Lords Sitting of 19 May 1846

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1°. Customs Duties.
Reported. Election Notices (Ireland); Insolvent Debtors Act Amendment.
3a. and passed. Western Australia.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Guardians of the Lewes Union, for Repeal of Lunatics Act and Lunatic Asylums and Pauper Lunatics Act, so far as respects the Building and Maintaining County Lunatic Asylums.—By the Duke of Richmond and Earl Warwick, from Tamworth Heathside, and a great number of other places, in favour of the Corn Laws.—From Turriff, and several other places, for Protection of the Agricultural Interest.—From several Charitable Institutions, against the Charitable Trusts Bill.—By Lord Campbell, from Elie, and several other places, praying that a Bill may be passed for compensating Proprietors of Lands for the Purchase of Sites for Free Churches (Scotland).—From St. Clement Danes, and St. Martin-in-the-Fields, for the Prevention of Sunday Trading.—By the Bishop of St. David's, from Cardigan, praying that Means may be provided for extending Education to the Poorer Classes in Wales.

EDUCATION IN WALES.
The BISHOP of ST. DAVID'Spresented a petition from the borough of Cardigan, the prayer of which he supported. It was in favour of the education of the children
860
of the poor in Wales in the English language, and also praying for their mental, moral, religious, and industrial training. The right rev. Prelate added, that at present there existed in Wales a pressing want of education with a most scanty means of obtaining it; and he suggested that the whole question, as far as the Government was concerned, was, what power they had to supply that deficiency. He (the Bishop of St. David's) was happy to hear that an inquiry had been set on foot by the Government at the instance of an hon. Gentleman in another place; but in his opinion inquiry was superfluous, because there could be no doubt of the facts. The only question, as he had said, was, what power existed in the Government to supply the defect which all acknowledged to exist in that Principality. He believed they had had sufficient experience to know there was no hope whatever of accomplishing what they all so anxiously desired—namely, the founding of some good and extensive measure for the education of the people of Wales; but, nevertheless, he hoped the inquiry might terminate in some substantial benefit. He believed that if the Government had it not in their power to do all these petitioners desired, they yet had it in their power to do a great deal that would be highly beneficial to that country; but he did not wish them, under present circumstances, to attempt to do everything. He thought it advisable that they should at present confine themselves to the attempt to draw forth the energies and resources of the country with reference to education; and that they should act on the principle of eliciting and meeting the advances of the people. In those places, however, where there was such an utter deficiency of means that nothing could be done without the assistance of the Government, he thought they ought to furnish some immediate and pecuniary assistance. He did not believe that it was in the power of any Government, however strong it might be, to do all that the petitioners appeared to suppose it possible for them to accomplish. He did not think it would be possible at once to produce a change in the language generally spoken in Wales. He was aware a strong opinion had been expressed elsewhere that all that was required in Wales was English schoolmasters to root out the language of the country; but his experience in Wales convinced him that this was an incorrect representation. In many districts of Wales English schoolmasters had been established

861
for a considerable time; but the Welch language continued the ordinary language of the people, and the knowledge of the English language among the children of the poor was extremely scanty; and their use of it out of school next to nothing. He did feel, however, that this was a subject which called for the active interposition of the Government. It was quite notorious in that part of the country with which he was more particularly connected, that if the means of education had been more extensively employed some time ago, and pains taken to improve the moral and intellectual condition of the country, there would have been no need whatever for the imposition of that burden under which they were at present labouring; namely, the soldiers and the police which had been found necessary to maintain the tranquillity of the country. He must observe, also; that although these soldiers and police were extremely useful in their way, and served to protect the country from a variety of evils, there were yet some evils from which they afforded no protection whatever. They might protect the public tranquillity, but he was sure they proved no safeguard of public morality. On the contrary, the presence of these people only made the work of education more needful and more difficult, while they were consuming and absorbing the sources which might be applied to that desirable end; and he would, therefore, ask their Lordships whether they would prefer that Wales should be protected by soldiers and policemen rather than by the less expensive and more efficient means of a body of schoolmasters.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEexpressed his entire concurrence in the important suggestions thrown out by the right rev. Prelate. He considered, however, that they had upon the Table of Parliament, at that moment, the most ample means of arriving at a correct judgment on this subject. It appeared from the Report of the Commissioners appointed two years ago to inquire into the lawless proceedings in Wales connected with the Rebecca riots, that in the districts where those excesses prevailed there was an entire want of anything like a good system of education. He believed that, since the Parliamentary grant for educational purposes, there had been a regularly increasing demand upon the Government for assistance towards the establishment of schools; and although the number of school inspectors had been recently
862
increased by Government, there was not now a sufficient number to exercise an efficient inspection over the schools already established. He thought that some increased efforts ought to be made by Parliament, for the extension of education; but he was not prepared to say that a different principle from that adopted in England ought to be applied to Wales. He hoped that, whatever Parliamentary grants might be made for educational purposes, the principle of local exertion would never be abandoned.
LORD BROUGHAMwas glad that the attention of the Government had been called to this important subject; for that portion of the United Kingdom to which the right rev. Prelate had referred, peculiarly required assistance on a liberal scale from the funds at the disposal of the Government for the promotion of education. He was happy to find that there was a universal concurrence in the principle—a general principle only to be relaxed as occasion, or necessity, or local circumstances might require—that no grant ought to be made towards any local scheme without requiring that a certain proportion of the necessary funds should be contributed in the locality. He was glad to find this recommendation of the Educational Commissioners sanctioned by such high authority.
The DUKE of BUCCLEUCH, with reference to the observations of the noble Marquess (Marquess of Lansdowne), said he was happy to say the number of the schools in the country were increasing so rapidly, that it was quite true it was not at present in the power of the Government inspectors to visit them as frequently as was desirable; but the subject was under the consideration of the Educational Committee of the Privy Council, and he hoped that measures for increasing their number and efficiency would be speedily adopted.
Petition to lie on the Table.

CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL.
The DUKE of BUCCLEUCHmoved that the Bill be read 1a.
The LORD CHANCELLORthen put the question, when
The DUKE of RICHMONDsaid, he could not allow this Bill to pass—to be read a first time—without expressing his opinion that this measure was positively adding insult to injury. Their Lordships were now called upon to consider two Bills for depriving the agricultural interest of

863
protection; and if they looked at the Votes of the House of Commons, they would find that those measures, which were called remedial measures, and which were introduced simultaneously with the Corn Bill, but from which he did not anticipate much benefit, had made very little progress. He thought it most unfair to the agricultural interest that these two measures, attacking them, should have been brought into their Lordships' House before the other measures to which he referred had passed a second reading in the House of Commons. The only remedial measures from which he anticipated any benefit at all, was that under that which it was proposed to lend money for the improvement of land. He thought that such a measure might, to a certain extent, be of some value; but he considered this Bill and the Corn Bill to be as bad measures as could possibly have been introduced. This Bill was inconsistent with the declaration of the Ministers themselves. They were told that the Ministers wished to establish free trade; but he would ask if there was a single line in this Bill for the establishment of free trade? It was, certainly, a free-trade measure with reference to the agriculturists and the landed interest; but they would find, on looking into the Bill, that there was to be no reduction of duty upon our cottons in India. It was true the duties on some manufactures were to be reduced, but that was not free trade. He objected to free trade altogether; and, though the Minister might propose to take away all protection from the agricultural interest, he (the Duke of Richmond) was not prepared, because the Minister robbed the agricultural interest, to turn robber himself, and, by establishing free trade, to throw out of employment the great body of the operatives of this country. He considered that this was a most unjust measure; that it would throw out of employment a large body of silk weavers in this country; and that it would convert Spitalfields into a mass of pauperism. Many parts of this Bill were extremely obnoxious. He called upon their Lordships to remember that, though the Members of the Government had in their speeches advocated free trade, they had not carried out free-trade principles to the utmost. There was nothing in this Bill to destroy differential duties. If they allowed corn to come into this country from the United States duty free, to the great injury of their Canadian provinces, he asked whether, on the principles of free trade, they ought not to permit the
864
Canadians to buy their cotton in the cheapest market? If they did this, the coarse cottons of this country would no longer be consumed in Canada, which now took from us a greater amount of this description of manufactures than the whole of the United States. The Americans would then beat us out of the Canadian markets with their coarse cottons, as they had done in the South American markets, and as they were near doing in China, where they ran our manufactures very close. One of the great leaders of the League, a cotton manufacturer in Cheshire, Mr. Greg, had expressed his opinion, that before long he should see the coarser cottons of America competing effectually with our coarser cottons in Manchester itself. He (the Duke of Richmond) entered his protest against this Bill, as he had already protested against the Corn Bill. He must again repeat, that he regretted these Bills had been sent up unaccompanied by what were called the remedial measures to which he had before alluded. Sir R. Peel had declared his intention to do something to relieve the agriculturists from highway rates, and the burden of medical relief; but this was not to be done by a Bill; it was to be by an annual vote in Parliament. Why had not Sir R. Peel given the landed interest security by a Bill, instead of by Resolutions? For if the right hon. Baronet left office, and he was succeeded by the noble Lords on his right (the Opposition), they might not be able to maintain it, and then the League would come in, and they would not allow them the penny per acre which Sir R. Peel proposed to give to the agricultural interest.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, these preliminary discussions were very inconvenient; but he could not allow the observations of his noble Friend who has just sat down to pass as conclusive. The noble Duke complained that the measure read a first time last night established a system of free trade, and that the one just brought up was not a measure of free trade. The noble Duke contended, therefore, that there was a difference between the two measures of the Government as they affected commerce and agriculture. He could not acquiesce in one part of the noble Duke's objection to the measure, as it would affect the finances of the country. He denied that the principles of free trade required, on the part of their Lordships, or of any abstract reasoner, a sacrifice of the revenue duties of the country. The principles of free trade demanded the sacrifice

865
of protection, but they were not at all inconsistent with the maintenance of revenue duties on those articles and in that manner which rendered them least burdensome, to the people. The principle which he contended for was, that when they put their hands into the pockets of the people, they should do so in order to obtain, at the least possible expense to the people, that amount of revenue which the public service required; and he could not agree to the statement that in the maintenance of the revenue duties there was any affirmation of, or opposition to, the principles of free trade.
LORD BEAUMONTthought, that the course which his noble Friend on the cross benches (the Duke of Richmond) had taken was not only consistent, but necessary. The noble Duke had placed the case in this way. He objected to the Bill which they had read a first time last night. He said, that it was opposed to the principle of protection, and therefore he was opposed to it; and in speaking of the Bill then before the House, he had remarked that it was inconsistent with the principle of the former Bill, inasmuch as the principle of protection was retained. Whatever his noble Friend might have thought of the Bill, he thought that their Lordships ought at any rate to maintain a character for consistency, so far as that, if in the first Bill they agreed to an abandonment of the principle of protection, they ought not in the second Bill to introduce a contrary principle. It was in his (Lord Beaumont's) opinion absolutely necessary that the Bill before them should be delayed until they had given the first Bill (the Corn Importation Bill) a full consideration, in order that they might know how far the second Bill could be reconciled to the first Bill, and thus judge of the degree of consistency between the two measures. He hoped that his noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) would act up to the principles he had advocated in his speech, and consider the second Bill solely on the principle of revenue duties; and if he did so he would agree to some of the objections urged by the noble Duke on the cross benches, for he would find duties retained in the Bill with respect to the trade of the Colonies, and to the silk trade, which had been looked upon as protection duties. He hoped, therefore, that he would regard all the articles enumerated in the second Bill solely with a view to the maintenance of revenue duties, and not with respect to
866
the principle of free trade and protection. He would assure his noble Friend, that the interpretation which was put upon free trade by the country was that which was put upon it by the Anti-Corn-Law League, namely, the total abolition of duties. Those who now opposed the cry of free trade would be found perhaps, when protection was taken away from one interest, ready to join in that unfortunate cry; and they might rely upon it, that the Custom House itself might not long survive the bonded warehouses. His noble Friend on the cross benches had spoken of free trade in the sense in which it was understood out of doors; and he could assure them, that in agreeing to that cry of free trade, they would run the risk of seeing the customs duties assailed at a future period.
LORD BROUGHAMfelt that no advantage could result from anticipating the discussion of this Bill, for there was no doubt that it would be discussed when the Corn Bill was before them; but he could not allow this discussion to close without protesting against the idea that it was an impeachment of the principles of free trade to maintain duties for the purpose of revenue. There was no ground for such a supposition in proposing to take the duty off corn, the principal food of the people.
EARL GREYagreed with the noble and learned Lord that this was an inconvenient period for the discussion of the Bill, and he hoped that when it was proposed for a second reading, when it would no doubt be fully discussed, the Government would be prepared to state the grounds upon which they had introduced a Bill proposing to do so much, and had not introduced a measure to do more. He agreed with some of the observations made by the noble Duke on the cross benches; but although he did not look upon it as anything like free trade, yet he would accept it as an instalment of free trade. He had not changed the opinions which he had maintained ever since he came into Parliament; he was against all protection to all kinds of interests. He wished to see duties levied for revenue, and for revenue only. He was prepared—and he was conscious the country was prepared—for a general reform of our commercial system, in order that there might be unrestricted liberty afforded to industry; and that was a system the advantages of which would be recognised, if it were once adopted, by both producers and consumers. The noble Duke on the cross benches referred

867
to Canada, and stated that the Canadians were not placed on equal terms with the people of the United States, if they were compelled to compete with them in our markets, and were not allowed to obtain the cheap coarse cotton fabrics of America. Now, he (Earl Grey) would state, on behalf of the great and intelligent body of the manufacturers of this kingdom, that they were willing and prepared to give up all protection, for they did not depend upon protection for their success, but upon their enterprise and energy and skill, and that as they wished to buy corn where it was cheapest, so they did not expect that the Canadians should be compelled by a differential duty to give the preference to their cottons. If they applied their skill and capital to the manufacture of the superior descriptions of cotton, and the Americans, from the cheapness of cotton and other facilities, were able to manufacture coarse cotton cheaper, they might both advantageously employ themselves.
LORD ASHBURTONconsidered the measures which hnd been introduced to their Lordships' notice on that and on the preceding day, of vital importance—he meant, of course, the Bill respecting the Corn Laws and the Tariff, which they were now discussing; and he thought it was proper that they should have before them the entire of that new system, and see the whole produce of that new light which had suddenly dawned upon the Government. Whether these measures were for good or for evil—whether they would bring round such an extraordinary state of prosperity as his noble Friend opposite seemed to anticipate, or whether they would be essentially detrimental to all the industrial classes of the community, as he was inclined to think, it was of the highest importance, and every way becoming in their Lordships, that these measures should receive the greatest possible attention. He did not find fault with any noble Lord for inviting a discussion even upon the first stage of such measures. From first to last their Lordships must be desirous of having all the light possible thrown upon subjects of such immense consequence. As for the definition of his noble Friend opposite (Lord Monteagle), he did not think much of it. He agreed with his noble Friend in thinking it a question of protection or no-protection. He did not approve of that tricky, shuffling sort of definition, which was not very intelligible or distinct, and which was
868
not generally accepted in the complicated sense in which his noble Friend had used it. It was easy to understand the views of the noble Earl (Grey), who was quite a purist—whose free-trade opinions were free from a tinge of protection. He confessed he was at a loss to understand the policy of the Government. They had restrained the German Zollverein and the French from exporting their produce into this country—they had for years kept a system of restriction; and upon what experience were they now about to abandon it? They had incurred immense expense and risk—they had engaged in heavy and expensive wars for the purpose of maintaining their Colonies—they had insisted, at the loss of much blood and treasure, on protecting their Colonies by giving a preference to their produce; and, on the other hand, providing that our manufactures should have a preference by our Colonies; but now it seemed there was to be no preference whatever. Why keep the Colonies at all? Why incur all this enormous expense? Not to benefit themselves, but to benefit the whole world. You will have the charge, they the advantage. He repeated, this was a system perfectly new and unusual; and he very much doubted whether those manufacturers, of whom his noble Friend entertained such great and magnanimous feelings, would take such comprehensive and disinterested views as his noble Friend imagined. He (Lord Ashburton) thought their opinions would be more tradesmanlike, and, notwithstanding the interest they evinced in commercial reform, would, when they found no preference given to their fabrics, even in the Colonies, over American goods, alter their opinions, and begin to see the value of protection. The coarser description of cotton goods, which were manufactured in the United States, would, in the event of perfect free trade, speedily come into competition with ours in the Canadian market, and our manufacturers would find the case very different in respect to this class of goods, with the finer fabrics, which were consumed by a higher and smaller class only. Some time ago there was a meeting at Manchester—a free-trade meeting—and a Manchester man, in urging the free-trade doctrines, said, there was the Macclesfield silk weaver who would have no objection to the introduction of foreign silk duty free; but Macclesfield manufacturers who were present, though quite approving of free trade in any other article, begged to be excused

869
as far as silk was concerned. In short, these free-trade theories, though people might give a general approval of them, they would, when it came to their own case, be quite ready to dissent from, and, in that respect, be stern protectionists. They might as well expect that the Newcastle coalowners would be willing to have free importation of fuel there, as that the manufacturers would be willing to have a free importation of foreign goods. The Government had brought in two measures: one, the Corn Bill to affect agriculture; the other, the Tariff to apply to commerce. Supposing both interests to be equally affected by the respective measures, they would, after all, be only equally injured. As to the Tariff being any compensation to the farmer, it was no more a compensation to him, than to the crew of a foundering ship to be told that their neighbours in another ship, which had struck against a rock, were going down also.
The EARL of DALHOUSIEagreed with every noble Lord who had spoken, that it was inconvenient and unusual to enter into the discussion of these measures at present; but, unlike them, would act up to his belief. But he could not permit the sentiments which had been uttered to go forth without at the same time stating, that if these assertions had not been contradicted—if these opinions had not been controverted—it was not from any unwillingness to engage in argument, but merely because the Government did not consider this the proper stage for discussion. When the proper time arrived, the Government would be fully prepared to state the reasons which had induced them to bring these measures before Parliament; and he also stated that they would be able to show to their Lordships good grounds for asking them for their ready and unqualified support.
The DUKE of RICHMONDagain rose and said: My Lords, my noble Friend who has just sat down, says it is unusual to enter into a discussion on a subject of this kind in the present stage of the Bill; but I must remind him, without in any manner wishing to make a personal attack, that it is also "unusual"—most unusual—for a Government to change their opinions so suddenly on great questions of public policy—and for the Government of one year to vote and argue against free trade, and the same Government in the following year to vote for and argue and introduce a free-trade measure. If the Government will
870
pursue so unusual a course, particularly without appealing to the country — although the Members of the other House were returned without the sense of the electors having been taken on this most important principle—I say we are perfectly justified—under such extraordinary circumstances, in taking the unusual course of objecting to the first reading of the Bill. I could not permit the Bill to receive the first reading, entertaining the strong opinions I do, without recording my protest against it. I am willing and anxious—[A Noble LORD: Spoke.] I will not be prevented from delivering my opinions on this most important subject—I am much too old a man to be put down in that way. I say that the principle of this Bill is contrary to the principle of the other measure—the one is a free-trade measure, and the other proposes only partial free trade. But my objection is to the principle of both. I wish to maintain protection to British industry. I wish to maintain protection, because I think on the preservation of that principle depends the happiness, the welfare, and the prosperity of all classes of my fellow subjects.
The EARL of DALHOUSIEexplained, that he did not mean to say the noble Duke had not a perfect right to oppose the first stage of the Bill.
The EARL of HADDINGTONsaid, there could not be the slightest doubt that his noble Friend on the cross bench exercised his right, as a Peer of Parliament, in entering his protest against a Bill upon the Motion being made for the first reading; nor did he understand his noble Friend behind him to blame for having so done; but his noble Friend spoke of that as an inconvenient time for discussing the measure, because it was, as he said, an unusual course. He entirely concurred in that opinion of his noble Friend, and without following the example that had been set by several noble Lords, each of whom had started three or four different points of discussion, he would merely say that it was not correct to assert that the present Government had ever been determined enemies to free trade.
Bill read a first time.

CONVICTS IN AUSTRALIA.
EARL GREYbegged to ask the noble Lord (Lord Lyttelton) whether any measures had been taken for establishing a new Colony to be called North Australia, which, it appeared from the Papers before the House, was to be constituted almost exclusively

871
of persons who had undergone the sentence of transportation, and who were called emancipists.
LORD LYTTELTONsaid, the scheme had already been carried out to a great degree, and that all the necessary proceedings, so far as they depended upon Her Majesty's Government, had been taken. It would not be convenient to enter upon an irregular discussion of this measure; but he must be permitted to say he was surprised at his noble Friend (Earl Grey) having brought the subject forward at so late a period, because he must have seen from the Papers before the House what were the intentions of Her Majesty's Government. As to this new Colony, it was to be a new settlement within the boundary of New South Wales, in the north of Australia. It was not, necessarily, to be occupied entirely, or even at all, by emancipists. It was certainly intended to ameliorate the state of those convicts who had gone through their punishment in Van Diemen's Land, where there was no demand for them, in consequence of which many of this unfortunate class were there entirely destitute. These persons, by various methods, would have facilities afforded of proceeding to this new settlement; and it was also intended that facilities should be given to the poorer classes in this country to proceed there; also to prisoners from Pentonville and Parkhurst. This was the means held out for relieving Van Diemen's Land of the surplus convict population.
EARL GREYintimated that he should bring the subject forward again at a future period.
House adjourned.