Star.
London, England, 1827-06-26 00:00:00

measure as a sort of cennectiii %tween
which had been lost that year, an e one his
Ministers proposed to hiring forward in the
He could notombAlotdluisters should not
ley, as they had done Lord Liverpeas
Nit, nor squid he see- what necessity there
:0411earvelsOncasure. His Noble Friend
.Ispe steed nkle wheat. When Lord Liverpool
brought in hii Bill for the adMission of 500,000
ters of wheat, he imposed 1 duty of 12s. an,'
declared, as the recognised principle, that
his vote upon that question, was committed . Be-
moral measure. He should deviate from the line he had

siways pursued, by agreeing to the present measure,
adis• it was brought forward in some other shape. As
Attid mentioned the quantity which had, upon a for-,
eimat occa,ion, been admitted for.home consumption, he
should state, that at that period, the year 1825, the ave.
rage price of wheat was 695. while in the present
year, it was only 68s. biing thus 11 s. a quarter
higher when the 430,000 quitters were let out of
band, and during the last year the quantity so admitted,
amounted to no more than 290,000 quarters. It was
impossible to calculate, if markets remained as they
ware, what effect the admission of 700,000 quarters
would produce, both upon prices and upon the agri.
cultural interest generally, especially as. the quantity
which the measure before the House would permit to
be let in, exceeded, by 10J,000 quarters, any amount
which had been previously allowed into consumption.
With respect to America, it had been urged, that is
would be a great hardship on our North American Co-
lonies to prevent their corn from being admitted, as
it was now upon the sea, and actually on the way
here; but that could not be considered any argument, I
asit was notoriousthat the Act which had been passedl
in their favour, was only to be inforeed for a period
of two years, and that it expired at the end of the pre-
seat Session of Parliament. Wherefore if Canadian
corn were allowed to be consumed here, it must be
admitted, it was more from courtesy than from right.'
The same argument applied to the bonded corn, in',
which it was said, capital had been invested on the
faith of the passing of the Bill, which had been Intro-
duced and had tailed. He would, certainly, bie very
sorry, that persons who had speculated in that' way
should suffer lisses; but, at the same time, such elle-

gations could not-be of the least avail as an argument,
as those persons were well aware, that the Government
had no power to permit any such thing, unless they
had the consent of Parliament. And as to the measure
itself, then proposed, his opinion was, that it would be
much better for Government to take upon themselves
the responsibility of admitting wheat, it there were any
circumstance which rendered such relief necessary ; and

he did not believe that they could have any diltculty
in pursuing such a course, as it was not more than
nine months since they had so acted, and afterwards
had a Bill of Indemnity passed without any opposition.
lie would not be the one to object to their doing so,
if they made out as good a case for wheat in this as
tl:ey had for oats in the last year. He was afraid he
trespassed on their Lordships' time; but he wished to
chew them the amount, and the great increase which
had taken. place in the importation of foreign
croductions within a very short period. The averaie
quantity of butter annually imported, for the first nine
years after the peace, had been 123,000 cwt. while, in the
last three years, it was 298,000 cwt. which was more
than double the former amount. Cheese had, .during
the first period, come in to the amount of 124,000 cwt.
while, in the latter, it came up to 275,000 cwt. 'Tallow
had also, in the same periods, increased from 672,000
'0,973,000, and hides from 345.000 to 767,000. Their
'Lordships were aware, that the admission of every one
of these articles must bear hard upon the farmers. With
respect to timber also, nothink was now heard of but
'the competition between the North American Colonies
and the Baltic,while nothing whatever was said about the
fair claims of the home grower. In 1823, the quantity
of timber imported amounted to 48.5,000 loads, while,
'in 1826, it came to 767,000; and as to wool, though
last not least, in interest, the quantity imported was ac-
t ually quadrupled. Was it then possible to say, that
all this foreign importation did not come into competi-
.tion, and that it was not calculated to inflict serious in-
jury upon our fellow-subjects? He, therefore, begged
of his Majesty% Ministers, before they brought forward
• a permanent measure in the next Session, to take this
subject into their serious consideration. The sacrifices
and oufferings of the manufacturers had also been much
spoken of, but he thought there were no grounds what-
ever for these complaints, because, if all those losses
had been incurred by them, the necessary consequences
'mild be, the increase of the importation of foreign
manufactures. In order to be satisfied upon the point,
he had examined the accounts of foreign cotton and
woollen manufactures, which had been imported, and
he would, as a matter of curiosity, state the result,
which would prove the correctness of his inference.
—ln the year 1824, the value of woollens imported
amounted to 71,0001. while in 1826, it only came to
41,0004 being thus actually less than in the former
year.. Then, as to the costs of the necessaries of life,
which were considered to be food, raiment, and fuel,
and which the removal of the restrictions would, it was
supposed, reduce, the contrary was directly the fact.—
As to cottons imported, the value of imports, in 1824,
amounted to 101,8011. while, in 1826, it only came to
104,3041. the difference in this article being scarcely any-
thing. With respect to leather, although a great portion
of the taxes had been taken off, there was not the least
difference in the price of shoes ; and it was an unde-
niable fact, that this reduction had conferred no bells
tit whatever on the village labourer, not even to the
amount of a single farthing, although the wants of
that class had been insisted on as one of its chief reasons.

The duty upon manufactured leather had been reduced
in the proportion of from 751. to 301. per cent.; and the
whole of that great reduction, instead of effecting a
benefit for the people, was absot bed by the manufac-
turers. The value of manufactured leather imported
was, in 1824, 6231. while in 1626, it came to 1,6721.;
t` us, in these three articles, he thought he had proved
,t the doing away of the protection had produced no
eat' ct whatever. There was another article which could

tv.t be done without, and which yet could not be had
vliliout a great increase of price—he meant hats. As
for a felt hat, there must be half-a-guinea extra
psid. As to the silk weavers, he should say nothing
about them, because he thought that, whatever they
had saved, they had brought upon themselves. There
was only oue other point which he meant to advert to,
he meant the agricultural interest as it was affected by
taxation. With respect to that, it was a singular cir-
cumstance that in the five years preceding 1793, the
average price of wheat had been 48s. 3d. while in the
last year it had been only 565. the difference thus being
bat about 16 per cent. • AK in 1793, the total amount

_LLINL -id,
not agree with his Noble Friend (the Earl of Whiffler
bury) in the opinion, that it would be right to throw
upon the Government the responsibili.y of admitting
foreign corn for consumption, and fully agreed with his'
Majesty's Government, that it was expedient that some
measure of the kind now proposed should be agreed to
after the disappointment which had been experienced
relative to the other measure which had not been cart ied.
He was therefore disposed to give the present Bill his
support, more particularly as he considered it to be the
same in principle with that measure, and, in fact, with
the amendment proposed by him, with the additional
advantage of ascertaining, by experiment, what would
have been the effect of that measure if carried; at the same
time that it was limited as to quantity so as to prevent any
injurious effect. Under all the circumstances, therefor%
he thought the present measure most advisable, and most
strongly recommended it to the House ; at the same time
that he could not help expressing his regret that it was,
not accompanied by the other measure which had been
before their Lordships. Upon that subject he would say,
that he never considered that what he did in any way
Imilitatedagainst the principle of that Bill, and would
always contend, that that principle might be carried into
effect, even if the system of warehousing were not to be
at all allowed of. Having these views, he thought that
any modification of that system might be safely intro-
duced, when it was not inconsistent with the principle,
of the Bill. The Noble Lords of his Majesty's Govern-'
ment, however, thought that a system of prohibition
was inconsistent with that principle, although he begged
the House to consider what was the difference, or whe-
ther the effect of a duty was not similar to what they
contended against? It that were so, then, in fact, pro-
hibition had existed during the whole period up to
which corn was allowed for consumption. It had ex•
isted in 1773, and from 1791 to 1815, when what was
done, was by the imposition of a duty, and the same
might be again done in such a manner as to afford sa-
tisfaction to the country. Under those circumstances
then, he should consider the Noble Lords themselves
responsible for the loss of the Bill, which it had been
said was lost by his amendment. He had been accused
not only of proposing a measure, which was inconsistent
with the principle of the Bill, but likewise of doing so
from pi ivate and party motives. But he must say, that if
ever there was a man who had proposed a measure indi-
vidually, and without any kaowledge,whether he would
be supported in it or cot, he was the person—(Hear,hear).
He would repeat, tht be proposed that measure to the
House,uot only believing that he would hate the support,
but that it actually was the suggestion of one of the
Ministers of the Crown. He did not mean to say that
he did not labour in that instance under a mistake; but
if he was. so, he could assure their Lordships that he
was so mistaken with a great many others who had
both before and siuce the amendment, read over the
letters of the President of the Board of Trade, and who
still attached to them the same meaning which he did
when he proposed the amendment. He should observe
too, that if that measure were inconsistent with the prin.,
ciple of the Bill, that it was not more so than others
which had been admitted into it. He thought it right
also to say, that during the discussion upon the subject,
he had endeavoured to impress upon the Government
the necessity of taking it out of his hands, and of carry-
lug it themselves, that he had done so not only by the
correspondence, part of which be had before read to their
Lordships, but by other communication., not only with
e President of the Board of Trade (which he would
then read in his own justification) but with his Noble
Friend the Secretary of State then present. His Grace
then read the following letters:

•
(Copy.) London, Jane 4,11147:
MT DILMI Husussou—As you say that I misunderstood 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 teaming your letter to me, I cannot but think that I should
have sought 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 its its nature, resulting from
the operation of the warehouse system on that of the proposed Corn
Law ; and I proposed a permanent remedy. Iu answer, you stated
very good reasons against what I bad proposed, and you tell me,
that " had my proposal been, that no corn bonded after the passing
...or the present Bill should be allowed to be entered for home
" consumption till the ' average price had reached 665. and that
" thenceforward all corn so bonded, or thereafter imported, should'
• come under the regulations of the Bill, individually, you would
• not object to such a proviso"—and you add, " It (this proviso)
• would insure, that no quantity beyond that now in bond should
. . - . .

" be thrown upon the market, unless, in spite of that quantity, the
.4 price reached a level which 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 permanent evil,
the existence of which is not denied, I was to consider the word
" thenceforward," not in an unlimited sense, but applicable to time
only, and having no reference to circumstances, notwithstanding
what followed in the succeeding sentence of your letter • and I was
to believe that you intended I should be satisfied, and that the
public should be satisfied, with a temporary remedy fir a perma-
nent evil.

However, I am ready to admit that I did net understand your
letter as you have now explained it, and you may rely upon it that
If I could have entertained any doubt respecting your meaning, that
I should have gone to you, or have written to you again.
Lord Goderich must do me the justice to acknowledge, that I
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 eolely to corn now in bond ; and I begged him
to peruse it again. He did so; and he came to me and returned
the papers without saying a word. I concluded, therefore, that he
concurred in the proposition which I certainly considered as sug-
gested by you, and I made it to the Committee of the House of
Lords, in the mode and at the timd most likely to be of service to
the Governmerft, by preventing a dilrislon on a proposition of Lord
Rosslyn's,which had for its object tO lay the duty upon corn upon
. .

into warehouse.

I shall be sorry if this Proviso should be inconvenient to the Go-
vernment, and I must add, that if Lord Goderieh had expressed to
me a wish that I should delay to propose it till on the Report, I
should have done so.

In your letter of the 24th you spoke with doubt whether the mea-
sure proposed by you would occasion the rejection of the Bill. You
write with more confidence on that which hu been adopted by the
Committee In the House of Lords in your letter received yesterday.
But what do you say to the Amendments agreed to by the Govern.
meat In the House of Lords?
Surely the omission of the word (British) in the second clause,
with a view that the Scotch, Irish, and Foreign Corn may be in-
cluded in the Averages, and the alteration of the term of the Ave-
' rages from one to six weeks, will make a material alteration of the
duties, and must equally occasion the rejection of the MI.
You will recollect my opinion upon the measure proposed by
Lord Liverpool ; to the principle of which, notwithstanding that
opinion, I consider myself a party, and I have accordingly sop.
ported e Government in every division that ha, taken place-in the

prohibition,
. -
keine, as "the" modification.
I that this impression is so strong upon as, mind, and
eat the sistijact in all its bearings, it appeared to mit that
Chi proviso agreed to by the Huns, of Lords, so completely met
!filo and was so just towards ail parties, that you mast havgl
ildpuliatod it exactly upon the "basis" of the price of 6•24. the label
and the ezpeases of carrying corn from the wares
=rilrid. to this country.
vs me, Ice. WELLINGTON.
Petwotth. sth June, 1521. •
1W sus Duce—l have received by the post of this morning
noble loner of yesterday's date.
I mutt ' on every account,' that the propositioo which I
coceneey in my letter of the 24th ult, was so stated, as.to
your misunderstanding my real meaping. So huh did I, bed
last Saturday, contemplate any risk of having been misapprehended,
that when I received (whilst in the House of Commons on Thursday
evening) the inclosed note from Lord Eioderkb. I immediately sent I
him an explanation, from thence, to the same effect as that which
I have since given to you. lam sure, if Lord Goderich is referred
to, that he will do me the justice to confirms thii statement.
From the moment I was informed that you Considered your
amendment as originating in my suggestioo, I was satisfied that
there had been some misunderstanding ; and as the nature of it is

now cleared up, I will not trouble yaiiwith any controversial argu-
ment upon the true construction of the words which you have
quoted from my letter of the 24th. The sentence (indeed the
whole of that letter) was hastily written, and, I admit, might
have been more clearly expressed; but when, in the latter part
of that sentence, I state, " that the regulation to which I saw
" no objectiod would insure that no ' quantity* heycin4 ' that
" now' in bond should be thrown upon the market, unless,
" in spite of ' that quantity,' the price reached a keel"—
(namely, 06s.)—" which might fairly be taken as an indication of
our being in want of a further supply from abroad.' "—I must
avow myself at a loss to reconcile the construction of words which
appear to palm to this meaning, namely, that the specific 'quantity
now' in bond should be protected against competition with • any fur.
ther supply from abroad,' until the average price at home should
have reached Cis. with your proviso, which leaves the supply from
abroad free 'at all times to come Into the British market, with.
out reference to any ge price; whilst it locks up any wheat
which may hereafter be a bonded in this 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 oar own warehouses had been disposed of.
How then could your amendment and my suggestion be conver-
tible propositions?
The real truth is, that what was uppermost in my mind. when I
threw out this suggestion. was the inconvenience which might arise
from letting into consumption further supplies of wheat, hereaftei
to arrive' until the greatest part of the quantity now in bond should
have been disposed of. The limiting the supply, in the first instance,
to the now bonded corn, was a question which had been mooted in
the Cabinet, if I recollect right, by Lord Westmoreland. I own
that I thought (as I understood him is think) that, within certain
limits, there were reasons for giving priority to that corn, before
we suffered fresh supplies to come into the market from foreign
countries-. 40 arrangement temporary In its nature, hut in its ope-
ration, by the bye, the very reverse of what your Amendment con-
sem_plates as a permanent system.
You will therefore Terceive that in writing the unlucky para.
graph which is the origin of all this confusion, I was no
thinking of the ' permanent evil,' your proposed, remedy for teYsli
I haddiscuued in the former part of my letter.
Having no copy of the Corn Bill with me here, I am quite in.;
capable of forming any opinion as to the effect of the word • British'
in the second clause of the 13111, an Amendment of which I was stilt
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 Sea-
don of Parliament. But whatever may be the fate of the ail, or
however produced. I never for a moment can doubt that, to the
part which you have taken, your anxious object has been to render
the proposed measure as free from objection as the watery of the
subject, dealing with such complicated interests, nod through stpds
a variety of transactions, will admit.—l remain, my dear Duke of
Wellington, ever faithfully yours, W. Humussort.
He begged their Lordships' pardon forhaving trespassed
so long upon their attention, but he had been anxious
to explain the motives by which he had been actuated.
He utterly disclaimed having been influenced by a fac-
tious or by any other feeling than by a wish to rents,
the measure palatable to the country; and of this be
was persuaded, that whenever a permanent Bill upon
the subject was again proposed, it would be necessary
to incorporate into it some proposition similat to that
which, at his suggestion, their Lordships had adopted.
Viscount GODERICH disclaimed any intention of
ever uttering a single syllable which could, by the re-
motest possibility, impute to his Noble Friend any but
the best motives for his conduct ; and he was sure, on
the other band, that his Noble Friend would do him the'
justice to believe, that he had opposed the clause which
had been proposed by his Noble Friend on no other
ground but his conviction that it would not effect the
purpose required. It was undoubtedly true, that before
the Committee on the Bill, his Noble Friend had com-
municated to him the letters that had passed between
his Right Hon. Friend and himself, as also the purpose
which he had had in view. If, under such circum-
stances, he (Lord Goderich) had hesitated, it would not
have been surprising. As well, however, as he inuld
recollect, he had handed the letters back to his Noble
Friend without mating any observation upon them;
having distinctly declared his opinion on the subject at
a former period, and conceiving that his Noble Ftiend
was in perfect possession of that opinion. As to what
had 'subsequently taken 'place between his Noble
Friend and himself, it was assuredly tine that his
Noble Friend had, over and over again, urged him
to take that particular queition into his own hands.
He had felt a disposition to make any sacrifice that he
could make, consistently with the principle of the Bill,
to meet the views of his Noble Friend. He had devised
what means he thought calculated to obtain that end;
and he had even delayed his last answer, in the hope
that either by some suggestion of his own, or by some
suggestion from some other quarter, their respective
d.fferencei might be removed, and something acceptable
to both might be proposed. He did not desist from
his endeavours until he saw it would be a farce to hope
for the accomplishnient of such a satisfactory adjust-
ment. It might be from' his want of knowledge of the
subject—it might be from-his error ; but seeing that his
fundamental objections were not reconcilable with the
opposition of. his Noble Friend, he could not conscien-
tiously consent to abandon them.. There was no subject
in the course of his public life that had given him more
pain than the present. He imputed blame to no quar-
ter; he felt that both himself and his colleagues were
perfectly blameless for the result, and he only consi•
dered that result as arising from the differences that
will prevail at all times among men legislating on
difficult subjects. Thus much he thought-it necessary
to say to protect himself and his colleaguesfrom unjust
reproach in the late unfortunate transact:....

Earl GREY next rose, and spoke to the following
effect :—...44114 Lords, it is not my wish or intention to
prolong the dismission of a subject which has already
been too mach agitated is this House and throughout

try rat to hem au contrary to the principle of Lord Liverpool%
SVnitn the Bill of the Funded and Unfunded Debt was 244,000,0001• noun of Leeds. I don't consider the Amendment as prepenel
t his Majesty's while in 1826 it *wonted t 01108,000,0001. thereat*
be foilowin is ate being, as 0 tie agridulturists, only 16 per cent.
of except bar• wle the increase • f thelbebt *as as three and a half of corn in England, rov ..1 or-- by averages taken weekly and
Warehousing to one, Sr aliput 0 psi cent. Ile potteliy coincieed
increase
pia tor thr weeks' averages. Since Lord lAterpoore • .
lejt . a)►a
ors* end agreed upon, a Committee has sat its the mime
tere was for. a telth his .Nqitte d /Viscount Goderteb) as to the r
takingt Which it hu been peeved that 'nothing cap prevent;
had not said tone and tniltinerin which a subject of this kind ought 6"6.!1„..bef
iverpool had to be discussed, and he was sure that his Nobl‘Friend hoses System, for the purpose of carrying into execution the objects
00,000 quar- had no right to complain of him, as he hid given his .r those trued&
[ld afterwards opinion., with the pu►lie good as the sole end andooliject ...lb IrinOld"e system then must be reformed) and as Lard
t no man, by he had in view, Ind without suffering any ober feeling. .7.„7,,,,
ed to any ge- to operate upon his mind or conduct. ... • • may-be allowed to continue, it is no departure from thatprinciple
/
he line he had The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that he could Assam gr.iielk was to protect Home Agriculture by the leq of a
dory ow Corn lenecli and to regulate this duly by the
the a•efeges, not the abuse Of the mistint Ware-
n cora principle might ell* even if the warehouse system were
la Mallon to corn, or under whatever ntodilicatian tt
to adopt a moderate prohibition, applicable only to corn in ware,
.. . - ....