The Sun.
London, England, 1827-06-15 00:00:00

culated to destroy all the securities upon which the inter-
change of property was founded. If the Hon. Baronet,
the Member for Westminster, could persuade the manufac-
turing and labouring classes, that in proportion as cern
was dear, their prosperity would increase, and at the same
time persuade the agriculturists that a free trade in corn.
without any restrictions or protecting duty, would give
them high prices, he would accomplish a very desirable
object, and save the House, if not in this, in a future
Session, a great deal of laborious discussion on a subject
upon which all were not likely to agree. Upon these
grounds he should oppose the motion for going into a Com-
mittee--a motion, in fact, which could hardly be seriously
made, considering the short time likely to intervene be-
tween the present period and the prorogation of Parlia-
ment, and of which, if the inquiry were at this time prac-
ticable, the only effect would be to throw the whole
country into confusion.
Mr. WESTERN defended the course which he had
taken in the year 1822, and at other periods, with regard
to the currency. He attributed all the difficulties of the
country to the measure of 1819, by which the currency
was erroneously said to be settled. The currency was not
fixed ; it had not been settled by the measure of 1819 ; it
was still in a fluctuating state, and he was satisfied that the
prosperity of the country would never be permanently re-
stored, until Parliament retraced its steps.
Mr. ATTWOOD contended that the whole of the fluctua-
tions in the condition and trade of the country, particularly
in the state of the shipping and agricultural interests,
which the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the
Board of Trade had ascribed to different causes at different
times, all arose from alterations in the currency. It was
impossible to reduce the quantity of Bank notes in circula-
tion without raising their value; and it was the alterations
in the quantity of Bank paper in circulation which had oc-
casioned the variations in the value of the currency. lite
Hon. Gentleman concluded by some remark on the Pre-
sident of the Board of Trade; which, from the Hon.
Member speaking from under the Gallery, we did not hear.
Mr. HUSKISSON replied, however, that he never
had, as the Hon. Member had accused him of doing, treat-
ed the majorities of that House with contempt. lie would,
however, treat with sovereign contempt the tissue of mis-
representations which made up the speech of the Hon.
Member, and would not trouble himself to contradict them.
Mr. E. DAVENPORT in reply, thought it rather hard
to be reproached by Ministers for a delay which had j
occurred in compliance with their own special request.
One Hon. Member accused him of recommending a reduc-
tion of the standard, whereas he had specially guarded
himself against any distinct proposition of the kind ; it
being a matter of indifference to him, whether the system,
the standard or the ratio, of taxation were changed.—
The Hon. Member for Coventry, had said that high priced
corn caused the distress of the people. How could that be,
when two years ago all classes were flourishing, at a time
when wheat was 15 shillings a quarter above the present
price, the masters giving great wages, the men working
three or four days in the week, and drinking the rest ? The
object of the motion, was to enforce the attention of Go-
vernment to the subject. The Right Hon. Gentleman not
. comprehending a part of the drift of the motion, was easily
accounted for, as he had been more agreeably engaged than
in listening to it, by talking with his friends. lie had
. alluded to the discrepancies of those who followed in the
debate, as if the mover was accountable for the variations
of opinion in those who followed him—but he had not
. answered to the principal allegations preferred against the
• Administration. He had argued, that because the House
had negatived the motion for inquiry into the Currency, in
1822, therefore they were bound to do so, in spite of any
. intervening mischief that could occur at all future periods.
He had not answered to the charge of utter ignorance of

the question, preferred and substantiated against the Admi-
nistration—he had not accounted for neglecting to redeem
his own last year's pleige, to take the silver standard under
his consideration—He had neglected to show by what pro-
cess a permanently higher range of prices for commodities
could exist here than on the Continent, so long as we
employ the same medium of value. He had said the cur-
rency had been finally settled in 1819, whereas it had been
tampered with by altering the One Pound Note Act, in
1822, and again in 1826: and whereas there was a
continual tampering still going on by means of Exchequer
Bills, every manoeuvre in which, upon a large scale was, as
regards the commerce of the country, a virtual alteration
of the standard. The Right... Hon. Gentleman had not
explained to the House why the Ministers had kept those
large means for their own emoluments, at the time they
gave a small one to the rest of,the community. His wish
was to abide by the suggestion of some Honourable Friends,
and he would withdraw his notice at present, with the de-
termination to renew the subject at a future period, unless
anticipated by some more competent person.
Mr. ATTWOOD explained, and retorted upon the Right
lion. Gentleman (Mr..Hualciason) the expressions which
he had applied to his (Mr. Attwood's) observations, desir-
ing to assure the Right Hon. Gentleman, that there was
no degree of contempt which he had thought proper to
express—that he (Mr. A ttwood) did not equally feel to-
wards the statements of the Right Hon. Gentleman. The
notice was then withdrawn.
FINES AND RECOGNIZANCES.

Mr. C. PALLMER moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to amend the Acta of the Sd Geo. IV. and the 4th of
Geo. IV., relative to the Entreating Fines and Recoveries.
After a few words from Mr. Nicholson Calvert, Mr.
Secretary Bourne, and Sir Charles Wetherell, leave was
given to bring in the Bill.
BOROUGH OF PRESTON.

Mr. STANLEY moved for leave to bring in a Bill for
the regulation of taking the Poll at future Elections for the
Borough of Preston.
Mr. J. WOOD observed, that he anti his Hon. Col-
league were agreed upon the two main points—that the
mode of taking the poll at Preston required alteration, and
that that alteration should be such as would be contained in the
Bill about to be introduced. He need mention only one fact
to show that some remedy was required—that the election
for Preston endured fifteen days, and that at the close of
the poll several hundred voters had not been able to give
their suffrages. At this late period of the Session it was
impossible that the Bill should be carried through Parlia-
ment, but it was of great importance that it should pass
one or two stages, in order that it might be printed, and
the House by next year furnished with suggestions by the
parties interested.
Mr. HUME enforced the principle of election by ballot
in all such cases.
Mr. N. CALVERT hoped never to see the day when
that demoralizing principle should be introduced into eke-
tions.—(Loud cheers.)—The lower order of voters must
necessarily be influenced, when few by bribery, and when
numerous by cajolery, of some sort or other. Their only
remedy in cases of ballot would be by hypocrisy, pro-
mising the vote one way, and giving it another.—(Hear,
hear.)
Mr. MONK thought the suggestion of the Hon. Member
for Aberdeen entitled to consideration.
Mr. P. THOMPSON advised the Hon. Member who
was so vehement against elections by ballot, to rely upon
sound arguments, and not upon bold assertions.
Mr. N. CALVERT added, that he had heard no argu-
ments to which he was called upon to reply.
Mr. V. FITZGERALD contended that elections by
ballot must be influeneed by majorities.
Lord RANCLIFFE had known many instances at Not-
tingham where voters had been deterred from polling from
a fear of its being known, in which case their masters
would have turned them away. An election by ballot was
not liable to this evil.
Mr. WARBURTON observed, that it would be incon-
venient to argue the question of elections by ballot now.
Mr. S. WORTLEY agreed that some change was ne-
cessary at Preston, but he rather wished laws of the kind
to be general.
Mr. DAWSON (of Louth) thought no good reason
could be stated why a voter by ballot should not state for
whom he voted.—(Loud laughter.)—He recommended
that the example of the United States should be followed,
where elections were conducted without influence, bribery,
or treating.
Sir C. FORBES was commencing a few observations
on Elections by ballot, when he was called to order by
Lord W. RUSSELL, who contended that such a topic
was not to the question.
The SPEAKER thought it fairly involved in the mo.
tion before the Muse.
Sir C. FORBES proceeded to remark, that in all eke-
tions an allowence of from 20 to 25 per cent. was made for
votes promised, but not given. He objected not to reform,
but to this pettifogging method of effecting it; it did not
go at once to the root of the evil and apply a general re-
medy. He should like to seo, as a security against mal-
practices, every Member, on entering the House, compelled,
under the pains of perjury, to swear that lie had not ob-
tained his seat by corrupt means.
After e. few words from Mr. STANLEY, leave was
given to bring in the Bill.
ATHLONE PETITION.
Mr. SPRING RICE, after some observations upon the
proceedings of Thomas Flanagan, with respect to the Ath-
lone Election, moved a Resolution, declaring, "It appears
that Thomas Flanagan had been cognizant of the forgery
of certain signatures to a petition presented to the House,
purporting to come from the inhabitants of the borough of
Athlone, and that he had therefore been guilty of a high
breach of the privileges of the House." The Hon. Mein-
bcr beued merely to add, that this Resolution could not