The Sun.
London, England, 1827-06-26 00:00:00

TO CORN BILL.

Lord GODERICH.-L-lly Lords, in rising to
move the sec(;tal reading of this Bill, I should think
it would` :not be necessary for me to; trouble
your Lordships, with many observations.. The
general: subject connected with the ilnportati4n
of Fc-,:eign Corn has 'been so much discussed, and
the sentiments of so many
of your Lordships
have been so frequently expressed, and the views
which the House at large entertains upon the
subject so ,fully, disclosed, that I think it would
be a waste:of your Lordships'• time, if I were ,to
preface this motion with - many general 'observations.
should wish, however, on my own account, and for

my Noble Friends, with 'whom I have acted, to
make a few remarks by way of explaining the
grounds which his Majesty's Government have
thought proper to pursue, first with respect to
the Bill which has not been read a third
time; and secondly, with respect to this. Bill
sent up to your Lordships by the other House.
With respect to the other Bill, if the alteration your
Lordships made in that Bill had been one which in
iny own judgment, at least, and in the opinion of
his Majesty's Government, had been one of compa-
ratively small importance—if it had been an altera-
tion with respect to which I had entertained even
a reasonable degree of doubt, as to its effects
upon the measure at large, I certainly should have
been most unwilling, and his Majesty's Govern-
ment upon a subject of so much importance as
this, and with respect to which the country
had looked up to your House with so much
anxiety ; I should have been very unwilling to have
abstained as far as I was concerned to have ab-
stained, from letting that Bill pass into a law ; but
hiving, certainly in the sincerity of my heart stated
to your Lordships what appeared to me to be grounds
quite convincing to my own mind agaiasS the pro-
priety of adopting that clause, I did not feel I could,
with any consistency, or with any propriety, or
with any hope of standing well with your
Lordships and the country—l certainly did not feel
that it would be possible for me at least to proceed
to call upon the other House of Parliament to consi-
der whether they would or would not acquiesce in
that Amendment. And, my Lords, I certainly felt
then as I do now, that, in taking that course, I
took the course the
,le4st likely of all others
to be the means of leading to any unpleasant or
inconvenient sollision with the other House of Par-
liament. That was the' reason why I abstained
from proposing to ytatia Lordships to agree to
the third reading of 'that Bill ; and certainly I
hitsie not been. induced by any subsequent reflec-
tion to persuade myself I adopted any course but
what was consistent with my own duty, and
likely to lead to the benefit of the public: It
was impossible, however, that his Majesty's Go-
vernment should not feel that it was very difficult—
perhaps, impossible to leave:this subject without some
legislative measure being adopted during the present
Session; and they had only two modes bt proceed-
ing, the one was to accede to a recommendation
thrown out by a Noble Friend of mine on the
other. side of the House, and which was enforced
by a remark from the Noble Baron, to substitute for
the law which had come up from the other House, an
Amendment 'which would maintain the principle
of the present law, by withdrawing the duty, until
the present priee should have previously reached 80s.
Now, it is quite clear that that proposition,
involving the permanent- retention of the law,
was a* principle 'which appeared to his Majesty's
Government and to the other House, and to some
of your Lordships, to be a principle which ought not
to be maintained, and it was impossible we could
all.at once come to a determination to adopt the re-
tvotion'of principle which we had argued to be, as
from its very nature and essence, calculated-to pro-
duce very considerable mischief. And I cannot
help thinking that that is the opinion generally
felt in regard to that law by the country at
large; and certainly when I recollect the division we
had of your Lordships' House upon the principle of
the Bill, I am justified in thinking your Lordships
did not consider that principle to be the one which
ought to be maintained with respect to the Corn
Laws. Then, my Lords, there was I think no other
course to pursue than seeing whether it was not
possible and advisable to confine legislation
for the presant to that portion of foreign corn
which is • now in this country, and with re-
gard to the 'admission of which, taken by itself
singly, andindependent of the concomitant influx of
Foreign Corn, the vote of your Lordships' Ilobse, in
favour of the principle of that Bill, appeared to
me to justify ; and it is with respect to that that
this. Bill is intended to .apply; and I think even
those Noble Lords who are hostile to any change of
principle in regard to the present Corn Laws, may be
indneedto see that this proposition which I have now
the honour of.submitting, is one, which accorißng to
their own views would not be inconvenient to adopt.
One of the. great evils, as it strikt:d tile, of the exist-
ing laws, is, that it has 4 tendency, at times, to ad-
mit: %reign corn, it is, in fact; not at all wanted,
and when its importition may be accompanied
w;th the greatest possible mischief to the agricul-
tural interest. Now, let. us see how this stands as
to one species'of grain, and if it applies to one it may
apply:to others: at the present moment there is, I
believe, as fine a prospect of a harvest as has ever been
known in this country ; there is with respect to Spring
.Corn—Barley for instance, which is the grain. I wish
to advert to. But it so happened that the crop of
Barley last year, was notoriously very deficient. The
price of it since last year, has never risen sufficiently
high to adMit" of the importation of foreign Barley,
and the supply has been very scarce, totally
quate to the present demand, which is not cni:. p.oved
by the statements I have received, but by the state of
the markets and the price to which that particular
species of grain' has reached. The fact is, that at
this moment, and for the last five or six months, the
price of Barley has been 40s. and upwards; and it
the law was what it had been proposed to be,
the importation of foreign Barley would bc
' admitted for home use by the 15th of Au-
gust, provided the price for tile precedin,s
six weeks were 365. Ndw, as the average of the
• past six weeks was upwards of 40s. nothing i,
More clear, than that in the face of an abun
, dant harvest, if this importation was allowed,
your Lordships would have- to contend, 41
only against the 180;000 quarters of tortign Bar.
ley which is at the present time in the warehouse,
but all that would be brought in within the next
- three months— That is a prospect likely ts
convince' every one that an acquiescence to th
Present measure 'would not be . against th
landed interest. If the barley now warehoused wer.
let out of bond, the price would be diminished, an'?
diminished to such a degree as to prevent the port,
from being unnecessarily opened on the 15th of Ap-
gust: He would say, therefore, that the Bill whi 1.
he then had the honour to propose should be read
second time, ought to • be recommended even to th.
agriculturists, by providing an adequate and cop
venient remedy , against the ensuing evil. 11
knew, also, that the course he was then pro
posing was not- unpalatable to the agriculturist,

The Earl of MALMESBURY apologized to
their Lordships for again trespassing on them on this
subject. His Noble Friend seemed las have mis-
understood his recommendation as to the Bill 'of
1815. What he had proposed vas to withdraw the
cstr;ctive clause, so as tO tilow the Bill of 1822 to
come into operation; for it had never yet been in
operation.. -He had recommended it, from supposing
it was the intention of his Majesty's 'Government
not to bring-forwara any other measure this year ;
and he supposed-it would be better under the Bill of
1822, without the elause, than as we were at pre-
sent. What his Noble Friend' said, as to barley.
being imported in Augnst, might be correct; but
why not bring in a Bill to apply only to barley ; and
why bring in a Bill which applied to wheat.—
(Hear, hear.)—His Noble Friend had good ground
for his measure as to barley, bu't he had no ground
whatever for their Lordships to consent to his Bilk
as it applied to Wheat: -There were no Returns on
their Table to guide them, for those: his Noble
Friend had moved • for were'not laid on the table..
It. appeared, however, that there were upwards of
600,000 quarters of wheat in bond, and there was
also a quantity ofilour.
.Viscount GODERICH-76,000 cwt.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said they would
find the price of wheat did not slceed 58s. 40., and
that there was no prospect rs,l its reaching 80., He
should therefore object 'to the proposed meas-,.re, as
he had objected .
the former one. His Noble
Friend had stated that he could not, with consist-
eneyi ree.mmend the other House to adopt a mea-
, sore contrary to the opinion he had given them on
the subject. He (the Earl of Malmesbury) in the
same way, should, therefore, 'decline compromising
his former opinion on the subject, by consenting to.
the present measure. (Here it became almost
Eim-
possible to collect even the substance of the Noble
Earl's' observations, in consequence of the crowded
state 'of the bar, and our being forced from a situa-
tion in which his Lordship's voice was very imper-
fectly heard, to one in which it was frequently wholly
inaudible.) 110825 the average Price of wheat was
695. per quarter. At-present it was only 585..; it
was therefore lls. a quarter higher when Lord Li-
verpool proposed, by the Bill introduced in 1825, to
let out 420,000
.quarters, than it was now. And,
last year, when there was a strong case of necessity
existing, only 290,000 quarters had been let out..
At present there was no necessity whatever at-
tempted to be shown. The season was the finest
that could be imagined, 'and the harvest the most
promising, and yet it was proposed to 'set out
700,000 quarters. It was impossible to Say what
might be the ruinous effects of this measure upon
the-market. It was argued that it sysnild be very
hard upon our American Colonies if this measure
were not suffered to pass. But it should be recol-
lected that the Act respecting Carnsdian corn was to
tdhtahvei
rnegfobeen leiymsi
itleodu
dn
ittesrmo
pi near taet Novni ttho tthwi so Syeesasrison;
have limited their speculations accordingly. But he
(Lord M.) would less objection to the admission
of Canadian whent than to this mass of foreign cern.
He thought 'slat it would be much better that his Ma-
-1 jeaty's Gaiernment should take on themselves the
responsibility of letting out the whole or , any part
of this quantity, in case the harvest should turn out
such " as to render it necessary ;
,because such a
course would' be. attended with
_this•advantage—it.
' would prevent that: sudden shock on the market
which the present measure was . calculated to pro-
duce. When his Majesty's Roisters let out the
bonded oats last year, they Came down to Parlia-
ment with a good case ; e.-nd he (Lord Malmesbury
should not object to a -Bill of Indemnity, if they
made out as tfOOlt a case this year with respect to
wheat, as they did then with respect. to oats. At
present the average price of wheat was only 585.;
and that was low enough, God knew, particularly
'When regard was had to the enormous increase in
the importation of all sorts of foreign produce con-
nected with the land within a short tine past. In
the first nine years of the peace, the average yearly-
importation of butter amounted to 123,0001.; in the
last three years it averaged. early,. 268,0004 whirls
was • more than double: .the. former • sum, The
average quantity of cheese imported during the first
nine years of the peace, amounted yearly to
121,7471.; for the last three years it was 275,000/..
The quantity of tallow imported for the first nine
years, averaged year1y.672,0001. ; for the last three,
917,000/. Hides, during the first nine years:
345,000/. yearly ; during the three last, 767,000 k.
The quantity, of timber imported in 1823 'ems
485,000 loads. In 1826, it was 767,000 loads. And,
though last not least, the importation of foreirdss wool
had quadrupled in amount since the be inning of
the present century. It was impossible,
produce. He
roeurthlleajriviLeordships came
not to say
that this great increase ,of foreign produce had se-
ly
to discuss this subject next year, they would gravely
Is4rQuastselYd
consider what the effect of thia increased importationmust be upon the fruits of
,atterteefdorte)hetivmaltubeeofof
the property and labour
of their fellow-subjects at; home. It had been urged
by those who were fe extending the principles of
free trade to corn, that very. great sacrifices had been
made by the Treenuficturers; and therefore sacrifices
ought to be maths on the part of . that class whose
interests he (Lord Malmesbury) was advocating.
But he contended that the argument was unfounded.
The quantity, of foreign manufactured wool im-
ported in 1824, the year before the new principles.
of free trade were brought into operation, amounted..
I 'to 71,000/.; while in 1826 it only amc anted to
41,000/. So that it was 30,0001. less than the year the principles of free trade were acted upon.
Notwithstanding the reduction 'of duty, howevet;
all those necessaries, such al clothing, Bre. which the
agriculturist was obliged to purchase, still retained
their former prices. Now the tex had been taken off
leather, but that made no difference in 'the world to
the consumer, who atilt paid the same price fi : shoes,
which were ,of the greatest importance to ism, that
he bad paid before. There . were other articles
of manufacture, the importation of which was, in
effect, prohibited by the amount- of the duty imposed
upon them. A. felt hat, for instance, paid half a
guinea duty. In sl,tort, were was no reason in the
world why the manufacturers were entitled to call
on the agriculturists to make sacrifices. With re-
spect to silks, that was an article of luxury; but,
besides, the measure on that subject proceeded from.
the silk-weavers themselves. (« No," from several
Noble Peers.)--There was one other point on which
he would trouble their Lordships with a word or
two, and that was taxation. .lle contended that
the .increase of taxation was out 9f all proportion to

the increased value of landed produce. In the five
years ending with 1; 93, the,year before the com-
mencement of the revolutioeary war, the average
price of wheat was 48s. 3d.: last year it was 565.
'The difference between the prices of the two years
was nearly Bs. or 16 per cent. Now, the amount
of the funded and unfunded debt in 1793 was
224,000,0004 ; in 1826, it was 808,000,0001.; so
that there was an increase in the debt of 3f to I,
or 350 per cent. while the price of wheat had only
increased It 3 per cent. His Lordship concluded his
observations by expressing his concurrence in the
hope of the Noble Viscount, who had preceded him,
that this subject would be considered by their Lord-
ships, not as a party, but a great national question.

The Duke of WELLINGTON perfectly agreed
with the Noble Earl (Malmesbury) that this should
be treated as a national, and not as a party question.
For his own part, nothing had been farther from his
mind than ruling it the instrument of indulging in
any party feelings; on the contrary, it had been his
anxious wish to avoid every thing of the kind. But
he could not agree with his Noble Friend in think-
ing it would be better to throw upon his Majesty's
Government the responsibility of admitting the
bonded corn into the market. He concurred in the
opinion of. his Majesty's Ministera that some mea-
sure of this kind ought to be adopted, particularly
after the disappointment which had been experienced
in consequence of the loss of the former measure ;
and therefore he was disposed to support the Bill
before the House. It was the same in principle as
the other with the Amendment proposed by him (the
Duke). And it had the advantage of making the
experiment with a limitation as to quantity. Under
all these circumstances, he thought it would be ad-
visable to adopt it, and he therefore recommended
it to the House. At the same time he could not
help regretting that his Noble Friend had not car-
ried that measure through the House, which he was
satisfied it was in his power to have done. He (the
.Noble Duke) considered that the Amendment which
he had proposed was perfectly consistent with the
principle of that Bill ; for in fact the Bill might have
been passed if the warehoused corn had not formed any
part of its subject at all. Under these circumstances,
any modification of that part of the measure could
not be inconsistent with the general principle of the
Bill. The Noble Lord said, however, that the
Amendment was inconsistent with the principle of
the Bill, because it contained a prohibition. But
the whole measure was founded on a protecting
duty ; and the same principle was acted upon on
every occasion when any enactment took place on
this subject. It existed in the measure of 1822, and
in every one from 1791 down to lel6. It had
always been effected by means of a duty ; and he
would say, that it might have been effected again on
the present occasion, and the measure would have
given satisfaction to the country. Under these cir-:
cumstances, he could not help thinking that his Noble
Friend was responsible for the loss of the Bill.'
He (the Duke of Wellington) had been accused, not
only of proposing a measure which was incon-J
eistent with the general principle of the Bill, but:
likewise of having (as we understood his Grace) pre,
viously concerted it, for the purpose of defeating
Bill, Now, if ever there was a man who had proJ,
posed a measure without the slightest knowledge oq
-whether or not it would be supported, he was that man.
ff
And he repeated, that he had done so under the belief,
not only that he had proposed it with the approba.
*ion, but even at the suggestion of a Minister of th 9
Crown. If he had acted under a mistake, and he
-would not now say, after what had passed, that it
was not a mistake, he was not the only person 'who!
had made the same mistake, forevery person to whom'
he had shown his Right Hon. Friend's letter under-I
stood it in the same way that he had understood it!
If, however, the measure which he had proposed WO
sneontsiitent with the principle of the Bill, it was cer.:
tainly not more so than the measure which it is ad-,
ratted was suggested in the letter. But so far fronj
his having any motive in bringing the measure for+
ward, he had done every thing in his power to induci
his Majeety's Government to take it out of hie luina.
In the course of a correspondence which he had on
two occasions upon the subject, he entreated that
his Majesty's Government would take the measure
out of his (the Duke's) hands. His Grace theri
proceeded to read the following correspondence'
explanation of the musecorrespondence,
he had adopted, with re; I
ference to the Amendment which he had proposed tti,
the late Bill :—_

" Londuta, June 4, 1827.

" My dear Huskisson,—As you say that I misunder-
stood the meaning of your letter of the 24th, I must have
done so. But I certainly never entertained a suspicion
that I had misunderstood you, and even now, after referring
to my letter Of the 24th to you, and examining your letter
to me, I cannot but think that I should have fought out
for a difficulty, if I had affixed to your letter the meaning
which you state that you intended to convey.
" I stated to you an evil, permanent in its nature, re-
sulting from the operation of the warehouse system on that
of the proposed Corn Law; and I proposed a permanent
remedy. In answer, you toted very good reasons against
what I had proposed, and you Sell me, that had my pro-
posal been that no corn bonded afW,' the passing of the
present Bill should be allowed to be enteizsd for home con-
fumption till the average price had reached t 765., and that
thenceforward all corn so bonded, or thereafter iznportedt
should come under the regulations of the Bill, indii;kitQlly
you would not object to such a proviso ;' and you add,
It (this proviso) would ensure that no quantity beyond
that now in bond should be thrown upon the market, un
less in spite of that quantity the price reached a level vrhich
might be fairly taken as an indication of our being in want
of a further supply from abroad.'
" It thus appears, then, that having stated to you a per:
rnanent evil, the existence of which is not denied, I wa:s
to consider the word thenceforward in an unlimited sense,
but applicable to time only, and having no reference to
circumstances, notwithstanding what followed in the sud-
ceeding sentence of your letter ; and I was to believe that
you intended I should be satisfied, and that the publi
should be satisfied, with a temporary remedy for a perm*
nent evil.

" However, I am ready to admit that I did not under-
stami Your letter as you have now explained it, and you may
rely it that if I could have entertained any doubt
respectinj your meaning, that I should have gone to you,
or have mitten to you again.
" Lord Guderich must do me the justice to acknowledge,
thatl
put into his hands the proviso which I had drawn,
together
with your letter. He did not at first understand
your letter, and he thought it related solely to Corn now
in bond ; and I begged hi
so; and he came to, no ltio peruse it again. He did
returned the papers without
Faying word. I concluded, therefore, that he concurred
in the proposition, which /
certainly considered as sug -
v.,Tested by you ; and I made it tothe Committee of I
preventing
House of Lords in the modedat the time
t%h a
ad forost
likelo
be of service to the Government, by
diviaidn
on a proposition of Lord %Wye\ whicla eta
object to lay the duty upon Corn upon introduction into
warehouse.
" I shall be sorry if this proviso should be inconvenient
to the Government ; and I must add, that if Lord Godc..
rich hid expressed to me a wish that I should delay to pm_
pose it till on the report, I should have done so.
" In your letter of the 24th, you spoke with doubt
whether the measure proposed by you would occasion the
rejection of the Bill. You write with more confidence on
that which has been adopted by the Committee in the
House of Lords in your letter received yesterday. But
what do you say to the amendments agreed I.:, by the Go-
vernment in the House of Lords ?

..Surely the omission of the word (British) in t le
second clause, with a view that the Scotch, Irish, a d
foreign corn may he included in the averages, and
wee
s,
teration of the term of the averages from one to six the 1-
Will =lke a material alteration of the duties,
equally occasion the rejection of the Bill. and m st
-" You will recollect my opinion upon the measure prs)-
posed by Lord Liverpool ; to the principle of which, iidt-
withstanding that opinion. I consider myself a party, aucl.l
have accordingly supported the Government in every di 1,-
;ion that has taken place in the House of Lords. I do
,t
i
consider the amendment as proposed by me to be at . it
contrary to the principle of Lord Liverpool's ineasuie,
which was to protect home agriculture by the levy o a
duty on farein earn linported, and to regulate this dt.ty
by the price! ef corn in England, discovered by averaQcs-
taken weekly; at"l'n°t England,
weeks' a rages Since Li'rd
Liverpool's plan %nut %met and 'igeet:ave.ton,. Committee
has sat in the House of Lords, wore which-a it has been
proved that nothing can prevent fr..d. i!, tale the
averages, nor the abuse of the existing warehouselenistem,

for the purpose of carrying into execution the objects of
those frauds.

" The warehouse system, then, must be reformed ; and
as Lord Liverpool's principle might exist even if the ware-
house system were abolished in relation to corn, or under
whatever modification it may he allowed to continue, it
is no departure from that principle to adopt a moderate
prohibition, applicable only to corn in warehouse, as:the
modification.

" I declare t%at this impression is so strong upon my
mind, and, considering the subject in all its bearings, it ap-
peared to rue that the proviso agreed to by the House of
Lords so completely met the evil, and was so just towards
all parties, that you must have calculated it exactly upon
the basis of the price of 625. the imperial quarter, and the
expences of carrying corn from the warehouses in Holland
to this country. Believe me, &c.
" WELLINGTON."
" Eartham, Petworth, sth June, 1527.
"My Dear Duke,—l have received by the post of this
morning your letter of yesterday's date.
" I regret, on every account, that the proposition which
I wished to convey in my letter of the 24th ult. was so
stated, as to lead to your misunderstanding my real mean-
ing. So little did I, before last Saturday, contemplate any
risk of having been misapprehended, that when I received
(whilst in the House of Commons on Thursday evening)
the enclosed note from Lord Goderich, I immediately sent
him an explanation from thence, to the same effect as that
which I have since given to you. I am sure, if Lord Gode-
rich is referred to, that he will do me the justice to confirm
this statement.

" From the moment I was informed that you considered
your amendment as originating in my suggestion, I was sa-
tisfied that there had been some misunderstanding; and as
the nature of it is now cleared up, I will not trouble you with
any controversial argument upon the true construction of
the words which you have quoted from my letter of the
24th. The sentence (indeed the whole of the letter) was
hastily written, and, I admit, mighthave been more clearly
expressed; but when, in the latter part of that sentence, I
state that the regulation to which I saw no objection,
would insure that no quantity beyond that now in bond
should he thrown upon the market, unless, in spite of that
quantity, the price reached a level, (namely, 665.),
which might fairly be taken as an indication of our be-
ing in want of a further supply from abroad,'—l must
avow myself at a loss to reconcile the construction of words
which appear to point to this meaning,—namely, that the
specific quantity now in bond should be protected against
competition with any further supply from abroad, until the
average price at home shall have reached 665., with your
proviso, which leaves the supply from abroad free at all
times to come into the British market, without reference to
any average price; whilst it locks up any wheat which
may hereafter be bonded in iaiis country, up to the same
price as that at which it was the drift of my proposition to
keep foreign wheat locked up in the warehouses abroad,
until the quantity now in our own warehouses had been dis-
posed of.
" How then could your amerldment and my suggestion
be convertible propositions ?
" The real truth is, that what was uppermost in my
mind when I threw out this suggestion, was the inconve-
nience which might arise from letting into consumption
further supplies of wheat, hereafter to arrive, until the
greatest part of the quantity now in bond should have
been disposed of. The limiting the supply, in the first in-
stance, to the now bonded corn, was a question which bad
been mooted in the Cabinet, if I recollect right, by Lord
Westmoreland. I own that I thought (as I understood
him to think) that, within certain limits, there were rea-
sons fur giving priority- to that corn, before we suffered
fresh supplies to come into the market from foreign coun-
tries—an arrangement temporary in its nature, but in its
operation, by-the-bye, the very reverse of what your amend-
ment contemplates as a permanent system.
" You will, therefore, perceive that in writing the un-
lucky paragraph which is the origin of all this confusion, I
was no longer thinking of the ' permanent evil,' ysur pro-
posed remedy for which I had discussed in the former part
of my letter.
" Having no copy of the Corn Bill with me here, I am
quite incapable of forming any opinion as to the effect of
the word British' in the second clause of the Bill, an
amendment of which I was not aware till I received your
letter this morning.
" I shall, for many reasons, be sorry if this Bill should
be lost, and nothing done in respect to our Corn Laws in
the present Session of Parliament. But, whctever may be
the fate of the Bill, or however produced, I never for a
moment can doubt, that in the part which you have taken,
your anxious object has been to render the proposed mea-
sure as free from objection as the nature of the subieet.
detavieg -veto. w...inuratea interests, and tbrougn sue
a variety of transactions, will admit.—l remain, my dear
Duke of Wellington, ever faithfully yours.

W. HUSKISSO.N.
" His Grace the Duke of Wellington, &c. &c."

Those letters with which he had troubled their
Lordships would speak for themselves. He could
now declare that any thing which he had done with
respect to the Bill was not from a motive of party
or faction—(Hear, bear)--or from any other feeling
than a desire to render the Bill more palatable to the
public; and he felt satisfied that that clause would
have made it more so than it was before. He was
persuaded that when Ministers came to introduce
the measure next session, they would find it neces-
sary to adopt that Amendment, or something on the
same principle. It was on a conviction of its pro-
priety that he had brought the clause in, and from
that conviction he conceived he should not have
done his du'y if he had acted otherwise.—(Hear.)
Lord GODERICH assured their Lordships that
he never for an instant meant to convey any imputa-
tion on his Noble Friend (the Duke of Wellington)
for the course which he had pursued with respect to
the clause; nor did he in any degree impute it to
the Noble Duke, that in moving that clause he was
actuated by a motive to defeat the object of the Bill.
rye hoped, at the same time, that his Noble Friend
would tlo him the justice to believe that his opposi-
tion to the clause arose solely from his conviction
that it would not answer the purpose of the Bill. It
was said that when he bad seen his Noble Friend's
clause, he handed it back, without making any
servation at the moment, because observatl,,na
had been made on it before; and he was At that very
time preparing to send the Bill to a Committee. It
was perfectly true, that in the correspondence with
his Noble Friend he did request that Government
would take the matter out of his hands; and he
could assure their Lordships that he had done every
thing in his power to meet the views of his Noble
Friend consistently with what he conceived to be
the spirit of the Bill; but he was unable to effect
that object; it would be a farce in him to offer to
agree with a proposition which he believed to be
wholly inconsistent with the general principle of
the Bill; but he must repeat that he did everything
in his power to find out some mode in which both
parties could concur. In the last letter which he
wrote to his Noble Friend, he told him that he had
delayed sending till the latest moment, in order to
try whether, from any quarter, some suggestion
might not come that would meet his Noble Friend's
wish, or whether some common principle might not
be adopted in which they might both agree. In
this, unfortunately, he did not succeed. His objec-
tions to the clause were unalterable, as repugnant to
the principle on which it was introduced, and the
consequence was, that the question still remained
unsettled. He most sincerely regretted that it
should be thrown over for the present Session, but
in justice to himself he must say that the blame wits
not his. He did not mean to impute blame any-
where. It was one of those occurrences which

sometimes happened in the course of human events,
for which, however much they might be regretted,
no party could be accused. Still, he must repeat
his conviction that the loss of the measure was most
unfortunate.

Earl GREY next rose, and spoke to the follow-
ing effect :—" My Lords—lt is not my wish or in-
tention to prolong the discussion of a subject which
has already been too much agitated in this House
and throughout the country. I am the more un-
willing to do so from the tone of moderation—if not
of apology—adopted by the Noble Viscount (Gode-
rich) who introduced the Bill; and, in imitation of
his example, I am anxious to abstain from any ex-
pression that may be calculated to excite angry
feeling in any quarter—a feeling, which, I trust, is
now fast subsiding every where.---(Hear, hear.)—l
have, also, the satisfaction to feel and declare, that it
is the more unnecessary for me to trespass at any
length upon the attention of your Lordships after
the statement of the Noble Duke, so remarkable forits propriety and clearness, and which placed the
motives of those who acted with him on a late oc..
would be casion in so perspicuous a light, that it

presumptuous in me, or in any man after him, to
attempt his vindication ; or to justify the motives by
which they were influenced who concurred with him
in a late Amendment--an Amendment sanctioned
by a majority of this House. After what has fallen
from my Noble Friend, I am sure there is no man
with a spark of candour and honesty who can say
that that Amendment was proposed with the inten-
tion of defeating the Bill before it was submitted,
or that it had been persevered in after it had
been first adopted for such a purpose. This has
been, I know, calumniously asserted, but the calum-
nious assertion had been met by the indignation that
it merited. It had been admitted by the President
of the Board of Trade, that the Amendment, which
had been the subject of such animadversion, might
possibly originate in an ambiguous expression of a
letter written avowedly in haste by that Right Hon.
Gentleman to the Noble Duke. The mind of the
Noble Duke became impressed with a conviction of
the utility of introducing that proposition into the
Bill, as he understood it; and he persevered in it,
not for the purpose of defeating the Bill, but for the
purpose of furthering it, by the introduction of such
regulations as he saw incident to the completion of
such regulations. Yet, for such a course of conduct
was the Noble Duke, and those who acted with
him, visited with the most calumnious aspersions—
aspersions, however, which no one had the inde-
cency to cast upon him in this House.—(Loud cries
of " Hear, hear.")—Yet were those aspersions most
insidiously and industriously circulated throughout
the country, so that no person could take up a news-
paper without meeting them. Yes !---the calum-
nious aspersions had been widely spread, that our
object in the introduction of an Amendment into a
Bill, lately before this House, was to defeat, by in-
direct means, that which we dared not openly to
oppose. It had been alleged, that it was our
object to procure the rejection of that Bill, and
thereby refuse relief to the poorer classes in one
of the first necessaries of life. By the ad-
missions of the Noble Viscount, we stand ac-
quitted of entertaining such purposes; and in
the deliberate judgment of the whole country, I
am satisfied that it will be admitted that we would
have acted inconsistently with our duty as legislators,
if, from the apprehension of such calumnious asper-
sions as I have alluded to, we had hesitated in the
adoption of such amendments • as we conscientiously
conceived to be an Amendment of the Bill, conducive
to its effective operation, and a corrective against
possible dangers.—(Cheers.)—But if this Bill has
been lost, it was not by this Amendment it was lost.
We were disposed to adopt the rest of the Bill, with
this Amendment. The Bill was lost by the refusal
of the Noble Viscount (Goderich) to persevere in
carrying through the Bill, with this Amendment an-
nexed to it. For his refusal to persevere, I have no
doubt the Noble Lord had reasons which were satis-
factory and conclusive to his mind, as to the pro-
priety of the course upon which he determined. The
Noble Lord had it in his power to choose between
two courses—either to carry through the Bill, and
submit to what he thought the inconvenience of an
Amendment which did not meet his approbation, or
to withdraw the Bill rather than have it encumbered
with an Amendment from which he so widely dis-
sented. The Noble Viscount made choice of the
latter course, and in doing so, I am disposed to give
him credit for what he conscientiously believed to be
the right and proper line of conduct to pursue. But
this I must say, that I myself, and those by whom
that Amendment was supported, had no apprehen-
sion that the Noble Viscount would be reduced to
this alternative, and it was with the greatest surprise
that we saw him placed in such a predicament.—
(Hear, hear.)—As to the present Bill I shall sup-
port it—(Cries of hear)—and I am in no small
degree induced to do so, as I find there is
nothing in it inconsistent with the late Amend-
ment proposed by the Noble Duke. ' Although I
own these has not been, in my opinion, a case of ne-
cessity made out to warrant its introduction, yet I will
give to it a reluctant assent, as it contains nothing
necessarily detrimental to the general interests ; be-
t7cll.lsV IL I MIL aI f
during the interval of its operation, an experiment
will be tried on the scale of duties, which will enable
us to come with the advantage of an enlarged in-
formation to the discussion of a measure which we
are told is to be submitted upon this subject next
year.—(Hear, hear.) I would now ask, what does
the present Bill propose to do, as compared with the
late Amendment? Is it not proposed by this Bill
to remedy any alleged evil that might be consequent
upon that Amendment? No such thing. There is
nothing in this Bill inconsistent with what that
Amendment proposed. Yet it was given out that
this Bill was rendered necessary, in consequence of
the passing of that Amendment in this House.--
(Hear, hear.) What is this, I ask, but a wilful
misrepresentation ? A mistake may be set right—
a prejudice may be removed—an argument may be
combated by reason—but a determined spirit of mis-
representation could not in any way be fairly en-
countered, for its malignity was only excited by
every exposure of its falsehood.--(Cheers.) I say
first then, for the thousandth time, that it is a gross
misrepresentation to say that the Amendment was
adopted in this House with a view of defeating the
Bill; and, secondly, I say that this Bill is not ren-
dered necessary to correct any evil that it is even
asserted would result from the adoption of that
Amendment. Have they who make this assertion
read this Bill and the Amendment ? Have they
compared them, and in what do they find an incon-
sistency between them to consist ? For my part,
as far as any feeble words of mine may reach and may
have influence—l wish it to be known that I support
because there is no part of its provisions incon-
sistent with that Amendment. The object of that
Amendment was, to prevent too great an accumula-
tion of corn in hond, and to prevent frauds, by pro-
viding that no" Wheat should be taken out of bond,
so long as the average price of wheatovithin this king-
dom, as settled by virtue of this Aef, shalt he less
than sixty-six shillings a quarter." Now, from the
correspondence between the Noble Duke and the
''resident of the Board of Trade, from whose
opinicn it was to be presumed his Majesty's Ministers
would not dissent, it was admitted to be a desirable
thing that " no corn bonded after the passing of the
present Bill should be allowed to be entered for
home consumption, till the average price reached
665., and that thenceforward all corn so bonded, or
thereafter imporsed, should come under the regula-
tions of the Bill." This was acceded to by the
Right Honourable Gentleman, no doubt for the
desirable purpose that I have already stated, of
of the Noble Duke in propo-
sing the accumulation of corn under bond, which
was
alsote
Athmeepntympoenset.The
Noble Lord proceeded
to contend, that the opinion of the Preaidesa a the
Board of Trade was conformable with the Amend-
ment of the Noble Duke, and that the only difference
between that AMendment and the present Bill was,
that as the preserst Bill was from its nature tem-
porary, those regulations were temporary also to
which the Noble Duke's Amendment would have
affixed the character of permanency. One reason
for withdrawing the late Bill, it was alleged, was,
that the Amendment would be fatal to it in the
other House of Parliancient, and Ny,'-s desirable
that the privileges of the two Houses of Parliament
might not be brought into collision. The present
was recommended to us, however, not from an
apprehension of such a eaision) but on its own
merits.—(Hear, hear, hear, from Lord Goderich.),
—I know the advantage which the Noble Lord
may be disposed to take of an admission which
he may suppose to weaken my argument, but as I
have touched on the question of privileges, and as it
is one on which great misrepresentation has also
gone abroad,
I must remark that the late Bill was
somewhat unaccountably sent up to this House as
a Bill of Supply, in which it is not permitted to us
to make a greater alteration than the correction of a
verbal error. As that Bill was to have an effect
upon the duties, it partook of this character. This
was an apparent difficulty, which was easily removed
as may be shown. from a case which is termed by
lawyers " in pan materiel?' In the Committee on
the Corn Bill in this House, an Amendment was

carried against the opinion of the Noble Lord
(Lord Liverpool), whothen presided here, by which
Amendment, according to the jealous tenacity with
which the House maintains its privileges—theßill was
formally lost. What was the course then pursued ?
Though that Bill was lost, another Bill, on the same
subject, was introduced, in which the Amendment of
the House of Lords was included, and thus the dif-
ficulty of interfering with the privileges of the other
House was got over, and the Bill in this amended
shape passed both Houses of Parliament. Thus
were the full powers of deliberation by this House
arrested.—(Hear.)—Was it necessary, therefore,
on the ground of privilege, that this Bill should
be rejected ? No. And, although knowing this
Amendment to be formally inconsistent with the
privileges of the other House, I did not suppose it
would have necessarily occasioned the loss of the
measure. I assert, upon the hononr of a Peer,
that I did not support that Amendment in the ex-
pectation or the wish, that by its adoption the whole
measure should be defeated. What had been done
on a former occasion might have been done in this;
but I must say, that besides the disadvantages in
other matters to which the calamity that has befallen
a Noble Lord (Lord Liverpool) has subjected us, it
is not the least of those disadvantages that his Ma-
jesty's Councils should not be marked by the same
discretion and the same temper which distinguished
them when he presided over them. The Noble Lord
proceeded to comment again upon the Amendment,l
which, whilst corn was now at 575. or 585., would.
not probably come into operation at all—at least from
the prospects of the ensuing harvest, or from any
probable or almost possible circumstances that could
occur, there was no likelihood of the price reaching,
665. certainly not for the next year; and until its
had reached that price, the Amendment was inopera-
tive. Indeed, from all that was probable to occur,
and from the late measures of interference with the,
state of our currency—measures which, though they
afforded a temporary ease, onlyprepared us fora future!'
panic, it was much more likely that corn would shortly
be at 465. rather than 665. a quarter. After having,
repeated that the difference between the Noble Duke's I
Amendment and the opinions of the President of the
Board of Trade had been calumniously mis-stated, and
the consequences of that Amendment exaggerated
by persons who owed their very existence to the
Noble Duke—he spoke not now of his great military
services, but of services of a different kind—he pro-
ceeded : I have little more to say, after having ful-;
filled the purpose for which I had risen—the attempt
to set myself right with the House and with the li
country as to the part I have taken upon this sub-
ject; and, what is more important, to vindicate the
character and uphold the propriety of the proceed-
ings of a majority of this House. I support the
IBill now before us, as I do not apprehend it will be
detrimental to the agricultural interests; but should
any such Bill, in the ensuing Session, be presented
to us, I do trust we will resist it with moderation,
with discretion, but at the same time with firmness
(Cheers), not for the sake of the agricultural in-
terests, but for the sake of those interests that are
bound up with and inseparable from them. It may
be that for that—the agricultural interest—l enter-
tain a partiality of which I am not conscious, but to
which, from my situation, I acknowledge I am liable
to entertain ; but however that may be, I do beJ
lieve that in the landed interest is to be found, more
than in any other, the deep-laid foundation of the
strength of the Constitution of this country, and,
therefore, to that interest, more than to any other,
is it the interest and the duty of this House to ex-
tend protection—due and fair protection, for, be-. 1
yond this, God forbid that any interest should either
expect to obtain any protection whatever. I main-
tain that it is due to that interest that this country
should render itself as independent as possible of
foreign supplies in corn ; and that to all interests of
the community, and to none more than the commer-
cial and manufacturing, is it essential that as much of
the land of this country as is capable of it, should be
brought into cultivation. These principles I shall
maintain, regardless that for maintaining_them it maj
rests of the rich to the sacrifice of those of the poor.
The most eager advocate of liberal principles cannot
shake the soundness of those principles which were
so admirably enforced in a Letter of a Noble Lord
(we believe Lord Grenville), who, I trust, still
effe
corn,cmaintainstthhee effect
throwingffhee
cmt
olbpfee(tnshaoai (said
tu Noblerotfphotarhttrsowo n g
a g Lord)re
teia.at
dtpeh iaey
t
of our land out of cultivation, and risking, all the in-
convenience of sudden changes and convulsions ih
our relation with foreign countries: though, for a
time, we may have cheap corn, yet, upon the long
run, the price of this first necessary of life will in-
crease, and the profit, as well as the power of supply-
ing us as they please, will be in the hands of fo-
reigners." The maintenance of such sentiments is
not at variance with popular rights, but was essen-1
tial for public prosperity. Popular rights I have
ever upheld, whenever and by whomsoever they
were assailed. I have made some sacrifices for
them. lam ready to make more. At the same
time, when I have met wild and extravagant claims
and doctrines under the name of popular rights, I
have not flinched from the obloquy to which an oppo-
sition to them may have exposed me, Tothatobloquy
I am as ready again to expose myself as I am to endea-
vour to retrievethe Constitution from those invasions
which I have considered as most dangerous to popu-
lar security. But at the same time, my Lords, that
we should be anxious to uphold the dignity of the
Crown, and to protect the just rights of the people,
we should remember that we, as well as they, have
rights and privileges given to us, not so much for our
benefit as theirs; that we are an intermediate body,
forming a link of connexion between both, and stand-
ing as a barrier to resist the encroachments of one
upon the rights of the other. These respective
rights, in their legitimate exercise, I am anxious
that all should enjoy. Animated by these motives,
and acting upon these principles, I hope we shall
all come to the dispassionate consideration of this
important question in the ensuing Session, and trust
that it may be settled on a secure basis, which will
give gsneral and permanent satisfaction.—(Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.")
Viscount GODERICH wished to be allowed
to make one observation with respect to an expres-
sion which Ell from the Noble Earl (Grey.)—
The Noble Lord, in alluding to the time in which
the motion had been brought before the House, said
that it conveyed something of an apology. He
must take leave to tell their Lordships and the
Noble Eati, that he made no apology. He made no
apology, because he did not think there had been
any offence.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—lf, however,
their Lordships should find him deviating from that
course of duty and respect, which he was equally
bound as a peer and as a Member of Majesty's
Government to Observe' towards their Ldrdships,
then that House would be entitled to call upon him
for an apology, and then it would be his duty to
make that apology.—(Hear, hear.)—ln this ease, he
repeated, Ise made no apology, because, whether the
measure which he proposed might prove right or
turn out to be wrong, it was his duty to bring it be-
fore their Lordships, and lie claimed the privilege of
maintaining his opinions and his measures with the
same earnestness as the Noble Earl or any other
Member of their Lordships' house.
Earl GREY did not intend to offend the Noble
Viscount by the use of the word apology. Perhaps
he ought rather to have said the Noble Viscount
made an apologetic explanation—for such it might
be called. He repeated, however, that he did not
mean to use the expression in any way which the
Noble Viscount might deem offensive; and although
he was not a person in the habit of retracting what
he had once uttered on such occasions, yet he would
say, that if any expression which fell from him had
offended the Noble Viscount, he was sorry he had
used it. —(Hear,
hear.)
Lord GODERICH.—I have not a word more to
say.—(Hear, hear.)
Earl STANHOPE then addressed their Lord-
ships, but the noise produced by their Lordships
leaving the House was so great, that we could
catch only a
few
sentences. We understood him

1993
182;
1825
1826
1827

1823
1824
1825
1828
1827

1823
1824
1825
1826
1827

1818
1819
1820
1821
1822

X. s. d.
13,2/7 19 1036
6,445 11 6
7,081 5 9%
6,445 17 0
6,481 8 PA

X. s. d.
12,082 4 9%
12,:557 0
13,882 3 9
13,640 11 91,4
13,376 4 10%
BIRMING
7-,170 -5 IDri
8,037 6 3
8,089 10 2(
8,157 13 3%

X. s. d.
111,960 17 2
6,972 7 0
7,855 19 11%
7,968 9 6
8,359 7 7
HAM.
3;4M ID
5,965 5 2
6,154 5 1
6,232 14 1
DS.

IX. s. d.
37,291 1 10%
2!,,774 19 2%
28,819 6
28,055 18 3%
28,217 0 7%

5,40814 82
4,758 4 214
4,723 4 23i

8,568 4 4%
4,097 14 5%
4,203 0 9
3,788 15 9
3,920 15 94

4,27318 434]
2,598 10 154
4,617 2 I}i
1,994 17 6
2,026 1 fl ,

Office for Ti

LEE
6,495 6 234
6,592 5 3
6;729 3 7%
6,481 8 0%
6,561 14 7%

1T,706 9 41
19,411 6 1
19,001 19 5}4
19,113 11 114
125,649 3 1
16,793 0 4
17,350 13 11
17,270 17 7
18,230 2 3

10,576 12 6
6,103 0 8
13,418 9 7
7,000 13 10
7,747 11 10
:LD.
j 3,288 13 9 10,e(78 15 24
2,075 8 6 8,067 4 11%
2,214 1 8 8,277 10 2
2,265 17 2 7,067 4 614
2 354 2 '7 7,218 4 914
CLICKER ST WARD.
'OWLETT RUSHWORTH
11GBY BRADSHAW.
t‘IPBELL.

SHEFFI]
3,116 3 1
3,393 6 4
3,446 6 4%
2,806 9 10%
2838 0 5
GABRIEL
CHARLES P
WILLIAM
HENRY CA
i, May 29.

COALS.

A RETURN of the Number of Chaidrons of COALS im-
ported into the Port of London, in each Year from the
Year 1800 to the Year 1826 inclusive ; distinguishing
the Quantity brought Coastwise.

•Coals imported into the Port of London.
1"" A
By Inland
Coastwise. Navigation. Total.
Year ended --.---.
January 5, Chaldrons. Chid irons. Chaldrons.
1801 - 1,011,119
1802 832,889 - 832,889
1803 927,831 - 927,831
1804 - 916,277
1805 975,840 - 975,840
1806 964,157 2063 966,220
1807 985,609 4808 990,417
1808 .. n.., 910,953 4187 915,140
1809
1810 973,843 6529 980,372
1811
1812 ......
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
I'l2l .
1822 1,291,994 1087 1,293,081
1823
1824 1,433,865 1330 1,435,195
1825
1820
1827
WILLIAM IRVING, Inspector-General
of Exports and Imports,
Inspector-General's Office, Custom-house,

Inspector-General's Office, G
London, May so.

of the Number of SKIPS, and their Tonnage,
A R RxE
whichTuhave entered the Port of London, laden With
COALS, during the last Ten Years ending the sth of
January ; distinguishing the Number in each Year.

Tonnage.
Ships. STonnage.
5239
1,068,756 1823 5756 1,174424
5518 1,125,672 1824 04410 1,323,960
5525,„, 1,127,100 1825 7117 1,451,868
"21 1,207,884 1826 5827 1,392,708
5877 1,198,908 1827 6863 1,404,132
WILLIAM IRVING, Inspector-General
of Imports and Exports.
Inspector-General's Office, Custom-house,
London, May 30.

The MarqMarquisof LANspowNE had a ,grand
dinner party yesterday at Lansdowne House,
Berkeley-square,

DREADFUL ACClDENT.—..Yesterday after-
noon, about five o'clock, a distressing accident took place
.
belonging to the General Steam Navigation Conl-
on board the Willi Glee, steam-packet, from Ham-
burgh,
Tile packet, which is of 120-horse power, had
made her passage from Hamburgh, and arrived off the
Custom-house at the time above stated, and just as the
machinery was about to stop, and at the moment the pas-
sengers were preparing to leave the vessel, an unfortunate
man, named James South, the stoker, came out of his
birth, and was ascending the stairs to the deck, in doing
which he imprudently put hie foot upon the top of the
cylinder, and, shocking to relate, his head got between
the heavy iron beam connected with the engine, and the
beam of the vessel, and in an instant his head was crushed
to atoms.