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

for corn would be warehoused at the Hans Towns and
Flemish ports, and would come into competition with tl‘
borne growers tothe,4lll,,as much as if it were ware-
housed at home: I`k nught apologise to the Committee
for taking up their'tin4 with such an Amendment as this ;
bui'eVery one must be perfectly aware, that foreign corn
might be easily Warehoused at Flushing and other parts
of the opposite Continent, and readily poured into this
country. Some gentlemen seemed to be of opinion, that
these foreign ports were at an extraordinary distance, while
some of them were not much further from Mark-lane than
Boston or Lynn.—Parliament could have given no greater
boon to foreigners than by passing this Bill in the shape
in which it stood after the Amendment. Foreign corn
would still have flowed in abundantly, when the averages
would have permitted; but all the benefits of the ware-
housing system would have been transferred abroad. There
would have been one difference, which he believed had not
suggested itself to the sagacious inventors of this beautiful
Amendment ; namely, that while foreign corn would have
come in at low prices with as much facility as ever, if
unfortunately the home price had risen to 90s. or 100 s.
in consequence of the scarcity resulting from a deficient
harvest, this country would then have found itself entirely
at the mercy of those foreign countries, where the ports
were situated in which the corn had been warehoused—
(Hear, hear,)—and from which the supply necessary to
our subsistence might in a moment be cut off.—(Cheers.)
Could any thing be more absurd or mischievous?—(Cheers. )
He gave credit to the ingenuity of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, the Member for Oxford, who had been obliged, in
defending the supporters of the Amendment, to suppose
that they were wholly ignorant of the mischief it was in-
tended to produce, from their total inability to understand
its bearings and effect—(Hear, hear)—and that they had, in
that happy state of simplicity, brought it forward bona fide
for the purpose of amending the Corn Bill.--(Cheers.)—
If he (Mr. Baring) thought that this was indeed a real
honest corn question elsewhere, he would rather the Bill
should have come back to that House, in order that they
might have had a free conference with their Lordships--
(A laugh)--in which they might, by the force of reason—
it' reason had any power in that quarter—have made even
those who professed to be most friendly to this Amendment
for its own merits, understand the proposition at last so
thoroughly, that nobody could have had the face to offer
an argument in its favour.—(Cheers.)--It was with great
reluctance he had troubled the House at this length, but
he was decidedly of opinion that the country would do
better to endure the inconvenience of delay, than legislate
in haste on so important a question. The plan of the
Hon. Member for Essex (Mr. Western) was not calcu-
lated either to do credit to the House or benefit to the
country.—(Hear.)
Mr. PEEL rose instantly.—l am at a loss to reconcile
the whole tenour of the Honourable Gentleman's speech
to the declaration with which he prefaced it—that such
was the veneration he felt for the character of my Noble
Friend (the Duke of Wellington) and such was his sense
of 'the obligations this country was under to that distin-
guished personage, that he could not on this day, as it had
been previously remarked by my Honourable Friend (Sir
E. Knatclibull)—the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo
—do that pain to his private feelings which lie must have
inflicted upon them, by occupying his whole speech with
an attempt to turn into ridicule the conduct of the Noble
Duke. —(Hear, hear.)—lt was no part of my duty to
vindicate the clause moved by my Noble Friend. I stated
expressly, as a reason why I believed the proposal of that
clause formed no part of a political scheme, that I had
never heard of my Noble Friend's intention to move it
until the next morning, when I learned that it had been
proposed. I said so, because I have reason to think that
the Noble Duke would take no step of that kind without
my privity. I certainly did say, as I felt justified in do-
ing, that such are our habits of confidential communica-
tion on these subjects, that I did think, if the proposal of
that clause formed any part of a political device, the Noble
Duke would have given me some intimation of his inten-
tion. But why does the Honourable Gentleman attempt
to ridicule my Noble Friend ? If his ridicule be suc-
cessful, it applies to my Right Honourable Friend (Mr.
Huskisson) who sits below him, and not to the Noble
Duke.—(Hear, hear.)—l deem it right to state the his-
tory of this clause, as an answer to the attempt of the
Honourable Gentleman to throw ridicule on a man for
whom, at the same time, he professed to feel the highest
veneration.—(Cheers, and cries of " No, no.")—I deem it
right, I say, to state this history, since the debate has de-
parted so widely from the channel in which it commenced.
I will state exactly the course my Noble Friend has
pursued. He was appointed a Member of the Committee
moved for in the other House, with the consent of
his Majesty's Government, the object of which was
to inquire respecting the prices at which foreign grain
can be shipped from ports abroad, and the quan-
tity that was to be imported into this country. The result
of this inquiry was to create an impression on the mind of
my Noble Friend, whether right or wrong I am not argu-
ing—l am only vindicating his motives, and not the Clause,
with which I have no concern—that the warehousing sys-
tem contributes greatly to fraud, by giving a direct interest
to parties who have a considerable quantity of bonded corn
to practise on the averages, in order that they may take it
out of the warehouses when they hive succeeded, as the
case may suit their purposes, in making the priCe rise or
fall. The object of my Noble Friend's Clause was, to give
a preference to the corn directly imported from on board
ship over that lodged in the warehouses ; and whatever ri-
dicule the Hon. Gent. may throw on that Clause, it is.un-
doubtedly sanctioned by the Act of 1791, which expressly
provides, that corn taken out of the warehouses shall be
subject, not only to the then existing duty levied on
all other corn, but also to a further duty of two shil-
lings and sixpence, in addition to the ordinary duty._
It was to that Act that my Noble Friend referred, as
something that corresponded in principle with his
Amendment. The Hon. Gentleman must have miscon-
ceived my Noble Friend's Clause altogether, when lie talks
of a duty of 2s. 6d. being the result of that Amendment.
While lie was exhausting all his powers of ridicule upon it,
lie was entirely mistaken as to its nature and design. There
was not one word in the Duke of Wellington's Clause as to
a duty of 2s. 6d.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—That Clause
merely provided, that no foreign corn bonded in this country
should be taken out for home consumption till after the
averages should have passed 665. Not a word was there
as to any additional duty. The Noble Duke only wanted
to prevent frauds on the averages; and he said explicitly,
" If you object to my mode, resort to the principle of the
Act of 1'791, and subject the bonded corn to an additional
duty of 2s. 6d." But that duty formed no part of the
clause he moved. He stated his object clearly; and hav-
ing proposed his own method of attaining it, declared that
he was willing to consent to any other equally effectual;
and in particular, lie said, if his Majesty's Ministers would
apply the principle of 1791 to the bonded corn, he was
content. But why do I say that the ridicule of the Hon.
Gentleman applies not to my Noble Friend, but to my
Right Hon Friend ? Becatise the clause originally sent by
my Noble Friend for my Right Hon. Friend's opinion was
entirely of a different nature. It proposed that no portion
of the bonded corn should be taken out of the warehouses for
home consumption, until the parties holding previously
bonded corn had signified their consent to the admission of
the corn subsequently bonded. My Right Hon. Friend
stated some objections to this clause, and very just ones
too, I believe ; but my Right Hon. Friend went on in his
reply to say, that if the Noble Duke had intended to pro-
pose another clause, restricting the admission of foreign
corn—pro hac vice, I am aware, to that bonded previously
to the Act—until the average price of British corn reached
665. per quarter, then, says my Right Hon. Friend, " I
for one, individually, should not object to it, though I am
afraid the amendment would he fatal to the Bill. All the ob-
jections the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Baring) makes to my
Noble Friend's clause, apply equally to this temporary
clause suggested by my Right Hon. Friend; for, during the
time, it would have operated to precisely the same effect.—
(Hear, hear.)—The Hon. Gentleman says the Noble
Duke's clause would have afforded no valid protection to
agriculture, because the coin-dealer had only to warehouse
at Flushing or Ostend, and he could bring his grain over
immediately, losing nothing but the additional cost of
transport. Does not the Hon. Gentleman see that, for the
time, the same objection applies with equal force to my
Right Hon. Friend's suggestion ? I know that my Right
Hon. Friend never intended his as a permanent measure.
But I have not the slightest doubt that my Noble Friend
mistook my Right Hon. Friend's intention, and proposed
his amendment under the impression that he was acting on
the authority of my Right Hon. Friend. Ido not stand
up to defend that clause. My sole object is to vindicate
the Duke of Wellington from the imputations that have
been cast upon him, and which he the less deserves, as he
distinctly admitted that a clause short of that he proposed
would satisfy him. The Noble Duke acted under the im-
pression,
that though, in point of form, the Bill would be
rejected, yet that it might be possible by means of another
to alter the warehousing system, without depriving the
country of the advantages it might derive from the Bill as
a part of the permanent legislation of the land. My
Noble Friend voted for the principle of the Bill, and pub-
licly declared his approbation of it. He gave it his cordial
support on going into the Committee; and he moved the
'Amendment, I firmly, believe, only for the purpose of
improiing it, by guarding against, fraudulent practices on_
"the averages. • Of this I sun' positive,:thatin ."no part. of
these priceedings did ent,NoblelFriendln the', slightest ile-
gree depart from that rectitucki 4;446)&116i and