Lords Sitting of 28 November 1826

CORN-LAWS.
Lord Kingsaid, he had several petitions to present on the subject of the Corn-laws; and he was very sorry, on that occasion, that he could not follow the recommendation of the noble and learned earl on the woolsack, who had stated it to be more conformable to parliamentary usage to present petitions without any comment. If it were his wish to perpetuate all kinds of abuses, he certainly would follow the prudent example which the noble and learned lord had set; but his object being the direct contrary, he should take the liberty of now making a few observations. The first petition which he should present, was one from the weavers of Carlisle, which he had selected on account of its importance and the sufferings which the petitioners had endured. Those sufferings would be an ample excuse for the language which they had used. It was, indeed, most extraordinary that so large a number of the king's subjects should put their names to a petition containing these words; namely—"that thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands, frequently addressed each other, coolly inquiring whether it was not as well to die on the scaffold as of hunger?" Excuse for this was alone to be found in the extremity of their sufferings. He had inquired of gentlemen capable of giving the best information on the subject, and he found that the petitioners had given but too true a picture of their sufferings. Nothing but great suffering could have induced such language, and the petition might, therefore, be regarded as displaying the feelings of the people. The petitioners prayed for the abolition of the Corn-laws; and, as drowning men catch at straws, they prayed besides for an appropriation of that property called church property, to the payment of the national debt, and also for a reform in parliament. The petition was worded with all proper expressions of humility to their lordships.
The Earl of Lauderdalesupposed this to be a petition for the repeal of the Corn-laws; but he now found that it was one for the confiscation of church property, and for reform in parliament.
Lord Kingsaid, the petition was for the abolition of the Corn-laws, though it suggested other measures in addition to that
146
abolition. He had another petition to present on the same subject. It was from the royal borough of Arbroath. The petitioners highly approved of the measure adopted by ministers for the introduction of foreign grain. And prayed for a revisal of the Corn-laws. He should not then trouble the House with any more petitions, as it appeared that their lordships did not wish to have too many at a time.
The Earl of Lauderdalewished to observe, that he never remembered to have seen the House in the situation in which it appeared to be placed at present. To be sure the noble earl on the woolsack and another noble earl opposite (Westmorland) were in the House; but these were not the usual persons of whom answers to any questions which their lordships might have to put were expected. He should much wish to have the opportunity of seeing another noble earl (Liverpool) in his place, as he had a motion to submit to the House, which he wished to make when the noble earl was present, and he knew that other noble lords were equally desirous of seeing the noble earl in the House.
The Earl of Westmorlandbelieved it was the usual practice for noble lords to give notice of any motion of importance which they might intend to bring forward. He was confident that, if his noble friend were made acquainted with the wish of any of their lordships to see him in his place, he would not fail to attend.

CATHOLIC EMANCIFATION.
Earl Spencerpresented a petition from the county of Mayo, praying for Catholic Emancipation. The noble earl said, he entirely concurred in the object which the petition had in view. Ever since the Union of the two kingdoms, which was now upwards of a quarter of a century, he had never altered his opinion on the subject of the Catholic claims. On the contrary, every year tended more and more to add to the conviction he entertained, that neither the interests of strict justice, nor of sound policy could be duly regarded, until those claims were conceded. In fact, without concession there could be no hope of peace or security for the empire, and he felt persuaded that continued resistance to those claims must ultimately be attended by some tremendous disaster. He trusted, however, that when the question should again be brought forward, the result would be different from that which

147
their lordships had witnessed hitherto.
Ordered to lie on the table.