The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-23 00:00:00

WEST INDIA PACKETS.

In answer to a question from Captain PLumEIDGE,
who was very indistinctly heard,
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT said, that in the printed
papers relating to the Admiralty regulation of the West
India packet stations, the word Liverpool was, by a
printer's error, substituted for Falmouth.
COMPTROLLER OF THE EXCHEQUER.

Colonel SIBTHORP begged to ask the Right Hon,
Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it
was his intention to submit any measure to the House
for regulating the manner of issuing Exchequer Bills,
and the other duties of the Comptroller and the Deputy
Comptroller of the Exchequer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped
to be able on an early day to lay before the House all
that he proposed to do respecting the issue of Exche-
quer Bills. The subject was a matter of serious consi-
deration to the Government, as well as to the Comp-
troller-General of the Exchequer, and some proposition
in relation to it would shortly be made to Parliament ;
but beyond that he was not able to make any statement
at present. In respect to the latter part of the Hon.
Member's question, he should say that there was at all
events no intention of abolishing the.office of Comptroller-
General.
Colonel SIBTHORP then gave notice that it was his
intention on an early day to take the sense of the House
on the subject of both the offices of Comptroller and
Deputy-Comptroller.—(Hear, and laughter.)
INTERMENT IN TOWNS.

Mr. MACKINNON gave notice that he would to•
morrow move for leave to bring in a bill on the subject o
interment of the dead in towns.
- PUBLIC WORKS.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave
notice that on Friday next, in a Committee of the whole
House, he would call the attention of the House to the
Acts which regulate the advances for public works.
THE CORN-LAWS—THE WAGES OF LABOUR.
Mr. COBDEN gave notice that on the first opportu-
nity he would move, that inasmuch as that House had
repeatedly declared by its votes and by the Reports of its
Committees, that it was beyond the power of the House
to replete the wages of labour, it would be manifestly
unjust to pass any law raising the price of food without
previously considering and determining what the opera-
tion of such law would be upon the rate of wages in this
country.—(Hear, hear.)
LEAVE OF ABSENCE.

Leave of absence was granted to several Hon. Members
until after Easter, or for shorter periods.
Mr. JERVIS moved that leave of absence should be
given to Mr. Grainger, to go on circuit.—(Loud cries of
" No, no.")
_Leave of absence was granted to Sir Hesketh Fleet-
wood on account of ill health.
Mr. C. BULLER wished to call the attention of the
House to the exceeding hardship of refusing leave of ab-
sence to Mr. Grainger.—(Cries of " Question.") It ap-
peared to him that it should be the object of that House
to make attendance upon their duties as convenent to
lawyers as they possibly could.—(Laughter.) He meant
as convenient to them as to other Members, consistently
with the proper discharge of their duties. When this
question arose last session, it was suggested that as it
was in the power of the General Committee ofElections
to place different Members on the several Committees as
they chose, the best course would be to place those Hon.
Members who had to go the circuits upon those lists in
which they would not be called upon during the period
whilst the circuit lasted. Surely that was a course
which could not be attended with inconvenience to the
public business. What was tho state of things at pre-
sent ? The Northern Circuit commenced on Wednes-

day, and gentlemen were obliged to go down imme-
diately, if they intended to attend the circuit, without
knowing in what list their name would be placed.
If the suggestion to which he had referred were adopted
all difficulty would be removed.
Mr. JERVIS could not see what possible inconve-
nience would arise from granting leave of absence to
Mr. Grainger. Of course the ti.ne would allow but one
panel to sit before Easter. A barrister could not be
excus 3cl from being placed upon a particular panel ; but
the Committee had now the power, if leave of absence were
granted, to substitute another name for that of the absent
Member. Supposing that a certain number of gentlemen
of the legal profession were appointed to act as Chair-
men, it was manifest that no Committee could sit
before Easter, except one ; and therefore there could
be no practical inconvenience arising if the indul-
gence sought for were extended by the House ; in-
deed, if it was the object of professional gentlemen
to be dispensed with, or to escape the duties of attending
on Committees altogether, he (Mr. Jervis) would agree
with the House that they should be obliged to perform
those duties • but it was not so ; all they sought for was
to be exempted front those duties during the circuits; he,
therefore, hoped the House would reconsider their deter-
mination, and that Hon. Gentlemen would not be carried
away by any feeling, that lawyers had any intention
or anxiety to shrink from the performance of the ar-
duous and responsible duties of acting on Committees as
well as other Hon. Members—on the whole, he submit-
ted that indulgence should be extended to professional
gentlemen during their absence on circuits.
Sir GEORGE GREY agreed with his Honour-
able Friend in saying, that if Honourable Gen-
tlemen were bona, fide practising barristers, they should
be exempted from being on Committees during the
circuits, and their names reserved for those counties
where they could attend and perform their duties con-
veniently and efficiently.
Mr. MURPHY observed that the subject was of first
importance to the profession ; if they sought the relaxa-
tion alluded to for the purpose of escaping attendance
altogether, he would say it was unreasonable.—(Hear.)
He thought it a very hard case that they should
be denied the indulgence which they sought, it
being simply, not that they should escape any
duty, but that they might be allowed to defer
it. He trusted he should be excused for making
his first appearance before the House in a matter of a
personal consideration, but he thought it best openly and
at once to state his views on the subject, as he should
consider it a great hardship if he were not allowed that
privilege which he now sought to obtain for another.
Lord MAHON thought the application before the
House was quite just and reasonable. The indulgence
claimed was not for the benefit of barristers only, but
the interests of the clients also might suffer much. He
did think the indulgence sought was one which the
House ought,in justice to confer.
Lord G. SOMERSET said it would not be convenient
at present to make an examination into the panels. He
should suggest, if it were the desire of the House to
grant any indulgence, that it should not be done till after
the appointment of the Chairman's panel and the general
panels. He would press it on the House, that leave of absence
should not be granted till the expiration of that period
which would be some time about the middle of next week.

As he had said before, to release the—various Mem-
bers of the legal profession from their duties in this
post. would throw impediments in the way of their ex-
ercising their discretion in conducting the business of
Election Committees.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he was inclined,
on general grounds, to join with the noes on the
motion for granting leave of absence to Honourable
Members under ordinary circumstances ; but :t was
frequently of the utmost importance to a member
of the legal profession, and might, in fact, determine
the whole career of a lawyer, his being able
.to
attend, or being debarred from attending a circuit.
In such a case, it was better that the mode of carrying
itinto effect should be considered by the

Members of the General Committee. The most
convenient mode would be to grant the
leave of absence, and then so:to arrange the panels that
the Members should not be called on duty during their
absence. The members of the legal profession migh
rest assured that the House was not unwilling to treat
them with fair consideration.
THE CORN-LAW DEBATE.

Mr. E. BULLER asked the Right Hon. Baronet
whether in the event of the House coming to a decision
to-night, he would proceed with his own plan imme-
diately ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he hoped the House would
see the necessity of bringing this long and protracted
discussion to a close—(Hear, hear)—and in the event
of a division, he should be prepared to go on with his
prososed measure to-morrow (Wednesday) ; should any-
thing occur to interrupt this course, he should propose
to proceed with it on Friday.
DETENTION OF BRITISH SUBJECTS.

Mr. MURPHY rose to bring forward the motion of
which he had given notice, relative to the detention of
British subjects by the authorities of Central America.
A grant of land had been obtained from a petty
king in Central America, and money had been ob-
tained, and an association, consisting of fourteen
individuals, had been appointed for the purpose
of carrying out the objects for which the grant had been
obtained. A ship had been chartered, and indivi-
duals selected to explore the country. One of those in-
dividuals was a professional gentleman, and the other
an individual named Bell, who was well known from his
connexion with the Vixen. These individuals had
an interview with the king of the country, who
confirmed the grant, but wishing to explore
the country they ascended, a river in the Mos-
quito country, and from thence they got into the Blue
Fields river, which they ascended till they came into
the Spanish territories. Here, being fatigued and
wearied, they were seized by the Spanish Government,
and after being taken a distance of 30 miles, were cast into
prison. The only reason assigned for such conduct
on the part of the Spanish authorities was, that these
individuals were taken by way of reprisal for some in-
dignities cast upon Central America by Colonel
M'Donnell. At the end of forty days all the prisoners
were liberated except Mr. Bell who died from the seve-
tities he endured. Under these circumstances he
wished to bring the facts before the House, and in
the words of the motion, of which he had given notice—
to call the attention of the House to the detention and
imprisonment of certain British subjects by the authori-
ties of Central America ; and to move for copies of any
correspondence which may have taken place with her
Majesty's Government upon that subject ; and of any
despatches which they may have received from Sir
Charles Metcalfe, the Governor of Jamaica.
Lord STANLEY said it would be unnecessary to
enter into the details of the case after the statement
which had been made by the Hon. and Learned Member.
From what he (Lord Stanley) understood, Mr. Bell and
other gentlemen entered into a speculation, and contracted
for a certain extent of territory on the Mosquito shore, but
these gentlemen, wishing to explore the country, had
ascended the Blue Fields River, and having entered
into the Spanish territories, they were seized and
imprisoned by the Spanish authorities.—(Hear.) That
was, however, the information of the party them-
selves, and it was entirely an ex-parte statement.
Restitution and reparation, unless the individuals in
question had been seized in consequence of some
violations of the laws of the State, were de-
manded by her Majesty's Government. The explana-
tion of the State had not yet been received in this coun-
try. Such being the case, the House would not, he con-
ceived, require an ex-parte statement, and he hoped,
therefore, that the Hon. Gentleman would withdraw his
motion.
Mr. MURPHY, after the explanation of the Noble
Lord, would of course comply with the request of
withdrawing the motion. He (Mr. M.) had been under
the impression that despaches on the subject had been
received from Sir C. Metcalfe. However, he presumed
the Government would adopt the measures that seemed
best in the case.—The motion was then withdrawn.
COLONIAL DUTIES—VAN DIEMEN'S LAND.
Mr. G. HOPE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
confirm an Act of the Legislature of Van Diemen's
Land for authorising the levy of certain duties of cus-
toms, and on spirits.—Leave granted.
MINISTERIAL FINANCIAL MEASURES.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to know if the Right
Honourable Gentleman would now state to the

House the course he meant to pursue with regard
to the other important measures of the Govern-
ment. The Right Honourable Gentleman had stated
that he was anxious to take the earliest oppor-
tunity of making that statement. The reasons were
obvious why such a statement should be made as early
as possible. Various rumours were afloat, and questions
asked in public on the matter. The Right Hon. Gentleman
might be of opinion that it would be dangerous to the
public interest, for some reason or other, to make that
statement now. He (Lord J. Russell) wished to leave
it entirely to the Right Hon. Gentleman's judgment as to
the course he ought to pursue. If the Right Honour-
able Gentleman thought it was necessary to make an
early statement, he (Lord J. Russell) conceived that
by taking votes on account, without going through the
estimates, he might obtain the necessary votes
to enable him to "go into a Committee of Ways and
Means. He (Lord J. Russell) did not say that that
course ought to be taken, but he wished to know whether
the Right Honourable Gentleman meant to go formally
through the estimates in Committee of Supply.
Sir R. PEEL was experiencing the same difficulty
that the Noble Lord would have experienced at the com-
mencement of last Session if he had continued in the Go-
vernment. He had called the attention of the House to the
subjects of the Corn-laws and the Import Duties,
and it had been stated, in the Speech from the
Throne, that it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to bring those subjects under the consideration
of the House, therefore the Noble Lord, had he continued

in the Government, would have experienced precisely
the same difficulty which he (Sir Robert Peel) was ex-
periencing at present. He (Sir R. Peel) had thought
it infinitely better to proceed at once with the
question of the Corn-laws, than to postpone the
consideration of that question until he could
bring forward his general financial statement.
He was not aware of any consideration of public interest
which should interfere to prevent explanations on the
part of the Government which they might think it
necessary to make in the Committee of Ways
and Means, and, so far as the public interest
was concerned, he was prepared to make his
statement at as early a period as possible. He had not
expected that the discussion on the Corn-laws would
have been so long. It was desirable that the House
should come to a decision on the question of the Corn-

laws at as early a period as possible.—(Hear, hear.)
That measure affected the.,duties on corn, and he hoped
that after the House had decided on the measure, those
who were opposed to the sliding scale, and those who
were opposed to any duty whatever, would receive the
Government measure as a great relaxation of the
existing system, and not to be disposed to throw ob-
stacles in the way of its becoming the law
of the land as speedily as 'possible. As
soon as he possibly could, he would bring in the Bill.
He had not been able as yet even to introduce the Bill,
on account of the length to which the preliminary dis-
cussions had extended. He did not complain of that;
he had no right to complain of it; he merely men-
tioned the fact. He proposed at the earliest oppor-
tunity, after the debate on the Corn-laws should be
closed, to take the Army and Navy Estimates in the
Committee of Supply, and if the House should feel
disposed to vote those estimates, he would, at the earliest
possible moment he could get those votes, propose
that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of
Ways and Means, when he would explain the whole of
the intentions of her Majesty's Government with regard
to the finances. The moment he had an opportunity of
making that statement, he would avail himself of it.
1f they were to interrupt the discussion on the Corn-
laws now going on, they would not elicit my opinion from
the House, while great inconvenience would be offered to
the public service.—(Hear.) What he proposed, was to
take the opinion of the House on the principle of the
law and on the duties, and then to take a vote ; after
Which, in a Committee of Supply, he would state his
financial proposals.
GOLD COINAGE.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in answer
to an Hon. Gentleman whose name we could not learn, said
that the attention of her Majesty's Government had been
for some time directed to the state of the gold cur-
rency, and that they had in preparation a measure to
remedy the inconvenience now complained of.
CORN-LAWS—ADJOURNED DEBATE.

On the Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned
debate being read,
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said, that being the represen-
tative of a constituency, which had sent a petition,
signed by 20,000 persona; to that House, but which
their rules prevented him from entering upon
at the time of the presentation, he was now anxious to
say a few words on the subject of that petition, as
a duty he owed to himself and his constituents.
He rose, therefore, to give his unqualified,
unhesitating, and uncompromising support to the motion
of the Hon.- Member for Wolverhampton. He
(Mr. Sharman Crawford) called for the imme-
diate and total repeal ' of the Corn-laws,
not only on the part of his constituency,
but on the part of every class of the nation, not
even excepting the landlord, for, as a landed proprietor,
he felt, that though the Corn-laws gave an apparent ad-
vantage, yet the landed interest would suffer ultimately
more from their continuance than from their repeal.—
(Hear.) It had been alleged that it was injudicious to
bring forward this motion, because he knew it was
impracticable to carry it. He asked would it not
be also imprteticable to carry a modification of the mea-
sure now introduced by her Majesty's Government? The
Government was so powerful that they could carry
their own measure without noticing any modification, and
therefore it was right to make a stand upon true
principles. The Corn-laws were not supported
by justice, or by wisdom, and therefore, we were
right in demanding their immediate and total repeal.
He demanded a total repeal because' he thought it was
only consistent with justice, and he demanded the imme-
diate repeal because the necessities of the people
required that it should be immediate. He felt that
those who supported the total and immediate repeal were
bound to bring the subject before that House ; for he
was of opinion that no Member should agitate the public
upon-a question which they were not ready and willing to
discuss within the walls of the House. Those who main-
tained the principle which he maintained, might be called
" impracticables ;" but he would ask, how could any
great principle be supported or defended, if there were
not some parties ready to stand upon the high ground
of principle. Compromises might be useful ; but
there could be no compromise unless there were some
who strictly adhered to principle. But though he
would not compromise the question of a total
repeal, he would be ready to take into con-
sideration the just claimi of the agrieu.lturi4tB

•
the County-rate, the Poor-rate, and the Land_
to relief and indulgence. It had been stated that
tax, were burthens which pressed peculiarly upon t,
landed interest. Now, he thought, those claims nau,
been satisfactorily answered, and that the landed intse.resoci!
were not subject to any burdens in these respect(s,
they. were not justly entitled to bear. He held a Eli r2L
opinion, however, with regard to the tithe, taxation. tl,e
~
could not admit that the tithes were justly chargVlol;
to the landed interest. He would be ready to make
comparison with the landowners on the tithe questimn
if tithes might be considered national ;,property, ..01
would be willing to extinguish tithes altogcthe!;._!r.)
to let every man pay for his own clergyman.'(el'
There was another question which he conceived oughto._
to be attended to. It was alleged that tenatt
who had taken out leases at a rack-rent,
vet'
on the high duties, would be subjected to r
r.
great hardships by the lowering of the averag.ef..
He admitted that there would be hardship, and was P.;
pared to consider some mode of protecting them. .I,°"-11
thought the mode by which they would be proteei
was this, that incases where tenants had taken out leas?'
at a rack-rent, since the year 1815, if it appeared
that
five years after the Corn-laws were rep
the average of prices were lowered, there should of
proportionable lowering of the rent. In the sPelord
the Noble Lord who opened that discussion the Noble ve
called for such a settlement of the question as would rereionn,
all complaints. The Noble Lord deprecated cone hen
without conciliating, altering without settling. ; rasa
he heard that speec he hoped that the Noble Ler:, he
ealed. . 0 a
about to advocate a repeal of the Corn-law ;
was satisfied that no measure short of a be
repeal would satisfy the people of this country. 444
proposition of a fixed duty, or any other measure s,he
of repeal, would only excite fresh agitation. Co
Hon. Member for Liskeard spoke of the with
laws as a vested interest, and deprecated dealing r„.„„
them in any other light. He denied that tut;
were a vested interest ; they were proposed hi tee-
landlords themselves for their own Prcl, $
tion, and therefore they could not be considered
out
vested interest. He would give the House an instnglot
the powerful feeling which had been raised
tiog
of the House in reference to that object. At a Ineefo.
held at Rochdale, the working classes and the rearni,ere
turers had come into collision. Two propositions Isther
put to the meeting, one related to the Charter, and thei,ftioa,
to the Corn-laws, and the upshot was that two rese"'„,l6l
were carried—one for the adoption of the measures deeit. of
in the People's Charter, and the other for the total rePiiigb
the Corn-laws. That was a meeting convened by the ere
Constable of Rochdale, and the resolutions agreed to
alt
to the effect, that the proposition of Sir R. Peel, en the
and ,sbit•
ject of the Corn-laws, was an ravated insult to the /ltto.
ants of the United Kingdom, that whilst the nieefin,g, rto
tested against the Ministerial plan as an insult
0011
the people, yet they considered that the tho
remedy to existing evils, was the adoption hey,)
People's Charter as the law of the land.—(Hear, :ater
There was no place in the kingdom which could be a g %ale.
proof of the desolating effects of the Corn-laws than Ilechf the
Before their enactment it was the flourishing seat °
tho
flannel-trade. But upon the passing of the present law; in
Americans enacted their tariff, which destroyed that trauecior
Rochdale and elsewhere in this country. He (Mr. C.)
cated the total repeal of those laws, because they
_.,oent
the utmost misery and suffering to the people. waiduties
House was sitting considering the amount of protective p;ovi,
for one class, the people were perishing of hunger• nbola
could it be denied that it was a kind of slow murder tat'l•pe,
'""
laws which deprived the people of food, and produced „ es;
disease, and death?—( Hear, hear.) He felt that it Wse"
Manse
it sary to agitate this question, not only in the House, 101,',0e
it ; and he spoke in these strong terms in that House, iteatio
it was his determination out of the House to take every "-cow
constitutionally to agitate this question, as tb°
sidered tlfat to be the only means by which lie
people would obtain a redress of their grievances-
std to
had only one word further to say, and that was with refit
Ireland. He was a landed proprietor there, and bad 60e1
terest of that country at heart, and he was convinced ecivaat
would be effected there till these laws were repealed. i„
country 2,500,000 persons were in a state of pauperige',icea
average rate of wages which the agricultural labourer llee."(bst
was about 4d. a day ; when such was the case he thollflu`.°ool
some other experiment should be tried to promote the elle of
the manufacturers and agriculturists of Ireland, heet,jse',
this he was sure, if the union was to subsist between '„,10
and this country, they must legislate for both on more "
terms.
Mr. W. MARTYN trusted the House would allow_A
make a few observations upon a topic that had been a P."; tes'
adverted to in the debate, he alluded to the Pop': 0
Within the last twelve months he had acted as one of
Magistrates for the purpose of revising the rentals. 'of the
county of Kent, and at that time they heard a good tle'iler
Poor-laws and the Poor-rate. It was said by the ilea' ',or'
b r for Bath that every person in the country paid the. t°
rates ; there was no one exempted. That was impossib the
e
deny, but it was utterly impossible to say thst erg'
Poor-rates fell equally upon every description of prer
Suppose a person possessed of 5001. a.year, the proprietererte
liable for poor-rates for every shilling worth of that PrFPfro°
because the tenants were entitled to deduct a portion of itscouiti
their rent. The poor-rates payable for 5,0001. a rare Or
be no less than 7501. a year. The Hon. Member th
tered into a calculation, with a view to show that thetcot
rates pressed more heavily upon 'the agricultural iiqtar
than upon the manufacturing interests of the country .0,5 t°
peered that many Hon. Gentlemen made similar objectolti'°
the highway rate, which was levied in the same way ouriol
poor-rate upon the land. The amount of poor-rates.
the year was 6,067,4201. ; the highway-rate was • 1,961.:„Ddet
of 7
Hon. Gentlemen must bear in mind that the incomewere
property amounted to 30,000,000/. a year, and if ,test, 3tl'
rated to the poor, or 30,000,000/. of landed propertyt, 1000;
in the pound, it would be a very considerable the
Ole
and if applied to the poor-rate would considerably rail 00'4
rate. If stock in trade, and utensils were also rated, it wee
than probable that one-half at least of the rate would 1;400
lieved from the land. In revising the rei tale of the "u°vre
Kent, he (Mr. Martyn) paid considerable 'attention to the .le,
portion which buildings bore to the gross property of the, 10
spective parishes. He had not the papers by him navei,vbfre°
knew that in moat of the parishes, containing geller3':;l tv`ofe.
600 to 700 inhabitants, the landed property formed 0.1),`; scbe,;,
thirds, and the building property about one-third of,t",,,or'l°.
parishes. It was not till they came to the large and in)th'll°
towns, that they found the value of the building, !f
equal to the value of the land. Out of 480 parishes h",•ll,iieb
there were not six towns in which the value of theL vat':
exceeded the value of the land of the district. If lia";
men of those towns paid their share, that alone, without
recourse to funded property, would cause a great di r,
of the burdens of the land. He did not like to reol,a.„l-05t 34,4'
on this subject, when, night after night, it was a"'thati
mitted as a fact that the land did not contribute more
just share to the burdens of ,he State.
Several Liberal Members rose together, but flee-
the 0#

Mr. F. VILLIERS remained in possession of t. be • eor
His opening observations were almost inaudible, but ber
understood to be supporting the resolution of the Dien' recto'
Wolverhampton, on the ground that it would tend r
the undue power of the landlords. Hon. and Right „art t')
Gentlemen opposite stated that it was necessary to 6714,..
interests and station of the agriculturists, but he , t,stiOc's
did not understand what they meant by the word 'ls
He considered it a very undefinable word, and o"e,,,inefj)
should be explained before it was made a subject of hew 't
for the maintenance of the Corn-laws.— ( Hear, of ,t)
He observed that many Members had spoken in favour ediat";
abolition of the Corn-lavas,who objected to theword " lonf soul; ,
but he coud not help thinking that if it were good, 'noel 0
they were repealed the better. He also heard it °get tj 'Co
that the motion of the Hon. Member for Wolverha°ll3;!iiest
opposed to a full consideration of those claims (if thtillnlc
any) which the agriculturists had. But he did not
i.,reve,.i
the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton intended tefrstoli_e,
calm discussion ; but that he wanted, if the agriculture
any claims, they should prove them to the House. tteatifor
Gentleman concluded by thanking the House for the de
vote
with which it had heard him, and saying that he wow' dy
the motion of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton%f ocP),
Sir C. BURRELL said, that in addressing hiinse, nog as
to the House, he would cite an opinion of Mr... C 41,0 aa
way of comment. In the discussion on the Corn-la 0 0,1
Ist of March, 1827, Mr. Canning said, " that variellget ht
the opinions on both sides of the House, he hat never
~,, (t;ir ,0
the landlord's case unequivocally answered." lie
ode
Burrell) considered that the attack which was being ° by tO,
the landed interest was not at all justifie.i Cie
circumstances. It had been stated by several /0 Weil)
tlemen that the Corn-laws were maintained solely for
treat'
of the landlords. He put it to Hon. Gentlemen slefit
case of disdress among the agriculturists, that dige-re 416.
not affect the other classes of the community ? .1 ear !we
was ntime so disastrous for the labourers as the, the
tha
The people then could not get employment, ana.,;ned "fat;
keepers were ruined. The home trade would be r"--000,110
Corn-laws were repealed, and that must affect the
tost.
turer. The first to feel the ill effects of such ame rise_
be the shopkeeper, the second the factor, and then t`',ebeeto,
turer. The home trade was the most certain, sod 00-00
be depended on. To repeal the Corn-laws _would bell rase
sive of the best interests of the country, ttt
would eventually suffer. Any one who wicUs
to open the Corn-trade would be an enemy to trade of Ist',
When they recollected that in former times the e
the 'bell
land was shut out from this country, and now the' a the 'well
were entirely thrown open to that country, it becaosentiroot
mart. He could not understand the policy of th°s6 thctl
who wished a measure to be brought into co
,ott
be detrimental to the interests of their country, 1-05 e
Mr. POWELL concurred entirely with the thatialiy
who had just sat down, that the discussions in esPe,;„ttr
ptuerresofnraolna it
should be conducted totally divested of asperity, an
the u'ilea'
personality.
that ilruutl eh fie r(stMore.cPurorwedelol)nctohneepeaivretdofthanat 000. 110.4,
be ;vie'
her on the Ministerial side of the House, cilrg'h ,r ina9 j,
Powell) now saw his place. That Hon. Mein-ti n to
in sneers, which he k Mr. Powell) had no heeita: of 00;
sitting would be unimportant, if that tos`nho $OO
ing were not re-echoed by Honourable Members., euse, •
stituted the majority on that aide of the '''aristecreet
were supposed to represent the feelings of the,, be thf,sele•
He was not opposed to protection to agriculture, yet' ":001
that landlords ought not to tax manufacturers to in ,40 be
selves, in otio cum dignitate ; but, within the la sit woo this
complicated. interests had been established, whted to see be'
most lamentable to disturb. He, therefore, wr!onecoos,l,o_
great question, compromised by a liberal mutual ee via!
tween the landlords and the manufacturers. It .as ther seo
'eulture bo,
to think of confining our population to on • inhabitgeled,
no resource with our twenty-five million _e _ ger_
_foot
their great expanitive powers, and the distress tti
_Yvelling ar,
to extend our manufactures. He was sorry, th? eentiog
to hear an Hon. Member condemning the riliosasinl ;G
men for participating in the Corn-law rePea,a,ken no Pareiobl.
clergy of the Established Church for having t oentite f.;
erhal33,"'
But, perhaps, this praise was ironical—p
ciergY - jot°;
Gentleman meant to convey that they, the_
_ir
ebegoteof
tablished Church attended to the shearing itnv
°goo-
of the feeding of them.—( Hear, and laughter')
erope
friend to free trade, he could not agree with the k' beta!
'oil ic,P
the How Member for Wolverhampton. , finest, ob
The Marquis of GRANBY said, that towfied upo.o,bere•
the House was one of the utmost importance, q: trustedrlt,oot;
depended the happiness or misery of millions.
and clis ter's'
o 101 •Die
fore, that it would be discussed with calm
cricultura 551
he feltsure that if it were so treated by the ag irt was w
they would find it for their own advantagaen. ; a ell
factu, -n• theee .t
to hear of the distress prevailing ie the tc r
.3. BLit lYistreilte
and not to sympathise deeply with that distress. es
d with that g
that in proportion as the house sympathised
by a repea,le„rivie
was their bounden duty to take care,
t distres: by
no,
er
ai..„ng
Corn-laws, they did not increase that
s. i
wao.
the agriculturists of their means of sub-is',!
einring te weiug
infer he
them to seek for employment in the .
the lea' • bu'ibt
ed • tor ,
distress hear.) It was said that a rem the
Corn-iase,y
was to be found in a rePea. e that tn
trat
It vas true true ,
did not agree in that opinion. it wa„, net,
cheapen food by such a measure, but
of the 'aus be 'Pi a
at
doing so they would improve the condition
nshat
wouldben
they cheapened food, the natural ctoonc.e
i That ha'
of ad;
wages would be lowered in propor
he
countries
t,
of
it.
d in al t • lea y
on of cheapening foo
synonymous vitth P
Cheapening of food was not synony