Star.
London, England, 1827-03-02 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 2, 1827.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOPS OF LORDS, ',Weal/ I.
Lords RIVERS, MINTO, DARTMOUTH, BOLINOBNOILS,
and Bssionovon, took the oaths and their seats.

Lord ROLLE presented Petitions from the parish of
St. Stephen, in the city cf Exeter, from the parish of
Great Torrington, and from ten other places in the
county of Devon, against any farther concessions to the
Roman Catholics. His Lordship also presented three
similar Petitions from the county of Dorset.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented similar Pe-
titions from. Newcastle-under-Lyne, in the county of
Stafford, and a parish in the county of Southampton.
The Bishop of EXETER presented similar Petitions
fro the Archdeacon and Clergy of the Archdeaconry
!'
of Exeter, and from the Clergy and Inhabitants of the
pario of St. Paal, in the city of Exeter, aad from the
linimeitants of the parish of Allhallows within the
I saw •ffi

Lord ROSSLYN presented Petitions, praying for
the reinoval 'of Rumen Catholic disabilities, from the
patish of St. Andrew, in the city of Dublin, and frOrn
the pari.h of Bari yloughfoyle, in the county of Galway.
Lord SPEN.:ER presented a similar Petition, signed
by 570 of the Inhabitants of the town of Northampton.
Lord MALMESBUItY presented Petitions against
any alteration in the Corn Laws, from the Owners and
Occupier s of Land in the Division of Wellingborough,
in the County of Nwthampten; from the Owners and
Occupiers of L.nd. in the Hundred of Mitiord, in the
County of Norfolk; and from Banbury. in Oxforsfehlte.
Lord GOWER presented a similar Petition from the
Town of Newport, in the County of Salop. •
Lord YARBOROUGH presented a Petition from the
Mayor, Corporation, and 700 of the tradespeople of
the City of Lincoln, praying au adequate protection for
the landed, interest. The Noble .Lord also presented
similar Petitions from. four different Districts in the
neighbourhood of the City of Lincoln.:.
'Lord G W YDYIt presented similar Petitions from the
Owners and Occupiers of Land residing in Cargill. is
the Ccnnty of Perth.
Lord MAYNARD presented a similar Petition from
the Hundred of Ittinsnore, in the County of.Essez.
Lord ROSSLYN presented a similar Petition from,
Owners and Occupiers of .Land, in different Counties
of England—from
.Owners and Occupiers: of Land{
frequenting the Market of Romford, in the County of,
Essex—from the Hundred of Threadsnell,• and from
Bosmere.and Clayton, in the County of Suffolk-4ft=
the labourers in the three Hundreds of Newport, in the
County of Bucks—from the Hundred of Calmenk, in
the County of Suffolk—and from the Palish of Sid-
bury, in the County of Devon.
The Marquis of TWEEDALE presented Petitions
to the same effect, from the Counties of Haddingtoa
and East Lothian. -
Lad DELAWARR resented sirMaar: Parisian',
from eight different places in the County of Susses.
Lord BROWNLOW presented a similar Petition
from the Hundred of Nees, in the County of Lincoln.
Mr.Caatroa, from the Treasury.-presented an'account
of Corn imported since the 26th of Jansuuy.--Adj.

but in eonsequeme of the important question which was owning
Do, he should pompous the presentation of the Petition to the fol-
lowing night.
_ • _ TIIII CORN' LAWS. _ _

Mr. Secretary CANNING rose and moved that the
House should resolve itself into a Committee of the
whole House upon the Corn Laws.
Sir Edward KNATCHBULL said he did not riseto
oppose the motion, but before he consented, he wi►hed
fully to understand that his so doing should not After-
wards be used as an argument that be was pledged to
any of the resolutions proposed in the Committee, or
to any measures founded upon them. The Hight Hon.
Gentleman wofild not„he was sure, wish to place the
House in such a situation.
Mr. Secretary CANNING said he could not con-
ceive how the Hon. Geothiman,:or any one else could
by possibility be considered pledged so any thing by this

Mr. Stetting CANNING ruse and delivered him-
self to-tht folhiwing effect:—
Mr. CHAIRMAN,--.BelOre I proceed to state the
nature of the Re.oluticuss which it is my intention to
lay berme the Committee, I trust they will permit
me to detain them for a few moments while I express
my ackno sledgments to the House for the indulgence
which it has been pleased to bestow upon me. I .lo
assure the House, that neither would that indulgence
have been craved. nor should I have been disposed to
air4il myself- of it, from any considerations personal
to myself alone. lam perfectly sure that there are
those into whose hands the opening of this question
.might have been placed with much greater :dean.,
ge to the measures themselves, and to the House.
But, Sir, under all the extraordinary circumstances
which have surrounded this question ; much as it
has been agitated, both within and out of this House;
and great as has been the inflammation of men's
minds in regard to it; it. was considered desirable that
.when the propositions of the Government were brought
fotward iu Parliament, they should be brought forward
in that manner which -should make it be understood
ost clearly that they were the propositions of the
Government, and not of any party. I say this the
more readily in the absence of my Right Hon. Friend,
the President of the Board of Trade, because, even if ,
be were present, I should be compelled to add, that inl
his bands the subject would have been better, if not
mete amieutly considered ; it would have experien-
ced from him the advantage of a superior acquaint.
ance with its nature, which, in my hands, it must fail
to receive. Sir, if these considerations were felt
strongly at the beginning of the Session, when the first
postponement of the question was proposed, and kindly
assented to by the House, undoubtedly they received
great additional strength from that a faictins dispensa-
tion of Pnotrinhiree, VW rook of which we are still
watehiog with eressistrag anxiety, and which depfived
my Noble Friend (Letd-L;vespooly of an opportunity
for opening the measure to the other House, simulta-
neously with the proposition I have now the honour to
submit to this. He was deirous of taking that course,
and of vindicating himself for his share, or rather I
should say, for that paternity—of the measure, which
was truly his. I know that he felt more interested and
anxious upon it than upon any other measure within
my recollection; and that upon its succes; be was
ready to stake aU that was distinguished and honour-
able in his situation. Sir, it is therefore not less as the
representative of my Noble Friend, than as the organ
of the Government in this House, that I am now bring-
ing forward the • propositions befogs the Committee.
And I only hope that I shall be able to convey to the
House of-Conslions the sense and spirit of his opinions,
in whith I hayeentirely concurred; and to prove my-
self not an unfaithful expositor of the sentiments which,
I derived from hyrn, and of the measure which in its
creation and-form is essentially, his. Sir, along with
the disqualifications which I admit as belonging to my-
self for opening this measure to the House, there are,
perhaps, some negative qualifications to which I may
lay claim; and particularly that, owing to accidental
circumstances, in all the long discussions which the,
subject has undergone in Parliament at various periods,
it so happens that I have never taken any part. In
the debates of 181.5, / was absent from illness. In
1822, it so happened, that front my contemplated re-
moval to a post in a distant part of the empire, I
took little part in the proceedings of Parliament.—
' With the single exception of one clause, which my situ-
' atiori, as representative for the town of Liverpool, re-
quired that I should watch over—l mean that clause
, which gave the House so much trouble, and which was
• known by the name of the Winding Clause—excepting
' in that instance. I took no share' in the discussion of
1822. Since that time the question has been but little
agitated. In the course of the last Session I had to
being forward some propositions respecting foreign
corn, which met the unanimous concurrence of the
House; but in the discussions upon which there was, by
general consent, a complete abstinence from the merits
of the larger question of the Corn Laos. In this I have
had at least one advantage. I came to the consideration
of the subject, and I pow come. to the discussions of
these measures, without pledge, without prej.iclice, sa ith-
out having to maintain any tomer opinions for the sake of
consiaricy, and without any feeling of inflammation or
acrimony towards any party concerned in the discussion.
Sir, it does indeed surprise me, that into this discussion
any hostile feelings should enter. First, because I be-
lieve that the differences between those who differ at
all, are infinitely less wide than they are generally
stated to be. And, secondly. because amongst all the
various opinions which exist on the different sides, I
have never met yet either in all that I have read, or in
all that I have beard on the subject,-1 have never
found the extreme of either side manfully and unequi-
vocally supported. First, as to the introduction of
foreign corn into this country, the extreme opinion on
one side must go to a perpetual, unmitigated exclusion;
whilst it is equally obvious that the extreme opinions
on the other side must as surely lead to perpetual, un-
restricted importation. I have never met with any one,
on the one hand or on the other, prepared to go the
folk length of these propositions, unequivocally or with-
out qualifications. Then, Sir, all between these remote
and extreme differences, ate questions of mode and de-

s [PRICE SEVENPENCE:

greet questions in the discu•sion of which, Gentleman
are apt in the language used t • enforce their argumenes,
to go beyond their real meaning, and to create the ap.
pearance of irreconcilable hostility, where in reality it
do-t not exist. I have never met the advocate for a fret-
tiade in corn who, when pressed in argument, would twt
admit that to the agricultural interest some protection
was due. I have never seen the most violent supporter
of the opposite opinions willing to risk all the cane-
quences of a permanent andiellexiSle exclusion. Ois
the one side, I find those who so loudly call for the im-
I portation of foreign corn, admitting the principle that
protection in some shape or other should be afforded to
domestic agriculture. As to the amount or degree,
that is the question at issue; but that some is dwell
have never yet heard denied. On the other hand, those
who press for prohibition or exclusion most strongly, all
A!** their opinion; by admitting, that a power—in

11.111111inieomemkisesidlibminy beAr.-sbeTesid elver;ys reels%
with the Parliament, or the Parliament not sitting, with
the Executive, to come in to the aid of the country
when any peculiar case of emergency shall require it.
Why, then, here we have it admitted by the one party.
that protection is not wholly to be abjured; and by the
other, that unbending prohibition is impracticable.—
Having, then. these admissions limp the widest oppo-
nents in the two classes of opinions, all the rest resolves
itself into a question of mode and degree. The ques-
tion is, Sir, in what mode. and to what degree. shall
protection to agriculture be extended ? In the course
of the last two or three years, two or three different
piano have been proposed for the settlement 'of
'this most important question. That of Mr. Ricardo
was one; another originated with a Noble Lord,
• Member of the other House of Parliament; a third,
which has been more lately seen, and whickje:
accordant with tie strict doctiines of the eeoi
is familiar to every body conversant wigs the current
literature of the day. Here, then, are three plans, de-
vised by persons most generally favourable to a free
trade in cora, which, nevertheless, not only admit the
principle of protection, but proceed to state the mode
at•d degree in which, according their notions, protec-
Sias o.jbt to be afforded. One of these plans, the first,
=Zs a duty of twenty shillings per quarter on wheat
I speak of duty, it is always in reference to
*bear, because the duties on the other sorts of grain
are regulated by that. This plan proposes a duty of
twenty shillings, without reference to price; the duty
to be diminished yearly one shilling until it shall have
reached a maximum—that is a minimum in the scale,
but a maximum of the ultimate duty of five or ten
shillings, at which point it is to be made permanent.—
The second plan, that of the Noble Lord, differed from
the f one in this respect. It proposed to begin
of duties at sixteen shillings, to. be gradually
so tens and that amount to be permanent.
The last plan dinned from Both t inasmuch.as it pro-
posed a duty, once for all, of 'five or six shillings,
equally, without reference to price, and to be perma-
nent; but with an admission of argument, not in state•
ment—that in cases of extreme emergency and pressure,
it ought to be left doubtful whether that duty should
stand. Now, Sir, my objections to each of these three
plans are theses Whenever the time of pressure comet.
they will prove a delusion to the agriculturists, and
leave them without substantial protection or relief.
On the other band, in times of an
.insufficient supply
from our own soil, abets famine is its our streets, our
workshops, and our manufactories; what will be said
if the Government cume to levy a duty upon the im-
portation of foreign corn ? Either the Parliament, if
sitting, would legislate, under the pressure of the ewer..
gency, to suspend the duty, or the Executive-Govern-
merit must exercise a 'power which unfortunately for
them, the system lodged in their bands, and suspend
the duty by violent and unconstitutional means; and
seek their defence in an Act of Indemnity—(Hear, bear,
hear). My objections, therefore, to this system is, that
it does not answer the purpose. It admits the prin-
ciple of protecting, but does not carry it into
effect. On the other hand, what is the qualifi-
cation of those who contend for perpetual prohi-
bition, with a power of mitigation re.erved In the Par-
liament or the Government What sort of security
have we that the mitigation which they offer, will be
either expedient or effectual ? I say, absolutely nothing.
They appeal from legislation to discretion. They
would leave the opening of the ports in times of emer-
gency to the Executive. They would throw upon the
Government the responsibility of suspending that pro-
hibitive duty which they now say ought not to be sus-
' fended. From this I bring myself to the practical
questions—What is the degree of protection required,
and do the laws as they exist afford that precise degree
of protection in the best mode, or do they affad pro-
tectiou to an unnecessary extent? Sir, the law of 1815,
I introduced for the firtt time into the Legislation of tbis
country upon corn, the principle of absolute prohibi-
tion—(Some Hon; Members dissented). I say the pi in-
ciple was here introduced for the first time. I am not
misinformed that antiquarian lore bas supplied an Act
of Edward IV. by wh cb an unqualified prohibition was
enacted. Some three centuries and a half distant from
the present time, a law was passed, providing as fol.
lows:—When wheat reached a certain ;nice ail impor-
tation was prohibited. And this did not extend to fo-
reign corn alore ; but wheat grown in one part of
England, could not be sold at another, it it fetched a
different price. I cite this law, because when I
say, that in 1815 the principle of prohibition
was first introduced into the Logislatim of this
country, I know that I am liable to conti adi _Lion
upon the authority of this Act; bu. when I
cite this law, I do not arprehend that it will be neces-
sary for me to say very notch as to its character. I say
then, that in the year 1815 the principle of prohibition
was first adopted; and when it was so adopted, it was
attempted to be qualified by a union with the opposite
principle of unrestricted importation. I do not mean to
cast any reproach upon the proceedings of that time ;
the same consideration had not then been given to the
principles upon which these questions rest. I do sot
mean to say, that if I had taken part in those discus-
sions, I should have been wiser than others iu foreseeing
the difficulties which have since amen. But looking
back and calmly tcfieeting upon thu e meatuses, it