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

Fusion, and with the most grave solemnity to support the pro-
section as it was.—( Cheers.) In the course of the elections
the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Govern-
sent, in addressing his constituents at Tamworth, said that he
deprecated a struggle in this question of the Corn .laws, be-
cause he believed, w th Lord Melbourne, that the advantages
sould not be equal to the risk, and he asked for their free
suffrages on that frank and.expliett declaration."—( Cheet s. )
Frank and explicit !—(Laughter.) Why, he never read a
sentence less explicit in his life.--( Cheers and a laugh.) What
was the advantage to which the Right Hon. Baronet alluded?
If it was the advantage of altering or amending the present
laws, then his intention was utterly inconsistent with all his
known and recorded opinions.—( Opposition cheers.) What
was the risk which the Right Hon Baronet apprehended. with
an immense and overwhelming majority in both Houses of Par-
liament, ready to support the interests of British agriculture ?
ft would have been convenient if the Right Hon. Baronet
had been a little more frank on the occasion ; he need not
have told his constituents whether there were to be one rest, or
two rests, or three rests, bat he might have hinted that the
effect of this Bill would be to cause a considerable decrease of
protection, and that the impartation of cattle would be per-
ted. The effect of that would have been that the Right Hon.
:;aronet would have been save-1 much time, expense. arid
rouble, and his colleagues, and himself would have been spared
he anxiety and trouble of office.—( Hear, hear.) He t Earl
tanhopel was not surprised at this. because he saw very plainly,
!nag before the cl se. of the last. Parliament. indications that
there vt ere to be considerable alterations in this law.
Earl RIPON —Just now you said there were not.

Earl STANHOPE said, tliat he said there was no expressed
determination. He was not surprised, he repeated; but the
-exult had been that, instead of allaying the popular clamour,
every possible excitement had been ad .ed to it. Great distrust
and discontent had been excited amongst the agriculturists ;
and the Minister who proposed this plan had lost, and for ever,
the confidence of the great majority of the agriculturists, who
might still, however, continue to support him either through
feelings of respect, or for a desire to exclude
the opposition from power.—(Loud cheers and laughter.) He
would consign them to the castigation they wuld receive front
those whose interests they had betrayed.---( Hear, hear.) He
would now proceed to the consideration of the question before
them. It was obvious that every Corn-law must proceed on
the consideration and comparison of the prices at which corn
could be imported into this country, and at which it could be
grown in it. It had been mowed that no satisfactory informa-
tion bad been obtained on the subject, but that information
could be obtained by means of a Parliamentary inquiry, and
'mai such had been obtained, no measure on the subject ought
to be introduced. There was a singular misapprehension in
regard to the price at which corn could he produced abroad.
It was supposed that because the seasons of late years had been
unusually unfavourable, and the price, high on the Conti-
nent, as well as in this country, that those prices were to be
taken as the ordinary price of the country. As far as he was
aware, there was no inquiry since the year 1827. According to
the return of the Consuls then, the average price in 182.5,
in the North of Europe, in Copenhagen, Bremen, Ham-
burgh, Rotterdan:, and Antwerp, was eighteen shillings and
sevenpence ; and in the year 18fl6 he presented a petition
from the Agricultural Society of Holdernesse, which stated
that good wheat in bond was sold at Hull at 245. a quarter, In
the year 1836 it was stated, by an eminent corn-factor, that he
purchased fine wheat for 265. or 285., and that corresponded
with the opinion very recently given by two corn-factors of
Liverpool, who stated that the effect of a present Corn-law,
after one or two favourable seasons, would be to reduce the
average prise to 48s. or 465. He could refer to a letter, written
on the 26th of May, by one whom the Noble Lord would admit
to be an authority, to the effect that corn had been imported
into Liverpool, and other ports, and freely entered, and that,
• having paid a duty of 225. a quarter, it had left a fair profit to
the speculator. Now this Bill proposed to reduce that duty to
is., and yet he was told it would do no injury to the agricul-
turist. With such a price it would be impossible to maintain a
orice of 565. for wheat, nor perhaps even 50s. He could show
that, in a part of Buckinghamshire, anti not the worst part, the
rent alone could not be paid out of a less price than
50s. He would not say, that whatever might be the
effect of the present Bill, the land would be thrown out of.cul-
tivation ; but he did say that the effect would be to break the
existing frame of society, the destruction of public and private
Tedit, and, in the end, national bankruptcy. His Noble
Friend (Earl Ripon) had said that the present protection was
extravagantly high, and might without inconvenience be dimi-
nished. His Noble Friend had not adduced even a shadow of
proof in support of that assertion. In the year 1828, when the
present law was passed, it would be proper to argue that a
lower rate of proteetion than that given by the law of 1815 was
wanted, because at the former period that most destructive
end pernicious of measures, known as Peel's Bill, came into
operation. The late Mr. Ricardo had said that after that mea-
sure the fall in the price of corn would be three or five per
cent. ; but the fall was now thirty or fifty per cent., and could
ho (Earl Stanhope) have foreseen 'such would be the case, no
power on earth could have induced him to support the measure.
No Corn-laws could raise the price of corn while there was a
currency that kept it low. In the years 1834-5-6, the prices
of corn were 395. 6d. and 445. Bd., which no man in his senses
could suppose was a remunerating price. TheNobleEarl (Ripon)
said that a free trace in corn would be a very good thing if it
was practicable. Now he Would say to the Noble Lord in the
language of Holy Writ, "Out of thine own mouth will I con-
demn thee."—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) In the beginning
of the Session in 1825—(and he wished that this Session and
every other since had eommeneett with such auspices)—the
Noble Earl advised his late Majesty George the Fourth to
congratulate the House on the unexampled prosperity and
happiness of all classes of the people of this empire.—
( Cries of " Hear, hear.") But in that year, and in the one
preceding, the price of corn had been 625. a quarter.
The statute of Charles 11., passed professedly for the protection
of agriculture, enacted, that when the price of wheat was 555.,
the duty should be 16s. 6d. ; and the duty by the present law,
and for the last century, was 17s. ; and now, notwithstanding
the enormous unparalleled distress which prevailed, the duty
was only Ws. 6d. per quarter. He would ask Noble Lords to
give a frank answer to this question, " It hether, under the ope-
ration of this law, they did or did not expect a large or small
importation ; and whether they expected a large or small re-
duction of price?" In either case he was ready to argue with
them. I! they expected a small importation, a small reduction
of price, where was the benefit to the consumer? If they ex-
pected a large importation, which might be very profitable to
the revenue, and acceptable in that depressed state in which it
now was, had they considered at all the etl',,et which must neces-
sarily be produced, not only on agriculture, but on all branches
of productive industry, all of whom had one common interest
in preventing the competition of foreigners in the home market?
If much corn were importec4a great quantity of specie would leave
this country, and in favour of this view he had the evidence of
those who were in favour of free trade in corn, who considered
it as " a consummation most devoutly to be wi.hed for," that
money must be used in great quantities for the purchase (Scorn.
The effect of this exportation of specie would be that the Bank
of England would stop payment. It was true that the supplies
of wheat from Ireland had been diminished, but what we had
lost in corn we had gained in cattle from that country. The
farmers were advised to accept this Bill on the principle that
half a loaf was better than no bread. But who would say that
the present measure would be final? Why, the Secretary for
the Home Department himself had assured the public that this
was not to be considered as a final measure.—( Hear, hear.)
Then he (Lord Stanhope) would not agree now to a commuta-
tion of the sentence on the farmers.—( Laughtest ) He would
say, " No surrender," in common with a Noble Duke, who, when
patriotism and devotion to the public service were almost ex-
tinct in this country—( Laughter )—showed an eminent example
of both, by abandoning power and place when they were crip-
pling the influence he knew ought to be exerted forthe benefit
of the community. Offer free trade in manufactures, and
those who cried out for free trade in corn, would soon
be scattered to the winds and annihilated. The farmers
must not be sacrificed. It mattered not to him whether he
was to have a Whig or a Tory Executive.—( Laughter.) It
had been truly said that it mattered not to the farmer whether
he were put out of the world by an axe or a guillotine. In
like manner the Noble Earl cared not whether the instruments
were to be a vli ling scale or a fixed duty.—(Great laughter.)
If the present head of the Government were in opposition, he
might be able to do what he did before—to stop the influence of
bad measures ; but he was grieved to see that nothing but mis-
chievous measures had been proposed—the Corn-law, the new
tariff, and the Income-tax, which he would oppose. The
people were silent, but he might say dam silent clamant. He
might say, and he was speaking not unadvisedly, that the si-
lence proceeded from the conviction that they were only at
" the beginning of the end," to use the words of Talleyrand ;
the signs of the times were written in such large and legible
characters, that " those who run may read." He begged to
warn their Lordships of the inevitable consequences that must
ensue from the system pursued by Tory, NVhig, and Conser-
vative Governments. The "end" was not far distant, and
would be accelerated by the measures which the Government
proposed. He entreated their Lordships to consider, even at the
twelfth hour, whether, if their Lordships were condemned as " the
tree bearing bad fruit," they might not be " cut shown, and cast
into the fire"—whether, if their duty consisted in registering
edicts, the Acts of the Commonwealth may not be renewed—be
voted useless and abolished. The first French Revolution
would afford but a faint outline of the proscriptions and couds-
cations that would take place. Seeking for himself no favour
from any Government, he thought it right to warn them, and
he would move that the word " now" be omitted, and that the
Bill be read that day six months.

Lord HARDWI6KE felt himself inadequate to do justice to
the subject before the House, and he would address their Lord.
ships but for the purpose of justifying the vote which he should
give to-night upon the question. He was not one of those who
supported the measure merely because he feared that if he did
not do so they would tend to overthrow the present Government.
He certainly should deplore such an occurrence as the restora-
tion to power of the Noble Lords opposite, as he had understood
not merely from themselves, but from their supporters in de-
mocracy, that they were unable to cenKluct the Government of
the country in the manner in which they most wished. The
Noble Lord who had just sat down had stated his intention of
adhering, in his address to the House, to the question before
their Lordships ; but, instead of doing so, the Noble Lord
had travelled out of his way to assail the Right Hon. Gentle-
tlernan the Prime Minister of the country, having accused
that distinguished individual of deceiving the people of this
country upon the present question.
Earl STANHOPE explained that he had not intended to
make what was called an attack on the Right lion. Baronet
at the head of her Majesty's . Government. However, his
(Earl Stanhope's) observations might have been interpreted
both ways.—( Laughter.) That Right lion. Gentleman had
given reason for the belief that he was a zealous supporter of
the Corn-laws, and he (Earl Stanhope) would leave it to his
Noble Friend to say whether he was a zealous supporter of
them or not.

The Earl of HARDWICKE defended Sir R. Peel from the
charge of deception, and said that for his own part he would
not support the measure if he were not perfectly convinced
that it would have no effect in deteriorating agricultural pro-
dueo.—( Repeated cheers and laughter on the Opposition
benches.) What ! would any man suppose that he would sup-
port the measure, if he thought it would have that effect ?
( Renewed cheers and laughter.) Their Lordships might re-
ject that Bill, but they could not prevent an alteration of the
press nt law atter the decision of the House of Commons and
the majority of the nation. Ile was sure that the change
would not depreciate agriculture, because, although the rate
had been changed twenty-six times since the year
1560, and the duty had varied from 2s. to 305.,
the average price in that long period was 51s. Id.
The existing Bill protected the farmers amply. The Bill pro-
posed only took away the surplus protection, which could be of
no use to them—(Laughter)—for they could still sell cheaper
than the speculator importing from Dant ate, paying duty ,and also
tir unloading, carting, and re-dressing. the protection for
barley would be also sufficient. He would therefore support
the Bill, because he believed it would give a fair protection to
the agrteulturist; but he would oppose an Ss. fixed duty, be-
cause he believed it would not be testable in hard seasons. He
considered the additional towns for taking the averages was a
great improvement. With regard to the pith of the measure
Ite said all he intended. With regard to the opinion out of
doors, which had been alluded to by the Noble Earl, he (Lord
Ilardwickc) would challenge him to prove them. No pro-
tection was given by the speech of the Noble Earl, and the
present Government were so opposed to all class legislation,
and so anxious to promote the general welfare of all, that the
people of this country could not doubt that their best interests
would be preserved. Ho believed the people of this country
were honest and loyal enough to appreciate the value of the
present Government, who set aside all class interests and
looked alone to the general welfare of the people.—( Cheers. )
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said he agreed with what
had fallen from the Noble Ear! who commenced
the deba:e, that this was the most important que:.

tion which could come under the consideration of the
House. lie was anxious thus early to state the course he
meant to pursue, as no alterations could be made in Com-
mittee. The question was, whether the Bill was to be read
now or this day six months. Ho confessed he looked en the
Bill with deep feeling of alarm, and without attributing any
motives, the Bill, in his judgment, is calculated to do harm to
the agricultural interest. The progress which agriculture had
made for the last hay years they must all be rejoiced to see;
but if it appeared that by this Bill the farmer was not pro-
tected, the effect would be that our fields world go Lut of the
high state of cultivation in which they had hitherto been up-
held by the system of Corn-laws. He must say, also, that he
looked with alarm on this Bill, because it afforded an oppor-
tunity for the foreign farmer to compete with the farmers at
home. In what state would this country be if the English
farmer were compelled to give up his tillage ? The bright sun
of this country's glory would be set. He was told that this
Bill would not satisfy the Opposition, and he could say, on be-
half of a large portion of the agricultural interest, that it would
not satisfy thern.—( Hear.) He felt that there was not suffi-
cient protection given to agriculture, and on this ground he
should support the measure of his Noble Friend ( Earl Stan-
hope). He regretted some of the remarks which had been
made by his Noble Friend, but he agreed with him that suffi-
c.ent protection was not given to the farmer. If they passed
this Bill, it might be too late to retrace their steps, and, acting
upon his feelings, a? the friend of the farmer, he could not but
view this measure with the greatest alarm. His Noble Friend
who had just sat down had attempted to prove that. this mea-
sure woa'd be beneficial alike to the farmer. and himself ;
but how could that be, when under the present law (he
foreign farmer could not come in under 68s. or 695., but by
the lew law they could come in at 585.? Ile adhered to
the opinions he had given and to the statements he had for-
merly made on this question, and he should now give his most
cordial support to the proposition for reading this Bill again
this day six months, because he believed it would be in-
jurious to the farmer, to the consumer, and crippling to the
agriculturist.
The Earl of. WINCHILSEA said he was prepared
to contend that the frequent agitation which had taken
place during the last three years in and out of Parliament
had been productive of the greatest evils. On this question the
great body of the labouring classes were quite unfit and unpre-
pared to give an opinion ; they were unable to grasp it in all
its bearings, and to look with justice on this protection which
the Legislature of this country had su wisely given to domestic
agriculture. Those, however, who knew better, were aware of
the evils of fluctuating prices, and would prevent them, as far
as human means couid prevent them. 'I hese discussions had
shaken the confidence of the great body of the agriculturists,
and had
i also stopped, in a great degree, those great improve-
ments n agriculture which were about to be carried on. He
alluded more especially to the system of di airings) and manur-
ing. He was one who was prepared to state that, if during the
next 15 years the same improvements should take 'place in
agriculture as had taken place during the last 15 years, the in-
crease in the produce would equal the increase of the popula-
tion, and he believed that Great Britain, instead of being an
importing, would be an exporting country. Unless this Bill
were pass•ad, the land would not be able to bear the peculiar
burdens which pressed upon it, such as maintaining the poor and
preserving the peace. He agreed with the Noble Earl that a
fixed duty was a perfect fallacy in the way of protection, for if
wheat was very low, of what use would it be ; or if it rose to
585., 605., or ',Os., what Government would endeavour io en-
force it ? The Government • had now, in this measure, main-
tained the principle of the existing law, and the Hight lion.
Gentleman had redeemed his pledge that he would maintain
the principles of the existing Corn-law. Ile did nut apprehend
that the agricultural interest, with respect to wheat, would re-
ceive any injury in the reduction of the scale of ditties.—( Hear,
hear.) He ever viewed this question, not with reference to
agricultural interest, but in reference to the general interests of
the great mass of the labouring classes.—( Hear, hear.) He
trusted that this measure would insure to the great body of the
people bread at the lowest price they could afford fo give it.
He was sorry that the Noble Lord had spoken so strongly with
regard to Honourable Gentlemen in the other House, because
he was sure whate%ste steps they hail taken were for the
general welfare of manufactures, commerce, and agriculture.
For these reasons he should give his support to the measure of her
Majesty's Government, and he hoped it would be productive of
those benefits which he believed would result froni them.

Lord WESTERN said he had listened with great attention
to the remarks which had fallen from the mover of the second
reading of the Bill, who had so deprecated the fixed duty that
it really almost became a question whether they should not
be acting right in doing away with the fixed duty and the
sliding scale too.—(clear.) If this Bill were to pass, pro-
tection would be taken away from the agriculturist, and the
weight of this would fall upon the labouring (asses. For this
reason he felt called upon to support the motion of the Noble Earl
( Starihope). The agriculturists thought the country were of opi-
ion that the present Government, when it came in, would.
support the agricultural interest ; and though he would not say
how that impression was occasioned, yet he would say there
was a great disappointment felt, and he was one of those who
had to complain of having been disappointed. The only occa-
sion on e. hieh he had withdrawn his :upport from his Noble
Friend (Lord Melbourne) was when the Noble Viscount's Go-
vernment proposed a measure which he thought would be fatal
to agricultui e. But he would not be deceived again. —( Cheers. )
Every Conservative gentleman through out the counts y expected
that the present Government would maintain the Corn-laws.
The Government had lost the confidence of the country, and the
people in the agricultural districts would rather have the Whigs
and open ports.—( Hear, hear)—than have such a measure as
the present carried into effect by the present Ministers. If it
were not for the state of our monetary system, British agricul-
ture would be able to contend with all the countries in the
world. But then the monetary system had prostrated the
commerce and manufactures of the country, which were the
real causes of the greatness of England.—(Cheers.) The
violent contraction of the currency since 1837 was the cause of
the present depression--( Hear, hear. ). In consequence of
that contraction, there was not less than forty millions lost to
the country. and the loss since that, in every year, was to be
counted by tens of millions. —( Hear.) The blame lay with
the management of the bank which contracted the currency and
threw down prices for the purpose of keeping up the price of
bank stock. He thmgl.t that the prosperity of commerce and
manufacture was the best source of prosperity to agriculture.
But this country never could prosper whilst the present mo.
netary system was continued. He wished that subject could
be brought before the House fairly, and be fully discussed. Ile
would be happy if the present state of the country would allow
the Legislature to satisfy the wishes of the people by throwing
open the trade in corn, but it was impossible to do so without
an amendment r.f the currency.

Lord FITZGERALD said that any one who heard the
forcible appeal of the Noble Lord on the depressed state of
our commerce and manufactures, to which, as he justly
said, the country owed its greatness, would suppose that he
was certainly not going to vote for the motion of
the Noble Earl (Earl Stanhope).—( Hear, hear, hear. )
The Noble Baron bad explained that the deception of which he
complained the other night was not deception on the part of
others, but misapprehension on his own. His (Lord Fitzge-
rald's) Noble Friends behind him did not separate themselves
from the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her
Majesty's Government. Had the principle of protection been
abandoned?—(" Hear, hear,' from the Duke of Wellington.)
,
Would they not, before the close of the next twenty-four hours,
agree that the protection was maintained too high ?—( Hear. )
Was it not known before the close of the last Session of Parlia-
ment, that it was intended to make a considerable alteration of
the present lave ?—( Hear.) In the last Session of Parliament
the Right Hen. Baronet was arraigned by the Member for the
Tower Hamlets ( Sir W. Clay) with having said that he would not
alter the figures of the scale in the schedule for the protection of
corn. Sir Robert Peel on that occasion distinctly de-
clared that he was not pledged to maintain the scale with
the same figures, but he would adhere to a liberal pro-
tection for agriculture. The Noble Lord then read other
extracts from speeches of Sir R. Peel to the same effect.
He (the Noble Lord) had not heard any argument against the
Bill, except from those who wished to maintain the present
law. All they said was, that it would adequately protect agri-
culture ; but this objection was already disposed of. He would
not proceed further, nor should he have spoken so much, had
it not been that he felt obliged to censure the language of tile
Noble Earl against that man, than whom done had ever pos-
sessed in a greater degree the confidence of his Sovereign and
his country, and who would be the last person in the commu-
nity to introduce a political measure for the party and per-
sonal objects most unjustly attributed to him by the Noble
Earl.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord BEAUMONT opposed the Bill, and alluded to the
meetings is Lincolnshire, Essex, and Berkshire, as a proof of
the general feeling of the agriculturists against the measure.
The Bill would show that the first act of the Government was to
amputate the right arm of those who had raised them to power.
He thought they could not compete with the cheap labour of
the Continent, and would not be able to meet them in the
market. Then, in case of a war, what would be the conse-
quence? They would be like an army without a commissariat
if they depended on foreigners for their supply. He would,
therefore, lay down the broad principle, that on this account
they ought not to alter the law. They acted on this principle
of not depending on foreigners in former times, and the con-.
sequences were, that waste after waste was reclaimed, and a
large part of the country was brought under cultivation. It
was said that the manufactures of the country would be
taken in exchange for corn, but the manufacturers themselves
knew that the best customers they . had ...ere the agricultu-
rists. But was it a fact that other countries would take
their manufactures? He thought there was no ground for
coming to such a conclusion.' What was the fact ? There
was Russia, who imported a great deal less from this country
than they did from Russia. Would Prussia, or rather would
the League, take their manufactures ? He thought not. Neither
would France. No, she would not ; and, in fact, it was natural
that that should be the case. The Noble Lord went on to
argue that tho cause of the distress of the country was attri-
butable to the commercial operation of Joint-rock Banks
and the increase of machinery, and concluded by saying, that
taking the whole, or, as he might eall them, the bouquet of
measures presented to them by the Covet nment, he considered
them manly, straightforward, and impartial.—(Cheers.)
Lord BROUGHAM said that he would not occupy
much of their Lordships' time, but it was obvious that
it was difficult for those Noble Lords who differed
both from the Bill brought in by the Noble Lord, and
the amendment proposed by the Noble Earl, 'to decide
what course they were to adopt. The Noble Earl avowed his
complete, entire, and uncompromising hostility to the measure ;
and in what position was he (Lord Brougham) placed, who slid
not altogether agree with either of the Noble Lords? Ile was
reduced to the alternative of either wholly adopting the measure
of the Noble Lord, or the amendmett of the Noble Earl. He
considered the Bill proposed a considerable change in the right
direction, and he approved of it, by comparison with the ex-
isting law. Ile considered it an improvement—he would not
exaggerate—he did not consider it a great improvement, but yet
a considerable one, in the existing law, and he would tell their
Lordships presently why he so considered it. Upon the whole,
therefore, he was favourable to the existing law.—( Hear. )
But it did riot go tar enough, and he would, therefore, move, by
way of amendment to the amendment of the Noble Earl,
that which he considered to be the assertion of the right princie
ple of legislation on the subject, namely, a total and absolute
repeal of the Corn-law._( Hear, fleas.) He would now state
how far the present Bill was an improvement on the existing
law. He did not think, that bete eon the two ex' remss in the
prices, the alteration was material. It did rot appear to him
to he a matter of much consequence that the duty of 201. was
substituted for the duty of 36a. ; and the reason was obvious,
because, whatever the price of wheat WAS abroad, whether it was
455. 6d. or 405., besides the freight, the duty of 203. would be
as effectual in excluding, foreign wheat as the present duty of
365. The effect was precisely the same if they took the highest
price with the lowest duty, because the duty was the same. But
the advantage of the proposed scale over the present was
when the price was from 535. and 545. to tl4s. and 655. The
Noble Lord then quoted the existing law, and went ors to show
how the present proposed scale was superior to the existing
one. For those reasons, he thought that there-vas e consider-
able improvement in the proposed measure as compared with
the existing law. He was also ready to admit that the change
had another advantage. To a certain degree the trafficking
and jobbing in the averages would be less frequssnt, and that
the temptations to such would be diminished, Upon the last
of the material change. which the proposed measures would
introduce, he was by no means certain that it, namely, the ad-
dition of 150 towns to those in which the ave ages were
taken, would have the effect expected from it.
He was very apprehensive that it would have a prejudicial
effect, because, generally, those towns were in out-lying dis-
tricts, at a distance from the great internal corn marts. To
carry corn from those districts to the corn marts yesuld impose
an additional expense, and consequently the grain, thus car-
ried a distance, would sell higher in those central places. Ac-

cordingly, if they added all those,l'eiii-ote places to the present
number, the result, if grain was cheaper in the cut-lying dis-
tricts than in the central places, would be. that the lowering
of the whole of the averages, two or three shillings more than
they now are, Would be confined. as they were, to the central
districts. The consequence of ail this would be, that the point
of importation would be postponed. It would become more
difficult, by thus lowering the averages, to get at the point at
which our por's were opened. His Noble Friend opposite
thought differently. It was possible that he (Lord Brougham)
might be wrong. But some steps might he taken, some colla-
teral provision made, whereby, after the experiment consequent
on the passing into law of the proposed measure, they might be
enabled to ascertain the effect of adding the 150 towns ; and if
his (Lord Brougham's) apprehensions were verified, they
could then strike out those towns from the Act. For
the reasons he had thus stated, he was strongly inclined to
prefer the proposed measure to the present law. lie wished
to see the trade in corn thrown entirely open. It would be
the safest course for all interests concerned. Yet as the pro-
poied scheme was a modification of the evils of the present sys-
tem, he was prepai ett to support it. He should prefer sup-
porting the motion of his Noble Friend (Lord Melbourne).
He did not concur with those who thought the proposed mea-
sure a final one; but it was preferable to the existing law, as
Was a step on the right side. The best argument in
favour of a filial measure on the subject was the
great uncertainty which resulted from the present Corn-laws,
and the unwillingness consequent upon it of capitalists to in-
vest their capital in dui purchase of land. In the island of
Jersey or Guernsey, or some o' the Channel Islands, there was
no, Corn-law. The average price of wheat, during 10 years in
that island, was 51s. and some odd pence. During the same
period the avorage price in this country, with a Corn-law,
was ether 57s or isBs., a difference of about 14 or 15 per
cent. The effect of throwing open the trade would cheapen the
price of corn by about 2s. or 3s. per quarter, but not more. The
opinion of a Noble Lord who was connected with the county of
NOrthampton (Earl Spencer), and who bad given much
attention to the subject, was, that the total repeal
of. the Corn-laws would not have any effect in lowering the
price of corn. Why, then, it might be asked, was it sought
to have the Corn-laws repealed? For this reason—it would
have a most beneficial effect on the agricultural interest of the
country, by encouraging commerc. , and restoring manufacturing
as well as trading prosperity. It was for that reason the repeal
of the Corn laws was sought, and not for any material lowering
of the price of corn which would result from it. No consider-
able increase would take place in the quantity of corn grown
in any country, unless more land vrs brought into cultivation.
and in a country perfectly civilised ; in such countries as
the upper parts of the Ukraine, and the more remote parts of
Russia, where the soil was covered with forest and heath, and
where much skill and labour would bo expended before the
land could be brought into cultivation—in such countries they
would not bring more land into cultivation merely by
creating a fixed duty, instead of one according to a sliding
scale—not by throw* open their ports.—( Hear. )
He did not mean to say that their improving their com-
mercial intercourse would not be of great benefit to them.
God forbid that they should not do so ; it would be
of great benefit both to them and to us; but he
did not believe dia• any great importation into this coun-
try would f.,110w. Their population would increase, their con-
dition would improve, and as their condition and circum-
stances improved, they would desire an improvement in their
fare. If their Lordships wished any proof in support of this
assertion lie would refer them to Ireland. In the ears from
1834 to 1/336 the quantity of wheat exported from Ireland to
us was 761,05:0 quarters, and now that, quantity was reduced
to 216,000 quarters, acid he attributed this entirely to the im-
proved condition of our Irish fellow-subjects. They had heard
a painful reason assigned by a Noble Friend of his as to the cause
of the present distress. He said it was not owing to the state
of commerce or to agriculture, but to the state of the cur-
rency. Ile said this distress had existed since 1837, but only
since 1837? 'fhe standard wag restored 20 years before that,
and surely he did not suppose that the Bank of England had the
power to issue ona note more than was actually required by
commerce ; the moment the Bank over-issued, the note would
be returned to them ; and they had in fact no more power of
over-issuing than any private bank in the kingdom: Ilia
Noble Friend said .there was not a sufficient issue of bank
paper. Would his Noble Friend have an issue of assignats,
such as took place dui ing the French revolution, when, as he
had heard, 500,000 francs were paid for a pair of gloves ? He was
sorry to say that he believed his Noble Friend did agree with those
who were in favour of an unlimited issue of bank paper. He
thought the total repeal of the Corn-laws was the only measure
suited to the present exigencies of the country; if it were only
that it would settle this question even, and for ever, he thought
that would be a sufficient reason ; but that it would restore
the state of commerce to its original healthy condition, and re-
establish the advantageous footing in which we have hitherto
stood with foreign countries, he entertained no more doubt
than he did upon the clearest proposition. He had heard the
assertion made again to-night, that if the price of bread were
; low, wages would fall with it. Need he remind their
Lordships of the fallsey of this statement? Be the
price of provisions high or low, the wages of every man's
' labour must depend upon the amount which he has to bring
into the market, and the demand which the employers may have
for it. The more dicult it was to obtain food, the higher the
price of food—the greater the quantity of labour which the
working man must give for it. In America, where food was
! cheaper than in this country, in the proportion of 2s. to a dollar,
I labour was dearer in the proportion of a dollar to 2s. Then it
was answered, on the other side, that the lower rate of wages in
this country was occasioned by over population. But did not
that decide the question ? Was it not conclusive that the wages
of labour depended on the proportion of the demand to the
supply, and in nothing else'? Although he approved of this
measure, as contrasted with the former state of the law, yet
there was another measure which he preferred. He would
support the amendment, if he could not carry a further
amendment, which he would now propose—( Hear)—
to the effect that all the words after the word " that"
should be omitted for the purpose of inserting the following,—
" No duty on the importation of foreign corn of any de-
scription "

The Eirl of SHAFTESBURY said, that it was irregular to
propose any amendment, which involved a general proposition,
after an amendment.

After a discuslion upon the point of order, in which Lord
Kenyon, the Earl of Itiprn, and Lord Canterbury took part,
Lord BROUGHAM said that he had looked to cases in
which he found that it was the practice of both Houses of Par-
liament that the question trust be taken first upon the last
amendment.

Lord CANTERBURY said that the • usage of both
Houses was, that it should first be put that the words proposed
to be omitted should " stand part of the question."—( Hear. )
The LORD CHANCELLOR was then about to put, the
question, when
Earl FITZ WILLIAM was desirous to address a few words
to the House before their Lordships divided. He did not ap-
prove of the pi% sent Bill, but it carried in itself the seeds of
future amendment ; and it was also a most desirable successor,
to enable us to get rid of the existing cumbersome law.
Therefore he would vote for the second reading of the present
Bill, and, on the whole, he felt grateful to the Ali •
nistry that had ventured into the gap their predecessors
had opened for them. This Bill was a step in advance towards
a final settlement of the question, which was free trade in corn,
which, though not a protective system, would yet benefit the
revenue. Reserving to himself the right of future opposition,
he would vote for the motion.—(Question )

Lord MELBOURNE could not approve of the principles or
the provisions of the Bill, but he thought it to be a great im-
provement of the present law, an I therefore he should vote for
the second reading. He regarded it as an introduction to a
better measure, to be introduced hereafter.

The House then divided on the original motion, and Earl
Stanhope's amendment for the second reading that day six
months.

The numbers were—
Contents
Nan• Contents
Majority against Lord Stanhope's amendment —lO2
The House a eecond time divided on the original motion,
and Lord Brougham's amendment for the total repeal of the
Corn. laws. The numbers were—

Contents
Non-contents 5
Majority for the second reading — 104
The Dill gas then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed to-morrow.

Their Lordships immediately after adjourned, at a Quarter
past Twelve o'Clock.'

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 18.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes before Four
o'Clock.

LONGFORD ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Lord ASHLEY brought up the :report of the Felect Com-
mittee appointed to try the petition against the late return of
a Member to serve for the county of Longford in the pre•ent
Parliament. It stated that Luko White, Esq., was not duly
returned ; and that Antony Lefroy, Esq., was duly elected fur
that borough.

The Cljkt of the Crown was ordered to amend the return.
CARDIGAN ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Mr. IIA.II'ER brought up the Report of the Select Corn-
mittee, appoint( d to try the petition againet the late return of
a Meniber to represent the borough of Cardigan. The Re-
port was to the effect, that Pryce Pryee,, Esq., was not duly
elected to represent the. borough in the present Parliament, and
that J. Harford had been duly elected, and ought to have been
returned as a burgess to serve in the Parliament for the borough.
The Clerk of the Crown was ordered to amend the return.
IPSWICH ELECTION COMMITTEE.

Mr. PAKINGTON stated that, as the Chairman of the
Committee appointed to try the Ipswich Election petition, he
had been directed by the Committee to report to the House
that they had that day come to the following resolutions : " Re-
solved, that Obadiah Ltfcas has been wilfully guilty of giving false
evidence in his examination before the Committee ; Re-
solved that the said Obadiah Lucas be committed to the custody
of the Sergeant-at- Arms, to await the pleasure of the House."
He ( Mr. Pakington) then moved, pursuant to the Report of
the Committee, that Obadiah Lucas be, for the said offence,
committed to her Majesty's gaol of Newgate, till the House
may make a further order in his case, and that the Speaker
should issue his warrant accordingly.—Agreed to.
Mr. HARDY presented a petition from a place in the West
Riding of Yorkshire against the New Po,r-law Act, and pray-
ing for a re-enactment of the old measure.
Mr. BLACKSTONE presented a petition from a place in
Kent against 'he New Corn Bill (as we understood), and that
part of the tariff which related to the importation of foreign cattle.
Sir ROBERT BA TESON presented a petition from a
place in the county of Derry, against the system of National
Education in Ireland.

Lord DALMENY presented a petition from Stirling against
the Income-tax proposed by the Government.
Mr. W. PATTEN presented a petition from Manchester,
against the tariff.

-Mr. JOHNSTONE presented a petition from tho boot and
shoe makers of Gla•gow, against the importation of foreign
boots and shoes.

Mr. WAKLEY presented a similar petition from Not-
tingham.

COLLEGE OF MAYNOOTH.

Sir It. INGLIS presented a petition from a place in Glou-
cestershire, against the grant to Marmot/. College.

INCOME TAX.

Mr. SH ARM AN CRA W FORD presented a petition from
the inhabitants of Littleborough, parish of Rochdale, and its
vicinity. These petitioners state that they have patiently en-
dured the effects of class legislation ; that they consider it a
violation of the principles of the Constitution to enhance the
price of bread without increasing wages; that they view the
income tax as tinju,t in principle, and a tax upon producers,
and therefore pray your House to reject the measure.
A similar petition was presented by Mr. WA KLEY from St.
Austle, in Cornwall.

Air. BECKETT presented a petition, signed by fibs ot-
eitors of Leeds, praying for relief from the certificate duty as it
was equivalent to an income tax.

Mr: COL VILI.I,_: presented a similar petition from Derby.
Mr BA GG E presented a petition against the importation of
foreign cattle.

Mr. \VAKLEY presented a petition from Mr. John Bell
Brown, a surgeon, of Brighton, against the Brighton Small
Debts B►ll.

The lloN. MEMBER presented a petition from Mr. Stock-
dale, praying that declarations may in all cases be subst►tuted
fur oaths.

I%lr. MACK INNON presented ,a petition from an individual,
whose name did not reach U 3, praying that the heating and
ventilating the House of Commons might he given tnlitatt, as
he would do it at a cheaper rate than it is at present done.
Lord F. EGERTON presented a petition, signed by 1E3,000