The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-19 00:00:00

ee-e• ""-t
ienelingly, if they added all those remote places to the Pre 'celins...
,umber the result, if grain was cheaper in the out-lyi tige
.
leas than in the central places, would be, that the lo
if the whole of the averages, two or three shillings mon than
they now are, would be confined, as they were, to the ci s'et.ralt.
districts. The consequence of all this would be, that the 1 `"
,f importation would be postponed. It would become
ifficult, by thus lowering the averages, to get at the point
,vhich our pors were opened. His Noble Friend oppos ire
liought differently. It was possible that he (Lord BrougharG
night be wrong. But some steps might be taken, some coils e
teral provision made, whereby, after the e.xperiment consequen t
.4"
on the passing into law of the proposed ram sure, they might b e
'nabled to ascertain the effect of adding the 150 towns ; and i
its (Lord Brougham's) apprehensions were verified, the 7'
could then strike out those towns from the Act. F' :,
'be reasons he had thus stated, he was strongly inclined •ac
prefer the proposed measure to the present law. He wish ed
o see the trade in corn thrown entirely open.. It would;be
the safest course for all interests concerned. Yet as the pi,"
-,used scheme was a modification of the evils of the eresent sys-
tem, he was prepared to support it. He should orefer sups
,erring the motion of his Noble Friend (Lord Meiliourne).
He did not concur with those who thought the propos ed mese
sure a final one ; but it was preferable to the existing LW, es.
it was a step on the right side. The best argumse st le •
,'
favour of a final measure on the subject was tht";.•
great uncertainty which resulted from the present Corn-la !Ist
ind the unwillingness consequent upon it of capitalists to .11";
vest their capital in the purchase of land. In the island
Jersey or Guernsey, or some of the Channel Islands, there w
no Corn-law. The average price of wheat, during 10 years i
that island, was 51s. and some odd pence. During the semi
period the average price in this country, with a Corn-lawl
,vas e ther 57s or sds., a difference of about 14 or 15' per'''.
cent. The effect of throwing open the trade would cheapen
price of corn by about 2s. or 35. per quarter, but not more. The
opinion of a Noble Lord who was connected with the county nE;:'
Northampton (Earl Spencer), and who had given muck,:
attention to the subject, was, that the total reeelw'
,f the Corn-laws would not have any effect in lowering the
price of corn. Why, then, it might be asked, was it relgh,„
to have the Corn-laws repealed? For this reason—.it wesna
hare a most beneficial effect on the agricultural interest of
country, by encouraging commerc., and restoring manufacturing, '7
as well as trading prosperity. It was for that reason the reel` ,
of the Corn laws was sought,'and not for any material lower • •
of the price of corn which would result from it. No essnOter"
able increase would take place in the quantity of corn gle.vga"
in any country, unless more land was brought into cultivateand in a country perfectly 'civilised ; in such countries •st
the upper parts of the Ukraine, and the more remote parts •
Russia, where the soil was covered with forest and heath, on"
where much skill and labour would be expended before the'
land could be brought into cultivation—in such countries they. •
would not bring more land into cultivation met ell v.;
creating a fixed duty, instead of one according to a sitdirl-
scale—not by throwing open their ports.--(
He did not mean to say that their improving their .r.
mercial intercourse would not be of great benefit to
God ferbid that they should not do so ; it wom'n
of great benefit both to them and to us; but -
did not believe that any great importation into this ear,
try would follow. Their population would increase, their CO*'Sio
dition would improve, mid as their condition and ci re tee
stances improved, they would desire an improvement in t„11
fare. If their Lordships wished any proof in support of e
assertion he would refer them to Ireland. In the years Lereos
1834 to 1 836 the quantity of wheat exported from Irelandelp
quarters, was 761,000 quarter and now that quantity was redtrew,e
to 216,000 quarters, and he attributed this entirely to the inre,!-
proved condition of our Irish fellow-subjects. They had he ;e
a painful reason assigned by a Noble Friend of his as to the au 11
of the present distress. He said it was not owing to the
of commerce or to agriculture, but to the state of the n.a."''
rency. He said this distress had existed since 1837, hut
since 1837? The standard wasrestored 20 years before that,
and surely he did not suppose that the Bank of England had the
power to issue one note more than- was actually requir 411
commerce ; the moment the Bank over-issued, the note Ws' f
be returned to them ; and they had in fact no more powel
over-issuing than any private bank in the kingdom. IS
Noble Friend said there was not a sufficient issue of bad
paper. Would his Noble Friend have an issue of assigns?:
such as took place during the French revolution, when,as ".*
had heard, 500,000 francs were paid for a pair of gloves ?
sorry to say that he believed his Noble Friend did agree with this'
who were in favour of an unlimited issue of bank paper. It
thought the total repeal of the Corn-laws was the only mare'
suited to the present exigencies of the country ; if it -were ordf
that it would settle this question even, and for ever, he thoughi...
.
that would be a sufficient reason ; but that it would restore
the state of commerce to its original healthy condition, and 7„,
establish the advantageous footing in which we have hitherr,
stood with foreign countries, he entertained no more dose',
tbs
than he did upon the clearest proposition. He had heard
assertion made again to-night, that if the price of bread tree,e7
.
low, wages would fall with it. Need he remind te"",,..',
Lordships of the fallacy of this statement? Bo 170,
price of provisions high or low, the wages of every eal.
labour must depend upon the amount which he has to
into the market, and the demand which the employersmaynro-pe
for it. The more difficult it was to obtain food, the higherioe
price of food—the greater the quantity. of labour whinbees
working man must give for it. In America, where food which
than in this country, in the proportion of 2s. to don,
labour was dearer in the proportion of a dollar to 2s. TheTeie,S.'
was answered, on the other side, that the lower rate of segos
this country was occasioned by over population. But diu_e4:l
that decide the question ? Was it not conclusive that thew
of labour depended on the proportion of the demand to the
supply, and in nothing else. Although he approved ef
measure, as contrasted with the former state of the law, e
there was another measure which he preferred. He 0100,-
support the amendment, if he could not carry Hsi) ee'
amendment, which he would now propose—f.
41,0
to the effect that all the words after the word "
tb
should be omitted for the purpose of inserting the folloseingC,
" No duty on the importation of foreign corn of any
scription."
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said, that it was irregular.
propose any amendment, which involved a general proposlee".
after an amendment.
After a discussion upon the point of order, in which 1•914_,,e,
Kenyon, the Earl of F,ipon, and Lord Canterbury took Pei;,
Lord BROUGHAM said that ho had looked to also.
which he found that it was the practice of both Houses of jest ;
nutrient that the question stomaU
be taken-first upon ''
amendment. botb,
Lord CANTERBURY said that the usage
Houses was, that it should first be put that the words W'e),-.e
to be omitted should " stand part of the question."—(ll.r.orr
The LORD CHANCELLOR was then about to put
question, when
Earl FITZ WILLIAM was desirous to address a few 11'1.4
to the House before their Lordships divided. He did Dot Wag
prove of the present Bill, but it carried in itself the seerl,.
future amendment ; and it was also a most desirable ellecToe,
to enable us to get rid of the exist:rig cumbersome -_O4
Therefore he would vote for the second reading of the
Bill, and, on the whole, he felt grateful te +131.00,
nist, y that bad ventured into the gap their prens‘7,ols
had opened for them. This Bill was a step in advance te;,7,0,
a final settlement of the question, which was free trade toe. tee
which, though not a protective system, would yet bele_e_6o,
revenue. Reserving to himself the right of future
he would vote for the motion.—( Question.) Pl°°
Lord MELBOURNE could not approve of the princl 0•17
the provisions of the Bill, but he thought it to be a gr 4 for
provement of the present law, an f therefore he should se'lo 0,
the second reading. He regarded it as an introduction -
better measure; to be introduced hereafter. Prt
The House then divided on the original motion, au'„
Stanhope's amendment for the second reading that us' ;';
months.
The numbers were— a
11'
Contents ......
Nen- Contents
Majority against Lord Stanhope's amendment --;,600
The House a 7econd time divided on the original tee fes
and Lord Brougham's amendment for the total repesll"
Corn laws. The numbers were—
Contents
Non-contents

~ 109
6 04
labf

Majority tor the second reading
The Bill was then read a second time, and order
committed to-morrow.
Their Lordships immediately after adjourned, at s
past Twelve o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMM 18.
COMMONS, April • foot
The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes befell
o'Clock.
LONGFORD ELECTION COMMITTE'„gO:I
Lord ASHLEY brought up the Report of the Se`e,:earee
mittee appointed to try the petition against the late ' rene
a Member to serve for the county of Longford in thLP, airj
Parliament. It stated that Luke White, Esq., wge 100
returned ; and that Antony Lefroy, Esq., was dull g'
that. borough. etar."
The Clerk of the Crown was ordered to amend thtV *
CARDIGAN ELECrioN COMMITTEEI4 vi-of
Mr. HAYTER brought up the Report of the Se'erettitte
mittee, appointed to try the petition against the late TheLif
a Member to represent the borough of Cardigan'. oot 1510
port was to the effect, that Fryce Pryce, Esq., utnieetL,"
elected to represent the borough in the present Per"e,g ie
that J. Harford had been duly elected, and ought to Pho rod
returned as a burgess to serve in the Parliament for the_eterg'
The Clerk of the Crown was ordered to amend the to
IPSWICH ELECTION COMMITTES'O.of
Mr. PAKINGTON stated that, as the Chaire'tittoes....,ife
Committee appointed to try the Ipswich Election
had been directed by the Committee to report to.
that they had that day come to the following
solved, that Obadiah Lucas has been wilfully guilty eite;
tlovit
evidence in his examination before the Ceininibe egg e.
solved that the said Obadiah Lucas be committed to t floor f the ,rt
of the Sergeant-at- Arms, to await the pleasure nee- peer
resoluti9 igiojtv:
He (Mr. Pakington) then moved, pursuant to the otos
the Committee, that Obadiah Lucas be, for the.„gatbe •}!.kor
committed to her Majesty's gaol of Newgate, Sr"
may make a further order in his case, and that ' vrot
should issue his warrant accordingly.—Agreed toe is thienrar
Mr. HARDY presented a petition from a plae:t,aeu r
Riding of Yorkshire against the New Poor-law A"" „to ie
ing for a re-enactment of the old measure. at $ Pa tits"
Mr. BLACKSTONE presented a petition fr°_„A), bra
against the New Corn Bill (as we understff;.eirroo
part of the tariff which related to the important%) ultitienZtional.
Sir ROBERT BATESON presented PI, of
place in the county of Derry, against the 515te
ati
i;
Education in Ireland. tS ,g
•
Lord DALMENY presented a petition from
the Income-tax proposed by the Government-
Mr. W. PATTEN presented a petition fro
boot sod
against the tariff, fret the -fattir.
Mr. JOHNSTONE presented a petition fre tioo
of
shoe makers of Glasgow, against the import.% 140,
boots and shoes.
Mr. WAKLEY presented a similar P
tingham. r,atEl. • G10g,4
, place
petition from

OLLprEeGseEntodoFa
Sir R. INGLISC p on ,i
cciterchir ' College'
. e, against the grant to hlaynooth
INCOME TAX. '6 n from
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFO D presented a peti__o 8, 0
the inhabitants of Littlehoroughrt parish of Rochdale,
yel _.,.
dvicinity. These petitioners state that the y have patien_ier
they CO
ured the effecto of class le islation ; that
Letiti from A .
violation of the princi les ofgthe Constitution to enhl!li ' 4
price of breadwithoutP. at they view.
increasing wages ; th 0,100,
income tax as unjust in pri
tour'pie and a taz upon pr
~
and therefore pray your House eject the measure. L•••
A similar petition waspresented by Mr. WAKLEY Irani
~.,31
Austle, in Cornwall. 8 11
Mr. BECKETT presented a Pe the signed bY
eitors of Leeds, praying for relief from the aertificate duty. ~,
was equivalent to an income tax .... ,
Mr. COLVILLE presented a similar petition from Veined
Mr. BAGGE presented petition .
a against the impoetsoe°;7
..a
foreign cattle.
Mr. WAKLEYpresented • ' from blr• Join.,- /.5
a petition
Brown, aagainst the Brighton SOT
surgeon, of Brighton,
Debts Bill. in 4;
S '
The Hon. MEMBKR presented a petition from Mr. ,ia
dale, praying that declarations m •all sbe substigg"--
ay io Cade -!s
for oaths. • Ai 'Jowl'
Mr. MACKINNON resented a petition froM an in—f
_;,i
whOse name did not reach us, r..-ing that the beatin# 'l.l
ventilating the House of CorLnPns)inight be •iven
to hinir''
lie would .doit at a cheaper rate than it is at present done. 000
Lord F. EGERTON presented a petition, signed b 1 le'