The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-07-26 00:00:00

titiptrim Oftilthilleili

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--THURSDAY.
Sic R. PEEL requested of Mr. Hutt that be would not
proceed with his motion relative to the Stade duties, as in
the present state of the negotiations the discussion might
lead to much inconvenience.
Mr. HUTT reluctantly consented to withdraw it, but at the
same time protested against the adoption of any course in-
consistent with the rights of this country.

On the motion of Mr. HUME, copies were ordered of do-
cuments relating to the affairs of the Raji:h of Sattara. The
hon. member withdrew his motion respecting the financial
difficulties of India, arising out of the Affghanistan and
Chinese wars.

Mr. T. DUNCONIBE moved a resolution to the effect that
an address should be presented to her Majesty to represent
the distress in the manufacturing districts as unabated, and
that the suffering and privations resulting therefrom were
rapidly extending from the working to the middle classes of
society—that none of the measures of the government, how-
ever just in principle, had been adequate to afford timely and
sufficient remedy for these great and pressing evils—that
her Majesty's government could not without the aid of par-
liament take the necessary steps for that purpose; and fur-
ther, to represent to her Majesty an anxious hope that if,
after the termination of the present session, no decisive im-
provement should take place in the condition of the people,
her Majesty would be pleased again, at an early period, to
call parliament together with a view of giving fuller effect to
those sound principles of commerce, which, if fairly and
impartially carried out, more especially as regarded the food
of the people, would, by giving an impulse to trade and in-
dustry, avert those calamities which the inclemency of win-
ter, superadded to want and destitution, must inevitably
produce. The hon. member regretted the apathy which
prevailed in the house respecting the distress of the country
—distress so great as to threaten social dissolution, and
which rendered the peace and tranquillity of the country
not worth two days' purchase.
Mr. WARD seconded and praised the motion as constitu-
tional, wise, and politic.
Mr. D'lsitaw not only admitted the distress, but he
also thought there was but little prospect of immediate im-
provement. Ile could trace the distress of the country back
to the time of the peace, and he was of opinion that the set-
tlement of Europe at that time was hostile to the commer-
cial policy of this country. Lord Palmerston had, he con-
tended, greatly contributed, by the course of policy he had
pursued, to increase this distress, by injuring our commerce,
and more particularly so in having neglected to complete the
commercial treaty with France. The remedy for the exist-
ing distress, therefore, was not to be found in the repeal of
the corn-laws, but by suffering the Government to pursue
during the recess a sound, career of commercial diplomacy.

Mr. EwArcr contended that the true remedy was to be
found in the corn-laws.

Mr. BROTHERTON took precisely the same view of the
subject. The people, he contended, met with no sympathy.
They did indeed meet with lip sympathy in that house, but

was done for their relief this lip sympathy was of no service
to the poor. If the present course were persevered in, the
result would be a revolution, or some calamity equally
frightful.
Mr. RICARDO, in supporting the motion, made a strong
representation of the distress prevailing in Staffordshire.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he had never contradicted the exist-
ence of great and wide-spread distress, but he must say that
it would be unjust to the rest of the country to take the dis-
tress in Staffordshire as a criterion by which to judge of its
severity, or of the causes from which it sprung. Wages in
Staffordshire were 4a. a-day, with full employment, and the
only question in dispute tbere was, whether wages were to
be 4s. or 3s. 6d. a-day. At the same time, in justice to the
workmen, he must say that the origin of the misunderstand-
ing which led to such unhappy results, was not their fault.
It rested with an extensive firm which threw its labourers
out of employment, without giving them the fortnight's no-
tice to which, by the custom of that part of the country, they
were entitled. The motion of the hon. member for Fiasbury
was very fairly brought forward, but still there was nothing
in it to induce one to imagine that it was anything more than
a peg upon which to hang another discussion on the corn-
laws. As to calling the Parliament together, the time for
doing so should be left to the discretion of those who were
responsible—the ministers of the crown ; and it would be
unconstitutional and ill-advised to interfere with that re-
sponsibility by such a pledge as that embodied in the motion.
Mr. HAWES said that the corn laws would continue to be
discussed, both in and out of the house, until they were
settled upon a just and proper basis. The hon. member, in
reyly to Mr. D'lsraeli, contended that the loss of our foreign
commerce was to be attributed to our refusal to take the
corn and timber of the states of the continent. As to this
motion being a peg upon which to bang a discussion of the
corn laws, he had no hesitation in saying that he would
seize hold of every opportunity as a peg upon which to hang
a speech against the corn law until it should be placed upon a
proper footing. The present corn law was a mere makeshift.
weich must give way when public opinion was got up so as
to bear upon it with its fullest influence.
Mr. M. PHILIPS said he should not shrink from taking
his share in any debate on this subject, in whatever way it
might come before the house. Every day convinced him
more and more of the truth of the arguments used on his
side of the house respecting the causes of the distres, and if
Parliament separated without applying itself to a remedy,
the country would think that its time had been misspent
since the commencement of the session. He feared that the
new tariff would do little towards relieving the distress, for
the trifling change of prices which it might occasion would
never reach to those in the lower ranks of society, who
bought necessarily in quantities infinitely small. It was said
that trade was improving in Manchester, but he was unable
to perceive the slightest indication of anything of the sort.
Even a good harvest would have little effect in relieving the
distress, for nothing could remedy the evil but a demand for
labour, and that demand could only proceed from an increase
of our foreign commerce. Many of the manufacturers, hav-
ing appealed so long in vain to the justice of the house, were
now contemplating—and many of them he knew to be men
of wealth and respectability—joining the ranks of those who
advocated measures stronger than any he had ever supported
in that house.

Mr. PARKER believed that had the measures of the late
Government been adopted, millions would be employed who
were now in a state of starvation.

Mr. TRORNELT supported the motion of Mr. Duncombe,
contending that the recent corn law was utterly inoperative.
Sir R. PEEL said it appeared that hon. gentlemen oppo-
site seemed to treat all that had been done as if good for
' nothing, and everything depended upon that which bad not
been done. He had no doubt that the distress was very ex-
tensive and very severe, but he did not think the state
of the country so gloomy as those hon. gentlemen seemed to
think. He by no means despaired of its recovering, ere
long, from the depression which now existed. With regard
to an observation respecting his declining to receive a depu-
tation upon the subject of the distress,
he was compelled to
say that while nine hours of each day was occupied by
parliamentary duties, and while also other duties devolved
on a Minister of the Crown, out of the house it was very dif-
ficult for him to find time to receive deputations ; more par-
ticularly when it too frequently happened that those depu-
tions, instead of confining themselves to a statement of
facts, allowed themselves to be actuated by a desire of
oratorical display. The right hon. baronet then enteredinto
some calculations, and quoted some returns, in order to
prove that hope might reasonably be entertained of better
times, arising from the operation of the new tariff and the
new corn law, neither of which had as yet had a fair trial.
With respect to the motion it was utterly out of his power to
assent to it, for it was neither more nor less than asking for
a pledge to repeal the corn laws early in the next session of
Parliament. The motion went the length of asking her Ma-
jesty to summon Parliament—a circumstance not unprece-
dented, but if it were frequently to happen it would be a
violation of the constitution, for it would make that house,
and not the crown, the judge of the exercise of the royal
prerogative. The matter should be left to the discretion of
the responsible advisers of the crown, in whom, as yet at
least, Parliament had not shown any want of confidence.
Lord PALMERSTON said, that the argument during that
debate was all on his side of the house. There was an old
saying and agood one—" When you have nothinc, to say,
say nothing;" and accordingly hon. gentlemen on the minis-
terial benches, having nothing to reply to the arguments used
on his side, very prudently held their peace and said nothing.
The noble lord then proceeded to reply to the speech of Mr.
D'lsraeli, and defended the foreign policy of the late govern-
ment, which he said had paid special attention to commercial
relations with foreign states, and had actually concluded
nearly half the treaties now in existence. He agreed with
Sir R. Peel that there was a principle of vitality in this
country which would raise it again to prosperity if it were
not kept down by injudicious legislation. The motion of
Mr. Duncombe was certainly open to some objections, but
in the present crisis he thought those objections ought to be
waived, and he therefore hoped the motion would be
agreed to.
Mr. HUME moved the adjournment of the debate until
Saturday, which was opposed by Sir R. PEEL, on the ground
that it would interfere with the committee of supply.
Mr. COBDEN said if they went to a division that night he
would raise the question of distress again, upon going into
committee of supply.

Mr. HUDIE ultimately withdrew his motion for adjourn-
ment ; and

Mr. STANSFIELD addressed the house in support of the
motion.

Mr. DUNCOMBE then replied, and said that, whatever
might occur in the ensuing winter, his side of the house had
done its duty, and would not be responsible for the conse-
quences. _ _

The house then divided, and the motion was negatived by
a majority of 147 to 91.
Mr. M. GIBSON gave notice that, on going into commit-
tee of supply, he should move for a committee of the whole
house to consider the distress of the country.