The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-20 00:00:00

fiti ruin

LONDON, FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 1845.

The House of Lords met at Five o'clock.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL brought down her MAJESTY'S
answer to the address on the subject of the provision for
Sir H. POTTINGER, which was ordered to be entered on
the journals of the House.
The Schoolmasters (Scotland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Lord BROUGHAM brought in a new Bill to facilitate
the recovery of small debts, which was read a first time.

On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, a Select Committee
was appointed to search the Commons Journals on the
subject of the Common Law Process Bills.

The Archbishop of DUBLIN moved the second reading
of the Bishops Patronage (Ireland) Bill.

The motion was opposed by the Marquis of CLANRI-
CARDE and supported by the Earl of WicKLow, and, on
a division, was carried by a majority of 16, the
numbers being—for the second reading, 35 ; against
it, 19. The Bills on the table having been for, arded a
stage, their Lordships adjourned.

The House of Commons met at Four.
The Commons Enclosure and Drainage of Lands Bills
were read a second time.

Monday was fixed by Sir J. GRAHAM for the Com-
mittees on the Irish Colleges Bill.
The adjourned debate on the subject of New Zealand
was then resumed by Mr. ELLICE, who urged the Go-
vernment to state distinctly what was the course they
intended to pursue with regard to the Colony. fie was
decidedly opposed to any attempt to take it from the
Company.

The House was subsequently addressed by Mr. CARD.
WELL, Mr. MANGLES, Mr. COLQUHOUN, Mr. SHEIL,
Sir J. GRAHAM, Lord J. RUSSELL, and Sir R. PEEL,
when the House divided, and the resolutions were nega-
tived by a majority of .57.

But a few years ago a perfeet apathy prevailed
throughout the country respecting the most impolitic
and unjust law ever passed by the Legislature—we
mean the corn-law, first brought forward in 1815, and
continued to the present day, modified Certainly in some
points, but still retaining all the more objectionable
restrictions which characterised it at first. When it was
proposed, the public were so shacked at the pretensions
of the landowners, that nothing but a foreign war pre-
vented a civil commotion, or a signal defeat of the Bill
from sheer terror. The houses of the leading members
of the Government were attacked, the lives of the
Ministers themselves were not without danger, and the
victory of Waterloo and a general peace, which
caused such universal joy, alone made the community
submit patiently to the plans of a Government who
had been so eminently successful abroad. But still
the glaring defects of this law did not escape the eyes
of men acquainted with the principles of free trade and
the best interests of the country—repeated attacks were
made on this obnoxious impost, and for little less than
twenty years have we been fighting against it, often
single-handed, though at times supported by
other journalists, yet the county Members were
still too powerful. The task was regarded as ut-
terly hopeless, and vast numbers looked upon a re-
peal of the Union, or the restoration of the heptarchy, as
probable as the repeal of the corn-laws. But "water
weareth the stones," and perseverance in a good cause
never fails of its legitimate effect. The eyes of
the public were opened at last. They began to
see the hardships to which they were subjected
by a law which did not even benefit its authors,
and latterly all commercial men have enter-
tained but one opinion as regards its ruinous results
on the vital interests of the nation. That general opinion
gave rise to the League, which was scoffed at by the
landed interest and their organs—denounced, by them,
as an illegal association, and stigmatised as a
body of selfish traders, who looked only
to their own personal advantages. But impartial
Englishman took a different view of the question. They
approved of its principles, admired the c, n tansy and
boldness with which it fought, and finally, lent their aid
by subscribing larger sums than had ever h-en collected
for similar purposes in the memory of man. It soon
became a national question, and though the landlords
were numerous and powerful—nay, almost omnipotent
in the Legislature—the small voice of wisdom
at last prevailed. The victory of argument was
entirely on one side; even the Minister " elect" of the
landed interest, whilst he opposed the change, was
wofully deficient in reasons ; the very advocates of the
injurious law d indled down to a mere junta of senators
without influence or eloquence, and have latterly exhi-
bited such a lack of prudence, skill, and knowledge of
true legislative principles, that the " strong Ministry "
have been compelled to throw them overboard. Sir R.
PEEL and Sir JAMES GRAHAM are now good repeaters,
and they want only time. When the proper season
comes they promise to walk as fast as Mr. COBDEN.
This is one of the greatest triumphs effected by perse
verance in right principles. Mr. COBDEN might well
ask the great meeting at Covent-garden on Wednesday
why that which was admitted to be just, and
politic, and urgent, should be delayed till
it pleased PROVIDENCE to visit the country with
famine ? "It was rather hard," said he, "to main-
tain an injurious law fur the benefit of the farmers, who
were, after all, but 250,000 out of the 27,000,000 who
form the population of these islands. But who ever
heard it urged that it was for the benefit of the people
that the law had been passed ? Sir ROBERT PEEL was
very fond of talking of the great and important interests
which had grown up under this law. I plead for
greater and more important interests which are
crushed to the earth by the pressure of this law ; and if
they want proof of this, why I bring their own Hume
Secretary, with his prison reports and his statistical tables,
and I put him into the witness-box, to show what the law
has done for that class which is most numerous in this
land. I apply for the total and immediate repeal of
the corn-laws, on the ground of expediency, and be-
cause it could now be better effected than at another
time. I apply for it on the ground of justice, because, if
the law be a bad one, it should be at once annulled.
And what will be the effect on the great body of the
people, when the time comes which Government con-
templates—for they are going to repeal the law in a
season of distress ? And such a season may come—
aye, three weeks of showery weather, when wheat
is in its bloom, will repeal this corn-law ? But
how ? We have the experience of 1839, 1840,
and 1841, and are the people of this country to be
subjected to another such infliction before this Lw is
repealed ? What provision is made for such a cala-
mity ? This is an important consideration at this
moment. Divine Providence may repeal the corn-laws
rigour
harvest,gou
addr
obmfu
ttohreae at present
tn
dthloers,
landlord's
Joe:
en
t-,corn,-law."
bwu.t, mitigates by his
thsyapda
ethee
by
littleunwords are
not now required—the fate of the cora-law is sealed; the
very farmers' friends have turned against it, and next
session, we confidently trust, it will be•classed among the
tliings that " were."

Mr. C. BULLER, on submitting to the House of Com-
mons a series of "resolutions" rela; ive to the government,
relations, condition, and usage at the hands of the Govern-
ment of the noble colony.of Nt-w Zealand--(a series, by the
way, in its protracted extent worthy of the extensively
projected coastline of the island-chain to which they re-

.-tr.'''
it, ,t'.-:,...--. . . ...-, ....
.1-15' 11‘?:',. i -... '4'..-- .; ~' ', ' ?*
CCIC--
1. - ,i. , ,‘,Qui•to,,.
a- ,;-r- A: \ '. V ',-,S
' ' ,„.....1t) • , ~', (--7 '.--t,'-‘-':',..' ,- At , jet' °
-V5.770t-1, ~. • - ,'4l' ~f.t." ..,.... L-- ~,,,.........mt- lli , ''4tAsl7
i 4 1 -*
" '" '.... 'E T 7 ; :It' 11.36.'":4 ii.,Mtv!°::,4l;?"l'l6""' ' -...."'WP".."' '"'llttl'tii
~., '