HL Deb 18 March 1830 vol 23 cc476-538
The Duke of Richmond

said, that he rose for the purpose of calling the attention of their Lordships to a Motion of which he had given notice. In doing so, he must confess that he could not avoid looking with great apprehension at the task he had undertaken,—not because he entertained any doubt of the propriety, nay, of the absolute necessity of the inquiry he meant to propose, but because he was fully sensible of his own want of ability, of his own want of experience, and of his own want of information, to cope with a question of so much importance, and of so great extent,—a question worthy to engage the splendid talents and the great acquirements of many of the noble Lords whom he saw around him, and whose assistance and support he trusted he should receive on the present occasion. The Motion he should have the honour to submit to their Lordships was, "that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the internal state of the country, so far as it related to the condition of the working classes, and to the effect of taxation on productive industry." In order to entitle himself to call upon their Lordships to give their support to this Motion, it would be necessary that he should prove that there was something peculiar,—something which, while it was productive of present mischief, was pregnant also with future calamity, in the condition of that portion of his Majesty's subjects to which his Motion related. Many cases of severe dis- tress—many cases of miserable suffering, both in the agricultural and in the commercial districts of the country,—had been brought under the notice of their Lordships during the present Session of Parliament; but as those cases, which he considered to be more than sufficient to make it imperative upon their Lordships to grant an investigation into the causes of these calamities, had totally failed to move them to give that substantial proof of the compassion which he had no doubt they all felt, he could not help seeing that the difficulties of the task he had undertaken were thereby materially increased. This difficulty again became the more embarrassing, from the circumstance that, in all the discussions which had taken place, he had not been able to discover what exact measure of distress it was, which his Majesty's Ministers and the House conceived would justify them in instituting an inquiry into its causes. Under these circumstances, he was sorry to say that he felt it necessary to trouble their Lordships with what he was afraid they would find a tedious, as he was sure it must be a painful statement of that misery and degradation into which the labouring classes were sunk; and which, as it had been ably stated by; a noble Earl opposite, threatened the breaking up of the very foundations of society. The very day after he had given notice of the Motion to which he was then calling the attention of their Lordships, he had sent to a number of parishes in order i to procure information respecting the number of persons who had been out of employment from 1826 to the present time. He had received forty answers to his inquiries, and by those answers it appeared, that in no one case were there a less number of persons receiving parish relief now than in 1826. Their Lordships would recollect that the year 1826 was the year immediately succeeding the year of panic,—a year in which the country was supposed to be at low-water mark; but the fact was, as their Lordships would see, that we had been gradually sinking lower and lower since that period. He would begin his statement by calling their Lordships' attention to a parish in Sussex, which he had selected because it was mentioned in the Emigration Report of 1827. In that parish the money paid for the relief of the poor in 1826, amounted to 2,314l. in 1829 it amounted to 2,960l.; and before the Emigration Committee, the rental of this parish, in 1827, was estimated at 2,599l.,—so that the Poor-rates in 1829 amounted to nearly 400l. more than the rent in 1827. He had also selected seventeen principal towns in eight counties, and he begged to call the attention of their Lordships to the average number of paupers in them at the respective periods he had mentioned. At Andover, in 1826 there were in the workhouse sixty-two paupers, in 1830 there were seventy; out of the workhouse there were 310 in 1826, and 430 in 1830, the number casually relieved in 1826 was forty; in 1830 the number was 117; the number of paupers not included above was fifty in 1826, and 112 in 1830. At Bradford the following was the proportion:—

1826. 1830.
In the workhouse 95 140
Out-door paupers 326 400
Casually relieved 170 226
At Coventry the proportion was—
In the workhouse 171 458
Out-door paupers 605 620
Casually relieved 446 1,395
Not before included 40 160
At Congleton the proportion was—
In the workhouse 41 62
Out-door paupers 125 158
Casually relieved 150 179*
At Huddersfield the proportion was 66 and 128, with 174 and 209; and so it went on till they came to Leeds. Before he spoke of Leeds, to which he wished particularly to call their Lordships' attention, let him observe, that it had been stated by one of his Majesty's Ministers (Mr. Herries) elsewhere, in a speech which somehow or other had found its way into the papers, that Leeds was in a most flourishing condition. The right hon. Gentleman he alluded to had been so informed, it appeared, by Mr. Gott, who was an old friend of his on the Wool-committee; and therefore he knew what reliance to place on his testimony; but their Lordships should judge for themselves of the correctness of his information. The document he meant to quote from was, an official return signed by the clerk to the township of Leeds, and according to it, the following were the numbers of paupers in the two years at Leeds:
1826. 1830.
In the workhouse 156 220
Out-door paupers 900 1,010
Casually relieved 700 1,230
Such, then, was the state of a town which was described as being in a flourishing condition, and such were the statements on which his Majesty's Ministers believed that distress was not general. In Manchester, again, which, according to another statement of the same right hon. Gentleman, was in a flourishing condition, the pauper account ran thus—and this account was also official, being signed by the overseer of the township.
1826. 1830.
In the workhouse 547 598
Casually relieved 2,706 3,359
If these towns, in which there had been such increase of poor since 1826, could be said to be flourishing, notwithstanding this vast increase of pauperism, what must be the abject misery of those parts in which all agreed that distress did exist,—of those parts where the admitted partial distress prevailed? How the Ministers could get rid of the facts he had brought forward,—how they could persuade their Lordships, in spite of those facts, that the country was not distressed,—he could not imagine, unless the speculations of Mr. Gott were thought better than the returns of the overseers of the parishes which he had mentioned. Not to detain their Lord-

• The following is the Official Return from which the noble Duke quoted the facts mentioned in his speech.
A Comparative Summary of the Average Number of Poor weekly relieved in the two periods 1826 and 1830, in the Towns of Andover, Birmingham, Bradford, Coventry, Congleton, Huddersfield, Leeds, Manchester, Mangotsfield, near Bristol, the City of Norwich, Portsea, the Parish of St. Nicholas (Nottingham), St. Martin's (Leicester), the two Townships of Sutton and Hurdsfield, near Macclesfield, and Wigan. N. B. The year 1828 is substituted for 1826 in the particular case of Norwich, in consequence of no earlier return than that of 1828 having been received.
—— Paupers in the House. Paupers out of the House. Poor casually relieved. Paupers not herein before included.
1826. 1830. 1826. 1830. 1826. 1830. 1826. 1830.
Andover 62 70 310 430 40 117 5 112
Birmingham 443 569 2,748 3,876
Bradford 95 140 3,000 4,000 170 250
Coventry 171 458 605 620 446 1,395 40 160
Congleton 41 62 125 158 150 179
Huddersfield 66 128 164 209 36 137
Leeds 156 220 910 1,010 700 1,230
Manchester 547 598 2,706 3,359
Mangotsfield 18 40 126 13 30 40 10 30
Norwich 555 383 3,776 5,928 6 8
Portsea 544 638 710 734
St. Nicholas (Nottingham) 40 80 96 120 5
St. Martin's (Leicester) 50 70 660 706 20 40 12 16
Sutton and Hurdsfield 7 48 81 222 13 47 40 37
Wigan 118 152 400 880 6 250
Total 2,906 3,656 10,963 15,155 6,958 10,678 325 610
Showing a Weekly Increase 740 4,192 3,720 285

ships by reading all the returns he had before him, he would content himself with stating, that the total weekly average of poor relieved in all these towns amounted to 2,906 in 1826, and to 3,656 in 1830. He would beg leave, however, to refer their Lordships to another return concerning the township of Hurdsfield, adjoining Macclesfield, in the county of Chester, in which the Poor-rates collected in the year ending March 1821, amounted to 140l. while the amount for the year ending at March 1830, was 711l. The gentleman who signed the return stated, that since 1826 some portion of the wages had been paid out of the Poor-rates to enable the manufacturer to keep his ground in the home market. He added, that 150 cottages were unoccupied, and seven factories of different sizes had stopped work. But if his Majesty's Ministers thought the distress of the distant town doubtful and not worth inquiring into, they could not be ignorant of the distress which prevailed in London. Moreover, to shew this, which was not difficult, he had brought together some facts. He had applied to the Mendicity Society for information, and he found, that the number relieved by that Society in the two first months of the year was 3,207 in 1826,

and that in 1830 it was no less than 45,219.* In the first two weeks of March alone no less than 3,570 had been relieved by that society. In the parish of St. Mary, Bethnal-green, the number of the poor in the workhouse in 1826 was 500, and about the same number of poor out of the workhouse: in 1830 there were 1,400 in the workhouse, and nearly 5,000 who received parish relief out of the workhouse. He thought that he had now clearly shown that the distress of the labouring classes had been increasing since 1826. and he would detain their Lordships no longer on that point. But if, in addition to these facts,—if, in addition to the fact that the progress of the remuneration for labour had been declining until it had reached almost to the point of starvation,—if, he said, in addition to these facts, he required any further justification for his present Motion, he should find it in the proceedings of the other House of Parliament, in which two measures were in progress, and would probably soon be sent up to that House, which would require their Lordships, before they gave their assent to them, to make themselves well acquainted with the condition of the poor. A practice had grown up in some parts of the country of paying the wages of labourers by truck instead of in money. Concerning this system, and the bill to remedy it, he could not pledge himself by giving a positive opinion, because he knew little of the circumstances connected with it, and because he knew that it was a recognized principle, that the legislature should interfere as little as possible between the master and the workman. It was clear, however, that the system was very repugnant to the feelings of the labourers: and an hon. Member of the other House had introduced a measure of which the object was to compel the payment of wages in money. Whether that measure were desirable or not he was not able to decide, but the subject would very properly fall within the inquiries of the committee he proposed. Another measure, intended to put a stop to the practice of paying wages out of the Poor-rates, had originated with Mr. Slaney,—a gentleman * In order to make the information conveyed in the noble Duke's speech as accurate as possible, the editor thinks it right to add that the number of persons said to be relieved by the Mendicity Society is calculated by the number of meals given, so that if one person receives three meals, he would appear in the report as three persons. The winter of 1830 also was peculiarly severe. See the 12th Annual Report of the Mendicity Society. whose benevolent exertions to ameliorate the condition of the poor deserved the highest praise. For his own part he did not object to the principle of the Poor-laws, but when their Lordships considered the extent of the evils derived from them, and the increasing amount of the Poor-rates, it was their bounden duty no longer to avoid going into the subject with a view to inquire whether the present administration of the law tended to demoralize the population rather than to benefit the country. If no other anomaly existed than that of the working people of England being exposed to an extraordinary competition with other labourers, the matter would be worth inquiring into. It might be an unpopular topic with many of their Lordships to allude to the irruption of Irish labourers into this country; but he would observe, that what they received from the Poor-rates was a bounty on their coming. He would give Irish labourers free permission to come into the English market, but they should speculate on finding employment at their own peril. He would place them upon the same footing here as an Englishman was placed on in Ireland: the fact of their being Irishmen should preclude them from obtaining a settlement in this country, from receiving parish relief, or being passed back to Ireland at our expense. The report of a committee of the Commons, generally known as Lord Stanley's Committee, stated that 20,418 Irish had been passed from the county of Lancaster alone within the five years ending with 1827. The average charge for removing each of these paupers from London to Liverpool was 4l. 11s. 3d., while the price of a place in the mail was only 4l. 4s. Ought such a system to be allowed to continue? What made this drain upon the Poor-rates less bearable, were the gross frauds frequently committed by those persons who procured a livelihood by vagrancy, and obtained relief intended for Englishmen. It often happened that while they managed to be sent home as paupers they possessed considerable sums, the profits of their labour, which they carefully remitted to Ireland. The noble Duke proceeded to refer to the accounts of the Savings' banks as affording proofs of distress, and observed, that those banks were in precisely the same state as our merchants, ship-owners, manufacturers, and agriculturists,—their capital was diminishing every day. He had a return of their receipts and payments in the year 1828, but should not quote it, as it might be said that the law relating to Savings' banks had been altered since that period, and consequently that the accounts of 1828 afforded no fair test of prosperity or distress. But in 1829, the payments into Savings' banks had been 419,493l., while the sum drawn out amounted to 1,444,937l.; and in the first seven weeks of the present year the sum paid in was 92,751l., while that drawn out was 117,510l., making a diminution upon the amount of deposits of 24,759l. within that period. It was evident from this, that Savings' banks could not last much longer, except their Lordships should be enabled to put the country into a better state. With respect to the second part of his Motion, which related to the effect of taxation upon productive industry, after the reductions recently made by the Government it might appear ungenerous and ungrateful in him to press the noble Duke at its head further on the subject. He should not enter into detail upon this part of the question. He felt great gratitude to the noble Duke for the relief already afforded, but regretted that he had stopped short in his wise career; he regretted that other taxes had not been repealed which curtailed the comforts of the working classes and crippled our manufacturing and commercial interests,—when he considered the privations and distress of the working-classes,—when he recollected how many thousands were obliged to exist with their families on a pittance of 4d. or 6d. a day, he thought that every tax which pressed heavily upon those classes ought to meet with serious consideration, with a view to its reduction or repeal. In alluding to the price of the necessaries of life he meant not to re-agitate the question of the Corn-laws, after years and years of discussion. Into that subject he did not propose to enter, nor did he suggest it as a matter for inquiry before the proposed committee. He might mention, however, the duties on tea and sugar as pressing heavily upon the productive classes: the amount of duly levied on the poor man's lea, which seldom exceeded 2s. per lb., was ninety-six per cent. The price of sugar in bond he believed was 25s., and the duty amounted to 27s.; here was a tax of above 100 per cent upon this article. In speaking of the taxes that pressed severely upon productive industry, he might mention the tax on candles: the poor man was frequently obliged to work many hours before daylight and after dark, and therefore felt the pressure of that duty severely. But he would not go into detail on these points: if he were to introduce the subject into a committee it would be with a view to ascertain which taxes pressed most upon the poor, and how they might most advantageously be remitted—if taxation to the amount of them could not be abolished. However, he felt sure that the noble Duke had every desire to make further reductions, and he hoped that he would soon see clearly how much the state of the country demanded that this should be done. He thought, that by reducing some taxes, consumption might be increased, and that the revenue, instead of losing, would be benefitted. The noble Duke had anticipated, by his reductions, some of the points which it had been his intention to press upon the House on a former evening, if he had not been prevented by illness from then bringing forward his motion. He was unwilling to allude to matters personally affecting himself, but he trusted their Lordships would excuse him for doing so, on the ground of his anxiety to place himself right in their good opinion. He had been charged with a supposed inconsistency between his language in that House and his acts out of it. It was supposed that he had connived at the practice of employing labourers to do the work of beasts of burden. The only instance of such a practice which came before him in his capacity of a magistrate was the following:—He had been called on, some time before the last Session of Parliament, by some men belonging to Bognor, nine miles from his residence, who complained that they were compelled to drag carts laden with stones. He met them the next day at Chichester, where he acted as chairman of the Petty Sessions. The overseer of Bognor was summoned before them, but he and his brother magistrates found, on examining into the subject, that they had no legal means in their power to prevent such a practice. He remonstrated, however, with the overseer, and he had hoped the remon- strance had been successful in putting an end to the practice, as he had heard no more about the matter till recently. Since the subject had been referred to by a noble Earl (Stanhope), he had inquired into it, and ascertained that daily, at the watering-place of Bognor, two carts were employed, each dragged by four men, in conveying stones and gravel from the shore; each cart was attended by a person whom they called a foreman, but who, he believed was, in point of fact, a driver. Would not their Lordships inquire into matters such as these, and give magistrates the power to prevent a practice so pernicious and demoralizing in its effects? He had heard with pleasure from the noble Duke, who was the best authority upon such matters, that England, which heretofore had seldom or never engaged in war but with honour to herself, was in a more effective state now than ever, as respected her establishments for the purpose of defence. No doubt this was the case—every body recollected our past achievements; but did noble Lords believe, if our armies had been composed of men thus degraded, that even under the command of the greatest general of this or any other age they could have stormed the ramparts of Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajoz, scaled the Pyrennees, conquered at Waterloo, and placed the standard of England in the capital of France? Their Lordships might be assured, that if they allowed the people to be degraded and demoralized our whole happiness and prosperity—nay, our existence as an independent nation—must cease. He had intended to enter much more into detail, but felt unequal to the task in consequence of his late illness; however, he felt less regret at having been obliged to curtail his observations, as he was aware that his omissions would be amply supplied by noble Lords who agreed with him as to the absolute necessity of a free, a full, and a fair inquiry into the whole state and condition of the unfortunate class of men whose cause he had so feebly advocated. The noble Lord concluded by moving "for the appointment of a Select Committee to take into consideration the internal State of the Country, more particularly with respect to the condition of the Working Classes, and the effect of Taxation upon productive industry."

Earl Bathurst

said, if his noble relation had moved for a Select Committee to ex- amine into the state of the Poor-laws, and the manner in which they were administered, he should have thought that there were strong grounds for such a motion, and should, perhaps, have felt disposed to agree to it; but in the present Motion he found it impossible to concur. His noble relation had gone into a variety of statements with respect to the amount of relief given from time to time to the poor in different places, for the purpose of proving the existence of great distress; but before their Lordships could determine how far these statements formed a correct test of the state of the working classes, it would be desirable to know on what principle, and under what circumstances, the returns had been framed. Noble Lords must know that there had been frequent departures in the mode of administering the Poor-laws from the true principle of the law. A practice had arisen (he spoke not now either in approbation or disapprobation of it) of overseers paying a part of the wages of workmen out of the rates, the farmers employing these men paying the remainder. Now, according to these returns, the description of persons receiving parochial relief was left undefined, and it did not appear under what circumstances the increase had taken place. It might be that it was owing only to the improper, at least irregular, mode of paying a part of the wages of labour out of the rates, which was a relief not to the labourer but to his employer. His noble relative laid great stress upon the increase of the Poor-rates in certain places during the last winter, but he should recollect that the last winter was one of unusual severity; and that we could not possibly judge of the state of the working classes throughout the country by the distress that look place under such circumstances in particular districts. The noble Lord endeavoured to prove the distress of the working classes by the diminution in the amount of deposits in Savings'-banks; but he should be aware that a law had been passed, not long since, by which no individual could have more than 200l. in Savings'-banks, or deposit a larger sum than 30l. in one year. When this fact was considered, the diminution was at once accounted for, and it appeared that it afforded no proof whatever of distress. His objection to the Motion was, that although it was apparently confined to the appointment of a committee to examine into the stale of the working classes, the actual inquiry would be as extensive as that recently proposed to be instituted by a noble Lord, and rejected by the House. In fact, this was precisely the same proposition as the former, with this difference—that in the one case the inquiry was to have been at the Bar of the House, and in this it was proposed to institute it by means of a Select Committee. There was no real limitation in the noble Duke's Motion, although there might be an apparent one: it involved an inquiry into the whole internal state of the country, and was not confined to the condition of the working- classes. If the Motion were agreed to, their Lordships must go into every county and district for the purpose of making an investigation into the state of the working classes in each. They would first have to inquire into the number of agricultural labourers wholly out of employment—into the number only enjoying partial and occasional employment what wages both classes received; and then it would be necessary to ascertain whether wages were so reduced as to deprive these individuals, or a portion of them, of sufficient means of subsistence. Their Lordships must ascertain what amount of wages was contributed by the farmers, and how much was paid out of the poor-rates. Could they stop there? No; in justice to the farmer and landlord they must examine into the cause of the reduction of wages, and see what had obliged the farmer to diminish the amount of employment and the price of labour. The farmers would complain of taxation, of the pressure of the Poor-rates, and talk of rents not being sufficiently reduced. What did this involve but an inquiry into the whole state of the agricultural interests, and the causes of its depressed condition? The same thing applied to the manufacturing interests. Their Lordships would have to inquire, in every manufacturing town, into the amount of wages, and it would be said they were insufficient. They would hear of the great numbers out of employment, and it would be necessary to investigate the causes of low wages and want of employment. The manufacturer would say his profits were so small that he could not afford higher wages, and that his only chance of disposing of his goods at home or abroad consisted in bringing them into the market at a low price, which could not be effected unless wages were low. He would say, that such was the redundancy of manufactures brought into the home market by reason of the extensive use of machinery, that he could not sell except at a low price: and he would add, that he was exposed to the competition of foreign manufacturers, who could bring their goods into this country under the existing system, which did not afford the home manufacturer a sufficient protection. Then their Lordships would have the whole of the system foolishly called Free Trade to inquire into. The manufacturer would say, that as regarded the foreign market, he could only sell at a price that afforded little or no profit, and that if he were to increase the rate of wages, even in the smallest degree, he would be driven out of the market. Thus this inquiry, professing to be simply an investigation into the condition of the working classes, amounted, in point of fact, to an inquiry into the state of the whole of our agricultural and manufacturing interests, and in what manner they were affected by the existing laws. But the House was not only called upon to appoint a committee to enter into the state of the working classes, but also to investigate the manner in which taxation affected productive industry. What item of taxation did not this inquiry include? Every tax, every item of the Customs and Excise, more or less affected productive industry; so that we must inquire into the whole state of our financial system. His noble relation stated his anxious wish for a reduction of taxation, and mentioned taxes which he appeared to think ought to be reduced;; but where was the substitute for these taxes? It was said "there are a great many taxes which you may reduce, and increase the revenue thereby." That was a hazardous speculation, and it would hardly be pretended, whatever might be the final result of such a course, that for the first year or two, at least, there would not be a decided loss, which must necessarily be supplied. The noble Earl re-stated his opinion as to the too extensive nature of the proposed inquiry; and observed, that to any motion of such a nature he must object, on the ground that great expectations would be excited, and disappointed as certainly as excited. His noble relation did not include the tax upon Corn in considering the taxes which pressed upon the working classes; but other noble Lords might not be so forbearing. After observing that the Corn-laws were yet a source of contention in the community, the noble Earl went on to say, that if he were asked what would afford the greatest present relief to the working classes, he should say a free trade in Corn; but if he looked to their permanent interests, his reply would be very different. If he were asked what would ultimately be most injurious to the interests of the country at large, and therefore to the working classes, by ruining the home market, his answer would be, opening the trade in Corn, and leaving the British agriculturist without protection. There might be, and there would be, different opinions on the subject, and if this committee were appointed it would be impossible to shut out a discussion of the Corn-laws,—a discussion which, on every ground, was to be avoided if possible; but ought particularly to be deprecated, as fomenting a division between the two great interests of the country. Neither could their Lordships, in the proposed inquiry, shut out the great question of the Currency. The noble Marquis opposite (Lansdown) would probably be upon the committee, and his opinions as to a standard of value were well known to their Lordships. The noble Earl proceeded to comment upon the Marquis of Lansdown's opinions on the subject of a double standard, and observed, that the noble Marquis had spoken of the relative supply of, and proportion between, gold and silver, and of the advantage of recurring to what he considered the ancient standard. The noble Marquis stated, that up to 1797, silver was the original standard. He did not wish to put his opinion in competition with that of the noble Marquis, but he had always thought that since the year 1717, when an Act was passed on the subject by the advice of Sir Isaac Newton, gold had been rendered the common coin of the realm. He maintained that at that time gold became as much a standard of value as silver. The practice as well as the principle bore out the assertion: from 1717 to 1797 the whole amount of silver in circulation never exceeded 550,000l., and in fact gold was the current coin. From the moment that a limitation was fixed upon payments in silver it then ceased to be a standard. True, it might formerly have been received to any extent, but that was not now the case. But what, he would ask, was the value of silver? The real value was thirty per cent below the nominal value. In other words, if a man had collected a certain quantity of silver, and had a bill of 70l. to pay, he was compelled to pay in that silver to the nominal value of 100l. At the same time, however, what was the state of the people respecting the silver tokens? It might be illustrated in the same manner. For if a man having this bill of 70l. to pay, and a quantity of silver on hand, went to the Bank, he there received 70l. in sovereigns to discharge his debt. At present we had gold as the sole standard, paper convertible into gold, and silver tokens, also convertible into gold, but not constituting a legal tender in payment of a sum above 2l. The amount of silver in circulation formed, in fact, as to value, no inconsiderable part of the whole currency. The effect of the noble Marquis's principle might be, to change the standard, and pay with a lower standard debts contracted in a higher; putting the difference into the debtor's pocket. To a proposition such as that, if made, he must always be opposed. But why did he allude to the subject? Simply because their Lordships must go into the state of the currency if a committee were appointed, for half the petitions that had been presented attributed the distress to the state of the currency. The noble Earl recapitulated his former statement as to the extensive nature of the inquiry, which, if entered upon, would keep the country in a state of suspense for a longer period than the present Session, upon subjects the most important, and would, in the end, be of no advantage to the country, but terminate in producing general dissatisfaction and disappointment. Upon these grounds he should oppose the Motion.

The Earl of Mansfield

expressed his entire concurrence in the Motion of his noble friend, whose arguments, he hoped, when their Lordships came to vote upon the question, would be found to have made as great an impression on the minds of other noble Lords, as they made on his own. They appeared to him so convincing, that he thought the noble Karl's objections to the proposition entitled to but little consideration. His noble friend's proposed inquiry divided itself into two branches—first an investigation of the internal state of the country, with reference to the condition of the working classes; and secondly, an examination of the effect of taxation upon productive industry. He thought that no valid objections could be taken, either to the subject or the manner of the inquiry. The subject he had just stated, and as to the manner of the inquiry, it was proposed to refer it to a Select Committee, which was better calculated to manage such an investigation than a Committee of the whole House, and could, with less show of reason, be objected to by Ministers. The noble Earl's objection to the subject of the inquiry was, that although apparently a simple Motion, it was likely to open up too many topics: and there might be a latent fear lest we should discover that the distress which had been represented in the royal Speech as partial and temporary, was general, and likely to be unfortunately too permanent. But even if this Motion were to have such an unfortunate result, the question was, whether they could, consistently with their duty, refuse it? When, upon all hands, it was admitted that at least some distress existed, was it not proper that they should investigate its nature and extent, the circumstances which had caused it, and endeavour to devise some remedy for it? He had not the advantage of being present in his place when his Majesty's Speech was road on the first day of the Session, but he confessed that the light manner in which the prevailing distress was touched did strike him with some surprise; although perhaps those light touches cost more labour, and were attended with more difficulty, than the more grave and weighty portions of that Speech. Their Lordships would recollect, however, that it was not the Speech of his Majesty, but of his Majesty's Ministers. There were, perhaps, some ministerial emoluments, in the amount of which, at the time the Speech was delivered, the Government had no idea of proposing any reduction, and they, being quite exempt from distress themselves, disbelieved that any distress existed with respect to others. They thought, he supposed, considering the situation in which they were themselves placed, that general prosperity prevailed throughout the country. If there were any misconception or misrepresentation of the real state of the country, Ministers were alone responsible for it. Considering the time and circumstances of the meeting to which that Speech was submitted, not for discussion, but for approbation, he was very much reminded of a saying of a certain king of Persia, who never felt more convinced of the happiness and prosperity of all mankind than when his own appetite was satisfied. The Speech no doubt was agreed to at a Cabinet dinner and their Lordships had the authority of a proverb for saying that 'Un homme riche, quand il a bien diné, voit tout le monde heureux.' So it appeared to be with Ministers—they were well rewarded, and they took it for granted that every body else must be as well off as they were. That there was distress amongst those classes to whom his noble friend's Motion extended could not be doubted: and their patient endurance of that distress deserved the utmost sympathy of the legislature. Some persons would, perhaps, say that their patience arose from the confidence which they placed in his Majesty's Ministers; others might be of opinion that there was no confidence in Ministers themselves—that they were viewed like the National Debt, or any other grievance, which could not be removed suddenly, but which the people would be glad to get rid of. He would not say, and he hoped he should not be misunderstood, whether he partook of or rejected that opinion. At the same time, he wished to observe, that he would, with their Lordships' indulgence, at any time state his sentiments, and nothing should induce him to adopt the opinions of any other man. He attributed the patience of the people to another cause: first, to that energy of mind which was so justly alluded to by his noble friend; and secondly, to a great increase of common sense, which prevented the people from being seduced by factious demagogues. They looked to Parliament for relief, because they knew that in Parliament there was always a body of men anxious to investigate their circumstances, and to protect their interests. They knew that seditious language, or acts of violence and insubordination, could have no other effect but to neutralize and render ineffectual the efforts of their advocates, if not to cause the continuance of those measures of which they might have most reason to complain. This statement might not be so flattering to some individuals as they could wish; but in making it, he placed the patience and forbearance of the people on their just and proper grounds. In the midst of the gloomy views by which that class of the community was surrounded, he could not look upon their improved loyalty without experiencing the most consolatory feeling. But he wished again to impress on their Lordships, that the patient endurance of the people gave them a great and serious claim on the attention of the legislature; and he trusted that Parliament would at least manifest the wish, if it had not the power, to relieve them. He called on their Lordships, therefore, not to refuse to take all the circumstances of the times into consideration. It might be thought that he argued the question as if their Lordships viewed the distress from an exalted height, where it never could reach, being themselves free from the contagion. But was this the case? In other countries, where the superb palace, resplendent with every ornament that art could furnish, and loaded with every luxury that Europe could supply, stood by the side of the lowly and wretched cottage, which appeared before it like Lazarus pining at the rich man's gate, there was no community of sentiment between the tenants of such opposite dwellings, founded upon the consciousness of equal rights and freedom and protection by the law. No! They had no common interest or feeling—the discrepancy between them in all things was as great as it was in wealth and station. But it was far otherwise in this country, at least it had formerly been so. No traveller could then pass through England (and the fact ought not to escape their Lordships' observation) without perceiving, that though wealth was unequally distributed, as it must be more or less in every country, yet that there was a greater and more general diffusion of property, and of the advantages of property here, than in any other quarter of the world. True it was, that objects of misery would sometimes meet the sight, but there formerly was not (he wished he could say that there is not) that stamp of misery impressed on the common class of people which was to be seen elsewhere. This was to be attributed to that feeling of universal interest which pervaded all ranks of society. But now whole bodies of people were in misery, and this could not long exist without affecting all classes proceeding from the manufacturing and agricultural labourers till it reached the very highest. He was convinced, to use the prevailing language of the day, that the productive classes could not long remain in a state of misery and distress without seriously affecting every class of consumers. He would assert that the manufacturing labourer could not suffer long without affecting the agricultural labourer—until, finally, the owners and occupiers of land, and, in short, every class of proprietors, would become included in one universal distress. He held this to be a certain, though perhaps not an immediate effect. There was one point to be ascertained which, in his opinion, ought to be developed in the committee; and that was, whether the misery which bore down different classes of people had one common cause and origin, or whether the misery of one class was reflected from the misery of others; and that would be one of the most difficult and important parts of the investigation. He looked to the chain of interest—he looked to the links of that chain, which, though not perhaps visible to all, yet bound the community together, and which, therefore, was a proper subject for investigation. Taking the question in that point of view, it was not the interest of the lower classes, but their own interests, to which their attention was called. If this inquiry were agreed to, he hoped that many of the statements of the existing distress would turn out to have been overcharged; but if the allegations contained in the petitions which were laid on their Lordships' Table were at all supported by facts (and of that he had little doubt), then their Lordships would be imperatively required, for their own sakes, to save the labouring classes from the sad degradation to which they were hastening. In looking to the real wealth and prosperity of a country, he contended that it was not to be found in the concentration of great riches in the hands of a few individuals: it was not to be seen in the profligate display of luxury, while the suffering poor were wanting bread; the sure test of national wealth was the degree in the scale of comfort and happiness which the lowest class of the people maintained. The second branch of his noble friend's inquiry was as to the effect of taxation on productive industry. Here he must say, whatever advantage might be taken of the observation, that the widest possible field of inquiry presented itself. He thought that their Lordships could not go into that examination without investigating the whole financial system of the country—the amount of taxes, the operation of the Corn-laws and of the Poor-rates—and last of all, and, he would say, the most important of all, the effect of the great alteration in the currency. It might seem that an inquiry so multifarious would be interminable; but their Lordships should recollect that reports might be made from time to time, and different subjects could thus be gradually and successively brought under their Lordships' attention in such a manner as would best enable them to adapt legislative measures to the peculiarities of each subject. He had turned his attention very seriously to many of the matters into which it was proposed the committee should inquire—but he would not, at present, state his opinions respecting them to their Lordships; because he felt that it would answer no useful purpose. His sentiments might be met by the statements and opinions of others, so as to furnish grounds to some of their Lordships, and excuses to more, to refuse this committee. They would be very apt to declare that there was no use in granting a committee, when the subjects to be considered were so numerous. If any noble Lord entered into the committee, determined to assume, instead of endeavouring to ascertain, facts—determined to adhere to preconceived opinions, as if they were immutably established—an inquiry conducted by such individuals would be worse than useless. The duty of that committee would be, he apprehended, first, to ascertain the facts; and he would appeal to every noble Lord who heard him, whether that was an easy task? The next point would be, to look to the cause of the distress, and to suggest, if their Lordships could, a proper remedy. He felt it to be his duty to agree to the appointment of this Select Committee. He thought, when there were so many objects to be inquired into, that a Select Committee was, if not the best mode that could be adopted, at least the best that had been proposed, and therefore he should support it. He should, however, have been much better pleased if the inquiry had proceeded from Ministers themselves, who had much greater facilities for investigating the several subjects, and submitting them to a committee, than Peers not connected with the Government. They had instituted such inquiries on former occasions. They might, after investigating the subject, declare whether a remedy could be found, or what measures were necessary for the preservation of the country. Looking, however, to the system which Ministers pursued, he did not know how else his noble friend could proceed, except by moving for a committee. If Ministers met the present distress with stout denials—if they refused an inquiry by which alone the discordant statements of those who rejected the idea of distress, and of those who loudly proclaimed its existence, could be brought to the test—if they would not allow Parliament to ascertain the state of the country, but let the matter just remain as it was—the people would, he conceived, have just cause for dissatisfaction. Under all the circumstances, he saw no other fair mode of proceeding but that of instituting the inquiry which his noble friend had proposed. He hoped, that on this occasion, his noble friend would have the support of some noble Lords who, in former times, were very acute in discovering the distress of the country, and very anxious to remove it. He was the more desirous that his noble friend should receive that assistance, because he observed, that for some time past—owing, he supposed, to the force of their eloquence—they had a very considerable influence on the measures of that Government to which they formerly were in direct opposition.

The Earl of Eldon

rose, with great regret, he said, to address their Lordships for a short time. But, however painful the subject was, he could not avoid delivering his sentiments on it, as he felt a most sincere desire to make one struggle more for the relief of his country. If their Lordships wished to preserve the link which connected the highest and the lowest class in the empire, they must investigate the distress which now existed, and they must make plain and intelligible what the causes of it were, and point out the remedy by which it might be alleviated. They ought to prove to the people that they entertained a real desire to remove their evils. The great peculiarity of this country, beyond all others, was this—that we were, from the lowest of us to the highest, dove-tailed into one common connexion with each other, and one class could not suffer without affecting the others. He did most sincerely hope and trust that their Lordships would endeavour to satisfy the people that they would do their utmost to ascertain the cause of the distress, and that they would, after mature deliberation, declare whether some mode of relief could or could not be devised. He should support the present Motion, remembering the mischievous projects that were afloat in the years 1792–3–4 and 5, and remembering how Parliament, by its exertions, had then succeeded in putting an end to discontent. He hoped that their Lordships would, by the vote of that night, be enabled to terminate any projects of a similar nature which might then be in agitation, and by satisfying the people, put an end to their complaints. He trusted, accordingly, that there would be no longer any objection upon the part of the House to the Motion, for a committee. They were told on a former night, by several noble Lords, that their only objection to the proposition then made by a noble Earl was founded on the mode of inquiry which he recommended. They were opposed to a Committee of the whole House, but now that a Select Committee was proposed, their objections should be removed. He was not one of those who supposed it was in the power of Parliament to give entire relief to the people, but it was of the last importance to have them satisfied, if it were not in its power to comply with their wishes, that at least it was anxious to inquire into the causes of their distress, and to afford them all possible assistance. He was encouraged to hope, from what had passed upon a former occasion, that this inquiry would not now be denied—an inquiry which the assertion in the King's Speech, that described the distress as only partial, did in itself, after the many documents to a contrary effect which had been laid before the House, render necessary. Ministers had found out that the country might be relieved of taxation to the extent of three millions and a half, in one Spring morning, and they even doubted whether the relief might not extend to five millions; he, therefore, felt confident, that as the weather improved, the country might expect further discoveries of this sort. The same objections that had been urged against an inquiry at the Bar of the House, were now urged against an inquiry by a Select Committee. In his opinion, many important things might be stated to a Select Committee as to the causes of distress; whilst individuals might be able to ascertain which of them admitted of relief, which of alleviation, and which were beyond the power of remedy. He had no hesitation in saying, that if inquiry were denied, it was neither more nor less than a total abandonment of all the duties of Parliament. But he had confidence in the people of this country. They were well disposed in their periods of distress, and none but Englishmen could suffer as they had done; nor could they have borne their suffering but from a love of that Constitution which they knew would sooner or later make them happier than any other people in the world. He had guarded himself against anything that could lead to a supposition that he was a friend to a change of the present system of Government. He thought, however, that an alteration of the currency might afford some relief. In Scotland the people were indulged with a small-note circulation, and they did not seem so much distressed as the other inhabitants of the empire. It was extraordinary that in his native county, Northumberland, the Poor-rates were only at 1s. 6d. in the pound, whilst in some of the southern counties they were as high as 20s. in the pound. He could very easily account for this, for the small notes would no more stay in Scotland than any thing else [a laugh]. In that part of the country, the people were too far north for the southerns, and they managed better than to want small notes, merely because Ministers said they should not have them. Considering the alterations of the currency since 1797, he should say, that their effects upon contracts made in the interval of those changes amounted to a violation of honesty and good faith. He denied that he was an introducer of the measure of 1797; all that he had then done was to propose that people should not be relieved from paying creditors in gold any longer than there was a necessity for it [a laugh]. But by the bill of 1797, although the power of arresting the debtor was taken away, yet gold could be demanded in payment when execution was sued out. It was a subsequent Act which obliged creditors to take payment in Bank-notes. He now thought that small notes might be issued, under proper regulations, without any detriment to the public interests. It was advisable, he thought, to make bankers' estates chargeable for their simple contract debts, but it would be necessary to know what were the embarrassments previously upon them. He recollected when this country was at peace with Spain, and the Parliament of England was passing Acts to prevent men enlisting in the South American armies. At that time British subjects were sending large sums of money to those colonies, before they had been recognised as Independent States by the; Sovereign of this country, and they were likewise sending out goods; but unless he was very much mistaken, all these transactions had proved more or less disastrous; but this was the fault of the individuals, and let them suffer; it would teach them that capitalists ought to employ their capital as much as possible to the improvement of their own country; and if they sent to foreign states, they must take upon themselves the blame and the consequences which they wished to throw upon Parliament. In the disturbances that took place in 1792, 1793, 1794, and 1795, the affections of the great body of the people were not disturbed by the distresses which oppressed them, for they saw that Parliament was anxious to relieve them; and they therefore concurred in that war which Parliament, by their concurrence, was enabled to carry on, and by the successful termination of which the noble Duke opposite had made himself so illustrious. The state of England was like a great and glorious pillar—the people formed its base; then came those of a little higher rank; then still a little higher, until it reached the apex, on which stood the Monarch of the country. If the distresses of those who formed the basis of that pillar were entirely neglected, he need not tell the House what would ensue. There was not an Englishman of that class that was not enduring, in the most exemplary manner, distresses difficult to conceive, and too painful for him to describe; and he thought the people were entitled to have those distresses patiently and carefully investigated by their Lordships.

The Earl of Rosebery

observed, that the noble Earl (Bathurst) who had alluded to what fell from him on a former night, relative to the silver standard of coinage, had not met his argument fairly. It was very true, as the noble Earl said, that in 1717, when Sir Isaac Newton settled the currency, gold was made the standard. He had not disputed that fact. But the noble Earl must know, that the current gold coin was made conformably to the price of silver. The noble Earl stated what was perfectly correct, when he said, that in 1774 an Act of Parliament was brought in, limiting to the sum of 25l. the legal tender of silver coinage. But the noble Earl forgot to state, when mentioning that fact, why it was so limited. The reason was, because the silver coinage was then debased considerably below the value which it represented. The noble Lord admitted, indeed, that silver, to any weight, was allowed to be taken by the same Act. Now, if he were not mistaken in his opinion, that regulated the price of commodities, and was, therefore, a standard of value in the country. The noble Earl had stated, that if any man now went to the Bank with 70l. in silver, he could easily obtain for it 70l. in sovereigns, but that was merely from the civility of the Bank, arising from their want of silver in their current transactions. They were not under any obligation, that he was aware of, any more than any body else to accept more than 2l. in silver in the payment of a debt. With respect to the question immediately before the House, he begged leave to state, that he acquiesced most heartily in the Motion of the noble Duke. On the former occasion, when a motion for inquiry was under consideration, he had addressed their Lordships, and the noble Earl (Eldon) had entirely misconceived the speech he made, and the conclusion at which he had arrived on that occasion. The tenor of his speech was in favour of inquiry, which he thought indispensable, although he voted against the proposition of the noble Earl. He did so because he thought that an inquiry at the bar of their Lordships' House would be most unsatisfactory. He felt that such art investigation would take up the time of their Lordships, and of his Majesty's Government, most uselessly, and that it would excite expectations that, in the end, would be disappointed. He was of opinion that the course now proposed was perfectly exempt from that objection; and he was sure the inquiry would, if properly conducted, be eminently conducive to good. He perfectly agreed with his Majesty's Speech where he recommended the House to separate those causes of distress which were beyond legislative control from those which might be within the reach of Parliament. He also agreed with that part of the Speech in which was recommended the greatest degree of caution in any inquiry into so delicate and intricate a subject; but he could not acquiesce in the opinion, that because some of the causes of distress were beyond legislative control, that therefore the House was not to make any inquiry into those causes that were, or might be, within the reach of Parliament. This would amount to an absolute prohibition of all inquiry. Every attempt to obtain inquiry in that House had failed of success, and he therefore could not understand why caution in inquiry had been recommended in the Speech from the Throne. Although a relief from taxation might benefit the country, he thought that nothing could be of great and extensive good, unless the supply and demand of labour in the market were regulated; and if emigration were to be the relief, the vacuum must not be filled up. One important point, therefore, for inquiry was, the administration of the Poor-laws, and to ascertain whether some means could not be devised for preventing the frequent inundations of Irish labourers, which, in his opinion, was one great cause of the disproportion between the supply of, and the demand for, labour in this country. The noble Earl (Eldon) was totally mistaken in his ideas of the reason why the Poor-rates in Northumberland were so much lower than in the South. It was solely from the poor not being paid their wages out of the Poor-rates, as was the custom in the southern counties. The noble Earl, he also believed, was not correctly informed, either as to the effects of small notes, or as to Scotch one pound notes circulating in Northumberland. He acknowledged that Scotland was not so distressed as England; but that was more owing to the habits of her people than to the small notes; and he did not believe that they circulated in the North of England. Whatever might be the conclusions to which a committee of their Lordships should come, he was sure that its recommendations, on the various points brought under their consideration, would be highly beneficial to the country.

The Marquis Camden

said, that after the best consideration which he had been able to give to the subject, he had come to the conclusion that the distress of the country was by no means so general as it was attempted to be made out. He felt it due to those who framed the Speech which was delivered from the Throne at the opening of the Session, to state that the nature of the existing distress was, in his opinion, correctly described in that document. If he were to contrast the present situation of the country with what it was in the year 1822, he should say that the comparison was in favour of the present period. In 1822, the complaints pf distress amongst the farmers were much more general than now, and many landlords, himself amongst the number, were then obliged to forgive their tenants a year's rent. In the present year he had not received a single notice to quit from any of his tenants. Under those circumstances, he could not believe the distress was so general as had been described. The distress of the country was spoken of in a manner which induced him to suppose that those who dwelt upon it so much, considered it no bad sport to distress the Administration. Their Lordships were divided into a variety of parties, and distress seemed to be the text on which they all preached. There was not only Ministerial and Opposition benches, there were ultra-tory benches, the discontented benches, and the cross-benches, where the neutrals generally sat, and which were now nearly deserted. With respect to the meetings that were held out of doors, they seemed to be formed for the purpose of backing opinions which were delivered in Parliament, and in most instances the petitions which proceeded from them did not express the real feelings of the persons assembled. He was sorry to hear it stated by a noble Earl, (Mansfield) that his Majesty's Ministers were not aware of the distressed condition of the country. It was impossible that they should not be aware of the distress if it existed. That distress did exist to a certain extent Ministers admitted, and they had resorted to the reduction of taxation, and the enforcement of economy, as the best means of alleviating it. The remedy for such distress as existed, was unquestionably economy and reduced taxation; and he was sure that the present Government had evinced a strong disposition in favour of both. A prudent economy had been both professed and practised. Upon the question of the currency he did not intend to touch further, than to say that he conceived some benefit would result from permitting country bankers to issue more paper, upon giving adequate security that they would be able to take it up. He placed great reliance on the good sense of the people, and believed the period was not far distant when the complaint of distress would cease.

The Earl of Winchilsea

expressed his cordial satisfaction at the able and feeling manner in which his noble friend had brought under the consideration of their Lordships the faithful picture of the distress which pervaded the great body of the labouring classes of the community, which had entitled him to the gratitude of his country, and had established for him a character which was more to be envied than even the high honours which he had earned in the field. What did his noble friend's Motion call on their Lordships to do? To inquire into the distress which pervaded the great body of the labouring population, as well manufacturing as agricultural. Could any individual who was aware of the unhappy situation of the great body of his countrymen, and had one particle of feeling about him, deny the justice and expediency of such an investigation? His noble friend proposed the inquiry with the view of tracing the distress to its sources, and of applying, as far as was in the power of Parliament, a remedy for them. He had heard with surprise a member of the Government—the President of the Council—assert that an inquiry into the state of the agricultural and manufacturing population could not be entered upon without also going into an inquiry into the distress which affected every interest in the empire. Because other classes were distressed, was that a reason why no inquiry should take place into the condition of the classes which were the object of his noble friend's Motion? He could not conceive that the House would refuse their assent to the Motion. A noble Lord had stated, that he considered the Poor-laws as one of the chief causes of the present distress of the labouring classes. He could not imagine on what ground the noble Lord founded that opinion. If the distressed labourers did not receive the 7,000,000l. of Poor-rates, their condition would be much worse than it was at present. He believed that if the Poor-laws were administered in their real spirit and intention, they would prove to be the finest code ever framed by the wisdom of man. It was the abuse of the laws, and not the laws themselves, which should be condemned. He firmly believed that there was but one interest in the country—that all were desirous to place affairs upon the best and most prosperous footing; but he thought, at the same time, that mistaken notions prevailed; and if it were true, as was asserted by some, that distress was by no means general, let the Motion be carried, and an opportunity would be afforded of ascertaining, beyond contradiction, the real condition of the people, and the true extent of the distress. No man in the country would receive with more heart-felt gratification the proof that the distress was limited, than the humble individual now addressing the House. He was prepared to admit, that if the Motion were carried, the inquiry would embrace a considerable number of important questions; but, as it seemed to him, that was the very reason why the investigation should be undertaken. Was the House to say to the distressed, who were earnestly beseeching relief, that because the Motion, confined as it was to the labouring classes, would include other topics of great interest and importance, it was not fit that any investigation at all should take place? Notwithstanding what the noble Marquis who had last addressed the House had stated, he must declare his opinion, that the distress of the country had been gradually augmenting for years past. If the noble Marquis would take the trouble to investigate the subject, he would find that the distress now existing in Kent exceeded any thing of the kind within the memory of man. He had heard from a gentleman connected with that once flourishing county, that numbers of farms were occupied at no rent at all. He had also heard from an acting magistrate of the county, that his land was occupied by tenants who had paid him no rent for the last seven years. A few days ago one of that gentleman's tenants came to him and told him that he was indebted to him for seven years' rent. The landlord supposed that he had come to pay him; but he placed some money on the table, and said—"If you take that, I have not a farthing left to purchase seed with, and I will give up possession of the farm as soon as you please." He could, if he pleased, mention numberless instances of this description. The class of freeholders who composed the link which connected the peasantry with the higher classes of society had, in that part of the county where he resided, been reduced one-half in the last six years, and at the present moment half the property of those remaining was on sale. If such a state of things were allowed to continue, it must end in the breaking of all the bonds which held society together. He wished he could coincide in the opinion expressed by some noble Lords, that the country at large felt confidence in the present Ministers; but he could not shut his eyes to what had passed at a late meeting, where he had been present, and where anything but confidence in Ministers had been expressed. He begged, at the same time, to disclaim any wish to have his opinions backed by meetings out of doors, or any intention of attacking Ministers, or rendering their situation more distressing than it was, for, in his opinion, it was one which was far from being enviable. He did not attribute the situation of the country to the conduct of the present Government. It had arisen from causes as to which he would not, at that moment, attempt to offer an opinion. He was averse to the meeting which had taken place in Kent, because he thought that the petitions of the people had not been received in Parliament with the deference and respect to which they were entitled; but as he was determined never to separate himself from the great body of the freeholders, he told them, as they wished to express their sentiments, that the only constitutional mode of doing so was by a county meeting; for he hated what were called hole-and-corner meetings. He implored their Lordships to give their support and approbation to the Motion of his noble friend, and to avail themselves of this opportunity of showing that they sympathised with the people in their sufferings, and were willing to do their utmost to afford relief. It was to be recollected that the proposition now submitted did not impugn the conduct of Ministers; for he agreed with his noble friend, that it ought rather to have originated with them as the anxious guardians of the national prosperity. In conclusion, he would express the strong feelings of gratification he experienced, which he was certain would be participated in by every man who heard him, at seeing his noble friend who had brought forward the Motion restored to health.

The Duke of Buckingham

said, that no one could join more cordially than he did in the sentiment of satisfaction expressed by the noble Earl, at the manner in which the noble Duke had been enabled to perform his duties, after the indisposition which he regretted, both on public and private grounds. The noble Duke's proposition was divided into two parts—one embraced the consideration of the labouring poor, the other an inquiry into the state of taxation, and its effects on the productive industry of the country. His objection to the Motion was, that it was too comprehensive. If either of the two questions had been proposed, the House might have entertained it; but both together were too much. The question was, not whether it was right to enter upon the inquiry proposed by the noble Duke, but the quo animo in which the subject had been brought forward. The noble Duke's object, of course, was, as he had himself stated, to impress on the public and their lordships the idea that the distressed state of the labouring classes was occasioned by the weight of taxation. The present, however, was not the only occasion on which the country had heard the cry raised of we, destruction, and ruin. For the last hundred and fifty years Parliament had rung with the same statements. Whenever rents had fallen, and the Poor-rates pressed heavily, the country had been described to be in a state of distress and ruin, and the labouring classes in a state of degradation. Even the amiable and excellent George Earl of Middleton, had fallen into that delusion, and declared in his day that the weight of taxation was so great that it was impossible any class of the community could survive it; and Sir John Sinclair, in one of his publications, had shewn that, according to the various declarations, the country had been ruined and bankrupt no less than twenty-two times between 1688 and 1723. In treating of the condition of the poorer classes of the community, it was necessary to exercise the utmost caution, and their Lordships' discussion sought to be managed with the utmost delicacy. The poor were always prone to believe that every thing which was done by the higher classes was done for their own interest, and not for the welfare of the poorer classes. They eagerly snatched at any hope which was held out to them, and bitterly regretted any disappointment. He objected to the Motion, because it would excite hopes which could not be realized. If he thought that it was in the power of Parliament to remedy the situation of the poor, he would cordially support the Motion; but he would never lend his sanction to a proposition which would excite hopes that must be disappointed. He was willing to do justice to the motives of the noble Duke, and congratulated him on having, thus early in his political career, come forward in behalf of the poor. But all persons would not do him that justice, and he ought to be aware that many individuals would be found out of the House, who would make use of his name and authority to excite expectations which they knew could never be realized, with a view to profit by the subsequent discontent. For his own part, he did not think that the poor only were deserving of attention. It was impossible for their Lordships not to know that other classes were deeply affected. When the labourer had no employment, the landlord was obliged to support him. So long as the land existed the pauper's claims could not be denied. They were attended to, indeed, before the landlord could put a single pound of rent into his pocket. What did the labourer care for the distress of the farmer, for his wants were supplied, though the other might have his house sold over his head? The situation of the poor alone, therefore, ought not to be inquired into, but rather the situation of all classes. In his opinion, the present sufferings of all classes, in various parts of the country, was attributable to the altered circumstances of the country as to our foreign relations, and even to our being in a state of peace. For example, something had been said by the noble Earl near him of the decay of opulent and respectable freeholders; but it was obvious that much of the distress was caused by their produce coming into competition with the cheaper produce of other countries. When farming produce bore a high price, they had large incomes; and now that its price had fallen, their incomes had been reduced in proportion. When prices were high they contracted expensive habits of living, and continuing to indulge in them when prices fell, they were unable to meet their expenses. Their distress arose from their inability to live as they had lived. Formerly, the greater part of the Metropolis was supplied with butter and cheese from the counties of Buckingham and Essex; but now those articles were brought to London in steam-boats from France and Holland. The butter which the noble Duke had eaten at breakfast that morning was most probably the produce of Holland, and thus he had assisted in adding to the depressed slate of the agricultural interest. The second part of the Motion was an inquiry into the subject of taxation. Now, in the first place, their Lordships should look, not merely at the state of taxation, but what proportion our taxes bore to the income of the country, and how far the revenue had diminished or increased; because, if our revenue had increased, and our trade had increased, the argument as to the amount of the taxation would go for very little. The most productive year before the war was 1790, and after the war, the year 1823. Now, in the year 1790, the quantity of cotton wool consumed in this country was 31,400,000lbs.; in 1823, it was 249,700,000lbs. In 1790, the quantity of sheep's wool consumed in this country was 3,200,000lbs.; in 1823 it was 30,200,000lbs. The quantity of British wool exported in 1825, the last year that our paper currency was in existence, was 18,367lbs., in 1829 it was l,669,389lbs. The quantity of cotton goods exported had probably doubled since 1819, while the price of the raw material had sunk to one half. Now what was all this a proof of? It was a proof that consumption had increased, and that taxation had had no sensible effect upon our trade. He would further observe, that taxation had been as heavy in 1823, 1824, and 1825 as subsequently; and, indeed, it was heavier, and then the country did not suffer from distress. Taxation was not, therefore, the cause of the distress. But probably his noble friend would say that then we had paper money to pay taxes; (he saw paper money smiling in his face) but the distress of which noble Lords complained was far too general in its nature to be caused by a circumstance so limited in its operations as our change of currency. What, then, were the limits of the distress? was it confined to our country? Far from it. The same distress experienced here was felt throughout the world. If it were said to be occasioned by taxation, go to Switzerland, where there is no taxation—go to America, go to France; the distress would be found the same. If it was contended that the distress was occasioned by the weight of our debt, go to countries not encumbered with debt—to America, where there is no debt; to France, where the debt is small; to Switzerland, where, perhaps, as in olden times, they may have money in their treasury, the distress is the same. Then it was said, that our distress was occasioned by Free Trade. He had heard much of the principles of free trade, but he had not seen them often acted on. But let their Lordships go to those countries where there was no free trade—Germany, the Netherlands, France—distress would be found to prevail in all. Then it was absurd and mischievous (if he might say so of anything which occurred in their Lordships' House), to say that the distress arose from causes which did not exist in other places where the distress was at least equal to that which prevailed in this country. Then the paper currency had been cited as a cause. If his noble friend wished to return to those times of confidence, as he called them, between the farmer and the banker, he (the noble Duke) could not participate in his wish. Some noble Lords wished for a restoration of the paper currency; but to that he could not consent. If, in 1825, the last year of the bubble speculations, 165 bankers became bankrupt, the credit of the country, instead of being distressed by a metallic currency, as was contended, must be restored. The paper currency led to speculation, and that was followed by failure and general mistrust. Since this; metallic currency was restored, 160 out of 165 bankers were enabled to pay 20s. in the pound. This proved that a paper currency was not necessary to keep up the credit of the country, when, during a metallic currency, these individuals could pay, in full, debts which they had contracted in paper. It was easy for the noble Duke to sit at the Custom-house, calling out for complaints of grievances. If the noble Duke heard from the north any unfavourable accounts of the state of the Tallow Trade, he called out for inquiry. If there was a pressure of French Silk in the market, the only remedy was a committee. The distress was general all over the world, and yet inquiry was called for as if it had been exclusively British. He granted that distress did exist, and to some extent; it was vain to deny it, and folly to conceal it. This distress was owing mainly to the breaking down of the barriers of that commercial monopoly we had possessed during the war; and also to two bad seasons, with which Providence had visited us, after one bright one. It was partly owing, likewise, to the gradual resumption of cash payments, which could not be returned to without some inconvenience. But these causes were temporary, and so, he confidently believed, the distress would be. In the manufactures of the country there was already an increase of improvement and prosperity; and the times were, he trusted, coming round, when those who supported this inquiry would rejoice at their own disappointment and want of success. There was no reason for despair; and it was satisfactory to know that our manufacturers were rising from their late depression; that they were now getting full employment, and that it was daily increasing. With this conviction, he (the noble Duke) could not doubt that the evil was passing away, and that he should soon have to congratulate the noble Duke on the return of prosperity. He considered this Motion to be brought forward in an extraordinary state of the country and of parties. If their Lordships went into any club, they would find a moderate Whig holding this language: "We must have free trade, and a metallic currency; nothing but that will save the country." "But," said his noble friends, "do not think of these things; they are the causes of our distress, of our particular distress; these are what we mean to make speeches about." They were joined by the true-blue Tories, who were now advocates for Radical Reform, and down they came to the House of Lords, or to the House of Commons, whichever it might happen to be, and one and all joined in a league to support a motion for a committee of inquiry. Such was the state of parties, under which the present Motion was brought forward. Believing, then, that the Motion was brought forward by an unwholesome and unconstitutional junction of parties, and that the effect of it would be, to excite and flatter the hopes of the poor, and afford no remedy to the disease complained of, he must oppose it.

The Marquis of Salisbury

observed, that it was a good system of parliamentary tactics to endeavour to draw away the attention of the House from the subject of debate; which had been done by the noble President of the Council and the last speaker. The question had nothing to do with currency or free trade; even these and several other topics had been debated. He had nothing to do with the question of a constitutional or an unconstitutional state of parties, but was willing to give Government his support where he could. He felt some difficulty in forming his judgment so as to guide his vote on a motion for an inquiry into the state of the poor, after a debate on taxation, paper currency, manufactures, and the various subjects which had been brought before the House. With respect to the distress of the country, he had heard, with surprise, from the noble Duke (Buckingham), that the labouring classes felt less distress than any others; that as long as the Poor-rates existed they had no reason to complain, for as long as any thing could be got from the land they were the least subject to distress.

The Duke of Buckingham

explained. He had stated that the labouring poor considered and believed that they had a claim upon the land,—not that they had really a right to the land.

The Marquis of Salisbury

continued. The explanation did not much alter the state of the ease, because it did not touch upon the important point whether the poor were in a state of distress or not. He contended that there was no period in which the poorer class had suffered so much. No parliamentary return indeed had been made to show the extent of the distress; but when he heard the notice of the noble Duke's Motion, he took measures to inform himself on the subject, and he had applied to every parish in the county in which he lived (Hertford) in order to obtain the number of persons unemployed. He would state to the House the result. Out of the whole population of the county, which, by the population register of 1811, was 62,920, the number of males between fifteen and seventy was 34,874, and the number of the working classes out of employ in the county amounted to the alarming sum of 2,200 persons, being six and a quarter per cent on the males, or three and a half per cent on the whole population. Taking this to be a fair criterion of the state of the country, and the Poor-rates were far less in Hertford than in several other counties, being 5s. 8d. in the pound; and supposing the number of males between fifteen and seventy to be 2,700,000, it might be concluded that the enormous number of 170,000 able-bodied men were at this moment out of employ.

The Earl of Rosslyn

inquired to what period this account was made up.

The Marquis of Salisbury

replied, to the 1st of March: and if that number were unemployed on the 1st of March, the number during the winter,—inclement as it was,—must have been more considerable. But even if it was anything approaching to this number,—one-half or one-third,—there never was a subject which called more for parliamentary inquiry. With respect to taxation, the country, as far as he could judge, was grateful for the relief which his Majesty's Ministers had afforded it; but in his opinion, a parliamentary inquiry into the state and nature of the existing distress was, nevertheless, necessary.

The Earl of Wicklow

wished for an opportunity to explain why he had supported a Motion of his noble relative, for a Committee to inquire into the state of the poor in Ireland while he meant to oppose the present. The Motion of his noble relative was for an inquiry into an evil which was permanent in its nature and duration; the noble Duke, however, wished to inquire into an evil which was new and temporary. With respect to the existing distress, great difference of opinion prevailed as to its causes, extent, and duration. Though several causes had been assigned, yet there was one which appeared to have been generally overlooked. This was the peculiar circumstances attending the last harvest, which had been gathered in, owing to the state of the weather, at a far greater expense than usual. Perhaps this had not been sufficiently considered by landlords when the rents became due, after paying which, the farmers were so exhausted, that they were compelled to dismiss their labourers. This accounted in a great measure, for the increased number of paupers. As to the extent of the distress, a great deal of severe remark had been made on the word partial, which was found in his Majesty's Speech. It was highly creditable to Ministers that nothing better could be found to say against them than this minute criticism about a word. But it would not much alter the matter, although the negative form had been used, and his Majesty had been made to say that the distress was not general. A short time since there was a good deal of wit displayed on the word "untoward," which was used in one of the Speeches from the Throne, but he really thought that all such observations were for the most part thrown away. The quarrel in this instance was with a word in the affirmative, but he had no doubt that the Ministers would have been willing to have inserted a negative in its place, and instead of calling the distress "partial" to have described it as "not general," and in that phrase he should have agreed, because he believed that the Ministers were the best judges of the real state of the country at the time the Speech was framed. The extent of the distress, however, he was happy to say, was diminishing; from his own knowledge in the county in which he resided, he could assure their Lordships that the distress was not general, or so great as it had been on former occasions in that county; and though the grazing farmers suffered, the agricultural farmers, on whom the poor chiefly depended, had no reason to complain. Was the distress likely to be permanent? He believed not. All ranks of society appeared to be in a sound and healthy state, and well disposed towards the Government. It was impossible, however, that rents could be kept up, now that the prices of all commodities were reduced. Those who suffered from the reduction were to be pitied, but the necessity was inevitable. He hoped his Majesty's Ministers would be firm, and not give in to any measure like the Motion of the noble Duke, which instead of satisfying the people would spread alarm throughout the country.

The Earl of Radnor

observed, that he rose principally to make some remarks on what had fallen from the noble Duke opposite (Buckingham). He had objected to the Motion because it was proposed in an unwholesome and unconstitutional state of parties. He (Lord Radnor) could not understand what this meant. The noble Duke said, that such was the state of parties, that a moderate Whig agreed with a true-blue Tory, and therefore the Motion was an unconstitutional thing; but this rather appeared an argument in its favour, and showed that it was so just and proper, that persons who differed upon all other subjects agreed upon this. If the noble Duke's statement respecting the improvement in the manufacturing districts, were correct, and there was really no distress, he wished that the noble Duke would go into the committee, if it were only to show how greatly the people were mistaken. Their Lordships had had a voluminous Petition laid upon their Table that night, signed by 10,000 persons, from no unimportant place—Manchester,—which proved that this great town had not yet discovered that improvement in the stale of their business which the noble Duke had announced. The noble Duke had said, that the class who suffered the least from the distress was the poor. The noble Duke was, he believed, an active magistrate; but he must say that in his magisterial capacity be found the case to be very different, and that the distresses of the poor were increasing. It was not long before the time when he began to act as a magistrate that the plan was introduced into his neighbourhood, by a benevolent individual in Berkshire, of making up the wages of the poor out of the rates. He admitted that this plan had led to infinite mischief; but when he heard it asserted, that it had been introduced fraudulently by farmers, he was bound to say that the assertion was not correct. The first person who introduced that system was a clergyman of the name of Watts; but there was no intention whatever, on the part of the farmers, that it should lead to its present melancholy results. In contradiction to the statements of the noble Duke that the labourers were not the greatest sufferers; he begged leave to remind their Lordships of a Petition he had presented from Dursley. He was not acquainted with that town, but he understood that it was conveniently situated on the banks of the Severn. The Petition, however, set forth that the number of rateable acres in the parish was 694, and that the sum raised in the current year for the relief of the poor, independent of 350l. the result of charitable contributions, was 3,000l. This sum was levied on 400 persons, 750 being too much reduced to contribute, and 1,500 being in such a state that without relief they must have starved. Of those who received relief, many got only 15d. per week. He begged to draw their Lordships' attention to a statement from the people of Manchester. Mr. Potter, who was his informant, said, that there were a great number of persons there living on the miserable pittance of 2½d. a day. At a public meeting at Huddersfield, in December last, it was stared that out of 29,697 persons, 660 persons were living on 6s. 11d. per week, 439 on 7d. per day, and 13,226 on 2½d. per day. This was on the 11th of December; but by letters dated the 28th of February, it appeared that the number of poor had been more than doubled. At Macclesfield, the wages of the silk weavers in 1828, were fifteen per cent; in 1826, thirty per cent; in 1825, forty per cent; and in 1824, sixty per cent higher than now. It was stated too, that these people had been generally obliged to sell their bedding and clothing; that they slept on straw, and were huddled together by half dozens to keep themselves warm. But were these the only places in which they had heard complaints of distress? No: there had been public meetings in almost every county, at which the same cry of distress had been raised. The cry of reform had been mixed with the cry of distress, but that was because the cry of distress had been disregarded. The petition presented from Manchester that night did not pray for reform; but let their Lordships look at what was going on at Birmingham. A political union had been established there by men of great talents, of great knowledge, and of great influence. That union was agreed to with only one dissenting voice out of 12,000 persons. The burden of the song of that union was Reform in Parliament. A noble Lord had told them that the people would look up to Parliament for relief; but he believed that the people were nearly tired of that prospect, and that if relief did not come speedily, they would cease to look to Parliament, The object of the union at Birmingham was parliamentary reform, but the groundwork of that union was the inattention of the House of Commons to their interests. He was a radical reformer,—yes, he was a radical reformer,—he had long since been so, and he became so because he saw that the people were not properly represented in Parliament, and that their petitions were not properly attended to. In these reasons for being a radical reformer, he saw nothing deserving of reproach. He was ready to admit that much relief would be effected by the proposed reductions in taxation; but that relief he was sure would be insufficient to meet the wants of the country. They were promised more next year; but if more could be given, why should it not be given now? The relief that was to come next year would be of little benefit to the people who were living on 2½d a day. As to the Motion before their Lordships, he thought the noble Lord who had spoken second, had made the best speech for the noble Duke's Motion. That speech reminded him of the saying—"My wound it is so great, because it is so small." The noble Lord told them they had so many people, 2nd therefore so many classes of distress, that this inquiry would be interminable. The noble Lord, too, had said—he did not know with what design—that one of the consequences of this inquiry would be, that they would be compelled to consider of the propriety of lowering their rents.

Earl Bathurst

.—I never used the word "compel."

The Earl of Radnor

did not mean to lay any stress on that word: but allow him to express his opinion, that the noble Lord was right, and that they would be compelled to lower their rents; but not one bit the less if this inquiry were refused, nor one bit the more if it were granted. Whether the Ministers relied on a change in the seasons, or a new organization of the world, to remove the distress, he could not divine, but it was obviously their principle to let things mend themselves, and they held out hopes to their Lordships, as they could not be worse, that they must be better. He did not exactly agree to their conclusion, and therefore he meant to vote for the Motion.

The Earl of Rosslyn

said, that the noble Earl had misrepresented his noble friend in the greatest possible manner, when he said that his (Earl Bathurst's) speech went to support the present Motion. His noble friend had complained, and very properly, that the terms of the Motion embraced every possible subject of inquiry, and had said that consequently the inquiry would be interminable. The Motion extended to an inquiry into the condition of labourers of all classes, whether in agriculture or in commerce: it extended to artisans of all descriptions; and in order to make the inquiry at all satisfactory, the nature of the employment of such labourers must be examined. Again, the inquiry, by embracing the operation of taxation on productive industry, involved that which was confessedly the most difficult question in the whole range of political economy. This was his noble friend's objection to the committee, and in that objection he fully concurred. The noble and learned Lord at the Table had said, that he should be happy to vote for an inquiry limited in its nature and duration; and they had also heard admissions from other noble Lords, that the various subjects included in the proposed inquiry, ought to be investigated separately. These seemed to be so many reasons against the Motion. But the real question was,—would this inquiry prove satisfactory to the country, or beneficial to the labouring classes? He had no hesitation in saying it would not. Suppose it should be granted, and suppose the noble Lords who were inclined to support this Motion by their speeches as well as by their votes, were all members of the committee; the noble Earl (Stanhope) at the Table would begin by proposing the unlimited issue of paper, the natural effect of which would be the expulsion of metallic currency; another Bank restriction, and a depreciated standard. But then he would be met by the noble Earl (Radnor) opposite, who would call a paper currency "filthy rags," and say that the reversion to such a currency would be an odious and detestable fraud. He should like to hear the noble Earl opposite say to the noble Earl at the Table, "No, I cannot listen to any alteration in the Currency, or to what you call an equitable adjustment; but I am ready to repeal the Corn-laws, and to effect the subversion of all monopolies." Such propositions would be received with horror by the noble Earl at the Table. Then would come his friend the noble Marquis (of Lansdown) opposite, with a recommendation in favour of a silver standard; but here again would ensue an opposition between the noble Marquis and the noble Earl near him, who would contend that silver should be taken at the market price, and that, consequently, the standard should be depreciated six per cent as compared to the Mint price.

The Earl of Rosebery

, interrupting the noble Earl, said, he never proposed that silver, as now coined, should be the standard, but that gold and silver concurrently, at the market-price, should form that standard.

The Earl of Rosslyn

, in continuation. Even that depreciation would be a relief, he was ready to admit, but then, it would be a relief of the same fraudulent nature as an alteration of greater extent in the standard. He preferred the bolder proposition of the noble Earl at the Table, and would rather say at once, we could not pay our debts, and, like other bankrupts, openly cheat our creditors than do it, to a certain extent, by these covert means. But the point from which he had been drawn was this—the various, the discordant opinions of the noble Lords who would meet upon the committee. This discrepancy of opinion appeared as strongly as to the extent and nature of the proposed inquiry, as it appeared in the topics to which he had alluded. The noble Lord had told them that this committee might propose a commutation of tithes; and as if this were not wandering far enough from the mark, another noble Lord had suggested, that the committee might make many useful suggestions to landlords as to the management of their property and their estates. Thus, every interest, commercial, manufacturing, and mechanical,—the commutation of tithes,—the operation, direct and indirect, of every tax,—and lastly, the management of private property by private individuals, were all to be included within the range of this committee of inquiry. Now, independently of the objection which he had already expressed to the appointment of this committee, he had yet another objection. He was one of those who believed that a great portion of the distress now existing in the country had arisen from the fluctuating state of affairs at many periods, and in various respects. He believed that the 1l. notes had little to do with the dangers of 1826; and that the country banks were pretty solid had been proved, he thought, by the fact, that 160 out of 165 had paid twenty shillings in the pound. At the same time, however, he did not believe that the restoration of the 1l. notes would place England in its former situation. He believed that the apprehension and the want of confidence which had produced the withdrawal of deposits and of accommodations, had been the causes of the mischief; and he believed those causes to have resulted from the fluctuations to which he had alluded. He, and others with him, had fortunately resisted interference with the banking-system of Scotland; but he thought the present comparatively prosperous condition of Scotland had arisen from that mutual confidence which had never been disturbed there. He believed, therefore, that the mischiefs they had witnessed in England had arisen by that interruption of confidence which was naturally produced by fluctuating and uncertain prospects. His position was, that there had been vast uncertainty, at various times, in the prospect of affairs in England. Changes in the law, which had been changes for the better—and promised changes, which might also have been for the better—had, nevertheless, produced uncertainty and speculation. The Corn-laws he believed to be not yet firmly enough established to give confidence in their operation, and changes in them are continually spoken of. His opinion was, that certainty as to legislative measures was almost better even than improvement, because he thought security essential to the welfare of a country. What had been the consequences of uncertainty with respect to the Corn-laws? Why, land was in the market and found few purchasers; the value of land was lower than the funds. This must be be- cause capital was withheld, in the hope of employing it more advantageously, or because distrust had taken possession of the capitalist. The wild notions respecting free trade had caused all retail stocks to be kept as low as possible. If there were any foundation for these opinions, see what mischiefs would result from the speculation which so extensive a committee of inquiry as this would give rise to. When he looked at the discordant opinions of the noble Lords who supported this Motion, he could consider it only as the single, the isolated point, upon which those who were not satisfied with his Majesty's Ministers could be brought to agree. He could rather wish, that if accusations were intended to be made against the Government, they should be brought forward openly and specifically; and as this would be much more fair, so it would prove the sincerity of noble Lords, if they brought forward separately each of the questions which were included in this inquiry, and took a discussion upon each, dealing with it according to its own merits. But such a mode would separate the upholders of the present Motion; for no two of them could agree upon the points included in it it taken by themselves. He thought, however, looking at the reduction of taxation which had already been effected, and at that which had been promised, the time was unfavourable for opposition to the Government. In the two great branches of the collection of the revenue, and of colonial expenditure, every possible reduction had been promised. A commission, which would cost the country nothing, because it was to be formed of members of the Government, would inquire into the means of reducing the colonial expenditure. He thought that such a course was much more wise than it would be to make reductions blindly, and at one sweep, as the noble Earl (Radnor) opposite recommended. He could not agree with the same noble Earl in the assertion, that the country had no confidence in the present Administration, nor could he admit to him that the distress which did unhappily exist, had been of so great duration, or that it was so intense now as the noble Earl had represented it. The consumption of tea in the last year had been equal to that of the preceding year; the consumption of coffee had increased; the consumption of sugar, it was true, had decreased, but to no great extent; and the consumption of spirits had increased 2,000,000 gallons. This, he admitted, was not a proof that distress did not exist, but it was a proof that the distress could neither be so general nor so intense as it had been represented to be, for otherwise, the consumption of articles of universal use must have decreased. So, again, there had been an increase in our exports of manufactured goods, which proved that there must have been employment for labour, though the profits of the manufacturers, and the wages of the labourers, might have been small. The noble Earl, alluding to what some noble Lords had called "the irruption of the Irish," which, he said, was not disadvantageous to the English farmers and landlords, for by cheap labour the profits of the farmer and the rents of the latter were increased, added, that he could never consent to make a distinction between English and Irish labourers, and concluded by declaring that he should vote against the Motion.

The Earl of Carnarvon

said, that he had proposed to recur to a silver standard, and he did it partly from thinking that the present standard was so completely an experimental one, that we could not permanently adhere to it. What he wanted was, that silver, not gold, should have been made the standard of the currency. As far as a concurrent standard of both metals was concerned, one must be subordinate to the other; and he would have had silver, allowing gold to pass at an agio. He would also say one word on the subject of small notes. He attributed the present distress, which was different from that of former years, inasmuch as it affected both farmers and manufacturers, to both classes being deprived of their usual home market, which grew, in his opinion, out of the distresses of the agriculturists, caused by the alteration relative to the small notes. He had anticipated, in 1826, these results, and had then pointed out the danger to credit, and the general distress which must ensue, if their Lordships put an end to the small notes. As he had then anticipated also, the people had been reduced to paupers. He believed that there were more small notes in circulation than the Ministers thought, and that their measure was more sweeping in its consequences than they had expected. This state of things might, he confessed, have been advanced or influenced by other causes, as well as by the currency. He thought that the greatest been the country could at this time receive, would be to forward those negotiations with the Bank of England which could not long be delayed, and to do so with a view of assimilating our banking system to that of Scotland, by placing; it upon a broad and secure basis. If they were also to allow an issue of small notes—such an issue as would make the 5l. notes circulate as easily as formerly—he thought that an additional benefit would be conferred upon the country. He would now detain the House no longer. Allow him, however, to say, that in voting for the Motion, he did so from a conviction that this inquiry was due to the wants and to the wishes of the people, and that he was far from being influenced by any desire to harass the Government.

Earl Gower

said, he should vote against the Motion, because he thought it could lead to no beneficial result, and because he was of opinion, that the conduct of Government, in the reduction of taxation, and in the promise of farther reduction, deserved and invited the confidence of their Lordships and of the country. By the appointment of such a committee as that now proposed, he was very much afraid that they would only excite hopes which they would find it impossible to realize.

The Earl of Darnley

said, he should also oppose the Motion, because he could not bring himself to believe that it could lead to any good practical result.

Lord Holland

said that, after the vote he had given on a former occasion, he felt it necessary to trouble their Lordships for a few minutes in explanation of the reasons which induced him to vote in favour of the noble Duke's Motion. He must confess that he was a little surprised at the course which his noble friend (the Earl of Darnley) near him, had declared that he should adopt; for, if he were not very much mistaken, the last time he had heard his noble friend speak, he had taken credit to himself for having proposed an inquiry into the condition of the labouring classes of Ireland, which inquiry the other House of Parliament had just consented to institute, though their Lordships had refused to follow its example. But his other noble friend (the Lord Privy Seal) had surprised him still more, when he painted the evils and dangers which would result from the institution of the inquiry proposed by the noble Duke; for his Majesty's Ministers, as he understood, had already agreed elsewhere to appoint a committee to inquire into the condition of the labouring classes of Ireland. His noble friend had said, that he knew of no distinction, and that he would hear of none, between the English and Irish labourer; and yet his noble friend, with great inconsistency, made this remarkable distinction; namely, that the English labourers were full of hope, violent, sanguine, quick of imagination, and therefore no inquiry must be made into their condition: whereas the Irish labourer, forsooth, was a quiet, unhoping, unthinking person, and therefore his condition might be inquired into. If any thing were to be done, he would wish Parliament to have some share in it. He was not a radical reformer, though he had been supposed to have the taint of radicalism in him; yet he should not be prepared to urge such arguments as some noble Lords, in high situations, had done in favour of radical reform, which amounted to this—that Parliament had nothing to do, and was not to sympathize, with the people—that the forms of Parliament were such, that in proportion to the degree of distress existing, in the same proportion Parliament became utterly impotent and useless. What was that but an argument for radical reform? But the noble Lord asked, of what use would a committee be, composed of persons of all opinions? Let him look to his own committee. Did he choose for it persons of one opinion? The noble Lord's argument went to the complete annihilation of the functions of Parliament. It was asked, what was to be the practical result of the committee? Why, if he knew that, he would not ask the House to go into a committee at all. The great merit, he thought, of the present Motion, unlike, in that respect, the motion lately brought forward by a noble Earl (Stanhope) was, that it excited no expectations. He thought it showed a want of feeling in a popular Government not to enter into an inquiry on which the feelings of the people were excited. It might be very agreeable to noble Lords on the other side to have every thing emanating from the Government, and not from Parliament, and to say that such a man did this, and such a man that; but he did not wish to give up what he considered his right—that of counselling his Majesty in what concerned the interests of the State. He believed that the Crown had been lately addressed to reform the Parliament, and even that the noble Duke opposite had been solicited, from populous places, to redress the grievances of the nation. These he considered as extraordinary signs of the times, which it was their Lordships' duty to investigate, and try to correct. This was the duty of Parliament, not of individuals. Noble Lords over the way might hold the opinion, Omnia bene acta nostro Marte agentur, but in that he could not concur, and desired, not that the Crown alone, or the Ministers alone, should promote the happiness of the people, but in every act for that purpose he wished the Parliament to concur. He had said thus much to vindicate the vote which he should give in favour of the present Motion, but in doing so he did not mean to join the noble earl (Stanhope) in tampering with the Currency. He begged to add, that he did not agree with that noble Earl as to the causes of the distress. What they were, he who ran might read. They had originated with those who now lamented their effects. He could say "my withers are unwrung;" he had no hand in those causes, but as the distress existed, he was ready cordially to join with those who proposed to try if it could be alleviated. Although he was not sanguine as to the result, he considered that inquiry would be useful, and the evil of refusing all inquiry great and certain.

Lord Ellenborough

agreed with the noble Baron who had just spoken, that this was not the country in which it would be proper to adopt the principle of absolute government, but he thought that the noble Lord could not impute to the Government any intention of arrogating to themselves the right of doing every thing that was to be accomplished for the people. The Ministers objected to the appointment of the committee moved for, because they thought that the object proposed could not be accomplished by means of that committee. The appointment of the committee would hold out expectations which could not be realized. It had been said, that noble Lords of all opinions had been appointed as members of the committee sitting on the East India affairs; but let their Lordships remember, that that committee was to deal with facts, and the one moved for now was to deal with opinion. He never knew a committee, the business of which was to examine into facts, which thoroughly investigated the subject; and he would ask their Lordships, what would be the result, if a committee was appointed to deliberate on opinions. He thought the appointment of the committee would create great mischief, as it would lead to the apprehension of change; and what the country required now was stability. The committee would be called on to investigate all the questions which had been submitted to Parliament for the last ten years, Agricultural Distress, Free Trade, Poor-rates, Game-laws, Artizans, Machinery, County-rates, paying labourers out of the Poor-rates, Prisons, Combination-laws, Parish Vestries, Emigration, Friendly Societies, Parish Settlement, and Irish Vagrants. It would be a committee co-extensive with the whole science of political economy, and would last during the life of the longest lived member of the committee. On three subjects—the Poor-laws, Corn-laws, and Currency—no less than thirty-two writers had written pamphlets within a short period. On the Corn-laws there were fifteen, on the Currency seven, and on the Poor-laws ten. These persons must be examined; and as the Currency seemed to be one of the principal objects of inquiry, he thought that MY. Tooke's pamphlet, called "The Currency free from all Mystery," would be a good thing to begin with. He asked their lordships how the businesss of committees were conducted? After the first few days, the whole business was done in the presence of two or three Peers. Several of those who attended entered into private conversation, and the whole scene exhibited so much confusion, that the short-hand writer was quite in despair and agony while attempting to write down the answers to the questions put to the witnesses. He objected to the appointment of the committee, because it would be a gross, wilful, and mischievous delusion; and after the announcement made to Parliament respecting the intention of the Government to reduce the taxation far beyond what any person had expected, he did not think that any noble Lord would come down to the House with the present Motion. If noble Lords were desirous of maintaining the honour, character, and respectability of Parliament, it was not by a motion, having no public end in view, that such an object was to be gained.

The Marquis of Lansdown

had at first only intended to state his reasons for supporting the Motion before the House, but after the speech of the noble Lord, he felt bound to stand up in favour of the practice of Parliament, and to maintain the utility of committees of their Lordships' House. The noble Lord had, by throwing ridicule and contempt on committees in that House, furnished the best argument possible to the radical reformers, who could now tell the people of Manchester and Birmingham, to inquire themselves respecting their own distresses, for that inquiry by Parliament was useless. But such had not always been the opinion of the noble Lord, for he remembered that the noble Lord had concurred with him, some years ago, as to the propriety of appointing a committee on the whole state of Ireland. Did the noble Lord do so, he would ask, because he thought that all opinions were alike on the subject? The noble Baron objected to the Motion that it would be necessary; to read all the books which had lately been published on the multifarious topics it was supposed would engage the attention of the Committee, and to examine all the authors of them. But how was it, he would ask, that the noble Baron made no such objections when he voted for the Committee to inquire into the affairs of Ireland, and when he proposed the committee to inquire into the affairs of India. On both these subjects there were as many pamphlets and books written, as on the Currency or on the Corn-laws. The noble Baron had not, when he moved for the Committee on Indian Affairs, mentioned one work (he did not know if the noble Baron meant to make the members of the Committee read it) which would put to shame all the puny pamphlets he had just referred to; he meant the mass of 90,000 pages, which he said had passed through the office of the Board of Control. Did he think that all these pages must be read by his Indian Committee, or did he suppose that they would be less useful to elucidate the inquiry than a few anonymous pamphlets on the Corn-laws? He meant to support the present Motion, because it was a practical motion for a practical purpose. He had opposed the motion of a noble Earl (Stanhope) because he considered it to be of too general a nature. In opposing that motion, he stated, that if any specific inquiry should be proposed for a practical purpose, to that inquiry he would give his support; and he thought it his duty now to redeem that pledge. All those who knew the manly character of the noble Duke who made the Motion, could not suspect that there lurked behind the terms of the Motion any concealed design, and therefore he felt no hesitation in supporting it, especially as he considered the present time well fitted for a dispassionate inquiry. He begged to be allowed to say a few words in reference to some previous observations of his which had been commented on by the noble President of the Council. He deemed the opinion which he had formerly given relative to returning to the old silver standard of currency, of such little importance, that he should not have again adverted to it had it not attracted the noble Earl's attention and his remarks. He had formerly, he admitted, made a mistake in saying that before the year 1795 silver was a legal tender up to 5l., whereas, in fact, it was then a legal tender up to 25l.; but he had then also stated that silver by weight might be tendered to any amount. He had stated that there was a difference between the standard and currency, and that then we had, in fact, a double standard; for if a party could tender silver by weight when it was cheaper than gold, there was a silver as well as a gold standard. The noble Earl might perhaps remember, that he was a member of the Committee, to which he had also the honour to belong, which recommended that a bar of gold should be made the standard: the proposition was adopted by the legislature, and the bar governed the Currency till Ministers found it necessary to come to Parliament and have it altered. While it remained the standard, however, and this was a curious fact, only one bar of gold was ever asked for, and that by a noble Lord who probably meant to preserve it in his family. That standard however did for a time govern the Currency, and so would silver, while it could be paid in weight, and was cheaper than gold. He hoped that when their Lordships considered the slate of the labouring poor of this country, they would not be induced to abstain from attempting to ascertain the causes of it by the apprehension of being led away by other subjects. The noble Lord said, that the great object of the country was to enjoy stability. But it must be stability in good, and stability of useful institutions, which the noble Lord had described in a way not calculated to ensure their stability, not—stability of the state in which the poor of the country now were plunged, and of the unnatural relation which at present existed between the poor and their employers. The noble Duke (Richmond) had said, that it was not an alteration, but a different administration of the Poor-laws which he wanted; but he (the Marquis of Lansdown) thought, that that system which forced magistrates in different places to adopt different plans of treating the paupers, required alteration. He called their Lordships' attention to a statement of the system, as exhibited in Dorsetshire. A magistrate in that county had made inquiries on the subject, and the result of his labours was, that out of twenty-four parishes which came within the scope of his investigation, twenty were nearly in a similar situation. In each there was one-third more of labourers than could find employment in cultivating the land. This superabundant population—it was a curious circumstance—was composed of the youngest and ablest men. The overseers maintained the married men and their families, but refused to give any thing to the unmarried and young men, in the hope of thereby driving them out of the parish. The result of this system was, that the farmer gave the minimum of support for the minimum of labour; and the consequence was, that the cultivation of land suffered considerably. He did not at the present late hour intend to enter fully into the question of settlement, but would merely observe, that that was one which required great attention on the part of their Lordships. He was glad to learn that the taxation of the country was to be reduced; but he hoped Government would not stop where it had begun. He wished to see the duty on sea-borne coal repealed, as he thought that a great impulse would be given to trade by taking off that duty. The sugar-duty was another tax he should like to see diminished, and he believed that the revenue would not be thereby diminished. While in England each individual consumed 22½lb., in Ireland each individual only consumed 4½lb. In 1824 Lord Liverpool, taking into consideration the state of Ireland, reduced the Assessed Taxes and the taxes on spirits, and the following was the result:—In January, 1823, the payments into the Exchequer amounted to 3,528,000l., and in January 1829, after the reduction of taxation, the payments amounted to 3,749,000l., being an increase of above 200,000l. He thought that, in the present state of the country, Parliament was bound to show itself alive to the distress of the people. He was one of those who indulged the hope that a great part of the distress was of a temporary character. He would not be so sanguine as to state that the whole was; but how much of this distress was temporary, and how much permanent, was a subject which ought to engage the attention of Parliament. He gave his support to the Motion of the noble Duke (Richmond), because he believed that in relation to some portion of the pressure, a committee might be enabled to suggest measures that would effect a considerable improvement in the state of the working classes.

The Duke of Wellington

quite concurred with the noble Marquis who had just sat down, that it was desirable for their Lordships to adhere to the usual practice of Parliament, in making inquiries, such as that proposed, by means of committees; but he was also of opinion, that in these matters their Lordships ought to adhere to the practice of Parliament entirely and closely, and that practice had invariably been to this effect;—That when a noble Lord moved for the appointment of a committee of inquiry on any particular subject which he wished to bring under consideration, he stated specifically to the House what was the object which he intended to effect by means of a committee. That was the invariable practice in moving for such committees: and when he found it departed from in the present instance,—when he observed that it was very doubtful what was to be the particular object of the proposed committee, and that several noble Lords who had supported the Motion had each stated a different subject forinquiry,—he thought the House had reason to doubt whether there was not some object in the present Motion beyond that which appeared on the face of it. The noble Duke, in bringing forward the subject, stated that it was a motion for inquiring into the internal state of the country, with a view to the condition of the labouring poor, and in order particularly to ascertain the manner in which taxation affected productive industry. As the noble President of the Council truly stated, there was not a single branch of the Government, or of the internal policy of the country, which might not, and would not, come under discussion before a committee appointed according to the terms of this Motion. Each of the noble Lords who supported the Motion stated a different object for the Committee; he had taken the trouble to write these objects down as they were mentioned, and he declared he believed there were not less than twenty important subjects proposed for consideration, including even a measure relative to the management of private property; and three or four questions concerning currency and coinage, some requiring the adoption of a silver coinage on one system, and others upon another. When he found a motion thus proposed and supported,—when he found that the words of it might be made to include every thing,—he concluded that the purpose of noble Lords was to go into what inquiries they liked, or if not, that there was some ulterior party object in view, directed against the existing Government. The noble Baron on the back bench had misunderstood his friend the noble Earl who opposed the Motion. The noble Baron was mistaken when he assimilated the committee moved for by the noble Duke to a committee lately appointed on the Motion of an hon. Gentleman in another place. That was a committee appointed to investigate the expediency of establishing Poor-laws in Ireland; and the Gentleman who moved its appointment stated specifically—at least so it appeared, as far as the report of what he said upon that occasion went—what object he had in view in his motion, and to what points he intended to direct the inquiry which he proposed to the House of Commons to institute. The conduct of the noble Duke (Richmond) was very different. A noble friend of his, it was true, had complained on a former night that the same Ministers who now consented to that inquiry in another place, had objected to a similar motion of his own two years ago. This was perfectly true; the ground of objection which he had stated to the noble Lord's Motion at the time was, that the noble Lord intended to propose the establishment of poor-laws in Ireland; and as he, in common with their Lordships, were not prepared to consent to the establishment of poor-laws in Ireland, he had opposed the motion, and the House agreed with him in rejecting the noble Lord's proposition. A noble Lord, in alluding to the recent reductions of taxation, stated that he felt full confidence in the intentions of his Majesty's servants to make further reductions if they found it possible to do so. The noble Lord thought proper to state his confidence in Ministers,—a confidence which he (the Duke of Wellington) trusted they would appear to merit,—and the noble Lord refused his assent to the Motion now before the House on the ground that it implied a want of confidence in his Majesty's servants, which was not warranted by their acts. The Motion was neither more nor less, in point of fact, than a demand upon their Lordships, within eight-and-forty hours after the Minister had come down and proposed a large reduction of taxation, to agree to a declaration of want of confidence in the intention of Government to carry on the public service as economically as possible, and to do every thing in their power to relieve the country. The noble Marquis misunderstood what had been stated by his friend the noble Baron. He described the number of subjects proposed by different noble Lords for inquiry, and he went further, and said, that no doubt each of these noble Lords thought he should be a member of the Committee if appointed, and he stated the inevitable consequences of such a committee being established, and the manner in which the business would, in all probability, be done under such circumstances. The noble Marquis must have seen the conduct of his noble friend upon different committees, that it was that which became a Minister of the Crown performing his public duty, and endeavouring, by every means in his power, to elucidate the subjects under consideration upon such occasions. The noble Marquis forgot a material feature in the committee appointed a few years ago to inquire into the whole state of Ireland: he was a member of that committee, as well as a noble Earl who had taken a part in the discussion, and he begged leave to remind the noble Earl, that there was one subject which, on account of the difference of opinion existing upon it, was wholly excluded from consideration.

The Marquis of Lansdown

.—It was excluded one year, and included the next.

The Duke of Wellington

, in continuation, thought the noble Marquis would find that his statement was correct, and that the matter in question was excluded from the inquiry, because it was considered impossible at the time to come to an agreement upon it; and besides, it was thought a subject too important to be taken into consideration by the committee. The same might be said, to a certain extent, with respect to the great and important question of Taxation. He must here observe, with respect to this committee, upon the appointment of which so many noble Lords had spoken, and to the Motion for forming which so many noble Lords had given their support, that in point of fact many of those who had said that they intended to vote for the noble Duke's proposition had declared their opinion that it would never produce any result. The noble Lord who sat on the cross-bench had stated that it was probable there would be no result from the appointment of a committee. The noble Lord appeared to dissent from this; but he begged his Lordship's pardon, he had taken down his very words, and they were, "it cannot be expected that relief should be given." But it was to afford relief that it was proposed to appoint the committee, and if "relief cannot be expected," for what good object move for its appointment? It was not, surely, in order that the discussion of a variety of questions before the committee might excite in the minds of the people hopes of some favourable result, which expectations, according to the noble Lord, must necessarily be disappointed! Surely their Lordships would not appoint a committee in order merely to give noble Lords an opportunity of discussing a variety of subjects in the committee without the prospect of any solid advantage arising from their discussions. Nor could it well be believed that this last effort of the noble and learned Lord was made with a view to annoy and derange the King's Government. Supposing that no result could be expected from the labours of a committee, was a committee to be appointed to try this question—did Government, or did it not put the truth into the King's Speech with regard to the state of the country? On former occasions he had stated various reasons for believing that the truth was stated on the subject in his Majesty's Speech, and he had not since altered his opinion—he was fully convinced that there was great distress in the country; but he did not believe that the distress was general, and he did believe that it was gradually subsiding: such was his belief at the present moment. But a noble Lord who formerly attacked Ministers for stating that the relief of many of the evils complained of was beyond the power of Parliament had stated to-night that a committee might not be able to afford relief. Ministers stated, in the King's Speech, that his Majesty was convinced no pressure of temporary difficulty would induce Parliament to relax the determination it had invariably manifested to maintain inviolate the public credit, and thus to uphold the high character and permanent welfare of the country. The King's servants had thought it their duty to propose a large reduction of taxation, in order to lighten the pressure of the public burthens, a measure that he was happy to say had given great satisfaction to many, and which had been handsomely mentioned by his friend, the noble Duke at the Table, and by a noble Marquis and Baron who took part in the debate. In executing this project, Ministers had done no more than what they thought to be their duty on this occasion, with reference to the public advantage; and if, instead of a remission of taxation, they had been under the necessity of maintaining the Revenue, and keeping up the taxes of which they had been enabled to propose the repeal, they would have endeavoured to prevail on Parliament to maintain these taxes as readily and manfully as they had proposed their repeal. It afforded him great gratification to believe, as he conscientiously did, that this measure would give relief to the country without impairing the necessary efficiency of the public establishments. He thought Ministers had chosen the best mode of affording relief that was in their power; they had repealed precisely those taxes that, as compared with others, would take the smallest sum out of the Treasury, and put the largest amount into the pockets of the people; he was satisfied that the repeal would be a great relief to the country. The noble Marquis, and other noble Lords, stated their expectation, that the repeal of taxes would be carried further. He would not, at that hour of the night, go into calculations which induced him to believe that, certainly at the present moment, reduction of taxation could not be carried further consistently with a due regard to the security of the country. As Government had proceeded hitherto on the principle of reducing every establishment and office as far as possible, which was not necessary to the public service, it would continue the same practice, and endeavour to reduce every branch of expenditure not absolutely necessary for the attainment of that object, hoping thereby to produce such a saving as might place other resources of economy, and the means of a further reduction of taxation, at their disposal. If Ministers succeeded in this object, so much the better; but if not,—if the public service prevented it, they would throw themselves with confidence upon Parliament, and in the discharge of their duty trust to its aid for support. If the motion of the noble Duke had been a motion to inquire into the state and administration of the Poor-laws, it might have been worth while to consider whether or not it ought not to be adopted; but at the same time he begged to remind the House, that the subject of the Poor-laws had been already repeatedly under consideration,—that there were now upon the Table of the House of Commons, and he believed upon that of their Lordships' House, reports of two or three committees, some of them detailing the very facts contained in the letter which the noble Marquis had read to the House: consequently Parliament, Government and the Public, were in complete possession of these facts, and the ends of inquiry, as far as the attainment of information was concerned, had been accomplished. It should be recollected that some of the greatest statesmen that ever lived in England—that Mr. Pitt and Mr. Windham, had attempted to deal with the difficult subject of the Poor-laws without success. It was a subject equally important, difficult and complicated; the system, as far as local practice and arrangements went, varied almost in every parish in England, more or less, and, he repeated, it was almost impossible to deal with it successfully. He appealed to the noble Earl whether it were not a subject which Parliament should approach with the utmost caution, and meddle with only after a most deliberate inquiry; they ought not to enter into it hastily, or at an inopportune period like the present: it would be better to wait till the country was restored to a state of complete prosperity, and then investigate the subject with a proper degree of attention.

Earl Stanhope

gave his cordial support to the Motion of his noble friend, the Duke of Richmond. The question was, whether the country were not afflicted from one end to the other with distress unparalleled in our history—of intolerable pressure, which it was impossible should continue without exciting in all classes, even amongst the most loyal and well-affected to our established institutions, a spirit of discontent which might ultimately lead to their overthrow. The noble Earl having recapitulated the two objects of the noble Duke's motion (which have been already frequently alluded to in the course of the debate), proceeded to say, that he never thought taxation, per se, the cause of all our difficulties, and of the dangers by which we were menaced: at the same time, if it were practicable at once to return to the expenditure and taxation of 1791, the change might afford us some relief; but as that was impracticable without a convulsion of society, the only thing that could be done was to replace the country in its former situation in other respects, so as to enable it to bear up against taxation without suffering an overwhelming pressure. Unlike the political economists of the day, he proposed no untried theory, no crude system of his own, he merely asked Government to return to the political principles of Lord Liverpool, previous to 1819, after which period, unfortunately, his whole political life exhibited a strange and pernicious contrast to the principles he had formerly professed. He called upon those who reverenced the memory of Lord Liverpool, and supported him by their votes in his best days, to pursue that line of conduct which could alone ensure prosperity. Expectations had been held out, but without assigning any sufficient or well-grounded reasons for entertaining them, that the distress now generally experienced would pass away. That it would at last pass away he had not the least shadow of a doubt; but, unless the evils complained of were remedied, other things would also pass away along with it; the debt and the taxes would pass away first, and it was doubtful whether the Constitution of the country would not pass away also. It was vain for the House to flatter itself with the hope that with the existing pressure of public grievances, it could refuse all inquiry, and still preserve the confidence and affections of the people. From all the information which reached him from every quarter, and seeing the indisposition of Ministers to afford adequate relief or inquiry, he considered (pray God the fear was unfounded!) that the present state of things would be best described by the pithy sentiment of a celebrated foreign statesman (prince Talleyrand), who in reference to the political aspect of affairs at a certain period, declared that it was "the commencement of the conclusion." That conclusion, however the noble Duke might be confirmed in his course by majorities that enabled him to stifle inquiry, would at length arrive if he persisted in his present measures. Not being a radical reformer, like his noble Friend near him, but being attached to moderate and salutary reform, he viewed such a state of things with feelings of great apprehension.

The Duke of Richmond

said, in reply, that he could not help expressing the feelings of astonishment with which he had heard the speech of the noble Lord, the President of the Board of Control. If that speech had been uttered out of the House, he should have designated it a libel on Parliament. If it were spoken out of doors, and there was no law sufficiently strong to reach such language—language in the highest degree inflammatory—he should then wish that a law might be framed for that purpose. That was the feeling with which he heard the speech of the noble Lord. But, on reflection, he feared that he had misunderstood the noble Lord; for surely the noble President of the Board of Control could not have been speaking of the House of Lords. No; he was opening the doors of the Cabinet—and informing their Lordships, that there presided in that Cabinet one man of great and commanding talent, who carried every thing as he pleased. He admitted the great talents and industry of that noble Duke, and he believed, that if he were properly advised and informed, he was the man who would do essential service to the country; but, unfortunately, that noble Duke was not so advised. The noble President of the Council, though he said that he would vote against the Motion, conducted his argument in such a way, that many noble Lords must have thought that he had risen to second it. Ministers did not oppose the Motion in a plain and direct manner; but they met it by the hacknied plea, that it ought to be refused, not because it did not rest on sufficient grounds, but because, forsooth, it was got up from factious motives. Was that an answer which would satisfy the country? Was it an answer which would satisfy any man with an upright, honest, and feeling mind? If it were got up in the spirit of party feeling, then he was the guilty man; but he disdained, and he wholly disclaimed, the imputation, as perfectly unfounded. His character—if an humble individual like himself might speak about character—ought, he thought, to shield him from such a charge; and he hesitated not to say, that acting conformably with the character which he had borne through life, if he had wished to make a motion to turn out his Majesty's Ministers, he would have done it in a manly and straightforward way, and not by a contemptible side-wind. It might be parliamentary, for aught he knew, to make charges of this description, but he was sure it would not be allowed in civilised society to impute motives to a man which did not belong to him, and with which he was totally unacquainted. He spoke strongly, because he felt strongly, well knowing that the charge had no foundation in reality. Before their Lordships could negative his motion with propriety, they had to get rid of this one appalling fact—that there were at this moment thousands of Englishmen in a state of misery and degradation so melancholy, that the slaves at Sierra Leone were absolutely better off. They were compelled to live, if it could be called existence, upon 2½d. per day; and, therefore their Lordships were bound to inquire into and ameliorate their situation. The noble Duke (Buckingham), as a consolation to the people of this country, had stated that there was great distress in France, and also in America. With respect to France, he had not the means of judging of the correctness of that statement; but as to the situation of America, he believed the noble Duke was mistaken. He would, even at that late hour, refer to a document, which would prove that he was mistaken; he meant the speech of the President of the United States to the Congress at the opening of the Session: "The task," he said, "devolves upon me, under a provision of the Constitution, to present to you, as the federal legislature of twenty-four sovereign States, and twelve millions of happy people, a view of our affairs." He called on their Lordships to notice that; twelve millions of happy people! "Would to God," exclaimed the noble Duke, "that the King of England could state, that out of the twenty-four millions of subjects over whom he reigned, twelve millions were contented and happy; but, instead of that, they were surrounded with the most deplorable misery and distress—a degree of distress which Ministers themselves did not dare to deny, although they would not inquire into it.' The First Magistrate of the United States went on to say, "In communicating with you for the first time, it is to me a source of unfeigned satisfaction, calling for mutual gratulation and devout thanks to Providence that we are at peace with all mankind, and that our country exhibits the most cheering evidence of general welfare and progressive improvement." Thus it appeared that thanks were given to Providence in America, whilst in England Providence was graciously permitted to bear the imputation of causing national distress. This was the case with America, and therefore he had a right to say that the noble Duke had been very much misinformed. But perhaps the noble Duke thought that the speech of the President was not worthy of more credit than speeches delivered elsewhere. One cause assigned by the noble Duke was, that we got fresh butter from Holland by steam. Now he would read an account of the butter from the Netherlands. In 1826 there were 160,000 cwt.; in 1827,136,000 cwt.; in 1828, 143,000 cwt.; and from other countries there were imported, in 1826, 273,327 cwt.; in 1827, 291,579 cwt.; and in 1828, 278,000 cwt. Here, therefore, was a decrease, and thus the argument founded on the butter melted away. A noble Marquis (the Lord Lieutenant for Kent) had adverted to the different parties in the State. Now he begged leave to declare under what party he ranked himself. He was not of any theoretical party; he was of that party—of that class of men, if such a class existed—who, in their public actions, had no other object in view but the good of their country. He belonged to that party which had the welfare of the country most warmly at heart: he would toll the noble Lord, and all who talked of factious motives being the foundation of his conduct, and that of his noble Friend who supported him, that he would never be able to influence his vote in that House, or to intimidate him and his noble friends by calling them ultra-tories, ultra-whigs, or whatever other name they might be pleased to use. He would vote for Ministers when he thought they were right, and he would oppose them in every fair parliamentary way when he thought they were wrong. He trusted that the mere imputation of being actuated by factious motives would not be deemed sufficient to induce their Lordships to say 'Not-content' to his Motion. He implored them to pause and consider this subject well. He conjured them not to give the radicals abroad this additional reason for reproaching them, that when a case of distress was fully proved and substantiated—as he had a right to say it had been by himself, and still more ably by his noble friends who had supported him—they had, without assigning any reason, refused inquiry. He pledged his honour that he had no motive in bringing forward this motion but the good of his country. Neither had those who supported him any object but the public benefit. They had come forward from a sense of duty, to support this question, and for them he demanded that justice which he called for for himself,—namely, that their Lordships should believe that this was a straightforward, plain, and manly Motion.

Their Lordships then divided, when the numbers appeared—Content, present 39, Proxies 22, Total 61, Not Content, present 69, Proxies 72; Total, 141.—Majority 80.

List of the Minority and Majority.
MINORITY.
Dukes. Eldon
Cumberland Rosebery
Gloucester Falmouth
Richmond Stradbroke
Argyll Kinnoul
Marquisses. Viscounts.
Lansdown Granville
Salisbury Goderich
Clanricarde Melbourne
Sligo Maynard
Ailesbury Barons.
Earls. Teynham
Winchilsea King
Carlisle Holland
Ferrers Vernon
Cowper Calthorpe
Tankerville Lilford
Stanhope Redesdale
Radnor Rivers
Digby Seaford
Mansfield Bishops.
Carnarvon Bath and Wells
Romney Llandaff
PROXIES.
Dukes. Marquis.
Newcastle Anglesey
Grafton Earls.
Devonshire Guilford
Marlborough Orford
Sheffield Churchill
Bradford Northwick
Manvers Lorton
Lords. Haddington
Walsingham Howard de Walden
Wodehouse Yarborough
Stowell Feversham
Kenyon Duncan
MAJORITY.
The Lord Chancellor Darnley
Archbishops. Clare
Canterbury Clanwilliam
York Fife
Dukes. Viscounts.
St. Alban's Arbuthnot
Buckingham Hereford
Gordon Melville
Wellington Barons.
Marquisses. Arden
Bute Bayning
Bath Clifden
Conyngham Clifford
Hertford Colville
Camden De Dunstanville
Cholmondeley Dunally
Earls. Ellenborough
Bathurst Farnborough
Rosslyn Forrester
Shaftesbury Glenlyon
Pomfret Harris
Malmesbury Hill
Charleville Manners
Jersey Maryborough
De La Warr Montagu
Dudley Prudhoe
Wicklow Saltoun
Hardwicke Stourton
Verulam Wallace
Glengall Wharncliffe
Westmorland Willoughby d'Eresby
Cornwallis Bishops.
Chesterfield Bristol
Huntingdon Rochester
Amherst Chester
Aberdeen London
Gower Winchester
Cassilis Oxford
PROXIES.
Dukes. Tweeddale
Clarence Winchester
Beaufort Earls.
Bedford Abingdon
Buccleuch Aboyne
Leeds Ashburnham
Manchester Balcarras
Montrose Belmore
Northumberland Breadalbane
Rutland Brownlow
Marguisses. Caledon
Cleveland Cardigan
Donegall Cathcart
Downshire Chatham
Lothian Courtown
Stafford Elgin
Thomond Errol
Glasgow Clinton
Harcourt Dormer
Hopetoun Douglas (of Douglas)
Howe Dufferin and Claneboye
Lauderdale
Macclesfield Le Despencer
Morton Monson
Poulett Plunkett
Scarborough Ravensworth
Somers Rolle
St. Germans Scarsdale
Waldegrave Selsey
Warwick Skelmersdale
Wilton Stafford
Viscounts. St. Helens
Beresford Stuart de Rothsay
Exmouth Bishops.
Gort Carlisle
Northland Chichester
Sidney Hereford
Barons. Lichfield
Abercromby St. David's
Bagot