The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-09 00:00:00

AVbON, 'FRIDAY MORNLNG, MAY 9 1845,
UE SUN,

-4- "e Australia. That gentleman
"' . his

would be interfered with by the line before Parliament granted
the oh At.t to critistthet it.
Atter a few words from Lord VIvIAN and Lord tAttotnina At,
The AlargiiiS df LONDONDERRY' reinarkbd that, ki
many of the projacted railways *ould past oiyet cord Min* it
might So happesi ifiet, in the coarse of time; they ;night fti:te
*Ay, and inflict serious injury, not only upon the owner of the
mine, but the public at large. He, therefore, wished to ask the
Noble Lord whether the Railway Clauses Consolidation Bill
trade any protiAion frir the piiiehtise, by the railway Company,
of the thine as well as of the surface a the earth?
Lord DALHOUSIE was understood to reply in the
affirmat

would aecrue to the inhaismo.,.. -- -
had fofnierly been a Member of that House 'tor
large property contieeted laitt with the great agricultural int.-
re6t, of that county, dnd,if he were, at all interesteti, it *Mild be
on the opposite side. He was delighted. at having the oppor;.'
ttinity of holditig tip sortie Pi.oof of the di,sinterctiedneis of that
excellent GovtrnOr. He objected to the duty now Clarged
upon colonial produce, because it was stated some years ago by
the Right Hon. Baronet to be the maximum. The Right
Hen. Gentleman he believed had not disapproved of his opi-
nions on this subject. He knew very well that his real opyo-
nents were gentlemen who sat below the gangway on the other
side. He would. undertake to prove that the Hon. Member
tot Nofthurikihiland fieVer adopted his own views on
agricultural protection. He also objected to this discrimi-
nating duty, because it intimated to the people of Australia and
to the would that the former were less deserving of the favour
of the Government than Ltheir brother colonists. He would
contend for it, that if the agricultural produce of that colony
were permitted to come into England, it would give an impetus
to British manufacture, and increase employment ; and thus the
idle labouring population would not be thrown back upon the
country for parochial relief. He declared when he looked at
the returns as to the state of the population in these realms,
and the obstruction that was offered to every description of
improvement in Ireland, all this affected him to a degree that
he could not express.--( Hear, hear.) He would ask, why not
give to Australia the same advantage that was given to the
United States? There could be no disguising the fact that
this state of things had induced smuggling to a great extent
along the coast; and would this country, then, persevere
in holding a state of law that would encourage such
a practice? Weald this country continue laws that
would encourage the produce of America, and de-
preciate that of Australia? Surely not. This, then, was
his case ; and all he asked for was, the same protection to corn
brought from Australia, as that given to the corn brought from
Canada. He asked it not only as an act of justice, but as an
act of prudence and good government.—(Hear, hear.) One
word more, and he had done. He heard the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, upon the in-
troduction of an important measure lately, speak of a small but
dark cloud that appeared in the western horizon. He did not
mean to say that the Right Hon. Baronet was then actuated
by any feeling of fear ; but, again, he would say that this Go-
vet nment ought to give the people of Australia equal rights and
privileges with all her Majesty's subjects.
Sir W. JAMES said he would occupy the attention of the
House but for a few minutes. He supported this measure not
only in compliance with the wishes of his constituents, but also
because he conceived it was one which was in accordance with
the general policy of her Majesty's present Government—
( Hear, hear.) His Hon. Friend who had proposed the mea-
sure might have gone into the question of the corn-laws and
the colonial government, but he ( Sir W. James) conceived he
had acted more wisely and prudently by not doing so.
Sir G. CLERK said he felt that he laboured wider great

WOIIIU u.....

The matter then dropped.
The Bail in Ertttr Bill \Vent tbrough Committee, and the
report was ordered to be brought up after the holidays.
The Privy Council Appellate Jurisdiction Bill was read a
third time and parsed, a clause being introduced to postpone its
operation to the let of January, 1846.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
On the motion cf the Duke of WELLINGTON, their
Lordships then adjourned for the holidays till Friday, the
pith instant.

disadvantages in attempting to reply to the eloquent speech of
his Learned Friend opposite ; but he could not permit the
measure he had proposed to go to a vote without stating why
it was that he (Sir G. Clerk) intended to negative it. He
conceived he (Mr. H.) had greatly exaggerated ;the benefits
which he said would follow from the adoption of the measure.
He ( Sir G. Clerk) did not think that any of these advantages
would follow it. The great trade upon which Australia de-
pended was its wool trade. As for its trade in corn, it would
be impossible that it could have the accounts of the state of the
agriculture of this country, in any one year, in sufficient time
to be of any benefit to it in its trade in corn.
He knew perfectly well that he would be asked this question—
.. Why, then, if you suppose that no great quantity of wheat is
likely to be brought from these colonies, do you offer any ob-
jection to this motion ?" Now, although the Hon. Gentleman
had attempted to throw some ridicule on the settlement of the
corn-laws which took place in 1812, he (Sir G. Clerk) still
remained of opinion that it was very unwise constantly to be
tampering with the laws relating to that article, in the produc-
tion of which so great a portion of the capital of this country
waa invested. He would call to the recollection of the House
the statement which was made by his Noble Friend the Secre-
tary for the Colonies, when ha submitted the Canada Corn Bill
to the consideration of Parliament in 1843. He stated then
distinctly that the measure had been brought forward in con-
sequence of declarations which had been made—which, al-
though not binding on the Legislature, had been acted upon by
the Colonial Legislature. If the Hon. Gentleman would look
to the returns which had been laid on the table of the House of
the quantity of wheat flour which had been brought from Ca-
nada in the last year into this country, he would find that the
amount was very small. The Hon. Gentleman must re-
member that if the existing Canada Corn Bill
was an anomaly, the present motion would only
introduce a fresh anomaly into the legislation of
this country. He (Sir G. Clerk) had stated that the South
Australian colonies would derive no advantage from the mo-
tion if it were carried, as those colonies did not at the present
moment raise sufficient corn to support the people of that
country. It appeared that during the last three years 48,000
quarters of wheat had been imported into the South Austra-
lian colonies from Valparaiso, and a considerable quantity from
Calcutta. Now, it was perfectly clear that if this motion were
adopted it would cause an outlet for the corn of South Ame-
rica, through which it would come to this country. Under
these circumstances, looking to the small amount of corn raised
in the South Australian colonies, even including Van Diemen's
Land, he did not think that the Hon. Gentleman had made
out such a case as ought to induce the House to tamper with
and alter the existing corn law of this country. As far as
price was considered he apprehended that the very small quan-
tity of corn that came from South Australia would not effect
the price of corn in this country. But they knew perfectly
well from experience what panics had been created in this
country by the alterations which have already been
made by the Government, not only as regarded the
trade in - corn, but as regarded also the trade in many
other articles the produce of this country. He knew
perfectly well that if they were to make the proposed
alteration a great deal of alarm would be created.
amongst the agriculturists of this country. It would de much
more harm to this country than any benefit it might confer on
the South Australian colonies. He knew that to tamper with
the corn-laws at the present moment would so far shake the
confidence of the farmers of this country, as to be productive of
much greater injury, not only to them, but to the community
at large, than any benefit which the Hon. Gentleman expected
would be conferred upon the colonies. For these reasons he
should oppose the motion.
Mr. LABOUCHERE would occupy a very small portion of
the time of the House in stating the reasons which induced him
to support the motion which his Hon. Friend had brought for.
ward with so much ability and judgment. He had opposed the
measure of her Majesty's Government with regard to the im •
portation of Canadian corn, and subsequent reflection had not
induced him to regret the part he had taken with respect to
that measure. He thought then, and he thought now, that it
was net desirable in a greater degree than already existed to
raise up a protected interest with regard to corn in the British
colonies. He had objected to the measure because he thought
that a protected interest would form an obstacle to the altera-
tions in the general corn-law of England, which he thought
ought to be made, and which he believed would be made. This
was one of the reasons which had induced him to object to the
Canada Corn. Bill. He stated at that time what he felt now,
that it was impossible to keep together a vast colonial empire
except en the principles of equal treatment and justice. He
felt if such a Bill as the Canada Bill were to be passed, that it
would only be justice if they should require it to extend such a
measure to the other colonies. The Right Hon. Gentleman
had argued this question in a very singular manner. First of
all, lie dealt `with the justice of the case, and the
necessity of dealing, in an equal manner, with
the various British colonies. He said that it would
be quite impossible, if the motion were agreed to,
that any corn would be sent to this country. from Australia.
That, to a certain degree, met the question of justice. He was
then obliged to find some reason for refusing this boon, which
was so trifling. He said that, trifling as it was, it would alarm
the great agricultural interest in this country. Now he (Mr.
Labouchere) thought a worse compliment never could be paid
by a Minister than this. In the first place, he said that no man
of common sense and intelligence could look into this subject
and have the smallest apprehension that any quantity of corn
would be sent to this country ; and then he said that, notwith-
standing this, the agricultural portion of the communiiy would
take great alarm at a measure like this. The agriculturists
had been alarmed at the Canada Corn Bill, believing it to be a
means of introducing American corn to this country ; but he
(Mr. Labouchere) could not conceive the most timid agricul-
turist in England fearing that corn would come over half the
surface of the earth to this country. He (Mr. Labouchere)
concurred with the Right Hon. Gentleman that it was not wise
to be always tampering with commercial laws of this descrip-
tion. Changes produced a . want of confidence ; but still he
thought no one engaged in the core trade, and still less
those who were engaged in the cultivation of corn, could believe
that this measure would produce any sensible change in their
interest. One great objection which he had to-the present corn-
law was that it could ncverlast. It was utterly.impossible that it
could last. The reasons upon which he supported this motion
were of the simplest kind. He did not profess to believe that
any advantage would accrue to the colonies in consequence of
it. But on the other hand it must be remembered that that
which was trifling to grant might yet be much to refuse.
When the British colonies came forward and asked to be put
on the same footing with regard to these duties as Canada, he
thought that if they were not able to give a better answer to
them than the answer which bad been given by the Right
Hon. Gentleman, the request ought to be granted. With
these views he should certainly give his support to the motion
of his Hon. Friend.
Captain ROUS thought that the present measure was quite
consistent with the Canada Corn-bill, and he could not un-
derstand how these gentlemen on his side of the House who
supported the one, could oppose the present motion.—( Hear,
hear.) If there was a distinction to be made at all, he was
of opinion that it should be made ia favour of Australia; for
the population of Australia was British, without any foreign
admixture; and they had a most affectionate regard for the
mother-country. Besides nn smuggling could take place from
Australia. But the reverse of this was the case with Canada ;
there the population was composed of indians, Americans, and
French, as well as English. There were rebellions there
which had cost this country large sums to suppress. They
cared little whether they would be under the American stripes
or the Union Jack ; and there were the greatest facilities for
smuggling from America. He could not understand, there-
fore; why there should be any preference shown in
favour of Canada. He hoped the House would not act so un-
justly towards the people of Australia and wait till a spirit of
discontent arose amongst them.—( Hear, hear.) He would
read an extract of a letter which be had received from a mer-
chant in the city who traded exclusively with Australia. The
Hon. and Gallant Gentleman then read the extract to the
effect, that this country need not fear any great competition
from Australia, for that it could not send to this country more
than 20,0 W quarters of wheat for several years, and the price,
though only 3s. 3d. there, would be vastly_ increased from the
great freight which would be charged. He was of opinion
that the worst policy they could pursue was not to admit corn
free of all duty.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the mother
country, and the colonies, he thought they ought to be con-
sidered as one large country, and that equal justice should be
done to all.—( Hear, hear.) lie was sure it was the most
unwise policy to show a preference for oee_colony more than
another) Red he ‘s ss persuaded that if they 'wide the American
colonies an integral portion of the kingdom they would still
remain British colonies instead of the United States of Ame-
rica. All he should asy In conclusion was this, that if they
acted so unjustly towards Australia they would break a link in
the chain which bound that colony to the mother country.
Mr. M. GIBSON said) that the tion, and Gallant Gen-
tleman who had just sat down propounded sound views re-
specting the motion which had been submitted to them; and
knowing how Much?
thq Honourable, and Gallant. Gentleman
ts 'toolediip to oy the agriculturists of Suffolk, and how
much weight they gave to his opinion, he trusted that
his views would tend to remove the alarm entertained by the
agriculturists respecting his motion.—( Hear, hear.) He was
afraid the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Vice-President of the
Board of Trade) was premature in opposing the motion, and
he hoped, notwithstanding his opposition, after the speeches
they had heard from the other side, the First Minister of the
Crown would give his assent to the preposition of his Hon.
Friend.—( Hear, hear.) Nor would that be an unusual course,
for when his Hon. Friend the Member for Lambeth brought
forward a certain motion, the Right Hon. Gentleman (the
Vice-President of the Board of Trade) was teo precipitate in
giving a nf.gative • for his negative was afterwards re-
scinded by the Right non. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel), and
the measure of his Hon. Friend was carried through the House.
The Right Hon. Gentleman also showed symptoms of the
' use of most extraordinary arguments. He did, not know
most decided distress.---(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He made
whether they were official arements talon from that pigeoh.

hole in the Board of Trade to which the Hon. Member for
Wolverhampton alluded, but they were arguments which
answer in the present state of society. If some
to the effect of this measure upon
-Q—f. the Legislature.
to

perms felt a7prehensise
tbh agficulturists, that was not to a.,.._.
They in that I`lotisB *ere not to tobinit their legato,—
the ignoront apprehensions of these perste-ie.—(l-fear, hear.)
He heSrd the Right Honourable Gentleman (Sif Robert
Peel) say, that if 116 *ere satisfied in his own mind a a
measure being good, and for ill!! benefit of the country, he
would not be deterred by unfounded appreliensiong from
take the consequences, and passing the measure, and that wa'S
the right course.—( Hear, hear.) One of the symptoms of
distress to which he alluded in the speech of the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Sir G. Clerk), was when he said that this motion
was not large enough—(Laughter)—that there was no general
principle involved, and that was the reason the measure ought
not to be adopted.—( Laughter.) That certainly was hardly
a fair objection against a motion which was supported by those
who were in favour of letting in corn from all their colonies,
and even from foreign parts. He admitted there was some force
in the argument of the Right Hon. Gentleman the late Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade, that if this motion were passed they
were giving a partnership in monopoly to the colonies, which
would render the application of the principle of free-trade more
difficult. But he thought that the advantages of the measure
would counterbalance such a result. He thought it would be a
step towards the accomplishment of that which they had in
view—a more unrestricted corn trade. It was most unjust to-
wards the inhabitants of Australia that they should exclude
their produce from the best—he might say—the only market
they had. Besides, if they did not allow the inhabitants of
Australia to sell what they produced, how could they expect
to have it in their vwer to buy what was produced in this
country.? What, then, became of the argument that the
colonies would be their best customers ?—( Hear, hear.) He
would call upon the House not to persevere in such a course of
injustice.—( Hear.)
Mr. DARBY said that the Honourable Gentleman who had
just sat down misrepresented what the Hon. Gentleman
(the Vice-President of the Board of Trade) had stated. The
Canada Corn Bill was brought forward on specific grounds,
and when that measure was brought forward it was stated that
the other colonies were not to expect that their corn should be
imported on the same conditions that Canada corn was im-
ported, because the cases were different. If, as was stated,
only 20,003 quarters could be imported from Australia, then,
he thought, this was a much-a-do-about-nothing affair. He
hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Govern-
ment would not assent to the present proposition. If they
tampered in this way with the capital employed in agriculture,
persons would not invest any more capital to it, and, if that
took place, the public would be the sufferers. Great improve-
ments had lately taken place in agriculture, but by tampering
with the corn-laws they induced persons to withdraw capital
from agriculture. He believed they would have a worse and
more irregular supply than if they permitted those laws to re-
main. Comparing the price of iron and the produce of the
various trades in the country with the price of corn, he did not
see what right the Hon. Gentleman had to bring forward a
motion tending to shake the confidence of the agri-
culturist s.—( Ironical cheers.) It was easy enough to
cry " Hear, hear," when the interests of agricul-
ture were brought forward; but whenever the subject
was corks, or shoos, or straw-plait, then Honourable
Gentlemen opposite get up and alleged some specific grounds
in favour of those articles. He recollected that the Honourable
Member for Finsbury, who had such a universal idea of the
people at large—(loud laughter)—gave the most strenuous op-
position when the House was discussing the reduction on shoes.
Honourable Gentlemen were ready enough to claim exemption
when articles in which they were interested were under dis-
cussion, but when the subject of the agricultural interest
was brought forward, they never showed any specific claims.
( Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. BARING must take an objection to one point of
the Hon. Gentleman's speech, namely, what he had said in
reference to those who had created the panic en the introduc-
tion of the Canada Corn Bill ; for he thought the Hon. Gen-
tleman himself had made so good an alarmist speech—had
rung the tocsin as effectually to the agriculturists on this occa-
sion, as Hon. Gentleman on his side of the House could have
possibly done.—( Hear, hear.) He considered it a question of
justice to one of their colonies—( Hear)—for they were bound
to deal with them on a principle of equality. He (Mr.
Baring) had voted against the Canada Corn Bill, but having
once admitted the principle, they could not refuse to act upon
it in all their colonies.—(Hear, hear.) It was said
by Honourable Gentlemen opposite that the present
motion was not sufficiently comprehensive—that was
rather a strange sort of argument, coming from the quarter it
did. The answer to it was this : Australia sought for this
concession ; she was entitled to it, because she was in the same
condition with respect to England that Canada was. Again,
it was said to be a very small boon. Yes, but Australia did
not think it too small to receive. Australia asked the favour
most respectfully and most earnestly, and he could not see
upon what principle Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who were
generally so anxious to protect their own colonies, even at the
expense of the British public, could oppose the present motion.
The argument, as to the smallness of the benefit which would
be conferred on the people of this country, must have been
imported from the north—one of the new arguments drawn
from the late Treasury edition of them. —( A laugh.) But it
was said by the Hon. Member for Sussex, and indeed by the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Vice-President of the Board of
Trade, that this was a settled question, for that, at the time
the Canada Corn Bill was passed, special care was
taken by the Government to declare that Canada
alone should receive this privilege. This, truly, must be satis-
factory to the people of Australia. It was saying to them,
We cannot deny the justice of your claim, but the injustice
will not be for a year or two, but perpetual, because we have
said that Canada alone should be equitably dealt with.—
(Cheers.) It was also said that it would be inconvenient to
Pass the measure, and that it would unsettle and disturb the
public mind. Why, the same argument might have been re-
sorted to on the Canada Corn Bill. It certainly was quite
true that it was sometimes found convenient to do justice to a
powerful and important colony, and inconvenient to act in the
same way to a weak and unimportant one.—( Hear, hear. )
But justice was justice for all that, and the wrong they did was
not the less because they inflicted it where it would be pa-
tiently borne.—( Hear, hear.) He thought, sooner or later,
justice would be done, and was glad to see two or three Hon.
Gentlemen on the other side of the House give expression to
opinions highly favourable to a just and equitable settlement of
this question. It was also argued that a promise had
been made to the agriculturists that to Canada alone
the favour should be extended. But who made that
promise ?—( Hear, hear.) An objection had been raised,
and with great force, against the Canada Corn Bill, that it
would induce smuggling, and that foreign corn—American
corn—would be surreptitiously introduced. This argument did
not at all apply to Australia—( Hear, hear)—there they were
sure that they would have fair dealing, and nothing else. But
Canada had other areumeuts in favour, which Australia had
not ; they were urged with great force by the Members of the
Government at the time. Canada was the neighbour of a
great and restless power.—( Hear, hear.) Canada had been
put in a state of rebellion against teis country—it was a power-
ful colony, and would not, as the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite then said, be trifled with. Well, he (Mr. Baring)
did not deprecate this sort of argument, but did it follow that
a loyal, true, and peaceable people, should be treated unjustly
and be deprived of privileges because they were not sufficiently
strong and turbulent to extort them?—( Cheers.)
Mr. STUART WORTLEY agreed with many of the
arguments that had been used by the lion. Gentleman who
made this motion, and thought it would have been better for
the people of this country if the corn-laws had never existed.
( Hear, hear.) He would be the last to oppose a measure of
justice to Australia, but he thought the circumstances of
Canada and Australia were widely different. He knew this fact,
that it was only two years since the experiment of introducing
Chilian wheat was made, but this was under the foreign duty.
There was only the further carriage from Cape Horn, and he
did not think that this would materially injure the
agricultural interest; and he did not think, therefore, that
there should be any exception taken to the introduction of
such corn into this country. This trade could not exist to any
great extent. But, supposing this benefit was to be extended
to any material extent, what would the Canadians say to us ?
They would say that we had given them what we conceived to
be a benefit, and the House had deprived them of all,advantage.
For his part, whether with respect to the importance of this
question, or to the interests of the agricultural interests in this
country, there could be no objection to admit Australian corn.
The Australian subjects had at least been peaceable subjects,
and he did not see why they should not enjoy the saw, advan-
tage as that possessed by the Canadians. He thought that
this argument went to the whole case, and though the Austra-
lian colonists were not precisely in the same position, yet on
account of the superior benefits which they possessed in some
respects, he should feel compelled to vote against the motion.
Mr. BRIGHT said that the Hon. Member who had just
sat down had concluded his speech by saying that, however re-
luctantly, he was compelled, from his view of the question, to
vote against the males' of the Hon. Member for Gateshead
(Mr. Hutt). Whenever that Hon. Member rose, he (Mr.
Bright) was always at a loss to understand from his speeches
on which side be thought upon the question before the House.
There was an amiable partiality to both sides in the whole of
that Hon. Gentleman's speeches, but there never was any dif-
ficulty in ascertaining on which side he intended to vote. He
was afraid, in this speech of his upon the corn-laws, that there
would be but small consolation for the Hon. Member for
Northamptonshire and the great party of.the agricultural interest
which he represented. The Hon.lllember invariably expressed
his great regard for infant colonies, and yet he showed the ex-
tent of that interest, by wishing to interfere with their trade
in corn, and yet the corn-laws exist for all. In the speech of
his Hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, a very apt dis-
tinction had been drawn with respect to the peculiar principles
advanced by the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. In
that speech the text had been supplied, and the Hon. Member
for Sussex (Mr. Darby) had taken upon himself the duty of
commenting upon that text; and all he could say of• that
speech was, that the commentator was worthy of the
text. They who were cotton spinners, and many
who were interested in the iron trade, it had been
said in the speech of the Vice- President, to whom he
had alluded, were only anxious ito reduce the price of wheat
when the price of their materials was high. :Now, it was not
a question of price at all with him, or the friends with whom
he acted. And they were not more anxious to reduce the
price of cotton and of iron, when the price of wheat was low,
than when it was high. All they asked on the part of the
Anti-Corn-law League, and of the country was, that they
might obtain a return for the exertions of their honest industry.
The Hon. Member for Sussex had been most anxious to pre-
serve the interests of the agricultural class in that county,
but he (Mr. Bright) thought it was highly unjust
that the interests of any one class of men should be upheld
at the expense of the whole body of the people. It had been
the custom in that House, in the speeches made by Gentlemen
opposite, on the proposition of any one of these changes, to in-
variably bring forward the dangerous effect on the agricultural
mind. Now, it appeared to him that this agricultural mind was
a very obscure and intangible sort of an affair. He' remarked
that some few years since the agricultural mind had been very
greatly distressedontheintroduction of a certain substance
eltfrormal
India called cutch, for the purpose of dyeing. The agrhicouuldu
be
mind had been dreadfully frightened that its Thosrig f,
interfered with in the sale of its bark, although ...ct was
A
that the high price of bark had been in no way reduced.
pretty broad hint had been given to. those connected w
the
sale of bark, a pretty sharp look-out
e_arter of the East would be
kept on their proceedings whenever the b
India Company should come to be re-considered. He re-
membered that when the introduction of. wool at a reduced
rate was talked of in 1822, that the agricultural
_min.d had
been dreadfully distressed with certain vague apprehensions of
grievous loss, and when last yeart.tahte
ithotealabolit ion of the duty
agricultural mind had
upon that article was proposed. h
anticipated little less than ruin, and yet not.withstanding all
these apprehensions, and these fears, he
.believed the price
of wool had not been affected to any sensible extent to the
British farmer. At the latter end of 1842, great alarm had
been excited by the alteration in the tariff, through which
cattle was to be introduced to this country from abroad. Cattle
had been introduced to some extent, to the very great alarm of
the agricultural mind; and yet be believed that, notwith-
standing. this affection of the agricultural mind, the
farmers of this country realised a fair price for several months
past. When the introduction of Canadian wheat was talked of,
a great panic had been excited among the agriculturists of this
country, and yet the return showed that there had been no greater
import of Canadian wheat during the last year than during some
years previous. Some persons who objected to the introduction of
American wool had exhibited an obstinate rejection of the prin.
ciple of friendly interchange between country and country
under the supposition that all that which did not tend to a present