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

()It .At'le

LONDON.
THURSDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 24, 1842.

We are afraid that the public will learn with no
Sati:ifaetion that the debate was not concluded last night,
though Sir R. PEEL spoke, and did what he could to
bring on a division. He even at the close of his speech
expressed very emphatically a hope that after the division,
and after the motion was negatived by a large majority,
the House would proceed as quickly as possible, with a due
regard to proper deliberation, to pass his measure into a
law. He urged this because commerce wGuld not be
settled till it know what those other measures were
which her MAJESTY'S Government were prepared to
bring forward. We are not ourselves convinced that this
is not a proper wish.
It is now quite clear, we are afraid, that from the
Parliament nothing more is to be got than the measures
proposed by the Government. Success must be obtained,
not by proceedings in Parliament, where right prin-
ciples are deserted by the Whigs, but by proceedings
out of Parliament ; and probably the sooner attention is
now diverted from that assembly to the means by which
public sentiment can be brought efficaciously to bear on
the aristocracy, the nearer we shall be to the attainment

of j ustice.
Besides, whatever of settlement and improvement
the measures of the Ministers can give to trade,
should as speedily as possible be brought about. We
are, therefore, now inclined to adopt the view which the
Times took of the scheme yesterday. That Journal,
after showing that the measure was without any jus-
tification whatever, concluded by expressing a hope
that it might, as speedily as possible, become a law,
Delaying it may add to the distress, passing it
can have no such immediate effects, and, there-
fore, probably the best plan will be to look, in
the first instance, beyond the Parliament, to obtain that
justice which the Parliament steadily and obstinately
denies the people.

Sir ROBERT PEEL'S was the great speech of the
evening, and though we cannot now examine it, we
must say that it made out no defence whatever for the
existing law, and showed no good reason why It should
not be repealed. In fact, Sir RopißT PEEL
has come completely over to our opinion,
and admits that the law has done no good
to agriculture. We have stated more than
once, that the growth and success of manufactures con-
stitute a greater stimulus to agriculture than all the
laws that ever were passed since the days NINOta, We
stated that expressly; to show that agriculturists had no
reason to dread the abolition of the law, our sur-
prise, and to our infinite satisfaCtin, we heard Sir
PEEL almost use our wed; last night, and say, that the
success of manufactures was of more importance to the
success of agricuiturt, OM Ray system of Corn-laws. By
that he glyes up, the whole question in dispute. There is
,tot the -shadow of a doubt that the Corn-laws injure
manufactures ; by injuring manufactures they must in-
jure agriculture. In fact the 4-tannins, as we have
before saidi giveP to agriculture by the increase
y population, and the growth of manufactures, is
so great, that the influence of laws, however contrived,
is as nothing compared to it. Under the shadow of
mannNctores, then, and not under the shadow of the
law, have the great interests involved in agriculture
grown up. As they are not caused or even protected by
the law, to repeal. t, which would increase manufactures,
would also stimulate agricultlim and be the best means
of increasing and protecting its complicated interests.
Oir 'ROBERT PEEL boggled indeed at the effects