The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-10 00:00:00

create great anxiety
.and
1,827,0001.—a falling off. suffirechieennts,ionn.o
Bdouutbt,thertoe
sivfe ryeo causes
referusesamplyto
e sufficient
of otuoarpapecou
commercialt for t that a
transactions
falling off
wwithith twhheoUs
en United
prosperityStatesaotuthat
wn period—withsso
intimately that countryinter.
woven—you will find that, during that period, there
were operating causes connected with monetary derange-
ment,whichaccounted for the temporary cessation of trade.
I stated that in the' year 1839, as compared with the
year 1840, there was a deficit of 1,827,000 Z in the
declared value of the export of British produce
and manufactures. But in the year 1839 there
was an export to the United States amounting
to 8,839,0001., whereas, in the year 1840 the total
amount was only 5,283,0001., leaving a deficit in the
value of our exports to the United States in 1840, as com-
pared with the year 1839, to the amount of 3,556,0001.
Now that fact is sufficient to account for the
falling off in the general amount of our exports
in the year 1840, as compared with the year 1839.
The falling off, however, was greatly less than the in-
' crease in other parts ; and consequently the differ-
ence was made up by the extension of our commerce
with other countries.--(Hear, hear.) Sir, it is very
satisfactory to view the progress of our colonial
trade. In the year 1837 the whole of our exports to the
Colonies amounted to 11,280,0001.; inlB3B, to 12,025,000/.
1839, t 014,363, 0001.; and in 1840 to 15,497,000/.—(Hear.)
Now let us look at our commercial transactions with these
countries in Furope which are the chief sources of our sup-
ply of food. Let its look to the state of our export trade
with Germany, Holland, and Belgium. In 1837 the value
of our exports to those three countries, the chief sources
of our supply of food, amounted to 8,742,0001. ; in 183$,
to 9,606,000/. ; in 1839, to 9,660,0001. ; and in 1840,
to 9,704,0001.—(Hear, hear, hear.) So that even with
respect to those countries which are the chief
sources of our supply of corn when we stand
in need of any, and which are supposed to be
such formidable competitors of our manufacturers,
and with which the sale of our productions is sup-
posed to be so rapidly declining on account of our
exclusion of their eorn,--eveu with respect to those
countries, there has been upon the whole an increase in the
export of our manufactured articles.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir, I cannot, therefore, infer that the operation of the
Corn-laws is to be charged with the depression which
unfortunately prevails in the country at the present
moment.—(Hear, hear.) Ido see other causes in opera-
tiou which are sufficient in a great degree to account
tier those evils which we all deplore.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir, in considering any modification of the Corn-laws
which it may be desirable to propose, it is impor-
tant to review the several proposals which have been
already made with respect to them. Various opinions are
entertained with respect to the Corn-laws: There are
some who would admit of no modification
whatever in respect to them, but would adhere to the
existing state of the law, without admitting any altera-
tion or modification. It is my firm belief that this
party are exceedingly limited in number in this Country.
I believe that, amongst the agriculturists themselves,
it is the prevailing opinion that the Corn-laws may be
altered with advantage.—(Hear, hear.) So far as I can
collect from the various communications that have
been made to me by that body, I am justified
in saying that the general impression—the
general feeling—amongst the agriculturists is in
favour of' a modification in some respects. There are
also others who entertain a decidedly opposite opinion,
who would consent to no modification, but
would insist on the immediate and absolute repeal
of the Corn-laws. Sir, it is impossible not to feel that
those who advocate a repeal of every imposition on every
kind of subsistence for the people, are enabled to appeal
to topics which give them a great advantage.—(Hear
hear, hear, and cheers.) To urge that there is
a law which taxes bread—an obstacle to the subsistence
of the community—an impost on the food of the popu-
lation—to urge that this a tax maintained for the pro-
teetion and advantage of a separate class—(Hear, hear)
—to urge arguments of this kind gives the oppo-
nents of such a system the power of making
a considerable impression on those who listen to them.—
(Hear.) A comparison is made between the dearness of
food in this country, and the cheapness of food in some
other countries, and the inference is immediately drawn
that the people of this country ought to be placed on the
came footing with respect to articles of subsistence, and
that their condition would be materially benefited if they
were permitted to avail theinselves of the labours of
the agriculturists of other countries.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir, it appears to me that any conclusion founded upon
such a position would be altogether groundless.--(Hear,
hear.) The question is, can you infer the comfort and
ease of' a people, from the price which they pay for
Food ? Reference is made to the price of food in Ger-
many, and to the facilities which the low price of sub-
iistence gives for the establishment of manufactures ;
and the inference is hastily and unwisely drawn that the
people of this country must necessarily be placed
upon a superior footing to what they are if the price of
l'ood could undergo a corresponding reduction, and be
equal with the price of other countries. I apprehend
the true question is not what is the price of food,
but what is the command which the labouring classes
have over it. (Loud cheers from both sides of the House.)
The question is, whether luxuries or the necessaries of
life are easily accessible to the people, and what com-
.eand the labouring classes have over the enjoyment
'f the products of the country. Under the operation of the
Corn-laws let us compare the condition of the labouring
classes of this country with the condition of the labouring
dasses in those countries in which I admit the price of
provisions is greatly less. There is nothing to impede
the cultivation of corn in the Prussian States. The price
)f corn there is much less than it is in this country,
but can it be from hence inferred that the condition
of the Prussian people is preferable to that of the
people of this country ?—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear")—
or that the consequence of the immense reduction of the
price of various articles, particularly in the price of
bed, must necessarily be a great increase in the com-
'orts and enjoyments of the labouring classes ?—(Hear.)
Sir, there are means, from sources I apprehend of
-inquestionable authority, of forming a judgment
is to the comparative degrees of comfort of
..he people in both the countries alluded to; and beforeyou
leter►nine that a low price ofpri visions is necessarily essen-
tial to manufacturing industry, to the general consumption,
to the comforts or enjoyments of the people, it
Nould be well to weigh the materials which
yon possess before you draw such a conclusion.
•iir, in the Report of the Committee which sat
the Import Duties there is evidence on the
ioint—evidence given by the Hon. Gentleman the
I(ember for Bolton, whose attention has been directed
to this subject, and who, before tl:at Committee, and
in the Report which he made on the Prussian League,
)n the state of our commercial relations with Prussia

has given information as to the comparative consumption
rif the people of this country, and the consumption of the
uhabitants of the Prdssian States. Now, • let us
ake the great articles of consumption ; and ive begin
ly admitting that meat is dear; and that corn is dear,

he great articles which constitute the suste-
Lance of the people, and administer to their

•••••••••
comforts. I admit that they are 'greatly lower
in Prussia than they are here.—(Hear.) But as
I said before, it appears to me that the true test is not
by comparative lowness of price, but the 'com-
mand the people have over that which _constitutes
their comforts. Now I began with meat, and in speaking
of that;, I shall take my information from a perfectly
unsuspicious source. It is from oue who differs from
me as to the operation of the Corn-laws, and who iaa de-
cided advocate for their repeal. (hear, hear.)
1)r. Bowring's • calculation with regard to meat
is given iri 1840. It is the report on the Zolverien;
he was speaking of a state of things in this country,

whore the Corn-laws had been in operation-fm thirty
vtiars, and must have effected, if that were their ten-
lency, the comforts of the people. But what was the
Report made by the Right Honourable Gentleman ?

Now, with respect to meat, Dr. Bowring says, that in
Prussia he calculates that 14,000,000 of persons consume

i 5,000,000 pounds of meat ; that is at the rate of about

35. pounds annually for each person. But the Hon-

ourable Gentleman says, that in this country
25,000,000 of persons consume 501 b. of meat annually, he
says that it cannot he less than 50 lbs., and it has been
estimated
_at double that amount. Now, I will
take it at the lowest calculation, and from that it appears
that; the inhabitants of Prussia consume but 35 pounds
yearly, whereas in this country fifty pounds is con-
sumed annually.—(Hear, hear.) Now, take sugar.
Observe I am not at all denying that severe distress
prevails in many parts of the country. I feel perfectly
convinced that in parts of the country distress prevails,
to- a very great extent.—(Hear.) I certainly do
not niegn to say that the 17,000 persons in distress

in Paisley consume so much meat or sugar. Not
at all ; but it'is impossible to argue the sub-

joet without drawing getiero inferences. You must

look at the whole amount, and i,A doing so,
kyou must not be taunted by the remark

of " Can you say, that at Paisley and Stockport,
such is the amount ? I" say no such thing. ladmit that
there is no such consumption ; but
.in drawing get
neral conclusions wits respect to legislation have
no other alternative than to dea averages
and comprehensive results, and by that means t o ascertain,

I upon the whole,'what the consumption of a country is.
Well, now, sugar ; now, before you determine that
high prices are necessarily an evil, I ask you to
compare the consumption of sugar in the dif-
ferent countries of Europe.—(Hear, hear.) I rely
entirely upon the authority of Dr. Bowring. The
Hon. Gentleman says that in France the consumption
of sugar is 4 lb. 8 oz. per. head ; I will allow that
it is 5 lb. per head, because there is certain beet-root
sugar which he has not taken into his calculation. But
in France, he put it at the highest, the consumption
of sugar for each individual per annum, is 51b.;
in the states of the German League it is 4 lb. ; in Europe
generally it is 2i lb. The consumption of Great Britain
the Hon. Gentleman calculated at 17 lb. per annum.
I take the consumption of corn, of this very article.—
(Hear, hear.) Mr. Hume—that is Mr. Deacon Hume, a
gentleman whose ,loss we must all deplore—Mr. Hume
calculated the consumption of the people of this country to
be one quarter of'wheat for each person. He calculated
the consumption of wheat to be 25,000,000 of quarters,
being one quarter per annum for each individual. The
Hon. Gentleman's calculation is, that 24,000,000 of
the inhabitants consumed 45,000,000 quarters of
grain, that is, all other kinds of grain included.
Now, I beg the House to bear in mind, with
reference to the article of corn, that the estimate
of consumption, by two gentlemen possessed of such
means of information, entertaining views which
made their testimony so altogether free from sus-
picion, is ' that the consumption of this country,
compared with that of other countries, is one quarter
of wheat for each individual. The Honourable
Gentleman makes the total consumption for 24,000,000
of inhabitants, 45,000,000 quarters of grain, which is not
very far from two quarters per head for each individual.
Now, the Hon. Gentleman has given us the con-
sumption of the Prussian States. The Prussian States
contain fourteen millions of inhabitants, and the con-
sumption of those States amounts to thirteen millions
of quarters of wheat—observe, less than one-fourth the
consumption in:this country; but while the Hon. Gentle-
man calculates the consumption in England as one quarter
of wheat per annum for each individual, according to the
Hon. Gentleman's calculation of the quarter of grain
consumed by the inhabitants of the Prussian states,
three-fourths at least are barley or rye.—(Ministerial
cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman says that through-
out the Prussian States the consumption of rye
is the proportion of three and four to one when
compared, to wheat. The consumption of 124,000
lbs., gives us a consumption of 65 lbs. of wheat
and 2401b5. of rye to each individual. Thus,
this 124,000 lbs. gave an annual consumption
of little more than one bushel of wheat
to each indMdual in the Prussian states,: instead of one
quarter of wheat which was the consumption of Great
Britain. The Honourable Gentleman says that
in England the consumption of tea is twelve
pounds per head per annum for each individual, while in
the Prussian States it is one pound. The annual con-
sumption of salt,:in the Prussian States is 16 lbs.
per head—in England, it is abs. per head. The con-
sumption.of cotton goods in Prussia was foue pounds and
one-third for each family of five persons, which
was not half the amount of the consumption
in England. The consumption of woollen cloth in Prus-
sia amounts to two ells and one-sixth per head per an-
num. In Great Britain it is six ells and a' quarter
a head. It appears that the consumption of tobacco is
greater in Prussia than in England.. In Prliasia it amounts
to three lbs. per head per annum ; in England the
consumption is only one pound per head per annum.
The consumption of butter is likewise greater in Prussia,
amounting to 21b. per head in that country, and lib. per
head in England ; but you must recolleCt that in all the
great articles, in cotton, in woollen, in salt, in tea, in
sugar, in corn, the very article which we are at this mo-
ment considering, the consumption of each individual in
this country, estimated in the year 1840, at a time when
the price of corn was exceedingly high compared with
the price in Prussia, owing to the command which
the labouring classes had of the necessaries and
comforts of life, the consumption far exceeded in this
country the consumption in Prussia, where the price
was less.—(Hear, hear.) I do not mean to santhat
that is any argument now against removing restrictions.
—(Loud Opposition cheers.) It is no argument against
giving those classes an increased command over those
articles, but it is an argument to show that it is not fair
to give the diminished priee of foul as an argument for
the prosperity of that country. Information has been laid
on the table as to the condition of the labouring classes
in Belgium. Now Belgiunie is a great manufacturing
country, and is represented. as *being in a high state of
prosperity.. In this document the wages of the agri-
cultural labourers in Belgium is 'stated at 11d. per day,
those of weavers at ls., masons ls. 3d., locksmiths
and carpenters Is. 3d., manufacturing labourers
Is. 3d., miners and quarrymen, Is. 4d., jewellers and
goldsmiths Is. Bd. Such is the rate of wages in Belgium.
In the last year the market price of wheat in
that country was from 51s. 9d. to 535. per quar-
ter. At Antwerp it was from 51s. to 565. per quarter.
Taking then, the general average of the prices of
corn in Belgium, and comparing them with the
amount of wages in that country, notwithstanding
its manufacturing and agricultural prosperity, it
appears to mo that the wages in that country
do not give the same command over the enjoy-
ments of life which the wages recei% ed in this country
do. Sir, I refer to this for the purpose of confirming
my impression that to look for any rapid or great change
in the condition of the people of this country from any
extensive alteration in the Corn laws, would subject you
td great disappointment, My firm believe is—l am
speaking of those who are in favour of the
absolute repeal of the Corn-laws—my firm impression
is, that if this House were to consent to that total re-
peal which is urged upon their consideration, in-
stead of mitigating in the slightest degree the
manufacturing distress now
.prevalent, you would only
superadd to it the severest agricultural distress.—(Hear.)
Auy such disturbance of the agricultural in-
terests would, in. my opinion, inevitably lead
to fatal results, not merely in respect of the agricul-
turists, but to those other classes of society whose
prosperity was identical with theirs. There is, how-
ever, another portion of those who are advocates
for a material alteration in 'the Corn-laws, who do not
go the length of advising absolute repeal of those
laws, but a substitution, in place of the present,
of a fixed duty upon corn. With respect to these the
ground is narrowed which we take. They are in
favour of a fixed duty on corn—they admit that
the agriculturist is entitled to protection, and
therefore would impose a duty invariable in
amount upon the importation of foreign corn.
With respect to those, it must be remembered that
whatever odium attaches to the imposition of a variable
duty, must necessarily apply with equal force to the
imposition of a fixed duty.—(Ceies of " No, no.") lam
sure, Sir, that Honourable Gentlemen opposite
do not understand me. lam not saying that the
same objection applies to a fixed duty as to a variable
one. lam only
.saying this, that as far as odium is at-
tached to the imposition of any duty on the main
subsistence of the people—so, to that extent, in prin-
ciple, a fixed duty is equally liable to objec-
tion.—(Tory cheering.) There may be- advantages
in a fixed duty. That is for argument—(Hear, hear)—
but the argument against the imposition of any duty
whatever on the main article of subsistence applies with
equal force to the fixed as to the variable duty.—(llear.)
Both the one and the other must assume that agricul-
.ture requires protection—(rory, cheering)—either
on account of the burthens which they have to bear
(Cheers)—or for reasons of public policy to encourage
the productions of our own soil.—(llear, hear.) But on
principle, it is impossible to say that they do not rest on
the same ground, and must be defended by the same
arguments.—(Hear, hear.) In common with my
colleagues, I have given this subject the
fullest and most patient consideration ; and, if
I could come to the conclusion that for a variable
it would be better to substitute a fixed duty, I hope I
should consider the obligations under which I ac

as Minister of the Crown, and should have the moral eou

rage to avow it and to propose it to the House.
But after giving._ the fullest consideration to the
principle of amending the law, I cannot reconcile my-
self to that.—(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) I
do not believe we could impose an amoant of a fixed duty
sufficient for the protection of domestic agriculture in
years of average supply, which would at the same time
determine in other years the quantity or the price
that would be adequate tq the wants of - the

country. In the consi6ration of the question it is ne-
cessary to ascertain what are the probabilities that this
country can, from its own resources, supply its popula-
tion.—(Tory cheers.) lam not prepared to admit that
this country is unable in ordinary times to supply itself.
If I formed my judgment, Sir, from the quantity of corn
grown during the last four years, I should be bound to
admit that we were dependent on a foreign supply for a
great portion of our subsistence, because during the last
four years, to state the case fully and- fairly, the average
importation of foreign grain was 2,300,000 quarters
in each of those four years. And if We take the last
twelve or thirteen years we shall find that on the whole
the importation of foreign corn has been very con-
siderable, I think altogether twelve or thirteen mil-
lions of quarters of foreign wheat and foreign flour.
Since the year 1828, the total amount Of foreign wheat
and foreign flour . entered for home consumption,
"from sth of July, 1828, to the sth of July, 1841, is
13,475,000 quarters. (An Hon. Member on the Oppo-
sition benches—" In each year?" The llon. Baronet
explained that it was the whole amount, and
proceeded.) This I think must be admitted also, if we
take any period of the last-ten years. We cannot have
any such period of time as ten years during which we shall
be quite-independent of foreign supply; such a period
of time cannot leave us without, during its progress,
being under the necessity of importing a supply
of foreign grain,. and in that sense you are
not independent of . foreign supply. I retain
my opinion that it is of • the utmost importance
to the permanent interests of this country, that it should
be as far as possible independent of foreign supply,—
(year.) ldo not mean an-absolute and entire indepen-

dence, which, I know, is absolutely impossible—it is per-
fectly impracticable—and nothing, I think, can be so mis-
chievous as to attempt to pass laws which should have the
effect of givin,..n such an encouragenient to domestic pro-
duce as should- certainly secure us such an unqualified
independence. This is impossible, but, speaking ge-
nerally, I think it is important that a. country
like - this, whose chief means of subsistence
are derived from its supply of wheat,—l say that it is
mpoitant that if a country like this, is obliged to
resort to foreign countries,-11,-!,oudit to be -rather
for tti purpose.; of making up its deffiaericy,-, than
for drawing. itS constant and chief source
of -subsistence.--(Hear, hear hoar how, Sir, I

form-this-inference, as I said- before, from what has
.taken place during the last four years ; awl, looking
at what has occurred, I am bound to admit that
this country was dependant .on others for a consi-
derableos n onportion tssuiPmply,
ported during that time
has because, as I have
beforebe setaled the
the
amunt
average 2,300 quarters a-year.
But let us take the last ten years, and let us see what
was the average importation during the first six of
those years. During the first six of the last ten
years, the produce of' this country was sufficient
for its own consumption. During the first six years of
the last ten
this country amounted only to 137,000 quarters.
And
h
ge importation of corn into
the case during the six
t at years
having
vin
g the
been aver a
years of 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836, and 1837,
it would be too much, I think, to infer that the
population bad so rapidly increased with reference to
its subsistence, that you must altogether abandon the
hope of deriving sufficient supply from your own
agriculture. Within the last ten years the popu-
lation of this country had, of course, considerably
increased ; and, during the last four years it had been
found necessary to import foreign corn, but during
the six years preceding, the average produce of the
country had been sufficient for the consumption.. I am
not prepared, therefore, to admit the conclusion, that there
must necessarily be a periodical and annual importation
of foreign corn to supply the deficiency in this country.
And therefore. Sir, in determining our duty, we had to
provide for periods of comparative abundance, as well
as for periods of comparative scarcity.—(Hear, hear.)
Six years of good harvests might again recur, during
which the produce of the country would be sufficient for
its own consumption. If they did recur, then I fear
that the effect of a fixed duty would be that the un-
limited right of importation, at a given amount of duty
which you would always undertake to maintain
in times of scarcity, would subject this coun-
try to severe distress and suffering in conse-
quence of the excess of produce, the fall in pdces,
and in the remuneration for labour.—(Hear, hear.) Sir,
it has been observed by writers of the highest
authority, that unfavourable and favourable seas
sons return in certain cycles—that you will often find,
looking back to the produce of several years, that years
of favourable harvests on the Continent have been gene-
rally found contemporaneous with • favourable harVests
here, for the great producing countries of Europe are
within the same parallels of latitude, and are affected by
the same climate ; and it will, therefore, be found that
abundant, or scarce harvests prevail through them
all at the same time. Now, where there is an
abundance, the consequence of a slight addition
to' the quantity of corn produces an effect on
prices vet's, different from the amount of excess.
Mr. Tooke in his work on prices lays down the principle
as follows :—" It will be found that prices vary in a ratio
very different from the variation of quantities, and that
the difference of the ratio between quantities and prices
is liable to alter according to the nature of commodities ;
but more in the case of corn, probably, than in that of
any other article- of extensive consumption." Mr.
Tooke also makes a comparision between defective
and abundant harvests in this country and
those of the Continent, and the conclusion he comes
to • is, that it is generally the case that deficient
harvests here are accompanied by deficient harvests
in the chief producing countries of Europe, so
that an abundant harvest here is an indi-
cation of an abundant harvest on the Conti-
nent.—(Hear.) While, therefore, this calculation shows
what supply we might look for from other coun-
tries, it also shows, that at a time of unnatural
depression, we might receive such discouragement
to our native productions, as to make us dependent on
foreign countries, a result that I should deplore as a
great evils —(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") It is urged
on the other side, by the advocates of a fixed duty,
that the consequence of imposing a fixed duty
would be to • prevent those great alternations,
and that although it might be difficult to maintain a
fixed duty if there were periods of some scarcity, yet
that the tendency of such a law will prevent such a
scarcity, and the occurrence of such a contingency, in
:which the difficulty would principally consist. Now, all
experience seems to me to show, that with respect to
corn, such fluctuations in produce and in price must be
impossible to be remedied by legislation—(Hear, hear)
—that no law that- you could pass for the freo im-
portation of corn, in case of deficient harvests here
and on the Continent, would prevent a rise in price
to such a point as to make ,a fixed duty tolerable.
Take the United States, which are not• subject to the
operation of the Corn-laws, and there you will find the
amount of fluctuation in price arising from the fluctua-
tion of the seasons to be as great as that prevailing in
this country.—(Hear, hear.) In Prussia you will find,
with respect to rye, a species of grain not affected by the
Corn-laws, that in consequence of the fluctuation of the
seasons as great, a fluctuation in the price of it takes
place, as in the price of any other grain. If
the fixed duty be Bs. or 10s., and if your anticipations,
that by legislative enactments you can guard against
the rising of prices be not fallacious, and then prices
rise to 80 or 90 shillings, I retain the impressions
I stated in the course of last Session that no
Government could undertake at such prices to enforce
a fixed duty.—(Cheek) If that be admitted, you must
make some provision for its relaxation. If you entrust
the power of relaxation to the executive authority, you
introduce immediately uncertainty into the operation of
the law. You give a power capable of being abused,
and most difficult to he exercised ; and if this be so
you destroy that confidence in the permanence of your
trade which you rely on as the great encouragement of
trade; and therefore, with reference to a fixed duty, as
applicable to the state of the country when there are low
prices of corn, or as applicable to a state of scarcity when
high prices prevail, I have come to the conclusion after fully
considering the subject, that it is not advisable for Parlia-
ment to alter the law and apply the principle of a fixed
•
duty.—(Loud Ministerial cheers.) The alteration of the
law which I shall propose will proceed upon the principle
of retaining a duty upon corn, varying inversely
with the price of the article in the whole
market, that is, . the principle of the existing law.
The maintenance of that principle necessarily in-
volves the principle of the system of averages.
-It is said there would be great advantages in sweeping
away altogether the system of averages.. It is quite
-trite that it might be competent to abandon the system
of averages with respect to the imPosition of a duty
on corn ; but you must maintain a system of aver-
ages, because the whole of your proceedings are founded
on ait is impossible to abolish the
system of
fem averages, of averages;because
the annual payments are
sys
founded on the accounts of the averages. It appears
that as the averages must -be maintained for the
purpose of tithes, it would not be expedient to
adopt any other system, materially varying in prin-
ciple from that for determining the duty on corn.
I am not saying, because there is a system of averages
averagesmerela' stawtihillge,
for the determination of tithes, that therefore we must
apply it for the purpose of determining the duties on
cAns.o
with
that you cannot dis-
your tithe commu-
tation exists. I say only that if you come to
determine the amount of duty by the system of averages
—seeing a system of averages is necessary, because it
might be encumbent on the one hand to have two sys-
tems of averages in the country at the same time ; and
it would be inconvenient to depart materially froM
the principle on which the averages with respect to
tithes are founded, —I propose, therefore, as necessary to
a varying duty ,to retain a system of averages. It is the
general impression throughout the country that there has
been great fraud in respect of the averages— a very general
impression, particularly in the agricultural districts,
that there htni been either great frauds practised on
the averages, or that extensive combinations have been
entered into for the purpose of influencing the averages,
and procuring the release of corn at lower prices.
In Leeds, Wakefield, arid other parts of Yorkshire, there
have been great and successful combinations for the pur-
pose of influencing the averages. As I said before, I
am inclined to think that the apprehensions upon this
subject may not be altogether without foundation, but I
think that the apprehnsions which have been enter-
tained are greatly exaggerated.—(Hear, hear.) Now,
Sir, if I take the averages for six weeks in the year 1841 ;
if' I take the aggregate averages of the kingdom
for the six weeks ending the Gth of August, the 13th of
August, the. 20th of August, the 27th of August, the
3d of September, and the 10th of September, the ave-
rages of the kingdom for the whole of those six weeks was
735. ld. Now, if I exclude London altogether from the
averages, the general average would be 725. Bd., in
place of, 735. ld. If I exclude the Yorkshire
market, the general average for the kingdom
would be 71s. 11d. It is probable that the raising of
the price in the London market may have the effect of
raising the price in the other markets ; but, as far as you
can judge from the figures and returns, I think that the
Apprehensions that there have been very extensive
frauds with respect to the averages have been, as I said
before, not altogether unfounded, perhaps, but that
they have been • greatly g exa,(" crated. It should
be remembered that the price of corn in London was
higher than in Leeds and other parts of Yorkshire, and,
therefore, they could: draw no necessary inference that
great fraud had been practised because the London
averages exceeded those of other places. For
of , instance,
in
from the 13th of August to the 7th
1838, the; weekly average was 735. The exclusion of
the London market could have made no difference.
In the- -year 1840 the- aggregate average front the
24th of July to the 20th of August was 70s. 2d. ;
the average, exclusive of the London market, was
70s. ltd., but that difference made a great difference
in the amount of duty. The duty upon the aggregate
average of 70s. 2d. would have been 2s. Bd. ; but the
average, exclusive of
the London Market would have
raised the price of corn up to 10s. Bd. But then, as I
said before, as the price of corn in London is higher
than in the country markets, you must not
infer fraud from that circumstance. But, Sir, various
proposals have been made with respect to the amend-
ment of the law as it affects averages—proposals which
have received the utmost consideration from her Ma-
jesty's, Government. I think - there will be a general
agreement in this, that whatever system is devised
fraud should as' far as possible be, prevented,—
(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Opposition benches,)
It is advised by some that the returns be taken by the
growers. That is a proposal which it is impossible to
adopt. At present the Irish and Scotch returns of corn
sold are admitted into the averages.
,It would be im-
possible to have this course adopted, excluding
the Irish and Scotch grower, as it would have
a very material effect in raising the price of corn,
Sir, I must state that I think we ought to guard as far
as possible against fraud ; but I do not think we ought
to effect an increase of protection by any indirect ope-
ration. If any protection be requisite, make it to
come direct only from the Lel4oatete; but it wOliltl
not be fair to procure indirect protection and
encouragement of domestic agriculture by any sugges-
tion with respect to the averages, except with a view of
preventing fraud. . Various alterations in the law of the
averages mutt which will have that effect,
lyliich? if pr Aro necesst47 tiefof ppm
, „ . ,

Of guarding against fraud ought, in' my opinion,
to be adopted ; but for the purpose of getting
any indirect protection for agriculture, I cannot
be a - party to the proposal of such an altera-
tion.--(Hear, hear.) It- has been suggested by some
that the sellers should be bound, under a penalty,
to make a return of the corn sold: It is difficult to fore-
see what would be the effect of requiring, under a
penalty, any farmer who might sell a certain
proportion of corn, to make a return of the
quantity sold, instead of the return made as at pre-
sent. I conceive that the greatest, and only effectual,
security against fraud, is to diminish the temptation to
commit it. Any plan that will remove motives
of self-interest will constitute. a most effectual security.
The proposal of her Majesty's Government with respect
to taking the averages, is thiS :-They will propose to
take the averages in the present mode from the factor,
or miller, or purchaser-the party who now; under
the existing law, makes the return each market
day of the whole of the purchases he has
made during the preceding week ; and upon the
whole we can see no advantage in departing from that
principle, namely, of making the buyer of the corn re-
turn the amount of sales of the preceding week. Trusting to
these alterations, we shall make a levy of the duty
for the purpose of preventing fraud. We shall propose
that the duty of collecting the returns shall be devolved
upon the Excise. The Excise is perfectly competent
to undertake it. They have officers employed in the
market towns, and such officers are qualified to discharge
the duty, by having similar duties to perform-
enabled at the same time to perform the duty
by their general habits of business, and the responsi-
bility they incur on account of their being public officers,
giving, by their character, and that of their occu-
pations, greater security against fraud than could be given
by any persons in a private capacity.-(Hear, hear.)
We propose, therefore, that when the averages have been
taken, they shall be collected and transmitted by an
Excise officer. Another security which we propose to
take, is to widen the range from which the returns aro to
be taken. At present there are 150 towns mentioned
in the Corn Act from which returns are received;
from this number of 150 many considerable markets
are excluded. We propose, therefore, not to take any
discretionary power for the Executive to add to the num-
ber of these towns, but in the Bill which we intend to
introduce we'shall name several populous towns, which
are now extensive corn markets, which have hitherto
been excluded, but which we propose should be now in-
cluded in the list for the averages. Thus, by increasing
the number of places from which corn returns are to be
collected, we shall obtain greater security against the
averages being improperly influenced, while at the same
time we shall gain a nearer approach to the actual
average price of corn, than we could hope to obtain
under the former system. It was thought proper when
the present law was passed to limit the towns
from which returns were to be made to those
of England and Wales. I propose to continue this limi-
tation, so that although I propose to add several towns,
the towns added will all be situate in England and Wales.
An Host. MEMBER on the Opposition side-How
many towns are to be added?
Sir R. PEEL-I will name them all in the Bill. I
propose to add those towns which have hitherto been ex-
cluded. Although we propose, therefore, to prevent
fraud in the taking of the averages, first, by widening
the range from which the averages are taken ; and, se-
condly, by employing a responsible officer, acting under
the authority of a public board to make the returns,
we more particularly rely, as a prevention of frtu'id,
upon such an alteration of the duty as shall diminish the
temptation to it.-(Loud cheers.) I trust I have made
myself sufficiently understood by the House as to the
alterations I propose to introduce in the method of tak-
ing the averages.-(Hear, and cheers.) I now
approach that much more important subject, in fact,
few subjects can be of more importance,
the amount of the protection we proposed
to give to corn, the produce of this country,
and the manner in which we propose to levy the duty.
At present the House is aware the duty depends-(Here
there was considerable interruption the cause of which
we did not apprehend.)-The Bight Hon. Gentleman re-
sumed. At present the duty on corn is levied' n this
manner :-When the price is 595. and under 60s. per
quarter, a duty of 275. is levied. It then diminishes'at the
rate of Is. of duty, with 1 s. increase of price, until it arrives
at a price above 665. and not above 675. when the duty
falls 2s. for every ls. rise of price until it reaches above
68s. and above 695. when the duty is 16s. Bd. At 70s.
per quarter the duty is 13s. 9d, ; at 71s. it is 10s. Bd., then
it falls 45., and at 725. it is 6s. Bd. At 735. it is 2s. Bd.,
and when corn reaches a higherprice that that per quarter
the duty is Is. per quarter. Now, Sir, the objection to this
mode of regulating the duty are these:-First, that
the reductions of duty are so rapid, that they hold
out a temptation of 16s. Bd., - up to the price of
705., for a fraudulent operation upon the ave
rages ; this temptation operates from 665. to 735.
From 60s. to 735. there is an increase of price of 13s.
per quarter, but there is a decrease of duty of 255. Bd,
which makes an under current of 38s. Bd. in a single
quarter of corn, for combining to raise the
averages between those prices. This diffe-
rence between 60s. and 735. is an inducement to
retain corn for the purpose of affecting the averages.
At 665. the inducement to retain corn in the hopes of a.
rise in its price is 4s. on account of its.price, and 10s. on
account of the duty, being an amount of 14s. in the price
of a quarter. Between 70s. and 735. there is a difference
of 3s. on account of price, and Os. in point of duty, being
an inducement to retain corn at 70s. in the
hopes of its reaching 735., of 12s. Now,
it has been urged that these rapid rises'in the price is in-
jurious to the consumer, is injurious to the producer of
corn, and injurious also to the revenue. It has been said
that it is injurious to the consumer, because when corn is
at a high price, between 665. and 705., and when it would
be to the public advantage to liberate it for the purpose of
distribution, still, by the joint operation of an
increased priCe and a diminished duty, holders of
corn were induced to keep it back, notwithstanding the
high price, in hopes of realizing a price upwards of 735.,
and of pouring in corn at a duty of ls.--(Hear.) It has
been said, that it acts injuriously to the agricultural
interest, because it is a temptation to keep back
corn until it can be suddenly poured in at the lowest pos-
sible amount of duty-(Hear)--when the agricultu-
rist loses the protection which the duty gives him. It
has been said that' it is injurious to the revenue,
because, instead of corn coming in at a pe-
riod when it might, under some other modifications, or
under a fixed duty, be sent in for consumption, it was re-
tained till it is brought in at a duty of Is., by which the
revenue loses the amount of the difference between
that amount of ls..and the duty that might have other-
wise been levied. It had been said to operateinjuriously
with respect to the trade and commerce of those dealers
in corn produced at a distance, because those producers
being uncertain what would be the amount of duty on a
cargo of American corn on its arrival in this country,
such grain is placed at a disadvantage, to which corn
brought from parts in the immediate vicinity of
England is not subjected.- (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
The pouring in corn at a duty of Is., therefore, may so
diminish the price as to increase the duty on that corn
which a speculator had entered into at a distance,
that the speculation .may be entirely defeated by the
holders of- the corn grown at a distance, finding an
amount of duty, on
,its arrival in England, which
they had never contemplated meeting. These were
the objections that hail been urged against the rapid
transitions of duty, and its rapid rise inversely with the
price. Now, Sir, one object wilt be in applying a scale
of duty on corn, to diminish, as far as possible, con-
sistent with the principle for which they contended,
the temptation to fraud, and the retaining of corn.
The agriculturists ought to observe what is the effect of
a law which permits the importation of corn at Is. duty.
In the year 1838 the total amount of wheat imported
for home consumption was 1,728,000 quarters ; and of
that amount 1,261,000 quarters were entered at the duty
of Is. In 1840 the total amount of wheat entered for home
consumption was 2,000,000 quarters ; and of that amount
1,217-,000 were taken out at a duty of 2s, Bd. It is not
merely to the amount taken out a duty of Is., or of
2s. Bd. that we are to look; we are also to look at the time
of the year at which these duties were paid. That is
a matter which it is very important we should ob-
serve. In the year 1838, the corn so taken out -at
a duty of Is. was taken out in the week following the
13th of September. In the year 1840 the corn 'taken
out at a duty of 2s. Bd. was taken out on the week fol-
lowing the 3d of September. In each of those years by
far the greater part of the foreign wheat was taken cut
at the low duty of Is. or of 2s. Bd. But it was taken
out at the critical period just before the farmers
in the greater part of the counties of England had
thrashed their corn for the. purpose of bringing it to
inarket.-(Hear, hear.) There was therefore a sudden
depression in-the price of corn at that critical period, on
account of the quantity of foreign corn that was poured
in at the ' low amount of duty, which met the
British farmer in the market just at the
time he was thrashing his corn for the purpose of sale.
And this told with a peculiarly unfavourable effect upon
the farmers in the north of England. As their harvest
was so late, anti as they were obliged to bring their corn
at a late period into the market, they were peculiarly ex-
posed to the disadvantage of having to contend with a
sudden influx of corn, kept back for the purpose of
being poured into the market at the lowest rate of duty
which it was possible to expect. That consideration
alone, it appears to me, ought to weigh with those who
are the most zealous advocates of protection to agricul-
ture, and induce theta to listen with favour to a modifica-
tion of the existing law. It appears to me that a
modification of that law would be equally advantageous
to the agricultural interest in that respect as it would be
to every other class in the country.-(Hear, hear.) Now
with the permission of the House I shall proceed in the
course of a few minutes to read to the Rouse the scale
of duty which we propose to apply.-(Hear, hear.) That
• scale of duty is devised with a sincere desire to afford
to agriculture, and to the agricultural interest, every
protection which it can legitimately claim.---(Hear.)
But, at the same time, it is a scale devised for the pur-
pose, when foreign corn is required, of facilitating, as far
as possible commercial intercourse with respect to corn,
and of subjecting dealings in corn to the same princi-
ples which regulate all other commercial transactions.
Nothing can be more difficult than to determine the
amount of protection which home produce is entitled
to.-(Hear, hear.) I should be afraid to mention what
I should think a remunerating price, becanse I know
that thousands of Vifenill.4l4Ticea must he talten Into con-
sideration behwe it can he seen what sum would or would
not he a remunerating price for the agriculturist. On dis-
cussing a scale with the object of giving a just and sufficient
encouragement to domestic agriculture, you must take 4
comprehensive view of the general pvudeptioxis of the
country and of th ;
-iter,rPumgPices attending the growth of
wheat Imo Allier. produce ; another element is to deter-
mine at what price foreign corn might be permitted to
enter into competition with our produce. But to draw
an accurate conclusion from the comparison pi theme ele-.
ments is exceedingly difficult, wing that various opi-
nions must prevail, and that' dueh view must be founded
Rol; uilpreasiou produced by It ygriety of coal-1

plicated details. But with respect to wheat Ido not
think there would be much difficulty in determining"on
what would be a fair average, and a satisfactory price to
the country at large. Now, if you take the average of
the prices of wheat, which formed the Tithe Bill-the
average of seven years, on which that Bill was founded-
you will find that the average price of *heat was 565.
10d. a quarter. The average of the last ten years was
655. 11d., but in this average enters the average of the
last ten years, during three of which corn was higher
than I am sure any one would wish to see it again.-
(Cries of " Hear, hear.") For myself, I should say that
so far as I can judge for the agriculturists, I believe that
if they could be secured in a price somewhere between
545. and 58s. a quarter, they would not object to the ad-
mission of foreign corn. Taking the average of the
seven years which was the basis of the Tithe Bill, and
taking the average of the last ten years, but . excluding
the three years which exhibited the extreme portion,
you will find an average of 565., which, so far as I can
Judge, is a fair remunerating price, which I. should
not wish to see exceeded.-(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
I cannot see on the other hand any advantage, consider-
ing the circumstances of th'e country, and the existing
relations between landlord and tenant, and considering
the happiness of the country-I cannot, I say, see any
great advantage in any diminution below that amount.
I am of opinion that the :variation in the prices should
be limited to some sum between these extremes.(Hear.)
But, as I said before, any calculation of this kind must
be vague ; and I say that I beg to disclaim it as a
pivot, or as at all times a remunerating price ; nor do I
consider it a question on which the Legislature can de.
termine with any accuracy, for I know it is impossible,
by legislative arrangements, to guarantee any particular
price of corn-that by a fixed duty or any other you
can guarantee to the production of corn, a special
price ; foreign abundance even at home may so reduce
the price as to put it beyond the power of legislation.-
(Hear, hear.) In the year 1835, when you had what
some thought a nominal protection of 645., the average
price of corn did not exceed 395. If you hope
to ensure to. the agriculturists any amount of
protection, or determine that a certain sum
must be given for corn, you are countenancing,
I say,. fallacy and delusion, if you hold out a hope of this
kind.-(Hear, hear.) The quality of land, the rents
paid, and a thousand other considerations, enter into
the question, and therefore nothing were more vain
than, in particular eases, to determine what is a
remunerating price for corn.-(Hear, hear, hear.)
The same difficulty occurs in regard to what shall be
the rate at which foreign corn can be imported with ad-
vantage into this country. In the first place, it is neces-,
sary to ascertain the quantity ; and in ascertaining the
price of corn, the quantity must be particularly regarded.
The price of wheat and the distance of the country ne-
cessarily enter into the calculation, and therefore it is
almost impossible to determine what is the exact price at
which foreign corn can be brought into this country.
I will proceed now to read the scale of duty which her
Majesty's Government proposes to place upon corn.
We propose that when corn is under 515., a duty of
20s. shall be attached • but in no case shall that
duty be exceeded ; when it is from 51s. to 525.,
per quarter, the duty shall be 195.-; .we should then
propose to make what may be called a rest in the scale,
for the purpose of applying to the three next items of
prices the uniform duty of 18s., so that when
corn was froin 525. AO 535., there " should be
a duty.of 18s. ; from 535. to 545. a duty of 18s. ; and
from 545. to 555., 18s. Then from 555. to 565. a duty
of 17s. ; from 565. to 575., 16s. ; from 575. to
.585., 155.;
from 58s. to 595., 14s. ; rom 595. to 605., 13s. ; from
60s. to 615., 125.; from 61s. to 625., 1 ls. ; from 625. to 635.,
10s. ; from 635. to 645., 95.; from 645. to 655., Bs.; from
655. to 665., 7s. Then with respect to the three next
items I would apply the duty of es., so that when Corn
is from 665. to 675. per quarter, there shall be a duty of
6s. ; front 675. to GBs. a duty of
.6s. ; and from 68s. to
695. a duty of 6s. We then propose, when corn is at
from 695. to 70s. there shall be a duty of ss. ;
from 70s. to 71s. a duty of 4s. ; from 71s. to
725. a duty of 3s. ; from 725. to 735. a duty of 2s.
from 735. to 745. a duty of ls., and that at 755. the duty
shall altogether vanish.-(Cheers and laughter.) What
I propose, then, is when corn in the British empire is
under the price of 51s. the duty should be 205., and never
exceed that amount, as I am perfectly satisfied that
it would be useless to take any greater amount.
The duty when the price of. wheat is from 565. to 575.
,will be 165., and from 60s. to els , as I said before, 12s;
I apprehend that the effect of this scale will be to
diminish the temptation to practice on the averages, and
that when the price of corn has arrived at from
60s. to 61s.' there will be no inducement, on account of
the duty to keep back corn from the market. It must
be recollected that there will be always an inducement
to a certain extent to hold back corn, for the purpose of
realizing a greater profit. If the markets are rising,
and there is a prospect of the price rising to 735., there
may be a considerable inducement to hold back to take
advantage of the rise. To attempt to remove altogether
every inducement to hold back would be useless, but
trust that the proposed scale is so arranged as to hold
Out no inducement on account of the diminishing seals
of duty to hold back corn from the markets.-(Hear.)
I now wish to call the attention of the House to what has
been, the effect in the articles of oats and barley,
of a more practical reduction of the duty. In the case
of wheat, the fall in the diity is so rapid, that it offers s
temptation to hold back wheat until it shall have reached
-such a price as to be admitted at the lowest scale of duty.
By far the greater amount of wheat has been imported
at the lowest duty. In Barley and Oats, where the fall
in the amount of duty is more gradual, the same results
have notfollowed. Of 3,513,000 quarters of oats which
have been imported, 248,000 quarters were admitted at a
duty of Is. 9d., 695,000 at a duty. of 3s. 2d., 243,000 at
4s. 9d., and 940,000 at 6s. 3d. Such is the effect of a gra-
dual fall in the duty of Is. 6d. I propose to apply the same
principle to wheat, and by applying that principle to wheat,
I consider that there is every prospect that wheat like
oAtS will be taken out at a higher rate of duty, that the
revenue will profit accordingly, and that the commercial
and agricultural interests will be equally benefited by
wheat being taken out of bond when the legi-
timate demand requires it.-(Hear, hear.) Sir, with
respect to the other articles of grain, I propose
to adopt the proportions I find in the existing law. The
proportions in the existing law are, that assuming the
value of wheat to be 100 s., the value of barley is taken
at 535., the value of oats is taken at 405., and the value
of rye, peas, and beans is taken at 50s. If it be as-
sumed that at a duty of 565. for wheat, a duty of 16s. should
apply, on barley a duty of 9s. ought to apply ; when
oats are at 225„ a duty of about 6s. 3d. ought to apply ;
when rye; peas, and beans, are at 325., a duty of 10s. ay.
Now, I am not .at all aware of any reasons which exist
for altering the proportions with respect to other kinds
of grain, which we find established by the
existing law ; and I propose, therefore, that
in adjusting the duties applicable to other,
kinds of grain the existing proportion of the Corn-
law should be applied. The schedule of duties
which I shall propose for those several articles of con-
sumption will correspond with that relation of price. In
the case of foreign oats, I. propose that the maximum
duty should be Bs. Probably it is scarcely necessary
that I should read the-whole in detail, but in the case of
oats I propose that the maximum duty should be Bs.; that
it should fall with the increase of price, that it should
fall to 75., then that it should fall to Gs., and continue at
Gs. for the three items of price, 215., 225., and 235. ;
that at 245., the average price of duty should be ss. ;
that it should continue to decline as the prices increased
by Is. ; that the extremes of variation of duty, should
be Bs., and the duty of Is. should be the minimum,
and be continued when the price of oats shall not exceed
285.-(Hear, hear.) In the case of barley, I would
propose that under 265. the duty shall be for every
quarter 115.., that being the maximum ; that between
265. and 275., the duty should be 10s. ; at 275.,
and under 305., it should continue at 9s. ; that
at 30s. and 31s. it should be Bs., and so on until 375.
and upwards, when the duty should be decreased
to ls; In the case of rye, peas, and beans, I pro-
pose that, the same proportion should be observed.
do not think it necessary to read the scale that will ap-
ply to rye, peas, and beans, particularl as it is founded
on the same principle. The law which regulates the
importation of British colonial wheat at present is to
this -effect :-British colonial wheat and flour has been
imported into this country at a duty of 55., whenever the
price of British wheat is below 675. When the price of
British wheat exceeds 675. it is then admissible at a duty
of 6s. 6d. I propose to give the same advantages to
colonial wheat, with respect to the reduction in price, as
is applicable to other descriptious of grain. But, con-
sidering that the sudden drop, from ss. to sixpence,
in consequence .of the difference of ls. in price,
is at variance with the principle of the law which seeks
to establish as equable and uniform a reduction Of duty
as possible, we propose to make theSe arrangenients with
respect to colonial wheat-that when the price of. British
wheat is under 565, the duty upon every quarter of British
colonial wheat should be ss. ; when it is 555. and under
56s.tehe3tsl.u;tyatto5b7es.4s.a;nadt su6nsd, anerdsBusi.letrhes7dsu.
ttyhetodubtae.
to b
2s. ; at 58s. and upwards the duty to be ls. ;
and this is to take away that sudden fall
in the amount of duty upon colonial wheat
which takes place under the existing law, thus giving
to colonial wheat the advantages in reduction which
are given to other descriptions of corn. With re-
spect to flour, I should propose the calculation that
exists with respect to wheat, and enable it to be
admitted at the same relative scale at which wheat is
admitted. I believe, Sir, I have put the House in full
possession of what her Majesty's Government intend
to propose on this subject. If you compare the reduction
in the amount of duty with the existing duty you will
find it very considerable. Those who think that
the modification which I propose to make in the
,existing- law is of no importance, I would ask to
compare my scale with the scale of duties on the ad-
mission of foreign corn, which exists at present.
When corn is 595. and under 60s. per quarter, the pre-
sent duty is 275. Bd. From 595. to eos. the duty which
I propose is 13s. At 50s. the existing duty is
365. Bd., increasing as corn falls. Now, instead of
that I propose a duty of 20s. at 50s. the quarter,
that duty in no case to be increased. At 565. I propose
a duty of 16s. At 60s. the present duty is no less than
265.; the duty which I propose at that price is 12s.
At 635. the duty which I propose is 95., the existing
duty being 935. Bd.. At 645.- the duty wich I propose
is Bs., the present duty being 22a, ad, The existing
ditty at 70s. is 10s. a* tusttmci of which I pro-
pose
ss. Therefore is iqi.pos4ble that any one comparing
.the duties whicb ivolinft, with those which exist at
preaetat co.w d deny that there is a very considerable de-
crease,li;
e.t) is td
If
sdptehacerreeatts oe consistentlyfip r t t
compare
pjusticeawhichr eth ett think
opiarlic
-tlie(nagretire,ullhluteuat
sent nominal duties vo;th those which
Ip
will perceive, that the reduction
not of a
tUe•W protection ; 'et I think agriculture can afford
r opos
diminution, they
to part with some of the protection which it receives,
and it is just that protection
should be diminished. Ido
not retain the protection for the sake of any particular
44,04147,0 W; hear) Protection canuot ,be

IeVEN'ING SUN

ciosmcnollininlietc;.edlwalit
eated upon such grounds.—(Hear, hear-)the ienietraisitfsl.
justifiableuk
ail
classes v‘'
salve of plel r
ld not be u
to agriculture if I protected it fir the sa
lowfathiet
up rents, and maintaining
—(Hear, hear.) I disclaim any such t
1 that it i°
It is my belief; and the belief of my colleagues,
,that
you should take precautions that the main ~use any
important for this country—of the highest trnP°6rource of
your supply should be derived from yourselves. t.mau ad-
additional duty which you pay for that purpose iLtius or
ditional price, is one which is not vindicated as a rweiga
a premium; but you are entitled to place a duty.°
may corn, equivalent to any special burdens wind' "
°tea°
thrown upon your agriculture. Any additional Pr:Hire ta
you may give to agriculture after that, I anl 0'; ;or
admit, can only be vindicated on the {round, that It it is
the interest of all classes.—(Hear.) but I consider
our
should ruur
the interest of all classes that we
occasionally a small additional sum upon
..„si
own domestic produce, in order to oPP.II-
-
security and assurance against the calamity wll:tt part,
ensue, if you are- altogether, or in a gr.'. that
dependent on foreign supply. My belief 's'wbat-
these alternations of seasons will take place th
ocio,
ever laws you pass you will find occasional'defie!e_iea
that you must expect the harvests of other count that
be deficient at the same time with your own, a_lluatries
if you are yourselves dependent on those eu five
for some such importation as four °,1.0. of*
millions of quarters of corn, should the calanD4 yoa
deficient harvest be a general one, in that case, each
depend on them, the interests of self-preservation lu.iaceti
country will prevail, and there will be impedimentsl'n'estic
in the way of exportation of corn, and theirown d°., „ii a
produce will be applied to the sustenance of the'' law
inhabitants. I certainly could not be a party to,,utYovlY
passed for the special interest of agriculture, be Ibe
t 6 one for the general interests of all. Nor cantthata party to any law the effect of which would makes for
country permanently dependent on foreign countrust, is
a very considerable portion of its supply. You )oar
a series of years be dependent for a portion °
f a
corn ; I cannot deny that in many years of seattic"rived
considerable portion of your supply must be
haeado'
from other countries, but
.1 do not g—lears
the hope that .this country, in average
c4plY; •
may produce sufficient corn for its 0" 'or.
But if that hope must be abandoned—if we mushf re:r
to other countries, under ordinary circumstances' 0 the
periodical addition to our own supply, then hetwee oci•
supply brought in for the purpose of repairing I
dental, and comparatively slight deficiege;per
form a great distinction from one of allot.)
manent and more extensive nature.— (Bear!, u) that
Sir, this.is the proposition which I am authorise. 7,- thst
Majesty's Government to submit to the House; it !'',„ to
proposal which they deem on the whole, advertil;rlo
the- extent of protection which for a long
of years the laws of this country have bnye
agriculture, and adverting also to those laws nre
assumed that a certain price for wheat was the rang
basis for great legislative enactments; , ;
°I
to
.the importance of deriving their suPP,
far as they can, from domestic 0 sourc' tber
is the proposal which, prompted by
and ,
interest but that of their reason ann
0 o+va
dolt, driven by no other pressure than their 1110
judgment, they consider, kr the interest ?ifoese;
country, should meet with the sanction of the,ed 10'
Sir, this is not altogether an unfr.vourable Pert there
the adjustment of these laws. In the first phice4 ce°',
is no such-amount of foreign corn available for t"dreso
sumption of the country as need alarm those wll°iV°
,„
any excessive competition from abroad. There L:ppsne
during the period which has elapsed since the
tion of Parliament, concurrently with gre4"prit
mercial distress, and concrrrently- with sever°
tion, as much -of calmness, -of moderation, and of he r,-
p
Lion to- view with deliberation any proposal for. tdea•
justment of. those laws, as could have been antielbee°,,
There may have been excitement—there may hal,eaerr
attempts at inflammation; but I must say that the bacoe
demeanour and conduct of the great body of the '4- V°
of this country, and of that portion of it which ijii-przw
most exposed' to suffering on account of coni'ia
the
depression, have been such as to entitle theln,,ityo:
utmost sympathy and favour. There is no diffiel;o
terposed by violence or menace. It is perfectly „°' ye;
the House to legislate as they may think 'l' 00;
the question.- I earnestly, trust that the, AlO v;
of these efforts, whether this proposal be acceaerd hot
not—that. the result of this proposal, on the Par:facto",
Majesty's GOvernment, will lead to some sate„.ert,
adjustment of the matter. The adjustment whici`
pose is that which we believe to be most el„-rs
upon the whole, in the complicated state of the n"'" Wit
relations of this country and its various interests'it
twice to all classes.—(Loud cheers.) I`e
,oriet'
the wish of Parliament to affirm the. Pliase',"
of the course we have proposed, or if it be the P
of Parliament to reject the proposal, still I h°l9l3e 1,!3
question may be adjusted ; and whatever nlaY, ade ,
adjustment of it by Parliament, I shall conch t""e
expressing a firm and earnest hope that
arrangemenf, whatever it shall be, may be
most conducive to the permanent welfare of all f
manufacturing, cominercial, and agricultural, gore'
great country.—(The Right Hon. Baronet then r 3
his seat amidst loud and long continued cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL would make nd observatPb,ooe,fj
evening on the statement of the Right Hon. o'oo%
except to remark that they would come better PrL),
to the discussion if they were supplied with „t"-rooei
of towns for• which the Right Honourable P,"l tito'
proposed to collect the averages. It was indispensals:,
they should have this information, and also a ste
of the principle upon which the selection was n?":,i e
hoped, therefore, the Right Hon. Baronet won].
House this statement to-morrow.
Sir R. PEEL would lay the list on the table °°l.olllll
day. His sole principle was to select the most inlP°o the
towns in England and Wales, including, of tours'
principal market towns.
rer
On the motion that the Chairman 'shoal.
progress, t„ el':
Mr. COBDEN said that it was not his intention I 1)"
ter into any argument on the question to night, 1'011056'
did not think it would be just to himself or to his
tuents, if he did not take that early
tunity of saying that he heard not "4,!h
~ tbt,
tonishment the proposition submitted "'lloilo
House and the country by her Majesty's Gnver•ted, (I '
lie said, not with astonishment, for though he sva.',olo,,
pommon with many others, until the Administrant4
brought forward the proposition, he did g`
pect that the measure they intended °oat:,
luce would be for the benefit of the e°
et,
di
idr looking to thgercaopnesstfirtounition of the present
thorns, or figs r tit
—(Cheers.) He denounced the measure as an 'l,,,tl'ht
the suffering people of this country—(Cheel;spijlico
people, whose patience had been so extolled by ta.-erve",(l
Hen. Baronet—that people, whose patience d
very different treatment from the landed aristoeri7beeP',
from the Cabinet, who were their instruments.--;(`'d 6
This was a proof to the country that if the pcoPl°„.-ishn'
land could permit it, selfish and ignorant iebotritec
would proceed to destroy every interest in the 0'44,
The motion was then agreed to. The C°l.jtti" 0
reported progress, and obtained leave to sit gg
Monday next.'
The House then resumed.
• t°' at°l
The other Orders of the Day were then ag'reea
the House adjourned at Eight o'Clock preciselP

. _
OtviCi,c;
NO LAWYERS AT 13A usE.--I ha-- lin s
Ihe judges and jurors, but missed an important part nr?s ie
lish Court—where were the gentlemen of the barourt`o,
of my readers will, perhaps, concur with Captain there ;of
that lialise was the last place made, when I fell Into but
not a single lawyer in that place, and never had been' ort10,1),0
some of my enterprising professional brethren should.„ 00 ,„'O,
be tempted to pack up their trunks for a descent lbell`ol
exempt city, consider it my duty to add, that Ido 0° CO"
there is the least chance for one. —Stephenis
America.
csil% VISIT OF THE KING OF PR U-- slit
t ,
NEWCATE.—It was stated, by mistake, that on "lied '0
January, when his Majesty the King of Prussia 'os' relitV of
gate, that Mrs. Fry read to the prisoners from 5091,,r for
work. What she selected that day was the I2th cale Pr'
Romans and one of the Psalms ; and it is the invo'„ peen' 1,
lice, not only of Mrs. Fry, hut all the ladies in c—ithel.reti
with the several Prison Committees, when reading words°
soners, to confine themselves entirely to the truths It
in the Holy Scriptures. 10,1
te
DEPTH OF SNOW.-051 Standedge, b
00' el'
ridge which separates Yorkshire from Lancashire, the:, Off it
sinary to
some places drifted
carriagedrif w
ted so much
at
leastlast aes d
eke,
etph ataist ItTisebeheigl4 °
laden coach.

r,
PATENT LEVER wAI.-
This celebrated construction (the most accurate
,:lg% Veot,
watch can be made) is now offered at the foltirs'oPer:,
with the latest improvements: e. the detached rot
owelled in four holes, hand to mark the SeCoDCIS, ea
taining power to continue going while winding ul',
SILVER CASES pa 6 0
6
With double-bottom cases, capped
With hunting cases, capped
COLD CASES. 0
12 12 0
Size for Ladies, with elegant gold dial
Ditto • in double-backed eases l3 13 0
Size for Gentlemen' enamelled dial , 7 )7 _rind°
Ditto extra full size, capped
A Pamphlet, containing observations respecting
„iees,
constructions on which watches are made, with the iiev!,be
in gold and silver cases, and a variety of s'AetVain oil." 0.
signs, which have just been completed in g
sent, gratis arid postage free, on application by
and SONS, Watchmakers, No. 9, u
don, opposite the Hank of England.
boyld le,toteror yety

_____
DR , dv f .1. &.
s/o.TILS'. 0
On the 31st ult., at Reigate, Surrey, the 'a'
94
Steele, Esq., surgeon, of a son.
Ali fio.g,
On the Ist inst., Maria, the wife of James ''-c Ma' 1 di
surgeon, Leicester-place, Leicester-square, of a daug the ',sof
On the 7th inst. in York-street, Portman-scluaroenerai
of H. E. Sharpe, Esq., her Majesty's Attorner•
lady
010.
llarbadoes, of a laughter. the la".'
KeOnidlatili7E4stqh:,inosfta. ,
soant.Oak-lawn, Weybridge,
drag rd lier
On the 4th inst., at Alders ate-street, Mrs. A--"
ring, of a daughter. g

MARRIED. to
On the 4h inst ,at Sholden curch, Nem, - • to.,
Armstrong,t Esq., 'A .M., of the Inner Temple, lbaleriCals
Francis Elizabeth Lady M'Creagh, relict of the& so 00
Sir Michael M'Creagh,
daughter of Mrs. Wilson, of C.B.
Hull House, Kent.

DIED. tonrPtree
pan
On the 9th inst., Mr. Robert Stone, of tieorisf
market, aged 49.
On the 17th ult., at Hanley-road,lfornse
ed. 79.
Levick, of the Corn Exchange, Mark-lane, ag

Loi.srndon•.
rio
Printed and Published by MURDO" - andt
No. v •
o• 112()
Straw:, at The Sue liee , 1i0,112 I°l
• °trio.
County Ahddlesex, Thursday, the