The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-09 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 9, 1827.

late on it. Unless, indeed, a breach of privilege were committed,
when it might be brought before them; but if neither of these
cases occurred, it was impossible to them to know what passed in
the Conventio,.. Tie saw ;t stated in a newspaper, which was no
authority ; that a Rev. Prelate, who had made a speech
in that House against the Catholics, had been called a liar. The
observation referred to something which had been printed, and
(lid not mention the speech. If Noble Lords Would publish their
speeches, and he did not know that this was not a breach of their
Lordships' privileges, they could not complain of what was said
of them ; but if any persons were to comment on what had
passed in that House, there would be no difficulty as to the mode
of dealing with them. He would go further, and say, that he
would not believe on the authority of newspapers, that those things
had passed in the Convention, which the newspapers described,_
because it was impossible, if such things had passed, and evidence
could be given of them before a Jury, that the parties should not
be apprehended, who had behaved as described in the newspapers.
It was impossible to believe that such things had occurred as had
been represented.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN, after the allusion
which had been made to the notice which stood on their Lord-
ships' Orders, thought it his duty to state, that though it was not
his intention that night to state to their Lordships what he meant
to do, yet he could assure them tinkt he wculd give them ample
notice of the course lie meant to pursue with respect to bringing
forward his motion or not, and perhaps he might give their Lord-
ships this information to-morrow. The Noble and Learned Lord
was one of the last persons whom he should consult as to whe-
ther he should bring forward the motion or not. In that he
should be guided by the exercise of that sound discretion which
he was bound to consult ; but whether he decided on bringing
forward the subject or not, their Lordships should receive suffi-
dent notice of the course he meant to pursue, and the motives
which decided his conduct.

The Earl of CLANCARTY said, he should never
cease to regret that any Act had ever been introduced into Par-
liament for putting down the Convention—(Hear, hear !)—That
Act was, in his opinion, a foolish Act—(Hear, hear.)—The
Common Law of the country was sufficient to have put down
that Convention, and it was the duty of the Law Officers of the
Crown to have put it down. He did not agree with the observa-
tion of the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, that the
proceedings of the Catholic Association were incorrectly describ-
ed in the public papers ; on the contrary, he thought that all
which they described actually occurred, and much occurred which
the papers never published. He begged, therefore, to differ from
the Noble and Learned Lord, as he was persuaded that much
passed in that Convention, which never met the public eye.
That it was the duty of the Law Officers of the Crown to
bring those things before a Jury, and why they did not re-
quired an explanation. He should be very sorry to be connected
with those who stood in the situation of the Law Officers of the
Crown. It appeared to him, to say the least of it, that there
had been a very considerable want of zeal in the execution of
the duty of those in the legal department of the Government of
Ireland.

Lord KING explained that he had not presented the
petition without giving notice of it to the Noble Viscount (Lord
Lorton did not object to the petition or the conduct of the Noble
Baron), and he had consulted his convenience as to the day on
which he should present it. He wished to set himself right on
this point. To the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, he
must also say, that he had on presenting the petition only said that
it was as full of loyalty as if he had dictated it.
The Earl of KINGSTON expressed his satisfac-
tion that the petition had been presented, but explained that he
had declined presenting it himself, because it had been drawn up
under the influence of the three persons already mentioned. Had
they not interfered, the petition would have been much more
numerously signed.

Lord -CEIFDEN did not rise to justify the languge
Which: had lately been used in Ireland on this subject—(Some
Peer exclaimed " Nor in England."),—nor that which had been
lately used in England ; and which had done great, but he hoped
not irreparable injury to the Catholic cause, and on the success of
which he thought the peace and security of the country depended.
He did not defend the conduct of the Catholic Association, but he
thought it was impossible to put it down—(" He subscribes to
it," was whispered.)—lt was not possible to prevent men com-
plaining of grievances. TheL had tried various means of putting
dosira the Catholic Association, they had passed the Convention
Act, which only allowed, by one exceptive clause, the Irish Par-
liament to meet. Their Lordships and the Government had tried
other expedients, but they had all failed, and would all fail, till
the Catholics were relieved from the disabilities under which they
laboured. The decision of the other night had been anxiously
waited for, and would, he had no doubt, be received with trans-
ports of joy on the continent. It was impossible, he thought, for
Ferdinand of Spain to continue to reign as he did, should the
Constitution of Portugal be preserved, and he, therefore, would
not rest till he had destroyed it. If he went to war, France, from
being in possession of his towns, must go into the war with him,
and if we went to war with France and Spain, the right of search
would again come into question. America would not submit
to that, and we should have war also with America. Let their
Lordships consider, then, what would be the situation of this
country with their enemies, and the Irish people also made the
enemies of this country. He believed that, generally, the Press
of the United States was in the hands of Irishmen, who cherished
in that country a feeling of hostility to Great Britain, by
which we should suffer. Should war ensue, it was impossible
to say what might happen. For Ireland, he was sure, there
would be no peace till the concessions claimed by the Catholics
were made.

The Earl of MOUNTCASHELL thought the
Irish Convention not worthy of notice ; but the language and sen-
timents of Mr. OConnell being echoed in that House, the disaf-
fected were eiwourd3-ed, and mischief, which the Convention itself
could not cause, was spread throughout the land. The Noble
Viscount who had addressed their Lordships, was an absentee;
be resided abroad, and knew nothing of the dangers which sur-
rounded those who lived in the country, and endeavoured to bear
up against the evil. It ill became any Noble Peer to speak in
that manner, repeating merely the words of the members of the
Association. The language used in that House was spread
throughout the country, and such words as he had that night
heard gave to the demagogues of t lie time all their advantages.
The Noble Peer said it was impossible to put down the Catholic
Association, and that it was impossible to resist the claims of mil-
lions of men. It was easy to talk of millions of men ; but it was
not so easy for these millions to find arms, and to be organised.
They would never follow one Chief, and could not carry all before
them, as the Noble Viscount seemed to think they would.. The
great danger to Ireland arose from the Convention, which was
spreading anarchy over the land. Those Lords who were not
absentees, were the best judges of what was required for Ireland ;
they were the best judges of the state of the country ; and they
did not suppose, like the Noble Viscount, that there was any ne-
cessity to be afraid of the Catholics. Supposing the population
of Ireland to, amount to seven millions, there were at least twelve
hundred thousand members of the Church Establishment and Pro-
testant Dissenters. If to these were added, as he understood he
was upon good authority warranted in doing, eight hundred
thousand Presbyterians, it would follow that there were altogether
two millions of Protestants ; and deducting that number from the
whole population of the country, there remained five millions of
Roman Catholics. The proportion between the Catholics and
Protestants was as five to two ; or, in other words, there were
two Roman Catholics and a half to one Protestant.--
(A laugh.)
—This was not such a mighty disproportion as to frighten the
Protestants out of their lives, as the leading oratorsofthe Gtolthdo-o.
lic Association, Messrs. O'Connell and Sheil, wished
Sure he was that if the Protestants would but stick together, and
be of one mind, entirely guided by true Protestant principles,
with loyalty in their hearts, and a sincere attachment to the King
and Constitution, they would be more than a match for the five
or even seven millions, as they were told, that were opposed to
them. But, backed as they were by their friends in England
and Scotland, they would not submit to be bullied by a handful
of insolent demagogues. The Noble Earl added some further re-
marks, which were not audible below the bar.
The Narquess of LANSDOWN said, he would
not attempt to dispute with the Noble Earl the palm of practical
wisdom. The Noble Earl had undoubtedly succeeded in throwing
a novel and singular light upon the question to which he had re-
ferred (hear, hear) ; and lie had certainly put the House in pos-
session of a striking proof of the importance of the Catholic Asso-

ciation. The Noble Earl had told their Lordships, that one ob-
ject of that body was to close his mouth.—(A laugh.)—lt was
quite clear, by what their Lordships had that evening heard, that
the Association had not been able to succeed.—(A laugh.)—He
would always be most happy to hear the Noble Earl deliver his
sentiments in' that House, only he claimed for himself and his
Noble Friends the right, in all humility, even in the presence of
that Noble Earl, of giving utterance to such opinions as, in the
due discharge of their duty, they might think fit to declare relative
to the affairs of Ireland.

The petition, together with another to the same effect from
some other place in Ireland, was then ordered to be printed.

THE CORN LAWS.

Lord DUDLEY and WARD presented three pe-
tition 3, from Hundreds in the county of Suffolk, against any change
in the Corn Laws. The Noble Viscount also presented a petition
from Wolverhampton, in the county of Stafford, praying for such
a modification of the Corn Laws as would insure an adequate sup-
ply of grain, at a reasonable price.
The Order of the Day was then read, for taking into consider-
ation the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the
prices of Foreign Grain.

The Earl- of LAUDERDALE began by observ-
ing, that when the Noble Earl (Bathurst) had discharged the
Order of the Day on which it was intended to have brought for-
ward the Resolutions that had since been moved in
.the oftter
House, the Noble Earl stated that he would object to any enquiry
into ivhat was called the remunerating price at which grain could
be produced; but that, still, as the Government of the country
had themselves called for further information, relative to the price
of grain abroad, he would not refuse a Committee for that pur-
pose, if any Noble Lord chose to move for it. At that time, he
(the Earl of Lauderdale) took the liberty of saying, that he was
not determined whether he would move merely for an inquiry into
the price of foreign grain, or whether he would call for a more
ea,ended inquiry. At all events, that was the prudent course, as
their Lordships were then near becoming masters of that mysterious
secret, relative to the Corn Laws, of which Parliament had been so
long kept in ignorance. He wished to know what this propo-
sition was, before he decided upon the inquiry he would institute.
Certainly he could not have anticipated the nature of the proposi-
tion that had been brought forward in the other House. It was,
however, as their Lordships well knew, such a proposition as
rendered the present motion absolutely necessary. That proposi-
tion was founded on a , principle which had never been adopted
before, either in this country or any other, in imposing duties
upon any commodity. The plan was totally novel. The duty
was to depend on the price of a commodity which was not to be
taxed, and was to have no relation whatever to the price of the
commodity which was to he taxed. When the price of home
grown grain was sixty shillings per quarter, the tax upon foreign
grain was to be twenty shillings, and according as the price rose
or fell in this country, without any reference to the price of grain
abroad, the tax was to be moderated or increased. If the House
proceeded in this case in the usual way of all legislative assemblies,
they would, in the first place, ascertain the fact, whether grain
could be obtained from foreign countries at such a price as would,
if it were admitted to be introduced, allow the home grower to
produce it in this country. If their Lordships knew what ward
the price of grain abroad, and what it could be grown for here,
they might proportion the tax to the value of the foreign commo-
dity. They would not then have before them a plan drawn
up in so slovenly a manner., that the author of it proposed to
impose a tax upon one commodity on account of the price of
another commodity.—(Hear, hear, hear:)—lf that author had
been as well informed on this subject as he (the Earl of Lauder-
dale) was, he would have known, that within the range from
Odessa to Petersburgh, there were not two ports in which the
price of grain was the same. If an attempt were made to have a
graduated scale adapted to each port, before it could be accom-
plished, the author would have had the, mortification of seeing
the events of the next season render all his labours abortive.
Did their Lordships think that their ancestors had not examined
this question ? They saw the difficulty of applying a graduated
scale to so ever varying a subject. It was reserved for this age
to produce a plan like that lately opened in the other House. Their
ancestors fairly shrunk from a task which they plainly saw was im-
possible. Till the present Government existed, or rather, he
should say, till some of those had joined it who now composed it,
and who were ready for every experiment, however dangerous, it
had never entered into the head of man to impose a tax upon
one commodity, to be regulated in its amonnt by t price of
another commodity, not to be taxed. What result could be ex-
pected from such a principle? Where was the Noble Lord who
could tell him, if this plan were carried into effect, the basis on
which his tenant was to offer rent, or on which he was to let his
farms? A Noble Lord behind him (Lord King) was always talk-
ing of the avaricious feelings of the landed interest. Every
man who was acquainted with the common practice of the land-
owners knew that their generous spirits induced them to mo-
derate, instead of aggravating, the lot of those who were below them.
He contemned such calumnies, but he would ask, under the pro-
posed plan, which Noble Lord would rise and give him the rule
by which he could, at the same time, do justice to his tenant and
insure his own rights ? Most of the land in his country (Scot-
land) was held on lease, and in this country a great part was held
in the same manner. Much of the occupation rested only on the
security of the good-will of the landlords. These were the men
whom the Noble Lord (King) chose daily to vilify as selfish men,
who voted only for those measures in which they were interested
—and cared nothing for the good of the community. He (the
Earl of Lauderdale) declared, that he would not stand up to argue
that question for a moment, if he did not honestly and conscien-
tiously believe that he was pleading the cause of the manufacturer
more than that of the landed proprietor. He was supported, too, by
the consciousness, that he was defending the principle of those laws
which had prevailed in this country, more or Jess, for the last 400
years, and which were closely interwoven with the Constitution
itself. It was said by some theorists who attempted to knock their
notions into the brains of the rest of the world, not by reason,
for of that they were incapable, but by the same sort of evading
with which the Noble . Lord (King) continually assailed that
House, namely, by repeating the same thing day after day ; it
was said by these persons, that at present there was a monopoly
in the supply of corn by the home growers. Now, he asked,
what was the nature of this monopoly ? and what were the mis-
chiefs that attended it ? The term monopoly implied that the
sellers had the whole community in their power, and could at their
will raise or lower the price of the market. Was there any such
monopoly as this in the home corn trade ? Would any man pre-
tend that any principle of combination could subsist among the
560,000 agricultural tenants of this country, some of whom, for
want of capital, were obliged literally to work from hand to
mouth ? All their circumstances were different, and precluded
the possibility of such a union as could alone give effect to a mo-
nopoly. Some of them were beginning new leases of long dura-
tion. Earls had his 'peculiar views and interests. How then could
they continue to establish a monopoly to the disadvantage of the
peo ale of this country ? Looking back at several periods of our
lusliory, when there had been no importation of foreign grain, he
asked what difficulty had ever been experienced from this mono-
poly of the home grower ? He was afraid, however, if the pro-
positions now before Parliament passed into a law, the country
would have some difficulty to encounter from monopoly—not the
monopoly of the home grower, but the monopoly of the corn
merchant, who disregarded equally the interests of the land-
owner and the consumer, and looked only to tee retans of en-
riching himself.—(Cheers.)—Let their Lordships observe what
would be the working of the wonderful Resolutions which, after
so much pains and trouble, had been brought forward in the other i
House. Let them suppose a great merchant, n this country—
and there was no other country on the face or the globe which so
abounded as this in capital, nor where large undertakings were
so easily carried on—let them then suppose the case of a great
merchant, flattered by these Resolutions with the hope of making
a large fortune at a blow, purchasing a Million quarters of grain
to be warehoused. If this was aupposed to be too much for ono
corn-merchant, the House would remember that the number of
corn-merchants was not so boundless as that of the tenantry.—
They could therefore combine with greater facility, and act with :
one design. The Noble Earl (Bathurst) must remember that
at one time an attempt was made to establish freedom of trade in
Corfu. The merchants, however, combined ; and if the Govern-
had not interfered, the people must have starved. By the new
plan, it was proposed to regulate the average weekly, which would
evidently be much more liable to management and flactua-
tioo than a quarterly average. Was it an extravagant sup-
position, that if, at a time when the price of borne grown grain
was sixty shillings, at whirls under the new plan a duty of i

►wenty shillings
vested in buying
price to seventy
would be chargeal
might be at once

to the landed inter

perfectly nugatory
one hand, it would withhold Corn till the price reached 70e., and
when once that point was turned, excessive importation followed,
to the utter ruin of the agriculturist. He would let their Lordships
into the secret of what Corn could be bought for abroad. By ju-
dicious combination, the corn merchants might reduce the market,
in order further to discourage the agriculturists, and make the con-
sumer still more dependent for the future upon the supplies from
abroad. Of all the times that he, in the course of his existence,
remembered, he thought there would not be a dissentient voice
in that House, when he said, that this was the most extextraor-
dinarytime for such an extravagant and dangerous experiment
as this. Two years ago, in the most , authoritative manner in
which Ministers could inform Parliament, in the Speech de-
livered by his Majesty from the Throne, in February, 1825,
their Lordships were told in that House, that " there never
was a period in the history of this country, when all ranks and
orders were so prosperous and so thoroughly contented." Yet,
what was the price of wheat at that time ? He had been cu-
rious to ascertain the fact, 'and he found that the price of
wheat that very week was sixty-nine shillings—(Cheers.)—The
price of wheat the week on which this experiment was made to
save the country from monopoly was fifty-three shillings—(Cheers. )
This new plan held out a semblance to the community as if it
would secure 60s. to the agriculturist ; but never was semblance
so fallacious. But he denied that it was really a security up to
60s. He thought the probability was, that one year with another,
Foreign Grain might be supplied at a rate of 255. a quarter.
Tinder this plan, the first of which was 60s. with a duty of 20
shillings, as the price fell ls. the duty rose 2s. ; and on the con-
trary, the duty fell two shillings for every shilling the price
rose above 60 shillings. Suppose then grain could be imported
from the Baltic at 25 shillings a quarter, and this was no vio-
lent supposition, for he was ready,to prove that within the last
month grain had been landed at 235. Granting, however, that
the price was 255., and supposing the home-grown grain -to be
selling at 555., the duty in that .ease would be 80s., which, added
to the coat price 255.; would -raise it to. 555., at which it might
he sold in the home market. To that sum, therefore, 'the protec-
tion to the home-grower would be reduced. Suppose the priceof
foreign grain should rise to 30s. what then would be the amount
of protection ? If the home price was 565. or 575., the duty
would be 265. which, added to the cost price, would bring up the
foreign grain to 565. and perhaps a fraction. He would carry it
further, and suppose that the foreign grain cost 34e. If the home
price then was 575. or 58s. the duty would be 245. When foreign
grain reached the extravagant price of 345. the amount of protec-
tion to the agriculturist would be only 58,.
Lord KING asked the Noble Earl, whether in this
calculation he included the cost of carriage ?
The Earl of LAUDERDALE assured tie Noble
Lord that there was no difficulty in landing grain from the Baltic
at a freight of about 4s. When he stated that he could land
grain from the Baltic at 255., he included freight and insurance.
He believed the price was even much lower. The new plan
would not give protection to the agriculturist at 60s. ; unless corn
abroad was at the same time 40s. a quarter. But when was it
to be expected that foreign grain would rise to the extravagant
absurd, and unheard of price of 40s. ? Yet a duty of 20s. was
fixed as an effectual protection to the home grower, and he would
venture to say, that people had an opinion that they were in per-
fect security up to 60s. One effect of the new system would be
to put an end to all the regular import trade. When a weekly
average was to govern the introduction of grain into this country,
the importer could not judge of the price so securely as when the
averages were taken every three months. All the ordinary trade
would be destroyed, and the sole chance of the supply of the
country would be from the warehouses, if the home growth should
be insufficient. This new plan would, among other evils, tend
to perpetuate the warehousing system ; and a system more fatal
to the country, not to the corn trade only, but to every branch
of commerce, had never been devised by man. That system,
and that alone, had rendered the Corn Bill of 1815 objectionable.
When that Bill was passed, he had supported it on the faith of
the Noble Lord at the head of the Administration (the Earl of
Liverpool), who had represented it as a final settlement of the
question. He had some inconsiderable objections as to the de-
tails of the Bill; but the Noble Earl urged him not to press
them. He remembered almost the very phrases the Noble Earl
had used. " When we have passed this Bill," said the Noble
Earl, " it will form the lasting law of the country during peace.
Is it worth while, then, to throw obstacles in its way ?" On the.
faith of this declaration, he (Lord Lauderdale) had agreed to
waive his objections. But the new plan was strangely called
Lord Liverpool's measure. If that Noble Earl were in his place,
and no man would rejoice more highly to see him than he (the
Earl of Lauderdale) would, he would tell the Noble Earl that
he did not believe that this new plan could be the work of that
Lord Liverpool who had projected the. Bill of 1815.—(Hear,
hear, hear.)—But evil communications corrupted good man-
ners.—(Cheers and laughter.) Whether it had been adopted by
Lord Liverpool he knew not ; but sure he was that it had not
originated with him. If he wanted evidence of this fact, be
found it in the Journals of the House of Commons for 1814.
There he saw something like a plan of this sort, coming from a
person (Mr. Huskisson) at that time totally disconnected with
the Earl of Liverpool, but who had since been much more in
contact with him as head of the Board of Trade. He (the Earl
of Lauderdale) would go ilirther. He knew of his own know-
ledge, where the plan came from. He had seen it himself twelve
months ago, when it was lodged in Mr. Huskisson's hands.—
How, therefore, it could have originated in the brain of the Earl
of Liverpool, surpassed his comprehension.(Cheers.)—This
was a new measure, and its author was, probably, not (10:.te
sure of its success. It was prudent, perhaps, not in the first
instance to avow himself, when his object was to de:molish a
system which had lasted for ages. This, at any rate he
knew, that when he had lately heard of 94111) person vapour-
big that he had stretched forth lull 11157,C1 and called a new
.
Nnio-owil,dunindteor itthefournoceurrtaminatnyutfhaact
manufactures,
the Earl of Liverpool's, but ail his own.—(Cheers.)—But
.e work was not then
attended this measure, it was
judged better to palm it upon, the Earl of Liverpool. He repeated,
he did not believe it was Nob:e L• -Al's measure. It was con-
trary to the principles of the school in which he was educated.—
Thet Noble Lord had been taught to reverence ancient institu-
tions. He was not an individual to throw the country into con-
fusion for the sake of a set of theories. He (Lord Lauderdale)
advised the House to reflect upon what had passed with refe-
ference to the silk trade. All the boasted measures for intro-
dtwang a free trade •had for their real object only this attack
on the Corn Laws. Did he speak unadvisedly when he said all
these measures had ended in vapour ? Three or four years ago
a Bill was passed to take effect at the end of the Session, by
which a duty of 30 per cent. ad valorem was imposed upon' fo-
reign silk goods, for the protection of the home manufacturer.-_
'this was considered a tolerable safeguard. But those who made
that experiment were deceived in the result, as would those who
were pushing forward this new plan for the ruin of the coun-
try, At the time this Bill was passed, any quantity of silk goode
might be insured at' Paris for delivery in London at 15 per cent.
The English silk manufacturer would, therefore, in effect, have
been exposed to a rivalry on those terms if the Bill had been
suffered to go into operation. But four or five days before the
close of the Session before last, an Act was smuggled through
that House altering the intended system altogether. By that Act,
the duty of 30 per cent. was repealed, and a duty instead imposed
upon the weight of foreign manufactured silk. No longer was
ttoll there
allowed
e an y
in free trade
of
rade permitted.3oand6o yards
Importationieleng ulwasto
take place only at the port of London ; and, to crown all, it was
moment the silk manufacturers heard of this change, they liaexed
with gratitude to the head of the Board of Trade, and said, " We
have better protection than ever ;" for they well knew, that if the
French silks were measured by the thumbs- of Cuatom-house of-
ficers, they were perfectly safe.—(Cheers.)—All these pretended
experiments had really for object to justify the attack on the.
landed interest.—(Cheers.)—Spitalfields was as secure of its mo-
nopoly as before. He could cite other instances of the hollow
policy of the Ministry, but he should fatigue their Lordships. It
was said that the country had one common interest in this ques-
tion. He believed so sincerely himself, but then he thought the
law should be, that the importation of all Foreign Corn should
be prohibited, leaving it to the discretion of the Privy Council to
open the Ports when Parliament was not sitting, but reserving
that power at all other times to Parliament itself. That, he was
convinced, would be the best possiblo law that could be framed.
He thought so, because the price of Grain varied from year to
year, and no permanent legislation could take place on so change-
ful a subject. The interest of the consumer would be better pro
tected by the watchful eye of Parliament, and the Lords of his
Majesty's Council. He could not refrain from noticing a paisage
in a recent speech. The speaker (Mr. Canning) observed, that
" after very nice experiments, he had cast the balance of principle
to trade, and the balance of price to the landed interest."—(Hear,
hear.)—Never had he heard a phrase so foolish and absurd as
this. The only way in which he could interpret this passage was.
" We have beat the landed proar-i,etopa out of their strong kola—
the ancient usages and lacy f the country, established by their

, ..,„.
_ .
~•_•-•;.....„ :, 4, '.., . tik.,,,,., , 4- . . •
.; ....,4„.., ,
'-'2' - - .1 ,•.- - - 1 ,
„„;...„ • O. 1.) x .., z. - .. 1,,:,
.....7"\A.
•✓
..._ ~. .....•.. _LA ',..- ---+ --_,_ ~/ N 2.,, •
'' • ,
~,,,,,,„„),,,„0...,..,;•,; , ,•• .'4' • . v C ,S • ~„. , , • ' -1.
. , Ir- A • ''''-,:--...--, s'
• -t;
111d3i
'PO
4 ~'.170- --.=',-:,--..1
......0, ta

via":4lf *Vital:cif* /. wss
up all .tb
shill'
• • .1. • es,
"
Yllitm744l
able, i - lig
brou • ) iiiised
erect, teition
ry. What would it d or consumer ? ICai! thebe

aneestors; and though we have given them, on this occasion, the
balance of price, yet that can be easily altered at any time." If the
landed interest ceded the balance of principle, they would give up all.
But it was not true that the balance of price had been cast in favour
of the landed interest. For every one shilling raised in the home
market, the foreign merchant gained an advance of 3s. This
was 300 per cent. ; yet it was said the balance of price was cast
in favour of the landed interest. He trusted that the House
would stand up firmly against all experiments of this kind, which,
in his honour and conscience, he believed would ultimately level
not only their 'Lordships, but the manufacturers and all other
consumers of grain. Let them consider for a moment how trifling
was the effect of any reduction in the price of grain. Suppose it
was lowered or raised fourteen shillings a quarter. Many of their
Lordship; with that benignity that characterised them, conde-
scended to look• sometimes into the affairs of their tenantry. They
would know that a difference of 14s. higher or lower in the price
of a quarter of wheat was a difference which would give i)rospe-
rity to a farmer, or reduce him to beggary. Did they wish to
knoW what it would do for the manufacturer ? Fourteen shillings
contained 336 halfpence, and as it was calculated that every indivi-
dual consumed a quarter of corn in the year, which consisted of
365 days, it followed that the gain or loss to each individual would
be not quite at the rate of a halfpenny a day. He would appeal
to any intelligent manufacturer, whether such a sum as this could
be an object to him ? Nay, he would appeal to the whole range
of operatives, whether they would risk the evils that must fall on
the agriculturists for such a saving? Much better would it be for
all to keep the home market in its former state, than endanger the
welfare of the community for the sake of a halfpenny a day. The
Noble Earl, in conclusion, said he trusted their Lordships would
resolve to support those ancient laws under which the country had
flourished. At any rate it was impossible for them to pronounce
any opinion on the subject, until they had all the information
before them relative to the price of foreign grain. He finally
moved, " That a select Committee be appointed to inquire into
the price at which foreign grain can be shipped from the ports
where it is lying, the quantity on hand, and the price at which it
can be imported into this country "

Earl BATHURST repelled the insinuation thrown
cut by the Noble Earl, that the plan now under their Lordships'
consideration, had been improperly attributed by his Majesty's
Ministers, to a Noble Earl who was now on a bed of sickness--
Their Lordships could not forget that his Noble Friend now un-
fortunately absent, had, before Christmas last, stated that a
project had been formed, and he then gave notice of his intention
to bring it forward himself. He gave this notice, and informed
their Lordships that the plan was formed upon mature delibera-
tions ; and that, upon its merits, he would stake his political re-
putation. The Noble Earl opposite,. he was sure, must be sorry,
to have made a charge which had no foundation. As to the ge-
neral question respecting the importation of grain from the north
of Europe, he should postpone any observations until the results
of the inquiries by the Committee should be laid before the House.
The Noble Earl had stated that the principle of graduating duties
was a new idea introduced for the first time into the legislation
of the country ; and the Noble Earl added that in order to
carry such a principle into effect, it was necessai y to be fully ac-
quainted with the price of grain in all the quarters from which ex-
portation was to take place. Now the Noble Earl must be aware
that in the time of Charles 11. the principle of graduating duties
was adopted. Up to 1655, there was no prohibition, but a pro-
hibitory duty, which duty was graduated according to the price of
corn. But that scale was fixed without any preliminary exami-
nations into the stain of the price in other countries. In 1776,
there was a scale of duty without being subject to previous in-
quiry. In the Bill of 1822, there was a scale of duties that
when the price of grain amounted to 705., importation would
take place at a duty of 175., and when it rose to 80s., the duty
was to be 12s. duty. Here w. a scale of duty, therefore, and
if it was necessary to know what was the price of foreign corn
before this measure could have passed, it certainly could not have
passed, for no such inquiry was ever entered upon. Now, ac-
cording to the Noble Earl, the duty should vary according to the
country from which the grain was exported, and it should be, in
different instances, 155., 175., &c. Now lie (Earl Bathurst)
understood that the petitions of the landed interest had for their
object the preservation of the existing law—namely, the law of
1822 ; for they uniformly said that they deprecated any alteration
in the Corn Laws. Let the House only consider the nature of
the protection this law afforded. According to this law, wheat,
when it rose on the average to 805. at home, might be imported
on paying a duty of 12s. ; and when it was 70s. at a duty of
17s. for three months. The House would observe that the price
was taken on an average of three months; and thus it might
happen that, for a Icing while, the price might be very high, in-
deed above the importation price, and if it fell a little lower after-
4vards, the average of the three months might be kept below the
importation price. This was a great evil. On the other hand,
let the House consider the injury that might be sustained by the
agriculturists in another way. Suppose the ports had been
opened once, and that in consequence of a large importation of
grain, the price should be reduced ere to 50s. The ports must
remain open for the three months, whilst the duty on importa-
tion would continue the same. Now let the House see the effects
of this system on the fanner. Suppose foreign corn was import-
ed at a price of 255. let 17s. duty be added to that, and this fo-
reign corn could be *chased in our markets at 425. Yet this
was the Bill for Which the landed interest was praying a continu-
ance. The fact was, that the farmers had a distinct interest in
doing away with the mode of taking the averages, as settled by
the Bill of 1822.

The Earl of ROSSLYN made a few observations
respecting the duty of 17s.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE, in explanation,
denied having made any improper imputation respecting the
eourse which Ministers thought proper to adopt, in attributing
this measure to the Earl of Liverpool. He had, he owned, stateu
some facts, and drew a contrast, leaving the House to draw its
conclusions. If the Noble Earl drew the conclusions, he (Lord
Lauderdale) surely was not to blame. " But," said the Noble
Earl significantly, " if I hat• said any thing rashly in the heat of
debate, I have only to print my weech, and leave out the objec-
tionable passage."—(A laugh from the Woolsack.)
Lord REDESDALE contended, that the mea-
sure now in progress for altecing the law was impolitic.

- -
The Earl of ROSEBER RY was glad that the mo-
tion foi a Committee would not be objected to.

Lord BEXLEY stated, that the observations of
the Noble Earl (Lauderdale) had not been more unjust to his
Noble Friend near him (Lord Bathurst), than they had been to
all the Members of the Cabinet. The plan now under considera-
tion was fairly to be attributed to his Noble Friend, now unfor-
tunately absent. When the fit occasion arrived, he hoped to be
able to show, first, that the measure was consistent with the prac-
tice of our ancestors ; and, secondly, that it was capable of afford-
in., to the landed interest a more secure and practical protection
than the former measure.

The question was then put and carried without a division.
The Committee was then appointed.
Adjourned at a Quarter to Eight o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 8.

Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from Glas-
gow, praying for a free trade in Corn.—Laid on the table.
Lord ENNISMORE presented a petition from
Cork, against the importation of Foreign Flour.—Laid on the
table.

„Mr. HOBHOUSE presented a petition, signed by
up,,,,arjs of 12,000 Shoemakers of Westminster, praying for a
free trade in Corn.—Laid on the table.

Mr. Dysot; brought
the Pontefract E.lectiot
W. Fremantle 1
J. C. Herries
Sir R. W. Vaughan
Lord Rancliffe
J. F. Luttrell

up the reduced list of the Committee on
1, as follows:
H. Willoughby
H. Meynil
Jos, Marriott
H. J. Borthwick
D. S. Dugdalg

Sir L. Palk
Lord C. S. Manners
J. Lindsay
Sir J. Graham
W. Holmes

General GAS dOYNE presented a petition from
Liverpool, praying for such a reduction in the price of Corn as
might make it au article of trade. The Hon. Member remarked,
that not a county meeting bad been yet held to petition against any
alteration in these laws.—Laid on the table. Also a petition,
praying that their interests might be taken into consideration.
Mr. Dyson brought up the following list on the Dover Elec-
tion
A. G• Legge James Bradshaw W. E. Powel
Sir J. W. Pollett G. R. Trevor Sir C. Cole
W. A. Roberts W. Drake J. Wemyss
Adam Hay J. H. Lowther Henry French
Lord Garlies Sir A. Hope George Lamb
Sir C. COLE presented three petitions from Gla-
morganshire, against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
Sir R. VIVIAN presented two petitions from Corn-
wall of a similar nature.

Mr. G. DAWSON brought up Returns of the
nnmber of persons confined in the Fleet for debt, and in Newgate
for criminal offences.
Mr. HUME complained of the manner in which

these Returns was made out ? Why was there not an abstract
showing the increase or decrease of crime?
Mr. DAWSON said that there was some mistake,
and he would, if possible, supply an abstract.—Laid on the table.
Sir J. SHELLEY presented a petition from Croy-
don and Ashurat, in Surrey, against any alteration in the Corn
Laws.—Laid on the table.

Mr. COKE presented a petition from Norfolk,
against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition from
Wolverhampton, praying for an alteration in the Corn Laws.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE conceived, that if GO-
tlemen were opposed to the principle on which the Government
were about to proceed, the best course would be to take their stand
in the first instance.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
recommended Gentlemen to abstain from the present discussion,
as a full opportunity would be aftOrded in a few minutes to enter
on the general question.

After a few words from Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL and Lord
Cmyr, the petition was brought up.
Mr. LITTLETON could not shrink from the
avowal he had made.

Lord G. CAVENDISH presented a petition from
Derby, against the repeal of the Corn Laws.
Sir R. WILSON moved for Returns of the Sums
of Money levied by County Rates in the county of Surrey, in the
year 1826.
Mr. V. STUART postponed until the 16th his
motion relative to the appointment of a Magistrate in Waterford.
Lord BECTIVE presented a petition from Meath
against any alteration in the Corn Laws. . .

Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented various petiti-
ons from Kent, against any alteration in the Corn Laws.

Mr. GROSVENbit presented a petition from
Chester, against the importation of foreign flour.

Sir T:ACLANt) presented a petition from De-
von, against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
CORN QUESTION.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
moved the order of the day for going into a Committee on the
Corn Duty Bill.
On the motion that the Speaker should leave the Chair,

Lord CLIVE regretted that it became necessary for
him, through a sense of public duty, to dissent from the propo-
sition submitted by the Government. He had prepared a reso-
lution, embodying his sentiments on the subject, which, with per.
mission of the House, he would take the liberty to read, although
at variance with the usual practice—still it would secure him
against misapprehension. The resolution was to this effect :
" That it was necessary to give protection to the grower of Bri-
tish corn, against the importation of the produce of foreign corn,
which was not liable to the same taxes, and which ought not to
have a preference over Ireland and Canada." The question of
duty be considered could be better arranged by the Government,
than by any private individual. The critical situation in which the
farmers were placed was this. The effect of the measure will not
be to place on a fair competition with the foreign grower, but with
the wealthy British capitalist, who can import corn when it suits
his convenience, and having it ready in the warehouse, can
overflow the country whenever he pleases.—(Hear, hear.)—He
was desirous to draw the attention of the House to the situation
in which the question stands in 1827. In 1815, there was a
change made in the Corn Laws ; subsequent to this there was a
change in the currency. In 1822, a second change was effected
in the Corn Laws, mid an avowal was then made by an Illustrious
statesman, now no more (Lord Londonderry) ; a regular stipula-
tion was made by that Noble Lord, that the currency should re-
main on the same footing until the expiration of the Bank Charter
in 1833. And yet, in the beginning of the last year, the Govern-
ment made an alteration in the currency, the result of which
affected the agricultural interests to a much greater extent than all
the wild speculations of the last few years had deranged the affairs
of ene commercial world. Soon after this, came the most ex-
traordinary harvest that had been experienced for many years
—in which the produce of all grain was one-third less than
usual, and fodder, and every thing necessary for the sup-
port of stock, was proportionably scarce. There were two
untoward events—the first, the change in the currency ; next,
the scarcity of the harvest. We now have the third period,
when Government proposes to admit foreign corn on the
payment of a duty greatly inadequate to the protection of the Bri-
tish growers. He had not any hesitation in saying, that penury
and want among the farmers would be the result of these mea-
sures now proposed to Parliament if they should be adopted. He
would conclude what he had to, say by reading a passage from o
printed letter addressed to the Right Hon. the President of the
Board of Trade, and published at Devonport. The Noble Lord
then read some paragraphs of the letter, to the effect that it
should be the study of Government to encourage by all means the
growing of corn in our own country sufficient for own consump-
tion, and not to be obliged to depend for our supplies on foreign
countries. Our hopes on this latter resource in the cases of emer-
gency might be disappointed, and we might consequently be ex-
posed to all the horrors of scarcity. The Noble Lord said he fully
adopted those sentiments of the writer. All he would ask for the
agriculturists was protection, and not prohibition.—(Hear.)
Sir E. KNATCHBULL could not avoid giving
his opinion on these measures proposed to the House. His ad-
dress would be very short. He was never disposed to differ much
from his Majesty's Government. Having always agreed with
them, he was sorry to be opposed to them now. The Right Hon.
Gentleman who proposed those measures to the House, told them
that they emanated from the Noble Lord at the head of the Go-
vernment (Lord Liverpool). If the Right Honourable Gentleman
did not tell them so, he, for 's own part, would entertain some
doubts whether that Noble Lord concurred in the proposed
measures. After passing a high eulogium on the Earl of Liver-
pool, the Hon. Baronet proceeded to advert, as we understood
him, to some petitions that were presented to the House. One of
these petitions alleged that it would be disgraceful to those who
advocated free trade, if they did not extend those principles to the
subject of the Corn Laws. Every Hon. Member admitted that by
all former and existing laws protection was given to the agricultural
classes. Then that was at once granting that protection was due to
them.—(Hear.) Some of those measures proceeding from the doc-
trines of free trade were already injurious to the agriculturists,
and among these were the measures of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man (Mr. Huskisson) respecting the importation of wool and
timber. On these matters the agriculturists were not fairly
treated. In opposition to these new doctrines, he would continue
to hold the opinion, that dependence on the soil of our own coun-
try was one of the soundest principles.—(Hear, hear.)—When
the question of the Corn Laws was discussed in the House of
Lords in 1815, Lord Liverpool said that in certain cases the Le-
gislature ought not to interfere, but leave all sorts of industry free.
Each nation could then purchase what they wanted from other na-
tions; and if all nations did so, he (Sir E. Knatchbull)
would agree with the Noble Lord. The Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman then said, that the system of foreign sup-
ply would completely paralyze us under certain circumstances.—
If the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Canning) could give him
(Sir E. Knatchhull) any security—(a laugh)—if the Right Hon.
Gentleman could give him security that his experiments would
answer—(hear, hear! and a laugh)—now, in coming to speak
of the Corn Bill of 1822, he would not contend for a price of i
wheat up to 80s. per quarter—(hear, hear!). In the present plan
we were proceeding in a system of duties, and not of a prohibi-
tion. But this plan was defective—it did not give any thing
about the price of corn in foreign ports—it did not take into con-
sideration the freight or other charges, nor whether British or fo-
reign ships should be employed.—So important an alteration as
that now proposed, should not be adopted so precipitately as they
were called upon to proceed. If this measure passed into a law,
it would be the first step towards dispossessing those who now
filled their various situations, and upheld their rank with so much
advantage to the country, of the means by which they would be
enabled to continue it. If they were to be made the sacrifice, he
called upon those gentlemen whose interests were identified with
his, to join him in opposing these resolutions.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
spoke to the following effect;--If, Sir, I appear 'to manifest any
haste to address the House on this interesting and important ques-
tion, the peculiar situation in which I stand with respect to it,
and the direct appeal which has been made to my opinion, by my
Hon. Friend the Member for Kent, must plead my excuse. As it
was I who proposed to this House in former times the measure by
which this trade has hitherto been regulated, I feel it to be my.
duty, I owe it to my colleagues, and to my own character, dis-
tinctly to declare, that I most cordially, and unequivocally, and
with the greatest satisfaction, support the proposition which is
now under our consideration.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—Sir, I am
not ashamed, I ought not to be ashamed, to admit that my present
opinion upon this subject differs from my opinion at the period to
which I have alluded. Whoever recollects and considers all the
circumstances of the case, will not accuse me with inconsistency in
the avowal. At that period my situation in the Government was
extremely different from what it is now. I was not a responsible
Minister; and what I did I did in the discharge of my official
duty. At that period I said in this House that I proposed the
, measure which I was recommending not merely as a choice be-

tween difficulties, but as a choke between evils. Having, with-
out experience, adopted that measure as the less evil, when I now,
after experience, recommend and support a measure of another
kind, I do not feel that I am at all liable to the charge of incon-
sistency. No man is fit to be a Minister of this country, who, on
a question of expediency like this, is not open to that change of
sentiment which greater experience and knowledge may produce.
I repeat, therefore, that I support the present proposition most
cordially and unequivocally; and I say this with the greater em-
phasis, because my Hon. Friend, the Member for Kent, in his va-
rious imputations respecting this and other proceedings of his Ma-
jesty's Government, appeared to point out my Right Hon. Friend
the President of the Board of Trade as the great author of those pro-
ceedings; as the individual on whom all the odium, as he considers
it, of those proceedings ought to fall. Sir, I should be ashamed of
myself, and I should be ashamed of any colleagues, if we were
base enough to sacrifice my Right Hon. Friend to such a cla-
mour. On the contrary, we invite all the odium of those pro-
ceedings, if odium it be (I think it quite the reverse), to fall on
our own heads in common with his. Sir, I beg leave to say,
with respect to the principles of free trade, that phantom of
terror to my Honourable Friend, the Member for Kent, which
seems as great a bugbear to him as the Pope himself—(loud
cheers and laughter)—if there be any one individual who is
chargeable with their introduction, I am that individual. My
Hon. Friend is quite inaccurate, when he says those principles
were introduced kw° or three years ago by my Right Honourable
Friend. On the contrary, they were introduced by myself.
I preceded my Right Hon. Friend as President of the Board of
Trade; and from the moment of the cessation of the war, every
effort was made to bring the commercial policy of this country
back to what it was, before the confusion and complicatiou which
the long continuance of hostilities, and the various measures con
sequent upon that continuance had introduced into it. In making
these efforts, I embraced every opportunity of recommending and
enforcing the principles which meet with the eensure of my Hon.
Friend the Member for Kent. Sir, when 'my Hon. Friend re-
commends to us to follow the example of my Right Hon. 'Friend
the Secretary of State for the Home Department in his mode of
introducing a reformation in the Criminal Law, and lauds my
Right Hon. Friend as he deserves to be lauded, for the prudence
which he has exhibited, he has no right to charge us with any
abstinence from that prudence.--(Hear, hear.) The opinions of
my Hon. Friend the Member for Kent, and the opinions of those
both in and out of doors who think with my Hon. Friend on
this subject, and who talk of the innovations of our commercial
system, are founded on a gross misapprehension or a complete
ignorance of what we have done, of the laws which we have
altered, and of the commercial policy to which we have
returned. I am ready to prove to demonstration that what
my Honourable Friend calls innovation, and at which he
seems to be terrified out of his senses, is in fact a calm,
cautious, and deliberate attempt to bring ,the commercial policy
of the country back to.tbe state in which..it was before that ex-
traordinary revolution, which turned every. 'thing in the world
topsy-turvy. I hope.therefore, Sir, that the, House will not be
deterred by my Hon. Friend's apprehensions from ever consider-
ing the subject of the Corn Laws. I confess I never was more
astonished than I was at what fell from my Noble Friend this
evening upon the subject. Recollecting all that has passed re-
specting the Corn Laws since the year 1815, to me it. appeared
most extraordinary and miraculous that any body should get up
and say that he thought we ought not to enter into any discus-
sion at all about them ! My Noble Friend gave us his history of
the Corn Bill of 1815. If the House will permit me, I will give
my history of that measure. At that period corn was exceedingly
low. It was clear that, as I always contended, the law of 1815
could never have the effect of raising the price of corn. It so
happened, that the harvest of 1816 and the harvest of 1817 were
bad ; the effect of which was to raise the price of corn, so as to
bring the law of 1815 into operation. This produced a very
considerable importation of foreign corn ; and being folldwed by a
very productive harvest in 1818, the price of corn naturally fell
with great rapidity. The agriculturists became greatly alarmed.
They formed an Agricultural Parliament, at the head of which
an individual, sometime ago deceased, Mr. Webb Hall, presided,
and which sat in the neighbourhood of this House. This Agri-
cultural Parliament sent manifestoes all over the country, calling
upon the agricultural interest to do—what ? To implore the House
to make no alteration in the Corn Laws ? Directly the reverse.
This House received above 500 petitions, all protesting strongly
against the principle of this law of 1815, which we are now told
by my Noble Friend and by my Hon. Friend we ought not to
touch.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—After this, Sir, am Ito be the
only person connected with this subject who is to be charged with
inconsistency ? To proceed. In the year 1819, soon after the
commencement of the Session, the Hon. Member for Wareham very
properly, and for which I was much obliged to him, asked me if it
was the intention of his Majesty's Government to propose any
alteration in the Corn Laws ; it being, I imagine, supposed, by
some persons, that the fire and fury of Mr. Webb Hall's pro-
ceedings would induce us to extend protection to agriculture
beyond what could be contemplated On my opinion) by any sane
mind. I replied, that his Majesty's Government had no such in-
tention. Next year, the Hon. Gentleman, who was then Mem-
ber for the County of surrey, proposed the appointment of a
Committee, founded on the various petitions which had been.
presented to us, complaining of the law of 1815. I objected
to that proposition, on the ground that it was preposterous to'
think of altering that law, on such grounds as those which
were stated in the petitions. I was defeated. The Hon.
Gentleman carried his motion, and a Committee was appointed.
Subsequently, however, tlfe inquiries of the Committee were
limited to the averages ; and the only result was, that some
alteration took place with respect to the manner in which the
averages were struck. In 1821 the agricultural interest was
labouring under considerable distress ; and his Majesty's Go-
vernment thought it their duty to acquiesce in a proposition for
inquiry. Accordingly a Committee was appointed, which sat
for a great length of time, entered into a very extensive and de-
liberate investigation of the facts, and made a very elaborate,
and, in my opinion, able Report to the House, in which the
principles of the law of 1815 were condemned, although the
Report stated that it was not desirable that, at that particular
time, any alteration should be made in that law. Another
Committee, in the succeeding year, although it recommended
that no immediate alteration should be made in the system, yet
adopted the opinion of the Committee of 1821, respecting
the law of 1825. I suppose any Noble Friend and my Hon.
Friend differed in opinion from those Committees, and there-
fore they are not bound by those Reports ; but I, who ac-
quiesced in those Reports, am not justly chargeable with incon-
sistency in my present conduct. Give me leave, Sir, to ask if
nothing has been done since the year 1815 to pave the way for
an alteration in the Corn Laws?
Noble Friend talks of
the currency. Why, Sir, the very fact of the improvement
which has taken place in our currency is a decisive reason
for reconsidering the Corn Laws. Nor have his Majesty's Go-
vernment neglected other means of enabling the agricultural
interest to meet a change whenever it might arrive; for, from
the year 1821 we have been gradually and steadily reducing the
taxation of the country; and have reduced it by no less a sum
than twelve millions. From the difficulties therefore under
which the farmers laboured from heavy taxation they have, di-
rectly or indirectly, been in a great measure relieved. My Noble
Friend however declares, that they have experienced no relief;
and wonderful to say ! he recommends the re-imposition of the
duty on wool ! Sir, if there ever was a point on which the whole
country seem to be in absolute error, it is on this duty on wool.
I have read a great many of the numerous petitions on the sub-
ject. They abound with sagacious remarks on what they term
" the wisdom of our ancestors," in protecting the trade of this
country in wool. Sir, it is difficult to say where the wisdom of
our ancestors begins. The contemporaries of one period become
the ancestors of another. In this case, however, our ancestors
happen to be just eight years old.—(A laugh.)—This high duty
on wool, which we are now called upon in respect to the wisdom
of our ancestors to re-impose, was laid on in 1819, not for the
protection of the wool-trade, but as a financial measure; with
a distinct understanding that whenever circumstances would al-
low, it should be taken off. There's " the wisdom of our ances-
tors" for you !—(Cheers, and a laugh. )—Our ,4 ancestors" must
by this time be fine well-grown babies.--(A laugh. )—My Hon.
Friend, the Member for Kent, talks of the remission of the duty
on timber. I will not trespass upon the time of the House on this
subject; but if I were sitting at dinner with my lion. Friend, I
should like to have a little conversation with him upon it. This high
duty on timber was not imposed until 1809. It is a little older
therefore than the duty on wool ; but not much. The purpose for
which it was imposed was to give protection to the timber of our own
Colonies. But so far from any intention having been entertained
of making it a permanent duty, it was limited to the duration
of the war. In 1822, this duty was diminished. How? By
rash precipitation on the part of a Government full of all sorts of
schemes and changes, and projects? No such thing. By a
Committee, who, after much investigation, and after having
examined a great mass of evidence, recommended the fearful and
wonderful alteration which appears to have so alarmed the nerves
of my Hon. Friend, the Member for Kent. Perhaps, Sir, I have
discussed these topics at greater length than they deserved ; but
it is exceedingly important to correct the mistaken views which
are taken of them. My Noble Friend insisted throughout his
speech on the necessity of giving protection to agriculture. Sir,
we never disputed that necessity. Our measures are the best
proof of our conviction of that necessity. We are acting on the
principle that agriculture must be protected, for the benefit of the

agriculturist, and full as much for the benefit of the consumer of
agricultural produce. The only question is, if it he wiser to
effect a prohibition of importation at a certain point by duty, or
by positive law. , The Hon. and Learned Member for Winchelsea
very clearly proved the other evening, that the ascending duty now
proposed must at some point or other be tantamount to prohibi-
tion. The evil of the old system is this. If you absolutely pro-
hibit the importation of corn at a certain price, the consequence is,
that it becomes the interest of all the great speculators when the
ports are open to pour into the country all the corn they can scrape
together in Europe; not with any reference to the immediate de-
mand, or the immediate market, but because the time of importa-
tion being limited, they are under the necessity of huddling it all
in together. Surely, Sir, that is xncire.injurions to the landed
interest than the plan we are at present proposing. We have
no wish to injure the landed interest. I am sure that 1 can
have no such wish. If it were not for the land, I and my con-
nexions should be nothing in this country. It is not likely, there-
fore, that I should cut my own throat. So far from weakening.
I am confident that the proposed plan will have the effect of
strengthening the landed interest. The• evils which we now,
propose to guard against are the evils which the law guarded
against before the measure of 1815. To hear some people talk
of the measure of 1815, hugging it to their breasts like a dar-
ling, one would suppose that agriculture never prospered before
its enactment. No man, however, who has attentively read the
statistical history of this country can deny that agriculture made
steady and progressive improvement from the Revolution to the
time at which the Bill of 1815 passed; although just at that lat-
ter period it experienced a temporary pressure, which perhaps
operated as a motive for the measure. Now, that we arc pre-
pared to revert to the laws by which Agriculture was gradually
benefitted for a century, how can we with justice be called inno-
vators ? We are no innovators ; we are merely bringing back a
system which has proved 'wholesome ; and from which I wish to
God we had never departed—(bear, hear!).—Tet the House
look at the immense mass of Petitions with which our table has
been loaded during the last, ,and the present Sessions ; some of
them calling for the aboliti* of the Corn Laws ; others intreat-
ing that they may not be tofiched; and the wisest of them praying
that if we do touch those-laWs, we will keep in mind the real in-
terests of all parties. Under these circumstances, what would
have been said of us if; we had not come forward with some pro-
position ? Would it not have been attributed to us, that we were
insensible to the agitation which the country was experiencing
from one end of it to the other? In what we have done,
we have merely done our duty. The plan which we propose
is that which appears to us to reconcile, as far as they can be recon-
ciled, the interests of all parties, although we know perfectly well
that we can never hope to satisfy the ultras on either side—(hear!)
My Hon. Friend says, that we ought not to make any alteration
in the Corn Laws at present, because we have not settled the
question of the currency. Why I thought it was settled. Have
I been in a dream on that subject? Do I merely fancy that my
Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment introduced a Bill in 1819 for the purpose of bringing back
the currency to its former condition ? It is true that a tempo-
rary deviation from that Bill took place in 1822, a deviation
which I for one greatly regret; but last year we applied a prac-
tical remedy to the evil of that deviation by accelerating the period
at which country notes should cease to be issued. Really, Sir,
I know not what we can do more with respect to the currency.
I shrewdly suspect, however, that what is meant by settling the
question of the currency, is making an alteration in the standard.
That appears to be the object recommended in all the pamphlets
which have been written on the subject; together with something
of which I confess I can make neither head nor tail, but which
is called "equitable adjustment." If that be the real object, if it
be proposed as a preliminary to any change in the Corn Laws to
alter the standard, I hope to God that such a proposition will
never be listened to by this House, and I am quite sure that as
long as his Majesty's present Government exists, such a proposi-
tion will never be successful. My Hon. Friend the Member for
Kent, says that be wishes the Corn Laws tb be such as may pro-
duce something like a certainty of price. Why, Sir, that is our
wish too. An absolute certainty of price is unattainable. In in ar-
ticle subject to the influence of the seasons as well as to the operation
of capital, it would be preposterous to expect it. But the nearest
approach to it that is attainable, our plan is calculated to attain.
One of the main objects which we have in the proposed alteration
of the law is to guard as much as possible against excessive fluc-
tuation of price. If our propoaition be adopted, foreign Corn
will never be imported but form immediate profit. As the lapse
of a week may so change the averages as materially to increase the
duty, no extensive speculation will be entered into. It is said that
the agricultural interest are much alarmed at this proposition;
that it has overwhelmed them with dismay. I do not believe any
such thing. I have received communications from various quar-
ters of the country; and so far are those communications from
expressing any apprehemion co the subject, that they speak of the
principle of our plan with unqualified approbation. For instance,
there is a letter which has been printed and addressed to every
Member of the House, containing the Resolutions of an Agricul-
tural Meeting recently held at Lewes, at which a Gentleman of
the name of Elmer, a very intelligent man, and extremely con-
versant with agricultural matters, presided. This meeting de-
cidedly approve the principle of the proposed alteration (which
they consider as an amendment of the existing law) although they
suggest some modification of the duties. That is one proof that
no such alarm exists as that which has been described. The reverse
I believe to be the case ; and I am convinced that the more people
reason on the subject and draw their conclusions from fact, the
more they will feel satisfied with what we propose. I know well
when any alteration of the principle of any law is proposed, that
it is very natural for individuals to take the alarm. In the course
of my official life, I have had occasion to propose many alterations
in the law ; and I do not remember a single instance of that
kind in which I have not received a multitude of sad anticipa-
tions and doleful assurances of the ruin that the change would
inflict on such or such an interest ; nor, Sir, do I remember a
single instance in which those miserable predictions were veri-
fied by the event—(Hear, hear.)—I cannot afford a better ex-
ample of the way in which uninformed and short-sighted persons
apprehend the most injurious consequences from measures which
have proved wholly innocuous, than in the proposition for allow-
ing the importation into this country of corn from Canada.
That proposition was founded on the soundest principles. Besides
that in recognizing his Majesty's distant subjects as brethren, we
did an act of justice, and cemented the union between our Colo-
nies and ourselves, there were considerations of political expe-
diency of the highest importance, which rendered the measure
most desirable. We were told, however, that it would cause this
country to be deluged with corn, not only from Canada, but from
the United States. The Bill was opposed in this House on that
ground—a ground which I and others, however, successfully
combated. But when the Bill got to another place, there terror
took its stand. So frightened were those by whom it was taken
into consideration, that overlooking all the reasons for its adoption
arising from justice and expediency, they declared that it was a
measure dreadful to contemplate, and refused to pass it into a law.
At last they were induced to acquiesce in a modified measure.
What was the result ? It turned eut That in the first year of the
operation of the Bill, when of course that operation might be ex-
pected to be most active, the quantity of corn imported into this
country from Canada was only between 60 or 70 thousand quar-
ters ; and in the next year it shrunk to 30 thousand quarters ;
and this was the result of a measure which we were called dolts
and children, unable to put two ideas together, or to reason from
cause to effect, because we did not anticipate from it the ruin of
agriculture.—(Hear, hear, hear.)--I declare to God, that I par-
ticipate in none of the fears of my Noble and my Hon. Friends on
the present occasion. On the contrary, I think that the course
which they have adopted is a course calculated to produce great
prejudice and great evil to that interest, in behalf of which, and
in behalf of all the other interests in the Empire I here stand, and
am ready, if necessary, to relinquish my character for consistency,
in order to promote their good.—(Loud cries of hear, hear, hear.)
the objects
Government
for
w hhi
cand
Sir E. KNATCHBULL explained.
Mr. C. WESTERN said, that the measure now
brought forward by Ministers, was directly contrary to the opinions
expressed by the late Lord Londonderry, in proposing the Corn
tßegulations u
introduced,
,IhBa2d2
fully. The
accomplished
measures whichlchhe
all
they were intended. The Earl of Liverpool had stated, that one
of the principal objects which Ministers had then in view was, to
and thereby increase
of corn advanced, and in February, 1825, the Ministers had
itincrease
publiclycrpe ari
ee
etthe
ofecorn.va
lacknowledged In
f th
teh circulatingt
he e yeaprrso slpBe2r medium,i3t Y 1 oBf24,theand 1825, the price
country to have
greatly increased. At that moment the price of wheat was from
655. to 68s. a quarter, and now the great object of Government
was, to prevent its rise even to 60s. This difference may have
been greatly produced by tampering with the currency. But
what a state of uncertainty and of mischief was created by these
fluctuations, when Government, within the space of so short a
can declare that the price of corn at 655., was im-
provingpenod
. the country, and now assert, that it is absolutely
necessary to keep the price down to fifty-five shillings.—
There was no adequate change of circumstances in the condition
of the country to justify their departure from their former prin-
ciples and declarations. It had been said' that great fluctua-
tions in the price of corn had occurred since 1815. This might
be true ; but at the same time much greater fluctuations
of price had taken place in every other country in Europe,
except France, where the restrictive law was more operative

than in this country. The extremes of fluctuation in England,
since the year 1817, had been from 928. to 435. In 1817 the
price of corn at Berlin was 655., and after 1824, it varied from
655. to 245. At Warsaw and Prague the extremes of price
from 1817 were, from 51s. to 13s. At Cracow, 575. to 13s. sd.
At Dantzig, from 90s. to 225. ; Vienna, 112 s. to 178. ; Munich,
120 s. to 258. ; Hamburgh, 818. 9d. to 218. In France the
price had fluctuated from Bs. 4d. the bushel to 4s. 3d. In every
country from which there had been any accurate returns, the
fluctuations had exceeded those of England. How could this be
attributed to the Corn Laws of 1815 ? He therefore should sup-
port the preventive system, upon the grounds of political expe-
diency, or even necessity—he meant the necessity of maintaining
the country independent of foreign nations. The national pros-
perity depended upon the continuance of the prohibitory system.
To alter that system, would be to enable foreign nations to starve
the English manufacturers, and thereby impose what terms they
pleased upon the country. England at present received great
quantities of corn from Ireland, the measure before the House
would deprive the Irish of the English markets, and increase the
evils of the former country.

Sir T. GOOCH said, that looking at the piles of
petitions from the many hundred thousand manufacturers suffer-
ing wader extreme distress, the Government would not have done
its duty if it had not brought forward the present measure. In
1821, when the table of the House was groaning under the weight
of petitions from the agricultural interests, no man grumbled
more than he did at. their not receiving proper attention from Mi-
nisters. The manufacturers had been taught to believe that their
distresses arose from the Corn Laws, and Ministers were placed
in a difficult situation. These distresses had never, in his opi-
nion, arisen from any thing of the sort. Every market was over-
stocked with manufactured goods; a child of ten years of age
could now do what an adult could formerly achieve with his in-
ferior machinery. This was the reason why the manufacturers
were thrown out of employment, and were in distress. Unless
a new market could be found for our goods, the manufac-
turers must continue to starve. The Corn Laws would not give
the agriculturist that protection which the other classes imagine.
The anre way to produce famine in the country, was to depress
the agricultural interests. He would confess that there was a very
great difference of opinion amongst his agricultural constituents as
to the present measure. Many of them had declared themselves
perfectly satisfied with the present measure. He would beg the
House to consider that the system of introducing foreign corn
would have the effect of sending gold out of the country. He
had known many ships to bring corn to England to return in
ballast. In the Committee he should propose a higher duty upon
the inferior sorts of corn. He should also propose a higher pivot
than 60s. He thought it ought to be 645.

Mr. WARD did not agree with a single opinion of
the Noble Lord (Clive), who had opposed going into the Corn..
mittee. The Noble Lord had thought that in twenty-two months
the present measures would have an effect in altering the currency.
He (Mr. W.) thought, that if experience of the past was worth
any thing, the country was likely to have a much better currency
than formerly. He thought the measure adapted to the circum..
stances of the country. The principles of free trade were objected
to upon very erroneous grounds. They had been totally mistaken
by the Member for Kent, and yet a child might understand them
if he were so minded. Those principles had unfortunately been
departed from by accident, or various causes; but now that the
House had succeeded in establishing them, he trusted in God that
they would not again be violated. The Citizens of London had
not expected a total abolition of th,3 old system of restricted trade ;
they.prayed for only an abatement of the old rigorous law. The
law at present proposed showed that Ministers had deemed their
wishes not to be very erroneous. He trusted that the existing
jealousy would give place to the utmost concord and sympathy be-
tween the two great interests of this affluent nation.

Mr. PEEL must say, that if any blame attached to
the Administration for precipitating the present measure with re-
spect to the Corn Laws, he was prepared to take his full share of
that blame.—(Hear, hear.)—Because that measure had his full
concurrence, and if illness or any other circumstance-had inter-
fered to prevent his Right Hon. Colleague, the Secretary for Fo-
reign Affairs, from bringing it forward, he (Mr. Secretary Peel)
would himself have most readily done so, not in the dry discharge
of an official duty, but because the measure itself had, in all its de-
tails, his most cordial support.—(Hear, hear.)—He felt it right
to say this, as well in the fair expression of his own opinion,
as in justice to his Right Honourable Friend the President of
the Board of Trade (Mr. Huskisson) than whom no Gentleman
had been more hardly dealt with by certain Hon. Members of that
House,—(loud cries of hear, hear from all parts of the Heuse)—
and be felt pleasure in expressing a hope that his Right Hon.
Friend would shortly be in his place, and have an'app9rtanity of
removing those misrepresentations and misapprehensions whick.
had taken place in his absence.—(Cries of Hear, hear. ).-:-He ap-
prehended that they were not then discussing the details, but the
principle of the measure submitted by his Right Hon. Friend (Mr.
Canning) ; and he confessed that the arguments urged by some
Hon. Members against that principle appeared to him to make di-
rectly the other way.—(Hear.)--The Hon. Member for Suffolk
(Mr. Gooch) bad urged the change which had taken place in our
currency as one argument against this measure; while be (Mr.
P.) on the other hand, contended that that alteration rendered the
proposed measure the more necessary. Again, the Hon. Member
for Essex (Mr. Western) recommended the adoption of the laws of
1815 and 1822, and advised their adherence to the restrictive price
of 80s. ! Was this, he would ask, consistent with the Hon. Mem.
tier's different valuations of money, which had taken place since the
adoption of the measures which he had the honour to introduce in
1819 ? or did any man think that the resolutions of 1822 could be
adhered to? The 80s. of the former period, alluded to by the
Hon. Member, was different from the 80s. of the present day.
There was not in that House any man more attached to the agri-
cultural interests than himself ; and he felt that, in the recent
distresses that had come upon the manufacturing districts, they
(the agriculturists) had shown the most earnest desire to alleviate
that distress.---(Hear, hear.)—lf an instance of this was re-
quired, they had it in the fact that, shortly after his Majesty's
Letter to the Bishops, not less than one hundred thousand pounds
had been collected, at Sermons, on Sundays, chiefly from agricul-
turists.—(Hear, hear.)—Did the House or the country require
more than this to show that there existed no hostile feeling be-
tween the agriculturists and manufacturers 2—(Hear, hear.)—
With respect to the currency, he must say that nothing would
more endanger its stability than the course proposed to be adopted
by Hon. Members opposed to tke present resolutions.—(Hear,
hear. ).—Adverting to what had been said with respect to the effect
which the proposed alterations would have on cultivation and pro-
duction, the Right Hon. Gentleman observed, that since he cum,
into the House, he had put into his hands an account of the
comparative number of Inclosure Bills passed from the Rs-
volution down to 1707, a period of entire restriction ; and also
flw quantitiesuon likely to be caused in home imported from abroad, they
would ' when they added to this increased
fluctuation similar account from 1771 to 11315 (both years inclusive), and
they were, during the former period, 619, and during the latter
trifling
N
2852.—(Hear,s0rce
p oefrproductionei
perceive
e t hear.)—Now, eea r t
r.)—hieng
prices. Let Hon. Members look at the effect which the intro-
duction of Irish produce had upon our markets here. There,
labour was cheaper, the soil fertile, and yet the opening of the
English markets to Irish produce produced no sensible effect upon
our prices in this country.—(Hear, bear.)—The effect of this
measure would be to equalize prices, and any material alteration,
unless such as might be produced by bad harvest, or other un-
avoidable circumstances,—(hear, hear)—prices would, in all pro-
bability, oscillate between 555. and 655. ; and therefore lie con..
sidered this measure a great boon offered to the agricultui ists.—
(Hear, bear.)---It would prevent the recurrence of that enormous
evil, occasioned by having three millions of corn poured in upon
the country, owing to the sudden rise in the price of that article.
—(Hear, hear. )—Under these circumstarces he hoped and trusted
his Noble Friend (Lord Clive) would not press his Amendment,
but allow the House to go into a Committee. He hoped, too,
that his Hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk (Mr. Gooch) would
agree to withdraw his opposition upon the same gronnds.—(Hear.)
Lord CLIVE and Sir R, Heron rose at the same
time, but Sir R. Heron gave way, and
Lord CLIVE proceeded. Much noise at this
period prevailed in the House, and we could only understand his
Lordship to say, that he was ready to withdraw his amendment,
if Hon. Gentlemen opposite felt inclined to withdraw their sup-
port of it.

- Sir R. HERON said a few words, which ',fere 41-
audible in the gallery.

Sir T. LETHBRIDUE
did not think, the gra-
duated scale of restriction proposed by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, would do, and objected not so much to the protecting price
of sixty shillings, as to the mode and machinery adopted for the
purpose of carrying it into effect. He was sure that when they
went into a Committee, they would find that 645. would be the
lowest protecting price for wheat, and 245. for oats. Ihe Hon.
Baronet expressed a determination to move an Amendment to
that effect.

Sir J. NEWPORT rose to protest against the
course pointed out by the Hon. Baronet.
After a few words from Mr. CHAPLIN, who spoke from
under the Gallery,
Lord CLIVE withdrew his Amendment ; anti the

House having resolved itself into a Committee (Sir A. Grant in
the Chair),
Mr. CHARLES GRANT moved the first Resolution.
When the CHAIRMAN was about to read it,
Mr. BANKES said, that as he meant to move
that the scale of protecting duty should be raised from 60s. to
645., he thought that that was the most proper time to offer him-
self to the Committee. The Hon. Member concluded by moving,
as all Amendment, that when the average price of wheat should
become 645. (instead of 605.), the protecting duty should be one
pound per quarter.
Mr. BARCL A.Y was glad that all parties had now
nearly come to an agreement as to what ought to be the maximum
price, and trusted that that circumstance would facilitate the de-
cision of this question. On the ground that the present proposi-
tion offered a fair medium between high and low prices, and would
therefore equally benefit the manufacturing and protect the agri-
cultural classes, he should support it.
Lord ALTHORP had already expressed his opi-
nion upon this subject, and he was very happy to find, that what
he had said had met with the approbation of his constituents.—
(Hear, hear.)—He was very glad to be able to tell the House, that
at a meeting of the farmers on market day, they had declared their
full approbation of 'l.e present measure.--(Heai, hear.)
Mr. FERGUSON thought that it was impossible
this debate could terminate without taking a more general turn
than that of a discussion upon the difference between 60s. and
645• Ile was of opinion that the question ultimately would be,
whether 30s. at the price of 509, would afford an adequate pro-
oftion
to "the grower. Nevertheless he approved of the principle
the Present measure, since, in comparison with the Act of
1815, he thought it was calculated to restore order and perma-
nencY to the price of corn. He objected, however, to the duty
now Proposed to be laid on barley and oats, and if it was deter-
mined to preserve that duty, he felt so strong an objection to it,
that he should feel himself compelled to vote against the Bill.
bepAlt. CANNING had been asked why 60s. had
cult- 'elected as the medium price ? Perhaps it would be diffi-
-Ito say why tbere had been any selection of a particular point
. variety which had been offered to their choice, but he be-
theleved that 60s. had appeared by analogy to be the natural point
at
°f 8° Which the medium price should be fixed. In 1815 the sum
°. Was assumed as the medium in reference to the averages
of the twelve preceding years. During the first six years, the
to gang' had
on ben 98s ,and during the latter six years it had fallen
i.„'`,l. Below even the latter sum the medium had been chosen,
and
been fixed at 80s , in consequence of the cessation of the
c,,'" and the decrease of 'those inflated prices which had been
tie: teti by it. In 1822, the sum of 70s. was assumed, because
p e„Prece(ling averages had rather gone beyond that sum. The
a„- r-
Was accordingly assumed rather below than above the aver-
'e
:f the Preceding- twelve years, during the first six of which
the
and'e had been 709., and during the latter six years 50s.—
average of these two averages was within a fraction of 605.,.
avera&teaverage was supported by the evidence of the positive
Itaver the 1 the last four years, which was also 60s. On theseh
erages the medium price of 60s. had ',seen now selected.
,Texis
isti"tia ion had been made, although some circumstances now
el, g kerred to justify the choice of a lower price. The present
Nealption of the average medium price was, therefore, most
ha:l_le", especially with regard to the agricultural interest, who
theseueeu rather favoured in the selection. If the rule which
f analogies seemed to have established was now departed
,r°lll,
.rtusi seemed to him that they would fix a medium price arbi-
fiahl Y. Such a course would not be safe, nor would it be justi-
, e, merely because some of the agriculturists might consider it
ire-a4°Laahle. Another question which had been asked was, why
nee: :anY alteration? His answer was, because of its positive
wheat Y; for by the law under which we are now living, till,
could gut 111) to the former price of 80s., not one single grain
tut„he admitted into the country. If it was now possible to go
the L.te argument, he thought he could most distinctly convince
ezikt °Mmittee that such a system could not long continue to
6.--(Hear, hear !)
objected
the :10nel WOOD t o tak
e i the averages n
if the, which the Right Hon. Gentleman had proposed ; and
th• ina",,nssion was adjourned till to-morrow, he wished that one
It besides the amount of the medium price should be noticed.
eles"" been said that the calculation was made upon the Win-
bushel. Now, he believed, he was correct in asserting
thseterk
two LY law the Winchester bushel had ceased to exist within the
e b 7, t Years. He therefore thought that if the discussion should
ado JOurned till to-morrow, the Imperial measure should be
t -"„sn,
hru as the standard of calculation, and in conjunction with
Ztandard the sum of 645. as the medium price.
w; 411 e CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
ii,;";rcl to say a word or two in explanation of the supposed diffi-
Ise, of the two measures. It was undoubtedly true, that the
gra.'sr the Regulation of the Weights and Measures had produced
pe-eLeltpence, and some confusion, and at first sight it might ap-
plieiZqo so in the calculations upon the medium price, as ap-
there' the standard measure of corn. But if he was not mistaken,
metes-s an express provision in the Act passed, for altering the
arnpel•es, that though men were compelled to buy and sell by the
retutltlial Measure, yet the calculation of the Inspector and his
bushel were to be made upon the standard of the Winchester
nor k; There would not, therefore, be any practical difficulty,
Could Y real confusion arising from this mode of calculation. He
let consent to any alteration in the medium price. .
was I' CALCRAFT thought that great confusion
he t)inl7,ucecl by these different standards of measurement ; and
Mt, gat the Act ought to be repealed.
Winch .I)4VIES GILBERT had recommended the
,„
blishea h'r measure, but as the Imperial measure was now esta-
Prefers Y the law of the land, he thought they ought to use it in
ivflet to the other.
discuj'ohilltOUGHAM really could not suffer this
ditioa 01 r. Pass by without expressing his opinion, that the ad-
matterProposed by the Hon. Member for Dorset, was a
in silence 4° khan importance, and ought not to be passed over
of the co' Re heartily approved of the principle of the change
we e°lll4l rilLLaws ; and he agreed with those te
state.d that
presett --. go on with the law in its present The
was
ewes3;stern
,„; ~ was one in which every possible disadvantage
the one h-- 11 the country ; it was a system of constraint. on
of last yenarnd.' and monopoly on the other ; and the evidence
It sven
a syusilowed to what "ii lery it was liable.—(Hear.)—
receive the iat
we arrive ern under which tjheggvalue of Corn would go on, till
this, lb
ofe7Peeo-- a famine price, before the country could hope to
lea
Obnenefit from' importation. In consequence of
this side the water might be starving on a
price, arket3 w e was
s
price In 'I.
1 while hselling at less than half that price
at L. of Amsterdam • and till it reached the famine
have tonew.......utehun• portatiou alone was permitted;relief they could
.1""' in the; "'ear, hear.) So much for the harshness of these
"°w did the: "'ear,
on the consumer. On the other hand,
s hiltPon thi °P"ate ou the grower ? ILI what he was going to
gy of etseß trusted he should not be accused of being
which he knrt4e,...?bag the dumnable heresy of free trade ; a guilt
Ipractices of ~-,,,Was accounted by some as the worst of the mal-
lauSh.) I,l?);`,iri Right Hon. persons.—(Hear, hear, and a
'twice!, he ',Co ",er, therefore, might be his opinion on that
cause he was ~ uelhtl cautiously confine it to his own bosom, be-
rible crirninaiie°
atiOo Which ~,e: arui to
-°und by any law to accuse himself of such ter-
expose himself to the dreadful denunci-
that point Was, Ili.ore to follow it.—(A laugh.) His opinion on
his f.onscienne,
sued his religion, a matter between himself and
euritv
' ---"gtegi,tee he should do what he could to enjoy it in se-
of "dr° as well a for that was clearly for the interest of the grower
se-
steady. sr. lyneertainr 1411,4
au re.gularity, of the consumer, that the prices should be
man' of t_he aseragee,
ThVe uki this respect, was opposed to all comfort and to
be overwiteleasa hy a "ern of importation, from the mismanage-
daud other causes left the landlord liable to
or', among others,
Whether the Illutaio,f inconveniences : and for that rea-
‘ way of iroproPyl.°Pesed new le4 the approach of a new system.
did not mean
aeerets ; but he 5c„.,.. -`.t.
Neat Which sYStena went the whole length in the
then to
state, he would have thought desirable, he
could not regularl;aensoerry tollenilasinentitled to keep his own
ing permission
jet. Let those
those who did another place, which he
toy enter ii,sl.(mao persons had pr.evailed in obtain.-
other
wish h inquiry upon this sub
of the Corn Law. c'r an aiteena.o
meld appear that goohe nu the
ottld
f'calltY "°4sll, if not change go to the one side,
and
ration in the present system
the
&frail and then, he believed it
aced those who had
taikedconfine,l Lut any alteration would be
were hostile to the
;Item,
amWere
teh a considerable
ed. about thenZelY to the Tellers. Ire.
naght at least to b In min price
oteights and measures, and
convince
eue ev
i cad hardlyetn 601., agreed that there
embody in t t:Y ration in the present
their speeches all other. T were
the innumerable Y in
eacerhsQoletg, he believed they
Suppose they
4 which had hecoPamPhlets published t had been stated in
perhaps, reed thPambhilshed f On this Slab.
in coni,, and,
Lindeed, now a treatise on logarithms
or some subject.—as to those
weeks or months ago, few,
world,
.-....50u viri
resding•—(A laugh. )`But44 aucb Pamphlets,- •
be easy and light
all the arguments
arkti suppose
tsreasuniogs
whitleytm)eteon gozzahr again
this subject in pamphl
, or otherwise, they could nPot now h n
.0 convince each othere. 'tbe general principle of
then
an
t
they could die,
d what But they could easily come to a voteoPe
amendmentsuahotheui
isuhordinatme
the new syseeon
qpureosptoinsende, tlovhtheethmer;
any,
4 be made in the details of the new

system. But in another place, he must not say where, they
were proceeding upon quite another plan, and had already, as it
was said, got into the mire and slough of despond, with refer-
ence to this matter. New inquiries bad been projected, as if
there had been no Committees on this subject in 1814 and in
1822, and there had been no voluminous Reports from these
Committees. Notwithstanding all this it appearedin to be con-
ceived in a certain quarter that they were still the infancy
of the question ; that they bad been all along in a com-
plete hallucination on the subject; and that it was still ne-
cessary for them to enter into an inquiry as to the facts. They
said this was a most important question, and therefore asked
that they should now be allowed to inquire into two points--
there was very good logic there—but what were these two points.
First, an inquiry into the price at which foreign wheat could be
sold in the home market; and next, the price at which wheat
could be obtained in the foreign country? In order to follow up
these inquiries properly, it would be necessary for the inquirers to
examine into the state and effect of taxation in those foreign coun-
tries; into the parish rates of Poland, if there were any such rates
there ; and into all the circumstances connected with Odessa and
other ports.—(Ct of question, question, and hear, hear.)—That
was the question, no doubt.---(A laugh.)—He begged of the
House to hear him a little while. as be might not have an oppor-
tunity of addressing them on this stiaject again. But certainly
he did not think that when they came to argue the question now,
they ought to be called upon to enter into inquiries as to the po-
licy of Russia and Poland, and other States, since they had en-
joyed abundant opportunities before to make themselves acquaint-
ed with all the material facts that bore upon the subject. Most of
the Members of that House knew the mode in which Bills were
sent out of that House to the other. But in case some of the new
Members might not be aware of it, he would state that the
practice was, when a Bill passed the House of Commons, to ap-
point some Member of that House to carry it to the other'
House. The Member who carried it up mentioned the
passing of the Bill in the Commons, and desired their Lordships'
concurrence ; but when the Bill which was now in con-
templation for carrying into effect the new system should
be presented in the other House, with a request that they would
concur in it, the reply might be, " No, we will not concur in
it ; we have an inquiry pending on the subject ; and if you will
please to come to us at the end of next Session, when our in-
quiries may, perhaps, be terminated, then we will inform you
whether we shall concur or not."--(A laugh.)—He was one of
those who had no hesitation in saying, that proper protection
ought to be given to the agricultural interests ; but while he ad-
mitted that, he begged of the agriculturists to recollect that they
were not entitled to any undue advantages to the prejudice of the
other interests of the community.—(Hear, hear.)—To protect the
agriculture of this country was just and necessary.—(Hear, hear.)
—The farmers of this country, under all the circumstances in
which they were placed, could not produce corn at the same price
which formed a remuneration to the foreign grower. Upon this
ground, he was perfectly ready to allow the agriculturists that ex-
traordinary protection which their extraordinary circumstances re-
quired. He was willing that, in consideration of the heavy bnrdens
to which they were subjected, they should have an equivalent pro-
tection ; but beyond that point of equivalent protection he could
not advance in their favour a single step. When any person pro-
posed to go beyond this in support of the agricultural interests,
he acted in a manner as extravagant as it was unjustifiable. It
was a mockery of all reason and common sense to say, that the
agriculturists ought to have any thing beyond what was a fair
and just protection. When the restriction on the importation
of foreign corn went beyond its proper medium, it ceased to be a
protection, and became a most unjust tax in favour of the land-
lords, upon all other classes of the community.—(Hear, hear.)—
Many of the arguments urged against the Landowners had his de-
cided disapprobation. But at the same time it was a little too
much to say, that the landlord should have for his corn in this
country, more than double the price at which corn could be pro-
cured abroad.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—lt ought to be kept in view,
that from 1735 to 1793, or 1795, this was an exporting
country as far as respected wheat. That it was during the
same period an importing country was true. But what was the
price of wheat in the home market in the intervening period ?
The average price was 455., and yet at that rate there were spe-
culations in England for carrying wheat abroad. He bad some
doubt, therefore, as to the accuracy of some of these Reports re-
lative to the prices of wheat in foreign countries. For instance,
it was stated that the price of wheat was dearer by ten shillings
per quarter at Dort than at Rotterdam. This was most ex-
traordinary. The places were not much more than two hours'
journey from each other. He had been at these places, and
could not understand how this difference of price existed.—
But the inference which he drew from the whole of this cir-
cumstance was this, that the present low price of wheat in
the ports of the Baltic and other parts, was the consequence of
a glut.—(Question, question.)—He could explain more in detail,
why he thought that the price was the consequence of a glut.—
but he would not enter more particularly into the matter at pre-
sent. But it was perfectly well known that the prices of wheat
had been in the Dutch and Polish markets 575. and 625. per
quarter, when we had no prohibitory corn laws at all—(Cries of
question, question! and coughing).—He was not in the House in
1815 ; but he knew that the country was then in very particular
circumstances, and that this, perhaps, might afford some justifica-
tion for a peculiar policy, respecting the Corn Laws, at that pe-
riod. But it was clear now that a reformation was required, and
he wished that the reform in this, as in every other subject, should
be gradual, and such as not to scare the minds of those who were
to be affected by it. That was one consideration. Another was,
that they ought not to make too great strides in the way of Re-
form, where great interests were in jeopardy. This doctrine was
that which he maintained in all matters of reform—whether Par-

liamentary Reform—Reform in the Law of Property—Reformin
the Criminal Law—Reform in Commercial Regulations—Reform
in the Agricultural System—or any other Reform—(Cries of
" Question !" and coughing).—He was anxious to address the
House then, because he saw that the next day they would be laid
up with colds and coughs.—(A laugh. )—He concluded by observ-
ing, that the interests of the landholders, however important, ought
not to be set against the general interests of the country.
Mr. CANNING wished to set the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman right on one point. The inquiry in the other
House had been allowed only on the express condition that it
should speedily terminate, and not interfere in the least with the
progress of the present measure. In the meantime, he thought
it better that the further debate on the question should he ad-
journed till to-morrow, when he understood an Amendment, the
reverse of that now proposed, was to be submitted to the House.
After a few words from Mr. Wodehouse, Sir John Sebright,
and Mr. Baring,
The Committee divided on the Amendment—.

Ayes l6O
Noes
Majority against the Amendment
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House Adjourned at a Quarter past One o'clock.