The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-05-19 00:00:00

rteciin. most o

the reprinting of
,ways in Ireland. He
to give employment to
would not only confer great
ald tend to put an end to the

epeat or

3N stated his resolution to do his
1-ss whether he was classed or
the enemies of his country.
ioble lords to pursue the same
assed amongst the enemies of
n very good company in the

,e day we

COUnLry •
hen disposed of, and the

OMMONS.—MoNDAY.
at he had said on governmentn-
n on the part of to
tation in Ireland.

e adjourned debate on
county members had
He was of opi-
Jeen far preferable to the

t• constituents

present system.
Mr. EWART contended that
bad indulged in mis-statements and fallacies, such as that a
repeal of the corn laws would produce low wages and prices;
but what was required was such an extension
le of the
nsume com-
merce of the country as ould enable the peop to co
The countwry, he bbelieved, was beginning to
the half-and-half policy of Sir Robt.
men to blot out consis-

opponents of free trade

more largely

form a just opinion of
Peel, who had done rnor
tency from the code of po,
Mr. P. ScaopE consider, t taxes on consump-
tion as savouring of protection ; but yet, with our great es-
ta W
blishments, we could not so far maintain the principles of
free trade as to repeal all these taxes. e s
thanadapt our financial system to the purposes ofthe revenue
in artic rathele
r
ofof protection, and more particularly in ma
subsistence for the people.
Colonel WOOD (of Brecon) avowed his belief that the corn
laws were as beneficial to the manufacturer as to the agricul-
turist. At all events the landowner could not abandon his
interest in the land so readily as the manufacturer could alter
the direction in which he wished to employ his capital. The
British agriculturist laboured under many
restrictions : he
was not allowed to brew his own beer without a heavy duty
on his malt ; he was not permitted to grow tobacco, nor to
make sugar from beetroot; he had not the advantage of free
tradete
any more than the manufacturer. He contended that
landowners were actuated by no other motives than the
h
good of the community, for they well knew that property had
Its duties as well as its rights.
Mr. THORNELY said he had last autumn been in the
ted States, and had urged on Mr. Tyler that, in return for
the concessions made by Sir R. Peel in his tariff, America
should adopt a more liberal policy towards England. That
gentleman, however, declared that a bar almost insuperable
wasth presented by our corn laws to an extended trade between
l.he two countries. A change in our policy would in all like-
the
;loci induce the Americans to adopt a similar course.
'r H. DOUGLAS considered a repeal of the corn laws as
fatala to the best interests of the empire, commercil, mann-
f awing, and agricultural, and he should therefore give his
decided opposition to the motion. England was the best
customer of England, and giving protection to the small
farmer was in reality extending protection to the people.
t Mr. Mcsrrz supported the motion, not because be thought
he landowners were too highly protected, but because they
protected themselves without protecting others.
They had
not protected the labour of the operative classes, and yet if
there was to be any difference at all in legislation, the poor
should have the preference according to all the principles of
Christianity, and yet in the legislation of this country the
leaning was always towards the rich. The slight improve-
ment in trade recently was to be attributed to ill-founded
speculation upon the extension of our markets in China,
whereas. in our woollen cloths we were undersold by Russia.
With respect to the burdens on land, the malt tax had been
put forward as one of those burdens. Was not this most
preposterous, for the malt tax was surely said by the con-
sumer ? The landlords of this country received 50 millions
annually, more than they ought to do, for their corn. This
sum was not lost to the country. It did not go out of the
country. But he would tell the house what it did do ; it
went out of
hone ockets of industry into the pockets of idle-
ness. The o. member contended that it was impossible to
legislate successfully respecting corn unless they considered
corn and currency together.
Mr. Cogoes said, in supporting the corn laws, the land-
corn
were inflicting scarcity of food on the people. I,Vould
they say they had a right to do this ? They could not raise
the price of corn except by making it scarce, and would they
dare to avow that they would legislate for the purpose of
producing a scarcity amongst the people ? He denied that
the farmers had ever derived any benefit from the corn laws,
for corn never had obtaincd uniformity of price. The corn
laws had, in fact, been one continued juggle, on the part of
the landowners, on the farmers. If such were not the case,
bow came the landowners to assign as a reason for main-
taining the corn laws that they were necessary.to enable them
to effect marriage settlements, ez.c., from which the farmers
derived no benefit. Rents had been doubled since 1793,
and if, in the same time, the food of the people had gradually
deteriorated from bread to potatoes, it followed that the corn
laws had benefitted the landlords only. The whole patronage
of the government had been given to those who called them-
selves farmers' friends hut the farmers themselves had been
in no way benefitted.; The landowners in many counties
declined to give leases, in order to keep their tenants under
their control for political'purposes, and in all those cases the
farming was decidedly 'lad. The longer the leases the
It
Was the system of farming throughout the 'singdom. was
intended to carry the repealrepeal
perfectly understood that they
were to advocate free trade in every thing- He called upon
Lord Ashley and other hon. members who were always the
advocates of benevolence to support the present motion, or
their influence would be destroyed in the manufacturing dis-
tristi if they were found voting for Making food dear to the
Pc4le.
Mr. VitLigpts shortly replied.
The house then divided, and the motion of Mr. Villiers
WS/ negatived by a majority of 381 to 125-
The other orders of the k•were then
•Y
•
the house adjourned. a,-----
...
HOUSE OF LORDS.—TrESDAY.
Lord BaouonAm moved the second reading of the Towns-
bend Peerage Bill, and in so doing stated all the facts of the
case, which will be found in our report, and said there could
n o longer exist a doubt but that Lord Leicester wes a spurio. us
issue, more particularly when he stated to their lordships
that Lady Townsbend bad authorised him to say that she
had always protested against the whole proceedine's tending
to place her children in the position of legitimate Children of
the Marquis Townshend.
OTTENHAM Sal
Lord C 'd that evidence certainly left no
doubt as to the facts of the ease, but still they would by
agreeing to this bill be establishing a precedent for many,
very many cases, which would hereafter come before them ;
because many uncles would be apt to perceive the convenience
of thus questioning the legitinaacy of their brother's children.
He thought great evil
mightwou from such asp recedent. as
that proposed. There be cases of legitiacy turning
" very nice points of evidence, and moreover evidence of
this hind might be one into on the petition enter re.lative, al-
though the parties might b
e again living tog in perfect
amity. There was no present grievance calling for the im-
mediate interposition of the legislature, and he begged their
lordships to remember in what a state they would leave tthis
family lf they should pass this bill but it should be rejec ed
by the Commons. The question of titles could not stand on
better grounds than those of property ;. yet this was not to
be a •
judgment per legem term or per juilieiurn parztors, but
an arbitrary act of the highest court of legislature, taking the.
rights of one man and giving: them to another. He moved
that the bill be read a second time that day six months. .
Lord 13nocosi am said, his noble friend's observations
would have been very pertinent before this case occurred, ,but
constituted no sufficient objection to a bill founded upeon
Lord
Lord KENTON wished to have the opinion of th
Chancellor, and other noble and learned lords
the subject. present, on
Lord BaouGFiaat said, those noble and learned lords bad,
on a previous occasion, given their assent to the pritleiPle of

norality
indirec

ay were then disposed of, and

thought no case was wade out for

the measure.
The Ear,L of
Davos
such a measure.
Lord
ugh
it said, ths question was whether their lord-
ships thought it would be a greater evil to create a precedent
of this nature, or to inc.fr a great public Qcandal, by tacitly.
assenting to such proceedings as were disclosed and adrnitteu
to be proved by the evidence. He could not C
had never
a
balance between such an alternative, and therefore had never
given a more unqualified vote than he should in saying
" content" to the measure.
Lord CAMPBELL thought no danger could arise from the
bill, and should therefore assent to it.
The Earlof W
IcKLow. thought there was no just reason
now for proceeding with the bill, as the evidence taken at the
bar would be d
Lord Li, perpetuated, and available at a future evidence,erio
and
was
entirely
said, he had carefully read
been proved
The therefore vote for the bill.
house then divided :
Contents
sr•
..... • '
on-contents ...........
Majority for the second . reading .
''
N:.
The bill was then read a second time, and
journed. the house ad-

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TUESDAY-
A select committee was appointed to inenire into the cir-
cumstances attending the singular occurrence that a bill had
received the royal assent, although the amendments made in
the said bill (the Scottish Widows' Fund Bill) by one house
of parliament had not been considered or agreed to by the
other.
Mr. C. Banes moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend
Lord Ashley's act of last session for regulating the employ•
anent of young persons in mines and collieries. He did no
pretend to impugn the purity of the motives of Lord Ashley
but the excellence of his motives was no protection agains
errorsin judgment. The Mines and Collieries Act was a
injudicious and hasty measure, and bad been productive al
ready of great distress in Scotland, by
throwing many per
eons out of employment. He did not wish to interfere with
the act so far as married females and young persons were
concerned, but be wished so far to amend it as to permit
widows :and.; girls over eighteen years of age to return to
under-ground labour.
Lord ASHLRY contended that no ca,se bad been made out
for the interference of the house. N% hy should a privilege
not granted to England be extended to Scotland ? The re-
sults had already proved to be beneficial in the relief of
women, young girls, and children from a m teedgdg ern-
" --<-,, and in which
ployment, to which they were •
they were succeeded by men and I}
tion of the public. He had rece
Scotland and elsewhere, intimating
the Mines and Collieries Act was
feelings of certain proprietors, who had
people to a reluctant consent to aid
act. He had no doubt but that caF'
red under its operation, but the
from want thosa unfortunat
been worn out in their service
beneficial measure repealed w
in operation. He hoped the
position, and, by so doing, at
had its duties as well as its r'
Mr. Hume, though he
Lord Ashley for remo:
suited to them, still though.
hastily on the subject ; and in or
that hasty legislation it was that Mr.
forward his motion, in support of which
case had been made out.
Sir J. GRAHAM denied that the Ni:
was the result of hasty legislation,
been preceded by very extensive it
several cases of hardship had
part of the experiment in,
the importance of preserving u,
gradation was on all sides admitted, .
maintain the act in order to ensure the ft.
from its operation.
Lord F. Eozicrox remarked
with a view to civilisation and religion, tha

wholly 11

seat satisfac-

letters from

ntition against
the selfish

ult
fled their work-
on to that

0 had occur-

lould preserve
had
energies

king to have a

use ;cot

but a short time

eative the pr

that propert

proposition of

cfovril ents.

is-fated too
he evils of

emeuy .
truce had brought

ought a strong

es Act

nd
)int of fact it had
Fie admitted that
--t trying

r. and as

)11,0laden from de

sary to
fad

hat it W

ber;etits expec

;fly important

xeitions shouia