Mr. Humewished to ask the noble Lord opposite (Lord Milton), whether in the present state of the country, it would not be better to postpone his motion on the Corn laws, which stood for Wednesday next? There was very little chance that it could now be brought to a prosperous issue.
Lord Miltonreplied, that he would yield to the wishes of the House upon the subject, whatever they might be.
§ Mr. John Woodwas prepared to support the noble Lord's intended proposition, at the same time, he thought that injury would be done to a good cause by urging the discussion forward in the present Session.
§ Mr. Struttthought it would be little less than absurd for a self-condemned House of Commons to undertake to settle the great question, which involved the prosperity and excited the passions of the whole people.
§ Colonel Lindsaysaid, that the agriculturists of Scotland were extremely anxious that the question should be discussed and decided; and he hoped that the noble Lord would state his views on Wednesday. It was of the utmost importance that the country should know how this question was to be settled.
§ Mr. Littletonwas of opinion, that if the Corn laws were now discussed, party feeling would interfere with any decision of the question upon principle. He, therefore, recommended postponement.
Mr. Keith Douglashoped that the noble Lord would persevere. It was indispensable that the country should be made acquainted with the noble Lord's plan.
Mr. Slaneywas in favour of postponement. He wished this great question to be calmly and dispassionately discussed, so that the decision might satisfy the people, which could not possibly be the effect of discussing it during this Parliament.
§ Mr. Robinsonwished to see whether Ministers intended to apply their principles of free trade to the trade in grain.
§ Sir Robert Pricethought it advisable to defer the Motion to the next Session of Parliament. He disclaimed any party understanding in the matter, but he could perceive, from the animus that had entered into the discussion, the motives by which some hon. Members were actuated.
§ Mr. Robinsondenied having entertained any motive beyond a wish for a direct consideration of the question.
§ Sir Robert Pricesaid, he had made no allusion to individual Members.
Sir Alexander Hopewas in favour of the earliest discussion, as the agricultural interest was deeply involved in the question.
§ Sir George Warrenderthought that the House could not arrive at a calm and satisfactory conclusion in the present Session.
§ Colonel Sibthorpobjected to the postponement of the noble Lord's motion.
§ Mr. Walter Campbelldeprecated all discussion on the subject at the present moment.
Mr. Baringthought it most strange that a question of this magnitude should be brought forward, and then left undecided. He had no doubt that the noble Lord (Milton) was sincere in placing this notice of motion on the books of the House, and was sure that in so doing it had been his intention to bring it forward; but see the state in which the country would be placed if the subject were now left in a state of uncertainty as to the course which Parliament might be disposed to take respecting it. No man, he was sure, would be disposed to take a farm while so much uncertainty was allowed to exist as to the probable future value of land, as it might be affected by some change in the Corn laws. It was objected that the discussion would be conducted with the acrimony of party feeling. Now, if there was any question which, less than another, was likely to excite party discussion, it was this of the Corn laws. Men would be influenced, not by the party to which on other subjects they might be said to belong, but by considerations referring solely to those interests in the country with which they were more particularly connected. If it were urged that, on the eve of a dissolution of Parliament, it would be inconvenient that the constituency of the country should know the opinions on this subject of those who came for their suffrages, then he must say, that a more unfair and hypocritical course could not be adopted towards the country. There was, he repeated, no worse situation in which the country could be left than that of uncertainty on this important question. Men would not know what course to take—whether to call in their mortgages, or to purchase or sell land—all would be doubt and uncertainty. If the notice had not been given, men's minds would not be agitated in this manner, but 302 the notice having been given and deferred from time to time, and then withdrawn altogether, would leave the matter in such doubt as must be productive of the most serious consequences.
§ Mr. Cokeexpressed a hope that his noble friend would defer his motion to a future Session. He had heard the observations of the hon. member for Thetford with some astonishment; for if his memory did not deceive him, the hon. Member formerly took a very different view of the question, and said, that for his part, he should like to see corn at 1s. 6d. a bushel.
Mr. Baringdid not think it necessary to explain what he might have said ten or fifteen years ago; but the hon. Gentleman had misunderstood him, if the hon. Member thought he meant to say, that this uncertainty would prevail because the House did not come to a decision on the Corn-laws: he said, that it would prevail on account of this notice having been hanging over us during the whole Session, and being now at length put off, for fear Gentlemen should be obliged to state their opinions.
§ Mr. Cokesaid, it was his belief that the general wish of the country was against the discussion of this question at present.
§ Mr. Woolrych Whitmorethought it much better not to enter upon the discussion at present. He entreated the noble Lord (Lord Milton) not to press his motion during the continuance of the present Parliament, but to do so on the first favourable opportunity which might present itself after a new Parliament had assembled.
§ Mr. Hodgeshad no apprehension of meeting his constituents after voting on the corn question, or of explaining his views on the subject before he voted; but yet he united with those who were anxious that the noble Lord should not press his motion at present.
§ Lord George Lennoxbelieved that, in the present state of the House and the country, it would be impossible to do justice to the question of the Corn-laws. As it had been attributed to some persons on his side of the House that they were anxious to postpone the discussion, as it might be inconvenient to meet their constituents after voting on it, he felt himself bound to say, without attributing anything to individuals, that some hon. Members might find a discussion on the Corn-laws very convenient for the purpose of wiping off the disgrace they had covered 303 themselves with by their votes against Reform. By their votes on the Corn-laws they expected, perhaps, to curry a little favour with those they had hitherto voted to oppress.
§ Mr. John T. Fanethought it was quite clear, from the speeches the House had just heard, that a dissolution was impending. For that reason he thought it very important that every Gentleman's sentiments should be known on the Corn laws.
Lord MiltonI hope that I shall not entirely fail in satisfying both classes of Gentlemen on this subject. In the first place, I beg to say, that I have never been in the habit of concealing my sentiments on political subjects, with the view of pleasing any party; and therefore I do not think that I ought to be accused of that now. But, nevertheless, I conceive that it is not the duty—perhaps hardly the right, of any individual to agitate a question in this House, when a great majority of those whose sentiments are congenial with his own are not desirous that it should at that moment be agitated. In the first place, I shall endeavour to satisfy the hon. member for Fifeshire, by fully stating to him the opinion that I entertain on the subject, and the ultimate object which I have in view, though I am afraid that I cannot be allowed to state all those arguments which with me are conclusive in support of that opinion, which, I can assure my hon. friend who spoke last, I am not afraid to proclaim even to my own constituents. It must be in the recollection of the House, that the Parliament and the country have been agitated by this question for not less than seventeen years. During that period, time after time, Corn bills have been propounded to the House, and each Ministry has in turn found it to be ultimately necessary for them to change their opinions and to agree in some new system. Without at all intending to detract from the abilities of my right hon. friend, the President of the Board of Control, I must be allowed to express a doubt whether he has in this respect been more successful than his predecessors; for I do not believe, that the present corn laws are able to stand the test of a serious and sober examination. For my own part, I believe that there is a radical defect in those laws; but, without entering into an examination of this length, I am free to state to the hon. member for Fifeshire, that my 304 opinion is, that the trade in corn ought to be free. At the same time, I am not of opinion that it would be inexpedient to levy a duty on the importation of foreign corn. I think that a fixed importation duty would conduce more to the interests of the farmers and the owners of land than the present fluctuating duties. Let me not, however, be supposed to be speaking in terms of disparagement of my right hon. friend who introduced the present bill; for I think that it was the means of introducing a great improvement in the former corn system; it does not, however, seem to me to place the trade in foreign corn on a footing which can be ultimately maintained by this country. Hon. Gentlemen have said, that it is impossible to come to a satisfactory conclusion on this subject during the present Session of Parliament. In that opinion I entirely concur. It has also been stated by others, that, at the present moment, it would be impossible to discuss the subject with that calmness and consideration which the graveness of the subject demands. It is very possible that those hon. Gentlemen may be better judges of the matter than I am; but I certainly had flattered myself that this subject might be discussed without any display of that intemperate feeling which is, unfortunately, at the present moment, too prevalent in this House. Under that view, I thought it desirable that, without any final adjudication of the question, an opportunity should be afforded to hon. Gentlemen to compare the different opinions that were entertained on this subject, and to discuss the various topics arising out of it in that spirit which might most tend to the advantage of the country. Undoubtedly, if such a prospect cannot be reasonably entertained—if it is impossible to flatter ourselves that such a result will ensue—it will be far better to leave the subject untouched for a time. At the same time, let me remark, that I gave this notice with the most perfect determination of bringing the question forward; and give me leave also to say, that in my opinion, there is no class of society in this country which has more interest, not only in having the question settled—but settled likewise in the sense in which I wish to see it settled—than the tenantry of England. One of the evils of the present state of things is, that it encourages both landlords and tenants to indulge in extravagant hopes and expectations which 305 never can be realized, and the non-realization of which must lead to the ruin of the tenant, and the distress of the landlord. Every Bill that does not proceed on sounder principles than the present Corn Bill, is vicious in its very foundation, and any superstructure that is built upon it, must necessarily defeat the objects that it has in view. This, Sir, is strictly the view which I take upon the subject of the Corn laws: I have not entered into that view so fully as I could have wished; but I trust that I have said enough to set the mind of the hon. member for Fifeshire at rest as to the intentions which I have on the subject. As to the great mass of consumers in the country, it cannot be denied that the present Corn laws raise the price of provisions here beyond that which they bear in any country on the Continent: and when we see the formidable competition which there exists against our manufactures, I cannot help trembling for their pre-eminence, if the price of provisions in this country is to rest at a level so greatly superior to that of foreign nations. These, Sir, are the reasons which have induced me to think that the present Corn laws are not advantageous to the country. Whether, therefore, I consider the question in reference to the manufacturing classes, or the agricultural classes, I am satisfied that the Corn laws are injurious to the great bulk of the community; and even with respect to the landlord, I doubt whether they confer so much benefit on him, as it is fancied they do; for though in some instances they procure for him a higher rent, they also necessarily increase all those other expenses which form, with owners of land, the great bulk of their expenditure.
§ Mr. WesternI rise to Order, Sir. Is the noble Lord making his Motion now, or is he not? I apprehend not; and yet he is entering on a long train of arguments which, because there is no question before the House, no one will be allowed to answer. For instance, the noble Lord has told us that he is for a free trade in corn; upon which I would beg to observe—
§ The SpeakerI am afraid that the hon. Member himself is now about to fall into the same error of which he accuses the noble Lord. After the questions that have been put to the noble Lord, it is certainly somewhat difficult to know exactly where to draw the precise line for his reply. The 306 noble Lord has been asked whether he intended to persevere in his Motion for Wednesday next? Now, it is certainly true, that as the Motion cannot now be entertained by the House, it must not be debated by one side, when the other has no opportunity of replying. But the noble Lord having been asked to postpone the Motion, he certainly was at liberty to state whether he would acquiesce in, or refuse that request., and his reasons for so doing; but in going beyond that, and in entering on an argument in reference to the general subject, he certainly rendered himself liable to the comment of the hon. Member.
Lord MiltonI am sorry if I have extended my observations too far; but I thought that they were called for by the remark, that it was desirable that the public should know what my views really were. It may be that I have entered too much into argument; but I am sure that the hon. Member himself would not have had me merely dryly state what my Motion was to be. I have, however, now pretty well stated what my opinions are. Allow me to add, that I consider that our present Corn laws are very injurious to our intercourse with foreign nations. And now, Sir, having responded to the appeal of the hon. member for Fifeshire, I must now respond to the appeal of those hon. Gentlemen who coincide with me in opinion, and who have asked me to postpone this Motion. To a certain extent, I do agree with their statements; for I did, undoubtedly, consider that this Motion would be the means of paving the way for more active operations next Session, and for making those operations more easy of execution. This, Sir, is not a question that is to be carried by storm. I desire no triumph of one party over another. What I want to see is, this question settled with the consent of the landed interest. What I wished was—though, perhaps, it was a vain wish on my part—to be an humble instrument towards inducing all parties to take a calm and consentaneous view of this question. Above all, I deemed it necessary that the agricultural interest should be a consenting party; because I should be extremely sorry that this question should be settled, so as to leave a sting behind. Pressed, however, as I have been by different hon. friends on all sides, I think that I shall be showing a greater deference to the House, if I now 307 declare, that I abandon all thoughts of bringing the question forward during the present Session; and allow me to add, that the probability is, that in so doing, I must altogether resign the Motion into hands more competent than mine to do it justice.
§ Sir Adolphus Dalrymplehad been at first much against the noble Lord's Motion, but now that it had been for weeks on the Books of the House, and no member of the Government had said a single word about it that evening, he thought it could not with propriety be postponed till next Session.
§ Lord Althorpsaid, I cannot help thinking that the hon. Gentleman has drawn a very unfair inference from the silence of Government. I can assure the House that my noble friend did not give this notice in concert with his Majesty's Ministers. On the contrary, the Government has no measure to propose on this subject; and I should, therefore, have opposed anything calculated to cause an alteration in the present Corn laws during the present Session.
Lord MiltonI beg to confirm the statement of my noble friend, that there certainly has not been the slightest concert between the Government and myself on this subject.
§ Subject dropped.