The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 14, 1845.

ihat the Government had chqsen to refuse this Committee.
He was returned to that House to support the
system of protection. He was returned on protection
principles, and from those protective principles he was not
aware that he had ever swerved.—( Hear, hear.) He had
been too long in that House to commit himself blindly by any
pledge against !hose changes which must occur in the " re-
v,lution of ages," as his Right llon. Friend the Member for
Newark had stated. But, as far as he could judge, he saw no
r,ason to shrink from the advocacy of these principles, and
because he believed them to be true, therefore be believed

facts.—(Hear, hear.) Why not go into Committee and
see on which side the truth lay, preparatory to the dis
cusdon which must eventually ceme on in the House?
s--Cries of -" Hear, hear.") Was it not desirable
to ascertain whether the existence of the law had- or
not the effect of encouraging false hopes in the tn.nds of
the farmer. ?—(1-lear.) That it had that effect was as-
serted in that House, and he now .asserted that it was
easy of proof if they went into. the Comm' ttee.—(Hear,
hear.) It led the farmers to expect a certain price for
their produce, and, since the peace, that fa'se expectation
had been the ruin of thousande.—(Cheers.) Again, it
was material to ascertain what. was the effect of the
price of corn upon wages of laboint.—(Cries of " Hear,
hear.) He heard it repeatedly said in the House
that the low price of corn produced low price of labour.
But now it was with infinite satisfaction h t heard the
Right Hon. Gentleman say that the low price of food
brought on by abundance was a benefit to every
(Hear, hear.) That must be the ease in a proper state
of the law; bat even in the present' state he believed
that it was so.—(liear, hear.) Bat how happened
it that wheneve r prices were lowered there
were the most whining complaints on the part of the
agriculturists? —(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman said that it was not the low prices that caused
the present distress but the failure. of the crops. He (Lord
Howled() believed it was so. But did that account for
the language used by the Duke of Buckingham, which
he could only describe, is the words of an old statute, as
that of a sturdy beggar —(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
The Right-Hon. Gentlemen opposite reported in 1833
the most melancholy statements as to the condition of
the tenant farmers. Their condition was painted in the
most gloomy terms—they were paying the rent out of
their capital—and they were then in a state of proerce
sive ruin.—( the Noble Lard then read at great length
an exnetet from the laafx)rt of time Agricultural Commit-
tee of la2l. setting forth the distree ed state of the far-
m, rs at that period.)—lf they took that report; the low
prices which the Hight lion: Gentlemen now Rotted to
be for the benefit of all parties were the ruin of the far-
tn-rs. However, the result of all the inquiries had barn
to take off the protection fro-n other anti des He should
like to see what would the answer of the proposed Com-
mittee be to the gloomy predictions of the Duke of Rich-
mond as to the hop >coition. of wool since 1837, and of
cattle more recently.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The
House would remember the arguments of the Hon. Mem
her for Berkshire against the importation of pigs, when
that Hon. Member said that so many quarters of corn
would be imported in the shape of pigs.—(Laught-r.)
NoW he sleethl like to ascertain in Committee What' had
been the effect of the introduction of cattle ? lie should
like to inquire for the facts which would show that pro
tection was necessary for the cultivation of wheat and
not for flax.—(H-ear, hetne): They were told that the
removal of protection woo affect the labourer. more
than the landlord, and would throw land out:of cultiva-
tion. lie should like to hoar from a Committee, as
merely matter of figures, whether rent entered so much
into the price of corn that a reduction of rent would
enable the farmer to meet a reduction of prices.—(Hear,
hear.) There, were many of those points on which in-
formation was easily attained, which would refute the
mass of vague, unfounded assertions which were
constantly reported in the House, and which in
terfered - with . the discussion of . this .momentous
question.—(Hear, and cheers.) Suppose they had
a strong conviction that the Committee would not tend
to any practical result. Was that a ground for refusing
the inquiry, when they saw at that moment what was
the condition of the tenant-farmer awl the labourer?—
(Hear, heia.) They might consider the inquiry useless,
but their reason for refusing the inquiry was to him in-
comprehensible.—(Hear, hear.) 'rho Secretary at War
stated that the agriculturists were of,very delicate nerves
—(A laugh)—and if the House were to ge into the In-
quiry, they would- be • thrown into a state of alarm, so-
that they would give up their farms.—(Laught r.) how
could-such a Committee as the Hon. Member for Wol-
verhampton' most fairly offered, containing, a majority
of " farmers' friends," give them such a shock?—(Hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman'aaid that, -in flaking for the
Committee, they (the Opposition) expected to put an
end. to protection. Undoubtedly he (Lord, Howick), for
one, did so.—(Cheers.) He believed that in the Com-
mittee-it would be shown that the repeal of the pro.
tectire duties would- be a-. relief to the farmers thems
selves. ,It was because he- had such perfect- confidence
in ,ahe' justice.- of -his ease, -that he asked for • irptiry,
because he believed-that the •most irrefragable proofs
would he -produced of the justice of his case.---(Cheers.)
The refusal 'to give. the Committee could be acconnted
for on no othet ground than that they (the Ministers)
had no confidence in. their own .assertiOns.ea-(Cheers.)
They would he .ready enough to grant the..ingniry, if
they did, not find, in the bottom of their . hearts, that
the vague sophistries which they passed muster so
boldly in the Helm would not bear to be sifted-in de-
tail,-and pass. through- the ordeal of examination up-
stairs.—(Hear; hear, and theers.) They knew that
they .would undergo so complete a 'refutation that
they would be ashamed to repeat them.---(Cheers.)
The only rational ground of•IIon: Gentleten- oppo-
site refusing to. go into this Committee wria,-that they
had really no case; .and he was the :more convinced-,of
this, because, while they refused,a. Committee, they also
refusedao grapple with the ergoinents of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Stockport against the whole system of protecting
duties. If they-felt any confidence in their caste they
mighteat• least, attempt to grapple with the. luminous
and•ahle speech-Of the Hon. Member for'Stockportaand
pro‘7e that the system of protectivedutics' was not:the
cause of. the agricultural distress: The 'Right Hon
Gentleman the Secretary at War did not'attetnpt the
slightest answer to those argument=. He (Lord Hoevick)
would now endeavour to show why it was that he en-
Airely.coneurred in the opinion expressed by his Noble
Friend the Member for London same time ago,- oho
said that protecting duties heel indeed, been the bane
of, agriculture.--(Hear; ' hear.) . If this . Gommitee
were grented, they - would show that - the system
of protection hid .been tried_ thirty 'years ago, and that,
notwithstanding ell the' mairfications which it under-
went, it was acknowledged .te be' a complete failure.—
(Hear.) The Bill of 1815 had even this advantage,
that it was concocted according to the views of the high-
flown advocates of protection..--(Eivar, hoar.) But the
result was, that in a -few years after there was a great
deal of agricultural distress. A :Committee was ap-
pointed, -containing a majority of agricultural. Members,
who came to the conclusion -that the - Act .of 1815 had
failed in its object, but they did not give up its protecting
system: No such thing—they said they - mistook • the
way, but they did not give up their . favourite notion.
The Committee made a report, and in .consequence of
that report an alteration was madein the laW of 1815,
and, under the auspices of the Right Honour-
able: Baronet opposite, the law of 1828, which
he afterwards destroyed, became the law-of, the land.
But what was -the consequence ? :In 1839, 1834, 1835,
and 1836, complaints were made in that House of agri-
cultural distress.' A Committee was again appointed,
and the Right Hon. -Baronet declared that more protest-
tion would not
.amend the case, and that they had better
wait for better times-a-for that was the meaningashortly
translated, of the report of 1833. What was the cause
of that ? There was then no Anti-Corn-law agitation,
because prices were •so low that the evils of protection
wore not then so seriously felt. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman then came forward, and. said that there had been
a good deal of bungling about Protection—that protec-
tion was a good thing, but they had not gone the right
way to work it, and accordingly he passed. his Corn
Bill with a great majority. But they were now witness-
ing the happy results of his experiment..--(Hetta, hear.)
Under that system of protection, the progress .of agri-
cultural improvement had been extraordinarily slow, as
the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Stockport had
shown. If any body looked at the country. be could not
fail to see that the degree of agricultural improvement
was far below what it ought to be. Let them compare
the improvements which had taken place in agriculture
since the peace, with the improvements which had taken
place in ether trainches •of• science, and it would appear
*from the•reeult, that while steam navigation and railroad
development, and, in fact, all the arts .and sciences, had
progress° I with great regularity, the science of agricul-
ture had by no nacelle kept pace with them.---(liear,
hear.) Although the most beneficial results might be
deeived from draining, draining was scarcely begun
in
some counties ; and while farmers allowed the best
in.enure at their own doors to run to waste, they-imported
it at a' vast expense from the coast of Africa.—(Hear,
hear.) Any person who travelled down to Manchester
must perceive that while the land in the neighbourhood
of that town, which was most fertile by nature, and
Which had an excellent market for milk and butter which
it would yield, was grown over with rushesa--(diear,
Dear)—land which required only a few hours'to render it
mast productive—that while the land near that town was
suffered-to- lie in such- a state, in the town itself every
improvement was adopted• which would - multiply the
means of production, and yield a saving, however small.
There was one modeeand only one, of- Recounting for
this, natnely, that there- was no security.—(hear, hear,
from Mr. Miles.) He understood -the cheer of the Hon.
Member for Somerset, and would advert to it preseetly.
The cause of that difference was to be found, in. the first
place, in the absence of the stimulus of foreign competi-
tion—(Hear, hear)—owing to which the.handedproprie-
tors were content to leave the land in such a disgraceful
state as it was in at present.—(Cheers.) It was owing
again to the want of leases.—(llear, hear.) Any Gen-
tleman who wits at all acuainted with the subject, must
know there was the greatest difference between those
farms which were held under lease, and those which
were not.—([sear.) Let a person for instance compare
the agriculture of East L )thian and 13uckinghamshire.
—(Hear.) But he would tell the lion. Member for
Somerset, it was owing also, and principally, to that
want of security which the landlords Could not give as
long as they kept up a system of security.—(lioar, hear.)
He supposed the Hon. Member meant by his cheer
that that want of security was owing to the Anti-corn-
law League, but he would tell the Hon. Gentleman that
there was notary security for the farmers before the Anti-
cam law League were in existence. And as long as they
were subject to the ebb and flow, whiclr he believed were
inseparable from protection, they would not have se•
curity.—(Cheers ) They would not, find it as long as
they breathed the sickly air of protection. It was this
insecurity that caused capital to fl iw out of the country
and to be invested in foreign railways, at the risk of
war. Even if they rejected this motion, as he expected
they would, by a majority of two to one, that would not
give that security to the farmers which the farmers.'
friends themselves were conscious was use sessary.—
((lear.) lie would now come to a more serious part of
the case, because, after what had been said by the lion.
Member for Stockport on the former part of it, ho (Lord
Howick) felt it would he unnecessarily wasting the time
of the House to dwell longer upon it. Bat he would
come to the effect of the protective system upon the
labouring classes ; and here also he thought that a
strong prima facie case had been made out against
protection.—(Hear, hear.) In the southern coun-
ties of England particularly, the agricultural labourers
wore in a most wretched condition. It was the wonder
of every one how the agricultural labourer supported
himself and family on the wages lie received.—Wear)

Of bread, he had very far from sufficient ; of meat, ht
sel lom or ever tasted—( Ilear)—his clothing was hindgtrtte and as to beer, coffee, and tea, he had infinitely
below•h's reasonable share.—(Hear, heaf.) Why any
One of them could not keep a labouring man and his
family for twice the money that the labourer could him-
self support them. How was this to be accounted for 1
From one or other of these causes—either that the
whole supply of the nation was below the want-
of the nation, or el,e the labourer did not
receive a fair proportion ; or else the supply was bath
t to small and even of that the labourer did not receive
his due proportion. If- that were admitted, he would
follow up his argument by showing that the system of
protective duties had diminished the whole supply of
the necessaries required for the national wants, and that
it also altered the distribution of that supply. As to the
first point, it was too plain to be denied by any ono.
H. would make that out in a short .time. He would
t ,he an illustration from the sugar duties. He had
shown a few nights ago that the same amount of manu-
factured goods ur money would buy 28f tons
of Brazil sugar, and only 181 of colonial sugar.
Ile would state the matter at a disadvantage, because
the dift'2rencQ•of the price between colonial and foreign
sugar was different to what it was now.—(Hear,) II
the duty on sugar was placed upon a proper foundation
they would be enabled to get in the country twenty-
six tens of sugar in the place of eighte m.—(Hear.)
Now, could it he for one moment doubted, that what
was true with respect to sugar. was equally so with
respect to coffee and meat?—(lTear, hear.) The first
was indirect taxation, and was bad; it diminished the
comforts of the poor, and that was its avowed object
and design.—(Hear.) The protective duties were put
on for that object and nothing else.—(l4ear, hear.)
He thought, therefore, that it was not • only not
unreasonable to ask for, but it was the bounden duty of the
Helve to grant a Committee to inquire into the subject.
Could any one deny that there was some connexion between the
distresses of the people and scarcity, especially when that scrrcity
was oecastoned by the law ? Now, with respect to the corn-laws,
the 3 deprived the lab uring man of his proper remuneration ;
labour was not protected, end he believed that the cause of the
want of the necessaries of life in America arose in consequence
of their copying what had taken place in this country with re-
spect to the restriction upon the fruits of industry.
He did not see how inquiry could be refused on
this important subject; if they refused it, they
would go before the country with this feeling,
that they were maintaining laws fOr the benefit of the owners
of the land, and for the purpose of keeping up rents and aggra-
vating the distress of the people. Was this consistent with
the Divine precept, that 4. the labourer was worthy of his
hire ?"—(Hear, hear.) But what was the fact '? Why,
while the wealthy classes were increas:ng in their comforts,
• the poor man's rents were doubled. The hire of the labourer,
who reaped and ploughed the fields, had been kept back by
fraud. He did not attempt to impute to any of tee Gentle-
men opposite the maintenance of laws that operated against
the working Classes_--the labsuring classes. They were bound
by the most solemn obligations to neglect nothing to alleviate
the condition of their fe!lovr-men—( Hear, hear)—and how,
therefore, could they refuse granting the Committee that was
now asked by the Hon. Member for Stockport ?Hear, Hear, hear. )
If they went into Committee he was content—( Hear, hear)—
but then he would say that they could not be justified in the
eyes of God or man in retaining those laws.unless they granted
inquiry.—( Hear, hear.) He could never believe that an
All-Rise and Beneficent Creator, who bad pronounced upon
the human race the curse of labour, ever intended that labour
should' go' unrewarded.—(llear, hear.) Let them remember
that every man among them was as answerable for that share
of political power which they enjoyed as Members of that
House, and for the use he made of it in reference to the con-
dition and'iweifare of the humble classes, as he was for his con-
duct in private life ; and if they did remember this, they would
hardly consent to reject the motion.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said he was quite sure that
a suspicion never entered the mind of any Member of that
House that the Noble Lord, in quoting that book to which he
had referred in his speech, had any intention of making a pere
sonal application • but at the same time the House would
agree with him that it was desirable to make allowances for
those who, as conscientiously as the Noble Lord, came to a dif-
ferent conclusion.—( Hear, bear.) Now, when they combined
what the Noble Lord had said, stating, as he had done, that no
other labourers, artificers, or manufacturers, were able to com-
pete with English labourers, English artisans, and English ma.
nufacturers, and that there was more corn grown in England,
compared with the quantity of acres, than in any other country
in the world exclusive of the Netherlands, he thought the)
would allow that the case had not been very dsfinitively
made out against the system under which each a state of things
existed. it appeared that there was a little contrariety of opi-
nion between the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member for Stock-
port. The Hon. Member for Stockport bad said, the other
night,:that in proportion as they receded from the tall chimneys
they found agriculture neglected; while the Noble Lord had
stated that evening that, in the neighbourhood of Lancashire,
rushes were growing upon the lands.—( Hear, hear.) It the
latter statement were true, instead of going into the agricultu-
ral districts, the Anti-Corn-lacy League should look to the
vicinity of their own town, where they might find land to be
drained, farms to be improved, and rushes to be eradicated.
Now, he had himself at a former period given notice of his in-
tention to mere for a committee to inquire into the causes and
extent of agricultural distress ; bat he was anxious
that it should be entirely a farmer's and farm-labourer's motion
If the House granted this moved for by the Hon. Member, it
would bo mer ely a matter for political economists and free
traders. Independently of the words of his motion, the animus
of the Hon. Member's speech made
.him doubt whether he
would be justified in giving him his support. Skilful as that
speech was, able in its details, and unvioleut in.its language,
whets he considered the picture which the Hon. Member hail
drawn of the tenan`.s-at-will and the tenants-at-lease, he could
not help thinking that he made a serious charge without dis-
tinction of party against the landowners of England. When
he heard him say that nothing could be mare miserable than
the condition of those classes of persons, that they were
averse •to all improvement, that.. they lived in indo-
lence, sloth, an.l inactivity, and were constantly corning to
that House for • protection, he certainly did feel that it would
not be b: easing in him, reterned as he had been by an agri •
cultural constituency, deeply honouring the landowners of this
country, and feeling that .on the whole they had done their
duty, to vote for a mutes. which had been introduced by stieli
a speech.—( Hear, hear.) He had the high authority of the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, for de-
claring that the decision. with reference to a motion for a
Committee .was a great degree to be determined by the
animus of him who moved for it.--( Hear, hear.) On the
whole he was very sorry that the Government had chosen to
refuse this Committee.—( Hear, hear.) He regretted that his
Right Hon. Friend, speaking the sentiments of the Govern-
ment, had felt it his duty to recommend him to withdraw his
amendment. He knew very well what was the meaning of that
advice.. Though it was given with all that agreeableness and
good nature which rendered everything that fell from that
gifted gentleman. .so undisagreeable.--( Laughter )—softening
down the refusal of the negative as mach as possible, it was
still tantamount to saying " if you divide on your amendment,
you will find yourself in a miserable minority."—(No, no.)
Now there were three parties in that House in reference to this
Committee.. There were the free traders, who were anxious,
for a Committee to blow up the country gentlemen. There
was the Government, which refused this Committee,
for the old official reason, that to grant it would create excite-
ment, and raise unfounded .expectations.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) The third party was himself, who earnestly wished
the inquiry, from a belief that so far from exciting it would
tend to soothe, and that so far from unsettling it would tend
to- tranquillise the country.—( Heat, hear.) He could tell
Hon. Members, that if they thought agricultural distress
was local they . were completely in the wrong ; and as
he was not to have the opportunity of bringing these
farmers there to speak for themselves, he trusted that
the House would permit him to read some extracts from the
speeches.which they had made when they had met together.—
( Hear, hear.) If they had often exaggerated, that was one
reason in favour of allowing them to come before the House,
in order that mistakes might be removed. He would begin
with a meeting at Market Harborough. The Hon. Member
then read a resolution, to the effect, that the admission o:
foreign corn at the present low rate of duty was unexpected
and uncalled .for. The. Hon. Member next read a petition
from Durham, stating that the agriculturists had been greatly
injured by .the late alteration in the corn-law, the tariff, and
the law with respect to Canadian corn. The Honourable
Member then read resolutions passed at meetings in
Devonshire and in Lincolnshire, couched in similar
language. A resolution passed at a 'meeting in Shrop-
shire, recommended the imitation of the spirit of union ex-
hibited by the .members .of the Anti-Corn-law League. The
Agricultural Protection Societies of Rutland, Leiceetershire,
Essex, and Staffordshire, all se oke in a similar tone, all declared
that distress existed equal to that he had read. Therefore,
when the Right Hon. Member for North Wiltshire said the
distress. was local, he mutt inform him that he did not speak the
sentiments of the farmers. The distress of these farmers was
exaggerated by the feeling that the Government was either not
aware of its extent or pressure. Had one-half of the distress
existing among the farmers, existed in the manufac-
turing districts, there would have been no end to the
clamour raised it their behalf.—( Hear, bear.) He did not
say that in that case he should blame the manufacturers—he
did not say that in such ceac he should blame the farmers. He
should not, on the one han'il, charge the manufacturers with
being too clamorous, nor on the other hand would he accuse the
farmers of being too supine. But he begged the Holler) to
remember. that the characteristics of the two classes
were essentially different. It was the habit of on,
class to unite—of the other to endure in isolation.
Therefere, when the question of agricultural distress came
before the House, both that House and the Government, what-
ever might be its political complexion, ought to remember the
characteristics of these two classes, and be careful how the)
neglected the &aims of the agriculturists. 'I he Right Hon.
Member for North Wiltshire had said he did not wi h to see
agriculturists come whining to that House for protection.
He (Mr. Stafford O'Brien) should himself be sorry to see the
bold yeomen of England come whining to that House, or else-
where. But he was sure the Right Hon Gentlem el did not
mean to say that if any portion of her Majesty's subjects felt
that they were in distress, and that any legislative enactment
would remove that distress, the farmers, if they come before
that House, and spoke by petition or through the voice of their
representatives, ought to be charged with whining. lie laid a
stress on this, because he knew well how eagerly every word
uttered in that House by the Government was watched, and
because he was anxious to do away the effect of an expression
which seemed something like unkindness or inconsistency
towards them. The Noble Lnrd the Member of Sunderland
had referred to the duties on wool, cattle and flax, and had In-
stanced these as three cases in which the repeal of the
protective duty might be considered as advantageous. He
could not but think that if The Noble Lore' had permitted him-
self to consider for a moment, he would have found that no
three articles could have been more injudiciously chosen. The
Noble Lord, skilful as he was in other things, would not be
considered as a practical grazier, if he thought that the effect of
the tariff, wi h respect to the importation of cattle, vrouldrealise
what was expected from it at the end of three years. With
respect to the ditty on flax, the repeal applied not to flax that
had been grown, but to that which was yet to grow ; and whe-
ther flax could be grown at all without a protective duty re-
mained to be proved. He had spoken with a farmer en this point,
sad he had said," If they could get a protectiveduty on flux, he
believed they could grow it very well in England."—(Hear. and
laughter.) The Noble Lord had argued that flex had been
grown without a protective duty, but he denied that tea any ex-
tent this had been the case. Flax was not grown in England.
._,(" Ireland," from several Hon. Members on the Oppositioe
benches.) He was mare of that fact, but the Noble Lord was
not speaking of Ireland, and whether flax could be grown in
England without‘a protective duty war an experiment that yet
remained to be tried. The Noble Lord alluded also to wool—
he should recollect that when the repeal of the wool duty was
proposed the agricultural interest did riot oppose it ; and he,
therefore, might give them fair credit for some degree of wis-
dom when they oppeted the reduction of the duty on corn. It
showed that they could discriminate—that they were able to
judge which duties might be repealed and which might not.
They were not misled and blinded by any theory to declare
that every kind of restriction was mischievous, nor did they
from the other extreme wish to retain every protective duty in
operation. They applied their minds to the question of re-
striction and that of the removal of restriction, and they might
claim equal merit for that which they bad the wisdom to refuse
anti that which they had the wisdom to retain. He was sorry

they would bear inquiry.—(Cheers.) He wag not going to
s,ty that in that House it was prudent to grant every inquiry
that every man might p -opose, at his own time, on his own
terms, End f-ir his own purpose ; but he did say, that when
they had heard the Right Han. Gentleman the Secretary of
State for the II me Department get up and introduce his
Bill on the law of settlement, and tell them that one person
-ut of every ten was receiving parish relief—when, in addl'ion
to this, he was able to bring forward statements from the whole
country of the extent of agricultural distress—it seemed to
him that the time had come when there should be this inquiry.

he could sugeest produce any t•ffect in bringing the same rate ' to explain the reasons which induced him to vole against the
of wages paid in British ships to that pai lin foreign shies, Atr. mce ion of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Stockport.
liume said it wool Ibe impossible to say, because there was a lie was a member of a Committee which sat in 1836, on the
great variety of foreign ships, and a great variety of rates of subject of agricultural distress, and though they had heard
wages, and a great difference as to the quality of find in foreign evidence from April to June, they were not able to come to
ships, but that the price of provisions in the ships any conclusion.—( Hear, hear.) He opposed the motion, be-
/nest be cheaper, and the wages less. He hoped this juste cause he thought that Committee would come to no conelu-
7, /lieu Government weld I take notice of these remarks of Mr. thin. lie thought it would only do mischief, that it would
Hume. Wages were the very reerrow of the whole question, hold Put fa.he hopes to the tenant-farmers and labourers, and
and the Government should give Mr. flume's evidence their upon this ground he thought it unwise to appoint a Committee.
st serious consideration. He knew he ought to sit down. Ile would not seek popularity by holding out hopes to the
—( Laughter.) Nothing could give him more pleasure than agriculturists.--(Hear.)
to know that he would never be called upon to open his lips Mr. COBDEN replied. All were agreed as to the
again.—( Renewed laughter. ) It bad been his fate, and it cause of the distress that existed—(Hear, hear)— and yet
was still his fate, that currency should be the great stumbling- they would not agree to any inquiry on the subject.—( Hear,
block between him and the Right lion. Baronet at the head hear.) In short, there was nut a single motion put forward by
of the Government, and he verily believed that currency had the benches opposite which was riot a source of laughter—
more to do with the question than anything else. He would which was not considered a sham. If Gentlemen opposite
give a decided negative to the motion of Hon. Gentle- would only separate themselves from the Government, they
man. The farmers, from top to bottom, would be thrown might do anything they ;leased.
into despair—( Hear, hear)—and it world entirely unsettle Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
men's minds on a steiject already the cause of so much dissen- divided, when there appeared—
sion and excitement. a For the motion ..
Mr. WILLIAMS said the Hon. Member who had just sat Against it
down began by reflecting upon the speech of the Noble Lord Majority against the motion
the Member for Sunderland, and said it was characteristic of The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
the days of Cromwell. Without saying whether he would House adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock.
agree with him, he would observe what he considered the lion. I
Member's speech was characteristic of—the present. day and
no other.—( Laughter.) The speech was characteristic of the
class to which the Hon. Member belonged. If the lion.
Member would excuse him from expressing his opinions
freely, lie would say. that he represented the decline and decay
of his class. The lion. Member for Norfolk must not be
offended with the remark that he was about to make.
Mr. WODEHOUSE—Not a bit.—( Laughter )
Ms. VILLIERS—The lion. Member said he had exagge-
rated and misrepresented in font:, former speeches, and animad-
verted to a speech made by him in which he stated that in
1797 the agricultural classes were depressed. lie presumed
in that assertion still, although the Hon. Member for Norfolk
said that at that time they were very well off.•
Mr. WODEHOUSE—I diel not say any such thing?
Mr. VILLIERS said he understood the lion. Member to
say they were very ill off. That was the year when country
Gentlemen tested the scheme of making other people pay the
wages of the apiculture' labourers. lie would now attain
state that there was no period when the price of food was high
th it the labouring classes were not seriously distressed.
Mr. WODEHOUSE-1822.
Mr. VILLIERS—It was precisely in that year thi•st a
Noble Lord, in the other House of Parliament, spoke of the
distress of the labouring classes in the agricultural districts.
The statement of the Hon. Member for Stockport was dear,
full, forcible, and lucid, but how was it answered ? He stated
what the coalition of these districts was, he desired investiga-
tion, and challgeged contradiction—he called totem the farmers'
friends, but they did not adduce a single argument against
•xliat. he stated. The Secretary at War affected to treat the
question will great indifference, but he could assure him that
it was one in which the people of this country felt the
deepest interest, and he bitterly complained of the mode
in which the Legislature had treated the subject. He really
thought that the Right Honourable Gentleman had treated
the House with indifference, if not with neglect and contempt.
Could the Right lion. Gentleman deny that Protective So-
cieties were in active operation is all parts of the country, ex-
pressing their opinion on the agricultural depression and distress?
Was not that an evidence of general distress? He (Mr. Villiers )
thought that this was evidence of great importance, and a proof
that the distress which existed xas both general and great,and
he thought that it supplied a sufficient reason for inquiry. Yet
it was said that committees were of no use, and he thought that
the lion. Member for Wiltshire ( Mr. Sidney Herbert) had
treated the House with disrespect, for he hail asserted that if
they would tell him who sat upon the Committee, he would
easily draw up the report. What was the inference to he drawn
from this ? Why, that Committees were of no use. Now, he
would defend the House before the country from the assertions
of a Member—from the assertions of a Cabinet Minister, and
he would venture to tell that Right lion. Gentleman that Com-
mittees had been of the utmost. use. lie would venture to as-
sert that no great measure had been brought before that House
without a previous inquiry.—( Hear, hear ) The Municipal
Law, the Poor Law, the Reform Act—all the great
measure; had been preceded by inquiry—(Cheers)—and he
really thought that in making that assertion the Right Hon.
Gentleman had treated the House with great cat:tempt. lie
(Mr. Villiers) was of opinion, that his lion. Friend had
chosen a very opportune period for bringing forward his
motion, and that it was entitled to deference and great con-
sideration from the House. He could not for his own part un-
derstand on what principle the Government granted or re-
fused these Committees. They had granted a Committee on
the game-laws the other night ; they had not refused inquiry
to the shipowners last year, and why not then grant a Com-
mittee asked for by nis lion. Friend. The motion stood pre-
cisely on the same footing, and was equally entitled to inquiry
as the motions to which he has referred.—( Hear, hear.)
A meeting hod been held the other day at Warwick,
where the Earl of Dartmouth was in the chair, at which
speeches were made and resolutions passed declaratory of the
conviction of those assembled. That the measures of the pre-
sent Government went neither more nor less than to confiscate
property.—(Hear, hear.) They said, that their measures
would confiscate property. The Earl of Dartmouth said so,
the meeting said so, the resolutions said so : and he thought
that it wits a very great shame that those assertions and resolu-
tiens should go uncontradieted. Let them grant this inquiry,
arid they might summon the whole of these parties before the
Committee, a• d make them state the grounds on which they
made these assertions.—('clear, hear.) It should be recol-
lected that this meeting was attended by a great number
of country gentlemen, and that they would go home and
diffuse these opinions.—( Hear, hear. ) Now, it should be
recollected that time opinion of these Lords and Spiro
was accounted as goipel much more than that which
the clergyman preached.—(Hear, and great laughter.)
Now, he did not believe these assertions, but yet they had
cause of complaint. They complained that wheat was very
low, and he did not believe all these assertions of the conse-
quence of the low price of wheat.—( Laughter.) [hut he found
that that there was another meeting held at Stafford three
days ago, in which the speeches of those who attended the
meeting, and especially of the Secretary of the Society, charged
the Right lion. Ilaroaet with all sorts of defalcatian of prin-
ciple. —( Hear, hear. ) Now he really thought that all this was
calculated to do a great deal of injury to the country.—( Great
laughter.) And ho was very sorry for it—(Laughter)—and
he thought it ought to be removed. The lion. Member for
Northampton hail adopted a curious -theme. lie said that the
agricultural mind was much agitated.--(Great laughter-) This
was a new phrase, but perhaps it was understood by the Hoe.
Gentleman who used it, as he was the librarian or secretary,
or something of a literary capacity of the Csntral Protection
Society—he could nm.t say what, but that was no matter. But he
thought that the best method of soothing the agricultural
mind was to accede to the request of His Ilonourable Friend.
It was upon these grounds that he should mast cordislly support
the motion.
Mr. G. BANKES said, at that late hour of the night, he did
not intend to occupy the attention of the House for more than
a very few minutes. lie should confine himself entirely to the
question that was really before the House, this question being
whether or not they should have a Committee to consider the
distress, and causes of the distress prevailing in the agricul-
tural districts, b cause they had been informed by the Hon.
Member who last addressed them that the motion which he
annually brought before the House would not be denied them,
whether they had the Committee or whether they had it not.
They knew, too, that another motion stood fur to-morrow on
the subject of agricultural distress, and, at no d atant day, he
hoped to bring in a measure to remove such local taxation as
pressed upon farmers. lie should, therefore, have ample op-
portunity for discussing the general principle which attached •
to the question of agricultural protection, and this induced
him to co:mfine himself to the question immediately before the
House. For his own part, when the suggestion was first
made by the lion. Member for Stockterrt, he met it with a
most unhesitating dental, and had his lion. Friend the
Member for Northampton made the same suggestion
he should have met it in the same manner. lie must
beg to offsr to the Hon. Member for Stockport his ex-
pression of gratitude for the candour with which he had
made his propotal, but certainly the agricultural in-
terest could net enter with any satisfaction upon an
inquiry in a Committee which was proposed by the Hon.
!October for StockpOrt. But he could not see the advantage
of withdrawing a discussion from that House into the more
limited arena of a Select Committee, and leaving to be con-
sidered by fifteen Members what well deserved the delibera-
tion of the whole House. The existence of the distress was
denied by no one. What then was the use of a Committee?
The cause of that distress, he ventured to think, arose out of
their having departed from the principles of protection. As far
as he was himself concerned he had no desire for
this Committee, because he had no doubt about either the
existence of the dist ess or the cause of it. 'Then with regard
to the remedy, it seas finite clear they could come to no ami-
cable conclusion in a Committee. The members of the Anti-
Corn-law League admitted that they owed no allegiance to the
soil of England. They could carry their wealth to foreign
climates and still be in the same favourable circumstances, but
landed proprietors could not do this. They were forced to
remain o:i the soil of England. lie had listened with great
attention to the speech of the Ilenourable Nlem-
her for Stockport, and he could not but observe
that there was a remarkable omission, am ! the same omission oc-
curred in the speech of the Noble Lori the Member for Sun-
derland. They had omitted to say what they were to do with
the surplus population of the country. This was a quest ien
which Hon. Members who advocated free trade always avoided.
If we impo:ted the quantity of corn that could be, and (if the
protection were removed) would be sent from countries
where it was cheaper grown than here, and where it was of a
superior quality, it was quite clear that a great portion of the
land must be withdrawn from cultivation to a vast extent.
( Hear, hear.) No contradiction could be given to that by a- y
Committee, sit as long as it. mlght.—( Hear.) But Wit h the
enormous weight of committee business that pressed upon the
House—upwards of two hundred railway committees—t. Hear)
—and the Game Committee, on which he hal the honour to
be associated with the lion. Member of Durham, he was satis-
fied that they might for this year at least dispense with the
Committee, lie did not say that there should not be a Com-
mittee upon the subject. neither did he think that the House
of Commons was the fittest place for such an iquiry. At the
same time he admitted that when there was a question of doubt
and difficulty, inquiry by Committee was desirable.—
( Hear, bear ) In this case there was no doubt
or ditlicultv—( Hear, hear)—and he did not see a neces-
sity for a 'Committee.—( Hear. ) He did not believe that any
in-ormation could be obtained beyond what they had at. present.
There was another objectien to the motion. There had been
no petition for inquiry, although the Hon. Gentleman the
Member fir South Staffordshire had presented a petition com-
plaining of the present sliding scale as affording inadequate pro-
teetion. —(1-lear ) With all possible respect for the Member
for Stockport, who moved for the Committee with so much
ability, he should give the motion a decided negative.
Lord INGEST RI E said that the Noble Lord who presided
at the meeting at Wolverhampton, referred to by the Hon.
Gentleman opposite (Colonel Anson), was not Lord Lieutenant
of any county. The petition from that meeting only complained
of the present sliding scale as not affording adequate protection.
Colonel ANSON rose amidst loud cries of " Qiestim,"
and said li would not detain the House five minutes.
He wished to explain an error into which he hail fallen. lie
had received three petitions to present, complaining of inade-
quate protection—One from Wolverhampton, another from
Lichfield, and the third front Stafford. Ihe reSolutioes agreed
to at the meeting of the Agricultural Protection Society at
Wolverhampton was sent to him with ;he petitions, and it aas
by a toe hasty readiag of the resolutions he had fallen into the
mistmke that the petition was against the sliding-scale.
The lion. Gentleman then proceeded to read the petition in
which the petitioners stated that the distress of the tenant_
farmers required the consideration of Parliament.—(Cries of
" Divide, divide.") lie was the representative of an important
comity, and he felt boon 1 to refer to those petitions which had
been platted in his hands.—( Hear, hear.) He did not vote fur
an immediate repeal of the corn-laws, but he thought that a
fixed duty would give confidence to the agricultural interest,
and he had supported his Noble Friend behind him
in his views upon that subject. He did not approve of agri-
cultural s icieties, for he thought they did more harry than
goil.-(Hear, hear.) -He thought that a more steady price
would be maintained by a fixed duty than under the prcoent
system. He would support the motion of the lion. Member
for Stockport, because he did not think the agricultural inte-
rest need be in any fear from inquiry.
Len' WORSLF.Y rose amid lour; tries of " Divide,
divide." He said he would net detain the House for
any length of time, but lie thought ho ought

It might be said, that the questions to be proposed to these
farmers would be beyond their understanding. It was ex-
tremely common to say that questions were beyond the under-
standing of common men, but, unfortunately, they were not
heyond their misunderstanding.—( Hear, bear.) They were
frequently misunderstood, with danger to themselves and to
the country. He did hope that the Government, before this
discussion closed, as they were to have no Committee
and no inquiry, would do him the justice of
saying that be had not shrunk from bringing
forward the cause which he believed to be that of the agricul-
turist; he hoped they would be able, and he saw the Hon.
Member fir Manchester opposite, to give them some intima-
tion that they had taken steps towards the furtherance of a
matter which was brought forward last session—he meant the
obtaining of more exact statistic knowledge with respect to
the agriculture of this country. He did not wish to re-estab-
lish the beard under Sir John Sinclair, but he did wish the
Government would announce that they had taken the matter
into their sesious consideration. The Right lion. Member
for North Wiltshire, and he believed the Hon. Member for
the West Riding, had been pleased to be very mirthful
on seeing the Hoe. Member for Stockport conferring with
him ( Mr. S. O'Brien); he said it put him in mind of the
entente cordiale which the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of
the Government supposed to exist, when he ( Mr. S. O'Brien)
pledged himself to more for thin Committee. This mirth
might be again excited, n' w that he again appealed for that
Committee. But he thought from whatever side or party a
motion was made favourable to agriculture, no distinction of
political opinions should induce h m to withhold his support
from it, and let him tell the Government it was not the union
of any individual Members on either side of the House, but it
was that while the benches of the House were distinguished,
and th' two sides preserved, the political principles of
one side were carried into effect by the legislation
of the other. The Hon. Member for Stockport had alluded in
an eloquent manner to the aristocracy of this country. The
aristocracy had ever stood by the people, and, he believed, would
stand by them still. While they were determined to maintain
an agricultural peasantry—while they thought that the great
merit of agriculture over manufactures was that if any evils
arose in connexion with agriculture they code{ he brought home
and traced—he was certain they would belie the history of the
past and their experience of the present—they would belie all
they had read, and all they had seen of them, if they refused, at
any time, however large might be the majorities in that House,
or the preponderance of interest, to take into their serious and
anxious consideration the great question of the food of the people.
Mr. BRIG FIT said if he had any doubts of the propriety of
voting for the present motion, they would have been dispelled
by the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down.
He had never heard a speech from an agricultural Member so
clear and explicit, or so easy to be understood.—( Hear.) It was
a speech entirely to the question, and contained a large number
• of statements from several of the counties of England, of the
amount of agricultural distress. But at the same time it con-
tained many paragraphs of a see-saw character, as if the lion.
Gentleman was vibrating between his lion. Friend the Mem-
ber fur Stockport and the Secretary at War. At the present
moment he could norm), tell whether the Hen. Gentleman
intended to vote for the motion or not. He had, however, cer-
tainly done himself more credit on this occasion than he did last
year, when he occupied two entire hours in reading extracts
from the speeches of gentlemen connected with the League,
which were not much to the point. lie had spoken out boldly; he
had told the Minister that there was some remnant of independ-
ence about them. He could not see how they could refuse this
committee, having granted committees of inquiry into the
game-laws, and even into dog-stealing. The speech of the
Right Hon. Secretary at •War was the usual stereotypedoffiaill
answer which was always made to every demand for an inquiry.
When the' Right Hen. Gentleman (Mr. S. Herbert) was
making his speech at Salisbury, near, his own residence, there
were able-bodied labourers who were picking stones from
fields at the rate of Bd. a day. The farmers were in a state of
the utmost dismay at the ravages which were being committed
by game on their farina. Did the Right Hon. Gentleman
give leases? He might or might not, but he (Mr. Bright),
very much suspected that he did not, and from the state in
which the Right Hon. Gentleman's estate was at present,
he (Mr. Bright) was quire sure that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man cold not do without a very high degree of protection. No
_doubt this Committee would be refused in consequence of the
prejudics which existed in favour of the corn-laws. This prejudice
he believed was founded in mistake. The agricultural was
nut the most prosperous class. ' There was not another class
from whom protection had been withdrawn that was not more
prosperous than' the cultivators of the soil, and more prosperous
than bafore protection was withdraw.—(" No," emphatically
from Col. Sibthorp.) Let them take the case of the iron
trade. At one time that trade was very highly protected, and
..hen the Government proposed to ab dish that protection the
iron masters were as much opposed to its removal as
the landlords were with respect to the corn-laws.--( Hear.)
They stated that if the protection were removed, they would not
be able to export any more iron, and they would be inundated
is this country by foreign iron. Now what had been the fact?
Why, instead of the exportation of English iron diminishing,
it had increased ten or twenty fold. The iron-masters had
now almost a natural monopoly in the supply of iron through-
out the world. Let them take the case of the
silk-trade. The increase in that trade since the
trade had been thrown open, had been more than
two millions of pounds in ten years. There could be no
touht that the abolition of restrictions with respect to agri-
culture would be attended by a large increase in consumption.
—(" No, no," from Colonel Sibthorp.) The case of wool
had that night been alluded to, anti he need not advert
•o it further. With respect to the linen trade, the Hon.
Member fur Dundee would bear his testtmony to the fact that
the opening of the trade had largely increased it. The protec-
tionists had first come to that House blustering, but now
they came in a more supplicating manner and asked that pro-
tection might be continued. They came down to the arena
before the public, but they did not come forward fairly to the
fight. Why did they not come and have a fair-fight in the
committee-room? Witnesses on each side could there be pro-
eucest. Those who asked for this Committee were not party-
men. Why, if it had not been for a few of them, those on the
other (the Ministerial) side of the House might have been
put to great risk and expense by another election last year.
They must recollect the shout, he would not say of approba,
tion, but something like execration, with which some Members
of that (the Opposition) side were hailed when they came in
from the lobby. They had never been party men in the coun-
try. If they got upon this Committee honest free traders and
honest protectionists, without having any mere politician, they
might fairly settle this question. The farmers world be greatly
disappointed if the Gentlemen opposite did not vote for this
Committee. He did not allude to the Treasui y bench, because
they were the politicians of whom he had spoken. The farmers
had sent the Gentlemen opposite to guard their interests.
Those Gentlemen bad, however, allowed the Right lion. Ba-
ronet to pass measures which were not wise. Their tenants
told them that those measures were not wise. At their
, meetings they told their tenants that those measures
were not wise, The Gentlemen opposite had come
to that House as the farmer's friend, and yet they refused to
go into the examination of this question. • New, this was too
bad. There were those on the opposite side of the House
vho had not scrupled to leave their party for their principles.
They, on the Ministerial side, had not yet left their party for
their principles. Some fifty years ago, he now spoke from what
he hail read in history, the country gentlemen, as they were
called, were very important Members of that House. They
frequently read of some of these country Gentlemen of great
weight having got up to p-opose certain resolutions for or
against the Government. Nobody expected Bashes of oratory
or flashes of wit, but everybody expected common sense and
honesty of purpose. Their independence was confessed by all,
and their influence was felt by all. That party had now
fallen into decreptnde and decay. Now, he was not
an enemy to the country gentlemen. Although he had
spoken severely of them, they certainly had hail satisfaction
out of him. He had said nothing harsh of them that they had
not replied to over and over again. It had been said of Charles
the First that he could see if he would, and of James that he
would see if he could. If Gentlemen opposite could see pro-
tection as ho ( Mr. Bright) did ( Laughter )—lie meant
with respect to the national good, and not as respected private
interest—they would not continue this law against millions of
their countrymen who were crying out. lie thought the
Ilitr,ht lion. Baronet exercised a little too much influence in
turning Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Those lion. Gentlemen
displayed a great deal of courage at the Freemasons' Tavern,
an I when they met their agricultural constituents they really
spoke-most valiantly. Bat they did aot do so when in that.liou-e.
fhe influence of the Right Hon. Gentleman put him in mind
,f the manner in which the It ishman tamed his horse. Did those
lion. Gentlemen recollect for what they were elected in
le-i1 ? It was to keep up the price of wheat. Wheat was
then 70s. a quarter. Would the farmers have supported them
then, if they had d:-dared that they intended to support a
measure which would bring wheat down to 45.—( Hear.)
Bat really this subject was too serious for joking. A Cam-
mi sion was going about the counties of Dorsetshire, Wilt-
shire, and Hampshire, and from that Commission a report
had lately been made. From this report it appeared that the
agricultural labourer expended about 30s. a year in articles
of manufacture, and that included making. Now the
manufacturing population were increasing, and the
agricultural
,population were increasing.—( Hear, hear.)
11e had spoken to the. Representatives of agricultural districts,
on the other side of the House, and he would ask them, why
should they not concede to this proposition ?—( Hear, hear.)
He would say to them, " Now, do be advised by the course
we suggest.' —(Laughter.) It had been said that they, at
his side of the. House, knew very well what it was already—
Perhaps they did—( A laugh)—but there might happen to be
a few who did not—(A. laugh)—and, in the meantime, who
could tell bat that the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her
Majesty's Government, would come forward with some new
proposition en free-tr ide.—( Hear, and a laugh.) But now to
put an end to this joking, he would ask the House to take
into consideration the state of the tenant population of the
country.—( Hear, hear.) He did not speak of them or their
condition in any feeling of anger towards the Government;
but this he would say, that when it had been well known
throughout the world that this subject would be brought for-
ward before the Legislature, he felt fully justified in making the
few observations he had.—( Cheers. )
Mr. WODEHOUSE said he did not rise for the purpose. of
making any reply to the comical parts of the speech of the Hon.
Gentleman who had just sat down —( A laugh)—but at the
same time he silo .1d say that his mind had been
made up on the vote he should give on this
question.—( Laueliter.) He had heard of the speech
made by the Noble Lord the Hon. Member for Sunderland,
and that allusion had been made to it by the lion. Member
opposite: buthe (Mr. Wodehouse) would say, that that speech
was worthy of the days of Cromwell.— (Laughter.) Strong
remake had been made on the state of the law in respect to
corn in former times; but he would ask Hon. Members to re-
collect the state of the country at that time.—(Hear, hear.)
In a speech of the Hon. Member for Weeerhanapton, on
this snbject, it had been Mated that when prices were low,
agricultural property was at its height ; yet in the years 1835
and 1833 such was not the case.—( Hear, hear.) Then again,
the Noble Lord had said, that in the years 1810 and 1818, the
same argument applied, but there was no competent record
of the kited that could be referred to. As to what had been said
about the state of the law in 1835, in reference to this subject,
in that year a gentleman, named Mr. Senior, published a
pamphlet, in which that gentleman had shown clearly that the
wages then paid were less in proportion to the receipt of the
farmer.—(Hear. hear.) Then, with regard to what had been
said, by Mr. Deacon Hume, he would hut say this—when Mr.
Hume was asked by
.Mr. Chapman (it having been said that
there was a great article of expenditure in the navigation of
ships) could he make any suggestion whereby this onerous
charge might be vedued—he was asked weal any remedy

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

(from the Votes and Proceeding- s of the 'louse of Commons.)
THURSDAY, MARC!! 13.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.

Motion made, and Question put, " That a Select Committee be ap-
ziinted, to inquirelnto the causes and extent of the alleged existing
agricultural distress, and into the effects of Legnitive Protection

upon the interests of Landowners, Tenant-ftrkvrs and Farm-
iabourcrs." The House divided :

MINORITY-AYES, 121.

Ainsworth, Peter Ewart, William 'Palmerston, Vis:otuit
Aldam, William Ferguson, Colonel Parker, John
Anson, Colonel Forster, Matthew Patti Son, James
Bannerman, A. Gibson, T. M. Pechell, Captain
Paring, F. T. Gill, Thomas Philips, G. R.
Barnard, E. G. Gore, Robert Plumridge, Captain
Bellew, It. M. Grey, Sir George Ponsouby, C. F. A.
Berkeley, Craven liallyburton, Lord Frotheroe, Edward
B,rkeley, 11. F. Hamner, Sir J. It iwdon, Colonel
Bernal, Ralph liastle, Archibald Ricardo, J. L.
Blakell. J. Hawes, Benjamin Rice, E. It. •
Biewitt, R. J. Hayta, W. G. lt-iss, D. R.
Bouverie, E. I'. Hindley, Charles }limbokl, C. E.
llowriiet, lir. Boland, Robert Russell, Lord J.
Brocklehurst, J. Hoisnaan, Edward Russell, Lord E.
Brotherton, Joseph Howard, C. W. Scott, Robert •
Browne, W. Howard, E. 0. Scrope, G. P.
Buller, Edward Howick, Viscount Sht-ridan, R. B.
Busfeltd, William Hume, Jessph Somerville, Sir W.
Childers, J. W. Hutt, William Stang:cid, W. R. C.
Clay, Sir W. Johnson, General Stewart,l'. M.
Colborne, W. It. Labouchere, Henry Stuart, Lord J. -
Collett, John Lambion, H. Stuart, W. V.
Cowper' W. F. Langston, J. 11. i Strutt, Edward
Currie, ltaikes Las( elles' W. S, Tancrel, H. W.
Dawso 1, T. V. Leader, J. T. Thornely, Thomas
Denison, J. E. Macaulay, T. B. Tomieley, John'
Dennistotin, J. Mangles, R. D. - Trelawny, J. S.
Divett, Etlwarl Marshall, William Nill"ers, Ctivies
Duff, James Marsl..n I, H airy Vivian, J. li.
Duncan, Viscount Martin, John Walker, Richard.
Duncan, CI :urge Malle, Fox Wall, C. B.
Duncanton, Lord Mitealfe, Henry Warburton, lima),
buncombe, 'flionias. Morris, David W.,rd, H. G.
Dundas, Admiral Morlson, General •Wawn, Jolin T.
Duntas, Frederick Muni?, G. F. Williams, William
Ebrington, Viscount Murray, Alexander Wilshere, W.
Ellice, Ed yard l'ilQier, Sir C. .
..
, Ellis, Wynn O'Connell, M. J. TELLER!.
Escott, Blekliam Osborne, Wm .ph Cobden, Richard
Etwall, Ralph Paget, Col it el Bright, Joi.n
Evans, William Piiget, Lord A.

MAJORITY—NOES, 213. •
Acland, Sir T. D. Fellowes, Edward Neeld, Joseph
Adam', T. D. Ferrand, W. B. Neeld, John '
A'Court, Captain Fitzmaurice, W. ; Neville, Ralph
Allix, J. I'. Fitzroy, Ileury Newdegate, C. N.
Antrobus, Edmund Flower, Sir J. Newport, Viscount
Arbuthnot t, H. Forbes, William Nicholl, John
Archdall, Captain Forman, T. S. Norreys, Lord
Arkwright, George Fox, S. L. Oswald, Alexander
Astell, William Fremantle, Sir T. Packs, C. W:
Basge, William Fuller, A. E. Pakington, J. S. ~
Dago; William Gaskell, J. M. Palmer, Robert .
Baillie, Joseph (Ha Istone, W. E. Palmer, George
Bailey. J 'jell. - ~_Gladstone, Captain Peel, Sir Robert
Baillie, Colonel tfordou,Captalu Peel, Jonathan
Ranked, George Gore, Montague Plumptre, J. P.
Baring, Thomas Garing, Charlel Pollington, Viscount
11.ule,g, W. B. Gioulburn' Henry Powell, Colonel
Barrington, Viscount Graham, Sir J. Fraed, W. T.
Beckett, William Granby. Martinis Pringt, Alexander
Bell, Matthew Greenall, Peter Fusey, Philip •
Benbow, John Greene, Thomas Bold, Sir John •
ilentlnek, Lord G. Grimsditch, T. Rendleshatn, Lord
Beresford, Major Grimston, V scount 'lepton, 0.-W. J.
Blackstone, W. S. Grogan, Edward Rolleston, Colonel
Boldero, li. G. Hale, It. B. Round, C. 0, •
Borthwlek, Peter Halford, Sir 11. Round, John
Bottleld, Beriah llamilton, W. J. Iloas, Captain
Bowles, Mm•ral Harcourt, G. G. Ruebbrooke, ; ). .
Bramston, T. W. Harris, Captain.. Ryder, G. D.
Brisco, Mi Ilayes, Sir E. Sanderson, Richard
Broadwoou, 11. lieneage, G. 11. W. Seymour, Sir it.
Bruce, Lord E. Henley, J. W. Shaw, Frederick
Bruce, C. L. C. Hepburn, Sir T. . Shirley, E. J.
Brae, W. H. L. Herbert, Sidney Shirley, E. P.
Buck, L. W. Ilohnes, W. A'Court Sibthorp, Colonel
Buckley, Edmund Hope, Charles Smith, Abel
Buller, Sir J. V. Hope, G. W. Smith, T. B. C.
Bunbury, Thomas Hussey, Ambrose Smyth, t•lt• H.
Burrell, Sir C. Hussey, Thomas Smythe, Get rgo
Burroughs, H. N. In restrie, Viscount Sine...lett, A.
Campbell, Sir 11. Irtor, Samuel Somerset, Lord G.
Cardwell, Edward James, Sir W. C. - Somerton, V's aount
Charter's, Francis Jenny'', Earl Somes, Joseph
Chelsea, ViSc mat Jocelyn, Vlscouut Sotheron, T. 11.
Chetwode, Sir J. Johnstone, Sir J. Stewart. John
Christopher, R. A. Joliffe, Sir W. Stuart, Henry
Clayton, It. it. Knightley, Sir C. Stun, 11. C.
Clerk, Sir 0. Lawson, Andrew Sutton, Henry
Clifton, John T. Leg-h, G. C. Tebot, C. R.
Cochrane, A. Lennox, Lord A. Tennent, J. E.
Codrington, Sir W. Lincoln, Earl Thesiger, Sir F. • .
Colette, C. It. Lockhart, William Thornhill, George •
Compton. V. C. Long, Walter Tollemache, John
Cortland, Alderman Lowther, Sir J. Tower, Christopher
Courteuay, Lord Lowther, Colonel Trollops, Sir J.
Darby, George Lytton, General ' Trotter, John
Deedes, William Mackueze, T. Tumor, Christopher
Denison, E. B. Mackenzie, W. F. • 'Villiers Viscount
Dick. Quintia Maclean, Donald Vivian:J. Ennis
Dickinson, F. 11. 111'Geachy, F. A. Waddington, 11. 8:
D'lsnoll, B. IPNeIII, Duncan Wa'sh, Sir J. B.
Dodd, George Manners, Lord C. S. Welleqley, Lord C.
Douglas, J. D. S. Manners, Lord J. Wodehouse, Edmond
Dugdale, W. S. March, Earl Wood, Colonel
buncombe, A. Marsham, Viscount Wood, Colonel T. .
nu Pre, C. G. Martin, C. W. . Worsley, Lord
Eastnor, Viscount Marton, George 'ri'ortley, John S.
Eaton, It. J. 11Iaunsell, T. I'. Wyndhatn, Colonel
Egerton, W. T. Meynell, Captain Yorke, E. T.
Egerton, Sir P. Wildman H. St. Jelm TILLERS.
Entwisle, William Miles, William Young, John
Farnham, E. 11. Morgan, Octavius Baring, Henry . .