HC Deb 10 February 1842 vol 60 cc245-6
Colonel Sibthorp

rose, to ask the right hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, a question relative to the resolutions which he had laid on the table last night. Among those resolutions, he did not hear one on a subject of great importance, and he would ask whether it were the right hon. Baronet's intention to make any improvement or alteration with regard to the mode in which the duties are now taken upon the importation of corn; in fact, whether it were his intention to make the duty payable when corn was brought into this country, or when it was taken out of bond

Sir Robert Peel

said, it was not his intention to make any alteration in the period at which the duties on corn were paid.

Colonel Sibthorp

would call the attention of the committee to that subject.

Mr. Labouchere

would put a question on a point which materially affected Ireland. The right hon. Baronet was probably aware that there was a difference in the law regulating the importation of flour into England and into Ireland. The importation of flour into Ireland was wholly prohibited, whilst it was admitted upon payment of certain duties into England. If the right hon. Baronet had the same law for Ireland as for England, flour would be admitted into Ireland at the same duties as into England. Was it the right hon. Baronet's intention to re-introduce into his Corn Bill a clause to prohibit the importation of flour into Ireland under all circumstances, or did he mean to have a uniform trade in the two countries?

Sir Robert Peel

had reserved this for separate consideration. He believed, that the restriction was in a separate bill.

Mr. Labouchere

No; it was a clause in the bill.

Sir Robert Peel

said, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would allow him till Monday to give a reply: he had meant to reserve the point for separate consideration.