The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-23 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS.

Sir G. STRICKLAND presented a petition against
the Corn-laws.

Mr. J. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from the
confectioners of London, praying that some steps might
be taken to prevent competition in the trade, by the
inhabitants of the Channel Islands.

Mr. COBDEN preSented a great number of petitions
from Scotland and!)ther places against the Corn-laws.

Mr. AINSWORTII piesented a petition, signed by
11,000 persons, from 111lton, praying for the total and
immediate repeal of the Corn-laws.

Petitions to the same effect were presented' by Mr.
J. Fielden, from Oldham ; by Mr. Villiers; froM several
parishes in the cities of London and Westminster; from
the town'of Paisley, in Scotland ; from places in Derby-
shire and Somersethire; seventeen from Lancashire; also
from place's in -Yorkshire, and from the borough of Wol-
verhampton; also by Lord 'John 'Russell from the town
of Harwtch, and. from places in Forfarshire.
Sir ROBERT PEEL presented certain papers by
command of her 'Majsty, which were ordered to be laid
on the table.
COLONIAL DIFFERENTIAL. DUTIES.
Mr. LABOUCHERE seeing the Right Hein Gentle-
man, the Vice. President of the Board of Trade, in his
place, wished to ask him a question on a subject which
hud out of doors created considerable anxiety. In the
measure which he (MY.Labodchere) had introduced last
year flir regulating_ the' commercial relations of the
colonies, he had proposed that there should be a protect-
ing duty of - 7s. per cwt. in favour of British manufac-
tures. He was desirous that in all other respects the
Colonial Legislature should be allowed to form their
own fiscal. regulations, but he thought it was the
duty of the British Legislature to secure a protec-
tion of 7s. per cwt. for British manufactures. He hoped
that the Right lion. • Gentleman intended to legislate
upon the same principle ; but the resolution was ambi-
guously worded, and great anxiety existed out of doors •
on the subject. lie wished to know, whether it nas the
intention of the Government, in their proposed measure
on this subject, to secure a protection of 7 per cent. on
British manufacturers.

Y Mr. GLADSTONE was much obliged to the Right
lion. Gentleman for giving- him an opportunity of allaying
ally anxiety which might prevail out of doors on the sub-
kid, although he was not aware of the existence of any
such impression. Nothing could be further from the in-
tention of the Government than to leave the differential
duties imposed on foreign commodities imported into the
colonies, liable to be neutralized by the Colonial Legis-
latures. It was the intention of the Government
that the protection of seven per cent., or whatever
other protection might be given, .
.should be a bona
fide an_' real protection for British goods. That
was the principle on which the Government pro-
posed to legislate, and he had no doubt or hesitation in
stating that it was his intention to carry that principle
into effect. The language which bad been used by the

Right lion. Gentleman last year had been altered, not
for the purpose of narrowing the principle, but for the
purpose of increasing it, effect. There were certain
cases in which the Colonial Legislatures had themselves
imposed differential duties on foreign articles, and the
Government did not propose to interfere with the pro-
tection which the Colonial Legislatures might be disposed
to give, in the shape of differential duties. They merely
intended to give to the Colonial Legislatures the power of
continuing any differential duties they might think
proper, in addition to the protection of 7 per cent.,
whicl', by an act of the British Legislature, it was in-
tended to give to British manufacture, in all the Colonies
For this reason, instead of the words of the resolutions
of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. G.) had intro-
duced a separate clause, which would have the effect of
securing independently of colonial enactments, pre-
ference to articles of British produce or manufac-

tures, and in case the Colonies themselves should lay on,
or wish to lay on any further differential duties on ar-
ticles of foreign manufactures or produce, under parti-
cular circumstances, the Bill which the Government
meant to introduce would not interfere with such acourse.
SPAIN AND THE GREAT POWERS...

Mr. HINDLEY begged to ask the Right Hon. Baro-
net, at the head of her Majesty's Government., whether
this country had made any efforts' to induce Russia,
Austria. and Prussia, to recognise the present constitu-
tion and Government. of Spain, and whether the Right
Hon. Baronet could. say.when such a recognition was
likely to take place ?
Sir R. PEEL—It is not easy to give, a simple and
brief answer to
.questions of this nature. The Hon.
Gentleman asks, as I-understand, whether any communi-
cations have taken place between her Majesty's Govern-
ment and the Great Northern Powers respecting the
recognition of- the present Government of Spain, and
whether there is any prospect of such recognition
taking place ? I wish to take this opportunity of stating, in
answering the question, that our policy respecting Spain
has been perfectly simple and open,and without anyreserve.
Our anxious wish has been to see Spain a prosperous,
a powerful, and an independent nation.—(Cheers
from both sides of the House.), Our wish is to see
Spain independent of all foreign protection, and
that no power which she can possess for her
own just defence, should be an object of jealousy
to any other power,—(Cheers.) It has been our desire,
certainly, to give strength and stability, as far as is
possible, by our councils and by exerting our influence,
to the present Government of Spain ; for we thought
we saw under that Government growing indications of
advance of civilisation and prosperity; and certainly we
have exercised our influence as far as could be done with
, .
propriety to induce the Governments of the Continent of
Europe—to induce the three Great Powers to recognize
the Government of Spain.—(Cheers.) We have thought
that such exertions on our part would give effect
to the advancing civiliiation of - that country
and stability of the Government which, in the
present general condition of Spain, seemed to
us best calculated to promote the interests of that coun-
try.. It is impossible to answer the Hon. Gentleman's
question as to the period when tbe.desired recognitions
are likely to take place. All I can answer is, that our
exertions have been made in an amicable and friendly
way, to giVe that stability to the Spanish Government.
which we thought would result from such measures.
Sir, we have no interest to serve, but I think that one. of
the greatest objects in promoting the tranquillity of
Europe is that the stiite of that country should be re-
stored to prosperity and independence, and that Spain
should hold the place which she used to fill amongst the
family of European States—(Hear, hear)—and no exer-
tions on our part shall be wanting to bring that about.

Members of the General Committee. The most
convenient mode would be to grant the
leave of absence, and then sotto arrange the panels that
the Members should not be called on duty during their
absence. The members of the legal profession migh
rest assured that the House was not unwilling to treat
them with fair consideration.
THE CORN-LAW DEBATE.

Mr. E. BULLER asked the Right Hon. Baronet
whether in the event of the House coming to a decision
to-night, he would proceed with his own plan imme•
diately ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he hoped the House would
see the necessity of bringing this long and protracted
discussion to a close—(Hear, hear)—and in the event
of a division,' he should be prepared to go on with his
prososed measure to-morrow (Wednesday) ; should any-
thing occur to interrupt this course, he should propose
to proceed with it on Friday.
DETENTION OF BRITISH SUBJECTS.

Mr. .MURPHY rose to bring forward the motion of
which he had given notice, relative to the detention of
British subjects by the authorities of Central America.
A grant of land had been' obtained fi om a petty
king in Central America, and money had been ob-
tained, 'and an association, cOnsisting of fourteen
individuals, had been appointed for the purpose
of carrying out the objects for which the grant had been
obtained. A ship had been chartered, and indivi-
duals selected to explore the country. One of those in-
dividuals was a professional gentleman, and the other
an individual named Bell, who was well known from his
connexion with the Vixen. These individuals had
an interview with the king pf the country, who
confirmed the grant; but wishing to explore
the country they ascended, a 'river in the Mos-
quito country, and from thence they got into the Blue
Fields river, which they ascended till they came into
the Spanish territories. Here, being fatigued and
wearied, they were seized by the Spanish Government,
and after being taken a distance of 30 miles, were cast into
prison. The only reason assigned for such conduct
on the part of the Spanish authorities was, that these
individuals were taken by way of reprisal for some in-
dignities cast upon Central America by Colonel
Al‘Donnell. At the end of forty days all the prisoners
were liberated except Mr. Bell who died from the seve-
titles he endured. Under these circumstances he
islied to bring the facts before the House, and in
the words of* motion, of which he had given notice—
to call the attention of the House to the detention and
imprisonment of certain British subjects by the authori-
ties of Central America; and to move for copies of any
correspondence which may have taken place with her
Majesty's Government upon that subject ; and of any
despatches which they may have received from Sir
Charles Metcalfe, the Governor of Jamaica.
Lord STANLEY said it would be unnecessary to
enter into the details of the case after the statement
which had been made by the Hon. and Learned Member.
From what he (Lord Stanley) understood, Mr. Bell and
othergentlemen entered into a speculation, and contracted
for a certain extent of territory on the Mosquito shore, but
these gentlemen, wishing to explore
.the country, had
ascended the Blue Fields River, and having entered
into the Spanish .territories, they were seized and
imprisoned by the Spanish authorities.—(Hear.) That
was, however, the information of the party them-
selves, and it was entirely an ex-parte statement.
Restitution and reparation, unless the individuals in
question had been seized in consequence of some
violations of the laws of the State, were de-
manded by her Majesty's Government. The explana-
tion of the State had not yet been received in this coun-
try. Such being the case, the House would not, he con-
ceived, require an ex-parte statement, and he hoped, 11
therefore, that the Hon. Gentleman would withdraw his
motion.

Mr. MURPHY, after the explanation of the Noble
Lord, would of course comply with the request of
withdrawing the motion. He (Mr. M.) had been under
the impression that despaches on the subject had been
received from Sir C. Metcalfe. However, he presumed
the Government would adopt the measures that seemed
best in the case.—The motion was then withdrawn.
COLONIAL DUTIES—VAN DIEMEN'S LAND.
Mr. G. HOPE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
confirm an Act of the Legislature of Van Diemen's
Land for authorising the levy of certain duties of cus-
toms, and on spirits.—Leave granted.
MINISTERIAL FINANCIAL MEASURES.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to know if the Right
Honourable Gentleman would now state to the
House the course he meant to pursue with regard
to the other important measures of the Govern-
ment. The Right Honourable Gentleman had stated
that he was anxious to take the earliest oppor-
tunity of making that statement. The reasons were
obvious why such a statement should be made -as early
as possible. Various rumours were afloat, and questions
asked in public on the matter. The Right Hon. Gentleman
might be of opinion that it would be dangerous to the
public interest, for some reason or other, to make that
statement nowi lie (Lord J. Russell) wished to leave
it entirely to the Right Hon. Gentleman's judgment as to
the course he ought to pursue. If the Right Honour-
able Gentleman thought it was necessary to make an
early statement, he (Lord J. Russell) conceived that
by taking votes on account, without going through the
estimates; he might obtain the necessary votes
to enable him to go into a Committee of Ways and
Means. He (Lord J. Russell) did not say that that
coarse ought to be taken, but he wished to know whether
the Right Honourable Gentleman meant to go formally
through the estimates in Committee of Supply.
Sir R. PERI, was experiencing the same difficulty
that the Noble Lord would have experienced at the cona-
mencement of last Session if he had continued in the Go-
vernment. He.had called the attention of the House.to the
subjects of the Corit-lawS and the Import Duties,
and it had been stated, in the Speech from the
Throne, that, it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to bring those subjects under the consideration
of the House, therefore the Noble Lord, had he continued
in the Government, would have experienced precisely
the same difficulty which he (Sir Robert Peel) was ex-
periencing at present. He (Sir R. Peel) had thought
it infinitely better to proceed at once with the
question of the Corn-laws, than to 'postpone the
consideration of that question until he could
bring forward his general financial statement.
He was not aware of any consideration of public interest
which should interfere to prevent explanations on the
part of the Government • which they might think it
necessary to make in the Committee of Ways
and Means, and, so far as the public interest
was concerned, he was prepared to make his
statement at as early a period as possible. He had not
expected that the discuSsion on the Corn-laws would
have been so long. It was desirable that the House
should come to a decision on the question of the Corn-
lawsa period as possible.—(Hear, hear.)
-rha a
That measure aseas arureealtryeeted the duties on corn, and he hoped
that after the House had decided on the measure, those
who were opposed to the sliding scale, and those who
were opposed to any duty whatever, would receive the
Government measure as a great relaxation of the
existing and not to be disposed to throw ob-
stacles system,it
the way of its becoming the law
of the land as speedily as possible. As
soon as lie possibly could, he would bring in the Bill.
He had not been able as yet even to introduce the Bill,
on account of the length to which' the preliminary dis-
cussions had extended. He did not complain of that;
he had no right to complain of it; he merely men-
tioned the fact. He proposed at the earliest oppor-
tunity, after the debate on the Corn-laws should be
closed, to take the Army and Navy Estimates in the
Committee of Supply, and if the House should feel
disposed to vote those estimates, he would, at the earliest
possible moment he could get those votes, propose
that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of
Ways and Means, when he would explain the whole of
the intentions of her Majesty's Government with regard
to the finances. The moment he had an opportunity of
making that statement, he would • avail himself of it.
If they were to interrupt the discussion on the Corn-
laws now going on, they would not elicit my opinion from
the House, while great inconvenience would be offered to
the public service.—(liear.) What he proposed, was to
take the opinion of the House on the principle of the
law and on the duties, and then to take a 'vote ; after
which, in a Committee of Supply, .he would state his
financial proposals.
GOLD COINAGE.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in answer
to an Hon. Gentleman whose name we could not learn, said
that the attention of her Majesty's Government had been
for some time directed to the state of the gold cur-
rency, and that they had-in preparation a measure to
remedy the inconvenience now complained of.
CORN-LAWS—ADJOURNED DEBATE.

On the Order of the Day. for resuming the adjourned
debate being read,
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said, that being the represen-
tative of a constituency, which had sent a petition,
signed by 20,000 persons to that House, but which
their rules prevented him from entering upon
at the time of the presentation, he was now anxious to
say a few words on the subject of that petition, as
iliinehesiTasteing,unqualified,
support to the motion
a duty, he owed to himself and, his constituents.
and therefore,co
of the lion. Member for 'Wolverhampton. He
(Mr. Sharman Crawford) . called for the imme-
diate and total repeal of the Corn-laws,
not only on the part of his constituency,
but on the part of every class of the nation, not
protLsiigigive his
even excepting the landlord, for, as a landed proprietor,
he felt, that though the Corn-laws gave an apparent ad-
vantage, yet the landed interest would suffer ultimately
more from their continuance than from their repeal.—
(Hear.) It had been alleged that it was injudicious to
bring forward this motion, because lie knew it was
impracticable to carry it. He asked would it not
be also impracticable to carry a modification of the mea-
sure now introduced by her Majesty's Government? The
Government was so powerful that they Could carry
their own measure without noticing any modification,and
therefore it was right to make a stand upon true
principles. The Corn-laws were not supported
by justice, or by wisdom, • and therefore, we were
right in demanding their immediate and total repeal.
He demanded a total repeal because he thought it was
only consistent with justice, and he demanded the innne-
diate repeal because the necessities of the people
required that it should be immediate. He felt that
those who supported the total and immediate repeal were
bound to bring the subject before that House • for he
was of opinion that no Member should agitate the public
upon a question which they were not ready and willing to
discuss within the walls of the House. Those who main-
tained the principle which he maintained, might be called
impracticables ; ' but he would ask, how could any
great principle be supported or defended, if there Were
not some parties ready to stand upon the high grinind
of principle. Compromises might be useful ; , but
there could be no compromise unless there were some
who strictly adhered to principle, Out though he
would not compromise the question of a total
repeal, he would be ready to take into icon-
sideration the just claithil of the agriculturists

THE SUN,
_LONDON, = WEDNESDAY .NORNING, [TATS. 23, 1842,

to relief and indulgence. It had been stated that
the County-rate, the Poor-rate, and ' the Land-
tax, were burthei.s whiCh pressed peculiarly upon the
landed interest. Now, he thought, those, claims had
been satisfactorily answered, and that the landed interest
were not subject to any burdens in these respects, which
they, were not justly entitled to bear. He held a different
opinion, however, with regard to the tithe taxation: He
could not admit that the tithes were justly chargeable
to the landed interest. He would be ready to make a
comparison with the' landowners on the tithe question ;
if tithes might be considered national property, he
would be willing to extinguish tithes altogether, and
to let every man pay for his own clergyman.—(Hear.)
There was another question which he conceived ought
to be attended to. It was alleged that tenants
who had taken out leases at a rack-rent, and
on the high duties, would be • subjected to very
great hardships by the lowering of . the averages.
He admitted that there would be hardship, and was pre-
pared to consider some mode Of protecting them. He
thought the suede by which -they would he • protected
was this, that incases where tenants had taken out leases
at a rack-rent., since the year 1815, if it appeared in
five years after the Corn-laws were repealed that
the average of prices were lowered, there should be a
proportionable lowering of the rent. In the speech of
the Noble Lord who opened that discussion the Noble Lord
called for such a settlement of the question as would remove
all complaints. The Noble Lord deprecated conceding
without conciliating, altering without settling. When
he heard that speech he hoped that the Noble Lord was
about to advocate a repeal of the Corn-law ; for he
was satisfied that no measure short of a total
repeal would satisfy the people of this country. The
proposition of a fixed duty, or any other measure short
of repeal, would only excite fresh agitation. The
Hon. Member for Liskeard spoke of the Corn-
laws as a vested interest, and deprecated dealing with
them •in any other light. He denied that they
were a vested interest; they were proposed by the
landlords themselves for their own protec-
tion, and therefore they could, not be considered as a
vested interest. He would give the House an instance of
the powerful feeling which had been raised out
of the House in reference to that object. At a meeting
held at Rochdale, the working classes and the manufac-
turers had come into collision. Two propositions were
put to the meeting, one related to the Charter, and the other
to the Corn-laws, and the upshot was that two resolutions
were carried—one for the adoption of the measures demanded
in the People's Charter, and the other for the total repeal of
the Corn-laws. That was a meeting convened by the High
Constable of Rochdale, and the resolutions agreed to were
to the effect, that the proposition of Sir R. Peel, en the sub-
ject of the Corn-laws, was an agravated insult to the inhabit-
ants of the United Kingdom, and that whilst the meeting pro-
tested against the Ministerial plan as an insult to
the people, yet they considered that the only
remedy to existing evils, was the adoption of the
People's Charter as the law of the land.—( Hear, hear.)
here was place in the kingdom which could be a greater
proof of the desolating effects of the Corn-laws than Rochdale.
Before their enactment it was the flourishing seat of the
flannel-trade. But upon the passing of the present law, the
Americans enacted their tariff, which destroyed that trade in
Rochdale and elsewhere in this country. He ( Mr. C.) advo-
cated the total repeal of those laws, because they occasioned
the utmost misery and suffering to the people. Whilst the
House was sitting considering the amount of protective duties
fur one class, the people were perishing of hunger. Now,
could it be denied that it was a kind of slow murder to uphold
laws which deprived the people of food, and produced famine,
disease, and death?—( Hear, hear.) He felt that it was neces-
sary to agitate this question, not only in the House, but out of
it ; and he spoke in these strong terms in that House, because
it was his determination out of the House to take every means
constitutionally to agitate this question, as he con-
sidered that to be the only means by which the
people would obtain a redress of their grievances. He
had only one word further to say, and that was with regard to
Ireland. He was a landed proprietor there, and had the in-
terest of that country at heart, and he was convinced no good
would be effected there till these laws were repealed. In that
country 2,500,000 persons were in a state of pauperism. 'f he
average rate of wages which the agricultural labourer received
was about 4d. a day ; when such was the case he thought that
some other experiment should be tried to promote the union of
the manufacturers and agriculturists of Ireland, because of
this he was sure, if the union was to subsist between Ireland
and this country, they must legislate for both on more equal
terms.

Mr. W. M A RTYN trusted the House would allow him to
make a few observations up:in a topic that had been a good deal
adverted to in the debate, he alluded to the Poor-rates.
Within the last twelve months he had acted as one of the six
Magistrates for the purpose of revising the rentals in the
county of Kent, and at that time they heard a good deal of the
Poor-laws and the Poor-rate. It was said by the Hon. Mem-
b r for Bath that every person in the country paid the Poor-
rates ; there was no one exempted. That was impossible to
deny, but it was utterly impossible to say that the
Poor-rates fell equally upon every description of property.
Suppose a person possessed of 500/. a.year, the proprietor was
liable for poor-rates for every shilling worth of that property,
because the tenants were entitled to deduct a portion of it from
their rent: The poor-rates payable for 5,0001. a year would
be no less than 750/. a year. The Hon. Member then en-
tered into a calculation, with a view to show that the poor-
rates pressed more heavily upon the agricultural interests
than upon the manufacturing interests of the country. .It ap-
peared that many Hon. Gentlemen made similar objections to
the highway rate, which was levied in. the same way as the
poor-rate upon the land. The amount of poor-rates during
the year was 6,067,420/. ; the hlthway-Tate was 1,267,000/.
Hon. Gentlemen must bear in mind that the income of funded
property amounted to 30,000,0001. a year, and if that were
rated to the poor, or 30,000,000/. of landed property, at 3s.
in the pound, it would be a very considerable sum ;
and if applied to the poor-rate would considerably reduce the
rate. If stock in trade, and utensils were also rated, it was more
than probable that one-half at least of the rate would be re-
lieved from the land. In revising the ret.tals of the county of
Kent, he (Mr. Martyn) paid considerable attention to the pro-
portion which buildings bore to the gross property of the re-
spective parishes. He had not the papers by hun now, hut he
knew that in most of-the parishes, containing generally from
600 to 700 inhabitants, the landed property formed about two-
thirds, and the building property about one-third of the whole
parishes. It was Not till they came to the large and populous
towns, that they found the value of the buildings anything
equal to the value of the land. Out of 480 parishes of Kent,
there were not six towns in which the value of the buildings
exceeded the value of the land of the district. If the trades-
men of those towns paid their share, that alone, without having
recourse to funded property, would cause a great diminution
of the burdens of the land. He did not like to remain silent
on this subject, when, night after night, it was almost ad-
mitted as a fact that the land did not contribute more than its
just share to the burdens of .he State.
Several Liberal Members rose together, but _
_ _

Mr. F. VILLIERS remained in possession of the House.
His opening observations were almost inaudible, but he was
understood to be supporting the resolution of the Member for
Wolverhampton, on the ground that it would tend to reduce
the undue power of the landlords. Hon. and Right Hon.
Gentlemen opposite stated that it was necessary to support the
interests and station of the agriculturists, but he (Mr. V. )
did not understand what they meant by die word " station."
He considered it a very undefinable word, and one which
should be explained before it was made a subject of argument
for the maintenance of the Corn-laws.—( Hear, hear. )
He observed that many Members had spoken in favour of the
abolition of theCorn-laws,who objected to theword " immediate. 's
but he coud not help thinking that if it were good, the sooner
they were repealed the better. He also heard it objected to,
that the motion of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton was
opposed to a full consideration of those claims (if there were
any) which the agriculturists had. But he did not think that
the Hon. Member fur Wolverhampton intended to prevent
calm discussion ; but that he wanted, if the agriculturists had
all claims, they should prove them to the House. The I-lon.
Gentleman concluded by thanking the House for the attention
with which it had heard him, and saying that he would vote fur
the motion of the Hon. Member fur Wolverhampton.
Sir C. BURRELL said, that in addressing himself shortly
to the House, he would cite an opinion of Mr. Canning by
way of comment. In the discussion on the Corn-laws on the
Ist a March, 1827, Mr. Canning said, " that various as were
the opinions on both sides of the House, he ha never yet heard
the landlord's case unequivocally answered." He ( ssir C.
Burrell) considered that the attack which was being made upon
the landed interest was not at all justified by the
circumstances. It had been stated by several Hon. Gen-
tlemen that the Corn-laws were maintained solely for the benefit
of the landlords. He put it to Hon. Gentlemen whether, in
case of disdress among the agriculturists, that distress would
not affect the other classes of the community ? There never
was a time so disastrous for the labourers as the year 1816.
The people then could not get employment, and the shop-
keepers were ruined. The home tra.le would be ruined if the
Corn-laws were repealed. and that must affect the manufac-
turer. The first to feel the ill effects of such a measure would
be the shopkeeper, the second the factor, and then the manufac-
turer. The home trade was the most certain, and the most to
be depended on. To repeal the Corn-laws would be subver-
sive of the best interests of the country, and all classes
would eventually suffer. Any one who would propose
to open the Corn-trade would be an enemy to his country.
When they recollected that in former times the trade of Ire-
land was shut out from this country, and now that the markets
were entirely thrown open to that country, it became the chief
mart. He could not understand the policy of those gentlemen
who wished a measure to be brought into operation that must
be detrimental to the interests of their country,
Mr. POWELL concurred entirely with the Hon. Baronet
who had just sat. down, that the discussions in that House
should be conducted totally divested of asperity, and especially
personality. But he (Mr. Powell) conceived that the depar-
ture from that rule first occurred on the part of an Hon, Mem-
ber on the Ministerial side of the House, whom he (Mr.
Powell) now saw in his place. That Hon. Member indulged
in sneers, which he ~Mr. Powell) had no hesitation in ad-
mitting would be unimportant, if that tone of feel-
ing were not re-echoed by Honourable Members who con-
stituted the majority on that side of the House, and
were supposed to represent the feelings of the aristocracy.
He was not opposed to protection to agriculture, yet, he thought
that landlords ought not to tax manufacturers to maintain them-
selves, in otio cunt dignitate ; but, within the last 140 years,
complicated interests had been established, which it would be
most lamentable to disturb. He, therefore, wished to see this
great question compromised by a liberal mutual concession be-
tween the landlords and the manufacturers. It was now useless
to think of confining our population to agriculture ; there was
no resource with our twenty-five million inhabitants, and
their great expansive powers, and the distress they suffered, but
to extend our manufactures. He was sorry, the evening before,
to hear an Hon. Member condemning the Dissenting clergy-
men for participating in the Corn-law repeal, and praising the
clergy of the Established Church for having taken no part in it.
But, perhaps, this praise was ironical—perhaps, the Honourable
Gentleman meant to convey that they, the clergy of the Es-
tablished Church attended to the shearing of their sheep instead
of the feeding of them.—( Hear, and laughter.) Though a
friend to free trade, he could not agree with the proposition of
the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton.
The Marquis of GRANBY said, that the question before
the House was one of the utmost importance, and upon which
depended the happiness or misery of millions. He trusted, there-
fore, that it would be discussed with calmness and discretion;
he felt sure that if it were so treated by the agricultural interest,
they would find it for their own advantage. It was impossible
to hear of the distress prevailing iss the manufacturing districts,
and not to sympathise deeply with that distress. But he thought
that in proportion as the House sympathised with that distress, it
was their bounden duty to take care, that by a repeal of the
Corn-laws, they did not increase that distress by depriving
the agriculturists of their means of subsistence, and causing
them to seek for employment in the manufacturing towns.—
( Hear, hear.) It was said that a. remedy for the maw facturing
distress was to be found in a repeal of The Corn-laws; but he
did not agree in that opinion. It was true that they might
cheapen food by such a measure, but it was not true that by
doing so they would improve the condition of the labourer; If
they cheapened food, the natural consequence would be that
wages would be lowered in proportion. That had been the
consequence of cheapening food in all the countries of Europe.
Cheapening of food was not synonymous with plenty of it..—.