The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-02 00:00:00

the country. Repeal the Corn-law, and such would not
be the case, and he fully believed that the landed in-
terests would not suffer. The Right Honourable
Baronet's reasoning was quite fallacious on this
subject. The distress was general all over the
country, and that which affected one part affected all.
The county of Forfar was in a state of great distress.
Linen n caving was the trade which the people of that
county carried on. France and America were the prin-
ciple receptacles of their manufacture, but now they
would take very little. He would beg to read a letter
from Mr. Edward Baxter, of Dundee, in proof of what he
said. "In that town," said Mr. Baxter, " the.poor's-tates
in 1840, were only 5,6621., last year the rates amounted
to 7.0871., and upwards of 1,2001. had been subscribed
for the relief-of the poor. In January, 1842, the number
unemployed, who subscribed themselves as paupers, yas
942, (and he would beg to remind the House that, before
a man in that country would subscribe himself a pauper,
he must be in great distress.) Besides that, since that
time, four mills in the town had stepped work, throwing
695 men out of employment.. Wages for spinning and
weaving were very low in .January, 1842, since then
spinning wages had been reduced 10 per cent., and other
wages from 14 to 16 per cent." What would be the result
in consequence of the present ordinance of France, it was
almost impossible to conceive. What was to be done he
did not know. The Income-tax would rather add to
their distress. The tariff would, in time, do something,
but, in the mean time, the people were starving. There
was a remedy, however, to which the people all
pointed, and he would ask them whether they
were not called upon to throw their ports open
and unburthen trade ? An Hon. Member had inquired
what would be the effect of the repeal of the Corn-laws ?
Why this would. be the effect. Directly they knew abroad
that the Corn-laws were to be repealed, large supplies
would come over here ; . the manufacturers here would
immediately commence their work again, till the goods
might be exchanged for corn, and the hands would be
immediately taken into employ. Notwithstanding the
patience and good conduct of the working classes, their
demanes had been mocked at.—(No, no.) No 1 He could
not mistake the votes of the House. They had denied
them bread—they had denied them their just demands.
Was food cheaper ? No, food was dearer.—(Hear, hear.)
The people asked for bread and they gave them stones.
Was that to relieve them ? They must re-consider the
Corn-laws, that was the only remedy. The House
was acting a cruel and hard-hearted part, and on that
ground he thanked his Hon. Friend fur bringing his
motion before the House. They might cavil about the
remedy, but he (Mr. Hume) thought the ' repeal of the
Corn-laws was the best remedy. If the Grivernment had
a remedy, let them try it, but do not condign the whole
population of England to misery, destitution, and death.
Mr. M. AT rwooD was understood'' to say that
America had, to a certain extent, f'.llowed the free trade
policy recommended by the Hon. Member i?r Montrose,
and the consequence was that the distress;in America
was second only to that which existed in England. He

remembered well the words of Mr. Huskis-son, when

speaking of reciprocity. He said that so long as foreign

al-tides—could admitted free, so long as taxes
could be reduced, and the Exchequer still remain
in a favourable condition, they might expect that
liireign nations would fallow their policy ; but if
they could not do that—if. whilst they reduced the taxes.
and admitted foreign produce free, the Exchequer be-
came empty—they then might depend upon it foreign
nations would not follow their example. And what had
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to show now ? Nothing
but an empty Exchequer, which required an Income-tax
to restore it ; and would they expect, with that before
them, that other nations would follow their policy, and
would act with them on a system of reciprocity ? He
(Mr. Attaood) did not attribute the present distress to
the condition of the Corn-laws, but he did attribute it in
a great measure to the extraordinary fait that the British
manufactures could be purchased in China, Bombay,
and in almost every market of the world at -as cheap a
rate as at the place where manufactured in England.
This might appear to be an anomaly, but it was a fact.
The condition of the people was such that Parliament
ought, if they could not relieve, to show that they were
determined to apply all the remedies,they could to the
evil. It was not in the mouth of the „Government to say
they had not caused the evil, and there let it
rest ; but they ought to join ',-with
and assist it in cluing all it could to remedy
the sufferings of the people.—(Hear, hear.) Par-
liament ought not to separate without some such course
being pursued. He denied that the Corn-laws were the
sole cause of the distress in the country, but the people
ought not to be left in the desperate state in which they
were without inquiry and relief.

Lord JOHN hirSSELL was not one of those who
took the most favourable view of the course pursued by
her Majesty's. Government; but, although he had no
great reliance on their councils, or confidence in the
efficacy of their plans for the relief of the distresses of
the country, yet he should not feel justified in taking
so hostile a course as that which had been
adopted by the Hon. Member opposite. That
Hon. Gentleman, after raising their apprehensions for
the tranquillity of the country, had suggested no remedy.
—(Hear, hear.) All that he had done, was to say that
there ought to be inquiry into the cause of the distress.
—(Hear, hear.) Now, in his opinion, to adopt such an
inquiry, would be holding out no reasonable expectation
to the country of any relief.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Gentleman had not even proposed the favourite scheme
of the one-pound notes.—Cilear, and laughter.)
Mr. M. ATTWOOD said that he never proposed any
such scheme.

Lord J. RUSSELL did not say that the Hon. Gentle-
man had proposed such a scheme, but those with whom
he agreed in opinion had.--(Hear, hear.) As to the
present discussion, there ought certainly some allowance
to be made for her Majesty's Government. They must
allow that they were not responsible for the distress that
existed. They must allow that they f(4lt as much for
their fellow-countrymen, as any other men. They must
allow, also, that no particular scheme would alleviate
their distresses. But having stated this much, he must
state that he entirely disagreed with the course taken
during the present Session. He (Lord J. Russell) believed
they were mistaken in supposing that the financial deficiency
was the only evil they had to deal with. The primary evil was
the depressed state of trade, and the financial deficiency was
but a secondary evil. The whole plan of the Government was
framed with the view of making the income equal to the ex-
penditure, b.nd afterwards to relieve trade from its embar-
rassments. In this first object he admitted they were likely to
succeed; but, with respect to the Income-tax, he thought it
was neither justified nor necessary. He thought the spirit that
had been shown by the country to bear that tax, was enough to
convince any one that the spirit of the people was unbroken, and
that they were ready to meet any difficulty. With respect to the
second, the greatest evil they had to deal with was the embarrass-
ment of trade, and the present distressed state of the country. The
Member for Whitehaven, thought they were wrong in adopting
the plan of Mr Huskisson. He (Lord John Russell) could
not agt ee with that becauie he did not think that the alteration
made with respect to cotton and woollen goods, silks and gloves,
had been any cause of the deficiency of the revenue of the
country, and more than once it had been shown that the con-
sequences of these measures had been to increase the industry
as well as the wealth of the country. Where, however, the case
of the Government failed was that, not agreeing with the prin-
ciple of the Hun. Gentleman, but agreeing with the principle
of Mr. Huskisson, they relied upon certain changes they
had made, but refused to apply the same principles to other and
greater articles.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet,
the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had told the
House that he thought the changes in the tariff would augment
the industry of the country. If that was the case, if the Right
lion. Gentleman was right in that sill position even to some
extent, bow could it be, he would ask, that measures founded
upon those principles should be correct with respect to oil and
other articles, but that when they came to corn and flour they
were not equally so ?—( Hear, hear.) He considered the admis-
sion of foreign corn was of the greatest importance to this
country The Hight Hon. Gentleman opposite, when he
(Lord J. Russell) made this observation, observed that he had
proposed an 86. duty ; that was perfectly true, and it
ssas his (Lord John Russell's) firm belief, that if, during
the embarasssments of last year, they had established
such a duty toreign countries would have sent orcr large
quantities of corn to this country. He agreed with the Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Montrose that they might consume
a greater quantity of foreign corn than at present without in-
jury to the agriculturists. The present depressed state of the
country was not to be attributed to the want of exports, but

to the fact that workmen were paid low wages, while they had
to pay high prices for their food ; but if foreign corn
was admitted, they would get their food cheaper, employ-
ment would be increased, and the country generally benefited.
Great alarm had been created by the anticipated changes in
the tariff; and yet the Government persevered in the measure.
It was found, too, after a short interval, that the fears of those
parties to be affected by the tariff had not been realised. He
believed in like manner, that if they were to effect a material
alteration in the Corn-laws, although apprehensions might at
first be created among the agriculturists, those apprehensions
would speedily subside ; and that the agriculture of the country
would be placed upon the best and soundestbasis. Ho did not,
however, mean to say that the Corn laws were the only source
of the national embarrassments. But sill those laws had
certainly largely contributed to create those embarrass-
ments. The Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. D'lsraeli)
had on a former occasion attributed many of our difficulties
to the unsatisfactory condition of our commercial treaties.
But it was to be observed that it was not always in our power
to improve the treaties. We should first have the consent of
other nations in any modification of this kind. But it would
not be wise, while waiting for such consent, to delay those
improvements in our commercial system which we could our-
selves effect, and to which we would be the only parties. He
did not, he might say in passing, approve of the principle of re-
taliating on foreign nations their illiberality towards our manu-
factures. He did not think, for instance, that because the
French Government had punished their people by prohibiting
the importation cf our linen thread, that the British Govern-
ment should punish the English people by prohibiting
articles of French produce.—( Hear, hear.) fle believed,
on the whole, that the Government, while they had adopted
sound principles in the formation of the new tariff, had not pro-
perly carried out those principles, and had not pursued the
course which would be most beneficial to the country. Expe-
rience had proved that the new Corn-law had contributed very
little, if at aa, to an increased importation of corn from other
countries. indeed, he feared it might be said that, considering
the present high price of corn here, there had been a less im-
portation since the new law had come into operation, than there
had been under the law of 1 ti2t3. lie felt convinced that, it
they applied to that very great article of trade. and of subsist-
ence, the &me principles which they had applied to other arti-
cles, and upon which their seasoning had been so just, and
their majorities so traimpnant—(Hear, hear)—if they were
to apply the same principles, he felt convinced they would be
making a material, a most useful alteration in their legislation.
He should certainly be ready, if any one were to propose it,
to give his vote in favour of an alteration of the present Corn-
laws.--(Hear.) But he must consider that the House had
made up its mind with respect to the plans of the present
Session. The Right Hon. Gentleman who had made the mo-
tion of that night had not pointed to any definite remedy for
existing evils ; he hail only stated its his resolutions that it was
the duty of her Majesty's Ministers to advise the Crown not to
prorogue Parliament until some remedy was found for the pre-
seat distress. But knowing shat the duties of a Government
were, how advisable it was, and as he (Lord J. Russell)
thought how just it was, not to place upon them, without giving
a clear and definite alternative, the whole of the responsibility
for not finding a remedy for the evils from which the country
suffered, he owned he could not refese to go into the ordinary
Committee of Supply upon such a motion as that of
the Right ( Heir. ) He believed
that the poi; •
and which he had repeated that night, with respect to the com-
mercial policy of the country, were the principles upon winch