Star.
London, England, 1827-06-19 00:00:00

arguments in that House., and by none more forcibly
than by the Right Hon, Gentleman himself. He saw
no diasti4the ituation of this country, or in the
nerkl of Europe, which called for an alteration
of thtpolicy which had been so ably advocated, and sa.
long acted upon with success. When the law of 181
Vested, was firmly persuaded, and he believed the
aantaiti was ssrtoo, Mat it was intended as a permanent
settlement of this important question. But the law of
18gff came to the surprise of all who had entertained
ahet.'belief, and although their confide
ince
oother was haw
'en
shaken' yet they did not suppose that stll a
was to be proposed within five years from that time,
and before that Act had ever come into operation.—
Up." the suspending clause which accompanied that
law, Ise never placed any value, and he now wished to
see it removed. The Hon. Member then moved his first
resolution —" That in the opinion of this Committee so
much of the Act of the Sd of Geo. IV. relating to the
importation of corn, •as renders the provisions of that
Act dependent upon the admission of foreign wheat under
the provisions of the 55:h Geo. 111. c. 56. be repealed."
Mr. CANNING.—" Sir, the first observation which I
shall venture to mike en the speech of the Honourable
Member who has just sat down, is, that I consider its
• tone and manner as exactly suiting the discussion of a
question like the present, which so deeply involves, not
merely the peculiar interests of the agriculturists, but
• also the food of the great mass of the population of this
• country, and the general interests of the community at
large. - I can assure the Hon. Member, that, ip imita-
" tion of his example, I shall address my:alto the subject
with the same Feeling as he has evinced in the eourseof
his speech, and whatever I, on a future. opportunity,
may feel due to myself, to others, or to the King's Go-
ternment, to sat or to do, in relation to this matter, I
shalt, on this occasion;abstain from entering Into any'
allusion with' respect to what may have taken place,
loCittlicoughannwant of feeling that provocations have
been offered, but because I am conscious thit the pre-1
• sent is not the time for discussing them. This, how-
ever, I will say, I can conceive no degree of faction
more inexcusable, mote blameable, or more wicked,
than that by. which a subject, touching the most
• vital interests of the community, is made the means
of political attack—(Loud and continued cheering).—
The next observation to which I am recalled on
the speech of the Hon. Metriber is, that I do not think
• the Hon. Member has made out, even according to his
own view, such a case as we should consider a sufficient
reason for the adoption of that particular clause. Ido
not think, Sir, that he has wrought the present cirtum-
stances, which he conceives so favourable to the success
of his proposition, into an argument strong enough to
convince us of the expediency of his resolution. In fact,
Sir, his reason is little more than this: that as the late
Corn Bill is extinct, and as there is now a vacancy on
the question, we ought, on that account, to adopt that
deterring clause in the Act of 1822, which is acknow.
'edged, on all hands, to have been got up as a sort
of bug-bear. But, Sir, while I deny that the Ho-
nourable Member has prove) that the present circum-
stances under which we legislate amount to a reason
for the adoption of that measure, I will admit, that
these circumstances are of such a peculiar nature, as
to call for the interposition of the Legislature. And,
I think I do not anticipate too much 'of this Com-
mittee, if they allow themselves to be at all influenced
by the ' late transaction in another place, when I trust
that they will, with overwhelming majorities, nay, I
May say, with one unanimous consent, throw aside the
resolutions of the Hon. Member who has just proposed
the re-enactment of the law of 1822. No man, said
that Hon. Member, out of this House, considers 625. a
sufficient remunerating pike; and oh that account
only has the Bill, which was lately passed, been lost in
the other House. So, because we are placed in a dffi-
culty, not arising from any fault of our own, we are
bound to adopt the expedient of the Hon. Member; be-
cause we cannot have the remunerating price of 625.
we must adopt the proposition of the Hon. Member, by
which it is raised to 70s.—(Cheers). Surely, the Hon.
Member cannot have forgotten, that in this House, at
least, the main point of discussion was not the particular
degree of price, but the adoption of the principle of the
Bill, by which prohibition was to be withdrawn, and
importation encouraged. Yet, fur this reason, added
to the loss of the Bill in another place, does the Hon.
Member call on us to retract our deliberate decision as
to the encouragement of importation, and to go back to
the principle of prohibition in the existing Acts. Now,
the Hon. Member does not want experience—does not
want information on the amount of the duty, or of
price, or any other detail or modification of that law ;
yet would he have us adopt his proposition, with-
out giving us the shadow of o single reason, and
• without a solitary word of argument. Sir, my
• reason for recommending to the Committee• the' re-
jection of the Hon. Members proposition, is, that 1
think that this House will not reduce itself to such a
low condition, as to abjure its recorded sentiments—to
rescind its deliberate decisions—and consent that that
Bill, which it passed with such almost universal con-
currence, should be thrown away as so much waste
paper, because another branch of the Legislature bas
seen fit to introduce. into it an alteration, whit,: I cos-
cider an abolition of its principle, but which that other
branch, in its courtesy, choose to call an amendment.
Sir, I do not think that this House will retract its deli.
berate opinions—will rescind its solemn judgment--
and lay itself prostrate at the feet of the other House of
• Parliament. Sir, if there be in this House a single
feeling of pride or shame, it will not yield a principle
which it has considerately resolved on—(Loud cheers).
But as it is necessary, in this state of things, to adopt
some measure, it is our duty that such a measure, on
the one hand, slay not contain any thing which may be
construed into a sign of hostility to the sentiments enter-
' tained in another place; and, on the other hand, that it
may not involie an abandonment of the principle of
our favourite but unfortunate Bill. My first wish
that we should do nothing that may lead to a collision
with the other House ; my second, that we should adopt
no permanent measure at present, as. it is clear we
must come to a most serious consideration of this sub-
ject early in the next Session; my third wish is, that
whatever measure we may adopt may be.couceived in
the spirit and ptinciple of the Bill that has already
passed through this branch of the Legislature. And on
that measure I must observe, that considering the length
to which it proceeded without alteration in the other
House of Parliament, namely, to a second reading, and
that carried by a large majority, I am inclined to think
that the consequences of the alteration subsequently
adopted were not clearly understood. But, Sir, a
certain time must intervene between the present time
and the coming-in of the next harvest ; and between the
exhaustion of the wheat at present in our warehouses
and the accession of our domestic produce in autumn, a