The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-20 00:00:00

Congou ; sales of good ordinary for cash were made at Is Sid, low
common Is 9d to Is 9l d, and Company's Is gid to Is 10d per lb;
the trade, however. were not disposed to purchase largely, in conse-
quence of public sales being czpseted to be shortly declared. The
deliveries of Tea last week amounted to 375,000 lbs.
MOLASIIIIIL—For West India the demand has been good at 11111
rates ; Demerara of fair quality but of old import has fetched 24b ;
St. Vincent's ordinary 24s per cwt; Barbadoes were taken in 3s
above the value. Bengal Syrup at 22s to 23s per cwt. Foreign
Molasses at Se to gs 6d per cwt. Honey of good and fine quality
49s to 68s per cwt.

Cocos.-For West India Cocoa full rates bare been paid ;
nidad at 38s to 408 for common, and 41s to 428 for middling red.
Prices are on the advance for Foreign.

SPICES.—This afternoon Pepper was in less request, but prices
were sustained; 1,186 bags Malabar are declared for la's to-mor-
row, and 5,341 bags various sorts for 28th April. The Cinnamon
sales declared for the 25th consist of 1,000 bales, the principal part
Ceylon.

RUM, BRANDY, AND HOLLAND& —The transactions in West
India Rum have been upon a small scale only since our last report,
but prices have been sustained, and proof Leewards are not pro.
curable under 2s 5d per gallon. East India Rum at rather lower
rates; proof at the high duty at Is sd, and at the low daty at Is Sd
to Is 9d per gallon; with certificate bought in at 2s Id to 2s 2d for
various strengths, being equal to is 9d per gallon proof. Brandy
firm, Cognac first brands of the vintage of 1836, hhds at 5s 7d,
puns 5s sd; 1837, hhds 51 3d, puns 5s Id ; 1838, hhds 55 Id, puns
4s I Id; do 1839, hiads 4s fid, puns 4s 4d ; do 1840, hhds 3s lid,
puns 3s 8d per gallon. Geneva common Is lldto 24 per gallon.
British Corn at 9s 8d per gallon, cash.
To-day the market was firm for Rum. Proof Leewards at 2s sd,
Calcutta at the high duty of is 5%cl to Is ad, and at the low duty
1 s 8d to 2s per gallon.

Rica—For Bengal Rice the demand has been good, rather
above former prices; middling white fetched I Os, good yellow Ss
to Ss 6cl; fine Rs 6d to 9s; fls to 10s for low middling, and 108 6d
to Ils for good and fine white; and at Ils to lls 6d for good
middling white. Carolini, first sort at 30s, second sort at 28s,
and other kinds at 25s to 27. Patna at 14s to 19s per cwt.
TALLOW.—There has been less demand for Russian Tallow.
Holders have been more desirous to realise, and prices have given
way 3d per cwt. On the spot 46s to 46s 5d have been the rates
accepted for P Y Candle. For the delivery the last three months
of the year, at 48s per cwt. South American, fine quality at
42s 6d to 435, good 41s 6d to 42s 3d, middling 40s to 41s, low
and grease 36s to 395. Archangel at 42s 6d per cwt. Town
Tallow at 45s 6cl net cash. To-day the market exhibited a dull
aspect, and prices are looking down. At 463 there were sellers of
P Y Candle on the spot, and at 49s for delivery in the last three
months of the year. For public sale on Friday 350 casks South
American are declared.

On.s.—For Southern Oil prices have declined 15s to 20s per
tun ; 190 tuns at Public Sale found purchasers at 291 to 22/ per
tun for common to fine pale quality. Cod oil advanced 30s per tun;
301 to 301 5s have been paid for several parcels. Brown Seal Oil
at 28/ to 291. Pale Seal at 381 103 to 391, yellow and straw
colour 301 to 361. Sperm at 81/ to 831 for fine British. For
Palm prices are declining. 250 casks nearly all taken in at 31/
per tun for good quality. For Cocoa-nut Oil 40s is the value of the
best. Olive, prices are moving upwards. Gallipoli at 61/,
Spanish at 55/, and Barbary at 521 to 53/ per tun. Linseed Oil on
the spot at 32s gd to 335, and for delivery at 33s 3d to 338 6d
per cwt. Rape Oil is cheaper, Pale selling at 47i 3d to 47s 6d,
and Brown at 47s per cwt.

ELECTION COMMITTEE.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday,
WAKEFIELD.

After Mr. Cockburn had concluded his address for the
sitting Member, Mr. Wortley was heard in reply, after which
the Committee-room was cleared. When it was again opened,
the Chairman announced that the Committee had come to the
following resolution :--

" Res-olved, that at the period of the last election for the
borough of Wakefield, Joieph Houldsworth, Esq., was the pro-
per returning officer, to whom the precept for the holding the
said election ought to have been directed, and that he was there-
fore incapable of representing that borough in Parliament."
The Committee then proceeded to hear evidence as to the
striking votes from Mr. Houldsworth's poll, so as to give Mr.
Lascelles a majority.
Dlr. Cock:Bumf objected to the validity of the notice.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEENS BENCH, diprii 12.
FOUNTAIN V. BOODLE.
This was an action of libel tried before Lord Denman, in
which a verdict was entered against the defendant. The
plaintiff is a governess, and had been engaged by the defendant
to attend her family, which she continued to do for a year.
She then became ill, and was dismissed with a very short
notice. The defendant recommended her to her sister-in-law,
and also to a Mr. Steward, to both of whose families she gave
in3truction. But, on a subsequent occasion, she gave it under
her hand that the plaintiff was " incompetent, ill-natured. and
ill-tempered," and on this charge the action was brought. Proof
of a contrary description was, however, given at the trial ; but
Mr. Kelly, who defended the case, contended that falsehood was no
proof of mala fides, and that until malice had been proved, there
was no evidence to go to the Jury. Lord Denman, however, con-
sidered that there was evidence to go to the Jury, and a verdict
was given for the defendant.

Mr. KELLY now applied to the Court to set aside the ver-
dict, on the ground of their being no evidence of malice.
Mr. Justice PATTESOK said that the Court had no doubt
that the case, if it could be left to the Jury at all, was properly
left, for on the assumption that there was some malice, it lay on
the defendant to prove that there was not. As to whether
there ought to be a new trial, the Court would take further
time to consider.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
ASSAULTING THE POLICE.—Mr. William Clarke, a young
man of fashionable appearance, and who carries on an exten-
sive business as a herald chaser and embosser, living in James-
street, Golder-square, with his wife, a delicate, pretty-looking
woman, were placed at the bar, charged with committing a vio-
lent assault upon four police-constables in the execution of
their duty. It appeared that some altercation occurred
between the male defendant and police-constable No. 181, of
the C division, about two yesterday morning, opposite to the
residence of the former, and a scuffle ensuing, the defendant's
family who had been aroused by the contention commenced a
melee amongst the complainant and three other police-con-
stables who came to his assistance. The female defendant in
her energetic defence of her better half, actually for a time
keeping at bay three of the police, left evident
marks of a brass-candlestick on their heads and faces of what
she would do on the part of her lord and master.
Mr. Marznr—lt is a foolish affair altogether • but the as-
sault upon the police is proved, and therefore I shall fine Wm.
Clark 305., or 14 days imprisonment ; and his wife 10s., or 10
days' imprisonment.—The fines were immediately paid.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—Sir Robert Peel last night devoted a
large part of a poor speech to a lame attempt to
wriggle out of the gross inconsistency of his present
measures with his tbrmer declaration that it would be
most unwise to resort to the machinery of an Income-
tax to raise three per cent.—to the disgusting
machinery of an unjust tax—for so the present
Minister then described-- it a tax which nothing
but urgent necessity or peril could make it
necessary to establish ! It is no answer to the
charge of inconsistency to pretend that circumstances
have so altered since the previous declaration, as to
make it inapplicable. Circumstances cannot alter
first principles, and fair proportions. They cannot, as
Lord J. Russell observed, render that which was unjust
in 1833, just in 1842. They cannot render enormous
machinery to effect insignificant objects wise now, which
was unwise according to Sir R. Peel, nine years ago. It
is ridiculous to answer (it was the only answer the
Premier could give) that an Income-tax " would be
more unjust with a surplus of 1,500,0001." The
injustice could not depend upon the surplus ; but if
it had, the proposals of 1833 to resort to an In-
come-tax, instead of the Malt-tax, &c., were
founded precisely upon the same principle as Sir
Robert pleads for enabling him to get rid of the Ca-
nadian timber duty. If an Income-tax was an
unjust substitute in one case, it is so in the other.
Lamely, however, as Sir Robert Peel has explained
his change on the point of injustice—on that of un-
wisdom, he attempted no explanation or answer at all.
He was right : it was impossible to attempt either
with the slightest success. He had deliberately de-
clared it his opinion, that it was most unwise to erect
the odious machinery of an Income-tax for bare
three per cent. ; and that such a proceeding would
create such an odium against that impost, "as
might render it almost impracticable to resort to it in
time of extreme necessity.' Time of extreme neces-
sity, according to Sir Robert Peel of nine years back,
was the only time in which the odious machinery of
an Income-tax could be eligible. Such necessity,
however, could not be pleaded for a tax of three per
cent., especially after reductions of taxes of eight or
ten times that amount since the peace. Sir Robert
Peel then remains branded by his past deliberate and
impartial opinion, that it is unjust to make (or aggra-
vate) a deficiency in order to impose an Income-tax
—that it is unwise to impose an Income-tax at all for
a pitiful three per cent. What trick, what device,
what starting hole, can save him from this open and
apparent shame ?
STANDARD.—It is well said, in the last number
of the Edinburgh Review, "We could make shift to
live under a debauchee or a tyrant ; but to be ruled by
a busybody is more than human nature can bear.
Now to this most intolerable of all political afflic-
tions the country was subjected from 1830 to
1841 ; and the farmers had more than their
share of the common visitation. The proposed
settlement of the Corn-laws will relieve them from
this torment. Lord Stanhope and Lord Western
insisted upon the pretence that the farmers were
deceived at the late elections, endeavouring to make
the pretence plausible by confounding the principle
of protection with the terms of the Bill of 1828.
We have already, upon more than one occasion,
shown the, fallacy of the pretence, and the unfairness
of confounding a principle with a table of figures.
We have by reiterated quotations proved, that in
every case where Sir Robert Peel committed him-
, self absolutely and without reserve to the principle of
protection, he carefully guarded against being supposed
to commit himself to the figures of any scale—proof
as satisfactory as if it were more direct, that he al-
ways considered the figures of the scale such as
might admit of change, and a clear warning to the
country that he did so consider them; nay, more,
that he considered the figures of the scale as
not only admitting of, but in some measure re-
quiring, a modification • else why always so earnestly
press the caveat? The Right Hon. Baronet's de-
fence against the charge of delusion, last night,
happily fell to the hands of a master. The speech
of Lord Fitzgerald was a complete triumph. One
is at a loss to say whether it was in the
higher degree characterised by strength of
reasoning, or by the expression of noble and gene-
rous feeling. Why does not Lord Fitzgerald speak
more frequently ? His polished, but manly and
inartificial eloquence, is that which best becomes and
must ever most prevail in a British assembly and
among the British people. Lords Fitzwilliam and
Melbourne did their utmost to disparage the Bill,
which they confessed themselves obliged to support by
their votes.

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 20, 1842

their Lordships to accede to the proposition of the No-
ble Viscount. They had last night rejected measures
intended to stop the progress of the present Bill, and
they had voted for the second reading of it ; but this
proposition would call upon them to rescind that resolu-
tion, and to adopt a new principle for regulating the
trade in corn, without having received fie-nil the Noble
Lord a glimmering how his principle was to be carried
into effeet.—(Hear, hear.) All parties consideried it
necessary to come to some conclusion or other on this
subject. If the proposal of his Noble Friend were
adopted, and the Bill were rejected, the question would
be left as it was, and it could not be supposed
that in the course of the present session they would be
in a condition to effect an alteration of the law.— (Hear.)
If the proposition of his Noble Friend were adopted, no
practical result would be obtained.—(Hear.) But he
would not put his opposition to that proposition upon
any ground of convenience. He objected to it on prin-
ciple. It would not effect the object which his Noble
Friend contemplated ; but that great difficulty would be
found in its operation He thought it would aggravate
the evils of the country, and render thorn more difficult
to manage. He thought the evils would counterbalance
any imaginable advantage.—(Hear, hear.) His
Noble Friend declined to enter into details,
or state any specific scheme, further than that
he would adhere to the scheme proposed by his own
Government last year, namely, a duty of Bs. per quarter.
His Noble Friend had argued his case very well. He
had stated a great number of good names, but he heti
thrown overboard also some equally good reasons.—
(Hear, hear.) He had stated his reasons against free
trade, and therefore he proposed a plan on the principle
of protection.—(Hear, hear.) But he had not told the
House in what way his duty of Bs. would give the ne-
cessary protection.—(Hear.) To propose a duty, which
was not sufficient to the protection which was thought in-
dispensably necessarv,would only deceive those for whom
the protection was intended, and would do no good to the
rest of the community. In the present state of things Bs.
would be no protection.—(Hear, hear.) Whatever
might be the objections to a prohibitory duty, if there
was any protection at all, it must be at some point or
other is prohibitory duty.—(Hear, hear.) If the price
at which foreign corn could be imported into this country
on an average of years was 405., and if the remunerating
price should be between 565. and 605., and his Noble
Friend had not said anything to the contrary, it was
perfectly manifest that the duty of Bs. would be no pro-
tection at all—(Hear, hear)—and it would be nothing
more than a delusion to imagine the contrary. But
there was another objection to this measure in his mind
which was impassable—he did not deny that the sim-
plicity and uniformity of its operations, would be a re-
commendation, but what was that when the food
of the people was concerned ? Protection was re-
quired in this country when the price was very low,
but at that time this measure would afford none.
His Noble Friend said that there was something
exceedingly regular and advantageous to the ordinary
operations of commerce under the fixed duty, which did
not apply to the graduated scale. If the protection were
sufficient, it must be such as to give a remunerating
price. The Noble Viscount, who contended for a fixed
duty, must admit that remuneration was one of the ele-
ments of the plan, but who is to say what is a remunerating
price ?He (Earl R ) never contended for the Corn-law on
that ground, but to keep out the foreigner when the
price was low.—(Hear, hear.) But when the price ruse,
and made a fixed duty dangerous, the Noble Viscount
would rely on the good sense of the country not to ob-
ject to a fixed duty on that account, in consequence of
the advantages it would confer when the price was low.
But would it not be imprudent to rely on anything of
the kind 2—(lleer, hear.) He did not even give
them a mystic view of the mode by which he was
prepared to inert the case of a rise in price.—(Hear,
hear.) His Noble Friend led him to anticipate
that some measure would then be necessary, but then
the fixed duty vanished, and therefore the essential prin-
ciple of a fixed duty was not there. His Noble Friend
let out that, if circumstances were favourable, and the
agricultural interest a little more agreeable, a little more
might be given—it might be 12s. or 14s.
Viscount MELBOURNE—I mentioned no sum.
The Earl of RIPON—That showed the ingenuity of the
Noble Lord—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—and that was
the reason they ought not to go with him. But what
was to be done when the prices rose ? Was a power to
be gieereto the Government ; and if so, might not Go-
vernments differ in their opinions on the subject ? What
was the objection to the graduated scale ? It was the
great rapidity with which the duty changed, and the
consequent inducement to parties to have recourse to
undue means of influencing the averages. But in the
case of a fixed duty, the charge would be more rapid.
It would be from nothing to Bs., and from Bs. to
nothing, and there would be the greatest uncer-
tainty from beginning to end. There fell from his
Noble Friend, a word which made him (the Earl of
Ripon) feel that he did not look on his proposition as
one that he could maintain inviolate. Alluding to the
various considerations that led him to object to the
motion of his Noble and Learned Friend, the Noble
Viscount (Melbourne) said that the situation of things
now would not warrant the absence of all protection.
The Earl of CLARENDON was glad to find that the
great and increasing evils of the Corn-law system were
now generally admitted. He would support the motion
of his Noble Friend (Lord Melbourne), but in doing so
he wished, in reference to the Noble Earl who had just
sat down, to congratulate the House and the country on
the unanimity which almost prevailed as to the neces-
sity of a change. He wished he could also congratu-
late the Noble Earl (Ripon) on the measures he had in-
troduced. He was far from agreeing with his Noble
Friend (Earl Stanhope) that the passing of the present
Bill would produce a revolution to which the horrors of
the French Revolution were but milk and water-
-(Hear, hear, from Lord Stanhope, and general laugh-
ter)—for certainly this measure would neither deprive
the agriculturists of the protection they now enjoyed,
nor abate a single evil of the present system.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) Still he rejoiced to see the measure intro-
duced, because it was an abandonment of the position the
party opposite had long held, and soon they would be
driven to another point. The present law had so far
disappointed its framers, that 2,000,000 or 3,000,000 of
the population of this country had under this measure
become dependent on foreign food. Did we not depend
upon foreign nations for the fifty millions of manufac-
tures which they took from us, and by which five mil-
lions of our population were maintained ?—(Hear, hear.)
How could we dispense with our dependence upon
foreignoesmtnewithw
forall our
of iron, flax, cotton, and the
r maintain our navy unless we had
mnations of the world ?—(Hear.)
commerce
ernationse
o couldw
the
e supply
But yet when it was sought to extend that commerce
and at the same time to augment the food of the people,
—Parliament was told that we ought not to be depen-
dent on foreign countries.—(Cheers.) But the true way
to be independent of particular nations was to have com-
mercial relations with them all.—(Hear, hear.) By that
means we should have a steady and constant course of
trade, and avoid that draining of the gold, and derange-
ment of the monetary system, which only three years ago
brought the Bank of England to the verge of insolvency,
from which it was saved mainly by the assistance afforded
by the Bank of France.—(Bear, hear.) Look again
to the result of mutual dependence, as it was shown
in the late revolt in Canada, when swarms of
American citizens were gathered upon the shores
of the colony, and the press and the people were
violent in their animosity to the country, whilst the more
prudent Government was impatient to restrain them.—
(Hear, hear.) What was it that then prevented war ?
(Ilcer, hear.) It was the 15 millions of raw produce
which we took from America, and the still greater quan-
tity of manufactures which we sent there. This was an
illustration of what his Noble Friend had said. There
was no country with which we could carry on so great
an amount of trade as the United States, and none with
which the object of increasing it could be obtained,
whilst they were yet in our power, whilst, in short, they
were mutually dependent on each other, and before we
compelled them, as we did the Germans 20 years ago, to
turn manufacturers. We excluded ourselves from the
supply from America in the same way as the Southern
States. His Noble Friend said that they could not get
any supply from America ; the reason was because we
closed our markets to them ; they- were anxious to send
it to us, and if our markets were opened, there was
every reason to believe that we should have a great supply
from that quarter.—(llear, hear.) They (the Ameri-
cans) complained of our laws, and no wonder, when, as
had been the case, the duty, in the course of five weeks,
varied from 225. Bd. to Is. He thought such an example
as that was a striking instance of the injurious effects of
the sliding scale, and justified the Americans in the com-
plaints they made against us. If America adopted a
sliding scale with regard to cotton, the consequence
would be that their trade with America would cease.—
(Hear.) And if the principle of a sliding scale was hurt-
ful with regard to countries at a distance, it would also
be hurtful with regard to countries nearer home, because
the principle of a sliding scale was to destroy all regular
trade. The demand was unexpected when it was made,
and they could not suppose that when it was made a cor-
responding demand would be made for their goods. An-
other evil of the sliding scale was, that the markets of
foreign countries were not prepared to supply their de-
mand, and consequently an artificial rise of prices was
occasioned in those foreign countries.—(Hear, hear.) He
did not suppose that the Government brought in the Bill
for the sake of occasional revision of the law as
the Noble Lord had said last night, were they not
holding out a premium to continued agitation.—(Hear.)
What Mr. Alexander Baring and Mr. Iluskisson said
on the subject ought not to be lost sight of, who said
that the. Corn-laws were intimately connected with their
manufactures and commerce. Was it not most absurd
to seek, by means of legislative enactments, to fix the
price of
of
food
—a subject which was above all such at-
tempts ?—(Cheers.) He had no hesitation in avowing
himself opposed to all protection as is system. He de-
sired, indeed, to see duty levied fbr the purposes of
revenue. Last year he had given his cordial support
to the measure proposed by the late Government, be-
cause he thought it would greatly benefit the producer
and the consumer. As to the protection of the Bs. duty,
when they took into consideration that the average duty
on corn for the last thirteen years was about ss. 6d., it
must be evident to all that that duty was quite sufficient.
He compared the proposition of the Bs. duty last year
to the demand that was made in former years for the
disfranchisement of the rotten boroughs. If that de-
mand had been complied with, the Reform Bill might
have been long arrested. So, if the Bs. duty were ac-
cepted, the establishment of free trade in corn would be
postponed for many years. Could the landlords say as
much of the present Bill?—(Cheers.) Cohld they doubt
that the whole protective system had now received its
death-blow?-(Cheers.) "Would not the next concession
we should soon most assuredly be called upon to make,
place the farmers in a much worse condition than if they
had accepted the Bs. fixed duty
? Many persons, speak-
ing of the distress of the country, attributed it to the
failure of American Banks and other causes. The calvies
were the vigorous competition .to our manufactures that
had sprung up in Switzerland, Germany, the United

thought it a legitimate scurce of revenue, and desirable
as a moderate protection to the agriculturist. Not one
of their Lordships had stated what would be the ef-
fect of introducing these towns into the averages, and he con-
sidered that they were legislating, quite in the dark on this
subject. How could they legislate with correctness on thi
subject, when he and all their Lordships were in total igno-
rance as to the effect of introducing these towns into the ave-
rages ? ,For these grounds he objected to this part of the
proposition. He admitted this Bill was a very 'considerable
improvement on the old law, but it was not such a one as In
wished to see; it would not cause a fair, wholesome, and legi
titillate trade in corn. It still left the idea of prohibitory du•
ties in the public mind, and the stigma of monopoly would stil'
adhere to the agriculturists without their receiving' that ad-
vantage which they had hitherto received. For these ground
he could not approve of the measure as a whole, and he
should therefore vote for the amendment of his Noble Friend.
The Marquis of SALISBURY said he congratulated his
Noble Friend who had just sat down, that though h«
;lid not so much approve of the Government measure
es to be able to vets for it, yet that he considered
it a great improvement upon the old law. He (the Marquis
of Salisbury) considered that there were two grounds on which
the Government should afford protection to the agriculturists;
the first was the necessity of giving food to the people inde-
pendently of foreign nations, and the second was that that
same protection should be given to agriculture as to every
other branch of industry. The question he apprehended ought
to be, the amount of protection which should be given to the
home growers to enable them to compete with the foreigner.
The average price of wheat under the old system was 565., it
would be the same under the new ; arid he considered that
though by the proposed plan there would be a reducion of
duty, there would not be a reduction of protection to agricul-
ture. He did not blame the Government for making their
alterations in the Corn-laws; no doubt they arose from the
great agitation which was raised on the question.—( Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord, when in office, endeavoured by every
means in his power, to raise this agitation oh the question ;
what motive he had for such a course it was not fai. him—(the
Marquis of Salisbury)—to say, but he certam2y bar
raised that agitation, and in consequence of the agitation vie:jell
was raised, these alterations had been made. The Noble
Earl no doubt thought that there would be a great reduction it,
the price: of bread by such an alteration, in that idea, how-
ever, he (the .Marquis of Salisbury) could not concur. With re-
gard to a fixed duty, his opinion was that, put it high or put it
low, it was no protection to agriculture : he saw no such fair
way of affording protection to corn as by a graduated scale.
Lord PORTMAN said he must confess that he differed
ent.rely from the Noble Lord who had just sat down. H;
thought that this proposition by no means tended to settle this
most important question. He believed it never could be
settled 61 it was placed ueon a principle which should be clear
and «atellieible to all mankind.—( Hear.) The Noble Earl,
the President of the Board of Trade, at the time when he
was on the Agricultural Committee in 1821, told the
agricultural interest that they were to expect a time
when these things should be settled, and they must look
to a fixed duty as the only settlement, which should
be applied as soon as it could be applied with safety. He
(Lord Portman) hsd always been an advocate for a fixed
duty, and he had always looked forward to the time when
that should arrive, though he must confess that his expectations
had been somewhat damped by what had fallen from the Noble
Earl to-night ; yet he,hoped that the!NobleEarl might, at some
future time, be led to give way to the proposition of a fixed duty,
as he slid now to what he was pleased to term edimioution in the
eliding scale. From the Report which the Committee had
issued in 1821, it appears that they had prophesied most cor-
rectly as to what would happen now, and if so, why should we
not follow the remedy tkey had pointed oat? That was
fixed duty.—(Hear.) The Noble Earl said he desired to
protect the agriculturist and the consumer by taking away the
temptations to commit fraud; but still the speculator had the
inducement of I Se. to raise the price from 645. to 725. London
ought to be added to the towns from which the averages were
to be taken. When he was in the House of Commons, in
1827, he moved a clause to that effect. The new Bill was bad,
because it would unsettle everything between landlord aeti
tenant. No man could make a bargain under it, whatever the
Noble Earl might say. If this Bill failed, it would be the
complete extinction of the sliding scale. How, then, could they
propose a fixed duty ?—( Hear' hear.) How could they secure
that preference which the English farmer ought, in the opinion
of all cicsses, to have over the foreigner? This Bill would
not stop the agitation in the Corn-laws which the
Ministry had encouraged.—(( Hear, hear.) It would not
strike down the enemy, but it would encourage them. He
must most strenuously oppose the Bill.—( Hear, hear.)
The Earl of WINCHILSEA defended the Bill, as having
the same principle of protection that all the former Corn-laws
had had ; it would give greater protection to the landed interest
than the present one had, for it would save them from the
frauds of corn-factors. He should most strenuously oppose a
fixed duty as a protection of the agriculturists, for when corn
was low, it was no protection, and when it was high, it would
not be maintained.—( " Question.")
Lord MONTEAGLE would vote for the Bill, as a great
improvement in the existing law, as discouraging frauds on the
farmer, and diminishing duties on the consumers.—( Hear,
hear.) But he agreed that it could not be considered as a
final measure. The population of Great Britain had increased
8,200,009 souls since 1801. Where were we to provig.e
for this vast accession ? Not at home, but in foreign coun-
tries. The population was increasing far beyond our means to
feed them. This fact alone proved that the present Bill could
not be final. But he was sure no practical man could defend
the sliding scale. Not an experienced merchant of authority
in the City of London would approve of it. In the whole of
the tariff the principle of a sliding scale was not applied to
any other article, and he wished to know how it could be de-
fended in its application to corn. He objected to the sliding
scale on account of its absurdity, and the uncertainty in trade
to which it gave rise. He also objected to it on the ground of
the inequality of its pressure on America.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
He recollected, when Mr.• Webster was in this coun-
try, that he said that the people of America had
corn ready to pay those to whom they owed money in this
country, if they took it from them.—( Hear.) The introduc-
tion of rew towns showed that the system of a sliding scale was
vicious, and that the viciousaess of it was perceived.—( R ear. )
He also objected to the Bill because it injured the persons whom
it was intended to benefit. Bad, unjust legislation, was sure to
react on those who sought it. It was of the greatest benefit to
the agriculturists of this country that they could import dry and
fresh wheat from abroad. The system of a sliding scale was
aleo the cause of fluctuations in price, though he admitted the
proposed Bill was, in that respect, an improvement on the pre-
sent law. But it would not only he the cause of fluctuation of
price in this country, but even abroad. Dantzic would be dis-
turbed to a considerable extent by the operation of that sys-
tem. ( The Noble Lord here referred to the opinions of Mr.
Tooke and Sir W. Curtis, to show that fluctuation was the natu-
ral consequence of the sliding system.) With respect to the
amount of revenue which was expected from the proposed sys-
tem, lee should like to hear the opinion of the Noble Lord
(Ripon). The truth was, the Noble Lord put himself into a
difficulty on the subject. He supposed the Noble Lord would
not for the world receive 6d. of revenue from the food of the
people.—( Laughter.) He remembered that last year the
Noble Lord had said that the Corn-law could be maintained
only on the principle of protection ; and that being the case,
he thought the Noble Earl was strangely uncommunicative as
to the anaemia he expected to receive.—( Hear, hear.) The
fact was, that every duty would be pro tanto productive ; but
the system of a fixed duty would produce a greater amount of
revenue than the system of a sliding scale. The Noble Earl
had stated what were the opinions of the people on the subject ;
but he (Lord Monteagle) differed with him on that ntbject.
He thought the consumers generally won d prefer a fixed duty,
with a considerable revenue, than a duty imposed solely on the
ground of protection.—( Hear.) But it was said that a fixed
duty could not be maintained In time of exigency. He re-
quested their Lordships' attention for a few minutes to this part
of the question. He would assume an Bs. duty—a time of exi-
gency and high prices—and a clamour on the part of the people
for the repeal of the duty. What, in that case, was to be done?
He (Lord Monteagle) would say, "Adhere to the duty," and
for this reason, that the consumer would not derive any benefit
if the duty were removed.--( Cheers.) He would state in illus-
tration, that during the late distress in the neighbourhood of
Glasgow there was a quantity of corn in bond in Glasgow,
and could any person suppose that if the duty on corn
were removed, it would sell for 20s. less. Was it not clear that
the repeal of the duty would only put so much money into the
pocket of the holder of corn, and be of no benefit whatever to the
consumer?—( Hear, hear.) Precisely the same thing would
occur if the holder of corn was a Dantzic merchant. Now if
that were the case, he should say that they ought to adhere to
the duty. He would now advert to the effect of the sliding
scale on the currency of the country, and if the proposition they
sought to establish were carried, they would he liable to pe-
riodical derangements in the currency, which would affect the
landed interest more than any other.--( Hear, hear.) The
first authority he would refer to on this subject was that of the
Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of her Majesty's Govern-
ment, a high authority, because he would say there were few public
men, and he spoke under correction he was aware, who could
claim higher honour than the Right Hon. Gentleman for
bringing forward, and afterwards defending the restoration of
the currency. He made that declaration, however unpo-
pular, because he believed it to be just. But in the year 1827
the Government of the day were pressed by the state of agri-
cultural distress, and on that occasion an attempt was made to
obtain a higher protection for agriculture. On that occasion
Sir R. Peel said that the return to the system of 1815 would be
most likely to disturb the currency, that speculations would be
indulged in which should be paid for in gold, and that it was a
fallacy to suppose that, because corn was cheap in Dantzic, it
would not be increased by the demand for gold. That doctrine
was now reprobated The case alluded to by the Right Hon.
Gentleman now at the head of her Majesty's Government was
the effect of a certain opening of the ports fot three months,
the demand for foreign corn during those three months, and the
necessity of paying for it in gold. He (Lord Monteagle) would
show them what happened on the occasion referred to. He had
moved for certain returns respecting the fluctuations of bullion
in the Bank of England since the passing of the last Charter
Act. He did not say that the want of bullion arose from the
state of the Corn-laws--(the returns were only from the year
1834)—but it was a most curious fact that, with the excep-
tion of those years in which from the effects of the failures in

States, and other countries. To that was to be attri-
buted the active competition with which we were met,
and the spirit of hostility which was engendered by our
own system.—(Hear, hear.) It was only by prompt,
and vigorous) and wise measures, that the future could
give to agriculture an adequate and steady protection. Ha
supported the proposition of his Noble Friend (Lord
Melbourne). (The Noble Lord sat down amidst mud
cheering.)
The Earl of WICKLOW said, that in the debate of
last night, he by no means concurred in the arguments
of some of those Noble Lords with whom he voted. On(
Noble Lord said that lie voted for the measure solely or
the ground that it would not have a tendency to reduce
prices. If that had been his (Lord Wicklow's) opinion,
he would not support the measure--e(Hear)--for he
thought that no change of the law ought to be math
which could be without effect. —(llear.) The opinion
of tha country was, that this measure would reduce
the price of food. That hope had been held out
to the people, and he should be sorry to see that
hope disappointed. Neither did he support it on
the ground that it would be permanent; but, on the con-
trary, that it would tend to ulterior measures—(Cheers)
-a-because he thought it a mode by whichathe public
would be prepared for greater chang,egto prepare the
agriculturists of this country for greater changes—that
this law was calculated to do good.—(Hear, hear.) They
first had a law introduced to regulate -the price at 80s.
or 90s. ; then that was reduced ; but the agriculturists
of this country were in as flourishing, a condition as
even—(llean) He did not think this Bill at all inter-.
fered with the prosperity of agriculture:But if the argu-
ments of his Noble Friends on his side of the House did
not operate on his mind in giving his vote last night, he
confessed that the Nlable Baron from Fassex said some-
thing relative to tax' borne by the land which should
guide him in his vote. Ile (Lord Wicklow) said
that the taxes of this country held no con-
cern in this matter. They were paid by the wealth
of the country, and by increasing that wealth
by means of commerce and manufactures,dle burdens of
taxation would not be so grievous. If the agriculturists
paid the taxes, then, indeed, there would be something
in the observation which had fallen from the Noble
Baronet—but that was not so. He (Lord Wicklow)'
agreed with the Noble Viscount that the burdens of land
could not be much affected. He would now advert to
the difference between a sliding scale and a.fiZed duty,
or as his Noble Friend (Lord Stanhope) had called it.
the difference between the guillotine and the hatchet.—
(Laughter.) His Noble Friend said that there was no
difference ; but in his (Lord Wicklow's) opinion there
was a very great difference._. (Laughter.), He would
much prefer the well-finished, well-wrought, well-con-
sidered instrument to the rude, unfashioned one, taken
up at the moment of execution, and perhaps taken up by
the executioner at the moment rather to defend himself
than to apply it to its legitimate purpose.—(Laughter.)
If the object of a fixed duty was to increase commerce and
manufactures, he believed it would be better than a
sliding scale.---(Opposition cheers.) Other nations
would know better the grounds on which they were
trading, and they would know what price they were to
pay:-(Cheers from the same quarter.) He thought the
trade would be more fixed and certain a but the
Noble Viscount having declared that the object of
a fixed duty was to protect agriculture, he thought
that object would be better secured by theßill of his
Noble Friend. He would now only allude to the circum-
stances of Ireland. He heard many persons declare that,
were it not for Ireland, they would be disposed to vote
for a fixed duty, but that Ireland being so peculiarly cir-
cumstanced, they would, for her sake, vote to maintain
the Corn-law. If he thought that the proposed altera-
tions tended to injure the interest of that country, he
would feel bound, circumstanced as lie was with regard
to it, but especially on account of the conduct pursued
towards it by this country—not lately, bat at a former
critical period of her history—he would feel bound to
oppose it. Had Ireland been protected and fostered by
their predecessors, she would now be a source of wealth
and credit to England, instead of a mill-stontaaround her
neck. He should, therefore, feel bound to oppose those
alterations if they tended to injure the interest of that
country; but if there was any part of the empire which
should feel less than another any distress from the pro-
posed measure, that part was Ireland. The Noble and
Learned Lord opposite, yesterday alluded to the decrease
in the exports of wheat from that country, and he
argued
from that an improvement in the condition of the
people. He feared that such was not the case. For the
last three years, there were peculiarly bad harvests in
Ireland, and scarcely any wheat was raised that was fit
for exportation. It therefore became necessary to apply
it to the other uses—the use of the distiller and brewer.
The greater consumption of wheat in Ireland had been
principally caused by bad harvests ; for then the wheat,
being unfit for exportation, was sold very cheaply to the
people. He hoped that the people would get a taste for
wheat ; but he thought the climate of Ireland not fit
for wheat, while it was admirably adapted for oats ;
therefore, while the protection on wheat was lowered,
that on oats ought to be higher. He v.4s glad of the
change made by the tariff as to foreign cattle. What-
ever effect the change would produce—and he only
feared, that in respect to cattle, it• would not be
much—still, it would so far serve as ran inducement
to the people of Ireland to apply themselves to the
cultivation of corn. It might be true that the nations of
the Continent would not be able to import much cattle
into this country. Yet there would be this advantage,
that the measure, by raising the price of food on the
Continent, would place the artisans of this country on a
par with their Continental rivals. For these reasons he
had last night given his vote for the measure of the
Government, and would now vote akainst the proposi-
ition of the Noble Lord opposite.
Lord VIVIAN said, he had endeavoured to divest
himself of all party feelings in coming to the consideration of
this question ; and when a Member of the other House, he had
supported, in opposition to the wishes of his constituents, the
same opinions which should on this occasion govern his vote.
His profession as a soldier had prevented him, until recently,
from giving the question of protective duties his consideration ;
but when he did come to examineothe subject, he was con-
vinced that protective duties were of little advantage to the
protected class, and a great disadvantage to the public.
( Hear, hear.) In a country like this, where the population
was daily increasing, and the demand for food and labour also
increasing, he thought the proposed legislation most unjust,
and he thought it better to fix aininzmum of labour than a
minimum of food.--( Hear, hear. 4 The Noble Lord proved
last night that they had not to fear any great importation of
foreign corn. During one hundred and eighty years,
in which this subject had beer) legislated upon, thirty-eight
Acts of Parliament had been passed, and yet no satisfactory
conclusion had been come to; with this view, he thought that if
they admitted foreign corn free of duty, it might set those
matters at rest, and restore the quiet and tranquillity of the
country. He was most anxious that this should be settled ;
and he should, therefore, be glad to enter into such t compro-
mise as a fixed duty. He kneW there was a feeling throughou,
this country, that the agriculturists were enriching themselves
by these laws, to the detrimerit of the other classes. He (Lord
Vivian) did not think so. He agreed with the observations in
an excellent pamphlet, ealled„;" Corn and Currency," written
by the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Home De-
partment, that the commerce and agriculture of this country
were se dovetailed together, ego linked and bound up in one an-
other, so connected, that they: could not be separated. He ac •
knowledged that the agricultarist was the best customer of the
manufacturer, and that, if agriculture suffered, manufactures
must suffer with it ; but when he saw that the manufacturer
was not able to compete with'the foreigner, and that the Corn-
laws were partly the cause, he considered that agriculture must
itself suffer. He :hought that the great cause of the present
fficultics were to be attributed both to agriculturists and manu-
facturers, who sought t i keep up war prices after the war had
ceased. He was rejoiced at the alteration made in the tariff,
but he compained that moA' was not done ; but he thought
there was an inconsistency imposing an Income-tax, which
was the most obnoxious add disagreeable tax that could be
imposed, while the corn and sugar monopolies were not
touched. He would say one word before he sat down with re-
spect to being able to maintain a fixed duty; the very argu-
ment showed that there was little danger that prices could get
up. It reminded him of .fin anecdote in which he was con-
cerned. An officer met him one day in the street, and said he
was glad that he was not passent at a certain battle, because he
• would have been killed, and, when he (Lord Vivian) asked how
he knew that, he answered that his successor was killed.—
(Laughter.) He rejoiced that some progress was to be made
in free trade, and he hoped they would not stop at where they
now were. To borrow the language of a Noble Friend of his
(Lord Palmerston) in the other House, the ground had been
broken, the outworks had been forced, and they would soon
see the giant commerce set free.
The Duke of CLEVELAND addressed their Lordships
solely from a paramount sense of duty. He very much feared
from the silent vote he had given last night, if he did not ex-
plain his views on theresent occasion, his conduct would be
liable to misconception. The total repeal of protecting duties
he hoped he should never live to see. He did not oppose the
present Bill as regarded wheat, but he thought a very uncalled-
for reduction had been made of the protection on oats.-( Hear
hear.) If that' large importation of wheat should take place
which was anticipated, he thought it would be most injurious,
and the same observation would apply to barley. They
must all bow to the aspect of affairs ' • they all knew
the great outcry which was raised for change, and
with regard to wheat, if they must have made a
change at all, he,did not think they could have made less change ;
and though he condemned the alterations on barley and oats,
still, taking the measure as a whole, he considered it his duty
to vote for the second reading of the Bill, and he was most
anxious that it should pass into a law. But notwithstanding all
that had been said, he was much staggered at the finality of this
Bill.—( Hear.) He must say that he was a good deal astonished
at what had fallen from the Noble Earl, who said that nothing
could be considered a measure of finality excepting the laws of
the Medes and Persians. lie (the Duke of Cleveland) would
vote for the present measure with a firm conviction that it would
never be altered in his lifetime. 'With respect to a fixed
duty, he thought, as a measure of finance, it would be
more productive than a sliding scale; but as a
measure of protection, it would be totally ineffective; and
therefore, whether it was a high duty or a low duty he should
feel it his duty to oppese it.--( Hear and Laughter. )
The Earl of RIPCN had only meant to say, that no
law which might be passed could be considered umalterable, but
that he hoped the present measure would not be speedily
altered. He .hould have thought that the minister who brought
forward the Reform Bill, and said that:it was a final measure,
might very well have allowed this to be considered a final mea-
sure—(Hear)—and being convinced' that it would be better
far the country if it never should be changed, he was deter-
mined, that so far as it lay with him, never should be changed.
The Earl of ROSE EltßY:opposed the Bill. It must be
utterly unsatisfactory to the farmers or the public at large. It
was known that it could not last, and as a preparatory plan it
was bad. He thought a fixed ditty would be more satisfactory
than any other, because he thought the price would never rise
to a ruinous amount—because it would put an end to speculation
—because it would lessen the demand for bullion—and, there.
fore, keep the currency more regular, which was the cause of
the periodical distress of the country,7and because the profits
now made by the speculation would go to benefit the consumer.
—(Hear, hear.) If they thought a fixed duty of Bs. toe low,
they might lay on a duty of 10s. per quarter, and gradually
lessen it every year by Is. With respect to the proposed
sliding scale lie objected to the " rests" in it, and
to the addition of towns to the present number.
lie would not trouble their Lordships at present with his objec-
tion as to the medium point, but as to the resting point, he
considered them wholly illusory ; he thought it was absurd to
suppose that in the ascendiug scale it would be possible to stop
at ISs., or in the descending scale at 65., when, at those very
points, it would be the interest of the speculator, as well "`
clearly iii 11... power, to run the duty up at one point, I.iid ro
bring it down to nothing from the lower. He had always been
favourable to the impost of a fixed duty on core. He

I America, and of joint-stock bank speculations, greatdistUrbi.
ance in the corn trade was contemporaneous with disturbance
in the circulation. In the year 1838 there was an introduc •
tion of wheat and wheat flour to the amount of 1,300,000
quarters. At that period the highest amount of bullion in
the Bank of England was 10,126,0001., and the lowest, at
most, was 9,350,0001. The next year the quantity of corn
imported was 2.862,000 quarters. Then shat became of the
circulation ? The highest amount of gold that year in the
Bank was 9,356,0001., but the lowest was 2,500,00 q., corre-
sponding in amount to the whole quantity of corn imported.
If he were to go through, merely as a matter of curiosity, the
annals of those two years, 1838 and 1839, they would find that
they commenced at a rate of introduction of 5,200 quarters
per month—( the maximum amount in September, 1838, being
5,620 quarters.) They began with an amount of ten millions
of bullion, and at the close of that period they had only two
millions to meet all the expenditure of the country—to pay the
army, navy, &c., &c. The non-coincidence of the American
distress, and the demand for foreign corn, was one of those
circumstances for which every British statesman, and merchant,
and lover of his country, ought to make matter of daily and
hourly congratulatiou. Had it occurred a few years previous
to the time at which it had happened, and contemporane-
ously with the time that that state of the bullion
, to which he had adverted was prodoced by the fluctuating
1 Corn-law, what might not hare been the consequence ?
They were only saved from the result of such a concurrence by
a miracle. As some one had said, France Lad come in to the
support of the Bank of England, and had given them a glorious
proof of their independence of foreign countries.—( Hear, hear,'
from the Opposition.) The Bank of England would have
been obliged to stop payment. The consequence of such a cir-
cumstance, not merely speaking of national distress, would have
been irreparable. It was said they were not like Indiana or
Ohio, but if so, they had not to thank themselves for it. It
was in spite of their bad legislation that they were not the first
commercial country in the world, held up to the acorn of all
• men, for having themselves produced that distressing calamity.
In adverting to these matters, he only touched upon the boun-
dary of the circle. He would take the liberty of calling their
Loidships' attention to one more passage. The document he
was about to read might be objected to. It bore the name of
Mr. Samuel Lloyd and Mr. Senior. It was prepared long be-
fore the late Government scheme was thought of. He knew
of his own knowledge, that those pere , were not aware of
the rneaseteproßosed bythe late (;overt;, ,:r when they drew up
this document. They'stated, adverting to the imprOvement in the
sliding scale, that, like the present law, it would keep corn at
au artificial price; that it must prevent any steadiness in the •