dissolution of Parliament. The
present Parliament might endure three years longer;
and in that time the farmers must be ruined if the re-
presentation given by their friends of their present con-
dition were correct. It did not seem likely that the
landholders would aid the farmers in passing through
the ordeal said to be prepared for them by any remis-
sion of rent. When gentlemen talked of a dissolution
they did not know what they were preparing for them-
selves. They could not be aware of what would be the
result of a general election on the question of the corn-
laws. It would be very agreeable for the county Mem •
berm to go down to their districts and be re-elected, but
other Members would have to undergo a severe ordeal.
When there was some talk of a dissolution, in 1846, he
told Hon. Gentlemen opposite what he now repeated,
that this great metropolis, with its 2,500,000 of inhabi-
tants, would not return one of their body, and he believed
that no Protectionist would be returned for any place
having a population of more than 20,000.—(Oh, oh.)
It must not be forgotten that not more than one-sixth
of the adult males in this country had a vote at elections,
and that this was a cause of great discontent. Would
it be wise in Hon. Gentlemen, in connexion with the
question of the people's bread, to bring on their backs
the question of the people's representation ? If by a
dissolution the Hon. Gentlemen opposite could obtain
a majority—which he did not believe—would the votes
of the two Members for Stamford be equal to those of
the Members for Marylebone or Finsbury?—(Murmurs.)
He was not afraid of a dissolution.—(Question.) That
was the question, for he understood that Gentlemen op-
site were going to lay UP the question of the corn-laws
until the dissolution of Parliament. If they were sin-
cere in wishing for a dissolution they should support
the motion for triennial Parliaments.—(" Oh, oh.") If
the wishes of Gentlemen opposite were realised, they
would bring about the most complete democratic revo-
lution that the world had ever seen .—(Divide, divide.)
Mr. NE WDEGATE rose amid loud cries of " Divide !"
and, with frequent interruptions, proceeded to say,—
, That the Hon. Member (Dir. Cobden) had appealed

Y
with confidence to the result of a dissolution.T He would
ask him, however, whether it was true that in a speech
delivered out of doors he had said, "I am told on good
authority, that if a dissolution took place next year 90,
at least, of the 105 Irish Members would come up
Wedged to restore the corn-laws?"--(Cheers.) He asked
if that language was consistent with what they had
heard from the Hon. Gentleman that night?—(" Hear,
hear," " Divider) He believed the Hon. Member had
spoken the truth at Sheffield.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Gentleman had showed an excessive anxiety for discus-
sion in that House, and spoke of the propriety of 'dis-
cussion being carried on even by a minority. But he
forgot that he had himself told his constituents at Leeds
that he only wasted his time in that House, and it was
useless for him to discuss questions of national reform
there unless they were taken up by the country.—
(Hear, hear.) They (the Protectionists) were following
therefore, the example of the lion. Gentleman; and if
they did not at this time promote discussion by the in-
troduction of their measures it was out of deference to
those who were showing that their opinions were chang-
ing upon this question.—(" Oh, oh!" and " Divide.") He
appealed to the House whether the statement which the
Hon. Member (Mr. Cobden) made with reference to the
measure of 1846 was not doubly true now that a large
number of the majority were voting against their con-
victions.—("No, no, and "Divide.") The Hon. Gentle-
man told his constituents that he could not find in that
House 200 men who voted heartily for the repeal of the
corn-laws; and as to the Upper House, he said he had
gone through the list, and could not find twelve men
who voted,beartily for the measure.—(Hear,:hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman used two languages—one language in
the West Riding, and another in that House.—(Cries
of " Divide.") The Hon. Gentleman endeavoured to
find some fanciful differences between the arguments
used by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire and the
Hon. Member for Stamford; but he differed from both
of them in this, that he urged the blind application of
the privilege of unrestricted intercourse with reference
to the policy of other countries, and without any consi-
deration of the state of the people of this country—
(Hear, hear)—and all this for a class purpose, for the
benefit of the manufacturing against the industrial
classes.—(Hear, hear.)
Colonel DUNNE, in consequence of what had fallen
from the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), begged to say
that at no moment of his life was he ever a Free-trader,
or ever had any sympathy with the Hon. Member for
the West Riding in his free-trade views. Ireland had
not received the slightest advantage from free trade;
for, in truth, there was not a class in Ireland that was
not suffering. It was folly to talk of the condition of
the people being improved when there were millions in
Ireland subjected to every kind of misery that human
beings had ever been called on to endure.—(Divide.)
Mr. G. BERKELEY replied. He did nut propose an
8s duty as had been stated by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, but only asked the House to consider the
whole subject of the corn-laws. The Hon. Member for
the West Riding said no reciprocity bad been broken
through; but he asked, if no reciprocity had been broken
between this country and Brasil?—(Hear, hear.) The
same Hon. Gentleman said no borough with 20,000 in-
habitants would return a man opposed to free trade; but
what did he say to the case of Cork?—(Hear, hear.)
He regretted that the Noble Lord at the head of the
Government had not favoured the House with his
opinion.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ... 184
Against it 298
Majority against the motion ... —ll4
The announcement of the numbers was received with
cheers from the Ministerial side of the House.
FACTORIES BILL

Sir G. GREY, in answer to a question from Mr. P.
Howard, stated that since the recommitment of the
Factories Bill was fixed for the 23d inst., he had had
communications with certain gentlemen interested in the
subject, and as that day was considered inconvenient, he
should fix some other time for the recommitment, though
he could not name the day at present.
KINGSTOWN AND HOLYHEAD MAILS.

The following gentlemen were nominated on this
Committee:—Sir Richard Bulkeley, Mr. Cowper, Mr.
Parker, Mr. Corry, Mr. Hayter, Admiral Bowles, Mr.
French, The Lord Mayor of Dublin, Mr. Mangles, Mr.
Frederick Peel, Mr. Childers, Mr. Osborne, Mr. Chi-
chester Fortescue, Mr. Henley, and Mr. Henry Herbert,
with power to • send for persons, papers, and records;
five to be the quorum.
NAVAL AND MILITARY OFFICERS.

Sir JAMES DUKE—Address for "Return of the
names and present rank of all naval and military ofi•
cers holding any civil appointment; stating the nature
of the office held by each, date of appointment, and the
rank held at the time of such appointment; the amounts
of salary, half pay, pensions, and allowances, received
by them respectively; and whether in the active or re-
tired lists; distinguishing the total amount received
by each."
The other business on the paper being then disposed
of, the House adjourned at a Quarter-past Two o'clock
until Thursday.

on the duties remitted and reduced on raw materials

of manufacture, 272,000 thalers ; by allowance of
drawbacks on exportation, 198,000 thalers ; of this
amount of loss to the whole revenue of the Union,
about .517,000 thalers will be borne by Prussia alone.
The reduction of transit: and river tolls will be at-
tended by a decrease of revenue to Prussia alone of
347,000 thalers ; so that she gives up by the revision
in all a yearly revenue of 918,000 thalers.
A telegraphic dispatch from Berlin, of the 13th
inst., in the Kelner Zeitung, states, that in the con-
ference which took place on the 1 1 th, Baden and
Lippe-Schaumburg revoked the conditions which
they had advanced on the subject of the League.
Electoral Hessen, however, still refused to give a
declaration before the definitive constitution of the
Federal authority at Frankfort.
In the same conference Prussia made sundry pro-
posals for the constitution of the " Board of Princes"
and the Cabinet of the Union. The propositions were
accepted ad referendum, and the debate on them was
to take place on the 13th.

Respecting the revision of the Bund Prussia pro-
poses that the League shall take part in a Con-
gress, but that they shall adopt the Prussian pro-
test of the 3d of May, and that they shall add
another protest to the effect that they will not consent
to the definitive constitution of the Grand Confederacy
unless the League be recognised as an integral part
of the same.

Letters from Erfurt of the 10th inst., in the Ober-
postamts Zeitung, states that instructions have been
issued by the Berlin llcme-office, from which it ap-
pears that the Parliament is to meet again on the
26th inst.
The Frankfort journals publish the dispatch of the
Prussian Minister of Foreign Affairs to the diplomatic
agents in the different states of Germany, with respect
to the Austrian circular on the establishment of a new
Central Government. It is dated the 3d, and commences
by expressing regret at the negotiations of Austria and
Prussia for the establishment of a new Central Govern-
ment having been without result ; but it says that the
Prussian Government had made the propositions which
it considered most simple and the best adapted to
circumstances, and that in consequence it declined to
assume the responsibility arising from the fact that
the powers of the ad interim Central Commission of
Frankfort had expired before a new Central Govern-
ment was appointed. With respect to the Congress
convoked at Frankfort by Austria, the dispatch
observes that the King of Pussia had invited his
allies to honour him with their visit on the
Bth, accompanied by their Ministers, in
order to deliberate on the measures to be adopted ;
and it says that it is on the result of these delibe-
rations that the subsequent policy of the Govern-
ment will entirely depend. The note then gOes on to
protest against the language of the Austrian note,
which causes it to be supposed that the Austrian
Cabinet convokes the Congress at Frankfort to re-
present the old Diet, and in virtue of the powers
which the presidency of that Diet conferred on it; as
it says the Diet is dissolved, and the powers have
ceased. Nevertheless, it does not dispute the right of
Austria to convoke a Congress; but it declares that
the states which may not take part in it will not be
bound by its decisions. _

The Berlin committee for managing the transport
of articles to be sent by German manufacturers to
the Exposition of Industry in London, has issued
advertisements requesting exhibitors to send in
descriptions of the goods to be sent. They
will be carried free of expense to the three
cities of Cologne, Dantzic, and Berlin, and from
thence to London; free carriage back is also guaran-
teed. The Government undertakes to insure them,
during the period of the exhibition, from damage or
destruction by fire. Similar arrangements have been
made in Brunswick, and will probably be made in
most of the States of the Zollverein.

The new railway that will connect Dresden with
Prague, passing along the valley of the Elbe, and
for a considerable part of the way on the immediate
bank of the river, was opened on the 10th from
Dresden to Konigstein.
The Austrian Congress of States was opened at
Frankfort on the 11th. Ten pleiaipotentiaries took
part in the proceedings ; among them was the re-
presentative of the Electorate of Hesse. The So-
vereign of this State is still among the princes at-
tending the Congress of Berlin.