§ VISCOUNT COMBERMEREpresented a petition against the repeal of the Corn Laws; and among others one from the tenant-farmers and other members of the Cheshire Agricultural Protective Society, praying the House to reject the Corn Bill, and the other free-trade measures of Her Majesty's Ministers. The noble and gallant Viscount said he cordially supported the prayer of this petition.
§ LORD DELAMERE, in reference to this petition, denied that it expressed the opinions of the tenant-farmers of Cheshire. It emanated from a meeting which was held 229 at Crewe, the chairman of which was his respected friend, Sir Richard Brook; but there were only two or three tenant-farmers present, and as far as they were concerned, the meeting was a total failure. He assured their Lordships that the majority of the tenant-farmers of the county palatine of Chester were in favour of the Bill now before the House. This opinion was confirmed by the evidence of circumstances which were notorious to the public. There had been no alteration whatever in the price of land in the county; and in the value of every species of farming stock, corn, as well as cattle, there had been none but the usual fluctuations. If there had been any farms to let, the applications for them continued to be as numerous as before, and at no diminution of rent. He mentioned these facts from his general knowledge of the county, not of his own estate only. He had supported the Bill before the House from its first introduction, and he should continue to support it, because he was convinced that, if carried, it would be of very considerable benefit to the public in general, and be attended with no injurious consequences whatever to the agricultural interest. He was told it was but the commencement of other measures, which were intended to interfere with the constitutional privileges of their Lordships, and to overthrow the ancient institutions of the country. But he did not in the least credit such representations; if he did, he would be the last man in that House to support the Bill, and least of all such measures as the Anti-Corn-Law League would prefer, for he liked them not; but he conscientiously believed the present Bill would be of great advantage to the country generally, without any diminution of advantage to the agriculturist.
§ VISCOUNT COMBERMEREwas obliged to his noble Friend for his tacit admission that this was a farmer's and not a landlord's question. He (Viscount Combermere) had nothing to do with the society or the meeting from which the petition emanated; but he would inform the House that a great number of his noble Friend's own tenants were members of the Association. As to the Corn Bill being supported by the people of Cheshire, the assertion was founded upon a misconception of the state of feeling. His noble Friend must have been in such places as Macclesfield, Stockport, and Congleton. He (Viscount Combermere) had been all over the county, and except in that corner of it which was near 230 the head-quarters of the Anti-Corn-Law League he found the people were very much averse to the Bill.
§ LORD DELAMEREasked the noble Viscount whether he was able to state that a large number of tenant-farmers attended the meeting in question?
§ VISCOUNT COMBERMERE, in reply, said he had a list of the members, tenant-farmers of the society, which he would road to the House, or present to his noble Friend.
§ LORD DELAMERE, in reference to a statement which was not heard, said he ought to explain, that in Cheshire land was not generally let on lease. There were few instances of land being let on lease in that county.
§ The DUKE of RICHMONDsaid, the noble Lord (Lord Delamere) had just given a pretty strong proof, perhaps unconsciously, of the feelings of the tenant-farmers of Cheshire. Notwithstanding they held by the year, they were found coming farward expressing opinions as to this Bill in opposition to those of their landlords. The tenant-farmers had been ill used throughout all these proceedings. They were continually presenting petitions to that House, stating that they did not like the Bill; but whenever one was presented from them, up jumped some noble Lord, as the noble Lord had just done, and said he knew that, contrary to what they stated in the petition, the tenant-farmers were not against the Bill. Why had not, he would ask, the noble Lord (Lord Delamere), with all his influence, induced the tenant-farmers to present a petition in favour of the Bill? That he had great influence with them was evident, for he found the noble Lord's name among the subscribers to the "Cheshire Agricultural Protection Society." The president, too, was Lord de Tabley, who had given a proxy in favour of the second reading of the Bill. The two noble Lords, he found, not only joined the society, but they supported it by their influence, and contributed to its funds. The farmers of Cheshire were no doubt grateful to them for these attentions; but their gratitude would not, he thought, last very long, when they came to know that they had voted, both of them, for a measure so detrimental to their interests. The question would not be long before it was put at rest; and he (the Duke of Richmond) hoped the Cheshire farmers would follow the example of those of Nottinghamshire and Gloucestershire, and not 231 return any man to Parliament who had abandoned his principles. He would tell the farmers of England, that whatever might be the present fate of the Bill, they had the game in their own hands. They were a large, powerful, and influential body of the people; and the opportunity was not far distant for them to speak their sentiments, if they only chose to exert themselves. His noble and gallant Friend had recommended their Lordships to pass the Bill because there must soon be a new Parliament; and if it were for protection the Bill might be got rid of, and protection be resumed. In connection with this opinion, he (the Duke of Richmond) sincerely believed that many of the greatest agitators for the repeal of the Corn Laws were now alarmed at their own work. They had no idea that free-trade principles were to be applied to every article in which they themselves dealt. When they asked for the entire repeal of the Corn Laws, they asked for more than they expected to obtain, in order that they might make better terms for themselves. The Bill, however, had not yet passed; and he hoped it never would pass as it now stood.
§ LORD DELAMEREbogged to explain. He had never belonged to an agricultural protection society in his life. It was not in his recollection that he had ever subscribed to one. This was certainly the first time he had heard of such a fact. At all events, he never had, and never would belong to such an association.