The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-23 00:00:00

( Hear, hear.) He did not think that a repeal oF the Corn-laws
would produce the good which some Honourable Gen-
tlemen opposite anticipated; if he did, he would be one
of the first to unite his exertions with theirs.—( Hear. )
He was convinced the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for
Tamworth, must deserve the gratitude of the people of the
country fur the proposition he had brought forward, for it wan
likely to confer the greatest benefits.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL would not venture to intrude
himself upon the attention of the House to the exclusion of so
many others who were anxious to speak upon the subject under
discussion, were it not that he wished, for the reasons he would
state to the House, to explain his motives in taking the course
he was about to take, especially as it totally differed
from that course which he would have taken a year ago,
or two years ago, had the present question come before the
House. In considering this question, it was impossible it
could be considered disconnected with the Right lion. Baro-
net at the head of her Majesty's Government ; and as one of
those who listened attentively to the measure brought forward
by that Right Hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. O'Connell) must say
that great and general expectation was never more signally dis-
appointed than it was by the speech of the Righ Hon. Baronet
on that occasion. A more completely negative speech he (Mr.
O'Connell) never had heard : it was completely nega-
tive in reason, negative in calculation, and negative
in every other respect. The contrast between
the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, and his speeches upon
all other occasions, when he had heard him in that House, never
was so great. The Right Hon. Baronet told the House that
there was distress throughout the country, and he (Mr.
O'Connell) was glad to see that assent had at last been given
by the Right Hon. Baronet to the existence of that distress,
of which they were so repeatedly told by the Hon. Members
for Stockport and Bolton.—( Hear, hear.) Yet, though that
distress did exist to an alarming degree, the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet plainly said that the measure which
he proposed would not afford any relief whatever
If wages were lowered, it was not the effect of the Corn-laws;
if manufacturers were being destroyed, they did not do that.
Whatever distress existed—whether commerce arid trade were
restricted, the profits of the capitalist destroyed, or the im-
provement of the operatives diminished. With all that distress
the Corn-laws had nothing whatever to do. What were the
conclusions which the Right Hon. Baronet drew from these
premises? They certainly were the strangest that he (Mr.
M. O'Connell) ever heard from the lips of a reasonable man.
Most strange, if he believed the measure he proposed one of
importance; for, after telling us that the Corn •laws did no
harm, he said we must alter them. One would have supposed
that, in the words of the Hon. Secretary for the Home
department, made use of in the debate of 1839, they might let
well alone—one would have supposed that they would have
allowed the Corn-laws to pursue their course, harmless at least,
if not beneficial. When he considered the real nature of the
question as it appeared to him ( Mr. M. O'Connell), and not •
withstanding the panegyric which had been passed upon the
proposed plan, as it appeared to the country at large, the very
slight change on the present laws, when they considered the
time the Right Hon. Baronet had taken to mature the ques-
tion, and that after all the inquiries made at home :and abroad,
during autumn and winter, after all these inquiries into the
financial difficulties of the country which he had to
consider, from the overdrawn . matters in South Australia
down to the heavy works to be carried on in the island
of Hong-Kong—he would not say what his own
opinion was, but he would ask the House if a Whig Ministry
had taken so much time, and had brought forward such an abor-
tive measure as this, whether one universal cry would not have
been raised against them, if the Press would not have univer-
sally attacked them from the thunder of Printing house-
square down to the Bucks Herald. There were two or three
points of objection against the measure, which occurred to him
(Mr. M. O'Connell), and to which he would briefly advert.
He objected to the plan proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet,
because it appeared to contain the same vicious principle, how-
ever modified, which had been the cause of the failure of all
previous Corn-law measures. And he had heard no ar-
gument to convince him of this, that, under all cases,
a fixed duty was not better than a sliding scale.
He should say nothing on the point which Hon. Gentlemen
had seemed so anxious of dwelling on—the point that had
been alluded to in the speech of the Noble Lord, the Mem-
ber for London, namely, that the inconvenience of a sudden
diminution in the duty should be controlled by the existing
Government of the day ; a plan, which, in case of a fixed duty
being adopted, he should prefer. It appeared to him that a
fixed duty avoided all the evils which he perceived in a sliding
scale. But with regard to the new plan, he did not think
that the tendency and temptation to withhold corn would be
diminished by it to the extent which the Right Hon. Baronet
seemed to anticipate. If the temptation to withhold a stock
of corn was not so great as under the 'old system, vet they
must remember that the risk of loss by doing it would also be
diminished; and if that were the case, he thought that, prac-
tically, they would find the largest quantities of corn would be
imported at the lowest point of duty.—(Hear, hear.) In a
paper that. had been laid before the House he found a clear
proof of this, and an instance of how small a difference in the
duty would cause a quantity of corn to be withheld. In the
week ending the 3d of April, 1840, when the duty
was 16s. Bd., the quantity of corn entered for
home consumption was 194,000 quarters. In the week
ending the 17th of April, when the duty had risen a little, the
amount entered was only 3,122 quarters; while for the week
ending the 24th of April, when the duty was 13s. 3d., at that
amount the enormous quantity of 341,925 quarters of wheat
were entered. The difference of duty between ss. and 45.,
and 4s. and 35., would give ample roorn.for profit by specula-
tion ; and he was afraid that from similar causes similar results
would follow. Another part of the plan he should not allude
to fully at present, as he did not see many Members from his
part of the kingdom in their places, and he was anxious to
notice it in their presence. The agriculturists of Ireland were
much interested in oats, and he had not yet heard any reason
alleged by the Right Hon. Baronet for diminishing the duty
on oats to a greater extent, in proportion, than he had done
with the duty on wheat. It was singular that this difference
should be made. The vanishing point of the duty on oats was
fixed at from 345. to 375., while for wheat it was left the same
under the new plan as the old. He could not think why
this should be, when in the course of the Right
Hon. Baronet's own speech, he appealed to the trade
in oats as the most satisfactory trade that had
taken place under the existing system. Some said, it was
because they, the Irish, were to be punished for the opposition
they had shown to the Right Hon. Gentleman's Government.
—( Hear, bear.) fie would not pursue this point, but of
course, in the absence of any reason, many things were said
which were not correct. He would not, however, detain the
house by entering on this. He had said he preferred a
fixed duty under all circumstances to a sliding scale, but he
must admit he heard some objections to a fixed duty which
struck his mind wish great force. He heard one from the
Right Hon. Baronet, the Member fur Tamworth, which he
considered to be very powerful, and it was, that in time of
scarcity they could not maintain a fined "duty, and that if a
fixed duty was once taken away, it could never be re-imposed.
He asked the House, and he appealed to the country, whether
there was anything half so strong urged against the Corn dew
as that objection of the Right Hon. Baronet against a fixed
duty ?—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) Could any hired
lecturer, or any minister of the Gospel, who had, so cre-
ditably to themselves, taken up the Anti-Corn-law question,
have said anything half so strong, or half so capable of in-
flaming the minds of the people, as the admission of
the Right lion. Baronet that when once the duty was taken
away it could never again be imposed.—(Hear, hear.) He
warned the Right Hon. Baronet, and those who joined him in
making that objection to a fixed duty on corn that for every
one they converted from the ranks of the supporters of a fixed
duty, they would draw 100 from those ranks to the advocates
of a total repeal.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to the effects
of an immediate repeal on the agricultural interest he must say
that he did not attach any importance to them. What he
feared most was the effect of the alarm that had been excited
on the subject. —( Hear, bear.) He could not but recollect
what took place when the question of lowering the duties on
wool came before the House, and the cry which was raised by
the wool-growers—lie was almost inclined to say the wool
gatherers—in the House on the subject.—( Laughter.) But the
result showed how entirely fallacious were their fears.—
( Hear, hear.) But it was said that wool was an article of
manufacture, and, therefore, was not a case in point. Well,
then, he took the case of butter, and he knew that when the
duties on foreign butter were lowered, the graziers in
the south of Ireland were greatly alarmed, but the only result
was that the butter trade had increased, he would not say in
spite of, but in consequence of, the change.—( Hear, hear.)
He had heard with great astonishment the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, repeat the
fallacy that the admission of two millions or three millions
quarters of fi,reign corn would have the effect of excluding
from consumption an equal amount of home-grown corn. He
would prefer a gradual departure from the present system, by
a gradually diminishing duty, but fixed for a time at each stage.
Still believing that the motion before the House was based
on justice, he would support the motion of the Hon.
Member for Wolverhampton.--( Hear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet opposite, the Secretary for the Home Depart-
ment, drew in 1839 an affecting picture of agriculture climbing
to the hill tops under the influence of protection, surveying
thence, and rejoicing at the progress of commerce. Now he
(Mr. 31. O'Connell) confessed he would rather see those hill-tops
feeding good sheep than growing bad barley—( Hear, hear)._
and he thought it would be better to let barren fields go out of
cultivation, for which they were unfit, than to see factories dila-
pidated, furnaces blown out, and the people lately employed by
them wandering in destitution.—( Hear, hear.) He thought
that agriculture could succeed without protection, for it was
not the law that had advanced it to its present advanced state
but the industry and skill of the people. It had been pro-
meted by science, and assisted by the aids of modern chemistry.
Should we then be told that agriculture so sustained could
not stand its fah; chance with the rest cf the world? His
own prospects-and those of his constituents were connected
with agriculture; but he thought he would injure neither by
supporting the present motion.
Sir F. BURDETT said that the Honourable Gentleman
who had just sat down had made a most severe criticism on the
speech of the Right Honourable Baronet who had brought for-
ward the motion. He (Sir F. Burdett) was not there to de-
fend the speech of the Right Honourable Baronet, but he was
well aware 'of the effect it had made upon the most important
and most interested class of the community. He had it from a
gentleman connected with the agriculture of the country, who
had attended at the markets of Nottingham and its neighbour-
hood, that the farmers and agriculturists were perfectly well
satisfied with the proposition brought forward by the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet. The) thought as much had been yielded as
possible to those whom they looked upon as their opponents—
the manufacturers—and at the same time they considered that
it was as low a protection as could be given to the agricultural
interests. No people were more inclined to conciliation than
the agriculturists : of all people and classes they were the most
disinterested, liberal, just, and considerate.—(Hear, hear.)
The Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down said that he
meant to support the motion of the Hon. Member for Wolver_
hampton ; if he did so, in his (Sir Francis Burdett's) opinion,
he would do more than the Honoura'ole Member,
had done himself.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for
Wolverhampton began his speech by stating certainly, in a
most gentlemanly manner, doctrines as strong and outrageous
as it was possible to imagine. He had heaped invective upon
invective, on the agricultural interests, and had described them
as the mest atrocious of classes. He repre:ented their num-
bers as being most contemptible, and that those who suffered
fium the oppression were most numerous. He spoke of 40,000
persons being in a state of starvation, and described their suf-
ferings in a tone of sympathy which certainly would have been
called for had the account of their sufferings been true ; but he
(Sir F. Burdett) did not believe it was; at least not to the
extent described by the Hon. Gentleman. What could the Hon.
Gentleman mean by thus pointing out the landowners to the
indignation of a starving people? What was the meaning of
this counting of noses—of saying that the oppressors were only
thirty thousand. and the, oppressed millions ?' What was it but
pointing out the landowners as monsters to be destroyed?
Why the Mon. Gentleman had outdone'what had ever been done
by the Jacobins in France. Although the manner of the
lion. Gentleman was kind and gentlemanly, it did not make up
for the doctrine itself. Having deliiered these invectives
against the landed interest of the country the Hon. Gentleman
had gone on to say that he should like to see a debtor and
creditor account stated, between the landed interests and the
other intersts of the country. Now, althbugh they could not
have tire minutiae of that account stated, vet the result was
stated in the fact that the landowner was content to receive
3i per cent. for his capital, while no other interest in the
country was content to receive so little. The lauded interest
was the foundation of every other interest,; and the
h valuable
u tradeahle
was the most valuable of any. It was infinitely more
than the foreign trade, and if the manufacturers ruined the
landed interest, they would find themselves in the situation of