Mr. J. Maxwellpresented a petition from the productive classes of Renfrew, praying for Reform, a free trade in Corn, and an Equalization of Contracts. 631 The genius and spirit of the constitution, the hon. member said, seemed to justify the extension of suffrage to those who paid taxes; and the result of such extension would produce greater economy in government. A free trade in corn would partly indemnify the artisan and labourer for the evils induced by the rivalry of mechanical labour, without disturbing the general law for agricultural protection. A revision of contracts would preserve the debtor from being defrauded by his creditor under false pretences, avert the risk of national bankruptcy, and give the sanction of public opinion, and its security, to the creditor of the state. A contrary course contributed to discontent, increase of poor-rates, and unjust revolutions in property; and when monied, as well as commercial, manufacturing, and agricultural, income should be reduced 30 per cent—as the currency which represented, as well as measured, all income, had already been by the return to cash payments; the levying taxes to pay the interest of the debt, and to defray the expenses of the state, might become impracticable.
§ Mr. E. Davenporttook occasion to complain of the conduct of Ministers, with respect to the question of the currency. He had already given a vague notice on the subject; and he believed that, in consequence of this threat, ministers had been induced to put off the consideration of the Corn question from the day for which they had originally given notice. He would now take the opportunity of saying, that he would redeem the pledge which he had given, and take a speedy opportunity of formally bringing the subject under the consideration of the House.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that if the hon. member had not concluded by giving this general notice, he should scarcely have been able to comprehend exactly what he was at. But, if he supposed that government had been induced to postpone the Corn question on account of any thing he might have said in that House, or what any one might have said any where else, he could only undertake to give to such an assertion a peremptory denial.
Mr. Maberlycomplained of the manner in which ministers had acted with respect to the currency question. They first tampered with the currency of England without inquiry. Without inquiry they created 632 a paper monopoly. Then, as to Scotland, they inquired into the currency of that country, and the result was, that they left it as it was. Then again, they neither inquired into, nor touched at all upon, the currency of Ireland. This was the sort of interference—this the description of policy —which they called legislation !
Lord Folkestonecharged ministers with supineness in having so long neglected the vital question of the currency. Their conduct gave rise to the inference, that they had altered their opinions upon the subject; for they had failed to carry into effect the principles which they set out with avowing. There was a tampering already going on with the currency; and, under such circumstances, the question could never be said to be settled.
§ Ordered to lie on the table.