The Sun.
London, England, 1828-06-16 00:00:00

riety of occasions it had been necessary for the Government
to interfere, in order to Introduce foreign corn by means of
proclamationsinto the markets of this country, so that the
consumer might not
.he distressed by the tpo high price
of corn at one time, and that the agriculturist might
not he ruined by the too abundant supply at another.
Under these circumstances the principle of duties was
adopted; and the trial made by the Bill of last year proved
that that principle might be resorted to with advantage.
There were various interruptions to the system of prohi-
bition during the several years in whiCh that system was em-
ployed. Not only did the Government sustain great incou-
veniences, but the disadvantages to the 'corn-growers was
Vera,' great, and there were othe'r' evils attending the
system. There was jealousy, on the part of the agricul-
turists of this country—there was jealousy on the Conti-
nent—nien complained of being throWn out of employ-
ment—and the Government could never interfere to the
satisfaction of 'all parties. For these reasons it became ne-
cessary to adopt and, arrange a system that would meet'the
wants of the country. The Government did not wish to
recur to a power that, wus arbitrary—that was, in fact, il-
legal on the part of the Crown ; and on all these. grounds
it was determined to adopt a different system. This was
not the time to discuss the amount of the duty. He :had:
stated on former occasions that that amount was sufficient;
but if, in the course of the discussion, any Noble Lords
should go into the question of the duty, he should have the
opportunity of making a reply.. The remainder of the
Bill referred entirely to the method of taking the averages.
In every respect but that, the Bill was a copy of that which
passed last Session. The only alterations which applied to
the averages were those required by the existing system,
instead of the former. The old system was an arrangement
for taking the averages ; by the new system, it was pro-
posed to take them every six weeks.
The Earl of L i%UDERDALE, notwithstanding that he
was suffering from ,severe indisposition; which would com-
pel him to require the indulgence of their Lordships, had
felt it his duty to come down to the Honse to oppose this
Bill. His object has always been to ascertain what were
the best means of maintaining the wealth of the country,
and at the same time procuring for the poorer orders a
cheap and a steady price of bread. With the view
of obtaining the cheapest as well as the steadiest price for
grain, he had first considered this question in 1813 ;
and the Noble Lord who was then at the head of the Go-.
vernment, and who, tho Ugh an opponent of his, was a fair
opponent, and one whose absence he should ever lament,
told him that in the course of the next session of Parlia-
ment, the question would be brought forward by his Ma-
jesty's Government, who intended to propose a protection
by prohibition up to a given price. He then assured that
Noble Lord that, though not generally a supporter of the
Government, he should certainly support them in that
view of the subject ; and those who were in the House at
that time must recollect how favourable he had been to such
a measure. The Noble Lord had told him that that law
should be a permanent law of the country during the con-
tinuance of peace. He (Lord Lauderdale) knew that the
prosperity of the country depended upon the permanency of
that law ; and he deeply deplored the change of the system.
It was an unfortunate circumstance, that the first remon-
strance against that law was by the agriculturists themselves.
He rose on this, as on other occasions, not for the purpose
of advocating the interests of the landholders against the
lower, orders of the community. God forbid he should do
so, for he firmly believed they were best provided for when
they were combined. There were three systems advocated
in this House. There were first, those who contended that
there ought to be a free trade in corn—then those who con-
tended with him for a prohibition up to a certain price, or
for a prohibition by duty; and the distinction which the
Noble Duke seemed ti, him to have taken on that point,
was, in his mind, a distinction without a-difference. For a
century past, the system of the law of this country bad been
to protect agriculture by prohibitory duties; and in the
best times for agricultural prosperity, that course bad been
followed. In his opinion, the scale of duties proposed by
the Noble Duke was likely to produce different effects at dif-
ferent times. It would be favourable to the agriculturist
in one state of the market, and unfavourable to him in
another. In his view, nothing could be more prejudicial
to the country than a free trade in grain.- It was an im-
possibility to introduce it, it would starve the community.*
and the more nearly they approached it, the snore should he
reprobate such a system. It was now for the first time
that he had occasion upon this subject to refer to the History
of the Roman Empire, which afforded a strong proof that
the abundance of grain imported front the subject provinces
had ultimately ruined the agriculture of Italy. In his re-
marks upon that subject, Varro had status, that the pro-
duce of Italy, to the quantity imported before that period,
,vits as 10 to 1; and Columella, whoafterwards wrote upon
the same subject, described the produce to have fallen as low
as 4 to I.—[The Noble Lord was here interrupted by some
remark from Lord King, and turning to that Nobleman, he
said] :".:-.These were classical authors, whom his Lordship
must be acquainted with, and might quote from them if
their opinions had been mistaken. In the Treaty between
the King of Spain and his subjects in 1665, it was stated
that the agricultureof that country had been destroyed by the
protectiop which was granted to the importation of foreign
grain, and the people prayed that a different system might be
adopted, and the. home agriculture protected ' • and that the
country might not be rendered as it bad been, dependent on
foreigners, who would leave them without a supply, when
they were in need of it themselves. He would state an
anecdote upon this subject, which chewed the way,in which
this free trade had 'been viewed in another place. In 1735
the Vizier of Turkey had encouraged to so great an extent
the importation of foreign grain, that there were at ong time
no less than three hundred foreign ships laden with grain.
The people of both countries complained of this; because
in the one it took away their corn, and in the other It de-
stroyed the market for their own produce; and the cense-
qitence was, the poor Vizier lost his head. But what was
the effect on the price of corn ? Why, that the same quan-
tity of corn that had been sold at' 17d., was actually raised
to Gs. In modern times, an instance of an opposite kind
had occurred. In Sweden; the home agriculture had been
vs much encouraged that the produce exceeded the demand,
and they were obliged to distil 200,000 quarters of grain
from the supply, and that country enjoyed a supply of
grain to a greater extent- than any other country.
—There _always would be a defect in any system
that freely admitted grail' from States more favoured
than those into which it . was imported. This country
stood in a particular situation with regard to foreign grain
at this moment. They knew that one part of the empire
had increased her supply, and from that country he
thought we ought to encourage the importation, more
especially as that was not a manufacturing country. He
meant Ireland; and he thought this country should look to
Ireland.in the first instance, and nut, by encouraging fo.
reign importations, interfere in the smallest degree with
that country's produce. What losses, he would ask,- had
hithertO been sustained by the system of prohibition ? What
mischief had been 'the consequence of the Act of 1815 ?
for the Noble Duke had spoken as if it had been mis-
chievous. Let them look to what had been the price of
grain ten or- 'twelve years,antecedently from that period.—
When he supported that Act, he was told that
.he was
erecting a mioimuni,of price, and that the country would
never he able to enjoy grain at less -than 80s. per quarter.
But what was the fact? Why, for 'some years, the price
had never exceeded 65e., and last year it was 575. Was
that an unreasonable price which required alteration by'
law ? Did tlw,proble Puke wish that the price should be
under 575. ? Certainly not. On thelcontrary,he argued the
question as if the Present I3ill would sustain corn above that
price. A feW years ago a number ofpetitions had been laid upon
the table against 'it, buthe 'knew how those petitions were
obtained, and valid get them in the same manner 'upon any
subject whatever. They generally added a clause upon the
necessity of .Parliamentary Reform—(a laugh),—and on.
that of reducing the salaries of officers of the Government
further than they had been reduced... ,He was oppoied:
fp such petitions ; had seen the walariesoloffieers of the
'Crown reduced too much for the condition-of the Officers,
and for that of the Goyernmeet, and 'Win his early life he
had enacurred in a resolution' declarimr, that "the influ-
ence of the,Ctivii has increased, was increasing, and ought
to be diminished," he now acknowledged that he believed
tile reverse of that proposition to be actually true. Re-
ports had been selit•into the House upon the subject of this
Bill, which, after differing much in' their statements,
!ode(' in declaring that it was impossible to recommend
.It.)eracolteetultdtht c eoefonodri. ins itdisTi
an:tit!: ;yi,e,baiansadieti
ffirioe)ceniiiinh.dtfi s,O
any distinct measure to Parliament. Ai measure was in-
edn.dginever
t thatsince
Bill
bleitt:nd
ir)sh.'ll°'S°Ponlitie-
orrit,h;terimp epaisiiukiremmookeiresalevcaosrdna:pintriVii)trhoutglthatt 'afbosrtzertd,thaemoidryloief.
would only say, that it tva: one which did not come re-
eernmended to hini from the source arOie.—
Ilow was it possible for the agricultural interest to goOn,,
'when, under the modern laws of these theorists, the duties on
'fliteign wool had been *so reduced, 'that wool which used to'
:sell for IBa. now only fetched 7•,. 10d. in the market
'A' Noble Friend Of his had sr,ted on a former occasion,
that the great danger to be apprelten!ledwits',. the frequent
ItiterPosition of the Legislature in altering-the law. It was.'
with him a question, whether it had not been the object
of certain parties so to act as to make a case against the i
andtroeigpd nati
law as it now existed. He would be sorry to attribute any '
such objects to the Noble Duke, or to the Noble Lords
who acted with him ; butt he did believe that there
were men likely to be led away by the fashions of the they, in

opposition to their better judgments. He, however,
maintained that it would be best to continue the existing
law, leaving all exigencies which might arise to be managed
by Parliament when sitting, or by the Privy Council when
Parliament was not sitting.. Last ear a curious, and
he thought somewhat extraordinary doctrine, had been
broached ; they heard talk of the comparative inte-
rests of the manufacturing and agricultural interests.......:
He knew of no difference between those interests. The
agricultural interests were so bound up with the general
wealth and prosperity of the country, that there was no
measure of general benefit which would not be of service
to those interests. But it was said that a resting place
was wanted for the agricultural interest, and it was pro-
posed to give it by this Bill. But where was to be the
resting place for the manufacturer who would have to ap-
ply to a foreigner for his food ? Where would be the rest-
ing place for the decay of agriculture which such a measure
was calculated to introduce ? Where was to be the rest-
ing place for the diminished home consumption which that
decay would, of necessity, produce? The Noble Lord, after
some strong allusions to the arguments used by Lord
Goderich last year upon this question, went on to observe,
that that-Noble Lord was mistaken,if he supposed he could
ever introduce a free trade in corn. The Noble Lerd
might shake his head and dissent from that opinion, but he
maintained that it was true. Did the Noble Lord imagine
that he could introduce sueh a s) stem, when all the nations
around- us were copying our ancient trading system? It
was preposterous to entertain such an idea. He repeated,
that he conceived it would be most advisable to continue
the present law, leaving it to Parliament or to the Privy
Council to act upon cases of emergency. Upon these
grounds he would oppose the motion.
• Lord GODERICH—My Lords, as the Noble Earilas
thought proper to mention me upon this occasion, and to
allude with some severity and humour—of which I do not
complain—to the opinions I expressed upon the present
question on a former occasion, I feel called upon to make a
few observations to your Lordships. The Noble Earl, in
• quoting the opinions I gave on a former occasion, has given
them with perfect accuracy. I wish, however, to inform
the Noble Earl, that, in forming my opinions on subjects,
I am not so much of a philosopher as not to perceive that,
in dealing- with the interests of man, in all their intricate
and complicated bearings, we must modify and regulate
them according to times and circumstances. But I say at
the same time, that we are hound to lay down some sound
principle as the basis upon which we mean to act. And
the questionvfor your Lordships here is, whether that basis
shall be a prohibition of foreign corn, or the indirect and
variable duty which is proposed to you by this Bill. This
is the question you are called upon to discuss ; and although
1-differ from the Noble Lord as to the benefits arising froth
the existing law, and the evils to be apprehended from that
proposed to us, I beg him to understand that I never pro-
posed, and never supported any thing like an abstract free
and unrestricted trade in grain. And although I have felt
anxious that the laws and modifications of that trade,
which twenty-three:. years of war have forced upon
us, should be brought back to what they were before these
derangements took place : and although I am no theorist
or inexperienced innovator, who sloes not care two
straws for the agriculturists; although I am not one of
those who are ready to sacrifice the best interests of the
country to novel speculations—although, I say, I do not
feel that I deserve to come within any of these reproaches
of the Noble Earl on the one hand ; so on the other hand

do I feel that I ought not to be reproached for wishing to
establish the basis of a free trade, subject, of course, to
regulations and restrictions, where the interests of the
country may require them.--(Hear.)--The Noble Earl
has argued this question as if its policy was entirely new,
and as if the law, as it now is, had had the experience of
ages to recommend it. Now, my Lords, the reverse of
this happens to be the fact. Formerly we always regulated
the importation of corn by a duty. The first regulation of
this kind was in 1804, at which period a duty of 245. was
imposed upon foreign corn, beginning when it was at 545.
and after that, instead of a gradual reduction' of duty, it
fell at once to 25.. 6d., by which an immense importation
might suddenly take place. An alteration was tubsegnently
made, raising the market price to 635. but still keeping
the duty at 245. up to that point, after which it fell again
to 2s. 6d. The Noble Lord went on to contend, that if
they were to . continue the law, which allowed the ports to
remain open for three.months after corn attained a certain
price, every person, having corn within the reach of our
markets .would pour it in, as, if they did not do so, it
might be long before such an opportunity again presented
itself. And it was only by a graduated scale of protecting
duties that such an evil could be prevented. The Noble
Earl wished to have the power of admitting corn under
such circumstances vested in the hand,* of Government.—
This he (Lord Goderich) should certainly object to, as he
thought it dangerous and unwise to vest such enormous
power in the hands of any Government, connected as they
necessarily were with the landed interests. It would be
much better to have a fixed la.' on the subject, and relieve
the Government both from the danger and the responsi-
bility of exercising such a power. The Noble Earl had
objected to the various changes made in the Corn Laws,
and in the price of corn at different times, and had taunted
Ministers with being the cause of those changes ; but the
Noble, Earl appeared to forget the period at which the
greatest fluctuations took place. Most Of the Noble Lords
who heard him would bear in mind that the greatest fluc-
tuations in the price of grain had taken place since the in-
troductionof the Noble. Earl's Bill in 1816.—(Hear.)—
It ,mould be idle to expect that they could frame any law
which would altogether prevent fluctuations in the price of
grain, and keep it at a steady price ; no law could effect
that object. But the law now proposed would, in his
opinion, go far to effect that object ; and more they could
not expect. The Noble Earl, in allusion to the various
changes which had been made in the commercial inter-
course of the country, had imputed certain'notions and im-
pressions to those by whom these changes were introduced.
It was easy to attribute motives, and cast imputations
upon public men, but he denied that either he or
his colleagues had been actuated by any such mo-
tives. The Noble Earl had found fault with what had
taken place under the warehousing system; now it should
be recollected that the warehousing system took place in
1822, and upon what ground was it proposed ? It was
proposed on these grounds: The corn was imported into
this country under the old law, and upon the faith of that
law ; and Parliament having thought proper to alter that
law, it was then thought right that this property ought
not to be destroyed. This was the ground upon which it
was allowed to be warehoused; that ground might be
good, or it might be bad, hut whether the one or the other,
it was impossible dint the Government could have been ac-
tuated by the motives attributed to them by the Noble
Lord. He had last year delivered his opinions upon this
subject so fully, that he felt it unnecessary to take up the
time of their Lordships in recapitulating them. It was
sufficient for him to add,- that the second reading of the
measure of last year had been sanctioned by the majority
of their Lordships. • He did not deny that there existed
objections to the measure, although it was not his inten-
tion to enter into them at that moment. Ile said now, as
he said on the first occasion, that he supported this mea-
sure herause ha wished the law to be settled. The greatest
mischief Must arise, and always had arisen, from an un-
settled state of the price' of griin. Ile repeated that no
*
law could settle the price of corn ; but they were bOund to
derive all that could be expected frominquiry and fair rea-
son. Taking this view of - the question, he felt bound to
support the motion. He felt it unnecessary to reply to
what had been stated by the Noble Earl, on the autherity
of Varro and Columella, of the former state of Rome and
its provinces, as he did not Consider it by any in'eans a vase
in point. Nothing could be' more different than the pre-
sent state of Europe from its former state of marshes and
fereste. He trusted the Bill before their Lordships would
fix the basis of our corn trade on a' firm and stable footing.
The Earl of MALMESBURY would observe, that the.
Noble Lord on the cross-bancli appeared to have mistaken
the ;Anion made by the Noble Earl opposite as to the
former state of Rome. If he understood the _Noble *Earl,
'all he meant to say was, that the policy of the Roinans in
compelling their distant and newly conquered provinces to
furnish corn for the capital, had the effect of destroying all
agriculture in the home provinces ; and this the Noble
Viscount would, upon referring to history, find to be the .
fact.. If so, then, he contended, that the comparisOn Was
perfectly applicable. He for one felt the great importance
of the question before their Lordships ; he had ever held
the opinion, that up to a certain point a prohibition of the
importation of corn ought to exist; and he confessed, that
if lie entertained that opinion before, be was much
strengthened in it by the experience of the past year- A
Right Hon. Gentleman who had devoted much time to
the subject, and who was known to have deeply studied
it, had proposed a certain scale of duties last year, in which
he stated that there required a protecting duty of 245. Gd.
On the scale at which his protection commenced. That
measure was not adopted, and this year the Right Hon,.
'Gentleman found that he was wrong, and felt it neeessoy to
retrace his steps. lie approved of the present Bill upon
one point—that it would tend to establish in this country a
Attie of independence as to the supply of the primary ar-
ticles Of subsistence. The language of the Legislature to
the producers ought to be, " we give you the exclusive
supply of the market, so long as you produce those articles
which are wanted at reasonable prices; but when the price
gets beyond that, you must allow us to derive some assist-
ance from the foreign growers." Was it not possible to
accomplish such an,object by permitting the admission of

foreign produce.? He had never met with any-anetllft°
~
this last argument. Why not prohibit the importat
grain when it is below a certain fixed point, so)" 6'pe'or
645. ; but, by the present system, the farmer. way cto
safe. The fine Dantzic wheat was equal to that of
and might now be imported to the injury of the "'Jo
grower. But a number of merchants might speculOg
the importation of foreign grain to the amount of thOo.
four. hundred thousand quarters, and they might
The creditors might urge them for paymento
they might afterwards seize this grain, and
it to market at a loss of thirty, forty, or 0
per cent. The speculators might .be ruined, but ri/
would not be the only persons ruined ; the agricultuo
would likewise suffer by this foreign produce being br'it
into the market. By the present measure neither olits
barley received any protection beyond what was aifordo
them last year, though it wag acknowledged that the tot
of last year was not sufficiently .high. He thougbi ip•
Ireland was not treated well, in not having her 1-etutolov
eluded in the averages, which, as they were now pi
taken, could not, in any fair sense of the word, be ci,e,
the averages of the United Kingdom. . The Irish
with respect to freight, agency, and other charge* rtvi
upon the footing of foreigners, without having the ,
advantages which were extended to the foreign grolfo,
He would now advert to the Isles of Man, Guernsey e,
Jersey. By the Bill 01/422, the Isle of Man was pllh,
upon a footing with' Great Britain; but by sepealing,i)
Act of 1822, and not adverting to the Isle of Man in
new Bill, the Island was placed in a singularly. inoineo
situation. Iu a former Act the Islands of GnernseY
Jersey were treated as the Mother Country, but by the,i;
of 1822, they were put upon the footing of a foreign of
Now that the last Act was repealed, the Islands
again placed upon their _former basis; and this roes
big of the cases of the Isle of Man with those of Guerr;
and Jersey, afforded a singular instance, of. legi'll o,e
He 'thought the danger to the country from- this meloi
greater than was imagined. proprietors of or
yielding less than about one. thousand pounds a''ot
would feel most seriously the operation of the law,
those of only about 50/. would be almost ruined.
Mischief had resulted from the state of the law in Isd
and he did not therefore see the necessity of the Legisilfrh.
altering the then state of things; but, at all eventsoo
could not possibly concur in the propriety of varying 'I
protection from seventy to so low as about fifty-eight
lings. He would maintain, that the, domestic' agrlr,,
ture was amply sufficient for the supply of the Oth,
sumpt ion of the country; and if it were not, he beggedA

House to einisider that they bad an inexhaustible grail
in Ireland.

Lord KING was convinced that the present meat°,
Was not intended to be a final settlement of the questiw'
and this, perhaps, was one reason why the Noble Lord °9b;
posite had had an opportunity of complaining that
re
(Lord King) had not indulged this propensity to-anticir's
evil. lie could tell the Noble Lord, that a More subs
tial reason was, that he did not much like to prOgnoticosi
good, nor to anticipate evil, nor to deliver any °Pin
Whatever to a sleepy audience;—(A laugh)—not that t).
House was, or ever had been, or perhaps ever would red
sleepy, when any questions were before it which c.nicer t
the personal interests of its Members ; but in the pr el
case it was of little practical utility to oppose the Bill- , ei
really did not understand the reasoning of a Noble I'Q
opposite, nor could he appreciate the impressionwhich
noble Lord hid of the facts of the case. The Noble L
had exultingly asked, " How could, that be called a I"?
nopoly which was. granted in favour of a whole country
~
This was, notoriously not the fact, for the monopoly of '''„lt.
and of the general produce of the laud, was obviously gra'-)
ed to one order of the country; and it not onlyak° °
all other orders, but it was granted at their eaPelo
and much to their injury. He looked upon the Bill 41"
far advantageous, that it repealed the Corn Bill of 10''
When he reflected upon the principles of that Bill, 01h,
all his knowledge of Parliament, he :was Most'farcu'
struck with the impudence of introducing such a meainre hat
°
the Legislature. The object of introducing that Bill nri
to keep the price of corn as high as 801. the quarter, ant
whilst it was as lr,w as between 40s. and 50s, on 0
rest of the Continent. The price of 80s would have boo
d
kept up had it not been for Ireland. The Noble PM hilt
maintained, that the prices of agricultural produce "g 01
to be kept up by Parliamentary measures in the ratio.
taxation. Did 'the Noble Lord really mean to my, that P:
proportion as Ministers increased the burthens of taxatio;
they were to raise the price of agricultural produce. 'i
this were his proposition, he maintained whet no map 'il
sound. judgment could possibly support.: He w°o
tell the Noble Lord that the question was not so rnuf"
between what was called the Agricultural and the Coo'
wercial Interests, as between the land-owners and t'
prosperity of the country. The general prosperity W'
I checked in proportion as they rose the price of corn;
. He was not a political metaphysician, nor a Scotch polite,
cal economist—he would send all such to the devil.,---(1'
laugh)—if their science contradicted experience; but with,'
out any scientific research, it was not difficult to tell we
effects of this legislating to raise the price of food. 19:
Noble-Lord (Goderich) was hiniselt not orthodox in t"-
new faith; he was a heretic, a sort of Unitarian, an`lige;
' parated the substances too much • he was afraid to 11017
the true faith, which embraced the doctrine of free trail
and many other doctrines not palatable to the Noble L 0
or to many others in that House. He (Lord King) ,h(id
say, that the first article of the new creed was Free Tra e,
—the 'emit', was against Monopolies in general—the this
article was snore especially against those monopolies svhit,
gave private advantages to any one class of the comunini If
to the prejudice of the remainder; and from all these 0)4
which the present Bill was one) he hoped .the House volil I,
be delivered. It had been held that the present mea°llr:,
was nothing but a compromise.. If this were the caw/ ,„-
would only say, that it was not a compromise between ti'-t
Agricultural and Commercial Interests of the country, hu)
between two parties in the same Government.—(War.

Lord MALMESBURY explained.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE denied that himself, °,ir
the Noble Lord on the cross bench (Lord Goderieb),
argued
de
awaret
ohfe of
arguing, but to what had bee-
argued the Bill Of 1815 as a measure intended to prod"'
80s. as a minimum price of
jiwihnet,;htte.but
really intended to be produced.
Lord GODERICH explained.
LordblllL Ktl NG
tdh wasaer mg
The Marquess of BRISTOL gave his most cordial surf,
port to the measure now before .the Howie, as one wbic
avoided extremes on both sides, and most calculated
promote the best interests of the whole ennuungi ~,
T,
mannerh
eLoridn
King)
)i
b hrn
not ta..A
Noble
alluded
uodredas o had
Another reason which induced him to give his support
the Bill was that it came before them recommended by tibe,
Noble Duke at the head of the Government, whose O;
simplicity of character and unflinching integrity had We
his confidence, as he believed it had that of most of rhetr
Lordships. --(Chee►s. )
Earl STANFIOPE contended that the agriculture °
the country had always flourished under a system of nr°bi;
bition. In the reign of Charles H. prohibition ex''4i ,
until the price reached 635. ; corn was then admitted ot)1
on payment of a duty of Bs., which taken together Witt
the prohibitory price, would be equal to about 8/. 4s.
the present money. Under that law there was an abthllilro
dant and constantly increasing supply of corn in
country, and we were even able to export to foreign eo'llioi
tries. In 1766 the system established in the reign
Charles IL, was departed from, and from that time to IC't
te
the price of wheat was on the average 16s. higher than
had been in the 30 years preceding. It as qUits.iireti
sible to state what was the minimum price at which foreitt
corn might be imported into this country. The Rig..
Hon. Gentleman, whom he was happy to call the late Pt.
s'7°
,silent of the Board of Trade, had himself admitted that fac
Some persons said that the present. ill, like the wag°
ufolerrelyan experiment. . thought it most impolitic letting in the bonded corn by proclamation,
sport with a great interest for the sake of trying an elfe;
rireant. A Noble Lord had said that he cold 00
consider the passing of the present -Bill would be
settlement of the question. In that opinion he-concurred
'for if the Bill passed, he believed that petitions would
in upon their Lordship, praying them to replace the
. country in that position which alone could afford it secitritY•
The Noble Earl would state 'what he considered the caral.
nal virtues of the greatest importance to the state:. The
first was-protection to agriculture, which- had justly been
represented in the speech from the throne as the most iny
portant interest in the state : the second was protectio?,
to other domestic industry, as contra-distinguished from all
those dangerous theories which had been.unfortimately re-
dured to practice, and known by the name of free trade
the third was protection to the navigation and shipping
interest of the country, which could' alone constitute nor
strength in war, and the violation of whose interests NOs
a just ground for the impeaching that Minister who should
venture to propose any measure having such tendency: the
fourth, and not the least important,
,and one to which he
was desirous of calling the attention of the House at no disc
Cant period, was protection to all the interests of the
country by: a currency adapted to its- wants: The Noble
Lord stated, that dkapproving of ilierperiSiiiou'iiiiiiiciplee
upon which the Bill was founded, he should move that tbe
Bill be read this day six months, in order that he 10;0t
enter his protest against it.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH felt confident that Goyeo.'
went could not have offered a Bill founded on any Pcit;
elide except that so generally approved of by the Ler