Star.
London, England, 1827-03-28 00:00:00

r Commission ; but thought the subject it was
r.posed
to investigate Might be separately inquired hunt in the
same manner as had been adopted in reference to the
Criminal Laws, and with greater advantage thee if the
whole question were submitted to a Commission; it
'being the too general tendency of such associations to
degenerate into theory, and to suggest alterations in
principle which it was most dangerous to meddle with.
Mr. Secretary. PEEL did not' pledge himself to
Commission. All he at present could promise was that
the subject daituld soon have his consideration, and ihd
the individuals he should select should be the mo:tega
cient possible.

After a few observations from Mr. SIIIIDWILL, thi
Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be coma
misted on Fa iday nest.

C3llll TRAYS ACTS.
Sir A. GRANT brought up the Report of t' e Coma
mittee of Monday night on the Corn Trade Acts.

On the question that the first Resolution be lead
second time,

Mr. HUME obj .tied to the amount of protection If.
forded by the Resolution to the Agricultural intere,t,
which, he contended, was at variance will the free trio,
principles laid down, and partially acted upon, by Anis.
tars. SJch an amount of protection ought not lobe
given to 'the Landed Interest, until they could pose
what they so frequently asserted, namely. that they p 414
a greyer proportion of the taxes than the other interest%
of the community. The proposed laur favoured the
agriculturist, and the other pOlllOll of the county
would have to make good their deficiency. He objected
' so the Resolution, first, because it involved a breach of
she promises given of free trade ; and secondly, because
it mould go to favour the few instead of the many.
The principle was decidedly bad. It would prevent
oilier States from cultivating corn, and the consequence
would be, that they would not be prepared to import
when our crops might fail, and we might require
assistance to relieve the consequent distress. With
dome views, be should propose to make the duty 154.
per quarter: this duty to decline is. every year one
reduced to 10s. that to be a fixed duty. He was
convinced such i'protection to the agriculturist would
be found sufficient: he had no doub: the additional taxes
imposed on the agriculturist did not amount to oat
than would warrant as low a duty as 4s. He, however,
suggested Ios. to air and them the opportunity of shew.
ing, if they could, that their additional taxes rendered ,
higher duty necessary. If a duty of 15s. wet e now fired,
our manufactures would revive; there would bean iss-

emeireiste importation of corn, or an exchange of corn ftA
leisosfactures, which would remove the present die.
was. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to argue that the
taxation on land did not warrant the high pro:otitis
afforded to the agriculturist. It had been argued that
the landed interest paid twenty-four 25ths of the pose
rates ; but this statement was founded en fallacy,
being a fact that labour was paid for under the head t
poor rates, to no inconsiderable extent. The Hon. Gen.
tlernan concluded with moving as an amendment, thtt
from and after the sth of J01y,11327, to the 6th of July
1128. a duty of 15s. should be imposed on every guar.
ter of Foreign Wbeat• imported ; and that the du
should be reduced Is. each year until 1897; after
which, the duty should be a permanent duty of 10r.•
all Foreign Corn imported, excepting that from Canada.
Mr. MARSHALL seconded the motion, though
had little hopes of success. He represented a porticos'
and respectable body of manufacturers, übo had Inked
to as alteration of the present Corn Laws, for relief
*Pei the severest distress, but had now lost all hope.
He also represented a respectable portion of the landed
Woo* bet be felt that their interest was in portar
conformity with that of the community at 1418 e, whit!
.vras
..00w suffering beyond any former period, prin-
cepully from the almitst prohibition of the trade
Corn. The distress of the country had long been atm
buted to over trading ; but the manufacturers had long
diminished their productions one third in quantity, and
' still the distress increased. He thought it must in
great degree be attributed to those laws that prevented
tie exchange of the products of our industry for the
products of the industt y of other countries.

Mr. IRVING opposed the motion. Our machinery
was now so Improved, that the price of fcod entered
very little into the cost of our manufactures. They were
told that they ought to proceed on a new system, be-
cause it was laid down in books. particularly by Mr
Ricardo; but, he believed, there was nothing in MI
Ricardo's new system that was not known to the grand-
mother of every man in the House—(A laugh). The
amount of it w. s, that if the tenaut could pay uo rest,
the landlord could not get it—(A laugh). If you give
to other nations a market for their surplus produce, you
enable them to accumulate capital, and become you
rivals in trade and prosperity. He was convinced that
the agriculture of the country was sufficient to supply
all its wants ;.and he would wish, as much as possible,
to confine the supply of our wants to our owe pro-
duction.

Sir HENRY PARNELL said, the conseqsawe
growing all our own corn would be to force us @attack
oration of poor soils, on which corn could only be pef
duced at a high price. By the present Corn Laws, ne 11.
than 25 millions a year was paid by the consamas
corn, more than they would pay if there was a free wall
in corn. It was true, not More than one:third of the
sum went into the pockets of the landlordo. and the to
mainder was lost in growing dear corn. America, sad
the countries of Europe that bad corn to export, ire
willing to receive our manufactures at low duties, if We
would receive their corn ; and by our refusal, all oor
manufacturing interest suffered the deepest injury. He
thought, however, that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Howe;
proposed that his plan should come into operation too
soon, and therefore he could not support it, though
every other respect he deemed it much preferable
that proposed by Government.

Mr. WHITMORE opposed the amendment on the
ground that a fixed duty would be sure to be abandoned
at a period of scarcity. It frequently happened that
France and England were allicted with dearth at the
same time, and were consequently competitors io the
markets of Poland and America. At such a period the
lied duty must of necessity be repealed.
Mr. CRI PPS argued in favour of the highest duty,
on the ground, that there was much land in this cone.
try not yet cultivated ; that we had population enoegi,
to cultivate it ; and were even about to send a pontos
of our people abroad to cultivate land elsewhere. He
spoke disinterestedly, for be had not the good forteoe
to belong to the landed interest.
Mr. WARBURTON objected to a graduated stale.
duties, varying inversely to the fluctuations of prior.—
! The effect of this plan would be to produce a trade
ifits and starts, and to render the business of the co.