The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-01 00:00:00

have that °ppm tunity of stating that, instead of changing his
opinions as he had his seat in that House, he could retort upon
Gentlemen opposite the accusation which they sought to fix
upon Hon. Members upon that side of the House.
Dr. BOWRING, amidst cries of "Oh," "oh," and
Order," "order," which rendered him for some time inau-
dible, stated, that he should vote against the proposition of the
Right Hon. Gentleman, because that proposition implied that
the food of the people might be conveniently and properly
taxed. If the Hon. Member proposed a higher duty thrn that
of-the Right Hon. Baronet, then he should vote against such a
proposition in order to carry out his (Dr. Bowring's) own prin-
ciple. The concluding observations of the Hon. Member were
lost amidst the cries of " Divide," which rose from the Minis-
terial benches.
Mr. F. 'l'. BARING would in a few words express to the
House reasons why he thought it his duty to give his vote in
favour of the Right Hon. Gentlemen's proposition. But before
doing so, ho mu,t say that he did not think the Right Hon.
Gentleman had sufficient grounds for the triumphant tone in
which he replied to the Hon. Gentleman ( Mr. M. J. O'C.)
en •hat side of the House. He ( ttr. B.) apprehended that it
was quite consistent for those gentlemen who advocated and
voted fur the principle of total repeal of the duties on corn,
when that question had been disposed of, and the House had
determcned on adopting the principle of a duty, and hal come
to dismiss it in detail—it wits then, he apprehended, perfectly
consistent in those gentlemen to argue that the protection given
by that duty was not as- fair a protection as that given to other
descriptions. of grain. Upon a previous occasion, he. ( Mr. B. )
as it was the first opportunity they had bad of entering their
protest against the scale of the 1- ight Hon. Throtiet, hail voted
against the first proposition upon the (mission of wheat Ile had
done so for the purpose of entering his protest, not only against
the principle upon which the duty wasfounded, but also against
the duty itself. But he apprehended that the present was a
question of proportion—whether they should follow the same
proportion in barley and oats that had previously existed or
should abandon that proportion, and adopt some new principle
giving additional protection to oats beyond what it before re-
ceived. He could not pretend to speak in the same manner
on the details of this subject as other lion. Gentlemen had, but
having listened attentively to the debate, he felt that the much
wiser course was to adhere to the old proportion, and not aban-
don it for the purpose of introducing a new principle, anc
giving additional protection to one particular article which it
did not b fore receive. On those grounds he should vote with
the Right lion. Baronet.
Mr. HARTFORD thought the protection granted to the
agriculturists quite sufficient.
Strangeea were then ordered to withdrew, and the Com-
mittee divided, when there appeared—
For the resolution 256
For the amendment
Majority for the resolution
The scale of duties on rye passed through Committee.
On the proposal of the scale with respect to wheat-meal and
flour,
Lord SANDON said, under the circumstances in which
the Committee was placed, after a series of succesres, he did
not, of course, intent to trouble the Committee with more
than a siropk. statement of the reasons which induced him to
think that neither the law as it then stood, nor as proposed to
be altered, afforded an adequate protection. lie thought the
manufacturers of flour would be placed under a disadvantage
by the propore:l me 'sure. When the present Bill was esta-
blished in 1828, there was ne, regular trade in corn. The sub-
sistence of the people was the prime object to be eossidered,
and the Legislature were not required to take into account the
relative .proportions between wheat and flour. At resent
they had. to provide for a new state of things, and
to examine whether, in laying the foundation -for
a permanent system of trade, they were establishing the im-
portation of corn upon such a footing that the mill-owners of
this country would not be placed at a disadvantage when com-
peting with foreigners. The proportions between wheat and
flour would vary according to the quantity of fine flour
which it would be desirable to extract from the quarter of
wheat. He did not wish in any way to vary the calculation of
1961b5. of flour as equivalent to 3811 A gallons of wheat, but
what he wished to impress upon the House was, the necessity
of giving to the miller of this country some protection equiva-
lent to the advantage which the foreigner would derive from
importing; his corn at a reduced cost.—( Hear, hear.) They
would dby referring to the papers before the House, that
the grower of corn ie Poland and I'russia, or other countries,
had a great advantage in sending flour rather than wheat into
this country. It appeared that a merchant wl.o sent 100 barrels
of grain into this country from the remoter parts of the United
States would have an interest to send flour rather than the
raw material of ss. lad. per barrel. Now, that was so much
advantage in favour of the foreign
.miller, as compared with the
miller of this country. lie believed that if the proposition
before the Muse were adopted a vast quantity of foreign pro •
duce would come into England in a manufactured rather than
in a 'raw state. They would find, even under the- present
system, that since the year 1831 a very large proportion of
foreign produce had come into this country in the shape of
flour ; and the English - miller was thus deprived of the
advantage of grinding the corn. Now, that was a mat-
ter which deserved the serious consideration of the House,
for various reasons. In the first place, it was the usual policy
of the Legislature of this country to favour the importation of
the raw material instead of the manufactured artie'e. In no
instance that he was aware of had the Houseeadopted a different
line of policy ; and it was but the natural policy of a great ma-
nufacturing country. In addition to that disadvantage, the
importation of foreign flour instead of wheat would prevent the
importation of the coarser kinds of produce, and they would
raise the price of the food of the poor. Ike found that this
had actually been the case for the last ten years, during whiCh
fine flour had been five per cent dearer than in the ten years
preceding, while the coarser quality of flour hail been
twenty per cent dearer as compared with the same period.
He trusted that, in removing the existing protection, the Go-
vernment would take care not to prejudice existing interests.
lie hoped they would examine the subject minutely, net taking
for granted the reports of the millers only, or indeed of any
one interest exclusively, which would probably be more or less
prejudiced, but that they would look at the question for them-
selves, and see whether there was not an advantage in bring •
ing the article into the country in a raw state, leaving the
English miller the advantage of manufacturing it into flour.
Whether the amount of protection was to be Is., 25., or 35.,
if they found. that it would not compensate fur other advantages
possessed by the foreigner, lie hoped they would see that the
milleeshould not be compelled to work at a disadvantage. lie
believed that the amount of duty was no more now than a
clear and adequate protection ; he did not wish to press the
question to a division, he only wished to hear the Government
state the reasons that had induced them to think that they had
fixed on a full and adequate protection.
Sir lt, PEEL said, while he was fully aware of the im-
portant interest referred to by his Nob'e Friend, and of how
many Members connected with it who had strongly urged the.
claim of the milers to an inyeage of protection, it would be
his duty to state that, havingTiven the subject a full considera-
tion, he could not, consistent with a sense of public duty,
agree to any increase of protection to that which they at pre-
sent received. In the first place, this subject was fully consi-
sidcred in the year 1827. At that period he was a Member of the
Government which proposed that 1961b5. should be considered
equivalent to • five bushels of wheat, or forty gallons.
He recollected perfectly well that the duty on wheat relatively
to that of flour was as 2 to 5, and that it was reduced from 40
gallons to 35e Again, with respect to barley and oats, it was
alleged that ffiey were departing from the proportion they had
fixed, and that they could not justify the proportion of the scale
bet Ween barley and wheat. The law, as it at present stood,
fixed the duty of 1961b5. of flour at the equivalent duty on 381
gallons of wheat, and that proportion they proposed to con-
tinue. Supposing they made an alteration, it would operate
most injuriously on the two countries with which, of all others,
they must wished to establish commercial relations—Canada
and the United States. They must all feel that the state of
their commercial relations with the United States were
such, that if there was any country in the world which they
might feel at liberty to place on a footing of advantage with re-
spect to the importation of corn, it was the United States. If
they looked at the state of their direct imports with Russia,
and their direct imports with the United States, it was clear
that if they wished to establish a preference, they should give
it to the United Statei. Now, if they made a departure from
the existing scale, it would tell most against the United States,
with which they most wished to establish an intercourse. Ap-
ieesring there as the advocate of a qualified free trade against
monopoly, he held the same opinions new as he held in
the year 18'27. The Honourable Member then read a quota-
tion from a speech delivered by him at that period.
at
ge
o
e
alsttttiwolthuhi:ihaaltisiiirilaiireaegsilece)stliogditu,h,iiitn:lonyunsheoeett,.
ogaciyirrbit,,
sgreei)trolutetshofeitythfagoi
ss%owi
iltuolroloynihrreecuilimuoy-
elmcsitlrwlunhit
,iorofdlaifilutat
f:llmibillvi,ilsbeciseig,theilareio.eac.urolitntusaiincaed.3lgfinisecst.timt:dorsllhtuifle:ttlipi.fiugfnlsarairotrerttptsig2tl
eq.segiouler
ne7,l3iiutura:rhalitaitl.eienitartlitreaige,
ideeen adroitictimpedimentsaeanirtinclaim
weitdio; of
sbdtttuiatietethehemsihe would
ingin: theunor.ahscui
gaahblys ofvecoaagtsm.
ttttu-t
hhihiss
eceett
ngdom, amounting
barley and oats.
g
is
upposing ho took
ole of that must
uetoasi • rlr:rtlr ivasissioe'ri:tmtbtto.itinh
laene'iHeci besides
large,i
dtlioe:
competition
Nhssissti tetuhuleipeataillit
ct
est imported, they
t
oble Friend hat
thou had ron the exists 'g styosbteeLtes n,
secured. The alarm of the millers was based, not on thlieornsaunp(;-
p ft
( si
wheat!ie
Inv
at,haant hunjuste i-) proportion
butti on
because betweena ther
ge dutyi
n r tfl, ao!
wheat would come in on more favourable terms than hitherto.
But though it might be true that to a certain extent they
!abound under a disadvantage, as flour was not so fitted for
bonding as wheat, as it was More hazardous, and though 34.
gallons of wheat would not produce I 961bs of tine flour, ye,, it
they took the quantity of second fl.mr" which was produced
from 38 gallons, in addition to the fine flour, he
thought the protection given to flour in relation to
wheat was amply sufficient. Coupling this with the monopoly
the millers necessarily have of grinding all their own home
grown wheat, and all the foreign corn imported, he, did not
think that the claim to additional protection was well founded.
It should be remembered, also, that there was a disproportion
between the price of wheat and the price of oats.—( Hear.)
This disproportion existed .to such art extent is times of
scarcity, that he could not help thinking some additional faci-
lity for the importation of foreign flour might greatly tenth,
when the price of provisions was exceedingly high, to reduce
that disproportion of price whch was sometimes perceived.
The House must decide on general principles ; and with-
out going into any minute estimates,' and looking
at • the peculiar position of this • country, and the
United States, he could not consent to any proposal that should
disturb the existing rela,ions between breast and flour.
Mr. LA BOUCHERE concurred with the opinion expressed
by the Right Hon. Baronet. Since 1828,, theee had been im-
ported 13,500,000 quarters of core, and of flour ()lily 4,300,000
barrels. One-twelfth only. of the bread stuff imported into
Eeeland was brought in in the shape of flour. He quite agreed
fit thinking that it was most important to interest of the-con-
suave-, that the power which the millers possessed to enhance
the price of bread should not be increased, and that the im-
portation of flour, to a certain proportion, certainly not less
than at present, should be continued. He wished he could
indulge the sanguine expectation of the Hon. Member for Li-
verpool, that • hereafter there would be a regular foreign corn
trade with other countries. Though it might be somewhat
improved he could not look forivai'd to the trade becoming
constant. ire begged, however, to express his satisfaction at
the opinions laid dowia by the Right Hon. Baronet with res-
pect to wheat and flour.
The question was then put, and negatived without a division.
Mr. SMITH
had 40iv'eB.RnlEotNiceti:i_enzTosheattoaumsoarktes tohiegTacieni,onthoof
oef Culon.al possessions inific):Gdragoeuraattrlhtleerritian7iinp,osrhtaonuelde,bacs
asp"t:...laholLtnicecteiudth:cdebe'lyt:a'trht AealNl-llti, mnE.eYsGa'evtna ast
(eflueulitlayynoe, foonifysi. improving and encouraging
the connexions between the colonies and the mother country.
No one could look, with more friendly interest than he did, to
the trade between this country and our North American colo-
nies, or be more desirous to remove all impediments to their
free commercial intercour e. Bet he did'not understand the
argument of the lion. Gentleman, that this Bill would place
our North American colonies in a averse position than they
were now. At present a duty of ss. • attached, until home-
grown wheat was 675. ; under the new Bill a duty of ss.
would attach, until: the price of our markets was ses.
And wishing to avoid sudden falls and rises in
prices, the Government would legislate for the colonies
On the same principle that they adopted stowards the United
Kingdom. There would be a, good deal of foreign wheat the
Hon. Gentleman had said, if the produce. we now imported
was the growth of Canada and our settlements; and he be-'
lieved the agriculturists at home would not be at all jealsus at
the free importation of wheat aria flour bona fide the produce

of Canada.—( Hear, hear, rut the fact was. wnat we had
been importing from Canada was not Canadian wheat and
flour, but the produce of those vast adjoining districts of the
United States—( Hear, hear)—the corn from which, coming
there ground into flour, acquired
the character of Canadian flour.—(Cries of ''Hear, hear.")
into Canada, and being
The Honourable Gentleman argued that we were bound to give
every facility and encouragement to those persons who, emi-
grating from the United Kingdom, settled in our Colonial pos-
sessions. But the fact was, as regarded Canada, the lion.
Gentleman would find that if he had consulted the agricultu-
rists of that settlement, they would tell him that the present
footing between Canaaaand thellruled States called for no such
regulation • and, in fact, the farmers of Canada would depre-
cate the lion. Gentleman's intended kindness. What was the
fact of the relations between Canada and the United States ?
The United States impoaed on Canadian flour and corn com •
ing into them a duty of Is. or Is. 3d. a bushel; being about Bs.
or 105. a quarter; whereas those commodities were allowed
to come from the United States into Canada duty free.
It would be unjust to allow such importation under the appa-
rently plausible pretence of encouraging Canadian agriculture,
and
on the 'importation of flour from Canada
without
akinthge
sdyeuctu
rity that we should not be inundated with
American wheat passing as Canadian flour. He believed it
o
was generally allowed that if an alteration were to take place
( t relax
taking
in the law in Canada, and that if the Canadian legislature
were to impose restrictions upon the importation of
wheat into that colony, so an to secure the agricultural
interest of this country from the competition of American
wheat under the denomination of Canadian flour, then the
case would be altered. But if they refused to set free
the trade in American wheat directly, sorely they would not
do tint indirectly which they refused to do directly. He thought
the agricultural interest was not unreasonable, not in opposing
the importation of Canadian wheat, but in opposing the im-
portation of American wheat under the denomination of
Canadian wheat.
Mr. LABOUCHERE did not pretend to have any very
exact information on the subject, but he could not help suspect-
ing that the Noble Lord had greatly exaggerated the real state
of the crae, when he described all toe flour imported into this
country as Cam/lien flour, as being the produce of Ame-
rican wheat, He believed that a certificate was re-
quired on importation, showing not only that the flour was
ground in Canada, but that the wheat from which it was
ground was Canadian produce also. He would admit that
it was impossible to form any system so stringent as to pre-
vent absolutely sach practicei from taking place ; but he (Mr.
Labottchere) did not think they had taken place nearly to
such an extent as the Noble Lord seemed to imagine,
and he trusted the House would not deprive the colonies
of the advantages they had hitherto enjoyed. Ile had no
doubt that when the Canadians found it to their advantage to
sand their flour here, they sent the whole of their produce to
this country, and imported their own supplies from the
United States across the frontier. That was precisely what
took place on a small scale in the Channel Islands,
The Channel blinds were permitted to import their produce
duty free into this country, and he believed it was well
known that the Guernsey and the Jersey people never con-
sumed a grain of Guernsey or Jersey corn, but sent the whole
of their produce to England, and imported their own
supplies front France. He (Mr. Laboucherc) did not
pretend to any very
could not but suspect that the Noble Lord was not quite accurate
in representing tile Canadian trade in flour to this country as a
mere transit trade. '1 here was one other subject to which he
would allude, which although net exactly before the House, yet
was so intimately connected with the subject under discussion,
that he could not help alluding to it. He trusted that if it
was intended to legislate on the subject of the importation of
corn or flour from the United States into Canada, the legisla-
tion on that subject would be left to the Canadian legislature. If
they chose to impose a differential duty the British Government
would certainly be right in confirming it ; but it was a subject
which the .British Parliament certainly ought not to meddle.
He should be glad, before giving his vote, to hear some explana-
tion from the Vice-President of the Board of Trade on the
snbjeet.
Mr. GLADSTONE thought that it was agreed on all
hands thee it would be improper to stiffer American
produce to be imported as the produce of Canada,
The question to be decided was whether the flour imported
was the produce of the United States or of Canada. If the
Right Hon. Gentleman would look to returns of the imports
during the last three years of flour and grain from Canada, he
would perceive that the greatest part of the flour im-
ported recently, must have been manufactured :Aim
wheat, the produce of the United States of America.
From 1828. to 1839 the annual amount of flour imported from
Canada underwent little alteration. In 1839 the quantity of
flour imported from Canada was 41,0 Cg cwt. ; in it!') it was
380,0U0 cwt., and in 1841 it had risen 41 632,000 cwt., be-
sides 61,000 quarters of wheat. Now, making all allowances for
the improvement of agriculture in Canada, it must be evident
that such an increase could not be accounted for, except on
the supposition that at least fore-fifths of the importation must
have been the produce of the United States. He was afraid
he had misled the Right Hon. Gentleman by what he had
stated the other evening, on the subject of the certificates. He
considered that according to the clause in the Act, a certificate
was required that the flour wan not gaound in Canada, but
that it was the produce of Canadian wheat. It appeared how-
ever, on reference to the Custom-house documents, that Ame-
rican grain ground in Canada was legally and practically
hel i as entitled to importation as Canadian flour.
There was no doubt whatever of that. In point of fact, then
the Canadian Act hail not made any miraculous sprinw, but
what it exported in 1838, was the grain of the United .Sates.
No one could suppose that American grain was careied all orer
the country, and was substituted in aßthe districts of Canada
for Canadian grain, but there was no question that American
grain did cross the border and was shipped over to this country.
They were now about to propose a duty of 2.1. a barrel on the
importation of flour fom America. They had brought for-
ward this motion,. with neither a British or a Canadian object ;
the reference to Great Britain was altogether trivial and re-
mote, and he did not think it Would have been worth
while fur England to pass such an Act, but it was
relative to inaercolonial trade, and justice to all our colonies.
Canada had at present the privilege of charging the duty on
flour and exporting it, and our other colonies were compelled
to purchase corn from Canada ; take Newfoundland
for example. Was it not most unjust that the
consumer in Newfoundland should be prevented from going
to the cheapest place for his flour ; in other words, that he
should be compelled to go to Canada for his flair, when he
could get it much cheaper in the United States. It was to
prevent such a state of things as this that they proposed to lay
a duty of on the importation of American flour into Ca-
n aria He thoeglit they should either equalize the tax
on importation of corn in all thee colonies, or else
abolish it altogether. The state of that law, therefore, would
be to place a duty of 2s. on the importation of corn into all
the Colonies of North America. Canada was the only one
exempt at present. ss. was the duty in the other colonic:, it
was now proposed to reduce the duty in all to 2s.
Mr. LABOUCHF.R,E having briefly explained, said he
wished to know which of the British Colonies would be
benefited by the proposed measure. Canada took no flour
from any other country but the United States. By putting
a duty on American flour, they were protecting no produce
whatever of the manufactrees. It appeared to him, and he did
not make use of the term out of any disrespect—to be done in
a spirit of malevolence ; every other colony had some, duty on
imports, and it was too bad to leave Canada out.
After listening very attentively to the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite with tercet attention, and though he was always re-
markably clear in his statements, yet he (Mr. Laboucherc) was
utterly unable to reconcile them ; he hoped that the
Government would reconsider that question, for they
must see, if they did reconsider it, that it could
effectuate no good whatever; a more unwarrantable,
foolish, or absurd tax never was imposed —(Cheers from the
Opposition.) He trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman, if he
could find no other better reasons than those he stated to
maintain the proposition of the Government, world not stein
the Statute-b kelt with such a measure.—( Hear.)
Mr. GLADSTONE said the astonishment expressed by the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite appeared to be so great, that
he could not resist saying a word with reference to it. The
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) asked upon what
principle this measure had been brought forward ? The Go-
vernment intended to do the same—the very thing which the
Right Hon. Gentleman himself (Mr. Labouchere) had done
last year when he was passing his Bill with reference to East
India rum.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) The
Right Hen. Gentleman then gave a privilege to purchasers of
East India rum in another market..--( Hear, hear.) He pro-
posed a prohibition upon the importation of rum into
the East India markets. That article wee prohibited
there. Now, it was precisely upon the same principle
that Canada claims, as an exporting country the iirivi-
lege of other exporting markets; that they sdould
not ,be subjected to prohibitions, Nut to a moderate tax.
What he (Mr. Gladstone) me int by saying that this was not a
British object was, that it was not exactly connected with the
British markets. The object of the Govesame at wrs to do
just'ee to Canada and to all parties interested.
Mr. C. 13ULLER asked, how could this measure be neon
the same principle as that of his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. a.a-
imuchere)? In what colony was it that the Right Honourable
Gentleman (Me. Gladstone) proposed to put on a duty upon
Canadian corn, to give a fear chance to the importation
of American corn? The Right Hon. Gent.'s ( Mr. Gladstone's)
statements were quite at variance with his magniloquence
at the beginning. It appeared that he found one colony better
off than another, and he told the House he was determined to
place both on the same fo?oting.—(A laugh.) Tic would now
apply another argument. ,The quantity of Hour amt corn im-
ported amounted U, 5h)3,000 quarters, or 43,000 qu.—ters per
annum, and the price, according• to their olio rvtr..T., was
from 50s. to 5.).. The:reight to England from Montreal could
not be less tha Ms., so that the price was 635., or 05s. in this
country. It therefore appeared to him, that, placing any duty
on Canada produce was quite nugatory, because it could, not

... .
come into the market without any duty at. all.—(Hear, hear.)
They might make the most of Canada for the purposes of
•
hour of the night,
trade, but Canada would make returns, and the • bad already
). •
pot a duty of 5 per cent. on British manufaaturc,. Suray,
an importation of 43,000 quarters at a rate of •635. or 655.
would not ruin the agicultorists, and . they might get th?ir
duty of 5 per cent. taken off their manufactures —( Hear. )
a sabstantial in.
He would suggest to the Honourable Member not to
ne
steps tot tothme make that privilege
Noble Lord near
ofsomuch impr.tance ought not to be so
I pressedisposedcaulsteisamegfou, teeisoetndi 0
nttioie a
best divisioncourse,
atthat
in Its opinion, to ba pursued,
would be to put it off till the House went into Committee on
the Bill, and thus he by that means would he
giving the Go-
Mr. S. WORTLEY rose for the
_.p purpose of
"Presiing his
justice.
—nt(ainieaor
haeratru.n)ity to do away with woitshe
choilonc.urrHeneceoolnv
in favour of Canada, as being on'- of their own colonies, and
that if they did not so act, they would be conferring an advan-
tage on America, which deserved no such "'outage at their
hands. .He did not consider the reasonsi given by the Hen. Gen_
sitihder'se.hdaitt fahiardtofatialek
Gen-
tleman opposite valid or substantial.
there
The Committee then divided, when appeared_

peas, anti beans, was agreed to.
Wipil:nrSloeinber, after the
. For the resolution .................................... In
resolution.., 97
rmbeseosvi bnegetthleairst
For the amendment ..................... ~ ........... 3t
•------97
The remainder of the scale was then agreed to.
The scale of duties tir.on. rye/
why'
reat many Members of
tuo-oduilsdeutlstscitthbeealv)eeirlaegeet3lyv)lpleZ ttioletlITIIII11:1
is
an opportunity of
listtheBl njoi::fahlinotilsi.levieo)trfEol‘ltilLesalhqsiatausyidechlsiobtnlieljefalatutv:forlea:nioirculilo:bettifit°:olPdr'cirj.l'icift:OlhieleHt.
hooutisepgeoh:strntepo,mpirtoihpt
c:erce." :
st,ould eg :ee to the resolution
Mr. BARCLAY had no objection to this Bill being pro-
caemeedneadmweintht,inifchoemsalhoitutlethave
he was
C.
aßatUtfo..LsaEglgt—estTshaesr,,taisio,tn a
course they
this side 0 the House had (Pit" it, under the impression
that there would have ben en adjournment of the discusiion.
He would propose that they
After a short conversation between Sir R. Pz.Et. and Mr.
ninoi'gvh, tletah%i
Inkg
atxhpeeind
,geruiitt.e_a(thileiabre,rtileatro. >r .e
,a, y
HAWEs, the resolution was agreed to.
Co'onel SII3 . •..
THORP left it to the decision. of the House
ychother he shouli go on with his resolution f`V Co. 1!
Sir R. PEEL suggested that the SPeaker shoul 4 state whe-
ther it would be consistent with the forms of the Hense for hi.
Gallant Friend to move his resolution in COmmitteb on the Bill.
The SPEAKER said, if the resolution would have. the effect
of increasing the duty on,corn, it could not he.
Colonel SII3THORP then withdrew his resolution "for the
pregent.
Sir V. BLAKE then rose to move that corn should be

THE SUN, LONDON, J TUESDAY EVENING. MARCH 1, 1841.

admitted free of duty for a yell., or for such other limited pe-
riod as Par iament might deem fit and proper, but at the
suggestion of Sir Robert Peel he withdrew his motion.
The Report was then brought up and ordered to be received
this day (Tuesday), and the House adjourned at Half-past
One o'clock.