§ MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he wished to make a few remarks in reference to a former statement he had made respecting the condition of the town of Coventry, which be regretted to say was in deeper distress than appeared to be generally believed. The House would no doubt feel that it was his duty to be very careful of what he said when he was speaking of men whose credit might not stand so securely as it had done before the distress visited the manufacturers and the working' people of Coventry. He trusted, therefore, that the House would allow him to correct himself in the matter. It would be recollected that he had, on that day fortnight, stated that out of eighty master manufacturers in Coventry fifty had been in the Gazette, not including those who had made compositions with their creditors. In consequence of that statement he had received the following communication:—
Coventry, Feb. 15, 1862.In The Times of to-day you are reported to have said—'But of the manufacturers fifty out of eighty had been in the Gazette, that fifty not including those who had made compositions with their creditors.' This is not correct; and I am afraid you will be called to account for it. I think your informant is in error; if you had said, 'Out of the eighty manufacturers thirty were either bankrupt, insolvent, or hare made compositions with their creditors,' you would have been about correct.As to the writer's observations that he (Mr. Newdegate) would be called to account for his statement, he would only remark that it did not matter to him whether he was called to account or not, inasmuch as it never was his habit to state anything in that House which he did not believe to be substantially correct. Immediately on the receipt of the letter be had just read he wrote to the gentleman from whom he had received the information which he bad felt it his duty to communicate to the House. The 888 following was the reply which he received:—Coventry, Feb. 20, 1862.Dear Sir—If you will refer to my statement, you will see that I stated in reply to your query as to the number of failures as follows:—'This cannot be at present ascertained, but it is estimated that the number at the present time far exceeds fifty, not including insolvents.' Now, when I mentioned fifty I did not confine myself to manufacturers alone, but I included other tradesmen who had failed in consequence of the depressed state of the trade in this city and neighbourhood. Again, I not only considered those men had failed who had become bankrupts, but who had arranged with their creditors to pay less than 20s. in the pound. At the same time I did not include in the fifty men who had taken the benefit of the late Insolvency Acts—that is, whose estates were under £300; for had I done so, I must have made the fifty into 150, &c. &c. From what you said in the House I infer that you took it for granted that the fifty who had failed had all been in the Gazette, and that the term 'insolvents' meant those who had made compositions with their creditors. If this is so, the apparent discrepancy between your speech and my statement is easily explained. From inquiries I have made since your letter 'reached me I find, so far as the time has enabled me to ascertain, that the number of tradesmen who have failed since the treaty is sixty-five, of which thirty-seven are immediately connected with the ribbon trade. Hoping this explanation will prove satisfactory,I remain, dear Sir, yours truly,C. N. Newdegate, Esq., M. P."—.He thanked the House for allowing him to correct a statement which had thus been called in question. But the letter which he had just read, although it did not very materially affect his statement, proved a fact of which he was glad to be assured, that the credit of the master manufacturers and tradesmen of Coventry bad a power of endurance greater than what he had led the House to believe.