The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-11 00:00:00

-

now going to enter upon a long recess during
which, more even than when Parliament is sitting,
the conduct of foreign affairs must be left to the unquestioned
discretion of the Government, let them not believe that 19°'
CALM they may meet us again with things done
,however. baillf,
those things may be done ethey must be accepted and submitted
to ; 'but let them be assured that if they change—if they losrer
the position in which the country stood when it was placed i°
their hands—if they sacrifice those interests which we incise
tained with that restless activity and perpetual intermeddll
of which we have been accused—if they are not convinced.o9
every affair, however distant and apparently insignificant,- el
ohich British interests are concerned, must be attended to be'
times—that if they once let events get the start of' them, tbeld
can never recover their lost ground—if they are not couvinel
that by standing npen our rights in the first instance, we,
most likely to prevent any further attempts to encroach urz
them—if they are not determined on maintaining the princird
that. Engiand should yield nothing that is right, while she elso-ji
ask nothing that is unjust, that we should encroach upon no°
but permit none to encroach upon us—if they are not resolvede°
executing what they may have on hand, whatever may be tbel°,
stacks which may from time to time arise to impede their OP
they maybe assured that they will in the end create insurmoun!'
able difficulties fer themselves, and irretrievable injury for tb,kelf
country.—( Loud and long continued cheers.) Noe'
Lord concluded by moving fur the following returnse'
Return of the names and titles of all the public Bills that bele.
been brought into the House of Commons during the presto'
session of Parliament; the date at which the order for brint
ing in each Bill was made; also, the dates at which they
Bills passed through their several stages. Return of ll
names and titles of all public Bills that have been sent down,ll
the present session, from the House of Lords to the House of
Commons; stating the date when each such Bill was receive°e,
and the dates at which it passed its several stages in the HO!
of Commons. Return of the names and titles of all poll
Bills that have passed through the House of Commons, an
have been returned from the House of Lords.
On the question being put,
Sir R. PEEL rose and said—Sir, I do not know whet°
the motion of the Noble Lord, the important conclusion asf
speech with which he has introduced it, has been seconded, I)°,
I rise for the purpose, if it has not, of seconding this motion °'
the Noble Lord's ; and I do feel under great obligations to hie'
for having, at the close of the session, put upon record the On
cessful efforts in legislation of the present Government, sal
enabled the country to draw a contrast between the progre9
which we have made, and the operations of our pret
cessors.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Minister°,'
Benches.) Sir, I am surprised that the Noble L 99"
has deprived an Hon. Friend of mine of the credit whia
due to this motion. The Noble Lord has followed in the tarot'.
steps of my Hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln. The 05
tion of the Noble Lord is a mere repetiton of the moils*
my lion. Friend on the 7th of June last year. The Not
Lord has followed in his footsteps, and has imitated his esa
ample, without giving him credit for the precedent ; and IL.
hope that there will be a comparison instituted between I:"
results of. our efforts in legislation, and of those which vre"„
made by the Government of which the Noble Lord WI;
member. ( Cries of " Hear, hear.") Sir, the 14°"„,
Lord commenced his speech by an historical revie"'
of the state of parties and of public principles since the sigh'
tore of the definitive treaty of peace. With reference. OW
Catholic question, I have no observation to make. I ackoof.
ledge the fairness with which the Noble Lord his on this,:
well as on a former occasion, acknowledged the motives eiltit
influenced my Noble Friend and myself in bringing forty
that measure.--( Hear.) Whether his panegyric upon the ee!;
duct we pursued was or was not greater than our merits .
a point for us to determine. He did us justice, at least, 901'
respect to the motives which influenced us in proposing ase,`i
tlemen of that question. The result of that measure must
have been perfectly well known to us. We deemed it e°
public duty to bring forward a measure for the settlement ,:f
the Catholicclaims ; the inevitable result we must have forsei
seen in the temporary loss of the confidence of those who 13,4
previously given us their support.—( Hear. ) Sir, lu
Noble Lord then referred to the question of Par:
liamentary reform. He stated that that subject bean'',
of pressing importance in the year 1830; that it bole%
necessary in that year, mainly in consequence of the imports')
events which occurred in France in July of that year, to WI
forward a great measure of reform. Now, Sir, when the
Noble Lord reflects upon his own conduct with respect tow'
question of Parliamentary reform—conduct, I am sure,
fluenced by the most honourable motives yet when he cop'
siders what that conduct practically was, the Noble Lord is a
man who ought tohave some toleration for changes in opinZ
on that subject. The Nohle Lord, who up to u'd
death of Mr. Canning was the bitter enemy.
Parliamentary reform in every shape and opilnen)
became the faithful follower of dr. Cantong.—( Hear, bear.'
In 1832, he was a faithful adherent of Lord Grey's Goverf;
ment, before the Reform Bill. The Noble Lord ought to 10,
some toleration for those who are now opposed to him. Durl7,'"
the lives of Mr. Percival, Lord Castlereagh, and Mr. Canine"'
who was a more determined enemy to general Parliamenlag
reform than the Noble Lord ? The Noble Lord admits it fie
I said before, I never will impute unjust motives to the N°."
Lord on this subject. But I say the Noble is not a man,so ~,
exercise intolerant criticism upon those opposed to him. 'l'.
Noble Lord says that when the great question of Parliamee.:
tary reform was carried, it was necessary to, adopt new printe,
plea with respect to commercial reform. Ido not deny that 0.;
necessity of more liberal principles with respect to commerTe
reform, originated in the change in the representation of
people. But I say that Mr. Huskisson and Lord Wallace enter:
tained different views with respect to that Commercial reform,
You cannot date the relaxation in the restrictions on comineoe!
or the abolition of monopolies, from the period at which ref
rep
in the representation took place. I venture to say that for
1.118
years previous to the Reform Bill more important changes_r_eii.
made in the commercial pthicy of this country than the au'eare
tion of monopolies or the relaxation of taxationein
which followed the Reform Bill.--( Cheers.) But if from
era of reform is to be dated the necessity for conneteraeial
ieeere
provement, if that be true, then the Noble Lord pea
r Bill fore
condemnation upon those who brought the Reform parlia-
mentary Cheers.) If it was necessary at the
policy, if that was
mentary Reform to extend the commercial po--C9 aesuit
necessary, coincident with that great act, how do you
see
yourselves of having permitted commercial reform to sleep neck
lected at the time. You had large and powerful majorities Ott
the ten y.the
would have carried the timber duties or any other measure this
you proposed.--( Cheers.) Why did you bring it forward whey
your party was broken up ? Why did you come forward
after a period of fifteen years, and in the moment
of death, like a penitent sinner?—(Hear, and loud cheers.)
You say that we spent the recess in reading and studying
Adam Smith and Ricardo ; why if in that time we had at'
a
tempted to reconcile the principles of the first fifteen years
~0'
your life, and the principles of the last fifteen Years, we sheot°.
have had a rather difficult problem.—(Loud cheers and laugh'
'er. ) How can you refrain from condemnation on yourself*.
when you reflect that you had the power to carry out thaws
principles, and you refrained from doing so ? There was
Hutt's Bill. Who opposed Mr. Hutt's Bill ? I speak of the
first four or five years after the Reform Bili. Why did you 11°'
then set the example of a more liberal commercial policy? I ea
in 1836, when Mr. Robinson brought forward that Bill whit
you now tax us with opposing, when he brought forward that
Bill, the President of the Board of Trade, and the leader of t°,„
Home of Commons voted against it..—(Cheers) 'l7;
with the sugar duties. Who opposed the motion of the
Honourable Member for Dumfries ( Mr. Ewart) e wiiee
,he Honourable Gentleman proposed to reduce the
duty on foreign sugar, the Noble Lord divided the sum by „
and then the whole strength of the Government was direct
against the proposal.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) I".',
Noble Lord then referred to the progress made with respect l°
the measures introduced this session. He said that st t fif
close of the Queen's speech, we called attention to the stele
the finances of the country, the Corn-laws, the Provision-lewd
the Bankruptcy Question, the Ecclesiastical Jurisdictien, 5.°4,
.he question of the Registration. Well, in conformity
the prevailing sense of the House, I as the organ of the Govers
ment, brought forward the three great measures connect
with the commercial and financial policy of the country, /4"
he proposal to equalize the revenue with the expenditurl
the proposal to reduce the duty on foreign corn, the real
of the prohibition on the import of meat and cattle. We;
now tell me what charge vou bring against ine
the subject of the tariff? Did the Noble Lord 10
my friends on this side the House, whom he e°
tile representatives of the agricultural interest, that I have
carried out a principle which would have the effect of uncle:•
milling the agricultural interest of the country ? Is that the
charge ? If not, the other was a contradictory one, natne2l
my measures are mere delusions ; that the agriculturists 197,
not be alarmed at the present Corn-law, De it is no betto
than the old one ; that the alterations in the tariff are of ht
importance, and that it falls far short of the principles et.,
which it was introduced. Now these charges are not consisteet
with each other. I take the charge of the Noble Lord, that
brought forward the change in the tariff to alarm those 9,.„'''
gave me support, as the question. I deny that I received
port upon any other conditions than those I publicly announe.„
as the conditions upon which I would accept
_power. Th%
conditions were the same as those of 1835. When I vise ka•
opposition I was told that I was more liberal than those Wu"
supported me.—( Hear.) Could any one say that the were
sures I introduced in the course of the present session seefee
violation of engagements, or a departure from principle ? llsv
adorted your principles ? The principles of the tariff, 14;0
do I find them ? The Noble Lord says, you could not ba;.,a
inherited them f. om us.—( Loud cheers and laughter.) .tr,t
is perfectly true.—(Loud cheers.) He says you do not 004
them in the Red Book. Why that is perfectly true.—(Loil
cheers.) These remarks of the Noble Lord 'citk
e,
respect to the producing of the tariff were perfect''
true. I never do and I never will, withhold Wee
from those who called attention to the import duties.—(
cheers from boils sides of the House.) I never will within'
my praise from the Hon. Member for Montrose.—(Cheers';
Who brought that inquiry about? It was the Hon. Member
for Alonm.uthshire. Did the Reform Government at th%
time acquiesce in the appointment of that Committee? Did le
receive any support from the exertions of the Goirerntaenl'i
Did the President of the Board of Trade attend tbat-
Committee? No; some one member of the Government'
holding a subordinate offee, little aware of the native of,!'i
lisclosures to be made, did, I believe, give something I'l;
regular attendance. Then ccmes the defence of the PI"l
Lord. What does it amount to? That you had not strengtr'
co enforce those principles, of the truth of which you were eeli;
einced. Then why did you not risk office upon it ?.....(10,7;
heers.) Why did you not risk office for the enforcement
'hose principles? Is not that the way to deal with rest
principles? Is it not clear that you preferred the retention o'
,tiller to those principles ?—( Loud cheering.) If thee
principles were tiue, why did you not risk the fate of your ad'
ministration for the maintenance of those principles?—( Renewed
elieers. ) Why did you not come forward with a readiness to make
a sacrifice in vindication of the great principles, being satisfied
of the truth of those principles, instead of remaining in office
incapable of exercising power, and preferring the retention 0r
.!
place to the exposition of the evils of the tariff?—(Great
cheering.) Let me tell you that you ought not to hold .fl q
unless you are prepared to risk power upon the maintenance 0°
lour principles.--; Loud cheering.) I saw the face of the Hone
Member for Stockport droop when the Noble Lord made big
defence. The Noble Lord in his enthusiastic defence of him"
,elf, could say nothing exclusive of the merits of his wit:nines-
• ration, and referred little to the measures fur the improvement
of the country, but referred to his own labours in the
:-'oreign-office.—( Cheers.) Well, the Noble Lord gave hieiveif
sceeit for having facilitated the trade in Mocha. coffees
I give him great credit for the doctrine of investing a- country
with a disciplined army, but 1 ask him whether that is likely to
tacilitate a peaceful intercourse ?—( Cheers and laughter.) But
the Noble Lord took credit to hiuoelf for having, under the old
ystem of the Corn-laws, increased the exports of the count*
from thirty-seven millions to fifty millions. In' the three
great measures which I brought forward I never complained of
the unfairness of the di'cussion, but I believe that 4S day`
were consumed in the consideration of those three Bills
the Tariff, the Income-tax, end the Corn Bill, I sat
appealing to Honourable Gentlemen opposite not to
-nterpose difficulties. I think 1 sat here for forty-five day out
~f the 115 of the session, fur the purpose of having the Tariff
passed into a law, to relieve the country from embarrassments
/in aeconnt of suspense. You may depreciate these measuress,
but I should like your Government to do that.—( Loud cheers.)
I shouts( like to have seen it. When I opposed the taking of eff
the Malt:tax in . 1835 I had 150
side. I supporters,
had.
who then
opposed me. -_(Hear, hear.) I called them
lly friends were generous. The consequence was that I carried
I the question with a triumphant, majority.
The only one
lam bound to say that I hail support from the other together. I
paid we must have a Malt tax; I shall persevere.
then risked the support of m own friends. It was insinuated!
on he other side House that I should be obliged to bow ter