The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-27 00:00:00

munity by the corn- laws ? The corn-laws were a direct I manufacturers of this country. Regardless of any other
interference with the freedom of trade—the freedom of i consideration, however, they adhered to rent—rent.—
ralustry ; and it was incumbent on those who main- i (Cheers.) The object of every change of the corn-law
tined this interference to prove that the community was , was to keep up rents.—(Hear, hear, and Oh, oh !)
benefitted by restriction.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. 1 Gentlemen might laugh and cheer, but this was not the
Gentleman had stated that the tenants themselves were language of the League alone, it was the language of the
the originators of the Pro-Corn-law Society. Coming ; wisest statesmen, the greatest poets, and the first phi-
from an agricultural county, he knew how easy it was to I losophers of the time. A poet, the first of modern time,
give a hint, through the steward, that the tenants were who was himself a lord and a landlord, expressed the
required to attend. on some particular day, on behalf of shme opinion in these words:—
the interests of agriculture.-(Hear, hear.) He wanted 1 "The last to bid the cry of warfare cease,
to know who it was that represented the agricultural 1 The first to make a malady of peace;
labourer in the Agricultural Societies. When the Pro- 1 For what were all these country patriots born ?
Corn-law Society was formed, no one appeared to repre- 1 To hunt, and vote, and raise the price acorn."
sent him ; no one said,
on his behalf that it was for his (Cheers.) That was the language of one of the most
advantage that security should be maintained. It was ; eminent poets of this country, and he (Mr G.) would
denied by the Hon. Member for Lincolnshire that the i tell the House what the noble poet said of the conduct
declarations of the Right Honourable Gentleman of the landed proprietors:—
at the head of the Government had had any ! " Safe in their barn, the Sabine tillers sent
effect on the value of land, or on the bargains 1 Their brethren out to battle. Why?—for rent !
between landlords and tenants. Why he himself i They roared, they dined, they drank, they swore they
had seen in the London papers, the other day, an adver- f meant
tisement of the sale of estates by Mr. George Robins, in ;To die for England. Why then live?—For rent!
which one of the grounds stated why agriculturists The peace has made one general malcontent
should come forward and give a large sum for them was, i Of this " high market patriot"—Wart was .It si.—
that the Right Hon. Gentleman had declared that the i Their love of country—millions all mis-spent.
corn-lawof 1841 was a final and irrevocable settlement of i How reconciled ? —by reconciling rent.
this great question. Did an eminent auctioneer want to And will they not repay the treasures lent ?
get less for an estate than it was worth ? He regretted No ; down with every thing—but up with rent.
those statements which disparaged the authority of the ! Their good, ill, health, wealth, joy, and discontent,
Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, ; Being, end, aim, religion—Rent, rent, rent."
He regretted the disposition which was exhibited, to ' —(Great che:ring.) But the noble poet did not except
put forced interpretations on his declarations. the Church itself from its share of participation of mono-
As a friend to the English farmer—as- one whose i poly in the corn-laws. He said:—
interest was bound up with that of the agricultural class, i "So Mother Church' while all religion writhes,
he complained of such an interpretation of the Right Like Niobe, weeps o'er her offspring—TiTnes."
Hon. Gentleman's statements. For what mdst be the —(Cheers and laughter.) lie knew that many excel-
effect ? They were teaching them that the corn-law I lent men thought the corn-laws were necessary, and he
protection was to be permanent, while at the same time I quoted those lines only to show that one of the landlords'
the Right Hon. Gentleman had never said that he con- I own class was convinced of the evils of those laws; and
templated the permanence either of the present or of any he believed that the time was coming when the whole
other corn-law,—(Hear, hear.) His assertion was that i community would raise its voice against them. It had
at the present moment he did not contemplate a change, been said that manufactures were protected ; but the
that he had no measure then to submit ; that was a very manufacturers, in their petitions, had called for the
different Thing from saying that he contemplated the per- abolition of protection of every kind. The landlords,
=anent maintenance of the protective principle. For however, did not stand upon the same grounds with re-
gentlemen to put that interpretation on his words epect to protection as other interests in the community.
was to strengthen the fatal error into which the agricul- Protection did not increase the wages of labour or raise
tural tenantry had fallen, namely, that it was better to the rate of profits; the unlimited competition prevented
rely upon what Parliament could do for them than upon that. But the landed aristocracy had all the benefit of
their own industry and enterprise. Gentlemen who did their protection to themselves from the limited nature
this were not acting as the true friends of the farmer ; of their monopoly. It had been said that the
they were not promoting the real and permanent kite- trade of the country was very great—that
rest even of the landed proprietors ; nor were they, in our export of manufactures had largely in-
any way, advancing the truewelfare of the community at creased. But the manufacturers complained that these
large.—(Hear, hear.) Now the Hon. Member for Lin- laws deprived them of a trade which they might now
colnshire said he felt conscious that the incendiarism in enjoy ; and the question between them and the land-
Suffolk, arose from the deep-rooted discontent of the peo. lords was, whether the latter had a right to deprive
pie, and that that discontent arose from distress. He said them of that trade. The Noble Lord, the Member for
that the farmers must pay the labourers better wages, North Lancashire, had presented a petition in favour of
the very expressionshowing that he had taken an erro- agricultural protection, signed by 16,000 person=, who
neous view of the whole question of wages. Why people were represented to be manufacturers. Now, he would
could not pay what wages they pleased.—(Hear, hear.) ask the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) were one half of
It was not in the power of individuals to regu- them manufacturers ?
late wages. From the redundancy of population, and Lord STANLEY—Those from Preston and Blackburn
the pressure on the means of existence, men would were.
work for the smallest possible amount of Mr. M. GIBSON—But those from Preston and Black-
wages upon which they could live. Let them consider burn did not amount to one half.—(Hear, hear.) But
iiihether there were not some causes arising from their the petitioners did not state what amount of protection
legislation which produced this discontent and distress they-asked for. They did not say the fixed duty, or the
in a country which apparently had within itself all the rising and descending scale, or what other scale. As the
msources of happiness and prosperity. It was remark- Noble Lord was the representative of a manufacturing
able that incendiarism should prevail in Norfolk, Suffolk, county, he wished to ask the Noble Lord, would he inl-
and Essex, where protection was supposed to confer the dertaite to rise in that House, and say that the corn-
greatest benefit—counties which were, to a great extent, laws conferred a benefit upon his constituents ?
grain-growing counties, and in which there were all Lord STANLEY said he thought so. He was sup-
those means and appliances in the greatest abundance porting the manufacturing interests still.
which they were frequently told were essential to Mr. M. GIBSON wished the Noble Lord to give the
the morality and good conduct of the pope- grounds on which he thought so.—(Cheers and laughter.)
lation. There were no counties in England in They might laugh if they pleased, but the Noble Lord
which the clergy so abounded. To such nn extent did state the grounds once, and what were those
did they abound, that if a gentleman's calling did not grounds ? Why, that they might be enabled to keep
happen to be known, he was set down as a clergyman.— grooms and gardeners.—(Cheers.) They had heard ex-
(Laughter.) Yet, notwithstanding these means and tremely little, considering the position the Noble Lord
appliances for good, a system of the most awful crime held in that House, upon the subject of manufactures.
prevailed ; for what system could be more appalling than It was true, that he did once threaten the agriculturist
incendiarism ?—(Hear hear.) They had a right tv ex- by the vision of Tamboff, but he had never satisfied
pect that they should be allowed to live in their homes, the manufacturers that the keeping out of corn was for
without having their lives or property endangered. He their benefit.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that they were
denied the insinuation thrown out by the Right Hon. treating this question in a way that amounted to little
Gentleman, the President of the Board bf Trade, that short of insult. Whenever gentlemen got up they never
this incendiarism might be the result of agitation in fa- came to the question.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord
your of the corn-laws.—(Hear.) He conterided that that and the gentlemen on these heaches—(Great laughter
insinuation was unworthy of the Right Hon. Gentleman. from the Ministerial side of the House, in consequence
Ile defied him to produce the smallest atom of proof of the bench on which the Opposition leaders sit being
that any incitement to incendiarism had been thrown entirely empty) —the Noble Lord and those who sit on
out by the opponents of protection. For one placard these benches were not responsible for the law. Those
which had been circulated by the Anti-Corn-law who sat on the other side of the House were rehsponsible,
.League in the county of Suffolk, he ventured to say, because they could alter the law. The Right lion.
that ten had been circulated by the Pro-Corn law Baronet was their ruler—he was their Minister, because
League.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had laid they could not get a leader out of the Central Pro. ec-
down the doctrine that the less corn there was in the tion Society. The Right Hon. Baronet would not tell
country, the greater would be the share of the labourer, them that he would keep up protection permanently. He
He ventured to say that they would then find that would tell them that the League was right in principle.
during cheap years the wages of the labourer had —(Laughter.) It might be all very well for gentlemen
not given him a greater command over the comforts to laugh and sneer, but he was dealing with facts as
and necessaries of life than he had in dear years. They they were. The gentlemen opposite were responsible
would find that in the cheap years the labourer had had, for the corn-law. They brought it in, and they kept it
it was in his power to obtain a larger quantity of food up, and, doing so, they ought to tell him what good they
than in the dear year.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. had done for the people by keeping up the law. The
Gentleman, the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, right of the people was to freedom of industry. Those
seemed to think that his Hon. Friend the Member for who sat on the other side of the House kept it from
Wolverhampton had no right to ask for an explanation them, and he. therefore, on the part of the people, had a
of the grounds on which protection was based, those right to call for a satisfactory explanation.—(Cheers.)
grounds being fully explained in Hansard's Debates. Mr. BANKES then rose to address the House. He
Now he confessed that although he had read nearly all could assure the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down
the speeches on this subject, he could not find one in that they, on that side of the House, were most willing
which the advantages of protection were clearly set to hear all the Hon. Member for Manchester had to
forth. The Right Hon. Gentleman said they state, and it was only in consequence of the Opposition
were visionary theorists and schemers, and bench being empty, that the laughter had taken place.
that without proof of the disadvantages of the corn. He agreed with the Hon. Members for Manchester .and
law, they were not entitled to call upon the Sheffild that it was desirable to keep as close to , the
Government to explain why it was maintained. Now question as possible. If, however, any side had departed
he took a completely different view of that question. from it, it was the Opposition rather than the Ministe-
He maintained that those who maintained the corn-laws rial. During the present session of Parliament number-
were the visionary schemers ; for they interfered with less petitions had been presented from agriculturists,
the natural course of things, they came forward with a complaining of the interference of the League. The ac-
subtle and refined scheme of ascending and descending count which they had had that night of the proceedings
duties for regulating the importation of corn, for ma,kne of the League was a summary of its life—it had eaihted
mankind happy, and trade and agriculture prosperous. six years, and he trusted that it would nut live; six
He (Mr. M. Gibson) did not concur in these extreme months longer. lie had read many of the papers of the
opinions. He preferred trusting to plain common sense, League. but he was not aware until that night that
the natural course of events, and the operation of men's it owed its origin to the Honourable Member , for
interests upon their actions, rather than to that visionary Bolton (Dr. Bowring), and he trusted the Honourhble
scheme which was maintained by the Government, but Gentleman would live to write its epitaph.—(Laugher.)
whichhe hoped would notlong be-maintained in this coun- There had been in the course of the present debate
try The NoblelLord, the Member for the City ofLondon, some questions addressed to him which would have
-held extreme opinions in favour of a moderate fixed rendered it fit that lie should have offered some obseTva-
duty; believing that that was the device for making tions to the House, even if he were indisposed to dq so.
trade flourish, and for promoting the improvement (I' It had been asked of him and others, why they had taken
agriculture and the happiness of society. To both the part in the Factory Bill, and how they could reconcile
devices he preferred that men should be allowed to buy it to themselves to venture to interfere with the grand
in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market, believing manufacturers unless they were disposed to show ;the
that Providence had intended that as the means of same feeling towards the lower classes ; for his own
securing general prosperity. He maintained that those part, he was sure that had he felt that the lin-
were else visionary schemers who interfered with the terferenee would have affected one class and ;not
natural freedom of industry. They had a right to call another, he would Lot have consented to it. Ile '
st,
upon them to explain clearly and definitely what were in the strongest terms, deny the statements of the lon.
the advantages which they conferred upon :society by so Menahe,. fur Manchester, that they desired to m .n-
-subtle a scheme, and if they failed to prove those advan- tarn those laws for the purpose of crushing
sthe
tages, they were entitled to ask for the total and imme- manufacturers. He was surprised that the Hen. Member
diate repeal of the corn law. Now he wishcel to know could for a moment have conceived that, in the vote on'the
how the corn-law benefited that particular class with Factory Bill, he fixed upon one portion of his fellow
whom he was connected namely the mane. subjects and not upon another. Those who desired to
fwiturers ? When a buyer went from the keep up protection to agriculture had no such wish or
town of Noiwich to Manchester toerchase object ill view, and there was no such wish on the Part
a fall of goods for the purpose of retailing then in Nor- of those who had voted in favour of the factory question.
folk, would he give anymore for them tha-n a buyer from It had been steed el-tether those who voted were refuly
America ? If he would not what was the ale vantage to get up in that House and state why they had (Ilene
conferred on the manufacturers by the corn- law ? sO ; he fur one was ready to accept:the challenge. lln
(Float-, hear.) But if he reversed the case he found that the vote he had given he was not guided by the st te-
the manufacturer had to give a great- deed more ments which he had read in newspapers or pamphie for his wheat in Norfolk than he would have to give in he saw the men themselves, and it was not until a, ter
New Yorke—(Hear, hear.) This appeared to hire to be many interviews with them that he ventured to give that
a very odd kind of reciprocity. He defied the Hon. vote. If he was travelling from the question it was ?lot
Member for Dorsetshire to show that he had any pro- his fault, because lie had been taunted to give his opirpon
party in the raw material, the machinery, or the labour on the subjmt, which he was ready to do, and reso to
'.Mich was employed in the production of a particular defend the condi et lie had hitherto pursued.
fabric ; and how could he say, then, that he The Honourable Member for Wolverhampton, ho
had brought furward this motion, had adopted a diffe .nt
was entitled to special protection as a landlord ?
Could it be said that the proprietors of the land bad any tone to that which he usually did. Differing as he ( Ir,
Property in the industry of other men ?—(Hmee, hear.)Banks) did from that line of arguments adopted by he
Could it be said that by any right, human or divine, they lion. Member, yet still they had been conducted in s eh
were entitled to deny to the manufacturers thee Freedom a gentlemanly manner, hitherto they had been expres •ed
of industry which they demanded ?—(Cheers.) They in such a proper tone and feeling that he could not ut
came to this House on the same grounds as the Dig- think them worthy of attention ; but upon the pre mt
venters had formerly come—to complain of dish bilities.— occasion he had come forth in a new character. ' 'he
They told the House that they could only live l)• the .ex- speech was delivered in an almost uninterrupted tone of
ehtang,e of the products of their labour. They-said that defiance. He had asked whether they dared do this and
their trade was legitimate and proper, and the ally call- they dared do that ? That might be all very well: in
ing.whieh they had to follow. But the Legislature—not another place—(Cheers)—that might do all very wel in
for revenue—not for State necessities—but for the in- Covent-gerden, It did so the other night, because there
• tercets of a particular class—(Cheers)—prevented them when an individual said "he dare" two policemen lin-
from obtaining, the advantages which Providence had stantly took him out. In that House, however, it should
. Placed within their reach.—(Hear, hear.) Thsey did not be remembered, they had no policemen, " I (exclaimed
use to the aristocracy the enjoyment of their
restates— the Hon. Meniter) dare" tell the lion. Member for
,Z,,,ether they were held by inheritance or by p urchasv.l Wolverhampton that I desire to maintain protection
hstAnasked no more than that the aristocracy aitiould be for the good of the tenant•farmer, and the whole popu-
r with their estates.—(Cheers.) The Yandlortis lation.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," and " the tendon's.") Yt s,
• never bought, or had inherited their estates, but; :they had and the landlords. Nobody who argued this question
bought ur inherited any right over the i, ai'ustry ef
ether menomitted landlords.—(A laugh.) But there was one
,—(Cheers.) The landlords were untitled to class that was omitted, and that was the tenant-farmers.
the full value of their estates, but they were not entitled . Those ieeividnuls had come forward in a body and re-
. te take the largest slice from the loaf of the ei, )(nest class pudiated the doctrines of the Members fur Stockport and
' of her Majesty% subjects. He called on the e . te Boltun• Ile hoped there were some tenant-farmers in
. a ymus r i , •
of the Forces, after his lone experience tooteevhat was I the House last night to hear the speech of the Noble
the ground on which the landholders ti te country I Lord the Member for
Sunderland. What said that had a matter of right to interfere with the i odustry of Noble Lord? Why did they not do in this country as
others. When he (Mr. Gibson)
was ' '
at Cain winoge, he in Canada:: There there were no tenant-fhrmers, there
read the works of Paley, as part of his acaden c'c course. was only the landlord and the labourer. But it must be
That great philosopher said that everyrestrai t.t wag, in remembered that that country was in a very different
itself, an evil, and that those who impose it sae
Add prove' state to this; and here they ought to legislate for the whole
its advantages, and that it was not incumbent "von those —the tenant farmers as well as the labourers. The
who suffered from the restraint to prove that it 'Joan evil. i move that had been made on the part of the tenant-
-(Hear, hear.) On that ground, he (Ah e re —v.
—Ben) farmers was spontaneous, and was not encouraged by any
demanded the immediate abolition of this gre. It evil and landlord ; but they were pleased to see that they were
cruel restraint. The total and immediate- ah *Mien of persons who would, attend to their own interests. On
the corn-laws was the only mode of settling thesaquestion. his part there had been nothing to encourage them to rise
for any other expedient will still leave mincer tai nty and
,as men against the bullying system of the Anti•Corn-
doubt. And when they came to vested in ter t,9tS, he I,a. w League. They had risen as one man, and lie lie
must inquire what was the nature of the post essloil ? It "eved• thy wo:tld ultimately put it down. The Hun.
vas an adverse possession, and no time c ould give a Member for Manc:iester (Mr. Mark Philips) had
late from an adverse possession.—(Hear, I bear.) The I asked him a question with respect to cotton.
law was paSsed by a Legislature of landloi d..--(Tory The lion. Member had asked him what greater advan-
,cries of " Oh, oh l") Yes, it was a Legislatu. et ,of land- tare it was to the manufacturer to have him for a cue-
;lords, for no man could be a Member of thee • House of tomer, than to have as a customer an American residing
Commons who did not swear that he was possessed in New York. Ile had asked if he supposed that lie
eif land 'of the value of 3001. a year.—(P Co ar, hear.) him more for his
(Mr. Bankes) would have to pay
the large manufacturing towns were not at t b e time re- cotton goods than his American customer.. Why, if the
presented, and the aristocracy had an especia E. mono of manufacturer were an honest man, he certainly should
of legislation by means of close boroughs.—(l gear, hear.) not have to pay more, but the manufacturer would have
might be
an
A.t.the time of the passing of the corn-law, lAI )rd Liver- this
advantage in dealing with him—that as a home-
pool avowed that the object was to prevent the settle- customer he could be more certainly relied on.—(A
meet which would otherwise take place bet we en landlord laugh.) Why, certainly, the home customer
__.ht tenant upon the restoration of peace. 1 lei the de • more certainly relied on.—(Hear and laughter.) There
=ands
not, attended
entreaties of those who opposed t 30-measure I might be a change in the American tariff, which might
the expressed°t; attended to, and the law was pas red against 1 altogether prevent the sale of our manufactures in that
will of the country, for that . objeCt alone I country. Why, one of the persons who was at present
which Lord
Lord
not the landlord
Liverpoolpool avowed.—(Hear, he ar.) Were a candidate for the Presidential chair of that empire,
s
would indtfce the aware,at inscribed,
the time, tha h the peace he supposed he might call it, went about with! banners
tend. their works, and to ,
manufacturers of other coy- ata 'ice to ex- " Protection to native industry." -
come into competie ichn with the hear.) Now, suppose they should place a prohibitory

. .
duty on the importation of our manufactures,. did not e landovvners. If you raise the price Of corn how will r Sir Be PEEL said, I can assure the House that it is advantage of the merchant. So the Noble Lord is pre •
the Hon. Member for Manchester think that even he I that enable those people to pay their taxes? They are i not my intention to trouble it at any length to-night on pared to guard the merchant against loss from excess in
would be a better customer to the manufacturer than people with a fixed income. If you tax them for the 1 this subject. I consider that the House has to-night the quantity of importation. lam afraid that
the inhabitant of New York? It would be no difficult purpose of raying your taxes, then you make them pay i been en..gaged for the benefit .of that company which concurrently with a good harvest in this c oun-
matter to adduce many reasons to prove to the not only their own taxes but yours too. Why, I really 1 generally performs at Covent-garden Theatre—(Loud try there might be good harvests in other
Honourable Member for Manchester, the advan- believe that the proprietors of land have a confused No- I cheers and laughter)—and I have very great reluctence , countries, and a great glut of corn coming into this
tages of the home trade. They were secure of that at an tion that the national debt only means private mort- ;in interposing myself, so as to prevent them from having . country would be the result ; whereas, if the tenant has
events, as long as they could assure them a sufficiency of gages. I have one or two facts to show what are the the full benefit of the occasion. lam exceedingly sorry i a guarantee against a sudden glut, I cannot help think-
money to purchase.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, consequences to the labourers of the country of high ! that at an earlier part of the performanees the front' ing that there must be more certainty in the application
the Member for Sunderland, who was not now in his p ices of cern. I have in my hand a list of the prices of 1 benches were not occupied. For a very considerable lor capital. I have heard it asserted to-night I gave an
place, had, last night, referred to the condition of the corn since the corn law was established in 1815. I part of the debate, those places were without a single ! assurance that there should be an average price of 565.
labourers in the county which he (ma. Bankes) had me It is a very remarkable fact, that the price I oecupant—(Renewed cheering)--until the Gallant Ad- (Hear, hear.) Sir, I ask hew can any gentleman say
honour to represent. The Noble Lord had said that the of corn is a kind of barometer of the state ' miral came in and took his seat alone upon them.— go ?---(Hear, hear.)
Hon. Member for Stockporthad stated more than (nice ~f taxation. The revenue of the country alwaysdeclines (Cheers.) I hope the assistance the Hon. Gentleman Mr. COBDEN—It was so understood. -
had e neverws6lla,
twslaosivad
said
nhwyass,u such
atth thing. that their condition was worse than the condition of any just as the price of corn rises, and rises as the price of and his friends gave to me at my benefit the other night
waSsisraißd.thFeEoEthLe—r
nligdbot ntio,tatknlogsavvwlsiaottnewasassuunidaenresetroda,
the
other labourers, and that statement had not been contra- corn falls. It is, so touch so, that, as I said before, it is —(Great cheering and laughter)—has not been the
dieted. It was true that the Hon. Member for Stock- a perfect barometer of the state of the revenue. Now I cause of depriving them of a fuller audience.—(Cheers.) Subject of the Bank Charter; but I could only reply, that I
port had made the statement more than once. He was will take the four years from 1817 to 1820, when the I only refer to it as a fact, that for the far greater per-
case what Lithiarhink hear.)tha t a Aiens,d
average
s
in the habit of making statements more than once • but average price of corn was 84s. 4d. the quarter, and when tion of this evening almost the only occupants of the
ctran
if those statements were contradicted, it was rather hard the farmers and landowners were rejoicing at high prices, benches on the other side of the House, upon this 1 to o lower
altadu he remunerating, and that the pric!..ought not
5 •
that those persons would not take the trouble to attend What was the effect to the revenue? Why there was an great and important discussion of the corn-laws, 1 kr. COBDEN said that the Right Hon. Baronet was un-
to the contradictions, but would continue to repent them addition to the annual taxes of the country of 2,400,000/. have been that particular class of gentlemen who have I derstood to guarantee the average at 563.
as if they never had been contradicted. He would now imposed. I then take the six years up to 1825, when rehearsed their parts on another stago.—(Cheers and Sir R. PEEL—I have only stated what I said.—( Cheers.)
refer to the report of the Commissioners appointed to in- there was unparalleled agricultural distres e During laughter. An Hon. Member—" Your own benches !") I said that I took 563. as the average of the last five years. 1
quire into the condition of the women and children em- those years you had taxes repealed to the nmoent of Well lat least 'ire were here.—(Cheers.) An Hon, read these words from the printed report of the debates. It is
ployed in agriculture, as a proof that the report which 8,100,000/. Now I come to the next period of exceeding Gentleman commenced his speech by attacking ray Hen, not my report. It is the report of a disinterested witness.
had been laid on the table at the close of last session, had low prices of' corn, viz., in the years 1833, 1834, 1835, Friend the Member for Northampton for having con- , ( The ltigtit Hon. Baronet then read an extract of his speech
been the foundation of mach vituperation of the county and 1836, when the average price for the four years was sumed a considerable portion of the time of the House by ' from Hansard's Debates, in which he was reported to have
which he represented, and of the other counties of the 465. 9d. During those years there were taxes repealed referring to the speeches of the Hon. Gentlemen who said that "it was beyond the power of the Legislature to
south of England. He believed that the true reason why to the extent of four or five millions per annum. I now were members 'of the Anti-Corn-law League, and he fnuc,raatidteelenstihoe ptroi -eolc:if
rh
out hopes easndthtatipastueit would b. e enfcourag-
the county of Dorset had been fixed on in this manner, come to the last dear years. During the years thought that reference was entirely misplaced— r
tion would be given to•agricupltuee.") Now, spleea'seks ecouPlidetaene.
was because it was represented by a Noble Lord 1838 to 1842 the average price of wheat was I (Hear, hear)—he said he ought to have addressed reasonable man, from this put that construct on u y upon my
who had taken up the cause of the factory women 645. ed. the quarter, being 20s. higher than himself simply and solely to the main question words that I would uphold the price to 56;? I referred to
and children, and it was thought by Honourable the previous four years. During these five years, before us.—(Cheers.) But I wish he had given that ad- former Acts, and I stated how they had failed, and that it was
Gentlemen opposite that it would be a fair retaliation you had first of all five per cent. additional taxes, and vice to his Hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhamp . impossible for the Legislature to guarantee prices which were
to move for this Commission.—(Cries of " Oh, oh." ten per cent, additional assessed taxes; and then came ton—(Loud cheers) —because it is the gentleman who determined by other considerations.—(Hear, hear.) That is
Now, he would read a few extracts from the report of the income-tax, amounting altogether to as much as commences the discussion who gives the tone to the what I said; and I hope that in future the Hon. Gentleman
the Commissioners on the state of the agricultural 8,000,0001. sterling Per annum. That was at a time vt hole debate— (Cheers)—it is the leading performer will rather refer to what I said, than to so high an authority
labourers in the county of Dorset.—(The Hen. member when rent was rising, when the landownersowere laying from whom all the others take their cue..— (Cheers.) las Mr. George Robins.—( Laughter.) Sir, we haee been
here read several extracts from the report alluded to, in extra rents, and when the farmers were in a state of heard the Hon. Member for 'Wolverhampton speak I taunted with having
ask
made ' predictions
houseiefti o n s
to which
oe k htanv ethnot been
front which it appeared that the women themselves prosperity. Now, I want to ask the Right Hon. believe for three hours and a half, and if I mistake not,
1
tions which lilve
e would
made bY the entlemen who :oPrteaulne;
stated that out door work was beneficial both to their Baronet, who, I presume, will favour the House with his one hour and a half was occupied in the production Of us —and which have not been realised! (Hear, hear.) They
health and spirits, and that the medical men who were opinion on this question—l want to ask him where is newspapers which contained the speeches which had predicted in 1812 that the averages would be lowered by the
examined, stated that, in their opinion, such was the the difficulty of carrying out the principles of free trade been delivered at every agricultural meeting, and which addition of the new towns.
ease. The Hon. Gentleman also read an extract, de- in everything? I wish to state, honestly and empha- he with great solemnity referred to. And if that is the Mr. GIBSON said that the average had been lowered.
scribing the clothing club at Blandford, which, last year, tically, that lam an advocate of free trade in every course which the author of the debate takes, if that be Sir R. PEEL—On referriug to the returns, it would be
had expended 2,000/. in the purchase of articles of thing. If you go into Committee on the corn-law, and the example set, really the Hon. Gentleman is the last seen that the averages are rather higher, in consequence of the
clothing for its members.) He begged to call the atten- the rules of the House sill permit me, I will move that person who ought to complain that other gentlemen addition of those new towns.—(The Hon. Baronet then read
tion of the Hon. Member to the amount expended by every article that is protected be inserted in this resolu- came provided with similardocumentsin order to remind an extract from an agricultural paper, which was intended to
this clothing club in a limited district, as a proof of the lion. Now, the Noble Lord the Member for the City of him and his Hon. Friends of the speeches they have deli- showhithat the new. corn-law did not give encouragement to
gambling—that prices did not depend now upon fluctuations of
value of the home market.—(llear, hear.) He now came London expressed some surprise that we did not bring vered. I wasglad to hear the second topic to which the Hon. fhaeniwelnather P '
, but fluctuations of supply.) Hon. Gentlemen
to the subject of wages.—(Hear, hear.) The report forward a free trade motion. Why, the Right Hoe. Gentleman referred. He delivered a homily against opposite predicted, wh hen t e present system was proposed, that
sested that, in the district of Blandford, wages were by Baronet at the head of the Government told us that we calling names. It is a bad practice, and I have re-
iwould be a
progress from bad to worse and that the re-
no means low, and, so far from placing the county of ought to deal with corn in a very different manner to marked that those who are most lavish of attacks on vival of trade was incompatible with the new corn-law. The
. Dorset lower than others as to wages, it showed that it any other article. Unfortunately to our sorrow, we others are the first to shrink from the application of a Hon. Member for Stockport said that if the law were carried
. was not so low in this respect as Somersetshire and know that that is true and we know that by abolishing similar instrument when used against themselves.— into effect, Stockport would be a howling wilderness, and all
. Wiltshire. He did not say but that, in many parts of the corn-laws,we shall abolish other monopolies. Now, (Hear, hear.) If there is any party in this House who the middle classes throughout the country would be reduced
, the county, wages were lower than in the Blandford 1 ham for free trade in everything. And lest the Right deals largely in the practice of calling names, and affix- to the condition of paupers.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
, dis trict, owing to the superabundance of the population. Hon. Baronet should think this a revolutionary Proposal, ing odious imputations on the motives of those who dis- • Now, Sir, that prophecy has net been realised—( Hear, hear 1
' He wished the wages were everywhere as good as they I want to show that you can adopt free trade, and that sent from themselves, that party is the one to which the —but I reg et that the improvement has not been so great as
we to at Blandford; but he was certain or this—that there is no national obstacle to its being carried out lion. Gentleman belongs.—(Cheers.) Ido not defend we
within eitid have wished. The Hon. Gentleman predicted that
wa;ges would not be made better by the rePeal of the corn- immediatele . I wane` to show you that, barring the practice, but the example provokes retaliation,
stateofsidixsaroLortltohns the manufacturing interest would be in a
' laws. —(Cheers.) That was the question before them, your own class interests and the interest of And those who first resort to the practice are very Mr. COBDEN—And it was so.
and. he felt convinced that, however much manufactures the landowners, and the farm labourers, there is no frequently the first to say the calling of names ought to Sir R. PEEL—What is the state of dissolution ?—( Hear,-)
might be extended by that measure, they could not be national impediment to your carrying free-trade to-mom- be distinct from legitimate argument, and they beg that Has there been no improvement? In cotton the declared value
' so ea:tended as to give employment to all those who row.—(" Hear, hear," ironically from Lord John Man in future the practice may be avoided. The Honeurable of the exports in 1844, as compared with 1842, showed an in-
, would he thrown out of employment in the agricultural ners.) lam glad to see the Noble Lord, because the Gentleman asked how the Anti-Corn-law League were crease of 16,300,000 lbs. The export of yarn had been in-
, districts in consequence of that measure.— (Hear.) Noble Lord professes an assumed benevolence. I am to be combatted. I think they have greatly diminished creasing. It had, however, since diminished, and the export
Even if the exchange could be made, he was not satis- glad to see the Noble Lord laugh. because it is a laugh their power by the use of the instruments they have had of goods in a more advanced state of manufacture had increase.
, fled that it would be for the advantage of the labouring of incredulity. It shows that he votes for the corn-laws recourse to.—(Hear, hear.) They have provoked in- Se with respect to earthenware, the exportation of that com-
modity-
, class. He had never drawn any distinction between because he believes there are national grounds for his dignation on the part of the tenants of the country, at tn 184 etwtaes srl,ooai?li.t,
ists;ehile in 1843 it was 659,0001.
• Itla7lllfactures and agriculture—their interests were doing so. The Noble Lord cannot be sincere in his pro- the free use they have made of unjust imputations, and
, creased cinesriP:e the continuance
gas,
of
tthhee exportation
shealatini-t
: auirdtea,mated; but if they looked to the comfort, the hap fessions (if humanity in upholding the corn-law they have provoked, by the attributing of base, and selfish, would be seen that the exports, as compared between 1842 and
, pinisas, and the morality of the labouringclasses, be mild for class interests, I want to show you that you can and interested motives to honourable men, a combination 1843, had considerably increased. But then it had been said,
not 'give the preference to the manufacturing over the carry out free trade anywhere.—(Hear, hear.) against themselves. It was but a short time since a take care of your imports. Now, what was the fact with re-
. agriesultural dietricts.—(llear.) Admitting that the What is carrying out free trade ? Nut by a boast was made that the tenants and labourers were in sped to them? Why, in 1842 the imports were 65,204,000/.,
agremiltural labourer received less money, it must be removing all custom-houses. Ihave heard that an Hon. favour of repeal of the corn-laws; but I apprehend, and while in 1843 they were 70,093,000!. I am, continued the
rersoseabered that money was not all that contributed to Gentleman, in writing to his constituents, has said that I infer it from the altered tone I perceived in the Right Hon. Baronet, only stating these things for the
happa ness. Admitting that wages were lower in the we wanted to abolish all custom houses, and I have seen debata, that they have discovered that they have Purpose of showing that the confident predictions that
agr2icaltural districts, sail the labourer had more a letter in the Times newspaper declaring_ that such is out-stripped the.: limits within which it would be have been made as to the particular operation
timer to attend to his comforts; and as to my doctrine. Free trade does Lot mean the abolition of prudent to have confined themselves, and the use of the iil the Bill have failed and been falsified.—(Heaia hear.) The
hap.pfness, he should cc rtainly give the preference customs' duties. It means taking off the duties which instrument they have' employed has recoiled on them- He
eble Lord, the
feelings
for Sunderland, for total repeal.
• to . the labourer of the agricultural districts, are levied for protection. How much was the amount sel% es.—(Cheers.) The HOU. Gentleman, then went to tremaciirelatset.e e4liteelV'obalne Lord said, thatwi
if
thetrheinkacomre ex.
l
The.:Noble Lord (Lord Howick) had very much exagge_ of that? The whole amount of duty paid last the particular motion, and said we would not es-ape from of the Ycorn-laws there would be an increased demandw s a
forep
in-
rate d the distress which prevailed in the southern coins- year for protective duties was 2,800,000/. ; that the discussion of it. It would appear from the speech -dustry, and the result would he an immediate restoration of
• ties o.f England. Ile hoped, as the Noble Lord had read
includes the duty on corn, on timber, on silk, of the Hon. Gentleman that the question they were now prosperity. Now, there have been many years in which there
the ,ac cusatio::s against the landowners there, he would and other items, in which there was a protective discussing was,the total abrogation of all protecting duties. has been an unrestricted importation of foreign corn. There
read their vindication in the report. The Noble Lord duty. Now lam an advocate for r, moving the whole of If that was the question, why was not notice given ac- was no duty on corn at the time of the war, but there was
had contrasted the condition of the people of Dorset- those Protective duties. The whole duty paid on foreign eordingly ? Nothing would have been easier to frame no cessation from those privations which are inseparable
shire, with those in Northumberland. He (Mr. Bankes) manufactures does not amount to 300,000/. How much than a motion, having for its object the repeal of all pro- from society in a i great agricultural and coat-
• ackn cewledged that in some parts of Dorsetshire 'S
their do you suppose was paid of' duty for cotton and foreign tective duties, but it referred to one particular depart- merciel country. It my firm belief that if there
dwel lkngs were bad ; but the report stated that in many manufactures last year? For cotton there was paid ment of industry, which it was thought expedient should was ad repdeal
for of
industry which
there would not be
• parts of Northumberland they were still worse. The 3,700 Z ; for lace, 7,600/.; china and earthen- cease and determine. The Hon. Gentleman shakes his Noble ennui Baid Lat rthe rabourer"shrutld
anticipated. a The
advocates of the repeal of the corn-law said the repeal ware, 3,600/.; linen, 12,000/.; wool, 16,7001.; silk head, but lam not wrong in saying that this motion has day's wages for a fair day's work, and that the repeeal of the
would? -not throw a single acre out of cultivation. Well, manufactures, 240,600/.; the whole amounting to 284,000/, reference to only one particular branch' of industy. Now corn-laws would ensure' it to him. For my own part I believe
he tie 31 tght differently • and he
,thought, moreover, that Now abolish all these duties, let there be no protection I defend protection to agriculture—(Cheers)—on the that no legislation could effect that, and what would not be the
the cceedition of those 'labourers, who would be still em- on manufactures ;we do not want them, for I began my principle and to the extent that I defended it before. 1 disappointment if, after the repeal of the corn-laws had taken
ployedl ,in agriculture, would be much worse than it was
address by saying we have no protection. The test of am about to address no new opinions on the subject to Place, it turned out that that perfect prosperity which the Noble
at pr ese nt. In those weekly displays at Covent-garden this is, that manufactures in this country are much the House. I have a strong feeling that, speaking Lord prophesied did not occur, and that the labourer did not
Theatre in which the Hon. Member for Manchester cut cheaper than they are anywhere else. The protection generally—l am now speaking of the amount obtaia a fair day's wages for a fair day's work? Would they not
such al. figure, great stress had been .laid upon the de- on silk manufactures is generally on peculiar kinds, of of protection—that the agriculture of the country is then revert back to the Noble Lord, and call upon him to make
clarations of Lord Ducie, who, it appeared, had been which the fabrics are rich and the patterns peculiar, I entitled to protection from considerations of justice as good that which he had promised. The. analogy between Ca-
prese nit at some of their meetings; but he thought his say abolish the protective duties on silk and other menu- well as of policy. I consider there are special peculiar, easilye anbdethabsowconunwrby itshteorteal
‘yvainaapephictiablea;sebdecre se it
dfe couldr
LordeNp, however amiable and estimable his character factures, and if there is any one here who supposes that burdens on land which entitle it to this protection— labotir in Canada and why there
colonies which re
there was not in
might be entertained wrong opinions on this sub- lam for a free trade in corn, and not in anything else, burdens imposed on the land for the relief of the poor. others. Now, I look to the state of the United States, and I
ject, elm; arrived at wrong conclusions.—(Hear, I repudiate his co-operation. I say you have no more On considerations of policy, I think agriculture is en- find that, even there, where there are no restrictions upon
hear.) He thought he might be termed rather a right to put a protective duty on silk than on corn, titled to protection, because I think that great public food, there exists great distress. In New York and Phila.
farmer among lords than a lord among farmers. Having Where we put out our proposal for subscription to the evils would be the result if this motion were carried to- delphia, there is certainty on the part of the labouring corn-
detaine i the House so long, he would not trespass fur- Anti-Corn-law League amovenhe manufacturers of the night—that is t , say, Ido not believe there are ten re- munity. On these grounds, Isdo not believe that the removal
them on their patience; nor would he have taken up so country, we distinctly stated that we did not ask a single fleeting, thinking men out of the Anti-Corn-law League of restrictions will realise the expectations of the Noble Lord.
much_ se,f their time had he not felt it necessary to rebut shilling from anybody who was not willing to abolish all who are of opinion that if the announcement were made I thank the House for the indulgence with which they, have
those e elumnious assertions which had been put forth Protective
_duties . in connection with his own to-morrow, that the House of Commons resolved that listened to me while I ventured to assign the reasons avhy I
regal diseg the landowners in that part of the country trade. This is the case. The amount you have from next Monday week all protection were suddenly totally disapprove of
the
absolute
whifchltlherollinobni.i Gentle -
with wl iich he was so intimately acquainted, to deal with would cause an apparent loss and immediately to be withdrawn from agricultural nmoatnandoas
tenadeano
new
opinionslue and
removal
p incnipleas prohibition,
the t en,
only
Mr. ;HUTT would be very brief. He would support to the revenue of two millions and a half' but you must produce, such a precipitate withdrawal of protection occasion' adopting
gly in opposition to the Noble Lord, who, ajthesme,
the a 3.0 tion of the lion. Member for Wolverhampton, recollect that by equalising the sugar duties you are would be for the advantage of the general interests of admits the principle of protection. I prefer the principle of
but not for the reasons with which he had recorn- voting away two pillions per annum in protection to the country. —(Hear, hear.) Suddenly to withdraw all the Bill of 1842 to the principle of the Bill of the Noble Lord—
mende d. it to the favourable consideration of the House. sugar. That is not enough for Hon. Gentlemen opposite, protection from the coffee and ginger producers of (Cheers)—and I have only to repeat the declaration which, on
He pa .e ferred the adoption of a low fixed duty to the and they want a little more • but if eou equalise the . the colonies, and to withdraw all protection from agri- the part of her Majesty's Government, I made at the corn-
aboliti on of all duty on corn under present cicumstances, duties on sugar, on coffee, and on other colonial products, culture and manufactures, would have the effect of mencement of the present session, that we do not intend, and we
A low 11,ixed duty would not be paid for by the consumer, you will make up every farthing of the revenue you are paralysing the commercial industry of the country, and have not intended, to diminish the protection vvhich the existing but by the foreign exporter; and if he erred in his going to lose by abolishing protective duties. You may would produce general distress, and the labourers of the corn-law gives to the agricultural interest.—(Loud cheers, from
opiniot ),„ he erred in the company of most intelligent and abolish every protective duty, and yet if you equalise the country would be involved in the general ruin. The theLlVerlintit tlitorfotsheetoHoeuxse.
House.)
The Right Hon Gen
indepe ttlent men. The Hon. Member concluded by colonial duties, the statesman will find himself' without question, then, we have to consider to-night is, whether tleman had so entirely mistaken') what he (Lord Howie's) had
saying he would support the motion. . the loss of one shilling of revenue. The Right Hon, we shall affirm this resolution, which, though confined said last night, and it related to a matter of so much import-
Mr. COBDEN then rose, and said—lt is not my in- Baronet, when he wished to benefit by an opinion as to to the question of corn alone, involves the sudden ance, that he trusted the'House would allow him to state-what
tention,, Sir, to follow the example of the Hon. Members an exception from his general rule, quoted with great ' and immediate removal of all protection from it was that he really had said. The Right Hon. Gentleman
for No: cediamptonshire and Dorsetshire, in making this a appiobation the opinion of Mr. Deacon Hume with re- our colonial and domestic . products. We should had imputed to him that he had said that, repeal of the corn-
questio a of the character or conduct of the Anti-Corn- gard to slave grown sugar Now, I have reason to know deal dispassionately and graduallY with the removal of laws would produce such an immediate effect as to insure, under
law Le et sue, for to my apprehension we are met here to that Mr. Hume's opinion on that point was the only part those protective duties, looking to the money expended all circumstances, to every labouring man a fair day's wages for
discuss -tl le character of the corn-laws, and not that of of his evidence before the Committee which he regretted in the cultivation of the soil, and seeing that Ireland is a fair day's work. Now he had said no such thin„e, lie had
the As iti-Corn-law League.—(Loud cries of e Hear, having given. I was in correspondence with him at the wholly dependent on agriculture.—(Cheers.) I know said that, in his opinion, society was so constituted by Provi-
hear," from both sides of the House.) If it were not so time of his death as to the Publishing of that evidence that, according to your rigid principles of political eco- dtieneces ca!hautrif it
lwere net interfered
sound and
by artificial restric-
very trite and familiar an anecdote, I would illustrate with notes, and the qualification he had made with re- nomy, I cannot abstractedly contest your principles.— °'l°
society,secuwreeintsddttilwe agar' airnda. He had said ntlemantra
e had been
eonf
the con iuct of these Hon. Gentlemen by that of the bar_ epect to slave grown sugar, was the only part he re- (Hear, hear.) Speaking mathematically, they may be admittd, on both sides of the House, that there had been a
lister w hoe, in complaisance • with the wish of the defen- gretted ; and if he had lived he would have expunged it. true. It may be true that the population from which progressive diminution in wages and in profits. He had said
dant to. %abase the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff's attorney, What was the opinion of Mr. Deacon Hume with respect production is sought to he withdrawn, ought to be em- that there existed in this country artificial restrictions, and that
lost his clieut's case.—(Laughter..) The corn-laws are to protective duties ?He was asked by the Committee ploved in other avocations. But is that practicable ?if those artificial restrictions were removed in the majority of
now on their trial, and there is only one way by which whether he thought the revenue would present any ob- —(Hear, hear.) If we are not mere philsophers or men cues, and under ordinary circumstances, they would secure to
they care be tried, and that is by their effects on the an- staele to the • simultaneous abolition of' all protective of science, having to deal with abstract and imaginary the poor, industrious man, a fair return for his labour, and that
tion at lay gc.—(Hear, bear.) Whether the farmer or duties.' His answer was "Certainly not; nay hesitation
.quantities, but men having to deal with the comforts and a system of legalised relief was a proper resource under extra.
the farmer 's labourer is a little better or a little worse, or applies only to the interests affected by the change, not subsistence or millions of human beings, host can we d
or inary circumstances, but one which ought not to be had re-
whether the landlord is a little richer or a little poorer, the revenue, which I have no doubt would be instantly disregard those considerations which are presented to the cousriser
itto rsdeErLordinaryeecirteaumi stares.— (Cheers. ) ,
does nest, to my mind, form anything like the whole of increased by • removing the protective duties." There contemplation of the legislator and the statesman ? .
- ssoble Lord had would
f t
rh in y aoe
words whipt the version which the
given o the
he had spoken last
the question which we have to consider. Now, I never appears to have been on the Committee some gentlemen You may regret having voted on the strict principles or night, and he would abide by that construction on all future
heard but two arguments, on national grounds, in favour who entertained an idea that it was not podsible to pay rigid philosophy and political economy ; but when you occasions; but the Noble Lord would perhaps permit him to
of the men-law., One is, that it is a part of a system of the State texeettnless theY continued the protective sys- have endanged the peace and prosperity of the country, read the passage of his speech by which he had been misled.
protectio n. This is one ground upon which the corn- team; and it was in answer to the questions of these you will have but a sorry return. Therefore, I say, for The Noble Lord had said we might give a new value to labour
law is defended. Is that a good ground of argument? gentlemen that Mr- Deacon Home made this statement, considerations of justice, looking at the long endurance by diminishing competition, and he had then proceeded trl, say
The other national argument is, that without the corn- He says that a highly taxed People cannot afford protec- of this protection—looking at the amount of capital in • that all that the poor man asked for was a fair day's wages for
laws you cannot meet the taxation or pay the interest on lion. An individua', ,wh".4e exPences are great, cennot. vested—looking at the nature of the population—looking a fair day's work, and they had a right to ask this, and the
the heavy debt which has been incuerech Now, with re- be generous. • That tue,very circumstance of the people at the fearful magnitude of the interests, not from a re- Legislature bad the power to give them this, by simply reliev-
gard to the argument that it is a pare of a system of pro- being taxed for the goo" of the State is a reason why gard merely for the interests of landlords and tenants, from
them from those artificial restrictions which prevented them
tection of native industry in all its bra they cannot be taxed Is it so ? d between. themselves. A people but the interests of all classes of the community—l must furnishing their labour to their best customers,—
If it bc so—if you can eit,v me that it does protect na- obliged to pay high public. taxes are less able to pay pmi- give my decided and unqualified opposition to the pro- (Cheers.) He read the passage for the purpose of showing
that
the Noble Lord had made use of expressions which, With.
Live industry., I will give up the corn-law.. But have you vete ones. . Now, upon Mr. Deacon Hume's opinion, and posal fur the immediate repeal of the corn-laws.— out those qualifications which the Noble Lord had intended,
done so ? Can you protect the exportin es manufacturer the facts I have stated, I take my stand against all (Cheers.) lam speaking now of the first proposal. If would bear the construction which he had placed upon them.
of this country ?—(Hear, hear.) One lit en. Gentleman Protection. If protection cannot be given equally, it lam asked whether lam prepared to bring under Lord HOWICK said that the passage which the Right
has referred to the case of a person who is a candidate must be unjust to some Portion of the community ; and, the consideration of the House any modified Hon. Gentleman had quoted was perfectly consistent with! the
for the office of President of America, who bad inscribed if it is unjust to any portion,- if they have the spirit proposition, I reply at once that I am not prepared. explanation which he had given. He did not usually look over
on his banners the motto, "Protection to nt itive indus- of Englishmen they ought never to submit quietly to The Hon. Gentleman says that my Right Hon. Friend the reports of his speeches, but it so happened that he looked
try." Why, there is a party in America in larecisely the such a system. elf 'you can apply generally, it can be of and myself' are using language different from that which this morning at the report of his speech in the papers—( Loud
same situation as the manufactures eere.--:ar. mean the no advantage to anY ?ne• Then, I say, abendon this we used at a former period. We are not holding dale. laughter)—and owing to the late hour at vvhich he had spoken
exporters of cotton. They receive no pro.% ction from system. It is unsound, and cannot be defended on any rout language. We said then, and we say now, that we de observationshoia: ha b
had
d been
entirely omitted in the news-
industry." so much abridged that many mm-
those parties who affect the cry of" Protectic ea to native Principle of sound 'policy. - Therefore it is I ask you to not contemplate any alteration in the corn-law.—(Hear,) P
rt
Paper reports.
qualifications
industry." There is precisely the same discos it 2u Ame- give your decision against this principle. You may say hear.) The Noble Lord, the Member for the City of
Mr. ELLICE had originally entertained no intention of ad-
rica, and precisely the same kind of agitatii en as that "We are strong in power—we have the const:tuencies London, whose absence on this occasion I regret— dressing the House, and he should not have done so had it not
in England. Everybody must recollect the cotin•se wffiell with us."—(lronical cheers.) Yes, hut how long will (Laughter)—has declared his intention of not voting been for the allusion which had been made to
was taken by the'South Carolinists when thciy threat'- you stand firmly .oo that pinnacle of power, if the against the proposal of the Honourable Gentle- him 'by the Right Honourable Gentleman.—( Hear, hear.)
ened to pass an Act of nullification. This is thse case in t foundations of your. pedestal are placed in jeopardy? man. Now the Honourable Gentleman has very fairly There was no choice left him between supporting the present
France. The wine-growers are the exporting producers, You must show that you .are on a just footing before called upon us to declare to night whether we are motion and voting for the continuanee of the existing corn-laws,
and they require no system of protection for native in- yon can hope to maintain your power. Now, I have for or against a total repeal of the corn-laws. Nothing and he should, therefore, support the motion. With regard to
dustry. This is the secret which is at the bottom of the never
,heard the question argued how protection benefits can be fatrer than the course pursued by him. You
silk duty, he would what the Right Hon. Gentleman had said on the subject of the
.observe tb at it was not all for protection,
i
opposition which now exists to the corn-law. How do the fin u. er, the farm labourer, or any other class of the cannot impute to him that he wants to catch ilk
and that f they were to raise a revenue by duties on imports,
I you suppose you will put that opposition down? By cominue •
ity You tell me that you do this to benefit stray votes by an equivocal motion. The Noble it was better to raise it on an article of luxury like silk,
jcalling names ? No. Show me that the corn-law is a the farmer and the farm-labourer, but my Hon. Friend Lord says distinctly that he is not prepared than on food, and the whole of the duty on ilk
ust law, and we will dissolve the Anti. Corn-law League; the Membee for Wolverhampton has asked you to show for immediate repeal, being of opinion that agri• was only one-half the duty imposed upon
feami.
but, unless you can show that, do not deceive yourselves how it does thtet. Do you do so? No, you immediateiy culture is entitled to protection. On what ground does He had always, in discussing the question of the corn-laws,
by supposing that such displays as those which have rise up and talk PS you always do, in the future tense, he withhold from his party the light of his countenance, and those other propositions which would most affect the work.
been indulged in to-night—such childish displays and you tell us w lot effect the opposite system has m and the advantage of his efforts, against the proposition ing classes, said, begin with reducing the duty on the raw ma-
I may call them—can ever effect the dissolu- injuring the farm er and the farm-labourer, but you do of the Hon. Member for 'Wolverhampton ? The Noble tonal, reduce the tax on food, enable the poor man to enter
Lion of the League. You talk of protection not tell us how th a preeent system benefits them. But Lord said that he found himself in a position in which into competition with his rivals in foreign countrie;. He
to native industry in all its branches. Now, I Ido ask the Righ t Hon. Baronet not to fly off into de- the Government had been, namely, in a very unenviable thought, considering the whole question, it would be absurd to
will bring that question home to you, and I will ask tails—not I mean the mere expediency of this matter. one. At any rate we have not solved the difficulty by say the present corn-laws
eeasd'outnld be permanent; could they,
you to show me how you protect the tabourer of the The Hon. Membei s for Wolverhampton has brought the rurtning away. The Noble Lord says, that because we for, instance, be ihiee
emenatienettai
to competet rowttirtopolis.; would the
country. I have told you before, and State it to you again, question fairly bef 'ore the House. This is a question, I maintain the existing corn-law, he cannot vote with us, artisans
more for their bread than in any other to sr n in E'puaryom-
g?onecHeiar,
that you may depend upon it that these 'vague declare. admit, which is no t sanctioned by the leading men on though he concurs with us in denouncing the proposi. hear.) This country formerly possessed exclusive advantages
tions will not serve you in this House. I will have you this side of the Hi else. But it is the sole question of tion of the 'Hon. Gentleman. The Noble Lord has not regarding steam and machinery, which no other countries en-
declare, and show, how you protect labour in this Loan_ controversy out of doors. The question out of doors is always been so squeamish.—(Hear, hear.) The other joyed ; but those advantages they possessed no longer, and it
try. I will meet you on the poor-law question. I will the principle of pie etection or no protection; anti when night the Noble Lord vindicated himself from voting with became therefore imperative on the Legislature to enable our
not avoid that discussion although an attempt has been a gentleman on t; als side of the House, possessing so those to whom he was opposed, by saying that he mechanists to compete with those of other countries.
made to avoid it by the Ministry. You shall not avoid large a share of the public confidence as my Hon. Friend should never have carried the Reform Bill and various Mr. Y. BORTHWICK rose amid loud cries of
," Divide,"
it. It shall be brought before the country; an m
d the the Member for Wdi verhapton, brings forward a Pre- other Bills, if he had not combined with those with whom, , and one or two exclamations of "Turn him out ! ' He at.
working classes of the country shall thoroughly under_ position against pr etoction, 1 say the Right Hon- Baronet though generally opposed to them, he occasionally con- ! tempted to explain, amid great confusion, some aspersions
stand the gross imposture you put upon them. Now with will not be treatin g h.lm or the people of this country cured in approbation or disapprobation of a particular ' which had been cast upon him in the
course of the debate,
regard to the revenue. It is said that without a protec- fairly, unless lie fairly met the argument be brought measure. Well, the Noble Lord does concur with us in The Hon.
BRIGHT Member,
then rose failed in obtaining a hearing.
hr. was received with loud cries
tive duty on corn we cannot pay the taxation of the forward on this occasion. The Right Hon. the disapprobation of this particular measure, yet he cannot lof " Divide, divide," and mingled cheers and uproar. He
country. I heard a remark fall from an Hon. Gentle- President of th e Board of Trade said that he make up his' mind to give that vote which his judement I said that he could assure the House that he did not intend to
man sitting opposite to me, who spoke with as much would not argue the principle of protection, because it tells him is the proper one.—(liear.) The Hon. 'Mem- I take up many minutes of their time. He felt that he would
gravity as if he believed what he was saying was un- was recognised by the Legislature of this country. put ber for Gateshead, on the other hand, who is the advo- not be performing his nine to those who had sent him to that
1
answerable—that unlees we maintained the corn-law we we come here to cr ntest that principle, and to call upon cate of a fixed duty, intends to vote with the lion. Gen- I House if he did not state the grounds upon which he would
' could not pay the taxation of the country. Why if weare to you to justify it. Is it not then sophistry., to say the Homan (Mr. Villiers), who has done all he can to repu."l give his vote thatnight-
_He w 3,s exeeedinglyglad that the night
had spoken upon this
be taxed to pay the taxes of the corn-grower,who is to be least of it, to tell us ' that because the principle has been diate his company, and who tells him that his le scan- i Hon. Baronet question that night, for
poke upon it he generally brought the
question
taxed to pay the taxes of the manufacturer? I think it admitted we will no t argue it, unless we make an exceP- tion is as much directed against a fixed duty as against '
when
he
spoke
compass than it -
has been shown that you cannot protect the manufac- tion to the mode in . which the tax is laid on corn. But a sliding scale. I think the Hon. Member has just as i into t
bee narrower
Right Hon. Gentleman opposedwas hehfore. Three years
turer; and the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire, with great I say again, we rt. ject the principle, and call upon the little defence for giving his vote, as the Noble Lord ! agfound that he did then, that tisellembnurpdoennsthne
posnamthee
candour, admitted that he does not pay more fur manu- Hon. Baronet to a bow how that principle benefits the has for stopping away. (Loud cheering.) Now landowners and farmers were a claim special
a just claim to pro-
factures than the foreign merchant pays for them, and country at large. The Treasury Benches on the other the more I hear this question discussed, the more tection. On this occasion the Right Hon. Gentleman
had
therefore there was no protection for the manufacturer side have shown a 'disposition to evade this question. convinced am I that it is infinitely better to maintain narrowed his ground, and had only addressed himself to the
either in the home or in the foreign market. I heard an The Noble Lord, the Member for South Lancashire, , the present protection than to attempt to conciliate sup- poor-rates.—( Cries of "No, no.") He would not like to mis-
Hon. Gentleman say that unless we have a high range of (Lord Stanley), wl tose great talents for debating no- 1 pert in favour of any slight modification.—(Cheers.) ! represent any Member of that House, but certainly the only
prices it is impossible for us to meet the national body denied, was sc sit to this House to defend the corn- The real, practical question, is between the mainte- ' special burden to which the Hon. Gentleman had alluded was
taxatior. Does anybody suppose that the corn-laws laws. Now, I have never heard him open his mouth on nance of the existing law and the total and unqualified . that of the poor-rates. Now the Noble Lord, the Member for
keep up anything but the price of corn? You would the subject of Prot& ,tion, and I challenge him to justify repeal; and I cannot conceive of any public advantage
_Laaneashire, came from a county where the landowners and
have high prices, yet have you not admitted that manu_ this principle. I et. ellenge him to justify it to the ma- arising from the substitution of the Noble Lord's duty . tarrmicirs
.were not so large a porti ti of the population as corn-
factures are sold cheaper here than in any other part of nufacturers of Pres ton and Blackburn, not to the foe the existing system. Ido believe that, for the bene-
,iobele with other
hclasses as they wnedte
if so,
other counties. The
IThe
the globe? And I want to know why you cannot pay minority who had p etitioned in favour of it, but to fit of the consuming classes, the present system works '
taNwkrnioawplseadwearteo,
his colleague, ethwatuthePrerweal:
communicate?'
the taxes the same as the manufacturers? There is a the majority. who op.i. sosed it. I ask him to show upon better than a fixed duty of' Bs. a quarter could possibly
such things as poor-rates in his county, and if the poor-rate were
great and fundamental fallacy lying under this argument Public grounds, the j, Istice of this law. Ido not ask , do. I have never heard a better .argument in favour of aground for taxing the community, to enable the land-owners
—that protecting duties tend to the benefit of the him to engage in a pet ems' skirmish in this House. 11 a graduated duty in preference to a fixed one, than we to; pay their poor-rates, they were also a ground for taxing
country. Protecting duties on corn, as has been ex- do not ask- him to engs v v upon that which he is so well I heard from the Noble Lord last nigh The Noble Lord
-t.
plained by the Noble Lord the Member for Sun- able to do—to engage nit a slashing debate upon personal ' goes quite as far as I do, in objections to the He would ask, where was the difference between the two cases?
deriand tend to lower both wages and profits; and how topics. I ask hini:to sh 4 .w upon public grounds, the jos- removal of all protection. He asked last night what He would be glad if the Right Hon. Baronet, when he spike
in the world, I ask, can it, therefore, t( ad to tice of the system of' gotection. If the Right n. could we reasonably expect from a sudden revolution, on this question, would be a little more explicit. No one was
I Ho
enable the country to bear the taxation? This is an Baronet rises in his phis e in this House, to def.
end the from a state of considerable Protection to one of free.. more capable of going into detail;, d eve: the most insignificant.
argument, argument, let me remind you, which applies not merely system, it will go forth to the country, and the pee-plc trade? The landlord and tenant would, said the Noble If the
vpeots.dr-rtttes
make
1
k to the farmer, farms,seie i wthat, when
the manufacturers as against the agriculturalists— would see whether the argument of the lion. Member Lord, be in doubt as to the manner in which their capital
the would
Inwere lowest, rent was at seeing
highest.
that is not the application of my argument. I contend for Wolverhampton wet i founded in reason and on facts, I could be profitably employed. lam afraid that a low fixed d P
when th han , w e poor-rates were high, rent was low?
that You are losing sight of the great body of the people or whether the weig he of argument by which they were : duty would not remove the anxiety. The Noble Lord
Let them cross the Tweed, and ask the farmer there why he
when he House You come to use this argument about protection, going to vote is on us 0 'side. Ido appeal to t e i further stated, that the effect would be a diminution in the paid more rent than his neighbour on the other side. They
I want to know how it will affect that great body of' net to go the vote um isl some argument has been given ! employment of' labour, and that there would be a much would be told that he had but little tithe and little.poor-rate to
people who are neither manufacturers, farmers, nor to show the justice of 'Jour principle of protection, greater importation than would be consistent with the pay, and that the"difference went to the landlord ut tile shave