§ Lord Beaumontin presenting a petition against the Canada Corn bill, took the opportunity of explaining a statement, which he had made on a former occasion, with respect to the Canada Corn Bill. He had then stated, that when they in Parliament were discussing the present Corn-law, they were ignorant that the Government had the intention of proposing a bill, such as it appeared they were now about to propose, with respect to corn coining from Canada. When he made such an assertion, he was met on the occasion by a counter assertion from the noble Duke, that the Government had, in proposing the Corn-bill, made known their intentions with regard to the present measure. Since then he had looked to the published reports of the speeches of every one of the ministers who had addressed either House of Parliament during the progress of that bill, and he could not find in any one of them a single line, a single sentence, which one of the utmost astuteness and greatest ingenuity could construe into an announcement that it was the intention of the Government to bring in a bill, by which, on the payment of 3s. fixed duty into the colonial treasury, American corn would be admitted into this country at a nominal duty, or it might be said quite free. There were many passages to be found in the speeches then delivered, as to a change in their colonial policy, as regarded duties imposed between the colonies and England, and between the colonies and adjacent foreign states, but nothing was said in any way to induce a person to anticipate the present measure. On the contrary, he found in a speech of the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, a principle laid down, which was in direct opposition to that which was now proposed to be acted upon. In one of the reported speeches of the Vice-president of the Board of Trade, he found this passage:—
The principle of the colonial laws, and a very just system he held it to be, was that where preferences were given to articles of colonial growth, the producing colonies should not be permitted to create a fictitious export trade, and so gain artificial profits at the expanse of other colonies, by substituting foreign produce for their own. This was the case with the tropical productions of sugar and rum. The right hon. Gentleman himself applied a very stringent rule of this kind, with regard to rum, in the act of last year.This principle was a fair and a just one, and it was directly the contrary of the principle of the intended Canada bill. 318 After this, he considered that he was perfectly justified in asserting that Parliament was ignorant of the intentions of the Government as to a Canada Corn Bill, when passing the present Corn Bill, that which was called by a high authority a "contract" between the landowners and the present Government, and which could not be in fairness set aside, broken through or violated by one of the contracting parties without a distinct previous announcement of the intention to do, and ample time being allowed for the re-consideration of so serious a measure.
§ The Duke of Wellingtonsaid there was not one of their Lordships' regulations which was more wise and more worthy of being adhered to than that their Lordships should refrain from referring to former debates. He must remind them that what he said on a former occasion was that his right hon. Friend, the Member for Tamworth, did give notice of the intention of the Government to introduce a measure on the same principle as this as soon as a bill was passed by the Canadian legislature. He did not exactly recollect the precise terms that had been used. He admitted that it was not announced by him; but his noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade bad made a similar statement in that House. He was not quite certain, but he thought some such measure had been distinctly announced.
§ Lord Wharncliffewas understood to say, that there had been an announcement by Sir Robert Peel and Lord Stanley of the intention to make an alteration as to the importation of corn from Canada, and it was deferred until the legislature of Canada had passed an act regulating the duty on corn. He might, also, add a few words as to what be had said on Thursday, in consequence of a question put to him by the noble Duke behind him, with respect to the intention of the Government to make an alteration in the Corn-laws. The next morning be was surprised to find that it was asserted he bad used words which he had not used. He did not take notice of this, as he supposed some other papers would have set the matter right, as they usually did. This misrepresentation, he found, had not only been commented upon by other papers, but he found that his Colleagues had been taunted, not for what he had said, but for what be bad not said. The question that had been asked him by the noble Duke 319 behind him (the Duke of Buckingham) was whether the Government had any intention of making an alteration in the Corn-laws, when he declared that " the Government had no intention to make any alteration with respect to the Corn-law." He believed, these were the very words he had used. He thought he could appeal to noble Lords that that was what he said, or, at all events, that such was the meaning of what he did say; but the newspapers thought fit to add the words, during the present Session"—that their Lordships must perceive made a very great difference. He had only now to repeat that which he had already said— that the Government had no intention of making any alteration in the Corn-law.