HC Deb 22 July 1831 vol 5 cc202-4
Lord Milton

presented a Petition from the inhabitants of the county of Gloucester, praying for a gradual and total Repeal of the Corn-laws. He thought the request of the petitioners moderate and reasonable, although they somewhat exaggerated, in his opinion, the evil effects of those laws, which were undoubtedly a heavy tax on the most numerous classes of the community, and, therefore, the sooner they were removed the better. The petitioners stated, that they could no longer be deluded by the sophistry and false arguments of those who desired to continue a tax upon corn, however small; and they, therefore, prayed, that the whole tax might be gradually repealed, by a reduction of one-sixth of the duty annually, until the whole was remitted. He concurred with the views of the petitioners, but at present he would not enter further into the discussion than to take the opportunity of stating, that if he occupied a seat in another Parliament, he should unquestionably bring the subject forward.

Mr. James

observed, that whenever such motion was brought forward, he should be happy to second it.

Mr. Hunt

also supported the prayer of the petition, for he entertained a positive opinion that the Corn-laws were the cause of great evil. He agreed with the noble Lord that the petitioners had taken an exaggerated view of these evils. The real mischief amounted, probably, to one-third of their estimate. He had given notice of a motion for the repeal of those laws, and as it was probable he might not again have a seat in that House, he hoped to have an opportunity of bringing the subject forward during the present Session.

Lord Francis Osborne

felt somewhat surprised, that hon. Gentlemen were inclined to support a petition, which even the hon. member for Preston acknowledged contained grossly exaggerated statements of the evils of the Corn-laws. He believed, that whenever these laws were brought under their consideration, there would be no difficulty in proving, that unless protection was afforded to the agriculturists, corn could not be grown in this country, and if these laws were entirely removed, we must depend on foreign countries for our supply of wheat.

The Marquis of Chandos

said, that when it was admitted by the hon. member for Preston, that the statements in the petition were grossly exaggerated, it could not merit much consideration from the House. He fully concurred with the noble Lord who had last spoken, in the opinion, that if it was desirable corn should be grown at all in this country, it was necessary to continue some protecting duty.

Mr. Ramsden

rose to advert to a different subject from the Corn-laws. It might be in the recollection of hon. Gentlemen, that the hon. Member who called himself the Representative of the people, had presented a petition, purporting to come from Huddersfield, praying for Universal Suffrage, Annual Parliaments, and Vote by Ballot. He had not been present when that petition had been presented, but he had since received undoubted information from that place, that no such petition had been heard of there, and if it really emanated from Huddersfield, it had not the real signature of a single respectable inhabitant attached to it. He had, therefore, taken an opportunity of examining the petition, and found, that in many parts of it whole strings of names were signed in the hand-writing of the same individual, and he should be ready to prove, that many of the signatures were not the bonâ fide hand-writing of those whose names were attached to it. It would become the hon. Member to examine petitions before he presented them, to ascertain if they were worthy of the attention of the House, or fit to be received.

Lord Milton

moved the petition should be printed, and said, the noble Lord, the member for Cambridgeshire, had dealt rather hardly with it, for the statements it contained rather proceeded from miscalculation than wilful exaggeration. The noble Lord had stated, that if the tax were removed, corn could not be grown in this country, and consequently, we must depend on foreign countries for supplies. But was he aware how much we already obtained from other countries? did he know, that according to the returns, no less than 2,000,000 quarters of foreign corn were imported into England last year? This fact must be quite sufficient to convince the noble Lord, that if protection was necessary to the agriculturists of this country, the existing laws did not afford it.

Mr. Hunt

thought, if the petitioners had made an erroneous calculation, that was no reason why their petition should not be supported. He begged leave to reply to the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ramsden) who had taken occasion to denounce a petition which he had presented from Huddersfield on Monday last. That petition was numerously signed, and was agreed to at a public meeting held in the town, as he had been informed, and he had no doubt the parties who signed it were as respectable as any of the constituents of the hon. Gentleman. Probably they did not occupy so high a station in life as some others, but they earned their living as honestly as any men in Yorkshire. With respect to the manner in which the petition had been signed, he believed it was not unusual for persons busily employed to get others to sign for them. In the present instance, many of the individuals who wished to have their names attached to it were unable to write themselves, and, consequently, employed others to sign for them. He had read the whole of the petition, and had no scruple in saying, that those who had signed it were as honest and worthy of consideration as any petitioners who approached that House.

Mr. Ramsden

said, then the hon. Member justified forgery, because he had a list of individuals, whose names were said to be attached to this petition, who declared they had never signed it.

Mr. Portman

put it to the House, whether a petition, which it was admitted on all hands contained gross exaggeration, should be allowed to be printed.

Lord Milton

had already said, that if there was exaggeration, it had originated in error, and had not been concocted for the purpose of wilful deception. He thought, therefore, no objection should be raised to its being printed.

Petition to be printed.