The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-24 00:00:00

any length of time until thequeation of the Corn-laws was settled.
Whether the state of commerce in this country ware prospe-
rous or otherwise, still they did their countrymen this injus-
tice, they prevented them from extending their trade, and they
had no more right to prevent the extension of their trade than
they had to prevent its creation; a prevention of the future
was as bad as an usurpation of the past. As long as they laid
their restrictions on the intelligence and eeterpi ise of their
countrymen, it was impossible they could ever know any real
and permanent prosperity. It was true they wre consoled by
the Right Hon. Baronet in a statement that their exports had
increased; but there were two sorts of exports, one a sound
sy stem, arising from a demand abs oar!, the other a forced
system, proceeding from the want of demand at home.
—(Hear.) Nothing had been more clearly proved then
that this was the fact with respect to the cotton
trade. If they took the return of the whole amount
spun, and deducted it from the whole amount exeorted, the
remainder world give the quantity taken for home eonsump-
tion. The quantity taken for home consumption last year,
was less than the year preceding it, the year 1840 ; that showed
whatever the state of the exports might be, the home consumert
was in a state of distress and depression. The total weigh-
of cotton spun in 1840, was about 406,000,000 Ib3. ; the
quantity exported, was 229,000,000 lbs., whit-h left
177,000,000 lbs. for home consumption. By the same
calculation, the quantity for home consumption last ycor.
was 111,000,000 lbs, being a diminution of ti9,ooo,ooolbs. from
1840. This export would still go on, because the manufac-
turers, finding they had no chance ofa demand in the home msrlset
were obliged to make consignments—a most dangerous system
of commercial policy—but blind to the consequences, they ran
the risk of selling at the smallest possible profit, rather than
not sell at all. The destitution of the he -no consumer was
occasioned by their refusing to extend c immerce, and give
employment to the industrious classes. They recognized the
necessity of extending commerce, and cheapening food by the
very measure which the Government had proposed.
They had admitted his (Mr. Ewart's) premises, and
had adopted the principle for which he was contend •
ing. It had been stated in the course of thess
debates, that it had been our original commercial policy
to place restriction on the supply of the fond of the people.
He denied that such had been the case. Up to the year 1771
the home supply of corn had been sufficient for the consump-
tion of the country. In that year a Committee of the House
had sat to consider the cause of the distressed state of the
country. General Pownall had been the Chairman of that
Committee, and Mr. Burke had been one of its members.
Mr. Burke had then declared that the mmt momentous of all
meddling was the meddling with the food of the people. That
Committee had reported that the cause of the distress ,was the
great extension of our commerce, which had rendered the
supply of corn inadequate to supply the wants of the people.
The result of that recommendation was the establishment of a
free trade in corn. For the thirty years following they hail
had a free trade in corn, and the report of the Committee
which had sat in 1821, a report drawn up by Mr. Huskisson,
had stated that never had any period of the history of this
country been so marked by prosperity as the thirty years
between 1772 and 1802, and he would refer all those
who denounced free trade doctrines as being merely theoretical
to the report of that Committee, as affording a practical ilois-
tration of the benefits to be derived from a free trade in corn.
He was much surprised at another omission in the statements
of the other side. How came it, he would ask, that the state-
ments made by the Government officers before the Imports
Committee had been wholly withdrawn from consideration ?
How did it happen that the Right Hon. Baronet, or other
Hon. Members opposite, did not cite in their favour the
opinions of Mr. Hume, or Mr. Porter, or Mr. M'Gregor, all of
whom expressed themselves favourable either to the immediate
or ultimate freedom of the trade in corn? There was another in-
quiry of which they heard nothing, and which, with the exception
of Mr. Huskisson's report in the year 1821 and that drawn up
by Lord Durham on the state of the Canadas, was the most
important which had been drawn up in the country. He al-
luded to the report of the Hand loom Weavers' Commission.
That Commission recommended that the dutiei on corn should
lessen from year to year till there was no duty at all; and it
came to that conclusion after the most extensive and accurate
inquiry. When they had such authority on their site for the
aboli,tion of the duties on corn, who could wonder that systems
of agitation should exist in the country, or that they were
based upon anything but reason? It appeared to him to be
an agitation of reason and not of force.—( Hear, hear.) In
former times they had had the revolutions of a Cade or
a Tiler, and not the peaceable, reasonable agitation
of Mr. Arland and Mr. Sydney Smith. He did
not know hew Hon. Gentleman could complain of an agita-
tion carried on by the force of reason, and not. of the pas-
sions.—( Hear, hear.) He was convinced that if the just claims
of the people were not satisfied, and if they allowed that species
of agitation to continue, it would he fraught with the greatest
danger to the social system. He had traced the agitation, not
only in the metropolis, but in Lae cashirc, Staffordshire, York-
shire, and in Scotland; and he was convinced that until the ob-
ject was attained that agitation never would slumber, never
would cease. He believed that the miserable apology for a remedy
would give no satisfaction, and never could be final. When
the Right Hon. Baronet brought in Catholic Emancipation, he
introduced it boldly, scorning all minor exceptions. The Right
Honourable Baronet was asked, would he not demand any
securities, or impose any restrictions ? He answered that he
would not. That he would concede the principle, because he
knew that until it was conceded, there would be no repose.—
( Hear.) Why did not the Right Hon. Baronet act so in the
present case ? Why did he not show the same boldness ?
However, he (Mr. Ewart) was convinced that the day would
come when he (Sir R. Peel) would regret that he had riot
done so. He must remind the Right Hon. Baronet that,
as Burke said, " Modification was the resource of a weak
and undecided mind."—( Hear, hear.) The course of the
Right lion. Baronet, was not only condemned, by the indig-
nant voice of a suffering people, but it would be condemned by
the mature verdict of a reflecting and impartial posterity.
Mr. F. BERKELEY would vote for the repeal of the Corn-
laws, because he believed them to be unjust in principle, and
mischievous in effect. Many Hon. Members had expressed
their great astonishment and virtuous indignation at the pro-
posal to repeal the Corn-laws. Remembering that those laws
h d always been opposed by statesmen of the greatest eminence,
he was quite at a loss to understand such expressions. He was
for the repeal of the Corn-laws, because he held the
great practical doctrine, that all commerce should be
benefited, and, because the Corn-laws especially, as
interfering with the sustenance of the people, did violence to
that doctrine. When the Corn-law was proposed in 1815, it
was opposed by several great statesmen. The language then
held by illustrious Princes of the Blood, and by several poli-
ticians of the first standing in this country was, that the neces-
sity ought to be irresistible which could authorise Parliainent
to tamper with the sustenance of the people, and to impede
the free sale and purchase of that, article on :which depended
the existence of so large a portion of the community. He had
the same authority for saying that those laws could never pro-
duce plenty, cheapness, or steadiness of price.—( Hear, hear. )
If he was in error, he shared the error with the late Lend
Grenville, with the late Duke of Buckingham, and with his
Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex, whose sentiments, when-
ever promulgated, would command respect, and arose equally
from the soundness of his head and from the goodness of his
heart.—( Hear, hear.) Among the petitions which had been
presented, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws, he had ha 1
the honour to present one from the city of Bristol,
which had received 25,000 signatures; and agreeing with the
Hon. Member for Birmingham, that the petitions presented
to that House were not received with the attention which was
due to their importance, he felt himself bound to raise his voice
on behalf of those petitioners who had so strongly expressed
their opinions on the sus ject of the Corn-laws. In one peti-
tion which he (Mr. F. Berkeley) had the honour to present,
signed by 17,799 individuals, the language was most remark-
able. At the same time that it was most respectful it was
firm. It expressed the great sorrows felt by the people.
And he (Mr. F. Berkeley) begged to say that
having perused the names of the petitioners, he
had found the names of such men as were not only incapable ofa
falsehood, but of even stooping to the meanness of exaggeration.
It stated the belief of the petitioners that there was a growing
dissatisfaction among the people towards that House.—( Hear,
bear.) They believed that the prayers of the people had been
neglected.—( Hear, hear.) They prayed the House not to
dr.ve famine to despair.—( Hear.) When he (Mr. F. Berkeley)
reflected that the inhabitants of the city of Bristol were not so
miserably wretched as the people in other parts of the country,
he did feel that petitions so worded, and expressing such sen-
timents, demanded the utmost attention and respect of the
House. Whilst on the subject of the constituency which he
had the honour to represenf, he might probably be annoyed to
refer to the speech of the Noble Lord, the Member for Csm-
br dgeshire, who alluded to his (,fir. Berkeley's) constituency.
In speaking of political agitations, past and present, the N ible
Lord, in alluding to the agitation of the Reform Bill, inferred
the folly of that agitation as connected with rotten boroughs,
and thought the folly was proved by the failure of the Reform
Bill; he added that Nottingham Castle was sacked, and Bristol
was b,rnt., in their agitation against. rotten iioroughs. A
more foul slander against a people had never before been ut-
tered by any Hon Gentleman or Noble Lord in that House.
He ( Mr. F. Berkeley) would defy the Noble Lord to produce
one tittle of evidence, to show that the people of Bristol in
their agitation against rotten boroughs had been actuated by
any such desire. The effects to which the Noble Lord
had alluded, were the operations of a lawless mob, and were
caused by the inefficiency and want of judgment of the Magistracy.
They were taunted with being a small minority and an isolated
body in that House. He was perfectly contented to put up
with the taunt, because he knew they were not an isolated body
out of doors. Let Hon. Gentlemen reflect that they had had
majorities on former occasions, which had fallen before the ex-
I -
Tessed opinions of the people. In his humble thinking, the
people at the present moment felt the deepest indignation at
the manner in which they were treated. They felt the ut-
most discontent at the measure brought forward by the Bight
Hon Baronet. They felt that it was a mockery and an insult,
and unless they were conciliated, the most disastrous conse-
quences would foil w.
Mr. THORNELY took the present question to be one of
protective duty. The Right Hon. Bart. in introducing his
resolution, did not lay any stress upon them on the score of
revenue. To protective duties, he (Mr. T.) would be always
opposed. Respecting the importation of corn and provisions,
looking to the comfort of the working classes, the extension of
the commerce of the- country, and the distress now existing,
the House ought to consider the inexpediency of any duty
whatever. He (Mr. T.) had come to the conclusion, that
those articles ought to be tree from all duty, and he would
most heartily give his support to the motion of his Hon.
Friend and Colleague ( Mr. Villiers). The principle of a
sliding scale operates! for the benefit of those countries near u',
but to the considerable injury of countries at a distance—he
alluded to the United States of America.----(Hear, hear,
hear.) Our most important trade was with that
country. For the last few years our exports to America ave-
raged about eight millions sterling. They consisted of manu-
factures, not in the state of cotton twist or yarn, but manufac-
tures wrought in a high state of perfection—woollens, linens,
and other such articles. It was of the utmost importance that
they should afford facility to the United States for exporting
corn and provisions in exchange for those manufactures.
(here was an opinion that America was not an exporting
country. Mr. M4Culloch, in a work published last year, re-
marks that every one knew that from the United States very
few supplies of corn could be obtained; that they even im-
ported wheat into that country from Dantzic and other ports.
In the year 1837 five hundred quarters of wheat were cer-
tainly imported into America from Dantzic, but that was
the only year when the importations were to any extent.
The harvest in America had been bad that year ; and there
had also been an undue expansi al of paper currency, the re-
sult of which circumstances was, that pr ces were unusually
high, and corn having risen, like all other articles, 500,000
quarters had been imported from Dantzic. The Noble Lord
the Member for North Lancashire had alluded, in a speech to
his constituents in September las', to the high price of corn
in America, and intimated that we could not look for any
supply from that
few days
dabyesen
ago
oid country. A paler had, how-
erdacthabol.feear:
byupothne
4,t4 40:90 quarters of whetßahtoea:
it appeared that the average exports from the United States
of
Trade, the
fromil"wsehiclas
for the last 49 years had amounted to 900 000 barrels of flour,
They had also ex-
pprted COpicierable viantitielof Indian beef,
It was also to he recollected that 4 and pork.
0111, rye,
ploded from the markets o
tiffs
eisunitietrrica. wads virtually lty,
Is iethx:
standing the exclusion, her exports 'Of irayin; acid et
had° been
very great ; and although she had to cgompete with Hamburg
and other coo.ntries, she had alm9lt excites ve 13supplied 'the'
West Indies and South America. The United Stat were
place,4 in circumstances
antage as regarded
. of great disease h the
markets pf s eminPry, m comparison with the na-
tions
of the Qontinegt of liiirope —( Hear, hear. )
He held in his hand a (MI ofa memorial addressed to the