The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-10 00:00:00

principle. The English manufacturer went to the foreign market sucha disadvantage as Dantzic and some other places. He 1
but be could not demand for his goods the price which he might wished in what he now stated, considering the length of the de
choose, but he must reduce the cost of the production of his menu- bateg, to confine himself to the particular subject they had dis-
factureto the cost for which the foretn manufacturer could pro. cussed, the relative merits of the fixed duty, and the fluctuating
and if the Noble Lord had wished to enlighten the House
di,uucfaectauresrimainladr
arritillra.uwfascutfruerree,dan_d(iiineatrii,athweaary)thelt Ehnagdlisahlwmaya:
upon the subject he would have explained what he meant by
been said in former debates, that the manufacturer could : justice to the agriculturist. The Noble Lord stated that he did
trust to the home market ; that would supply all deficiencies nut expect that a Is. duty would diminish the price of corn—
in the foreign market, and that in the home market the manufac. I low, therefore, he would ask, could it be considered as a settle_
curer would find his best safety. But when, in consequence of the I merit of the Corn.laws ? Those who were for the repeal of the
Corn-laws, corn was at such a price that the labourer was obliged Corn-laws said that the Bread-tax was odious and unjust. The Noble
to spend the greater part of his earnings in food, then the diminution I Lord told them they did not think that a fixed duty would materially
in the sale of manufactured articles was so great that, in some reduce the price. It, therefore, could not be expected that such
djstricts, they found thousands of artisans, as was the case last a proposition would act as a permanent settlement. The Noble Lord
• year, were reduced to a state of the greatest possible distress.— who spoke early in the debate, the Member for Sunderland, not
(Hear, hear.) Thus there were two causes operating to produce I only admitted that the proposition was an improvement on the
distress, the first, foreign competition, which was gaining on us old system, but that it would be 'productive of an increase
year by year; and secondly, the diminished quantity of food in 1 to the revenue; he alio drew a favourable contrast between
the country, as compared with the population—(Hear, hear)— i the proceedings of the present and the late Government, in re-
arid both these circumstances tended to produce distress among tke spect to the measure now before the House. Having determined
people of this country. With such causes existing it was to be' lon the alteration of the Corn laws, he (Sir R. Peel) had thought it
expected that the effects would not have been wanting, and un- duty to put it in her Majesty's Speech, and they had brought it

happily they knew too well of the existence of intense distress at
the present moment, unhappily they knew too well that in certain
districts of the country there were thousands of persons wanting em-
ployment, and whose Ciminished means enabled them to consume only
so much food as with difficulty kept them alive.—(Hear, hear.)
While such was their condition, it was the duty of the Legislature
to provide some remedy that should be potent, immediate, and
effectual, and what could be a more important remedy than an alte-
ration hi the import duties on corn ?—(Cheers.) He could not
agree with the Right Honourable Gentleman in his his view
of the state of the country. It seemed that the Right lion. Gen.
(lowan cons;dered the present was one of those ordinary transitions
in commerce and manufactures in which, after a period of great
trade and production, distress naturally followed. He (Lord J.
Russell) attributed the distress to the operation of causes, which
would not pass away in that manner. He attributed that distress
to the operation of the present Coin-laws, and of the sliding scale,
and ha could only look to the removal of that cause for an efficient
remedy.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman
bad seemed very anxious throughout the discussion to
weaken the force of the argument respecting the trade in corn
with America. He had felt the great disadvantage under which
the corn trade of America laboured as compared with the corn trade
of other countries : he had felt the impo:tance of not discouraging
the corn trade with that country, but he had felt likewise that the
sliding scale was a great obstacle to that trade. With a duty
of eight shillings a merchant might be enabled to send his corn
to this country, and to obtain a profit on the transaction,
but if on its
.arrival in this country he found a duty of 18s. or

205., he could not enter it for consumption except at a loss. In
order to get rid of that difficulty, the Right Hon. Gentleman
had been obliged•to make allusion to voyages of unexampled raai-

dity which had taken place two years and a half since. Under fa-
vourable circumstances, it might, no doubt, be possible occasionally
to make the v..yage in time, but he would ask the House ifthe better
way would not be not to make a law interposing a difficulty. There
were largeland fertile regions in the country producing corn in abun.
dance, from which the starving multitudes in this country might
bel supplied, which was anxious to supply us and to take our
manufactures in return. What must be thought then of the Par.
liament sitting here and of the Congress in America—of the Legis-
latures of the two most free and enlighted nations in the world
legislating as if their objects were to interpose obstacles to prevent

the enjoyment of those blessings?—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had spoken of a price of 725. offering a greater inducement
to the importer than could be offered with a fixed duty of Ba.
But if at the price of 565., with the duty of Bs., the merchant could
import corn so as to obtain a profit equal to that which he would

obtain on any other commercial transaction, was it to be supposed
that he would abstain from doing so?—(Cheers.) No doubt the
Honourable Gentleman's 725. would hold out a great induce-
ment, because he might make one hundred per cent. profit
by that transaction, while by the next he might lose fifty

per cent. (Hear, hear.) That was not the trade that
oughtto be encouraged.—(Loud cheers.) The Right Honourable
Baronet was right to hold out that inducement with the sliding
£cale. It was the only way in which the Bill could do good ; be-

cause the merchant would calculate that though upon one transac-
tion he might be obliged to sell at a loss, another time he might be
enabled to make an immense profit. But this was the very fort-
ing on which they ought not. to put it. It was the very induce-
ment which they ought not to hold out. He must beg pardon for
referring to what had been the policy in 1804. It was to
have three duties—one a prohibitory, the second extending over a
large number of prices, and another which was merely nominal.
Rut looking backwards he found that in the year 1703 the duty
was Bs. 6d. from 555. to 82s. That was the rate of duty in the
reign of Ctarles the Second. But in 1774 a change was made, by
which the duty was reduced to the nominal one of 6d.—(Hear,
hear)—and during the period of 134 years, from 1640 to 1774,
the rate of duty was under 9d.; and in that period the price of corn
remained more steady than it ever had been since. Instead of a
sliding scale, the policy of all former times was to have a fixed
duty of about es.—(Hear)—and now the Right Hon. Baronet pro.
posed an average duty of 18s., coming down to 75., which he called
a modification of the law.—(Hear, hear.) It was to be remembered
that when the attempt was made, in 1815, to raise the protection,
it was in a depreciated currency (Hear, bear)—but now
that by the Act of the Right Honourable Gentleman
(in 1819) the country had got a currency payable in
gold, theyought to go back to as liberal a principle as their ancestors
had pursued. But he would ask, why Cid they think it ne-
cessary that in these days it was necessary to uphold a protective
system ? It had been for a long while the favourite principle of
politicians to extend protection to every part of industry. But
Mr. Huskisson and Lord Ripon abandoned that view, and saw
that it was a mistaken policy to continue such protection. They
changed the system of protection in respect to cotton, silk,
gloves, and other articles of manufacture, and instead of
injury, those engaged in the manufacture a those articles had ul-
timately derived the greatest advantages.—(Hear, hear.) Those

who proposed such changes were not deterred by the apprehensions
of the manutacturcrs.—(Hear, hear.) Neither ought the Legisla.

forward as early as possible; the question affected great interests,
in respect to which the minds of Hon. Members were divided.
In dealing with the question, he felt that it was desirable to bring
it to a practicable conclusion. He did not wish to bring forward a
measure stating general principles, which, upon consideration,
could not be carried into effect. He wished to bring forward a
treasure, not to give universal satisfaction, for of that he despaired,
but to give to the rational portion of the community—(lronical
ilieers from the Opposition, and cheers from the Ministerial side of
the House.) Yes (continued the Right Honourable Gentle-
mem) , and I have done it; and what makes your debate
so dull P it is because the country has decided in its favour.
Lut he was speaking of the agricultural community, and he be.
lieved that among the trading, manufacturing, and commercial
c'asses there was a strong conviction that the measure which he
proposed, looking to the distressed state of the couutry, was a
lair and just arrangement.—(Loud cheers.) If it had been other-
wise, he would have found the debates in that House carried on
with vigour and a little more courage—(Continued cheers.) Well,
the question was, what should be done with this law
upon the second reading of the Bill. The proposal was to reject
the Bill. Why, the division that night would be no indication of
opinion on the subject of the Corn-laws, because it would be his mis-
fortune to find opposed to hiT those who were with the Noble Lord
In favour of a fixed duty. Was that the fixed duty of last session or
' the fixed duty of this ?—(Loud cheers and laughter.) He would
tell the Noble Lord that when he said he spared his agricultural
friends from being threatened with the ghost of the late Govern-
; rnent in " Palace-yard," if that Government were an indication of

ture now be deterred by the apprehensions of some of the land
holders from applying the same principle to the production of
corn—(Hear, hear)—fer in the end these would find their inte-
rests as little damaged by the change as were those of the menu-
tacturers by the change to which he had referred.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the agriculturists themselves, what had been the
effect of modifying other protections which they had enjoyed ?
One of their valued protections was that of the duty upon
the importation of foreign wool. His Noble Friend the Duke
of Itiehri.ond—(Hear, hear)—applied himself to that subject, and
assisted in procuring a repeal of the duty ; and so far from a dimi-
nution of the value or quantity of the home production, there had
been a great increase.—(Hear.) Why, then, was it not possible
that all which theory taught, arid all that experience confirmed In
respect to other products, should not be verified in the Cage of
corn ? There was, however, an objection to the perfect ameliora-
tion of the law, which depended more upon political than commer-
cial considerations. It depended more upon the state of parties
and the wishes of the Right Hon. Gentleman to conciliate his sup_
porters, than upon any commercial grounds.—(Opposition cheers.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman had to some extent carried an altera-
tion of the law, which many of his supporters disapproved. But by
what argument was it carried P Not on account of the impolicy of
the law; not because, as the Right Honourable Gentleman
himself had admitted, the present law was, to a certain
extent, a cause of the distress of the country, and of the
manufactures especially, but because the failure of the Right
Honourable Gentleman's-proposition would cause what was worse
still, another change of Government.— (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
That class of the Right Hon. Gentleman's supporters were told,
that if the measures of the Right Hon. Gentleman were not car-
ried, they could not pass through Palace yard without meeting the
ghost of the late Government —(Hear, hear, and great laughter.)
It was by such argument that Gentlemen opposite were
induced to support the proposition. If such argu
ments were good for anything, they would be good
for another and a better change.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) If
such a change could be made, then the late Government would be
glad to remain in abeyance until it was carried through.—(Cheers
and laughter.) A gentleman in Liverpool had said that the (pies_
Lion at the general election was not whether the late Government
should remain in power, but whether the Right Hon. Baronet,
even under the auspices of the Duke of Buckingham, would be able
to form a Government.—( Cheers ) But he should not so much
complain of that course of electioneering policy, if he could see a
sound commercial principle introduced in legislating upon other
questions which at the present time were before the House,
—such as the law of marriage, &c. The object was avowed to b.
the removal of an evil. But in legislating upon this subject,
the argument was that corn ought not to be reduced so low
as 4s. a quarter; that it was horrible for food to be provide.:
from foreign countries in too great abundance. For Ilia part, it
was not his wish that corn should be at 545. or 565.•; but that
it should be at the lowest price at which it could be obtained
with due protection to the home producers of this commodity.
He would not have the farmer bring his corn to market loaded with
imp-rts, to which those of other countries were not subject. But,
he thought that, without lowering the remuneration to the farmer,
there would he a great increase of trade, and all the financial diffi-
culties we had to contend with would be overcome.—(Hear.)
He thougtot that with such an increase of trade, the landlords
themselves would greatly benefit.
S'r R. PEEL then rose to address the House amid much cheer-
ing. He must first offer his acknowledgments to the Noble Lord for
the liberal offer he had been good enough to make him of the Ss.
duty.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had said that he was perfectly
welcome to take possession of it,and that probably, if lie adopted it,
his Friends and supporters would be compelled to sanction it.
He would not adopt it because he totally disapproved of it. He
disapproved of it when in Opposition, and he disapproved of it now.
The Noble Lord was no doubt aware that he (Sir R. Peel) would,
in the present session, propose an alteration in the Corn-laws, and
he therefore need not taunt him with inconsistency in bringing
forward the measure he had done. If he (Sir R. Peel) had proposed
the Bs. duty, he could not defend it on the principles of the Noble
Lord, because he had told the House that he did not wish corn to
he lower in price than was consistent with justice to the agricul.
turists. Now, having made that statement, it was, in his (Sir R.
Peel's) opinicn, incumbent upon the Noble Lord to inform tie
House what he considered to be justice to the .agriculturists. He
apprehended that, in doing so, he would labour under pretty nearly
the same difficulty that he (Sir 11. Peel) laboured under, as he was
Lot aware of the distinction in principle between himself and the
Noble Lord. He had been blamed for stating that corn would
probably vary between 545. and 585., and the Noble Lord had said
that if he adopted his Bs. duty, he did not apprehend there
would be any material difference in the price of corn.
—(Hear.) In speaking of the present price of corn
he could not go along with the Noble Lord, because his opinion
was, that under his proposition a considerable reduction would
take place in the price of corn He (Sir IL Peel) should not have
thought it necessary to have adverted to the speech which he made
in bringing forward this measure if the Noble Lord had not taken
notice of it. Ho (Sir R. Peel) had been told that in bringing for-
ward this measure he had stated that he did not contemplate any
relief to commerce from it. Now, this was what he did state ; he
hail not cettrected it, but he must express his surprise at the fide-
lity with which reports had been falsely given in that
House. He found from the document he held in his hand
that he stated that when he brought forward the Corn-
laws that he ' found great attempts had been made
to create excitement by declaring that distress was attributable to

the present Government, the apparition would net be an uncem.
fortabla one.—(Cheers and laughter.) Would the Noble Lord,
when he made that offer, tell hint ? As he said before, when the

the Corn-laws. lie found that there was great distress, and that

Noble Lord made that offer, he was bequeathing to him (Sir Robert
I'eel) one of those legacies the late Government on their death bed
left to an admiring country. He did not tell him (Sir R. Peel) whe-
ther he meant the fixed duty of Ss., which was to be the amount
proposed by the late Government, whatever might be the
price of corn, in order to insure a permanence of commercial ar.
rangements, or whether it was a modification- of the fixed duty,
which it appeared the Noble Lord had proposed, in the course of the
xt Sesrion—the presant one, which adopted the average—for it
was necessary to the working of the system, and which provided that
when corn should arrive at 735. there should be a sudden drop in

the scale from Bs. to a nominal duty. Therefore the Noble Lotd,
when he made that offer, should distinctly explain the nature of it.
tie was saying whom he should have the misfortune that night of
having opposed to him, and w he were the advocates of a fixed duty.
All those who thought there ought to be a fixed duty as counter-

vailing the burthens on land; and those who were with the Noble
Lord, the Member for Tiverton, thought there ought to be a
bread tax upon foreign corn imported, not for the purpose
of protection but for revenue.—(Hear, hear.) Those who opposed
the Noble Lord, and were for a fixed duty of 55., and those Ho-

nourable Gentlemen opposite who opposed any duty whatever.
Then he was afraid he should be opposed by those who, differing
with him in the details of the measure because they thought that
proposhl endangered the prosperity of agriculture. Then he

efforts had Leen made to inflame the passions of the people with the

was afraid he should be opposed by some of the Hon. Gentlemen
ftom the sister kingdom—(Laughter) —who are the loudest advo-
cates of free trade, and who gave the support to the measures of a
Government when it was only the ghost of a free trade principle.
The Noble Lord had proposed a duty of 3s. 9.d. on oats, when the
price was at the highest, and yet his (Sir R. Peel's) measure was
considered inadequate, and pregnant with danger to the interest
of the grower ; at any rate, the protection he offered was prefer.
able to that of the Noble Lord. Now, he asked Hon. Gentlemen
entertaining these different opinions if they could agree with the
Noble Lord ? He did not think the Noble Lord
would vote willingly, for he knew that he was in
a minority. He thought the advocates of increased pro-
tection in Ireland, and those Gentlemen who thought that
there should be increased protection to wheat—although
they might think he did not go far enough, yet they
would see in the present state of parties, and the state of
the public mind, it was not possible that any increased protection
would give general satisfaction. If they found amongst the most
intelligent of the agricultural community an opinion that increased
protection could not be maintained, he hoped they would add
their influence, and that his Hon. Friends, if not agreeing in the
details of the measure, yet he hoped they would themselves give it
their support. The Noble Lord ridiculed the prejudices and ap.
prehensions of the agriculturists. Now the Noble Lord ought to
be sparing in his ridicule. He was perectly right. He ( Sir
Robert Peel) did not question his rigfit to com.
plain, but he ought to do it in a manly and
courageous manner on those men of more extended views. The
Noble Lord ought to have some mercy on the ignorant farmer who
had prejudices and apprehensions as to agricultural affairs, because
if ever there was a public man who wrote in a manner calculated
to excite those apprehensions, that man was the Noble Lord.
The Right Hon. Member for Dungarvon was all for oats.—(An

cry of the Corn. laws, and that the distress in the great agricultural

Hon. Member on the Ministerial Benches here made a suggestion
to Sir R. Peel, which was understood to be to the effect that the

interests of the_ country was inflamed for the purpose of keeping

up the Corn-laws. Now the language which he made use of was
this, that he felt it to be his duty to declare, that he could not re-
commend the proposal he was about to make by stating that it
would tend materially to mitigate commercial distress; and the
Noble Lord stated that in that respect be took a view not

presei.t Member for Dungarvon was representative for Tipperary at
the time the Right Hon. Baronet alluded to.)—That was exactly so
(continued Sir Robert Peel); the Member for Tipperary was
then all for oats, and the Noble Lord (J. Russell), then
Member for Huntingdonshire, was all for wheat.
Other Hon. Members had their agricultural partialities,
and the maxim of each Hon. Gentleman would Eppear to have
been troque prior, to paree—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) What
would be the consequence if the measure then proposed by him
(Sir R. Peel) was rejected, he offered, immediately upon the passing
of it, a great mitigation in the amount and extent of distress at
present suffered throughout the country. Reject that Bill, what
other would be proposed. 'Was the Noble Lord opposite (Lord J.
Russell) able to propose or strong enough to carry out any other
measure ?—(Ldud cheers and counter cheers.) Was there any
other party able or strong enough to carry out a
better measure than that now before the House ?—(Cheers.) No,
—the only result, if it was attempted, would be that the question
might remain the subject of long discussion ; that it would dis-
turb that connexion which should subsist between landlord and
tenant, making it impossible for any man to know what were the
circumstances in which he was placed. Upon the whole he be.
lieved that the measure he proposed was as large as any man
could propose. He believed that the agriculturists of the country
were anxious for the passing of that Bill; and that they were
anxious for a practical proof of the working of it.—(Hear.)
That being the case, although he could not anticipate the support
of Hon. Gentlemen opposite, ha did hope that the Bill would have
the support of a majority of that House ou the present and future
readings.—(Cheers.)
Sir CHARLES NAPIER rose amidst loud cries of " Divide,
divide," and gave way for
Lord WORSLEY, who addressed the House in a very inaudible
tone of voice, said he would not have hesitated to give way to the
Right lion. Baronet, but that he was anxious to move for the ad.
journment. He (Lord Worsley) might have adopted the Caine
course last year, but he felt that he should no'. have been acting as
an independent Member of Parliament if he voted for the Inca.
sure proposed by her Majesty's Government. He was afterwards
called inconsistent, because he recerded his vote to express confidence
in the Government, and when he was asked by his constituents if
he would withdraw his confidence from the then Government, he
said he would not, because, from what lie knew of the political
conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet, he could not be depended upon.
It might be said now that the House had pledged itself to inquire
into the subject of the Corn.laws ; but who made that pledge?
There was an amendment to the address, moved by the Right
Hon. Baronet. It stated a willingnesl to inquire into the subject
of the Corn-laws. It was moved by the Hon. Member who before
objected to the measure proposed by her Majesty's Government,
and, with the single exception of the Right Hon. Baronet, those
who opposed that measure did so on the ground that there shou'd
be no alteration in the Corn-laws. This Bill, in his (Lord Won-
ley's) opidion, was not calculated to promote the interests of the
agriculturists, and he did not think that the manufacturers con-
sidered it as contributing twards their welfare; and then it could
not be denied, and it was the general feeling throughout the
country, that this would not be a final measure. But the Right Hon•
Baronet said that the country was equally wining with
himself to adopt this measure ; but that was only because the
country knew that the Right Honourable Baronet had power to
carry any measure he brought forward. He (Lord Worsley)
did toot think that the Government of the country showed
that Interest in its welfare which had hitherto characterised
its proceedings. It had been said that if Gentlemen
could not agree to the measure of the Right Honourable
Baronet, they must either take the fixed duty, or revert to the old
law. He (Lord Worsley) wanted to ensure a plentiful supply of
corn in this country, but unless they put on such a duty as would
prevent corn coming in when there was plenty at home, they would
be doing that which, whilst of little benefit to the consumer, would
greatly injure the honest grower of corn at home.—(Hear, hear,
hear.) He had received a letter from a gentleman at
Manchester, recommending this Bill on two grounds—first,
because it would lower the price of corn on the Continent, and
secondly, because it would not secure a regular supply here; but
these were the very grounds on which he (Lord Worsley) thought
this Bill ought to be opposed, because if it were enacted, and if
such were to be the results, much of the land in England
now employed in agriculture, would go out of 'cultivation, and
the agricultural labourers suffering in consequence, would be
driven to the manufacturing districts, and universal distress must
ensue. The Noble Lord concluded by withdrawing his motion.
The SPEAKER having put the question,
Sir C. NAPIER said that he wished to observe, in reference to
the papers for which he had moved the other evening, in the pas.
age from Liverpool to America and back, fifty-one days would
elapse before the merchant's order for corn could be executed;
why, then, he wanted to know, should not the duty be paid accord-
ing to price that existed when it was shipped.—(Cries of " Divide,
divide."
The House then divided, when there appeared._
For the second reading
Against it
Majority for the second reading .
RAILWAYS BILL.
,This Bill went through Committee, pro forma, and is to be
taken into consideration on Monday. To be reprinted In the mean
time.
The Orders of the Day were then proceeded with, and the House
adjourned at Two o'Clock

materi .11y diftient from his (Sir 11. Peel's). He then went on
to say that he thought lie should prlctice a delusion if he stated
that if an alurmion in the Corn.laws he proposed would make a
material alteration in commercial distress. He then added that
he admitted the existence of commercial distress, and deplored the
sufferings occasioned by it, yet he felt bound to declare that he
could not attribute that distress to the extent to which it was sup-
posed by some to be caused by the operation of the Corn-laws'.
Such was the statement he made, and he adhered to it. He
thought that the eff'ect of the Corn.laws had been greatly exaggerated.
He stated that there wire many other causes of the distress, but
that he did not despond. That was one of the misrepresentations
which, in the course of ten nights' debate, had been made
with respect to what had been stated.—(Hear, hear.) It was
said that he had brought forward the measure without the

- 104

JACK CADE.—A work under the title of " London
Legends," has just appeared, and a more attractive
title could scarcely have been selected—for where is
there one that gives promise of greater variety, or appeals
to the sympathies of a larger class of readers? Not a public
building of any note—hardl , indeed, even a street—in
ancient London, but has some interesting legend attazhed
to it. Southwark is pecu iarly rich in this respect ;it was
there the notorious Jack Cade took up his head quarters, and
kept the city in state of constant alarm by his insurrectionary
movements ; arid there, too. Ilenry the Eighth indulged in
some sit* his ma'ldeet freaks. 'I he author of " Loudon Legends"
has, we understand, given a most graphic portrait of the rabble_
leader, Cade, and described all the horrors of his insurrection,
with a minuteness and tnergy unsurpassed even by Walter
Scott in his account d the exce,ses committed by " the Wild
Boar of Ardennes," William tie la Marck. Nor has he done
less justice to the wi!d vagaries of "Bluff Hal," whose noctur-
nal adventure, in disguise, are described with not less humour
than spirit. The reader of romantic fiction will find a rich
treat in " Loudon Legends."
OFFICIAL POSTPONEMENT OF TIIE EARTHQUAKE.
—Yesterday Messrs. Blaby and Ellis, the ushers of the Thames
Police Court, received a letter b, aring the seal of the Police
Commissioners, and enclosing a printed notice decorated with
the Royal arms, which they handed to Mr. Broderip, the
Magistrate, who laughed heartily at the joke. The letter was
to the following effect :—" Commissioners of Police-office,
Great Scotland-yard, March 8, 1842. Gentlemen,—l am di-
rected by the Commissioners to request that you will affix the
enclosed notice in the office, that it may be as serviceable as
possible to the subjects of her Most Gracious Majesty the
Queen. cry order, R. Ellerby, clerk. To Messrs. Blaby and
Ellis." The notice, which was printed in large type, was as
follows :—" Important News to the Public.—The earthquake,
which was to have taken place on the 17th of this month, is
put off till the 25th. By authority."

-.—
slightest hope that it would do any good. Then with respect to
importation of corn, the Noble Lord had said that he (Sir R.
Peel) had taken a practical instance with respect to the imports
from the United States. He admitted that he did take an instance

of imports from the United States for a short period, and the Gal-
lant Commodore, the Member for Marylebone, wished to have same
information with respect to the period which vessels took in coming
from New York to Liverpool. Now he (Sir R. Peel) had an ac-
count of thirty vessels that sailed from New York in 1841, and the
average duration of each voyage was twenty-three days. Now if
that was the case—if they permitted, by an alteration of the duty,
a. more regular trade in corn than under the existing law, he thought
It would appear clear that the United States was not placed at