Sitting of 13 March 1815

PROCEEDINGS UPON COMPLAINT THAT THE APPROACHES TO THE HOUSE WERE OCCUPIED BY A MILITARY FORCE
THE orders of the day being read, for taking into further consideration the Minutes of the Proceedings upon the matter of the Complaint made upon Monday last, that the Approaches to the House were occupied by a Military Force; and for the attendance of the High Bailiff of Westminster, and Magistrates,
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the object of the House in taking these

151]
minutes into their consideration, must be to secure on the part of the Police a vigorous discharge of their duty. He believed, since last Monday, every person was satistisfied with their conduct. Parliament had never held their sittings in greater security—had never been less in danger of interruption. With respect to what had taken place on the day he had named, he thought it unnecessary to say any thing now. It appeared that every precaution had previously been taken by the Secretary of State which common prudence could dictate. He regretted that it had been found necessary to call out the military; but the propriety of doing this under the circumstances of the case, he believed, would not be questioned, and he thought it would be seen that hardly any blame attached to the civil power, if, for once, it had not been able to preserve the peace, and afford full protection. If on this subject there was any difference of opinion, he trusted the House would think the conduct of the Police since Monday had atoned for their first errors. Conceiving it would be best not to revive the unfortunate events of Monday night, and that there would be no objection to pass over what had occurred, he should move, that the said orders be discharged.
Mr. Whitbreadwas sorry to be under the necessity of bringing back to the recollection of the House, the evidence which was taken on the night in question, from the nature and effect of which he conceived the motion of the right hon. gentleman was by no means such a motion as the House could agree to, with a due regard to its own character. The right hon. gentleman, however, had not contented himself with merely moving, that the order should be discharged, but had intimated that the magistrates were almost without blame; and, by a panegyric upon their subsequent conduct, seemed desirous of at once wiping out all recollection of their previous proceedings. Now, what was the real history of the transaction? With respect to the precautions taken, upon the part of the Secretary of State and that of the Speaker, nothing could have been more proper or creditable to their vigilance; but, unfortunately, those precautions were rendered nugatory by the conduct of the magistrates to whom the execution of the orders given was entrusted. Notice, it was seen, had been given to the High Bailiff of Westminster of
[152
the possibility of a tumult, and of the propriety of his being prepared with proper assistants to prevent as much as possible its pernicious effects. But what was his conduct? Why, he issued summonses in the usual way for eighty persons to attend, of whom about forty obeyed his summons. He had no account of those persons, however, and seemed to have adopted no method with regard to their organization, and not one of the witnesses who were examined seemed to have observed the existence of any outrage, at a moment when one member of the House had complained of being nearly rode over by a troop of horse. He thought the apathy which had been displayed on this occasion should form a subject for very rigorous inquiry; as he was convinced, if the constables, of whom it appeared not less than 150 were in attendance, had been properly mustered and judiciously directed, at an early hour in the afternoon, all necessity for the interference of the military would have been obviated; and if it was not probable, it was, at least, possible, that all the disgraceful scenes which had taken place would have been prevented. Under this impression he could not concur in the vote which had been proposed by the right hon. gentleman, of passing over conduct lightly, which he could not but view with great jealousy in persons to whom, the protection of the House was entrusted. He thought, with a view to the future, that it was essential something like the disapprobation of the House towards the conduct of the magistrates should be manifested.
Mr. Bathurstsaid, the House would recollect that it was understood, on the night alluded to, that information should be given to the magistrates of the feelings which the House entertained of their conduct. [Mr. Whitbread here remarked, that there was nothing on the Journals to this effect.] Mr. Bathurst, in continuation, observed, that Mr. Morris, the high bailiff, was in fact under the direction of other magistrates, at the head of whom was sir N. Conant, who at the time the outrages were taking place, was acting as the chief, from whom orders were received; but from the immense multitude which had assembled, he believed it was impossible to have avoided calling out the military. With respect to the assertion, that the calling out the military had produced the other outrages which had been committed, he believed this would not for a moment

153]
be credited, when it was known that before the military had arrived in Palace-yard, sir N. Conant had actually been called away to suppress riots of a complexion equally dangerous, which had broken out in other parts of the town. It was very true, that the magistrates had not placed themselves without the avenues of the House, because such situations were attended with imminent danger—one or two of the constables having been absolutely incapacitated from the exercise of their duties by blows received from brickbats. As far, however, as they could, consistently with the strength of the force under their orders, they had taken every means to resist the gross attacks which were made. Upon the whole, he saw nothing which called for punishment upon those individuals, or indeed merited the further cognizance of the House.
Mr. Wynnwas of opinion that it was impossible to pass over the conduct of the magistrates without notice. He would recall to the recollection of the House, that the noble lord (Castlereagh) had objected to any admonition being given to those persons on Monday night, because be considered that any discussion upon the subject would have kept them from those duties which at that time required their presence. It was then understood that their conduct was liable to inquiry on a future occasion, and, in obedience to that feeling, he conceived an inquiry should now take place. He thought with his hon. friend (Mr. Whitbread), that the conduct of the High Bailiff had been particularly reprehensible, because he was the person, of all others, to whom he believed the House ought to look for protection, and yet he, of all others, seemed to be most ignorant of what was passing. With respect to the hazard in which it was stated by the right hon. gentleman, who spoke last, the constables would have been placed by remaining without the doors of the House, he considered it of less importance that they should run risks, than that the members of the House should be prevented from performing their parliamentary duties. It was, in fact, a necessary attendant upon the office of constable, that he should expose his person to danger; and if such an excuse were to be received as a ground for neglect of duty, the necessary consequence would be, that on all occasions the military must be resorted to. Upon the whole, he could not help being of opinion, that there had been great re-
[154
missness on the part of the magistrates and civil power; and with this feeling he thought their conduct should not be passed over without an expression of the feeling of the House upon the subject.
Mr. F. Douglasthought it of importance, that the conduct of the civil officers should be minutely inquired into, not so much with a view to punish or to censure the past, as to guard against a recurrence of the evil complained of. However he might regret some of the events which had taken place, he should always remember with pleasure the firmness and dignity which that House had displayed, and exult in the reflexion, that not one of its members had mistaken the clamour of a mob for the voice of the people.
Mr. Lockhartwas willing that the proceedings which had taken place should be consigned to oblivion, as far as the punishment of the magistrates was Concerned; but he wished their recollection to survive, in order that such measures of precaution might be taken as should make it unnecessary to call out the military on any similar occasion. He wished to see the constables young, healthy, and vigorous, instead of decayed and decrepid men, like those which he had seen on the late occasion, who appeared to be incapable of acting with effect, although he found they had foolish vanity enough to be jealous of each other. He understood such a feeling had caused a difference between the officers from Bow-street and those of other offices. He was of opinion that a civil force, better headed, and better organized, ought to be at hand on such occasions. He wished the old law, of calling out the house keepers of each parish when the public peace was endangered, were again resorted to, places of rendezvous named, and other arrangements made for their being speedily assembled, and effectually engaged to quell the disturbance. If such measures were not adopted, the capital might one day fall into the hands of a mob, who might not be kept down till they had done it great, and almost irreparable injury. He took occasion to censure the conduct of certain persons forming the jury on a coroner's inquest, who had promulgated authoritatively what they took upon themselves to lay down as the law, though he would not acknowledge it to be so. He controverted the opinions published by the jury, who lately sat on the body of the officer unfortunately killed in Burlington-

155]
street, refuted the doctrine which they had attempted to inculcate, and, supporting himself on the authority of lord Mansfield, contended that the right of the parties entrusted with the care of any place assailed by a mob, to use the weapons with which they were armed, to the destruction of the assailants, was only to be determined by the necessity of the case.
Mr. Addingtonobserved, that the charges brought against the magistrates seemed to be, that they had not been in their proper stations at the time of the riot, and that they had not made a judicious disposition of the civil force. Now, the first charge could only amount to an error in judgment; and he admitted that if they had been on the outside of the building, they would have been better able to direct the constables. As to the second charge, he thought it too much to expect, that on the first occasion, they should have been able to make the most judicious disposition of the civil power, which it was possible to make. The chief magistrate of Bow-street had been desired to be present at the Secretary of State's office during the evening in question. From a laudable degree of zeal he came down to the House in the beginning of the evening, and there continued till between eight and nine o'clock, being then on the outside of the building, when he was called suddenly away, his presence being necessary in another quarter of the town. The magistrates within were not aware that he was called off, and it was from this, he believed, that the circumstances had taken place which had given rise to the imputation of remissness. The conduct of the magistrates had been marked, since that period, with a great degree of zeal and assiduity, and he hoped the House would not think it proper to visit them with a punishment so heavy as its censure.
Mr. Whitbreadexplained, that it was not his intention to lump all the magistrates, who had been examined, in the charge which he thought should be made against some of them. It was well for the right hon. gentleman who defended them to confound them; but he did not mean to attack them altogether.
Mr. Hammersleythought the police laws defective, there being no provision for an extraordinary number of constables in case of riots. He hoped that the persons to whom this department of the government was entrusted, would pay attention to the subject.
Mr. Butterworthsaid, that he had experienced some difficulty in reaching his carriage, about eight o'clock of the evening in question; but on that occasion, as well as on his return to the House about an hour afterwards, the constables exerted themselves to the utmost to clear the way.
Sir C. Monckobserved, that the Speaker of the House was not supposed to know any thing about the preservation of the peace; having given orders for their attendance, it was the duty of the magistrates to take all proper measures. He thought it most extraordinary that a verdict of murder had been returned against the soldiers, while it did not appear that any rioters were in custody, or that any attempt at arson or murder had appeared on the part of the populace.
Mr. Addingtonstated there were at least thirty rioters in custody.
Mr. Wrottesleycould not agree that the magistrates were altogether exempt from blame. He remarked on the evidence of the high bailiff, who had stated that he had about 50 out of his 80 constables about the House; that that force was insufficient to repress the mob; but that he did not take any measures to procure additional force, relying on Messrs. Baker and Birnie, whom he knew were in attendance. He did not, however, communicate with them. His reliance on Mr. Baker was much to his credit, as there was a marked difference between the conduct of that gentleman and that of the other persons who had been examined at the bar. He thought the high bailiff blameable in not communicating with the police magistrates. Some measures, he thought, should be taken to let the magistrates know that it was necessary for them to take proper methods to stifle tumults in their commencement; for he was confident that with the help of a few constables at the beginning of the evening the riot might have been altogether suppressed, by taking such persons into custody as refused to disperse. He observed, that it was extraordinary that none of the persons had been apprehended, who had defiled the walls about the metropolis with the most inflammatory inscriptions. He thought this might have been done by the ordinary exertion of the Police.
Mr. Alderman Atkinsstated, that as far as he had witnessed the conduct of the magistrates on the night in question, they had been very active. The high bailiff, he thought, had exerted himself to the ut-

157]
most of his power. The civil power was by no means adequate. Having filled the office of sheriff, on the occasion of former riots, he had witnessed the conduct of Messrs. Baker and Birnie, who had read the Riot Act to their own great danger, with laudable zeal and courage. In those riots he found, that of the constables for Westminster, nevermore than 10 attended.
The motion for the discharge of the orders was then put and carried.

SOUTH SEA COMPANY.
On the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to consider of the Act 9 Anne, c. 21, for for making good deficiencies, and satisfying the public debts; and for erecting a corporation to carry on a trade to the South Seas, and for the encouragement of the fishery; and for liberty to trade in unwrought iron with the subjects of Spain; and to repeal the Acts for registering seamen,
The Chancellor of the Exchequertook a view of the establishment of the South Sea Company, and observed that this corporation possessed the exclusive privilege of trading to America, from the river Oroo-noko, round Cape Horn to the north-west coast of that continent. This exclusive privilege had for many years been of no advantage to that Company; but South America having become at last open to us, it might become a great obstacle to our commerce. He therefore had to state the terms on which the Company were willing to sell it to the country. That Company had lent all its capital to the Government, for which they received 3l. per cent.; and they also obtained a further dividend of ½ per cent. on their capital, by acting as agents for Government in the payment of the dividends of such part of the public debt as existed in 1721. By the Act of 1813, which would cancel all the national debt which existed before the establishment of the sinking fund, they would lose that ½ per cent. They therefore consented to abandon their exclusive privilege of trade, on condition that the Government would guarantee this ½ per cent, or about 18,000 l. a year to them. For this income it was his intention to propose the creation of a fund, by a duty on tonnage of ships trading to South America, and on the export of goods thither, to the amount of 2l. per cent. The fund necessary would be 400,000 l.; when that sum was accumulated, the duty would
[158
be repealed. A duty of 4l. per cent. on goods shipped to South America would expire on the 16th of March, so that a renewal of only half that duty would be necessary. He concluded by moving the following Resolutions: 1. "That the exclusive right of trade granted to the South Sea Company by an Act made in the 9th year of the reign of queen Anne, do cease and determine. 2. That, in consideration of the surrender of such exclusive right, a guarantee fund be created in any of the public funds or annuities, bearing an interest of 3l. per centum per annum, which shall accumulate until it amounts to the sum of 610,464 l. 3s. capital stock, bearing an interest at 3l. per centum per annum, and such capital stock shall then he transferred to the said Company. 3. That until the said sum of 610,464 l. 3s capital stock shall be so accumulated and transferred as aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the lords commissioners of his Majesty's Treasury to direct the issue, out of the consolidated fund of Great Britain, from time to time, of such sums of money as may be necessary to enable the said Company to pay a dividend of ½ per centum per annum on their trading stock, after applying to that purpose all the funds of the said Company which now are or may remain applicable thereto. 4. That a duty of 1s. 6d. shall be granted, for a time to be limited, for and upon every ton burthen of every ship or vessel entering outwards or inwards in any port of the United Kingdom to or from any port or place within the limits of the sole and exclusive trade granted to the said Company by the said Act. 5. That a custom duty of 2l. be charged upon every 100 l. of the value of all goods, wares, or merchandize, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United Kingdom, exported to any of the said ports or places, for a time to be limited." The first resolution being put,
Mr. Bennetthought the proposition just and equitable; but he wished to make some observations on the state of the country which was the subject of the law on which they were deliberating, viz. South America. All that continent was now in arms, and the spectacle of a great nation struggling for liberty had always been regarded with peculiar interest by this country. He wished to know whether any steps had been taken by this country to mediate between the mother country and the colonies? The consequence of the dreadful-

159]
struggle had been, that in the kingdom of Mexico, no less than one million of human beings had been destroyed in 1813 and 1814. From the Oroonoko to Cumana the country was a perfect waste. To give an idea of the horrible nature of the war, he should state, that when the city of Valencia surrendered to the royalists, the capitulation was sworn to on the altar, and high mass was performed in presence of the parties; when the old Spaniards entered the town, within twelve hours they gave it up to pillage, and executed the unhappy patriots who remained in it. Had any offer of mediation been made on the part of this country? He knew that offers had been made to, and rejected by the Cortes; but there was a difference between a Cortes under the influence of the monopolists of Cadiz, and Ferdinand the 7th. From the cruelty and ferocity of Ferdinand, perhaps they had as little to expect, but some attempts at least should be made. A man had been sent as viceroy to the new world, who, after having betrayed an army to the French in his own country, had gone to America, where, without taking active steps to suppress the rebellion, he issued such orders as deluged that continent in blood. An expedition had since been sent out to South America, commanded, to his disgrace, by a British officer. That expedition he prayed to God might perish on the shores of the New World! This country had to choose between eighteen million of free people, and nine million of slaves—between a people who had opened their ports to us, and a despotic Court who had persecuted our merchants, insulted our trade, and oppressed our subjects. It had been said, that Great Britain had remained neutral in the contest. This, he believed, was not true. During the war in the Peninsula, under the very eye of sir Henry Wellesley, an expedition had been sent to the New World, fitted out by British money, the troops appointed with British arms and clothing. The conduct of the governors of Curacoa was of the same description. They received the fugitives of the royalist party, provided them with arms and ammunition, to renew their attempts. But when the patriots were driven out in their turn, they excluded them from the islands, and forced them to seek and find protection from Petion, a black—the excellent man who governed a part of St. Domingo. The patriots of America had to complain of us for a breach of en-
[160
gagement towards them; the Cortes and people of Spain had also to complain of us, for having suffered their constitution to be destroyed, and themselves to be delivered over to an usurper—for such was Ferdinand the 7th. The hon. member expressed a wish to know by what minister the Regent had been advised to send the Order of the Garter to Ferdinand, and to accept the Order of the Golden Fleece? and he also desired to learn, whether the British Government had entered into any treaty or engagement whatever, guaranteeing the South American colonies to Spain?
The Chancellor of the Exchequertrusted the committee would see the propriety of his declining on this occasion to enter into details of such delicacy as were referred to by the hon. member, and the more so as the hon. member's observations were not properly relevant to the subject before the committee. He had, however, no difficulty in stating, that upon the offer of mediation which had been made on our part between Spain and its colonies, his Majesty's ministers were always ready to act. In our endeavours, indeed, to procure independence and liberty for Old Spain, we had ever been equally anxious to obtain the liberty of its colonies. Upon the commercial advantage likely to accrue to this country from the establishment of a complete freedom of trade in South America, he should at present abstain from delivering any opinion; but, however interesting or important that freedom might be, neutrality, in the present contest between South America and the mother country, was the duty and the resolution of Great Britain; which never could attempt to seek any object, however beneficial, from a connexion with the former, that should be tainted with, any thing like treachery towards the latter.
Mr. Whitbreadthought, that as the subject before the committee referred to the opening of a free trade with South America, the opportunity had been very properly chosen by his hon. friend to bring forward the questions to which he had adverted. The proposition being to open the South American ports his hon. friend very naturally submitted some inquiries with regard to that country. His hon. friend had therefore asked, whether, in the contest in which (he would not say the colonies, but) New Spain was engaged with Old Spain, the government of the

161]
country had observed neutrally? That New Spain had experienced the most atrocious treatment, as well from the late as from the present government of Spain, was an undeniable fact; and it was desirable for the credit a ltd the interest of this country, to know whether the right hon. gentleman was able to deny that any money, arms, or equipment, had been furnished by our Government, for the purpose of suppressing the patriots of New Spain, in their laudable rebellion against the tyranny of the mother country. It was also desirable to know whether, as his hon. friend's question imported, any of our colonial governors had refused that hospitality to the patriots which had been grained to their oppressors; for such partiality would be obviously inconsistent with those principles of neutrality which the right hon. gentleman professed. If, indeed, the right hon. gentleman were not able to deny such partiality and that it had been actually evinced, the patriots of New Spain would have the best founded reason to complain of our conduct, nay, that our offer of impartial mediation was by no means sincere. If, then, under such circumstances, the people of New Spain should succeed in their gallant efforts to shake off the yoke of their persecutors, and to raise their country to that independent station to which it was entitled, the best interests of this country were but too likely to suffer, for it was the best interest of Great Britain to cultivate an amicable connexion with New Spain. On these grounds, therefore, he lamented that the right hon. gentleman had declined to afford any explanation respecting the points referred to by his hon. friend. It was, he presumed, a mere omission on the part of the right hon. gentleman, not to have noticed his hon. friend's allusion to the grant of the Order of the Garter to Ferdinand, and the acceptance of that of the Golden Fleece by the Prince Regent; for such marks of esteem towards such a person as Ferdinand did certainly not seem very compatible with the feelings likely to belong to any prince reigning over a free people. The minister who had advised such proceedings ought to be made known; and he hoped this, with the other questions so properly submitted by his hon. friend, respecting our conduct towards the usurper, Ferdinand, would be satisfactorily answered by the right hon. gentleman.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerstated
[162
that no money or assistance whatever had been supplied by this country to enable the Spanish government to subdue New Spain. As to the Order of the Garter and the Golden Fleece, he could not think that such interchange of ceremonies formed an object worthy to call for the attention of that House. With respect to the recognition of Ferdinand, that prince having been recognised as the sovereign of Spain, by the government with which we had originally treated for the deliverance of that country, and by the Cortes also, he should have thought it very extraordinary indeed, if this country had declined to acknowledge his authority.
Mr. Ponsonbyconsidered the subject of South America as one of the greatest importance and delicacy. He was far from recommending one step on either side inconsistent with the good faith of Government, or in violation of our neutrality. At the same time he was free to say, that there was no foreign country whatever in the fate of which Great Britain was so much interested as with South America. For he had no doubt that the establishment of the independence of that country, and the detaching of it from Old Spain, was to us an object of the highest importance; but he was equally positive that that object, however desirable, should not be pursued by any means whatever incompatible with our public faith. It was the duty of our Government to attend strictly to its engagements, but at the same time he should hold it imperiously bound in no degree to assist the projects Of Old Spain against the liberties of South America.
Mr. Wynnconcurred with his right hon. friend as to the propriety of observing a strict neutrality in the present contest between Old Spain and South America, but he could not conceive it compatible with that neutrality to refuse that hospitality to the people of South America; which ws afforded to their opponents. This proceeding did certainly not manifest good faith, and he was surprised at the silence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon the subject. But he was equally surprised at the undue levity with which the right hon. gentleman had spoken of the grant of the Order of the Garter to Ferdinand. How was it possible that the right hon. gentleman could so undervalue an honour which had been so highly estimated among the first, monarchs in Europe? This distinction had,

163]
indeed, been often anxiously looked for, and always gratefully received by the most eminent princes. It was notorious that the favour had been refused to the present, and also to the last king of Sweden. He believed, indeed, that the present king of Spain was the first sovereign of that country who had been favoured with this honour since Philip 2. On these grounds he was astonished at the levity with which the right hon. gentleman had thought proper to express himself with regard to what he had denominated the 'ceremony.'
Mr. Alderman Atkinsinquired, whether it was intended to abolish the South Sea Company altogether?
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied in the negative; but the intention was to take the monopoly out of its hands.
Mr. Whitbreadasked, whether any farther steps had been taken for the liberation from Ceuta of M. Correa, and the gentlemen surrendered by general Campbell?
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied, that no opportunity would be lost to produce the effect alluded to.
Here a conversation arose upon the proposition of a tax of 2 per cent. upon all goods exported from Great Britain or Ireland, to South America, in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Finlay, and Mr. Alderman Atkins took part. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, that the produce of this tax was to be applied in aid of a fund to indemnify the South Sea Company, and that it was to cease when that indemnity was discharged. The two latter objected to it as inconsistent with our commercial policy, by imposing a tax upon our exported manufactures. Mr. Finlay deprecated, and sir J. Newport vindicated the policy of the tax upon foreign linens, with a view to benefit the linen of Ireland and England. The several Resolutions were then agreed to.

COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS— NEW TAXES.
On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the House resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. Tierneyrepeated and enforced his objections to the proposition of the right hon. gentleman, to grant the ways and means before the supply was voted, conceiving such a course inconsistent with the established practice of Parliament The only supply yet voted was 24 mil-
[164
lions, winch the proposed amount of ways and means would considerably exceed. He would be glad to hear upon what ground the right hon. gentleman could justify such a course of proceeding. Under the Act brought forward by the right hon. gentleman before Christmas, which Act differed materially from any that preceded it, he observed, that the Treasury were invested with the power of issuing Exchequer-bills without limit. Indeed, according to this Act, the Treasury might issue 50 millions in Exchequer-bills in addition o the 8 millions which it was authorized o borrow from the Bank. Would the House, then, he would ask, go on in voting he ways and means proposed, without knowing the amount of Exchequer-bills issued in consequence of this extraordinary Act?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he perfectly agreed with the right hon. gentleman in the general parliamentary principle which he had laid down, that the ways and means should not exceed the supplies voted; and he hoped he should be able to satisfy that right hon. gentleman and the House, that on the present occasion he had not infringed upon that principle. The right hon. gentleman would himself be convinced, when he reminded him that he had omitted two or three considerable sums which had been voted by Parliament. Among these sums was one of twelve millions and a half, for the repayment of Exchequer-bills, and another of fifteen millions. It should be recollected that they had voted supplies to the amount of fifty-one millions, and the ways and means only for thirty-one millions, leaving a deficiency of twenty millions to be made good. With regard to the act empowering the Treasury to issue Exchequer-bills, he did not consider that it gave any authority to anticipate the aids which had not yet been granted by Parliament. There certainly had been an issue of Exchequer-bills, but they were not issued upon taxes which Parliament had not yet granted, but upon the aid of fifteen millions which had been voted last year.
Mr. Tierneysaid, that by the plan which, the right hon. gentleman adopted, he might issue Exchequer-bills to an unlimited extent. There was the great evil, and that we were now, though in a state of peace, pursuing the same plan as during the war. He certainly thought that the whole was irregular.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerread the words of the Act, and repeated, that he did not consider the Treasury empowered by it to issue Exchequer-bills to an unlimited extent, because Parliament might afterwards grant supplies to cover them. The accounts of those Exchequer-bills which had been issued would be forthcoming when any member should choose to move for them.
Mr. Ponsonbysaid, he objected to receiving the report, because the minister of finance had come down to that House, and asked for enormous supplies without condescending to state for what purposes they were required. Such a practice was perfectly new to that House. The right hon. gentleman had told them they were to have a peace establishment of nineteen millions; but he had not imparted a single tittle of information as to the items and heads of that expenditure. If the House of Commons sanctioned such a proceeding, they would at once surrender their control over the public purse and the ministers of the Crown. On that ground, therefore, he should certainly take the sense of the House upon receiving the report.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that it would be most satisfactory to every member of that House, and to no one more so than to himself, if, when they entered into the discussion of what should be the peace establishment of the country, any means could be devised for reducing it below what had been proposed. That question, however, was not now before them; and the grounds upon which the House was then called upon to agree to the report, was that the grants had already been voted by Parliament. Nor would they be at all pledged, by agreeing to the report, as to their future proceedings with respect to the proposed plan of finance. They merely provided for sums which had been already voted. When the time came for considering the various estimates for the service of the present year, he should call upon the House for its most patient and deliberate attention to the subject, and should thank any honourable gentleman who could lighten his heavy labours by shewing how the peace establishment might be made less.
Mr. Tierneydenied that the five millions of new taxes were to be considered as a part of the ordinary aids of the year. they voted for receiving the report, surely they would be recognizing the plan of the right hon. gentleman.
The Chancellor of the Exchequercontended, that the inference of the right hon. gentleman was not a correct one. By agreeing to the report, they would only agree to provide a certain sum by way of taxes; but they would not therefore agree to the taxes themselves. As to the amount of that sum, every one would feel that what was proposed to be raised by those taxes could not be regarded as unnecessary, even if the expenses of the country were cut down to what they were before the French Revolution. He really thought, indeed, that he was much more liable to objection for not bringing forward taxes to a greater extent, than for proposing what he had.
Mr. Tierneyreplied, that the great object was to have the whole matter before them at once. If, for example, they knew how much would be wanted for the present year, they would then be able to say what portion should be raised by taxes, and what by loan. For himself, he really had no conception what would be the extent of supply required for the present year; and the whole subject demanded more explanation than the right ton. gentleman was yet in a condition to give them. All be wanted was, that they might not be called upon to vote in the dark; and he wished the right hon. gentleman would take the five millions, intended to be raised by the new taxes, in some other way for the present, and leave the other to future discussion, when he would be able to tell how much he required.
Mr. Ponsonbysaid, he would repeat the grounds of his objection. The right hon. gentleman having stated a certain motion, and told the House that 19 millions were necessary for a peace establishment, then desired them to adopt his plan, without entering into particulars, and shewing how the money was to be applied. This mode of voting supplies at different times was what he most particularly objected to; and he protested against it as an innovation upon former practice, and altogether unconstitutional.
Sir Robert Heronobserved, that the plan, of the right hon. gentleman was in direct opposition to the interests of the nation. For what purpose were we to threaten the countries around us with a fear of war? He must protest against voting supplies to such an amount, without insisting on one resource,—he meant that of the most strict economy, which ought to pervade every

167]
department of the government. Ministers, if they consulted the tranquillity and happiness of the country, should advise the illustrious Personage who exercised the royal functions, to limit his expenditure; and should inform him how far more glorious his days would be, were he to reform his expenses to the wants of his subjects, instead of increasing the enormous and unnecessary charges of an extravagant court—[Hear, hear!]—It was not long since, that the nation had admired two illustrious Sovereigns who visited our country; and the cause of their having received so much approbation was, that they had endured the greatest privations in times of public distress. This was a conduct worthy of imitation, and he would take the liberty of recalling to the recollection of the House the words which William 3, one of the best of kings, had addressed to his Parliament. "It always gives me," said that great monarch, "the deepest concern to impose new burthens on my people; but I have never called for any which related to my personal expenses."
Mr. Bennetobserved, that ministers had not told the House a syllable as to the his situation of the country. It was not real intention at that time to make any comment on the taxes; but when they came before the House, it would be his duty to oppose them, for he objected to them all. He considered it proper to abolish situations where there was pay without services; and, indeed, to put Government itself upon short allowance.
Mr. J. P. Grantobjected to going into the committee, until the Chancellor of the Exchequer had laid before the House a distinct and comprehensive statement of the whole of our financial relations. He was at a loss to conjecture of what votes the supply which the right hon. gentleman asserted had been agreed to by the House, was made up; and expressed himself particularly unable to understand how the two sums of 15 millions and 12 millions and a half, to make good the issue of Exchequer-bills on the aids of the year 1814, were to be considered.
Lord Miltondeclared himself to be in a similar difficulty, arising either from his own misapprehension of the subject, or from the mystery in which it appeared to be purposely involved. If he was right in his supposition, they were, as far as the five millions were concerned, about to vote en establishment for four years to come.
[168
He decidedly objected to voting the ways and means, before the House was circumstantially apprized of the purposes to which those ways and means were to be applied.
Mr. Bankesdeclared, that if he thought the proposed voles were to cover any insidious machinations—that under the pretence of one object, the House was called upon to vote means which were to be applied to another, he would not only oppose the motion himself, but would use all the little influence which he possessed to induce the House to reject it. But this could by no possibility be the case. The sums now demanded, and much more, must be voted, to make good the supplies to which Parliament had already agreed. As to the explanation demanded of his right hon. friend, with respect to the peace establishment, it was evident that his right hon. friend only waited until he might be able to speak decidedly on the subject. Who could yet tell what might be our ultimate relations with America? Who could tell to what expense for the next twelvemonth this country might be put by the extraordinary occurrence of which we had been informed only within the last two or three days? He could assure the noble lord who had just spoken, that as far as his humble endeavours could go, they should be directed—not to cut down the peace establishment below what was necessary, but to bring it down as low as was consistent with the safety of the country; and above all, to take care that what remained of expense should be employed not in external show, but in real and solid strength. The measures proposed by his right hon. friend appeared to him to be much preferable to raising a larger loan, or to any encroachment on the Sinking. Fund. Certainly, unpopular as was the sentiment, he did conceive that a continuation of the property-tax, under some modification, would have been a still wiser plan; and he sincerely believed, that when the good sense of the country returned upon this subject, his opinion would become pretty general. Did he therefore reproach ministers for having abandoned it? By no means. The strong hostility exhibited towards the tax at the present moment, and the consideration, that its conservation would have been a kind of breach of parliamentary faith, were sufficient grounds for inducing his right hon. friend to relinquish a tax, the good qualities of which his comprehensive mind must have suffi-

169]
ciently appreciated. With respect to the future coarse of our financial regulations, one great principle was, that we ought as much as possible to make our income and our expenditure commensurate; and he really thought, although it was alarming to find the conjectural estimate of our peace establishment rated so high as 19 millions, great savings might be made out of that sum. On the present vtoe, however, all jealousy seemed to him to be superfluous. It would not tie the House down to any new system of taxation, or to any irrevocable amount of the peace establishment. Before he sat down he must, however, warn his right hon. friend and the House from being so misled as to expect that the proposed taxes would be permanently as productive as they might be in the first instance. With respect to those of excise, such as the tax on wine, they would according to repeated experience occasion frauds on the revenue, and a diminished consumption; and as to the assessed taxes, it would, after a twelvemonth, be in the power of any master of a family to reduce them in his own case, and the general result would unquestionably be a considerable diminution of their produce. This system of taxation, therefore, could not be considered, as he considered the property-tax, a sound, solid, and permanent system of taxation.
Mr. Douglasobjected to the confusion arising from the transfer of the ways and means of one year to the supply of another. He recommended to the right hon. gentleman to postpone any further proceeding on this subject until after Wednesday, as the explanations, which would then be given by a noble lord, would probably affect it materially. Certainly, if there was a time in which this country had a right to expect that she should be secured from being again engaged in continental warfare, it was the present; and we had an undoubted right to find that our representative at the Congress had so secured her. He had old prejudices enough left to entertain a horror at the thought of England's degenerating wholly into a military country. Every approach to such a state shook the foundations of our national character. He earnestly wished that the recollections of the war might be obliterated with the war itself, and that from a nation of soldiers we might become a nation of citizens, trusting to our energy and patriotism for defence against an enemy, should any
[170
sudden occasion demand it. To principles almost obsolete he was anxious that we should return. The dictatorship, with which the Administration had for so many years been properly invested, ought to cease with the necessity by which it was required. Until he heard these doctrines acquiesced in, he must withhold his assent to all motions like the present.
Mr. Whitbreadexpressed his admiration of the sentiments of the hon. gentleman who had just spoken. The original and wholesome practice of the constitution was, that the ministers of the Crown should first state to Parliament the whole of the supplies which were requisite, and then obtain the ways and means of providing for those supplies. Of late years, however, the budget had been brought forward by piecemeal (a system which originated with Mr. Perceval), so that the House never could have the whole system under review at one time. He admitted that circumstances might embarrass the right hon. gentleman as to his exact estimate of the peace establishment; but an easy remedy was, to delay further proceedings at present—at least to postpone them until the expected explanations of the noble lord, by throwing a light on the determinations of Congress, should give the House an opportunity of judging of the probable results of its deliberations. He confessed he was not surprised at the eulogium which he had heard from the right hon. gentleman, and from an hon. gentleman on the floor (Mr. Bankes), on the property tax. Like all deceased personages, its vices had vanished from memory, and only its virtues remained. People were generally favourable to the dead; but it should be remembered that that tax was objectionable—not because it was a tax on property—but because it was impossible to divest its mode of collection from partiality and oppression intolerable in a free constitution. It should also be remembered that the property tax was not absolutely dead—it only slept. The right hon. gentleman had wedded it to war. It would be up again if we were again involved in hostilities. And here he could not refrain from noticing the hint which had fallen from a noble lord and from the hon. gentleman on the floor. It was evident that in estimating the peace establishment at nineteen millions, a troubled state of things was contemplated, and perhaps the recurrence of bloody wars arising out of the proceedings of the Congress. But

171]
the singular event of which we had very recently heard, might lead to a civil war in France. In such a case, he protested against the interference of this country in any way. I take this early opportunity, concluded Mr. Whitbread, to declare, as a hint has been given on the subject, that I enter my solemn protest against any interference on the part of this country in the internal affairs of France.
Mr. Philipswas proceeding to make some observations on the partial and oppressive nature of the proposed taxes, when
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that with respect to one of those taxes, to which the objections of the hon. gentlemen were probably the most strong (the tax on windows), he intended to reserve it for further consideration, and for a revision of the schedule.
Mr. Philipsthen adverted to the proposed duty on cotton, and remarked on the inconsistency of the right hon. gentleman, who no longer ago than last session had declared, that in the event of peace it would be impossible for our manufacturers to go on without a drawback, and who now imposed a duty of 5d. a pound on cotton wool imported in foreign vessels, and one penny a pound on cotton wool imported in British vessels! From any advantage proposed by this inequality, a countervailing duty on the part of the Americans would no doubt deprive us. To France the measure would be highly beneficial. In all the arrangements on this subject the interest of France seemed to be consulted, rather than those of this country. The right hon. gentleman's predictions on this subject with respect to France, had been completely falsified. No duty had been imposed in that country on the importation of cotton; and the greatest protection was there afforded to the cotton manufacture, at the very moment that the right hon. gentleman was devising every possible means to bring ours to ruin. The passing of the Corn Bill in that House had already occasioned a serious alarm in the manufacturing districts of the country. Was it desirable at such a moment to propose measures the tendency of which was to increase dissatisfaction? The hon. gentleman here read extracts from a letter which he had received from a very intelligent individual, resident in the manufacturing districts, in which it was declared that the measures about to be pursued would occa-
[172
sion irretrievable ruin to our manufactures, and must compel the emigration of our manufacturers. He knew the right hon. gentleman would contend that it was in the nature of taxation to be thrown on the consumer. But that remark would be inapplicable in the present instance. With respect to the foreign trade in particular, it was impossible.
Sir John Newportsaid, that his objection to the Speaker's leaving the chair was, that it went to perpetuate a system of voting the supplies of the year by piecemeal, and not giving sufficient information to the House, contrary to the old and constitutional practice. The taxes might be good or bad relatively; and that was the reason why they ought to be informed of the situation of the country. The whole demand, and every article of it, should be known before the supplies were voted. In time of war it might be different; but in peace, they should return to that wholesome principle.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that one of the resolutions was to continue all the war duties of excise, "with the exception of that on cotton imported in British shipping." The whole extent of his offending, therefore, was, that he did not propose to take off the duty on cotton imported in foreign shipping; the difference of expense on which to the manufacturer would not be above a halfpenny a pound.
Mr. Philipsrepeated the statement of its being a duty of 5d. a pound.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that that was not the tax then under consideration.
Mr. Finlaydeclared, that he considered the right hon. gentleman as the most formidable antagonist that the manufacturing interest of the country had ever met with. The proposed system was so ruinous, that he would give it the most determined opposition in every instance. By it the property tax would not merely be continued on the manufacturer—it would be more than doubled. A manufacturer would now have to pay near 3,000 l. a year, who had probably never been liable to a property tax of more than 1,000 l. As to the difference between the duty on cotton imported in British shipping and cotton imported in foreign shipping, a countervailing duty on the part of the American government would soon equalize it.
Mr. W. Fitzgeraldsaid, that the only

173]
duty on cotton in Ireland was a permanent duty.
Mr. Elliotsaid, that in opposing the motion, he gave a vote which he was obliged to give, from the utter want of information to satisfy the House of the necessity of the taxes they were about to vote.
The House then divided: For the motion, 95; Against it, 24; Majority 71.
The House then resolved itself into the committee.

STATE OF THE CORN LAWS.
The Corn Bill was brought up from the Commons, read a first time, and ordered to be printed. After which,
Earl Greyrose to bring forward his motion for further inquiry into the subject of the Corn laws; a motion which, from an imperious sense of duty alone, he was induced to submit to their lordships, and to which, from the great importance of the subject, he conceived that he had a strong claim on their lordships patience. It was not his intention at present to discuss either the general principle how far the Legislature ought to interfere with the regulation of the commerce in grain, or even to enter into any of the details of the measure now before the House, any farther than to shew the imperfect state of the information on which their lordships were proceeding to decide upon this occasion, and also to shew the necessity of farther inquiry into the subject. For the second reading of the Bill now before the House, it would be proper to reserve both the entering into the general merits of the Corn laws, and the particular discussion of the subject of that Bill; and he was persuaded that the House would then enter into that discussion with all the calmness and all the temper which such an important subject certainly required. He said all the calmness and all the temper which the subject required, because he had observed that in the discussions which had already taken place on this subject elsewhere, these qualities had not always belonged to them; and he was convinced that nothing could more prevent the decision which their lordships should
[126
think proper to pronounce from being satisfactory to the public, than the appearance of this being treated as a matter where adverse interests existed, and that it was not taken up in the spirit of calm investigation. For in no decision ought their lordships to favour the interests of one class more than another; but they ought to take a general and enlarged view of the interests of all, and the welfare and good of the whole community.
It had been truly stated by the noble earl opposite, the last night on which they were assembled, that unless it could be shewn that the measure was for the general good, it ought not to be entertained; and he had thus admitted, that if he could not shew that it was for the interest of the consumer as well as the agriculturist, he would proceed no farther with it. If one interest, however, ought more to be attended to than another in that House, it was that of the most laborious class of the community—the manufacturers: he trusted that even their prejudices would be indulged; and he was convinced that the decision of their lordships, whatever that decision might be, would give satisfaction to that part of the community, as that which was best calculated to produce the good of the whole. He could safely say, that in order that this character should be established with respect to the present proceedings, he had been induced to submit the present motion to the attention of their lordships. He could have no other motive than this. On this question, one of the most important which was ever argued within these walls, those friends whom he valued and looked up to for knowledge and instruction, were much divided in opinion. With respect to his own particular interests, if a man might speak of his own interests in a question like the present, they were entirely those of that description of persons by whom the present Bill was supported. He could, therefore, have no motive but the obtaining satisfactory data on which to proceed—excepting the elucidation of truth—excepting the attainment of those clear results which could alone make their decision such as to afford satisfaction to their own minds, and have authority over the minds of the public. If they wished their decision to be respected—if they wished the law, (if this Bill should ever pass into a law,) to be cheerfully obeyed,—the true way of proceeding ought to be to manifest an anxious desire to investigate this impor-

127]
tant question in all its bearings, before they came to that decision.
In a question like the present, on which the greatest number of petitions had been presented, that had ever, perhaps, been known in the history of parliament, the petitioners uniformly stating that the measure would have the effect of preventing a cheap supply of food to the labouring classes, it was their duty to examine into the subject with the utmost diligence and impartiality. The petitioners might possibly be labouring under a mistake—their feelings might have been improperly excited, and the views taken by them might be unfounded; but the true corrective of this evil would be to go into a dispassionate inquiry into the subject, and not to seem as if they had come to the decision of the question with minds already made up and determined. If the people were right in their views, they had a claim on their lordships to interfere in protecting them from the injury which they apprehended—if they were wrong, it was their lordships paramount duty to endeavour to enlighten their judgments, and to shew at least that they had themselves examined the subject. Let them not imagine that the discontent, if it existed, could be suppressed by any appearance of conduct indicating that they proceeded with undue precipitation, as if they were determined to pass a measure on which they had themselves made up their minds, and to shut the door to every objection and every call for information. This course, he was persuaded, it was the duty of their lordships to follow; and the question, therefore, this night was, whether, in point of fact, there existed a case sufficient to make the inquiry which he called for necessary; whether, in the discussions both in that House and elsewhere, in debates and pamphlets, in the amplitude of documents, in the voluminous evidence which had been adduced, the subject was not yet sufficiently elucidated; and whether there still remained on any point a want of information which could justly be required, and which ought to induce their lordships to stay their opinion, with a view to the farther investigation and elucidation of the question.
On this subject he had little more to do, than to refer to the Report of the committee of their lordships; for, with a view to consistency, their lordships were bound to adopt the recommendation with which the committee concluded that Re-
[128
port. It was almost unnecessary for him to state, that last year a committee of their lordships was appointed to investigate the present subject, who began to sit on the 13th of June, and continued to the 25th of July, in all six weeks, when they made their Report to the House. Knowing the persons who composed that committee, he was persuaded that neither pains nor diligence was spared by them, and he knew that they had communicated much valuable information to the House: but in producing this information they themselves were aware that it was not complete; and it was incontestable that they not only admitted that farther evidence was necessary, but expressly recommended to the House, that they should not proceed to legislate on a subject of so much importance without making farther inquiry, and obtaining that knowledge on subjects on which they were defective. The Report of the committee was fresh in the recollection of their lordships, but he was induced, on this occasion, to quote their expressions:—"Upon these principles your committee have proceeded in the investigation of this important subject; and though conscious that their labours have not been productive of all the information that they could have wished to have laid before your lordships, yet they are not without hopes, that their proceedings will, at least, have the effect of proving, in the most authentic manner, their anxious desire to execute fairly and impartially the duties confided to their charge: being persuaded that your lordships sole object in this inquiry, and in any other that you may institute, is to obtain such a body of information as to enable you, hereafter, to judge of the regulations which it may be proper to adopt, for securing to the public an adequate supply of grain at the lowest price that may be found consistent with the necessary encouragement of its growth." And the committee afterwards added, "At the same time they are so fully impressed with the necessity of producing further evidence upon some parts of the question, in order to render the investigation complete, that they cannot avoid anticipating your lordships opinion on the propriety of resuming the inquiry in a future session, and before any alteration takes place in laws affecting the interests both of the growers and consumers of corn in this kingdom." This was, in July 1314, the opinion of their lordships committee,

129]
after the conclusion of their laborious investigation, who thus stated their conviction, that before their lordships proceeded to make any alteration, they would call for farther evidence by an inquiry, conducted in some way or other before their lordships House. Since the printing of that immense body of evidence, a general discontent had spread throughout the country; the petitioners at the bar stated, that in their opinion the measure proposed would be injurious to the trading and manufacturing interests of the country; and yet, without one additional tittle of evidence, were they now to torn round on the petitioners and say to them, they were determined to hear nothing farther on the subject. This Report, in the opinion of the committee itself, was confessedly incomplete. If they wished to allay the discontents of the country, this was most assuredly a strange mode of proceeding. But he knew that it would be said by the noble earl opposite, that though no farther inquiry had taken place, certain facts had since come out, so obvious both in their causes and their effects, that it was impossible any longer to doubt of the necessity of the present measure. Upon the particular facts on which this rested, he should have something to say when they came to a farther stage of the discussion; but from what he had been told had passed before it was in his power to attend his duty in parliament, he understood that there were many persons of the committee who had recommended further inquiry, who now were of opinion that it was proper to desist from making such inquiry.
It was his duty now to state the particular point on which further information was required, and without which they would be proceeding to legislate on some most important points, as he conceived, without due knowledge of the subject. It was not, in his opinion, necessary to admit the general principle of the propriety of Parliament interfering for the protection of the agriculture of the country. Making no such admission, therefore, but for the sake of the present argument supposing the principle established that such interference was requisite, the question then was, in what manner they were about to interfere, and if they were sufficiently informed as to the nature and probable effect of the regulations which they were about to establish? The first point was, the regulation of the price at which they
[130
would admit the importation of foreign corn. This was fixed in the Bill brought up that day at 80 s. Now with respect to this most material point, had they, he would ask them, such information as to enable them to say what price ought to be fixed? A great deal of evidence had been adduced on this subject, but not of a satisfactory nature, often resting on data, which, when examined, would not bear the test, the same witness often affording the best means for refuting his own statement, one part of his testimony being at variance with another, and different witnesses having delivered the most different opinions. Looking at these opinions, he was altogether at a loss to conceive why 80 s. should be stated as the proper sum at which foreign corn might be imported. Many persons had been examined as to the price at which the grower of grain could afford to sell it in the market. One witness stated that he could not produce it at less than 96 s.; another had stated 120 s.; a third from 90 s. to 100 s.; Mr. Arthur Young, 87 s.; Mr. Driver, 90 s.; Mr. Turnbull, 84 s.; and Mr. Brodie and some others, from 84 to 90 s. A great number of these witnesses were much above 80 s.; and why 80 s. should be pitched upon he certainly could not conjecture. In looking at the calculations on which many of those opinions were founded, it was impossible for him not to say that they appeared to him to be conducted on a principle which stated the expenses of the agriculturist much higher than they ought to be, and there was therefore no sufficient groundwork for these opinions. In saying this he did not wish to be understood as imputing any improper motives to the gentlemen who gave this evidence. It was natural for men in their situation to act as they had done. But this he would state, that there were persons of no less authority than those who had been examined by their lordships' committee, who had given an opinion directly the contrary—there were persons as respectable in every way, who had given their opinions that a price a great way below this was sufficient for the farmer. He observed his noble friend (the earl of Lauderdale) looking as if he disputed the troth of this assertion; he would inform him, that he did not allude to the evidence taken before the committee of their lordships, but the evidence before the committee of the House of Commons; and here he must say, that notwithstand-

131]
ing the obligations which they were under to the diligence and ability of the noble lords by whom the inquiry was conducted, it was impossible not to perceive that the questions and examinations had often been influenced by a partial view of the subject; and that, if the witnesses had been more accurately examined, many of them who appeared at first view favourable to the measure would in reality have appeared adverse to it. There was evidence before the House of Commons supporting the opinion that much less than 80 s. was sufficient.
Mr. Driver, the first witness examined by the committee of the House of Commons, stated, that in his opinion 5l. per quarter was absolutely necessary to protect the farmer against the foreign grower—that there should be an absolute prohibition of importation till the price arrived at 90 s. and that from 90 s. to 5l. there should be a duty on a decreasing scale. Being, however, asked, if he was of opinion that if 18 l. or 20 l. a load could be obtained as an average price, the improvement of the agriculture of the country would continue progressively to increase, he answered that he thought it would pretty much; that would not alarm the people—the cultivation of the country would continue, if not increase. Now here he would only remark, that wheat at 20 l. a load would be 10 s. a bushel, and at 18 l. a load 9s. a bushel, which was exactly 72 s. the quarter, so that, even at 72 s. a quarter, one of those persons who had stated that the foreigner should be excluded till the price reached 5l. still thought that the English farmer could be sufficiently protected. Another witness, Mr. Claridge, who stated the price at 80 s. being asked if, in his opinion, the inferior lands in Yorkshire, and other counties he had described, would be thrown out of the cultivation of wheat, if the price were to be 8s. a bushel, the prices of sheep, wool, and other produce, excepting wheat, remaining nearly at their present rate? answered, that he thought, under those circumstances, the cultivation of wheat would be discontinued. Being afterwards asked, would those lands remunerate the farmer, if the price of barley and oats were reduced in proportion to that of wheat? He answered, perhaps they might; he could not say but what they might. Here, therefore, was evidence, which in one part of it certainly bore a very different construction from that which the first part of
[132
his opinion might lead to. Mr. Crabtree stated from 70 s. to 75 s. as sufficient; Mr. Mant and another gentleman thought 75 s. and 72 s. were ample protection. With this evidence, that 75 s. or 72 s. would be a sufficient protection, he would ask them on what ground they adopted 80 s. as a protection? Many of those witnesses who had been examined, and whose evidence had been represented as favourable to the Bill, would, if further examined, afford a contradiction of this. He alluded in particular to one gentleman, Mr. Wakefield, very eminent in his line, who had great experience and great knowledge, both with respect to this country and to Ireland, and who had been represented as stating 80 s. to be a proper protecting price to the farmer. He believed he might state from authority, that Mr. Wakefield's opinion was against the present measure. If he had been represented as stating that 80 s. was a fair remunerating price to the farmer, and if he was a man conversant on the subject, and capable of giving their lordships much useful information, and the data on which this opinion, unfavourable to the Bill, was founded, their lordships would surely allow him to be further examined on the subject. There were other persons also, though he had not authority to name them, who would state an unfavourable opinion, and what was of most importance to them, the grounds on which that opinion was founded. Among those persons whose habits made them conversant in subjects of this kind, and who thought 80 s. too high, and that 72 s. was a sufficient protecting price, there was one person, whom he could not with propriety name in that House, or allude to (sir James Graham), who had of late paid particular attention to the investigation of this subject, and who had in an opinion given somewhere else stated himself in favour of the lowest of these sums. This person was well known to be connected with some of the greatest land estates in the kingdom; and he had declared that in all the communications he had had with farmers and surveyors of credit, he had never heard that the agriculturist would not be sufficiently protected at a prohibitory regulation of 72 s. If they had this high authority against the price of 80 s., was not this, he would ask, a point which they ought to inquire into, and ascertain, before they proceeded to legislate on so important a subject?
Though he had hitherto only stated the

133]
argument as applicable to England, with respect to Ireland, the case was still stronger. But though they were urged to this measure as much for the sake of Ireland as of England, and though the greatest number of petitions praying for some relief were from that country, yet he would say that there was not one tittle of evidence before their lordships to shew at what rate grain could be grown and sold by the Irish agriculturist. In the House of Commons some evidence had been obtained on that subject, but it was contradictory. Mr. Wakefield said he thought 70 s. sufficient: another gentleman said 64 s. The general result, however, of the evidence before the House of Commons respecting Ireland was, that grain could be grown at a much less price in that country than in England. And as far as his information went, from the state of labour and the comparative low taxation in Ireland, corn, under a moderate rent, could be grown at a much less rate than any of the sums which had been stated. Looking, therefore, at Ireland, in particular, he would say that there was no evidence that any protection was required for that country; but if some protection was necessary for the safety of the English farmer, what would be the effect produced by this measure? It must produce one of two effects. By fixing the protecting price at 80 s. it would have the effect of keeping up the price to the consumer to that sum, and would thus give the grower a greater remuneration than was necessary, and would thus keep up the rents of the landholders of Ireland at the expense of the people of England; or it would have this other effect—as grain was grown in Ireland much cheaper than it could be grown in England, they would be enabling the Irish grower to undersell the English farmer in the market of England, which would render the present measure an insufficient protection to the English farmer. Would any man say that any of these effects were of so unimportant a nature that it was not necessary to inquire into them before coming to a determination? The Irish grower would be able very much to undersell the English grower, and with the number of Irish absentee landlords, resident in England, to whom remittances must be made, and with the interest on their public debt due in England, the Irish grower would be under the inevitable necessity of bringing his corn to England, and would thus undersell the English
[134
grower. But, then, what became of the protection to English agriculture, the poor lands, which would be thrown out of cultivation, and the numerous other mischiefs which were to follow the want of this protection? [Hear, hear!] This effect would be infallibly produced, and all the advantages which they promised themselves from this measure would be defeated, unless at the same time that they protected the English farmer against the foreign grower, they also repealed the beneficial law of 1806, by which corn was allowed to be imported from Ireland into this country. All he said that they ought to ascertain was, whether these effects were likely to follow or not. They ought to inquire whether the English farmer should be supported or left open to the competition which he had here stated.
He conceived that he had already made out a strong case for this inquiry, by showing, first, that there was no satisfactory evidence that 80 s. was required for England; in the next place, that there was no evidence to show that this sum was requisite for Ireland, but that on the contrary there were strong reasons for presuming that a much cheaper price would be sufficient for that country; and, lastly, that England and Ireland together were proceeding to enact a law by which the English farmer would be exposed to those very evils which it was the intention of this measure to remove. Before they could fix the price at 80 s. it was necessary not only to know whether this sum was requisite for Ireland, but also at what rate corn could be imported from foreign countries. Here, also, the information of which the House was in possession was defective. When their lordships committee were sitting, the only importation into this country came from the Baltic; and the whole tendency of the evidence before that committee was to shew that corn could not be imported from the Baltic, without a loss, under 75 s. One person, Mr. Solly, stated, that it could not be imported much under 80 s., but in general the witnesses agreed that it could not be imported under 75 s. If, therefore, the evidence went to shew that 75 s. or 72 s. was a sufficient protecting price to the English landholder, as far as the foreign importer was concerned, there was no evidence to shew that the public interest could be in any wise affected. But it was now found that the Baltic was not the only place from which corn might be imported. By

135]
the happy termination of hostilities with France, which situation of things, he trusted, was not likely to be endangered by any recent events in that country,—and he hoped that it at least would not be endangered by any injudicious interference on the part of this country, if any struggle should take place in France,—the markets of Great Britain, were at length accessible to Holland, the Netherlands, and France. Whether it was thought that England could not permanently obtain any supply of corn from these countries, or that they wailed for further information on this subject, he knew not; but the fact was, that with regard to the supplies from these countries, they had no information whatever; and they were ignorant both as to the capacity they possessed of producing more corn than was necessary for their own consumption, and as to the price at which corn could be imported from them into England. He knew that he should be told, that all examination on the subject was unnecessary, from the notoriety of the fact, that importation had taken place to a considerable extent from these countries, and that such importation had produced a great effect on the home market—a notoriety which precluded the necessity of any inquiry. He anticipated this statement, as one which the noble lord opposite was likely to make. But to this he would answer, that no noble lord ought, from the importation of one particular year, to conclude that the same thing would happen in all future years. The importation of that year might be produced by a thousand temporary circumstances which were not likely to continue. In fact, they had some sort of evidence, to shew, that such a state of things as did exist last year arose from peculiar circumstances, which could not be supposed to continue. He alluded to the two witnesses called on this point—Mr. Samuel Scott and Mr. Barandon. Mr. Scott told them, that in the present relative state of the home market and the continental markets, it was impossible that any considerable importation of grain could take place. He allowed that some wheat had arrived that year, but not in considerable quantity; and he accounted for it partly from disappointment of the holders of wheat on the continent, who had principally intended their adventures for the Spanish and Portuguese markets, which markets had fallen in a greater proportion than the markets in England, and
[136
partly from an expectation of the foreign merchants that an advance would have taken place in Great Britain. Here, then, there was evidence that the importation arose from a decrease in the demand in Spain and Portugal, since the cessation of hostilities. Mr. John Barandon stated, that the importation was on account of the high prices expected in this country, and the high duty which they thought would be imposed.
The noble earl proceeded to observe, that upon this point there was no satisfactory information as to the price at which grain could be imported, and that therefore it was peculiarly incumbent upon the House to call for information upon this branch of the subject before they proceeded to legislate. He was aware he should be told, as it had already been said, that the importation of grain to a considerable extent from France, together with the price, was a matter of notoriety. Still, however, much information upon the subject was required, particularly if, as there was reason to believe, a large importation had taken place upon the speculation of some measure regarding the Corn laws passing through Parliament. If this were the case, then it would be found that the avowed or intimated intention of Parliament had been the chief cause of the importation, against the effects of which it was the object of this very measure to seek protection. Upon another important point also they were greatly in want of information; he alluded to the effect of the present mode of taking the averages. It was on all hands admitted, that the present system of ascertaining the averages was extremely erroneous. The average was struck of the twelve maritime districts; and one small district in South Wales, where perhaps not more than 100 quarters of wheat were sold, might regulate the average of the vast supply for the consumption of this great metropolis. No information whatever was before them as to the effect which this mode of striking the averages would have upon the price under the present Bill. Were they sure that they were really legislating for a price of 76 s. or for 80 s.? They had no data whatever before them to lead them one way or the other to any certain conclusion; all was doubt, hesitation, and contradiction. It had been said that the effect of the measure would be to raise the quartern loaf to 1s. 4d. This had been controverted; and he was ready to admit, that supposing the

137]
actual price to be 80 s. the quartern loaf ought not to be more than 1s. But what was the fact? At the present price of 60 s. the quartern loaf was 1s. and therefore at 80 s. one third more, the price of the quartern loaf must be 1s. 4d. He admitted that this arose from the mode of setting the assize of bread; but did not this form an important subject of inquiry, in order that they might ascertain the details of the manufacture of flour, and the manner of setting the assize? They might thus confer an important benefit upon the consumers, by lowering the price of bread, which would tend at once to allay the popular ferment. But to do this they must institute an inquiry, without which they could not legislate with any advantage or satisfaction. Another assertion had been made and denied, that the import price would be the minimum price in the market, and that wheat would never be sold at a less rate. He did not mean to assert that such must necessarily be the effect of the measure; but the House had no information to enable them to legislate upon the subject with any certainly, as to what would be the actual effect upon the price of wheat. He had looked into the tables, comparing them with the averages for several years back, and he had found that the market price of wheat had been often below the import price, but sometimes much above it, and that there was frequently a very considerable difference between the average price and the real price. Upon these points the House was destitute of information, and this formed an essential ground for going into the inquiry which he intended to propose. They did not know whether the import price might be the maximum or the minimum price in the market, or what effect the measure would have on the market price. How, then, could they legislate?
There was still another point applicable to this subject of the greatest importance, he alluded to the state of the circulation. Would it be contended that 80 s. now, particularly after the sanguine prospect held out by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of the resumption of cash-payments in the next year, was the same as 80 s. would be when a regular and healthy circulation was restored: This, then, was a point on which the House required information, and without which they could not safely proceed to legislate. In thus detailing the grounds on which he thought further inquiry necessary, he certainly
[138
did not mean to object to the general principle of extending protection to agriculture; that was equally just as applied to agriculture as to the woollen trade, the coal trade, and other branches of commerce. The question was, what protection was required by the actual circumstances of the case? He was aware that agricultural distress existed to a great extent; he knew that in his own neighbourhood it existed to a considerable extent. The pressure on the farmer of course extended in an aggravated degree to the labourer. Still, however, it should be recollected what the price of wheat was for a few years previous to 1813, and even in that year, although a year of great plenty, the price of wheat was 120 s. It was impossible, therefore, to suppose that so much distress would have arisen in a short time from a fall in the price of wheat, unless arising from that general derangement of interests which resulted from the effects of a long and expensive war. All these therefore formed strong and essential grounds for inquiry, in order that they might ascertain with correctness what they were actually doing, and what was, in fact, required to be done. All parties would be satisfied if a case was properly made out. The ports were now shut against importation, and would remain so for three months to come; no inconvenience therefore could arise from delay. His lordship concluded by moving "to institute a further inquiry relative to the state of the growth, commerce, and consumption of grain, and the state of the laws relating thereto."
The Earl of Derbydeclared his conviction, that the petitions of his fellow-subjects were always entitled to the most serious consideration. This opinion he had held through life, and he was the less likely to abandon it on such an occasion, when the table was crowded with them. He had presented many himself, with the prayers of which, unfortunately, he could not agree; but as they were all dictated by the most honourable and conscientious motives, they should be attended to. He would even go so far as to say, that, as long as there was a single man in the country who wished to petition, Parliament ought to pause. He therefore recommended to their lordships to agree to the motion. It was impossible for them, even if they could pass the Bill to-night and obtain the Regent's assent to-morrow, to prevent the discussions which they

139]
might be anxious to avoid. These discussions would arise upon motions for the repeal, and in other shapes that could not be evaded. He agreed most cordially in his noble friend's motion; and if the discussion on the Bill itself should alter his opinion, no false shame should prevent him from retracting the opinion which he now held.
The Earl of Hardwickedefended the committee, and explained its proceedings. The first inquiry in which it was occupied, was to ascertain the price at which grain could be imported. The want of communication with the continent prevented the evidence from being so perfect on that head as could be wished. With respect to the commerce of corn from the Baltic, it was complete; but there was a deficiency in the intelligence regarding France, Holland, and the Netherlands, from which such an immense supply had recently taken place. There was another head of inquiry relative to the manufacture of flour from grain, and of bread from flour. The committee had a difficulty on that subject; and in former times it was found impossible to combine it with the general subject. His lordship then entered into a detail of correspondence between the committee and several petitioners; from which it appeared, that the committee had taken every means to collect evidence either for or against the measure.
Lord St. Johnsaid, that if the present motion had been made at a former period, he would have agreed to it, but he thought the proposition now came too late.
Viscount Bulkeleysupported the motion, without pledging himself as to his future opinion.
The Earl of Limerickobserved, that the noble mover seemed to consider Ireland as if it was a foreign country, and not entitled to the protection of the British Legislature. [His lordship was proceeding to observe upon what he conceived lord Grey to have stated, when the noble earl rose to explain as to the hypothesis he had put with respect to the effect of the measure. The Earl of Limerick spoke to order, conceiving the noble earl was replying. Earl Grey again rose and explained, that he had alluded to the effect which in one way or the other, with regard to Ireland or England, either giving the Irish farmer an undue profit, or to the Irish landlord a greater rent, or enabling the Irish grower to undersell the English farmer, which the measure was calculated
[140
to produce.] The earl of Limerick then proceeded, and observed, that of the six million of which the population of Ireland consisted, four million were engaged in agriculture. By the importations from France, this numerous class of persons were greatly distressed; was it not, therefore, an object of the greatest importance to give protection to this numerous class of persons, which could only be effected by the present Bill?
Earl Spencerobserved, that the question was, whether they would legislate with their eyes open or their eyes shut? His noble friend called for inquiry; there were many most essential points upon which they were either utterly ignorant or deficiently informed; surely, therefore, they were peculiarly called upon to agree to his noble friend's motion, that they might legislate with due information, and with a knowledge of all the bearings of the subject.
Viscount Mountjoyurged the interests of Ireland as being deeply involved in the present measure; the agriculture there, from which this country derived so essential a supply, standing greatly in need of protection. Delay would be to their interests highly injurious, as there were a great number of farmers at the present moment who refrained from sowing the ground until they should be secure of protection against foreign importation, under a fair protecting price.
Viscount Sidmouthconceived the motion to found itself on two things—the necessity of having more information, and respect for the rank and number of the petitioners, which was supposed to be involved in the delay of the measure. As to information, he was surprised to hear that now called for. There was, in fact, no one subject in the whole range of political economy on which our information had been so full, nay so voluminous. It had been the subject of twenty years. A great nnmber of volumes, and some of them of great excellence, had been written on the question. In 1794, the subject had been discussed. Again in 1804, again in 1806, it had come under revision: two committees of the House of Commons had investigated it; it was now examined by a committee of their own. There was no ground for the idea that the committee had proceeded on ex parte evidence. They had examined the question diligently in its various bearings, and their opinion was pronounced with all obvious impartiality. As to the motion for in-

141]
quiry, why did the House hear of it now for the first time? During the six weeks that passed from the first meeting of parliament, net one syllable had been dropped on the subject, except by a noble lord (Grenville), who at the recess had mentioned it as one of the questions necessary to be discussed. On the first day of their last assembling, a noble lord gave notice that he would not propose the further sitting of the committee; thus giving room for noble lords to declare any intention they might have of following up the topic. But here again, not one syllable was said from the 19th of February to the 13th of March. The noble chairman assigned his reasons why further information might be wanting. That referred to France. That information was now, however, fully given. The noble lord proceeded to state, that were the motion acceded to, the House might go on examining witnesses till the dog-days, and after all, there would be no end to the inquiry. The House had ample grounds to legislate upon already, and they must at any rate exercise their own judgment in the last resort. The noble earl had suggested the possibility of the Irish underselling the English farmer, and had stated this as a fit subject for farther inquiry: but was the House prepared to make any such distinction? As well might the House inquire into the rates at which farmers in various parts of England, in Devonshire, Cornwall, and Yorkshire, could raise their produce. The question was, whether we were not rather to protect the supply from Ireland, than from other countries which could either give or withhold it, as it pleased their respective governments. No man entertained a higher respect for the petitioners than he did: he wished that the people of this country should always think and speak freely on the great interests of the nation, and should approach both Houses of Parliament with their sentiments. At the same time he had to remark, that very few of the petitions asked for delay; they neither asked for, nor offered to present further evidence. They were for no change in the Corn laws. To please them, the Bill now in its progress must at once be stopped. But would this meet the views of the noble mover, or of their lordships generally? He saw great inconvenience in the suspense, anxiety, and irritation which any unnecessary delay would produce, and therefore should oppose the motion.
Lord Kingcontended, that the petitions praying for no alteration in the Corn laws, formed no objection to inquiry, it being for the House to legislate, and it being of course its duty, before legislating upon a subject, to obtain the best information respecting it. The information at present before them was altogether insufficient; they had none as to the expense of growing wheat in Ireland, or as to what would be a fair protecting price for the Irish farmer. They had no satisfactory information upon many other important points; and he should, therefore, vote for the motion of his noble friend.
Lord Mountjoycontended, that any delay in the measure would be of the greatest injury to Ireland, where the farmers would abstain from sowing wheat, till they knew what would be the protection they were to expect. His lordship repeated the arguments so often urged respecting the advantage to be derived by this country from the circulation of her manufactures in Ireland. They had been told, that Ireland was a log round the neck of England; but if this was the case, what had been the cause of it? He would answer—the want of capital; and he would add, that the only means of furnishing capital to that country was to encourage her agriculture, and to enable her to bring her corn to this country. By this means her prosperity would be insured, and instead of becoming a burthen upon England, she would become one of her chief supports. With these sentiments, he felt it his duty to vote in favour of the Bill, and against the motion of the noble earl.
The Earl of Lauderdalesaid, that conscious of the vital importance of the subject now before the House, it had received from him the most anxious consideration; and the result was, that he was more firmly fixed than ever in the opinions he had originally maintained. He admitted to his noble friend, that there were some points on which sufficient inquiry had not taken place, namely, on the mode of taking the averages of corn, and regulating the assize of bread. These, however, were topics by no means essentially connected with the Bill before the House; and he must say, in justice to the noble earl at the head of the committee last year, that he never saw a chairman labour so hard as he did to get evidence of all sorts. For himself, he only viewed the measure as a protection to the British farmer, and therefore he did not care

143]
much about the precise importation price that might be fixed. In this view, thinking that the price ought not to be lower than 80 s., he would have been prepared to go as far as even 90 or 95 s., as being calculated more effectually to secure domestic supply, and when the proper time arrived he should be prepared to assign his reasons for this opinion. In the mean time he should advert to some parts of the evidence before the committee, on which his noble friend (earl Grey) had commented. It was true that Mr. Mant, one of the persons examined, had given it as his opinion that 72 s. would repay the farmer; but this was on the supposition of the removal of the income tax, and of the wages of labour being lowered. The former of these conditions had indeed taken place; but were the petitioners, he would ask, prepared to consent to the latter? Would they not find it better to leave bread somewhat dear, with good wages, than cheap bread and no wages at all? The latter of these alternatives, he was sorry to say, was the situation of many of the agricultural labourers in his part of the country, where bread indeed was cheap, but, from the want of employment, they had no wages. His noble friend had called upon the House to stop legislating on this subject, until the currency of the country had recovered its standard value. This, if listened to, he feared would entail an absolute prohibition on the measure for years to come. It by no means followed, that if 80 s. was fixed as the importation price, it would be also the minimum price of corn. This was contradicted by the whole history of our corn laws; and during many years of the last century the average price had been only 35 s., while if the importation price was likely to be the minimum price, it should have been as high as 60 s. He would repeat, that the distress among the agricultural labourers was extreme; and if agriculture was not protected, they would naturally crowd into the towns, and thus, by competition, lower the price of manufacturing labour. His object was to afford such protection to home supply as would, upon an average of years, secure abundance, for the supply was necessarily regulated by the demand. He was disposed to speak with every respect of the petitioners; but on questions of this sort, he had seldom witnessed, enlightened proceedings on the part of the great body of the merchants and manufacturers. They
[144
were too apt to consider the present alone, without looking forward to future years. There was only one way of enlightening the lower orders on a subject of this kind, and that was by making them experience the beneficial effects of the law which the Legislature should enact. It was a frequent argument in the mouths of the manufacturers, that if we imported grain to the amount of a million, we exported manufactures to a similar amount. There never was a more unfounded opinion than this. If by the protection of agriculture the whole of this corn was raised by our own farmers, would not this be preferable to the manufacturer in every point of view? It was impossible to enumerate the variety of ways in which the prosperity of the agricultural classes created a demand for manufactures.
The Earl of Darnleyexpressed his high satisfaction at the speech of his noble friend who had just sat down, by the strong arguments contained in which he had been confirmed in opinions which he had long entertained. At the same time he was anxious that the House should proceed with every possible degree of deliberation, and that they should not move a step with the Bill, while it was possible to say that a single piece of evidence on the subject was wanting. By this course, he was convinced the landowners would be far from losers. Although he was satisfied, in his own mind, that the restrictive price of 80 s. would not raise the quartern loaf above 1s., yet he thought that, in a measure on which so much agitation pervaded the public mind, further inquiry ought to lake place; and, therefore, he should give his vote in favour of the motion.
Lord Grenville, in a luminous and elaborate speech, contended that the only safe line of conduct for the House to adopt was to abstain from all legislative interference on the subject. If, he said, a just light did not even yet pervade the councils of the country upon it, he should deplore it as a calamity. He conjured the House not to take any step without well understanding their ground. The facts before them were sufficient to shew the consequences of proceeding upon any mistaken principle. The committee had felt that the House would not discharge its duty unless it resumed the inquiry before any alteration took place in the laws. He was of the same opinion. The first object of the inquiry ought to be into

145]
the capability of the country to supply the full quantity required for its subsistence. The number of acres might be extended to three times, or even thirty times as many as were now sown with corn, if sufficient capital could be employed in their cultivation. But the quantity of capital requisite to effect this object was a material consideration, as well as to ascertain at what price the corn could be grown. Respecting the necessity of fixing the price at 80 s., the evidence, so far from agreeing, had been completely contradictory; yet the House was about to legislate on a subject which was to be permanent, and to fix a price, calculated at a time when money was greatly depreciated, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer had declared that there was a prospect of the currency rising to its former level in the very next year. This was a most important reason for going into the inquiry, and it was the only way in which the House could discharge its duty to the country. He was unable to discover what other effect the measure could have than to raise the price of corn. But another question was, what effect it would have on the wages of the labourer? The House should proceed to inquire what would be the effect of an increase of the price of labour? If the price of bread increased, and the price of labour did not increase, what then would be the condition of the labourer? The wisest thing, in his opinion, would be to abstain from legislating at all. He would never assent to any doctrine which separated the manufacturing from the agricultural interests; and if there was any one interest that could be more injured by the measure than another, he would say that this was the body of landholders, on whom it would entail the greatest mischief. It was, therefore, a matter that ought to be looked at and sifted to the very bottom. He would wish to propose an inquiry into the causes which have kept corn at the high prices at which it so long had been; and if it should appear owing to the difficulty of importing corn at any period from abroad, on what principle could it be argued that this high price would not continue when importation was prohibited? Importation ought, on the other hand, to be entirely free from Ireland; if not, where was the justice of the Union? Nothing could be more just or important than the knitting together the interests of Great Britain and Ireland.
[146
Yet, when all the ports of the world were to be shut against the British consumer, except Ireland, it then became the House to consider that they had a duty to perform as British subjects. He objected to the very imperfect and inaccurate statements of the averages on which it must be utterly unsafe to found a permanent measure, and insisted that the market price bore no regular proportion to the standard price. That the Bill was meant to have the effect of raising the price of corn was plain, else why uniformly put this question—to what price must corn rise to give it protection? That it must also have the effect of keeping out of this country the foreign corn which formerly came into it, till it reached 80 s. was equally clear. He should ask a question, which he was surprised had not been put in this report, What had been the cause of the exceeding high price of grain for many years past? And if that question was answered—the difficulty of getting corn from abroad—which he was sure it would be, that should certainly deter the House from proceeding farther. With regard to foreign supply, he much doubted whether, under any circumstances, France could now supply this country with any considerable quantity of corn, so long as that law continued in force which prohibited the exportation of corn from that country when it was at 49 s. the quarter. Upon the general question of dependence, the present was not the time for entering; but when that time did arrive, he should be prepared to maintain the opinion, that a more pernicious maxim than the vain imagination that a commercial country could keep itself wholly independent of foreign supply,—in other words, that we should cut ourselves off from commercial intercourse with Europe to a certain extent,—never entered into the policy of any state. There was another subject which had been altogether omitted in every discussion of the present measure, both in another place, and in the opening speech of his noble friend: he alluded to the distilleries. Had they no connexion with the proposed measure? and how would its operation affect the revenue, by increasing the price of the raw material? Not a word had been said upon that subject, and yet their lordships would be surprised to hear the amount of revenue which was put to hazard by legislating on it. He implored their lordships from every consideration, in justice to themselves, in justice to their

147]
country, not to precipitate a question affecting the vital interests of the whole nation, whether agricultural, manufacturing, or commercial. As yet they had the evidence only on one side, and they had no evidence to prove what would be the effect of the measure upon the manufacturing classes of the community. For himself he had no possible motive that could bias him in the judgment he had formed. If he had interests, they were interwoven with those of the agriculturists of the country; if he had connexions that might influence him, they were to be found among the landed proprietors; nay, if he looked higher, and had any public prejudices, he did not blush to say that they also pointed the same way, for to the landed interest this country owed its present greatness among the nations of the world. Yet, with all those feelings about him, he most solemnly pronounced it as his opinion, that the intended measure would be an impolitic one; and he therefore again entreated their lordships to pause, to inquire, to reflect, if they hoped to discharge their duty to themselves, and to their country.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, that whatever differences might subsist between himself and the noble baron who had just sat down, he would frankly confess that he had never heard a question discussed with more candour and fairness than the present had been, not only by that noble baron, but also by the noble earl who opened the question. The question they had to determine was, whether they had or had not a sufficient body of evidence before them to entertain the Bill that had been brought up that day from the House of Commons; and he should proceed very briefly to state his reasons for thinking that they had enough. Were the measure one which stood upon the narrow ground of affording relief to a particular class of the community, he would not support it; not from any want of feeling towards the sufferings of any separate body of men, nor from any indisposition to alleviate those sufferings, but because, from long expeperience, he had come to the conclusion that you cannot relieve one class of people without injuring some other class more or less. Upon that subject there was a great deal of mistaken legislation in our statute books; but with regard to the present measure, it was so far from being one which looked only to the relief of a particular class, that it embraced the interests
[148
of all, and of the poor above all. What had been the course of the question now before them? It had occupied the attention of Parliament for three years; and dining the last session the subject was renewed; but nothing was done respecting it, except a partial act of legislation, because it was thought necessary that more inquiry should be instituted, and more information obtained. That inquiry had been gone into, and the result of it was the mass of evidence now upon the tables of both Houses of Parliament. One thing was most certain, that whatever it might be thought necessary to do, should be done without delay. If they meant to legislate, they should legislate at once; but their pace ought neither to be quickened nor retarded by the clamour out of doors. The injury which the country was sustaining from indecision and procrastination was great. Many estates could not be sold, many farms could not be let, and many landlords who were disposed to lower their rents, could not do so, till it was known decisively what course Parliament intended to pursue. Neither land nor labour could stand upon its true footing in the present uncertainty of this measure. The next question was, whether the noble earl had laid any sufficient ground for inducing the House to demand further inquiry; and after the most attentive consideration which he had been able to give to the speech of that noble earl, he was decidedly of opinion that no such ground had been shewn. One of the arguments urged by the noble earl, was the contradictory evidence which had been given: but surely he could not suppose that by continuing the inquiry he would be able to get rid of that contradiction in the testimony. Such contradiction must inevitably exist. If a farmer were asked at what expense he could cultivate his farm, his replies must depend upon the country in which it might be situated, the nature, of the soil, and whether it happened to be in a manufacturing or agricultural district. Upon the whole, he really did not see how further inquiry could throw new light upon the subject. Upon the question of averages, he should merely say, that those averages having been the existing ones for the last twenty years, it would be more expedient to legislate upon them than to proceed to make any alteration in them. He had been at great pains to examine that subject, and the result of all his investigations was, that he felt fully

149]
persuaded they were not liable to any fraud or trick, as they were now taken. If they altered the averages at the same time they altered the prices, they would not be able fairly or fully to judge of the effects of the present measure. Another question connected with the Bill was the assize; and undoubtedly as long as the assize continued as at present, the people of this metropolis would eat their bread dearer than those who resided in parts which were beyond the operation of that regulation. His opinion upon the subject was, that under certain modifications it would be better to get rid of the assize altogether. With respect to the petitions which had been presented, he felt most thoroughly disposed to pay every respect to them, as containing the wishes of a great portion of the people of this country; but he was persuaded that accidental circumstances alone had prevented their lordships table from being loaded with petitions from Ireland, in support of the measure; and he mentioned it only to impress upon their attention, that they had to legislate for the population of the whole empire. It was undoubtedly a question of great difficulty, and one which had created great difference of opinion; but he believed, if the united kingdoms were canvassed throughout, more would be found favourable than adverse to the measure. It was the duty of Parliament to legislate deliberately, and, having formed its opinion to proceed with that measure which it might, in its wisdom, deem most expedient for the benefit of the whole empire.
Their lordships divided on earl Grey's motion.

Contents

18

Non-Contents

Present …81

124

Proxies …43

List of the Minority.

DUKES.

Fortescue

Sussex

Darnley

Gloucester

Grey

Devonshire

Breadalbane

Argyll

VISCOUNTS.

MARQUISSES.

Bulkeley

Douglas

Torrington

Wellesley

BARONS.

EARLS.

Grenville

Derby

King

Essex

Calthorpe

Stanhope

Earl Spencer was obliged to leave the House before the division, on account of indisposition. The duke of Somerset paired off with lord Cassilis.

PROTEST ON THE REJECTION OF EARL GREY'S MOTION.
The following Protest was entered upon the Journals:
"DISSENTIENT,
"Because inquiry has been deemed necessary to afford this House full information respecting the state of the growth, the commerce, and the consumption of grain, and all laws relating thereto, previous to the adoption of any new regulation on these subjects.
"Because, though a committee has been appointed for the purpose of such inquiries, and has produced a voluminous Report, containing much information respecting the matters referred to their consideration, it is acknowledged in that Report that the investigation is not complete, and it is anticipated as the opinion of this House, that it will be proper to resume the inquiry before any alteration takes place in the laws affecting the interests both of the growers and consumers of corn.
"Because, with the obvious deficiency of information thus acknowledged in the Report of the Committee itself, and with the strong doubts which so many persons entertain as to the propriety of making any change in the existing laws, we cannot think it expedient to proceed to legislate upon a subject, which, of all others, requires the fullest and most patient investigation, and in which the mischief of any error must be so extensive and dangerous.

(Signed,) AUGUSTUS FREDERICK.

WILLIAM FREDERICK.

STANHOPE.

ESSEX.

KING.

TORRINGTON.

GRENVILLE.

GREY."