The Sun.
London, England, 1827-06-19 00:00:00

perfect sincerity, which are as conspicuously the gam'
naments of his chlricteras hie-splendid achieve'
.meats have raised his,fame far above that of all otheiCroll'
.manders.—(Cheers.) •• • . • ,
• Mr..BARING, in explanation, assured the House thes
• it was with unfeigned reluctance that he felt himself cool'
pelled to animadvert on the conduct of the Noble Duke.
He had stated most truly what he felt. He agreed entirelt
with the Right Hon. Gentleman in believing that the
Noble Duke had mistaken the meaning of his Right Holi•
Friend (Mr. Husliisson), and had been misled by sole
persons much more cunning and artful than himself.—(2l
laugh.)—He could not commend the mode in which the
Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded to the day, for be
really thought the debates of that House were not to he
obstructed because they might happen to take place on the
anniversary of the battle of Waterloo.—(Hear.)--Virith
one other observation he would conclude. To make hie
argument as short as possible for the convenience of tbe
House, he had stated that the Noble Duke's Amendment
would have been more than tantamount to an additied
duty of 2s. 6d. as by raising the price from 625. and e
fraction to 665. the difference of duty would have exceed'
ed that sum.

Mr. HUSKISSON then addressed the Committee:-"
Whatever it may be my duty, in my own defence, to stare
to this Committee, I beg it may be borne in mind, that°
is not I who have personally connected the Noble Puke
with this subject. Whatever disclosures I may be aoll'
pelled to make, I beg it may be borne in mind, that at
least they are not of my seeking. I will strictly confine
myself to the motion tinder consideration ; and I do Will
tell my Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Peel) the Member for
Oxford, that though he thinks all the ridicule which 011
Hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Baring) has thrown on the.,
amendment, is a ridicule that attaches to myself, I wool°
infinitely rather bear it all than suffer that amendment r°
pass, and work all the mischief which it must have pro'
duced. I shall at once, after what has been said, go into
the particulars of the correspondence to which my Right
Hon. Friend has referred, in order that I may defend nix'
self against the charges of inconsistency that were-thy°
founded upon it. I should have presumed that my Right
Hon. Friend had seen it, and was well acquainted with ill
contents, if he had not so stated them this night as to she
that he has entirely mistaken the passages which relate r°
the suggestions I offered to my Noble Friend. I trust the,
as thesedocuments have been stated in substance in another
place, and referred to in the debate of this evening, that 0
objection can exist to my reading extracts from them floor.
It was at a late hour, between eleven and twelve o'clock at
night, on the 24th of May—that being the eve of the dol
when the Corn Bill was to be committed in the other
House—that I received from my Noble Friend a priou
communication, which I MUM now beg permission to re'
to the Committee— • -
LETTER PROM THE MIZE OF WELLINGTON TO Mil•
HUSEISSON.

" London, May 24, 1827. ,
" My dear Huskisson—l beg you to look at the encloW
Clause, and let me know whether you have any object°
to its being inserted in the Corn Bill, after the clause Per"
mitting the entry.—ln my opinion, it will tend to diminish
the apprehensions entertained, that the system of- or
housing may be for the purpose of facilitating and 001'14
the results of frauds in the averages; and will tend to
induce some to vote for the Bill who would otherwise rote
against it.
" Let me have your answer as soon as you can. Ever
yours, most sincerely, " WELLINGTON."
As it bears on the subject, I must take the liberty also to
read the Clause which contains the enclosure referred to 111
the letter, and which Clause was in these words :
" Provided always, that no Corn shall be entered for
home consumption from any warehouse in any port or
place in this kingdom, previous to the entry for home con-
sumption, or to the exportation of every other portion of
portions of Corn previously lodged in warehouse, in aid,
port or place ; without the consent in writing, under tbe
hand and seal of the proprietor of such last-mentioned Corn'
so long as the average price of Corn within this kingdron'
as settled by virtue of this Act, shall be less than 70e. a
quarter."
That was the Amendment on which my Noble Vrien4
did me the honour to ask my opinion, and begged zne,/,
send an answer as soon as possible. I immediately toc, t -
pen, and wrote an answer which I dispatched that night'
and which I believe he received at an early hour the at,
morning. I assure my Right Honourable Friend, and-r
House, that when I received that 'note, and looked at ",„e
motive of my Noble Friend, which was, as he stated,
induce some Peers to rote for the Bill who would other-
wise vote against it," I considered that in replying to roi
Noble Friend I was doing (if! may be allowed so to expre°
myself) what one Colleague should do towards another;
and I considered, my Noble Friend to stand in that relati°l
to me with respect to this Bill. I did not keep a copy
this letter ; and I am now indebted for one to the kludges'
of my Noble Friend, who has, on my application, sine°,
transmitted it to me. My letter was hastily written, hn"
as some passages of it have been the cause of all the x6sar
prehension that has taken place, I must beg perraiseinn to
read it to the Committee. My Noble Friend stated in It
note his wiskto conciliate friends to the Bill. I beg
answer, therefore, by alluding to that statement:—
" FROM MR. EIUSKISSOX FO THE DUKE OZ WZLLINaT".
" Somerset-place, May 24, 1827.
"My dear Duke—l should certainly be disposed to acs
quiesce in any reasonable concession which would concilirm,
some of those who object to the Corn Bill in the House of
Lords, without risking the loss of the measure when 00
bask to our House.

"...I cannot take upon myself to say, whether the provise'
whichgrounds, return,grll am
afraid you would find
wouldheopen tothisobLecatt practicalion.O
other
difficulties in the execution of the proposed measure.
" It would give, as I understand it, the power to any One
proprietor of foreign corn, in any port, to lay a veto upon
the sale of all corn warehoused subsequent to.his in that
port, until the price reached 70s.
" This would put it in the power of one individual, bY
reserving a quantity, however small, of old corn, to sto?
any sale below '7os. as effectually as it could be stopped by
a positive prohibition under that price.
" Supposing this objection removed, how, at any of tbek.
great ports, can you hope to get the consent in writing ell
every proprietor? I have no doubt that the corn ll°
warehoused in London is the property of at least 500 6015,
or individuals, some living in London, some in differew
parts of England, some abroad. This corn, whilst ;I'
bond, is every day changing hands. How can it be ter
tisfactorily certified to the Custom-house that all the colt
seats have been obtained; or how is any party to set abett
ei
procuring them all, or to know when he has accompbebd
it?
"There are other difficulties of detail which occur t°
me.—For instance, a party who cannot fulfil the cOI
tions in the port of London, may not find any difficulty
~fj
doing so at Rochester, because of corn previously bonie
at the latter port there is none. In that case, the Lovu°"t
owner may either remove his corn to Rochester, or
fresh corn from the Continent into that port, and the la"
would be different in different ports, though possibly vel
near to one another.
" Had your proposal been that no corn bonded after ail
passing of the present Bill should be allowed to be entereja
for home consumption till the average price had reacbe
665., and that thenceforward all corn so bonded, or there'
after imported, should come under the regulations of the
Bill, individually I should not object to such a proviso. It
would ensure that no quantity beyond that now in bond
'should be thrown upon the market, unless, in spite of that
quantity, the price reached a level which might fairly be
taken as an indication of our being in want of a further
supply from abroad.
But I am afraid that even this Amendment w0*414
prove fatal to the Bill in our House.
" I remain, &c.
" W. HUSKISSON."
The Committee will see by this letter, that inereoul,,,,d'.°
my suggesting the proposition not to let out the, :bond
corn till the averages had reached 605., and that uito
price the corn actually in the country should be locked "r.
in the warehouses, I had proposed that it should -ia!,"
preference and priority of admission till the average Pri
had reached 665., and that thenceforward all tbe-
gulations and provisions of the Bill should apply to 11"
but still I warned my Noble Friend that even this Arnow;
ment might prove fatal to the Bill. The 550,000 gnat.,
now in bond represent British capital, and are rfe
property, of British owners. This core has lain in Pi,
warehouses during the last twelve months, and tolleZ
of it was brought here in expectation that it would be sel_.
mated under the measure of last Session, which rri,
adopted by Parliament, but not carried into effect by r
discretion of the Crown. I did think, under these Of"
cumstances, that up to 665. this corn was entitled tf:o.7
priority of preference, but only pro hac vice, as my Rig%
Hon. Friend states. My suggestion, so far from gig
~-
preferencejos
tthereyteorsteh. e clornpia.obprosoaedd otvoer
givthee coa rnprefinerbeonnced,f-or
limited time to the corn in bond over any fresh porn.,!la
might arrive after the passing of die Bill. I 0w4,1
not pursue this • correspondence further, were it :11001
wiry to set myself right with this House ell4'ollßaulll.o
I confess it is a matter of great regret t01ie4e4.31,11,,WY ,41•72„.
Friend, who, on the 24th May, had dovic4.4! AP, .0:11C7i
to consult me as to a clause ,he intenclod
who bad done me the further honour to 11,Peeets, to' i thre4er.
sesunsl hid stated why that clause .wo. iny opini9ify