The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-23 00:00:00

A1t,14,„,

LONDON:
SATURDAY MORNING, JULY 23, 1842.

Early last evening, on the motion for a Committee
of Supply, Mr. M. Ginsox moved, as an amendment,
that the House resolve itself into a Committee to in-
quire into the public distress, and supported his mo-
tion by a speech distinguished by ability and a con-
siderable number of new and startling facts. He
waSl followed by Mr. HUME and several gen-
tlemen on the same side, and to twelve o'clock
no person on the Ministerial side spoke
on this most interesting and important ques-
tion, but Sir CHARLES BURRELL: At twelve o'clock,
therefore, Mr. COBDEN moved that the debate be ad-
journed ; the House divided, and the adjournment was
negatived by 188 to 33. Mr. HINDLEY, on the ques-
tion being again put, moved that the House do ad-
journ, and complained of the disrespect shown by
Sir ROBERT PEEL and the Ministers to the
country. Mr. EWART and Mr. HAWEC, on the
Liberal side, recommended the withdrawal of the
motion for adjournment, and the latter gentleman said
he could be no party to opposing the declared will of
the majority. Mr. FIELD EN, however, in a speech
distinguished for its plain good sense, and not unen-
livened by wit, b01(13.3, stated that the Government
ought to he obstructed ; that it AV lIS only taxing and
robbing the pee,ple ; and he asked what did Govern-
ment exist for ? Nobody could give him any answer
In the House of Commons the whole Government
was lftanded as a useless plunderer of the people,
whi ought to be obstructed, and no person gain-
said the important and homely remark. Finally,
Mr. HINDLEY withdrew his amendment, and Mr.
COBDEN made an excellent speech in favour of Mr.
GIBSON'S motion, mentioning the recent conduct
of the French and American Governments as new
facts, which changed, the whole aspect of affairs,
and required from us a prompt and a new policy.
At a late hour Mr. COBDEN, who spoke under
many disadvantages, was listened to with much atten-
tion, th ough not a few of the gentlemen, who after-
wards 'decided not to inquire into the public distress,
preferred sleep to the information he gave them. The
country, however, will judge the House of Commons
and the Government as they deserve, and the bodies,
which, as Mr. FIELDEN said, can only and
only tax the people, and can give them neither em-
ployment, relief, nor food, will be assuredly despised
and contemned, and in the end. cast aside as worth-
less. The House of Com/iions, by the direction of
Sir ROBERT PEEL, deCl6d that it would not inquire
into the public distress, and that it will continue to
tax and starve the people.

Though there can be no doubt that allowing the
corn whic:n is now in bond to be taken into consump-
tion free of duty, would be a great temporary relief,
it stiould not be, in our opinion, except as a step to.
wards the abolition of the Corn-laws, vehemently
urged or strenuously recommended. Not only pre-
sent and immediate relief is needed, but permanent
improvement. We not only require abundance now,
but to be secured abundance hereafter. Present
alms may save a man from destruction, but per-
manent independence can alone make him free and
happy. Admitting the corn in bond for consumption
free of duty will not extend nor continue our trade
with the United States; it will not immediately en-
large our market nor provide for its continued ex-
tension. What we want is a present and an ever-
growing market, which can only be secured by per-
manent free trade.
We are inclined also to think that the free admission
of the foreign corn now in bond, by affording a tem-
porary relief; might fix the disease on the system.
It would skin over a foul ulcer, and make it

spread inwards. At the same time, it would
scarcely add to the quantity of food at. the com-
mand of the people, unless the permission to im-
port free of duty were continued—for all the wheat
now in bond will probably be brought in paying the
duty. If it would not cdd to the quantity of corn, we
mwt vulture to doubt whether the permission to
escape the duty would much lower the price, and if
the price were not lowered, equal to the amount of
duty remitted, the persons who would really benefit
by the permission would be the opulent owners of
bonded corn, whether foreigners or Englishmen. We
cannot, therefore, cordially and earnestly join some of
our Contemporaries in praying Sir PEEL will allow
the corn now in bond to be admitted duty free.

What the nation requires is free trade in food.
Our manufitcturers and merchants want the assure
ance that there shall be no other impediment to their
importing food than an inadequate price. The
Americans want an assurance that there shall be no
hindrance to their bartering their corn fin- our cloths
and cutlery, by which they may be induced to grow
corn in future fur us, and with it buy our goods,
instead of making cloth and cutlery for themselves.
Oa both sides of the Atlantic an assurance is required
that trade may be extended without being inter-
rupted by political regulations, or subjected to any
laws except those which naturally determine the
profit or trade. The proposition to bring in free of
duty the corn now in bond, will not give those
assurances, whi h can only be given by the total aboli-
tion of the Corn-!aws. We Will not, thermoro, slide
down from the lofty ground of principle, on which we
have taken our stand, into the paths of flowery expedi-
ency, which will soon lead to a more complete stoppage
than is at present experienced. Justice, morality, and
political. freedo* ,311 c.°ll7oand the repeal of the
:Garroaws 4
.1.100: will nOtcounnel the poor .mendi-
liiiiicy or asking Sis4l°BEkT 'l4 to Admit,- for the
seseint,'. 1,20000 .94,1ArterS of corn dtilty_frte.
`;` t.(3!4, gaap4444,.