The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-02-17 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.-TUESDAY

The Earl of ABERDEEN, in answer to a question from
Lord Kinnaird, respecting the cruelties alleged to have
been perpetrated on the Polish nuns at Minsk, stated that
he bad no doubt the persecutions in question were grossly
exaggerated•; and that, whatever might be the state of the
case, her Majesty's Government had no power to inter fare.
in the matter.

The Scotch Turnpike-roads was then forwarded a stage.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TIIESDAY

The adjourned debate was resumed by Mr. Stafford
O'Brien, who complained that the government had not
yet thought fit to consult the agriculturists at all on this
measure. He bad little hope of attracting the attention
of the house ; he bad not changed, and therefore he had
nothing to explain, but remained in the same state of bi-
gotry in which he had ever been. The law of 1815 might
have been the greatest error that the landed interest had
ever committed, but he would ask who had encouraged
them to persevere in that error ? Year after year the
hon. member for Wolverhampton had given them an op-
portunity of retrieving that error and year after year the
right honourable gentleman had urged them to persevere
in it. He would not impute to the occupants of the trea-
sury bench dishonesty, but this country had hitherto
been governed by party ; and if parties were to be broken
up in this way, he would ask how the government of the
country was to be conducted? He had no hesitation in
avowing that he was a party man ; and if ever there was
an opposition conducted by party tactics for party ends, it
was the opposition of the right hou. gentleman to the
late government. It was a bitter disappointment to find
him now eschewing all party. The right hon. gentleman
who spoke last night said that the law of 1842 bad failed.
Had it failed to the Sidney Herbert of last year, or to the
Sidney Herbert of this year ? If the law had failed in re-
gard to the question of averages,(it must be a reason for
re-adjusting those averages ; and if he found the sliding
scale fail, that was no reason for giving up protectibn—
they had the sliding scale to fall back upon! If it had
been merely a question of duty, why had they raised such
an agitation on the subject ? It was not on a mere clues-

tionof import duty that the present government had
dis-
placed the last. If the present government had changed
their opinions, let them avow the change, and give due
credit to those who had always upheld those principles;
bnt let them not deprive them of the credit due to them
by saving that this was a mere question of import duties.
He was not careless of the evils impending over Ireland ;
but a particular evil required only a particular remedy ;
and although the ports were opened to prevent a famine
in Ireland, yet there was no necessity for repealing the
corn laws. All the authorities in Ireland agreed that the
destruction of agriculture in that country would be its
ruin. He admitted the existence of the potato disease,

and if it had progressed he was convinced there would not
have been a potato left in Ireland. The rest' had been
stayed, but had now recommenced, and he believed that
the government was prepared to meet the emergency ;
but I.e denied that the case of famine in Ireland would be
met by the proposed alteration in the corn law. He be-
lieved that the landowners in Ireland were greatly respon-
sible for the distress existing in the country, but he de-
nied that a repeal of the corn laws would provide a re-
medy for the distress.

Mr. S. Crawford, Mr. Bailey, Lord Clements, and Mr
Gregery spoke in favour of the government measure, and
Mr. Lefroy, the Marquis of Granby, and Lords Brooke
and Clive against it, several of the members requiring a
fresh appeal to the country.
Lord WORSLEY challenged the recollections of the go-
vernment respecting the last election. The predominat-
ing motto then was, " Peel, the Farmers' Friend." The
opinions various members of the administration had ex-
pressed on this subject, up to a very recent period, coin-
cided. Even within the three years during which they
declared their conversion had been effected, Sir Robert
Peel had professed his adhesion to protectionist principle.
It was said this measure would settle the question. This
he denied ; a fresh election before 1849 would again agi-
tate the question, and the farmers, wiser from' past expe-
rience, would exact pledges from their representatives for
the repeal of the measure, while the other party would
seek an earlier consummation of free trade than was pro-
posed by the government. He should vote for the amend-
ment.

Sir J. GRAHAM protested against degrading- the ques-
tion into one of mere finance, much less of personality.
He avowed a change in his opinions, and that avowal
would at once dispose of all citations from former
speeches in favour of protection. Referring to the cir-
cumstances of Sir Robert Peel's resignation, he owned he
thought it would have been better for the country and
for the character of public men, had Lord John Russell
proposed the free trade scheme instead of Sir Robert

Peel. (Hear, hear.) The members of the cabinet had
been taunted with adopting opinions upon the corn ques-
tion altogether inconsistent with those they formerly en-
tertained, but extracts which he read from their speeches
d:s, roved this statement. Circumstances had precipi.
tated the change which otherwise be would have preferred
to be gradual. The peculiarity of the harvest of last year
had caused the corn law of 18-12 to prove more stringent
than the law which it had succe.,ded. The potato disease
in Ireland had also contributed to hasten a legislative
change. His own opinions had been influenced by the
isordered state of the manufacturing districts in the year
2. T' lisorders he ti•°a - • --d to 0-

614. ..hose a, nad satisfactorily tracer. ~ie
litEculty of gaining subsistence. He then read several
statistics to prove that thyL rate of wages varied univer-
sally with the price of fool!. Exaggerated apprehensions
had been entertained respecting the fall in price which the
coniemplat:d measure would occasion. It would batefit
the consumer principally by the guarantee it would pro-
vide against extreme price in the event of a deficient har-
vest. A settlement of this question was manifestly
needed. Certainty and peaceful enjoyment were great
objects to attain, and they would be encomcassed by the
measure proposed by government. The valuable ends
now sought to be effected would be cheaply purchased by
any reduction of rent, and be for one would, if necessary,
have consented to such a sacrifice.