The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-11 00:00:00

sETMCES IN CHINA.

Mr. H. BERKELEY gave that, on the Bth of
July next, he should move for a Committee iff the
whole House, for the purpose7of examining into the
propriety of presenting a humble address to her Ma-
jesty, praying her Majesty to order that the services
of the officers, the seamen, and marines, who served in China
in the years 1841 and 184, should be taken into consideration
with the view to their pecuniary recompense.
REFORM BILL.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice that, on the Bth July, le
should move for a repeal of the ratepaying clauses of the Re-
form Bill.

NEW ZEALAND.
Mr. A GLIONBY vreuld wish to put a question of some
importance to the Hon. the Under-Secretary for the Colonies,
whom he saw opposite. He wished to know whether
dispatches had been received from New Zealand,
and whether those papers would be laid on the
table of the House previous to the introduction of the question
on the subject of that colony by his Hon. Friend the Member
for Liskeard?
Mr HOPE said that papers down to th.t 19th of December
had been rc ceived at the Colonial-office, aid he had that mo-
ment directed that they should be laid before the House at the
earliest opportunity.
THE CASE OF THE WOMAN BRISCOE.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE wished to know from the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite if he had received any further information
relltive to the case of the unfortunate woman Briscoe, at Wor-
cester, to which he ( Mr. Duncombe) had once before called
the attention of the House?
Sir J. GRAHAM was understood to reply in the negative.
CORN-LA WS.

Mr. VILLIERS said, that in rising to submit to the House the
important question which was involved in the resolution
to which he was about to call the attention of the House, he
believed he might congratulate himself at least on one thing,
which was, that by a sort of general understanding in that
House, the propriety of this motion being made was recog-
nised, or at least it was acknowledged generally that such was
the unshaken conviction among numerous classes of the
importance of the objects connected with the question,
of the necessity which existed for some decision, in order to do
away with the unsettled state in which it remained at present,
that it did become the duty of some Member, before the
close of the session, to test the opinion of Parliament,
and, if possible, to elicit the views which influenced
Honourable Members in that House upon the sub-
ject. If he had apprehended rightly the reasons which her
Majesty's Ministers had given when they had occasion to speak
on the measure which had already been brought forward this
session, on this question, they had said that this measure in-
volved principles opposed to the policy of the law itself, and that
it would be impossible for them to givea satisfactory vote to that
motion until they had decided thegeneral question. They said that
that was a question recently raised in that House, and that
when the general principle was considered, then would be the
fitting and proper moment to express their conviction on this
question. He bad been further encouraged to bring forward the
question in consequence of the manner in which the Noble Lord
t he Member for London had represented the worth on that side of
the House, and stated that his conviction was that no mo-
ment could be so fitting or so appropriate to
the discussion of this question as the present. He
had further reason to be pleased at the part he had taken
on this subject, when he had had reason to believe that many
Honourable Members opposite had declared that they agreed
in opinion with the Honourable Member for Brecon, who
had said that, whenever the time came when the people of this
country should say this law was unsatisfactory to them, that
was the time to abolish it altogether, for it would be impos-
sib'e to legislate upon it. Now, so firmly convinced was he
( Mr. Villiers) that the time hail now arrived when
this law could no longer be deemed satisfactory to the people of
this country, that he was prepared to move that it be alto-
gether abolished, fur it never could be legislated upon. On
these grounds, then, he would say, he hoped he
would be excused, if he should be looked upon
by some Honourable Members as having brought
forward an extravagant measure, or of having introduced it at
a peculiarly inconvenient time. He was encouraged in this
course by the Right Hun. Gentleman the Secretary of State
for the Home Department, who had expressed his approbation
of the resolutions proposed by the Noble Lord near him,
upon a late occasion, when he said he did not object to
those resolutions upon any other ground than that there
were too many of them proposed at one time. The
principle involved in those resolutions was the same as that
advocated by him, and, therefore, no real difference existed
between them. The Hon. Member for Essex, who was
one of the most malcontented Members of the House
upon this subject, had said that one of the wisest mea-
sures that could have been introduced by the Go-
vernment, was that one which proposed the total
abolition of the duty upon an article of general consumption—
he meant the abolition of the duty upon the raw material of
cotton, a measure which the Hon. Member entirely apps oved of.
The Noble Lord was an advocate for moderate measures. He
had acted from the desire of conciliating all parties, and framed
his motion so as to make it agreeable to the protective inte-
rest, and equally satisfactory to the advocates of free trade. In
that endeavour to reconcile differences of opinion, he (Mr.
Villiers) thought that the Noble Lord had acted perfectly
right. He was quite justified in making such an attempt, and
that this was the general opinion of the House was shown in
the spirit and manner in which his motion was received.
He (Mr. Villiers) might observe that the Hon. Member
for Gateshead (Mr. Hutt), who was apt on particular ccca•
sions to elevate his head, and feel gratified that he was not a
supporter of extravagant measures, that he did not take part
with the repealers, was now beginning to think that
the measure proposed by him (Mr. Villiers) was not too
large, and that there was evidence before them of its
being made successful. Considering the manner in which
measures tending towards the principle he sought to establish
had been dealt with this session in that House, and considering
the views which had been advanced in their support,
he congratulated himself on the great improvement which had
taken place in the treatment of those questions. He saw it,
this an indication of a sound and growing opinion in
favour of just and liberal economical principles. From the
manner all measures bearing upon the views he had so long
maintained in that House had been reasoned, he augured fa-
vourably of the early success of the principle of the
motion he was about to submit to their consideration.
There were, he thought, this session three or four Hon. Mem-
bers who had previously always opposed any alteration in this
law ; one of whom said, he regretted that such a
law bad ever existed ; another that he was sorry it
was necessary, and a thrd Noble Lord declared that he
was not afraid of repeal. His own impression was, that
the leading members of the Government, the leading members
of the ex-Government and the repealers—if the measure were
referred to a Select Committee—would be found to differ very
little in opinion.—(Laughter, and cries of e Hear.") He be-
lieved that the report of such a Committee to the House, though
it might not contain the same language, yet, in
substance, would be much of the same nature
as the motions he proposed to the House.
It would declare the law wholly unsuited to present circum-
stances—that its promoters had not any laudable object in view
—.that it had been very injurious to the working classes
of the community, and that the sooner it was abo-
lished the better. He believed that was the im-
pression in the House, and if there was such a
thing as a mind of the House, such would have been the
impression made upon it. But it was very well known that it
was not the mind of the House, but the votes of the
House, which determined legislation, and there was no doubt
but there would still be votes against the repeal of that law.
Last night he learned that the Society for the Protection of
Native Industry and Agriculture was still living; he sent for
their publications, and found them of the same na-
ture as ever. He believed the advocates of the ob-
jects which that Society had in view had even still
a preponderating influence in both Houses of Parliament--
they were not quite satisfied that it would be unsafe and un-
wiie to continue this law. With respect to the latter, it was one of
the objects of his annual motions and the movements ef that useful
body, the Anti-Corn-law League, to prove—he meant that the
continuance of the present law was unsafe and unwise. There
could be no question about the original institution
of the law. It was to make land dear, and subsequent legis-
lation had been consistent with that object. The
proprietors of the land were almost exclusively the legislators,
and thus it was accounted for. The preponderating influence
of the land commenced in 1688, with the revolution,
and in that year this sort of legislation commenced.
It was at that time that the decision was come to which
had occasioned this great change. In 1688, when that re-
spectable monarch had ascended the throne, of whom the Noble
Lord the Member for Newark had spoken in terms of no great
respect—within three months after that King's accession, as if
to :how the little occasion there was for any plea such as that
which had been set up in later days—within three
months after that accession, a motion had been put
and conceded for imposing a duty on corn, in
consequence of the war with France, and for the
purpose of raising the sum for meeting the expenses of that
war. And since that Committee had given their sanction to
the measure, the purpose of the motion had been most consis-
tently pursued, only at that time, it was cloaked under the
pretence of imposing a duty on exports. That was in 1683.
Till the end of the last century the law had continued just the
same in principle, and had effected this object in raising
the value of land and raising the rents. But at that time the
people of this country had not the same power in the State as
they have now, and the land proprietors had ob-
tained a preponderance in the Legislature and could
impose what duties they pleased. This mode of increas-
ing the value of land continued till the latter end of last
century, that is, till between 1760 and 1790, when they had
thought of a different plan, and had imposed a duty on goods
coming from foreign parts; for the country had become an
importing country, and this principle had continued till the
present moment. The object was to increase the value
of their own property by raising the price of their
land, and raising their rents, and a very judicious way it
certain'y was. The constitution had, it was true, coetinued
the same, and one might despair of any alteration but that the
position of men in this country with regard to it had changed.
charged. The lower classes in this country, with respect to
the Legislature, were stronger than they were, and he believed
that no wrong would no* long be made known in the country
without being redressed; and this wrong would have been
redressed, bad not the landlords in both Houses cajoled the
country. He therefore was bound to admit that, up to a very
recent period, that law had been maintained by the sanction
of a very considerable portion of the public, and a very
a
siderable expression of public opinion might hepointedtcooa:s
haying given that law effect. It had been upheld by very .n
fluential parties in this country, C 5 h. had not bier persuaded
that the law was of that character a hick its opponents had
ascribed to it. Great delnsions had been practised on two classes
of the community in this country—upondelusions had, however, the cultivators of the
soil, and the labourers upon it. T hose
passed away. The Hon. and Gallant Member for Sussex had very
successfully described the character and the intellect of the
farmers of this country. He said that they were men of narrow
and contracted views, with vision singularly limited—men
chiefly occupied with the vegetables they were growing, or the
cattle they were rearing, and men who were very apt to mea-
sure affairs of the world by the markets they may attend.
lle had
declared he could not submit to be dictated to by
person whose views were so narr'sw and limited as the persons
,hom he had described. If that had been the proper descrip-
tion of a farmer, it certainly was not very amiable to deceive
him, and he (Mr. Villiers) dill not think that ten persons in
this country could be produced at the bar of the House to say
the contrary. The Hon. Gentleman had been deluded by a
word—he had been deceived to believe that what meant price
was profit—( Hear, hear)—and high profit, on the capital
employed. He being a roan of very contracted sight
was not able to discover that if the land was susceptible of
high profits to those who took it, there would be many desirous
to hire that land. He hail been induced to cry out for the Act
of Parliament that held out a high price in the
.expectation of
procuring a greater profit, and derided those persons who had
told him that that Bill would not produce the anticipated effect
of a high profit. Several Hon. Members were at that moment
sitting in the House, who held their seats simply on the ground
that they had persuaded the farmer they were his friends, and
the enemies of those who wished to diminish his profits. The
principle of his (Mr. Villiers') observations was to enlighten
the farmer on this subject, and to call his attention to those
who were really his friends, and to those who, on the contrary.
were his most persevering enemies. The Hon. Member for
Somersetshire had said he had become much better informed
on the subject since the agitation of thp Ant:- Corn-law League
had commenced. He was beginning to open his other eye.
( Laughter. ) The farmer was now looking aghast when he
was told he was being protected. He would ark the Hon

that
sake

Member for Northamptonshire if he would explain how the
farmer had come into this position? He wanted him t
define the farmer's relation to his landlord, to explain
how !t Iva; by paying a high price for his land,
he was to realise ,t!a fortune. Now it was the farmers who
were to distinguish the distinct es3ations which existed between
them and their landlords. He would beg to tell the Honour-
able Gentleman the Member for Northampton, that he (Mr.
Villiers) thought that he was precluded from assigning reasons
for the present state of the farmer, who was liable to high rents
and receive low prices for his produce ; he was threatened with
dismissal if he was not satisfied, and asked to be grateful for
being protected. The Hon. Member whom he spoke of was
perfectly master of the case, and the development of the case
was what he hoped for by this motion. There were two things
which precluded him from alleging that he had caused the
farmer's present position. One was, that it was not caused by
any measure of the recent Government; and the other was,
that the landlords were in the same boat with the farmers. He
did not think that he could say that it was owing to the recent
measures of the present Government, because this was not the
first attack that the farmer had had. He had been now for
nearly 35 years subject to them. It was a farmer that had
given him (Mr. Villiers) that hint; he said that he was told
in 1836, when his position was quite as bad as now, that it etas
owing to the Whig Government being in power.—( r.aughter. )
The farmer, who had spoken to him on the subject yester-
day, said that he was old enough to remember when he was
quite as badly off in 1822, suffering as much as in 1836. and
much more than in 1833 ; the farmer did not understand that,
because protection was much greater in 1822; and there was
more protection in 1836 than in 1835. He could not under-
stand that problem. He wanted some explanation ;so that he
would be extremely glad if he drew from some Hon. Gentle.
man belonging to the Protection Society what was the
matter with it, and bow it was that it was so often indisposed.
He considered that the system was not favourable to the people,
because it did not afford them an adequate supply of food. He
thought that there was great distrust upon the subject among
the agricultural intere,t. Meetings had taken place of the
farmers and the Agricultural Protection Society, and the
views taken at those meetings were exactly opposite. At the
farmers' meeting they looked to agricultural distress, while at
the landlords' meeting they only looked to keeping up high
rents. The Hon. Member then referred to the meeting that
had taken place of the Exeter Agricultural Protection Society.
At this meeting, J. Hope, Esq., abused the Canada Corn Bill,
And moved a resolution, setting forth the peculiar and heavy
hurdenswhich pressed upon the land. —( Hear, and a laugh ).The
same speaker spoke strongly of the necessity of the landlords
and tenants acting firmly together, and more especially that
the tenants should have full confidence in the landlords.—(lro-
,deal cheers). Another speaker, who had been one
if a deputation of the Agricultural Protection Society
to Sir Robert Peel, an extensive farmer, stated
.hat he had never paid out more than during the last three
years, and never received so little ; and that being the case,
he thought if the Legislature did not come forward to their
assistance under such circumstances, he did not know wha.t
circumstances could arise that would entitle them to considera-
don. After a Mr. Chappel had spoken against the policy of
Sir Robert Peel, the meeting wound up by a resolution to the
,ffect that the resolutions adopted by the meeting should be
forwarded to the county Members, as instructions as to how
they should regulate their proceedings in Parliament. He
would next refer to a farmers' meeting held in the same
county, in which sentiments were expressed, showing that the
tenant famers looked with a very suspicious eye upon the Pro-
tection Societies, and had very little faith in what
'he Legislature had done for them. It was their impression
that the best way to insure protection was to protect them-
selves.—( Hear, bear.) Here the reporter remarked, that
the Noble Marquis present, who had for some time been
fidgety, had now become furious."—( Great laughter.) He
would now call attention to another agricultural meeting that
bad been held in Derbyshire, at which a tenant farmer made a
speech, in which he said, " Let the farmers depend

upon themselves, and if they did so, they could not fail to pro-
duce an effect upon the landlords." The next meeting of
this description he would call attention to was one that had been
been held in East Sussex, at which Mr. Derby presided ; but
the reporter remarked that besides the chairman, the judges,
and the reporter, there were but eleven persons present.—
( Laughter.) One of the speakers, upon that occasion, observed
that no one regretted more than he did the absence of the in-
fluential landlords or the respecizble tenant farmers. The
former might have absented themselves because of their differ-
ing in opinion with many who depended on them, on the sub-
ject of agricultural distress ; and the latter ni!q.ht have re-
mained away rather than incur the displeasure of their land.
lords.—( Hear, hear.) He would not read any more of those
extracts; but he would contend for it that he had read quite
enough to show that there was something demanded by the
landlords which the tenants did not wish to yield, or some-
thing required by the tenants which they were justified in de-
manding, independent, altogether, of the Legislature.—( Hear,
' hear.) The inquiry sought for by his Hon. Friend the
Member fur Stockport was refused. The Secretary at War
told them that these motions were very mischievous, and that
these matters had much better be kept quiet. He seemed to
think that was a remedy for everything, and addressedhis friends
upon that side of the House and his opponents upon this. He
seemed to speak with the confidence superior judgment gives,
or the confidence which ignorance sometimes creates. He
said to his friends, " don't talk about distress—don't come here
with your complaints, and your grievances, and you, Gentlemen
opposite, don't tale—don't say you want more food, and every.
thing will be as it ought to be.;" This was the sum of what the
Secretary at War said upon tnat occasion. It was a very con-
venient way of reasoning, but more convenient than conclu-
sive. He did not think that was satisfactory to Hon. Gentle-
men opposite, and he was sure would not be to the House.
Nothing would satisfy the people but an abundant supply of
food, which would only take place at a reasonable price.
The Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House
continually talked about improvements. They said that
the law must be left as it was, or they could not make any
improvements. The Government said to them " Protection

has never done you any good. What we have taken from you
we will not give back, and we are not sure but we will take
____

more from you." What say the farmers? The farmers say
to the landlords just what the Hon. Gentleman opposite said
to the Government; and what did the landlords say to the
farmers? Why just precisely what the Government said to
the Hon. Gentleman opposite. They had given the leases
to them, had allowed the game to destroy the crops ;
and then, when the farmers came and lodged their
complaints, the landlords said, " Oh, you foolish
people, only go home, rest quiet, don't. trouble 3our-
selves, and all will be well !" That was the state of agri-
culture at present, and that was the way in which the land-
lords provided for the protection of the tenants. The land-

lords did this from a necessity to obtain their political position.
Everything had been sacrificed for the sake of this political
influence; and it. mattered but little what the tenants might
suffer, they only obtained the cool assurance that all would be
well; and it was thus that agriculture was left to take care

of itself at this moment. They bad refusod them I;iurrjr:
They had relied on their privileges. They had claimed the
right to manage their property as they would. They had
stated that improvement bad been made, and would be made.
But when the landlords told them that the friends of the peo-
ple of this country had a right to inquire what charge there was

Of this improveMent being carried out, the Ce-ntral
Agri-
cultural Protection Society seemed to give an assurance it
would be made, but it was an assurance on which, he was
afraid, but little reliance was to be placed, and, in his opinion,
offered obstacles to any chance of this improvement being
made. He ( Mr. Villiers) wanted not to inquire into the privi-
leges of the landed gentry in this country ; he wished not to
meddle with the way in which their property was managed.
They might negleet it—they might disregard it. They might
make parks of it from one end of the country to the other.
They might preserve game all over it ; and allow that game, if
they would, to eat all the crops, instead of sending them to
market. They might use it for political influence. He (Mr.
Villiers) could well understand how an ambitious man might
be desirous of obtaining po itical influence, and use his pro-
perty fur that purpose. He could well understand how a wealthy
man might be desirous of preserving the game on his estate.
He could well believe that it was very desirable

a man through means of his property should, for the
of his family, seek fora good popition_in the county in

which he lived.

He wished not to interfere with tbetil on

these points. They might waste their property if they pleased.
They might buy, or sell, or settle their property to their heart's
content—(llear, hear) —but he could not help calling their
attention to a subject which he had brought under their notice
last session. Tt-y might settle it on their eldest or their
youngest son, whichever they thought best, but the system
which prevailed in the settlement of property at present, was,
in his opinion, bad and injurious to agriculture. There was a
custom prevailing in this country, called the custom of primo-
geniture. Under this custom the owner of an estate was only
a tenant for life, and it was impossible that a tenant for life
could have the same interest in the land which the real owner
was sure to feel. He would naturally desire to enjoy as much
of the property as he could for hirnselt.—(Hear, hear.) There
was also, unfortunately, another custom in this country, that of
having large families, and it was but natural that a raao should
be desirous of taking part of this property in order to provide for
the younger children. This had grown to a great evil, and he
believed that in the other House a Noble Duke, who
was himself a great professed friend of agriculture,
had moved for a Committee to inquire what amount
it was right to charge land with out of the annual in-
come of the tenant for life, in order for its improvement. He
believed that there was a Bill also for the same object in that
House. Thus they had the tenant for life and the tenant at
will, the two persons least able to improve the property, the
only persons who were ostensibly engaged in promoting the im-
provement of agriculture. This was the system. But he did
not find so much fault. They might do with their property as
they pleased. They might do anything on earth with it; make
parks of it, eat it up with game, do anything they liked with it,
but let them not deprive the honest, industrious, and hard-
working classes of the country of the only property which they
e
tiht a t
couldload
possessed—the profit of their labour. The result of this whole
system was that there was not that abundance of food
been described, and this was a fact so important, that
not possibly be overcome. When he al.o de dto the delusion
under which the community have been labouring as to the
corn-laws he had intended to apply his observations to the la-
bouring population, but the delusion that their condition had
been improved when food was high-priced and scarce was now
completely exploded. After the speech of the Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman the Home Secretary, that had
been delivered last year, it was impossible that the
minds of the working-classes could any longer re-
main under a cloud on that subject. The opinion had very
generally prevailed that wages were influenced by the price
of food, and that a higher reward for labour was obtained in
consequence of the high price of food. He would call upon the
gentlemen connected with the Protection Society to explain, if
possible, how they could justify what could only be considered
as something most extraordinarily untrue and deceptive. He
alluded to that opinion because it had not been expressed care-
lessly by foolish men, but had been uttered with due delibera-
tion. There had been a great effort made by men of wealth,
station, and influence, to interest the views of the working
classes on this subject. lie had lately perused the whole of the
publications issued by the Protection Society. In them he
had found the assertion that if food was made cheap the wages of
the people would be reduced. He really thought this was a strange
charge to bring against the influential classes of the country.
The corn-law was maintained by the majority of both Houses of
Parliament, and it was supported by them heeau3c they thought
the people did not care about it: 13,.ing repealed. In the pub-
lications put forth by the Protection Society, a charge had
been made and reiterated against the manuracturing (lasses
generally, that they had a sordid and mean object in view in
seeking the repeal of that law, which was to lower the
rate of wages for their workpeople.—(Loud cheers.)
The Honourable Members for Devonshire and Lincoln-

shire both cheered that sentiment. They are going to stand
forward and prove that all that has been stated is false alto-
gether—they will vindicate what they have done. and they
would tell the House that crime had diminished, poverty was

less, education was more generally diffused, and the poor were
contented in consequence or food being cheap. He would
listen to them with the greatest interest and attention to hear
in what manner the Hon. Gentlemen would substantiate all
this. He could not understand how the) would prove that
when food was high wages were diminished. and when, on
the contrary, food was cheap, wages rose. The Hon. Gen-
tlemen who professed to represent the agricultural interest
were bound to give an explanation of this. The Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government had referred
to a period when bread was dear and scarce, and congratulated
himself on the improvement which bad been effected—an
improvement which he did not ascribe to the seasons, but in
a great measure to the course of legislation he pursued. Yet
he would call the attention of the Gentlemen who advocated
protections many of whom, he admitted, were men of great