Sitting of 18 March 1830

MINUTES.
Returns presented—Of the period at which the Cork Foundling Hospital was first established, and statements relative thereto:—Copies of Memorials to the Irish Government on the subject of advances to build the Court House at Kerry. Of Memorials to the Commissioners of Customs relative to the office of Coal Meters, Dublin. The expenditure of the Commissioners of Public Records in 1829, and Works published. The number of Letters, from the Solicitor to the Board of Taxes to persons in i arrear in 1829, and charges thereon. Writs or Processes issued by the Solicitor. Letter from Mr. Abbot, dated Nov. 27, 1829, with the observations of Messrs. Brooks-bank and Bcltz. A Scale of Stamp Duties on Bills of Exchange. Accounts of the Notes of Country Bankers; Notes stamped; and of the Bankers who have commuted for the Stamp Duty since 1826. Accounts relative to the Penitentiary at Milbank; and to the Irish Tontine Annuity office. Accounts of the Corn, Meal, and Flour imported from Ireland during the last two years. Copies of the informations and judgment against Mr. Alexander, the Editor of the Morning Journal. The gross receipt of the tolls of vessels passing the Light Houses of Winterton, Orfordness, Dungeness, North and South Foreland, and of Hunston Cliff, with the expense of maintaining the Light Houses. The number of Contracts now existing for supplying the Naval service. The Second Report of the Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on East India Affairs. A copy of the Commission issued for inquiring into the state of Ecclesiastical Courts in England and Wales.
An Address was ordered to be presented to his Majesty, for a copy of the 18th and 19th Reports on the Public Records of Ireland.
Returns ordered—On the Motion of the Marquis of BLANDFORD, of the number of Persons entitled to vote at Election of Members of Parliament for Ireland:—On the Motion of Mr. SYKES, of the amount of Tonnage entered Inwards and cleared Outwards in Ireland since 1823:—On the Motion of Mr. WOLRYCHE WHITMORE, of the total quantities of Hides, Skins, Malt, Coffee, Tea, Paper, Printed Goods, British and Irish Spirits and Tobacco, charged with Excise Duties in each year since 1818:—Of the number of Gallons of Spirits imported from Scotland into England since 1827; with the number of Excise Officers employed on the Borders, and the Expense, as well at an Account of the quantity of Spirits seized.
Petitions were presented—praying for a Free Trade to China—by Sir R. FEROUSON from the Magistrates, and Town-Council of Kirkaldy; and from the Chamber of Commerce of Kirkaldy:—By the Earl of BELFAST, from the Merchants of Belfast. Praying for a Repeal of the Vestry Act, Ireland, by Lord BINGHAM, from the parishes of Kilcomen and Robin. Praying for the Repeal of the Subletting act, by Mr. O'CONNELL, from three parishes in Ireland. Praying for a Reform in Parliament, by the Marquis of BLANDFORD, from Garboldsham (Norfolk). Against the proposed Alteration in the Licensing System, by Mr. PELL, from the Licensed Victuallers of Cheltenham. Praying for a Repeal of the Malt Duties by Mr. EDWARD DAVENPORT:—By Mr. POTTER MACQUEEN, from the Freeholders of Bedford; and complaining of Distress, and praying Relief, by Admiral SOTHERON, from Southwell.
The Indemnity Bill was brought in and read a First time; as was a Bill to Repeal certain Inoperative Statutes in Ireland.

REVISION OF THE CRIMINAL LAW.
Petitions praying for a revision of the Criminal Law, so as to do away with the punishment of Death incases of Forgery and other crimes, except murder, and to render punishment more certain, were presented from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, by Sir M. W. Ridley; from Carlisle, by Colonel Lushington; and from Chelmsford, by Mr. Bramston. The hon. Gentleman said, that he concurred with the Petitioners in their prayer, that human life should not be taken away except for murder. The making any other punishment, such as that of solitary confinement, certain, as the consequence of particular crimes, would probably be more effective for the prevention of crime than the present system. However, he should not feel altogether disposed to take away from the judges that discretion they were very properly allowed to exercise in particular cases.
Mr. Western, like his honourable colleague, supported the prayer of the Petition. He concurred with the petitioners in thinking that the punishment of death was frequently inflicted when it was not necessary to insure the safety of society, but he had not yet carried his opinion so far as to suppose that it ought to be abolished in all cases except murder. It sometimes happened, that great violence was used in committing crimes, which, though not amounting to murder, could only be repressed by capital punishment. Except in such cases, he admitted, as a general principle, that the law ought not to inflict death as the punishment of crimes.
Petition to be printed.
Similar Petitions were presented from Sunderland and Darlington, by Lord W. Powlett; from Lewes, by Mr. Kemp.
Mr. Grantsaid, he earnestly hoped that this subject would not escape the atten-
542
tion of government; the punishment of death was inflicted in many cases, where it completely failed to deter others from the commission of offences. Horse-stealing, for example, had been carried to a great extent, and it was quite plain that the number of executions for that crime had not tended to check it. In the revision then going on of our Criminal Code, he hoped, therefore, that this subject would not be overlooked. The number of offences to which the penalty of death was attached was disgraceful, and it had signally failed to answer the effect intended.
Petition to be printed.

OPERATIVE WEAVERS.
Sir M. S. Stewartbegged leave to present a Petition from the Operative Weavers of Glasgow, praying for some relief from the sinking distress under which they suffered. The Petition was signed by about 4,600 individuals; and large as this number was, he was informed that it composed but a very small portion of the thousands that were now suffering the severest privations from the extremely low rate of wages given to Operative Weavers in Glasgow. The petitioners averred, "that the average income of each family, according to the strictest investigation, amounts only to about 3s. 6d. of clear money per week, or does not exceed 4s., and that after ninety-six hours of incessant labour." The petitioners attribute their destitute condition to the rapid increase of population, and the still more rapid increase of machinery in Glasgow,—causes over which the House had no control, and could not, therefore, be responsible for their effects, heavy and afflictive as they in this instance declared them to be, and it was very natural that the petitioners, in their wretchedness should "presume that in the hands of this House rested the power to carry into operation measures of relief for the existing distress, and by efficient regulations, prepare means of happiness and subsistence to almost any amount of population." He sincerely wished that he could feel convinced that it was in the power of the House to afford the asked-for relief, unless it was by opening the vast markets of India and China to the enterprise of their employers. But undoubtedly these petitioners, and thousands of their fellow operatives, were enduring, both themselves and families, deep and heavy misery; and he most earnestly offered their well-drawn

543
petition to the just and compassionate consideration of the House. He begged to take the opportunity of saying, and he had much satisfaction in doing so, which would prevent him trespassing on the time of the House, in the long interesting debate that was to be continued that night, that, with the exception of the operative weavers (and that only made their case the harder), he had good reason to believe,—and he had taken much pains to ascertain the facts from the best sources,—that the manufacturers of Glasgow and Paisley were in rather a better condition than last year; and that, small as profits were, still they had improved, and were considered, by those best qualified to judge as still showing a tendency to improve.
Ordered to lie on the Table.
Mr. Humesupported the prayer of the petition, though he did not see by what means that House could give the petitioners any relief, except by reduction of taxation. It was a singular anomaly, he observed, in so rich a country as this, that so many thousands of the poor labouring classes should have to work for so many hours in the day at wages of 3s. 6d. per week. He agreed with every part of the prayer of the petitioners, except where they objected to machinery. No doubt, they suffered from it, and he regretted it, but the introduction of machinery had been productive of great benefit to the country.
Mr. Brownlowpresented a Petition from the Operative Weavers of Dublin, complaining of distress, and praying for means of employment. The petitioners thanked the House, the hon. Member observed, for the advantages of civil and religious liberty they enjoy, but they venture to complain of the unparalleled distress from not having a market for their commodities. They complained chiefly of the want of a home market, and they therefore prayed the House to encourage the erection of public works in Ireland. Government, they thought, might advance money without the risk of loss, which, judiciously laid out, would give employment to thousands. All they asked for was employment.
Petition referred to the Committee on Irish Poor.

REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.
The Marquis of Blandford, in presenting a Petition, praying for a Reform in Parliament, as necessary to restore that House to the confidence of the people, moved
544
for Returns of the number of persons entitled to vote for each borough in Ireland, distinguishing the resident from the nonresident voters.
Mr. Rossobserved that it would be very difficult to make out such a return. There were many electors non-residents, and they would not be included in the return.
Mr. Benettdid not see why it should be more difficult to make it for Ireland than it had been for England and Wales, for for which such a return was moved last year.
Mr. Humesaid, a motion of his to that effect was carried last year.
Sir J. Newportsaid, he thought there could be no difficulty, for the non-resident freemen were included, as well as the residents, in the poll-books, and they were not liable to any sudden change.
Mr. Alderman Waithmanexpressed his surprise that any objection should be made to the Motion.
Motion agreed to.

BOROUGH OF CARLOW.
Mr. O'Connell Mr. O'Connell moved for a return of the number of persons entitled to vote for Members to serve for the Town of Carlow, distinguishing the resident from the non-resident. He founded this Motion on a letter written by the Clerk of the Peace of that town, stating that the borough was the property of Lord Charleville, and that he returned the Member who represented that place in Parliament. This was a subject which he felt the necessity of bringing under the consideration of the House, as a case' materially affecting its privileges—a case in which it was openly asserted that a Peer returned a Member to serve in that House. He wished, however, before making any motion on the subject, to have the regular return in the hands of the hon. Members.
Motion agreed to.

GALWAY TOWN.
Mr. O'Connellpresented a Petition signed by several Protestants and Catholics in the town of Galway, praying for the admission of Catholics as well as Protestants to the freedom of the Corporation of that, town. The petitioners stated, the hon. Member observed, that the right to vote for Members of Parliament had been recognized, several times, to vest in the resident burgesses, and in particular, that it was recognized by the

545
Irish Parliament, though it was barred by the enactments of the 4th of George 1st. Now, they said, in consequence of confining this right to one class of persons, a great many, abuses had crept into the borough. They stated that, in 1819, one gentleman procured the freedom of the borough for 793 tenants of his, only one of whom was resident in the borough; the gentleman himself being a non-resident. They further stated, that large funds, in the possession of the Corporation, were not applied to the purposes for which they were intended. One man had held the office of mayor thirteen years, and another had been sheriff seven years, during a part of which he was non-resident. So bad was this system, that there were not resident magistrates sufficient to fulfil the duties of the magistracy, and the Government had been obliged to supply the deficiency. They added, that the rates of the land subject to the Corporation, were 1l. 13 s. 7d. per acre whilst on the adjoining land they were only 2s. and the petitioners prayed that the House would take these matters into its serious consideration, and pass a law to admit Catholics as well as Protestants to the freedom of the borough.

TRIALS AT CORK.
Mr. Jephsonwould take occasion to advert to certain official documents from Ireland, which he had formerly moved for, but, as it seemed, without effect. He alluded to the memorial of the Grand Jury of Cork to the Lord Lieutenant, relative to the postponement of trials in that county, together with the viceregal answer thereto. The return which was laid before the House, in compliance with his motion, consisted of a simple statement from Mr. Gregory, and dated from the Civil Office, at the Castle, in Dublin, that there was not the least trace of any such memorial having been received at the Castle. As he (Mr. Jephson) had stated that a memorial of that nature was transmitted, he found himself placed in rather a disagreeable situation. There could be no doubt that such a memorial was forwarded, and he wished to know from the noble Lord how it happened that a copy could not be laid before the House?
Lord F. L. Gowersupposed that some accident had befallen the memorial on its way to the Castle, but he had no means of elucidating the subject any further, having been absent at the time when it was alleged to have been presented.
Mr. O'Connellobserved, that the postponement of these trials had cost Government an expense of 3,000 l., nor did he believe that the slightest blame could attach to the Crown counsel. He hoped, however, that his hon. friend, the Member for Mallow, would not suffer the matter to rest as it at present stood.
Mr. Kingsaid, that he, as Foreman of the Grand Jury, had forwarded the memorial on the day of the assize, accompanied by a letter, and he knew that both the letter and memorial were put into the post-office; and he did not know why a special commission had been granted, unless it was in consequence of that letter.

WOOL TRADE.
Mr. W. Burrell, in presenting a Petition from the owners and occupiers of land in Shipley and West Grinstead against the importation of Wool with a nominal duty, said, that it was necessary, in consequence of some remarks which had been made by Gentlemen on the Wool Trade, for him to describe, at some length, the contents of the Petition. The petitioners stated, then, that British wool had become nearly unsaleable, and that the admission of foreign wool into the home market was a serious injury to them. They were of opinion, that the real wealth of a country consisted in the quantity and value of its produce, and of the skill and industry of its inhabitants; that those branches of manufacture which combined the production of the raw material with its subsequent preparation, either for home consumption or for exportation, were the most profitable, and to be considered as the natural manufactures of a country; and it was, they affirmed, on this account that woollens had been, for so many generations, the staple manufacture of England. For all these reasons, the petitioners submitted to the House the propriety of encouraging, by protecting the home-grower of wool, the manufacture of woollens. If he were correctly informed, Austria, which sent a great quantity of wool to this country, would not, in return, take any of our manufactured cloths. And why, then, he would ask, should we sacrifice our home-growers of wool for the sake of admitting her raw materials into this country? There were other countries, he believed, which, like Austria, would allow us to have wool, but would take none of our manufactures in exchange. In France, a duty of thirty-three per cent was levied

547
on British Wool, in order to protect the French grower; while our Government permitted the importation and sale of French woollens at a less rate of duty; and he knew that French carpets had last year been selling in St. James's Street, after having paid a duty of only twenty per cent, or thirteen per cent less than the duty levied in France on our unmanufactured Wool. Such a system was equally injurious to the British carpet manufacturer, and the grower of Wool; and the sooner it was revised and altered, whether called free trade, or by any other name, the better. He trusted that the Government and the House would take these matters into their consideration, and at a time when such serious and unusual distress prevailed among the farmers and labourers, adopt some means of protecting the interests, both of the British Manufacturers of Woollens and the grower of Wool.
Petition to be printed.

LUNATIC COMMISSIONS BILL.
Mr. M. A. Taylorsaid, that, some short time since, he had introduced a Bill to enable the Lord Chancellor to issue Commissions de lunatico inquirendo in a different manner from what had been heretofore the practice. Since then, the noble and learned Lord, as he had that day informed him, had turned his attention most seriously to the subject, and had consulted some of the Judges; and as their opinion was, that the Lord Chancellor possessed power to issue such Commissions, in the manner the Bill was meant to prescribe, that noble and learned Lord said, he should, on proper occasions, issue such Commissions without the further sanction of any legislative enactments. Doubts had before been raised upon the subject, and the object of the Bill was to put an end to, those doubts; but as the minds of the noble Lord and other eminent Judges were, he understood, now made up on the point, it would be unnecessary to advance his Bill beyond the present stage. It was due to the noble and learned Lord to state, that he wished to do all in his power to prevent expense; that he did not think the present tribunal the fittest for such inquiries; that he had already expressed his disapprobation of entertainments being given to the commissioners and the jury each day. The Lord Chancellor stated his intention of exercising, in future, the power which it was now agreed that he possessed, of
548
issuing commissions to Judges of the superior courts, with juries summoned in the ordinary way, to try questions of lunacy. To give the House some idea of the enormous expense against which the Bill was directed, he had to state, that the costs of the petitioning party alone, in the Portsmouth case, amounted to 23,000 l.! He concluded by moving, that the order for the second reading of the Bill be discharged.
Mr. R. Gordonwas very glad that the hon. Gentleman had withdrawn his Bill, because it only gave power to the Lord Chancellor which he already possessed. What they wanted was a real and efficient bill to remedy the evils of which they had so much cause to complain.

DISTRESS OF THE COUNTRY—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
Mr. Cutlar Fergusson Mr. Cutlar Fergusson moved the Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned debate on Mr. E. Davenport's Motion on this subject.
The Order of the Day having been read,
Mr. Fergussonsaid, that although the hon. Member for Shaftesbury (Mr. E. Davenport) had, on the previous evening, accused the Members who were of the same opinion with himself of being luke-warm in the cause, he (Mr. Fergusson) must say, that he had not perceived any behaviour to justify that accusation. For his own part, he thought that nothing like apathy had been displayed; for scarcely an evening during the present Session had elapsed without the subject being adverted to in one shape or another. Neither did he think, though he should perhaps have to vote against the Ministers that night, that they had thrown themselves open to the charge of having been negligent of the state of the country. On the contrary, after the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a few evenings ago, the House was bound, he thought, to believe that the Ministers were really willing to do whatever was in their power. The hon. Member for Shaftesbury having moved for a committee of the whole House, he should have felt some difficulty in supporting that motion, knowing that the time necessarily occupied by such a proceeding might be advantageously employed in the other affairs of the country. The Amendment proposed by the hon. Member for Shoreham, however, relieved him from the difficulty that he felt on that head, and he should therefore vote for the appointment of a Select Committee. The only ques-

549
tion that ought to be considered with reference to the appointment of such a committee was, whether a sufficient case of general distress had been made out; and the fair way of looking at that was, by turning to the numerous petitions which had been presented to the House, and to the almost universal county meetings that had taken place on the subject, rather than to statements made on the strength of private, and, in some instances, anonymous informations such as had been produced on the former evening, by the President of the Board of Trade. But even if those private communications were correct, they only went to show that there had, till very lately, been very severe distress; and he did not see how, on the strength of a few orders transmitted to Manchester or Glasgow, it could be asserted that all that distress had disappeared, especially when the House had lying on their Table petitions from the counties of Renfrew and Dumbarton, complaining of the existence of distress. It might be true that there was less distress in Scotland and Ireland than in England; but even if such were the case, he did not see how it could be contended that the diminution of suffering in some places ought to preclude inquiry into the distress that existed in others; and which every where partook of this one remarkable feature, never, perhaps, experienced before—which was, that the distress did not affect this or that particular class, but all the productive classes of the country. The orders that had been spoken of might, in the course of a few days, turn out to be nothing but a passing dream, and then what would they be able to say to the people of England? The distress of the country, no doubt, was not universal; but neither was it necessary that he should show that it was universal to establish sufficient grounds for the House to interfere. Though he agreed with the hon. Member for Shaftesbury in many of the points he had stated to the House, he was bound to differ from him in what he had urged with respect to the currency. A great part of the distress, he believed, took its origin from the suppression of the small notes. Nor was this felt in England only; it necessarily reached Scotland, because the markets of that country in a great measure depended on the markets in England; and only that very day he had heard, that at the Dumfries market it was
550
impossible to find purchasers for cattle at any price. Prosperity would never, he thought, be restored to this country till the injury which had been done to it by the destruction of the country banking-system had been remedied. In his opinion, no set of men had ever been so ill treated as the country bankers. He did not, however, think that the right hon. Gentleman deserved so much blame as had been attributed to him on the previous evening for having introduced the bill on that subject, because, though it was true that he had brought it in, it could hardly be called his measure, as he had been called upon from all sides of the House to bring the measure forward, and in the end it was carried by acclamation. If, however, they wanted to get at the real source of the mischief, they must go still further back, and trace it to the restriction on cash payments that was enacted during the French war. So many causes had been assigned for the distress, that the very different opinions entertained were to him a satisfactory reason why there should be a committee to examine the subject. It was only by inquiries, in such a committee, that they could ascertain the true cause. Those who opposed going into a committee ought to be able to show, both that a committee would do no good, and that the distress was beyond legislative control. If it were not in their power to relieve the distress, they had better tell the people so, and that they were not fit to be there, and were unable to carry on the business of the country and of the Government. If all the papers referred to by the right hon. the President of the Board of Trade the other evening were correct (and he had some doubts on the subject), they only showed that there could be no danger from the inquiry. They would show that the distress was passing away, and that the country might look for better times; but if that gleam of hope were to pass away, and the country were to remain in the same state of distress as it had been in for several years past, they would all deeply regret that they had refused inquiry, when they had an opportunity to inquire, and when inquiry and redress were demanded by the petitions of the people.
Mr. W. Whitmorewas ready to admit that there had been distress in the country during the last year; but he thought it would be better to look at the causes of that distress, to ascertain whether it

551
were likely or not to be permanent, than to content himself, as the last hon. Member had done, with affirming its existence. He did not concur with those who said the distress was exclusively caused by a change in the currency; other causes had contributed, and they were bound, before again changing the currency, to inquire if such a change would not cause greater mischief than allowing it to remain unchanged. Two effects had resulted from a change in the currency, the one physical, the mere change in the price of gold, and the other moral. He believed that when Mr. Peel's bill was passed, the difference between the market price of gold and the Mint price was not move than three per cent, and that, therefore, would not, of itself, have produced any important consequences. But any man who knew this country must be aware, that in all our towns, and in every part of the country, great speculations had been entered into, and great undertakings begun, by men who had not sufficient capital to complete them. They borrowed of bankers. The little depreciation in prices, occasioned by the change in the currency, caused the property on which they had advanced money, to be scarcely sufficient to repay them; they sustained a loss, and restricted their business; they ceased to make the same advances as before, and the industrious manufacturers, not being able to obtain accommodation to the usual extent, there was an actual and a considerable contraction of the currency. A panic was the consequence. Capitalists saw their property was falling in value; that to lend was to lose; they would not lose, and that caused a stagnation. Moreover, we had two bad harvests consecutively, which contributed to augment the distress. He believed, however, that this panic was not likely to be permanent. Paper money could not increase the production of the country; that was regulated by the capital of the country, and would be carried to the same extent with a metallic as with a paper currency. Another cause of our temporary distress was, the gradual fall in the price of all species of produce, which had taken place, independent of the change in the currency. Since 1814, various new sources of supply had been opened for cotton, coffee, and all colonial and tropical produce. The countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope had since then sent their productions to the market, which had di-
552
minished the price of the article. A vast supply had been obtained of coffee also. The trade of South America had been followed by similar effects. Sugar had been sent to Europe from many new places, and in vast quantities. Our only supply of wool formerly came from Spain; now we obtained a large quantity from Germany. Since the peace, too, the capital that had before been employed in war, had been engaged in production, and had had the effect of augmenting supply and lowering prices. But while a fall was taking place, there was no encouragement to extend production. Stocks were not laid in more than was absolutely necessary, because the holders might expect to lose on them. No works were undertaken which could be avoided; but he believed that the fall from these causes had now reached its limits. He hoped, indeed, (not as the President of the Board of Trade had stated, that prices had risen, and that manufactures were reviving, but) that a rise would speedily take place, and that manufactures would speedily revive. He would also mention, that he believed the diminished supply of the precious metals from South America, had occasioned a fall of prices, and this cause would probably continue to operate for some time. Taking all these circumstances into consideration, he saw no reason to doubt that the country would soon get through its present difficulties, and would again increase in prosperity, population, and wealth. He found evidence, indeed, that it was not at present declining. Not only were the exports greater last year than before, but almost every description of raw materials had been used to a greater degree last year than in former years. In 1820 the quantity of cotton consumed was 470,000 bags; in 1829 it was 780,000 bags. The quantity of silk consumed in 1823 was 2,104,000lbs; in 1829 it was 4,547,000lbs. The amount of our exports, the quantity of raw materials worked up, and the number of ships employed, all showed that there was a great deal of business going on, though he believed it was, in general, carried on at a low rate of profit, and sometimes at a loss. For whatever distress now existed, he did not believe any remedy could be found in returning to a depreciated currency. He approved of the right hon. Gentleman's bill of 1819; and had we not then regulated the currency, he believed that instead of now suffering only temporary dis-

553
tress, capital would have gone out of the country, and would have sought employment where it was not subject to a ruinous fluctuation. He would also state (as it was said that nobody would defend such an opinion, though he would not then enter into any argument on the subject) that he believed we had done right in selecting gold for our standard instead of silver. He would take that opportunity, also, of declaring, that he could not agree with the hon. Member for Newark in any one of his propositions. That hon. Member would find employment for our agriculturists by making the people eat dear bread, and prohibiting the importation of foreign corn. That hon. Member would find employment for our manufacturers by excluding them from the foreign market, and would crown all by a return to a paper currency. In no one of these propositions could he agree with the hon. Member for Newark. If the legislature would give employment to the people, and profit to capital, it must open the markets of the world to us by extending the principles of free trade, and removing, as far as possible, every restriction on enterprise. There was an inquiry going on into a most important subject; and if that should turn out as he desired, if free access were to be allowed to the East Indies, (as sound policy, reason and argument, were they allowed their due weight, recommended) more would be done to relieve the distress of our manufactures than could be accomplished by any other measure. He implored the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) to look at the case with his own eyes, and judge of it with his own understanding; and if he saw all the benefits likely to result from the opening of the trade, he would be sure to come to a conclusion that it ought to be opened, and he would lay a permanent foundation for prosperity in India and in Britain. He hoped that the prejudices of the members of the Board of Directors, or of that Board which controlled the affairs of India, would not be suffered to influence him; that he would judge for himself, and grant the country those means of permanent improvement which it was in his power, by opening the trade to India, to bestow.
Sir George Philipssaid, if he could believe all the representations made by hon. Members, he must suppose that there was no employment in the country, and that the people were actually dying of starva-
554
tion; but while he admitted that there was partial distress, he did not believe in the universality of that distress among the manufacturing classes, which had been mentioned by the hon. Member for Kirkcudbright. He would state to the House what he knew of Lancashire, with which he was best acquainted, and of the state of which he had been at considerable pains to obtain correct information. That which he should submit to the House was obtained from gentlemen who had not taken part in the controversy now going on in Manchester on this subject, and whose opinions, he believed, were not biassed either way. He had received this information partly by means of letters, and partly from gentlemen who had lately come to town from Manchester, and confirmed the statement lately submitted to the House by the hon. Member for Bramber. Gentlemen acquainted with the manufacturing districts must be aware that it was impossible to obtain an average of the wages of labour in them, such as might be obtained of the uniform labour of agriculturists. He must, therefore, state the wages of different classes, and he would begin with that most extensive class—the hand-loom weavers, who were some of the most distressed. The wages of this class were, in Manchester—women, from 4s. to 5s. a week; and men, from 6s. to 7s. Of late there had been a small rise, so that what was done for 10½d. now produced 1s. and what used to be done for 6s. 6d. is now paid for at the rate of 7s. At Manchester, he understood that at present the hand-loom weavers were generally employed. At Blackburn, the wages of the same class of persons was 5s. per week. At Ashton-under-Lyne, the wages of the hand-loom weavers, who were principally (we understood) employed in making ginghams, were better, and amounted to 10 s. per week. At Bolton, the weavers earned from 5s. to 6s. per week for sixty-reed cambric. The weavers of fustian were also earning from 5s. to 6s. a week. At Tyldesley the weavers of quiltings get 12 s. a week. These were some of the lowest prices that had ever been paid in the manufacturing districts, and it certainly was much to be regretted that the distress of the masters had ever compelled them to pay their workmen at such a rate. The hon. Baronet then proceeded to state the prices given for various kinds of labour in cotton factories. The power-loom, weavers, he

555
understood, were earning according to their skill and age—women from 7s. 6d. to 12 s. 6d. per week, and men from 12 s. to 15 s. Of all classes the weavers seemed the worst paid, the wages of a man and boy, or a woman and girl, making together from 15 s. to 20 s. a week. There were other descriptions of persons engaged in the factories to whom he would then advert. Females in the factories could, from the age of thirteen to sixteen, earn about 5s. 6d. a week as carders, and from the age of eighteen to twenty, about 8s. or from that to 8s. 6d. and 9s. 6d.; females working as cleaners earn from about 6s. to 7s. Males employed in carding got, if youths, 7s. a week; young and good hands get from 13 s. 6d. to 16 s. Cotton mixers earned 12 s. In spinning, to which he would next advert, the wages were paid according to the weight of the yarn, and one statement he had received said that the average wages of spinners was from 26 s. to 30 s., while another represented it as from 20 s. to 32 s. The women engaged in the mills made from 16 s. to 18 s.; little piecers, boys and girls received from 6s. to 9s., while children under ten years of age earned 2s. 6d. per week. The over-lookers got from 20 s. to 40 s., but the fine spinners got more—from 35 s. to 40 s. These were the wages generally; but at Glossop and other places the spinners received 21 s. a week, although they had formerly 26 s. At Oldham, where there was a great population, females of twenty years earned, as spinners, about 8s. a week, while the men got 30 s. a week for fine work in some places, although the average was about 25 s. a week in the district. It was proper to observe that the spinning trade was continually on the increase, and that the wages had a tendency rather to rise than fall, an effect which had been in part produced by the use of machinery causing such a large demand for twist. Indeed such was the demand that the manufacturers were compelled to employ machinery. Bleachers, (the hon. Baronet continued) worked twelve hours a day, and earned 16 s. a week. Calico printers, who, on an average, were employed only nine months in the year, gained 30 s. a week, but it was intended to reduce their wages and give them constant employment. Dyers are exposed to great fluctuations, and last winter they suffered great depression, but they are now recovering It was natural to suppose that
556
other persons who, like them, were employed out of doors, suffered severely during the continuance of the late frost. Bricklayers, carpenters, and boatmen, being unable to find employment, were of course compelled to be economical, and the result was distress among the small shopkeepers; for if the customers had no money, they could not indulge in their usual luxuries. But he believed that the distress arising from that cause, and among that class of people, had been much exaggerated. He would take the liberty of calling the attention of the House to some observations on the condition of the working classes at Preston. Mr. Taylor of that place said, "with respect to persons employed in making machinery, and in cotton and linen factories, power-loom weavers, and other artizans, that little or no distress exists, they being generally fully employed, and at the same wages that have been paid to them for some years past, with the necessaries of life much lower in price." Of another class, the out-door labourers, such as bricklayers, masons, &c. he says that they have suffered more than is usual from the lengthened severity of the weather. He adds, "The third class, and, I am sorry to say, the most numerous, is formed of the hand-loom cotton weavers, whose situation is become, in very many instances truly deplorable, arising from underpaid labour in proportion to the prices of the necessaries of life; which labour has gradually been reducing in price for several years, and has now arrived at such a point of depression as to be inadequate to supply them with proper food and clothing. It must, however, be admitted, that there are gradations in this class, and that one part is in a better condition than the other, arising from the whole family of some weavers not being dependent upon the wages of hand-loom weaving. Many heads of families, for want of better employment, are yet obliged to keep to the hand-loom, but where the children are growing up, they are frequently engaged in the spinning factories, or in power-loom weaving, where their employment is constant, and wages considerable. But in the recent visitation of the town, a great many cases have been found of a whole family, composed of a man, his wife, and perhaps three or four young children depending entirely upon the man's earning at the loom, eked out by the miserable

557
pittance from the parish. In comparing the present state of the working classes of Preston with that of other times, when subscriptions have been made for their relief, and the town has been visited, the committee will, I think, bear me out when I say, that distress has more generally prevailed at other periods, when employment has been scarce, and provisions much dearer, but at no time, I believe, have there ever appeared so many individual cases of complete destitution and misery among the weavers as at present. With respect to the probable continuance of the present distress, I think it will be seen by a review of what has been previously said, that there is no prospect of hand-weaving generally being ever again a proper employment for a man, the master, and principal supporter of a family; but that there will always be such employment, is certain. The coarse light description of goods may, in my opinion, always be produced for a less sum by hand than by power; and there will be many difficulties to encounter to make the very finest descriptions of cloth, and many of the fancy cotton goods, by the power-loom. The former will, however, be never more than fit employment for children and old people, but the latter, that is the fine and fancy cloths, will require good and experienced hand-workmen, who may probably always obtain fair wages for their labour." The favourable part of Mr. Taylor's representations concerning Preston applied, he knew, in a still greater degree to Manchester, because there the hand-loom weavers bore a smaller proportion to the whole number of manufacturing labourers. It had been contended by an hon. Member near him, in the course of the discussion—an Alderman of the City of London (Waithman)—that trade was in the manufacturing districts at the very lowest ebb, and that it had been constantly carried on for several years at a great loss; that the merchant had ceased to export, and the manufacturer manufactured in vain, and without the slightest hope of obtaining an adequate profit. He was quite ready to admit that the merchant had ceased to export at his own risk, and that the manufacturer exported his own goods. This seemed to reverse the order of trade, and to be at variance with improvement; but was in fact its natural order, and thus doing away with the middle man, as it were, was a great gain to
558
the manufacturer, and attended with one obvious advantage to the consumer, namely, that it placed one profit the less on the price of the goods. The manufacturer and the consumer, the buyer and the seller, were brought more into contact, and could understand the wants and demands of each other better than when the merchant interfered betwixt them, but besides that, it was a diminution of risk to the manufacturers. In ordinary times the manufacturer gave the merchant who ordered goods from him for exportation a credit of eighteen months, and thought himself lucky if he got paid in two years. Now, however, the manufacturer manufactures goods for exportation at his own risk; and it was one of the best advantages of the increased facility of communication, that the Birmingham or Manchester man was enabled to send his goods abroad without the expense and the risk of the intervention of the merchant or middle man. Besides all that, however, the Alderman should understand that the manufacturer who is thus become his own merchant does not manufacture himself the twentieth part of that which he exports. He buys the linen cloths and the cotton yarn from others, and so gives increased facilities and spirit to the general trade. The hon. Alderman contended, he recollected, that this trade was carried on at a loss. That he (Sir G. Philips) denied. It was carried on with advantages, and great advantages, else why had it been carried on for so many years at all? It was absurd to suppose that it would be continued if loss was the certain consequence. The hon. Alderman said, they were forced to carry on the export trade because the manufacturers made more than the country required. But he could tell the hon. Alderman that there were manufactures carried on expressly for the foreign market. The export of cotton was double the amount of the quantity consumed at home. And why was the trade continued and extended? Why, but because the manufacturers found it for their advantage. That they should wilfully ruin themselves, seemed to him an extraordinary proposition, but he could tell the hon. Alderman that if he were to broach his doctrine at Manchester he would be laughed at. Another doctrine of the hon. Alderman's was, that the manufacturers did not look much to the price of the raw material, and that it was of little consequence whether cotton was a 6d. dearer or a 6d. Cheaper. Why

559
nothing could be more erroneous. A manufacturer calculated the one-eighth of a penny in the pound, and if he could buy at that one-eighth of a penny cheaper he did so. It was attending to advantages of that kind that so many large fortunes had been realised in the course of the last few years. As to the complaints of the worthy Alderman and others about machinery, all he could say was, that they were not new; machinery had been improving for the last thirty years, and the distress was not greater now than during those periods when machinery formed no part of their complaints. Upon the whole, he was of opinion, that although the profits of trade were undoubtedly small, yet there were profits in every branch of industry; and although capital might not be increasing very fast, or so fast as some supposed, yet it undoubtedly was increasing. He thought, however, with the hon. Member for Bridgenorth (Mr. Whitmore) that the country was placed in circumstances which required the most watchful circumspection on the part of the Government. He rejoiced that Ministers had determined to lighten the public burthens—he thanked them for what they had done; and while he praised the liberality they had displayed in their domestic policy, he regretted that it had not been extended to their foreign negotiations. The plan of lightening taxation on some points, in order to increase the consumption in others, was highly praiseworthy; and he hoped that the doctrines of the right hon. Gentleman, the Master of the Mint (Mr. Herries), as laid down the other day, would be followed by the Government. He hoped, too, that some alteration would be made in the system of monopolies, and particularly in that of corn, which he was afraid both Whigs and Tories would unite to continue; but, in common with every person connected with the county of Lancaster, he implored them not to make any alteration in the currency. They had now the best currency in the world, and they wished to keep it, as they were satisfied that any attempt to tamper with it, or even to introduce silver as a standard as well as gold, would only enable foreigners to defraud us. It had been said, that there was a scarcity of money in the manufacturing districts. He knew as much of them as any one, and he never recollected money more plentiful there. His own residence, however,
560
was in the agricultural part of Warwickshire, and there too he found an abundance of currency. No man who had property could say he was not able to obtain money. There was no scarcity of currency with them when means justified credit. The honourable Baronet concluded by observing, that as he did not think any relief could be afforded to the really distressed by the inquiries proposed in the Motion of the honourable mover (Mr. Davenport), or in the Amendment proposed by the hon. Baronet (Sir C. Burrell), and as he thought, on the contrary, that an acquiescence in either of the motions would lead to delusive hopes which never could be realised, to expectations of improvements which Parliament had not the power to execute, he should feel it to be his duty to vote against both Motion and Amendment.
Mr. Bucknall Estcourtsaid, that the subject was too delicate for a Member so young as he was to presume to pronounce an opinion on it, but he might say, that the present state of the country excited in him feelings of pain and deep concern, and that he could not look on the future without the most frightful forebodings. He thought that in a Committee the question of the public distress was likely to receive a better consideration than it could do in the House, and that the relative value of opinions could be ascertained with greater certainty, and their merit more fully appreciated.
Sir Hussey Viviandid not deny that considerable distress existed; but was persuaded that many of the statements of it were greatly exaggerated. He entertained no despair of the country; but, on the contrary, felt convinced, that however serious the difficulties might be with which it was beset, it would rise superior to them all. With respect to the low prices, some of the causes of them were, in his opinion, sufficiently obvious. During the war, our manufacturers and merchants had a monopoly of the markets. Now, however, they were obliged to enter into a competition with foreign manufacturers and merchants. Now, as one-fifth of our industry was employed in the supply of the foreign markets, our exports being between fifty and sixty millions, and as the prices we obtained in the foreign markets must govern our prices at home, he thought there was little difficulty in accounting for the low prices. Among the causes assigned by various persons for the existing distress

561
were over-production, superabundant population, machinery, free trade, taxation, and the state of the currency. As to overproduction, the only consequence, as it appeared to him, of our producing less would be to throw a number of persons out of employment. With respect to superabundant population, to a certain extent the population might be said to be superabundant. But he should be very sorry to see the population diminished by the means recommended on a recent occasion by an hon. Gentleman, and he trusted that the House would never forget
That a bold peasantry, their country's pride,
When once destroy'd, could never be supplied.
Machinery, in his opinion, so far from producing the distress, must have greatly contributed to prevent its increase; since it gave employment to millions, who would be otherwise destitute of it. A great portion of what was considered among the middle classes to be distress, arose, he was persuaded, out of the extraordinary change that had taken place in the habits of the people, who indulged in an extravagant expense of which their forefathers never dreamt; and who being now compelled to curtail that expense, felt the privation severely. The necessity under which they were of discharging a number of their servants, had also added to the general difficulty. He had made as accurate inquiries as he could into the real facts of the case, and more especially with respect to the parish, that of Lynn, in Hampshire, in which he himself resided. The hon. Gentleman here read a statement, by which it appeared, that although from the year 1813 to the year 1829, the Poor's-rate had increased from 2,700 l. to 3,200 l., the population of the parish from the year 1811 to the year 1829 had increased from 3,100 to upwards of 5,000. Under this latter circumstance, it was not at all surprising that there should be an increase of paupers. The hon. Gentleman then entered into a comparison of the quantity of tin and copper raised in the county of Cornwall in the years 1813, 1814, and 1815, as compared with the quantity raised in the last years; and maintained that the increase, combined with the foreign competition, was the cause of the present low prices. He was far, however, from thinking low prices an evil. If it were not for the low prices of hemp, of tallow, and of all the necessaries of life, tens of thousands of people would be
562
thrown out of employment, and thousands of tons of shipping would be laid up. As to Free Trade, he was convinced that it had nothing to do with the distress; and he was happy to make that avowal in the presence of the right hon. Member for Liverpool, as when the principles of Free Trade were originally discussed, he had expressed some apprehensions with respect to the result of their application to the commerce of this country. In his opinion, the great principle of Free Trade was briefly this: that as long as any of the manufacturers of the country produced a commodity for which there was an entire demand in the home market, we might protect them by duties; but that when they were obliged to go to a foreign market to sell their commodity, the price must be regulated by the price at which the foreign manufacturers were able to bring the same commodity into the market. This, as he had before observed, was one of the causes of the diminished price of the produce of the Cornish mines. But unless his information on the subject was very incorrect, there was no distress in the county of Cornwall, notwithstanding the low prices. In the meantime, those low prices had been very beneficial in other respects. What would our shipping—what would Birmingham and other manufacturing towns have done had the price of copper remained high? It was clear that to the low prices thousands of persons were indebted for their present employment. But it was asked, how could we go on with such low prices and with such heavy taxes on agriculture? He did not believe that those taxes bore especially on agriculture. He believed that they bore generally on the consumer; that they bore on the whole property of England. He considered available property to be property which a man possessed beyond taxation. If he had 1,000 l. a year, and paid 500 l. in taxation, he should consider that he had 500 l. of available property. If that 500 l. at the present prices would purchase as much as 1,000 l. when the prices were high, he should have no right to complain. He would advert shortly to the remedies which had been suggested for the existing state of things. In the first place, there was what had been called an equitable adjustment. He had heard with the utmost astonishment what had fallen, upon that subject, from the hon. Member for Colchester. That hon. Member ought to re-

563
collect that what was law was not always justice, and that what was equity was not always equitable. It would be the extreme of injustice to make any attempt at reducing the property of the fund holder, and he trusted that no such attempt would ever be made. Of this, too, he was persuaded, that if a sponge could be applied to the National Debt to-morrow, the country would derive little or no benefit from the operation. The visits of the tax-gather would be exchanged for those of the parish overseer; and the population of our exchanges and markets would be transferred to our workhouses. The reduction of taxation was one of the remedies which had been insisted on. It was undoubtedly the duty of Ministers to reduce taxation as much as was consistent with the public service; and they had done that duty. But he was not one of those who fancied that any extraordinary relief could be derived from such a source; and he was one of those who would be very sorry to see the principle of reduction carried to such an extent as would compel us to disband our army, dismantle our navy, and close our arsenals and dockyards. He trusted, to use the eloquent words of a late right hon. Gentleman, "that the sovereign of this country would never be reduced to sit on a degraded Throne." A change in the currency was another of the nostrums recommended; nostrums so numerous, that they reminded him of some doggrel lines, with which he was familiar when at school:—
"One doctor physic'd him and purg'd;
A second bleeding strongly urged;
A third a tonic mixture tried;
Among them all—the patient died!"
He had frequently heard of people being music-mad; but he believed that some hon. Gentlemen were currency-mad. His view of the currency question was this:—that if, as had been asserted, the substitution of gold for paper had produced a change of five-and-twenty per cent in the price of commodities, that proved that the former price was artificial. It was impossible to maintain a paper circulation while we kept up a commercial intercourse with foreign countries. We could not buy bread at home with paper, and cotton abroad with gold. If we were to return to paper to-morrow, we should speedily have two prices, a gold price and a paper price, as we had formerly; even although the House should again adopt a Resolution
564
declaring that gold and notes were equivalent. He was delighted, therefore, to hear his Majesty's Ministers declare that they had no intention of proposing any change in the currency. He apologized to the House for having trespassed so long upon their attention, and thanked them for their indulgence. What he had said was not said in a spirit of hostility to any interest. Agriculture and manufactures must flourish together. Although his particular interest did not he in that way, yet certainly, if he were called upon to give a preponderance to either, he would throw his weight into the agricultural scale. But not conceiving that to be necessary, and being persuaded that no measure could be adopted, the tendency of which would be materially beneficial to any interest, he must oppose the Motion.
Mr. Liddelldeclared himself prepared to support the Motion of the hon. Member near him, though he trusted that in doing so he incurred no risk of being understood to pronounce any opinion condemnatory of the motives of his Majesty's Government. He was willing to give every credit to the right hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House for the uprightness of their intentions, and for the earnest zeal with which they endeavoured to promote the interests of the country, as it appeared to them; but he must be allowed to say, that his views of the true interests of the country, and what its necessities at the present moment demanded, were quite opposed to the course which the Ministers of the Crown appeared determined to persevere in adopting. There was one proposition on which he would mainly rely, and which he did not apprehend that any hon. Member would attempt to controvert—namely, that at the present moment there was not profitable employment for the capital of the country. Notwithstanding the low rate of interest at which money could be borrowed, there were not to be found traders in the United Kingdom who could see any profitable means of embarking it in any speculation whatever—that he believed was true of nearly every branch of commerce and manufactures. Were the Government and Legislature of the country to allow things in such a state to take their course—were they to say to the people, "You must wait for the operation of natural causes, and not look to any amelioration of system for that relief of which you now stand so deeply and alarm-

565
ingly in need?" Amidst the various departments in which distress prevailed, if there were one which stood peculiarly forward it was the shipping interest. He had within a short time received a communication, in which it was stated that the spring freights opened at rates one-ninth lower than the former year; and in every point of view, however much they might have suffered last year, the present was infinitely worse than any preceding season. Those were facts, and facts well authenticated—facts which he believed would receive no contradiction; it was therefore that he stated them, and confined himself to them, for he might easily procure a variety of other statements, if possible more strong, respecting other departments of trade and manufactures; but he had no wish to exaggerate the distresses of the country. They were alarming and severe enough, without adding to the pressure of them by overcharged descriptions. One of his grounds of complaint against right hon. Gentlemen opposite was the manner in which they met the present Motion. They applied themselves, in the course of the debate, to any thing rather than what formed the question at issue. Thus, on the first night of the present debate, the right hon. Gentleman (the President of the Board of Trade) advanced with much form to the discussion of the Motion, and when he came to the most important branch of it, he suddenly started off, or to use a sporting phrase, baulked the fence, and left the House in the same state of uncertainty and ignorance as before he began his speech. He confessed that never, on any similar occasion, did he experience a greater disappointment than when the right hon. Gentleman declined to enter upon the considerations connected with the state of the currency, and the mode in which it affected the present distresses. He declared himself unable to comprehend how any Member of that House could profess to inquire into the distresses of the country, and pass by altogether a matter so intimately connected with them as the state of the currency—a matter which many held to be amongst the chief causes of that distress. Nobody could deny that there had been a great depression of price, and that, during that time, taxation had stalked like a giant through the land fattening on the ruin it created. To ascertain the influence of taxation on prices, and on the general
566
distress, some persons denying that it was injurious, and to ascertain the influence of the alteration in the laws concerning the currency, on prices, were, he had no doubt, among the most important duties of Parliament. For his part he must say, that nothing was better worthy the attention of Parliament—nothing which at the present moment could better occupy their attention, than to consider whether, without debasing the currency, it might not be so far replenished, by a judicious issue of paper, as would give a salutary stimulus to prices and manufactures, and revive the suffering commerce of the country. He thought that a committee might be very usefully employed in investigating the best mode of carrying so desirable an object into practical effect. The committee might also advantageously direct their labours to the subject of an improved system of banking, more calculated for the necessities of a commercial community than that which at present existed in this country. He had not the slightest hesitation in expressing his opinion, that the standard ought to be changed; and to this he would add, that he felt no doubt whatever, that if the well-known measure which bore the name of the right hon. Gentleman, and would continue to be known as his, were again to be proposed to Parliament, its authors would shrink from pressing it upon the acceptance of the Legislature; and sure he was, that if they were to go the length of doing so, Parliament, foreseeing all the evils that have since arisen from that measure, would reject it in a manner the most marked and decided. He was satisfied, that were the same Bill to be proposed over again, the consent of Parliament could never be obtained to anything so unjust and oppressive to the country. However, the deed had been done, and it was now the duty of all—when no perfect remedy was practicable to do what the circumstances of the case admitted; it was the duty of every man in the country to do the utmost he possibly could for the relief of the country; and it was the duty of every Member of that House to apply himself sedulously and seriously to the discovery of what might be done towards meeting the present emergency. He was convinced, indeed, that if something were not done, discontent would increase, and, like the earth-born giants of old, would shake the earth with convulsions

567
in endeavouring to cast aside its fetters. He was apprehensive that this might be the result, and therefore he said inquiry was necessary, and that every thing possible ought to be done by that House to relieve the public distress. He went further, and would say, that they ought to co-operate with his Majesty's Government in everything that they undertook for the public good; for the existing Administration was, generally speaking, well deserving the confidence of Parliament and of the country. There was no set of Gentlemen, on either side of the House, whom he should more desire to see in the Councils of his Majesty. He believed that a change of men could work no beneficial results—that none could be found to assume the reins of Government with better prospects of success than the right hon. Gentlemen opposite, though he must qualify this testimony in their favour by repeating his objection to the course they had thought proper to take in reference to the present Motion. So much he felt bound to say in vindication of himself, and in justice to the country and the Administration.
Mr. Courtenaywould state shortly his views to the House upon this most important occasion; in commencing to do which, he could not help saying, that those who were loudest in their expressions of sympathy with the sufferings of the people, were the slowest to bring forwad any measures of relief, or to pledge themselves to any definite proposition for the benefit of the country. It had been made matter of repeated accusation against the Ministers, particularly by the hon. Member for Newark, that at different times they had attributed the public distress to various and contradictory causes. First, they were accused—or rather he should say, not the present Government, but several successive Governments were accused—of attributing the distress, some years to a transition from a state of war to a state of peace. Now he believed that, at this distance of time, no one could doubt who looked at the condition of the country at that period, that the distress then prevailing was to be ascribed to that cause. At that period, the mere disbanding of the Army and Navy was in itself a considerable source of public inconvenience, and one of the most active causes of public distress; and he believed, that if the other causes to which, in truth and in justice,
568
his Majesty's Government felt bound to impute the distress, were fairly examined, they would prove not less to have produced the effects ascribed to them. In his opinion, the mistake most frequently made consisted in supposing that any practical measure to be introduced by the Government, could remove at once an extended evil, and one, the causes of which were, in many instances, beyond the reach of legislation. In the case of the public distress which took place at the beginning of the present peace, it was to be observed, that not only was there the transition, with all its attendant evils, but trade suffered, and those to whom the administration of public affairs was then intrusted, had the additional difficulty to encounter, which has only since their time been ascertained, that a great alteration in all the relations of the country—agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial, and of all other countries, was then in progress. Over-production was the next cause to which the public embarrassment was attributed. Of the reality of that cause—of its wide and powerful operations, he believed there would now be as little doubt as of any proposition which could possibly be announced. Not alone in England, but all over the world, did over-production prevail. With peace, then, came the loss of much that we possessed during the war—many sources of commercial wealth possessed through and by the war ended with it—many advantages incompatible with a state of peace were lost likewise, and added to these were the effects of overproduction, which we felt in common with the rest of the world. All those causes, though different, were real and effectual in their operations, and with them was combined extensive competition, which reduced prices to a level before unknown, and produced an amount of public distress which every one who aimed at popularity ascribed to all imaginable causes. The Bank Restriction Act, he was ready to admit, was not without its share in producing much of the public embarrassment which at different times had arisen; that measure gave a fatal facility to improvident speculation, and produced great injustice to many portions of the community. That restriction having been at length removed, and it not having been proposed by the hon. Member who spoke last, to repeal the bill of his right hon. friend, it would be unnecessary for him to

569
enter upon that topic. He heard no distinct proposition for the restraint of cash payments, and therefore he felt the less called on to enter upon that subject. He could not, however, pass to any new topic without observing, that the suffering of the several classes to which he adverted was aggravated by unfavourable seasons. In every instance, however, the effects produced by the weather were laid upon the Ministers, and they were held responsible for the dispensations of Providence. The hon. Member for Newark said of the Ministers, that they complained of the seasons, sometimes as being too wet, and sometimes too dry, as if such a complaint was self-contradictory. Now, to his mind it appeared the best founded and consistent mode of accounting for distress that could easily be imagined. Might not the hon. Gentleman himself on some occasions find his roast beef under-done, and at other times over-done, and in both cases to blame his cook. Again, another class of hon. Members, who professed to represent the country, urged that the public establishments ought to be reduced, and taxes repealed; he thought the time had at length arrived when a cry of that kind ought to cease. Since the termination of the war, forty per cent of the taxes had been repealed, and the public establishments proportionally reduced. But with objections of that class it was unnecessary any longer to contend. The real object of those who opposed themselves to the views of his Majesty's Government, upon a question of that nature was to procure a return to the small-note system. Now he would inquire in what way did those hon. Members suppose that the small-note system would restore the prosperity of the country; was there a want of circulating medium in the United Kingdom? If so, he wished they would supply Parliament with some more satisfactory evidence of that fact than had yet been adduced. Did they mean to say that the whole gold and paper circulation, taken together as it at present stood, was insufficient for the occasions of the country, and less than in its present state it required. If such was their view, he begged to be excused on that occasion from entering into any detailed reply to them. He would not then go into the statements and calculations necessary for rebutting an opinion so ill-founded; for he thought that in doing
570
so he should be but abusing the patience of the House, and wasting its time, in insisting upon truths already acknowledged by the great majority both of the legislature and of the more intelligent portion of the community. But this much, however, he would say, that if a return to the small-note system, by increasing the circulating medium, produced the required remedy, he would gladly learn what there was to prevent the increase of the circulating medium being made to produce all these beneficial effects if it were applied in metals instead of paper. He would not enter into calculation as to the amount of the currency, but he would say, that if hon. Members wished to remedy the want of sufficient circulation, gold would be just as effectual for the purpose as notes. Why then require an issue of 1l. notes? From his own experience of what took place in the west of England, he could state, that there was not a 1l. note withdrawn from circulation which was not replaced by a sovereign. But the true reason, as it appeared to him, why hon. Members required an issue of 1l. notes was this—that the country banker would be more disposed to lend five 1l. notes than five sovereigns, or ten half sovereigns—that he would not be so strict as to the security in lending notes as in advancing sovereigns. The right hon. Gentleman then proceeded to contend, that an extensive issue of small notes would have the effect of driving the gold out of the country—that gold would then become scarce and dear, and that the time would come when a demand would be made for it, and there would be a run upon the banks, and even upon the Bank of England, which they would not be able to meet, and the situation of the country would be worse than ever. It had been said, that this might be avoided if the system of banking were established upon a principle of greater security. Much as he would wish to see our banking system carried on on a principle of great security, he did not see any system on which the adoption of an extensive small-note circulation would not be liable to the evil consequences to which he had just adverted. The hon. Member for Newark had urged what he called the system of free trade as a cause of the distress of the country. He would ask the hon. Member what he meant by free trade? He would tell him further, that if he continued to blame the

571
Government for the passing of laws in which the great majority of the Members of that House had a share as well as any of his Majesty's Ministers—if the hon. Member for Newark continued this system of accusation, without himself introducing some specific remedy—he would denounce him to the public as a betrayer of his trust. He would say, that the Member for Newark evinced apathy to the distress of the people, and not the Government. The Government did all in its power—it had reduced taxes as much as the circumstances of the country would admit. The Ministers had applied the only remedy they could command by reducing taxation—and he repeated that if the hon. Member for Newark renewed his attacks on Government for what they had done—and for not doing something more, without some specific plan of his own—he would denounce him as a wordy man, without meaning, who did not do his duty to his constituents and his country. He would not waste the time of the House by going into the theory of free trade; he would state a few plain facts—one was, that the experiment of free trade had been successful as far as it had been tried, and he wished it had been carried further. There was not an interest connected with it which it had not bettered. He knew not if the House recollected, that about two years ago he stated in his place, that he had not given the subject of free trade much of his attention, and he used a phrase at the time with reference to his unacquaintance with it, of which he supposed he should never hear the last. Since then he had studied the subject, and he now confessed that he embraced it from a conviction of its superiority over any system which we had ever adopted. This acknowledgment he felt was but an act of justice to his right hon. friend, the Member for Liverpool. The right hon. Gentleman then adverted to the low prices throughout the world as a cause of the distress we felt, and contended that laws preventing importation would have no sensible effect in bettering our condition, even for a short time, while in the result such laws would aggravate the pressure on the country. If low prices had thus a disadvantage, they had also a compensating power of relieving the country by reaction, and then they would bring us to act on that which he took as the sound principle of free trade, viz. of procuring
572
the articles we might want where we could get them at the cheapest rates, be it in the domestic or foreign market. This was the principle of free trade on which the Government was determined to act. He had only one word more to say. The hon. Member for Newark had told the House, on a former evening, that he liked free trade, to a certain extent; that was, if they were to import the articles of other countries, let them give the produce of their own in exchange. He was really ashamed to have to answer such an argument in that House; but, plain as it was, it seemed not to be plain enough to meet the hon. Member's understanding. Did the hon. Member imagine that foreigners would give us their goods for nothing? We must give them ours in exchange, or, if not, we must give them gold; and where could we obtain the gold except as the price of our goods? He would put the whole question of the committee upon this point, and would consent to it on condition—that the hon. Member for Newark should go before the committee to be examined, and should submit to a cross-examination by, he would say, the hon. Member for Dover, who was well acquainted with the subject, and should, in a few plain answers, not exceeding four or five lines each, and, without epigram or metaphor, be able to show that it was possible for us to import the goods of foreigners, without giving our own goods, or money purchased by our own goods, in exchange for them. In conclusion, the right hon. Gentleman observed, that as he could see no measure likely to be proposed by the committee but a revision of our system of currency, and the issue of small notes, a measure which would raise expectations that could not be realized, he must give it his negative.
Sir Richard Vyvyansaid, he could not concur in the view taken of this subject by the hon. and gallant officer (Sir H. Vivian). He did not think the country was in a state approaching to prosperity; on the contrary, from his own knowledge of the condition of the people in Cornwall, and from his information as to the state of other parts of the country, he was convinced that it was suffering very severely. We were now in that situation, that if some remedy were not applied in time, they might, in three Sessions more, meet under a different form of government. He would not go into any detail

573
as to the state of distress in which the country was, but after the admission of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Monday night, that the country was so pressed with taxation, that he felt it necessary to relieve it by taking off nearly 3,500,000 l., it was hardly consistent with common sense in hon. Members at the opposite side to deny that distress existed. The admission was made by his Majesty's Ministers, and they acted upon it to an extent which he allowed would give some relief, though not equal to what the country required. Some hon. Members attributed the distress to the state of the Poor-laws—some to taxation—some to over-population—but all admitted that the body politic was diseased. As to surplus population, he would not admit that in a country capable of supporting a much greater number of people than it had at present, there could be a surplus population; but looking at the manner in which the labouring poor were treated, at the state of their small cottages, and at the whole system of the Poor-laws, he would say, that under such a system, a population of only half the present amount would be a surplus population. The hon. Member then adverted to the terms in which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtenay) had alluded to the sentiments of the hon. Member for Newark—terms so different from his usual mildness of temper, which, he must say, were not called for by any thing that had fallen from the hon. Member. Mr. Sadler, he believed, was perfectly sincere in the principles he advocated and was much respected by a very large portion of the community. He hoped, however, that those terms proceeded merely from the heat of debate. The mind of the right hon. Gentleman, which had undergone a change on the subject of free trade since this time two years, when, as he himself confessed, it was a sheet of white paper, had had certain principles written on it in respect of that system, one of which was, that we should purchase articles where we could get them cheapest, without reference to whether they were foreign or domestic. But what would the landed interest, who supported Ministers, say to such a declaration as this from the Vice-President of the Board of Trade of the country? How would it affect them on the subject of the Corn Laws? The hon. Baronet then proceeded to take a review of the causes of
574
the present distressed state of the country, and observed that many of them had arisen from circumstances which no Sovereign, however powerful, could control, or no philosopher, however wise, could remedy. He admitted the truth of a remark attributed to the Premier in another place, that the extent of our machinery was one cause. In the present state of civilization that could not be avoided. It was, however, an innovation of which future times would derive much greater advantage than we could at present, as the change caused by its introduction was productive of much present inconvenience. These causes had, indeed, been urged into increased effect by the actions of Ministers. In the year 1824 it was said, that it was utterly impossible to force the markets of the world, or to produce more in this country than could be consumed in the new States of South America, which were fast rising into political and commercial importance. That doctrine was most fully acted upon in this country in the year 1825, and the consequences were well known. In his opinion the government of that day had, in a great measure; instigated that immense trading; and it did not, as it ought to have done, express decided opinions concerning the course which English merchants and manufacturers were then pursuing. None of the Ministers had stood up in their place, and pointed out the ruin which must ensue from following such a course. For himself he would neither follow party nor prejudice—he would look at this, as at other questions, fairly; and no mere party feeling should induce him to say, that the Government was unworthy of confidence. Still, however, he could not overlook those instances in which he thought Ministers had acted with great indiscretion. But while, on the one hand, he would not for mere party feeling make the Ministry the object of his attack, neither would he, on the other hand, forget all that they had done wrong in consideration of any particular measure of theirs that might have been of advantage to the people. The nation was in distress. Was it enough to say that it must not be inquired into because the noble Duke at the head of the Government had done what he could to pacify the country? The people asked for bread—but then the right hon. Gentleman, it was replied, made a great sacrifice last Session, and it would be improper to desert him now. What

575
notion those Members who made that reply could have of the independence of Members, he was at a loss to discover. Could they turn, and turn, again and again, with every turn of the Administration. He was sorry he could not express his confidence in his Majesty's Government; but if any change of Administration should take place, and a new ministry should adopt measures that were agreeable to his ideas of what was for the benefit of the country, he should be most willing to join them. His friends and himself had abandoned no principle, but he could not say the same of some of those Gentlemen who now formed part of the Administration. There were some Gentlemen who in the year 1826 refused to form part of an Administration, because the right hon. Gentleman then at its head was stated to have in view a certain measure to attain an object to which they objected. In that refusal they were supported by the approbation of many Members of that House. But now both these parties came forward and claimed great merit—the one for having introduced, the other for having aided in passing that very measure. It was from seeing the constant attacks made by these parties upon those with whom he had the honour to act—attacks made in the public prints as well as in that House—and from the way in which the right hon. Gentleman addressed those with whom he had formerly been united, attacking them, and praising those from whom he had formerly differed, but to whose plans he was now a convert, that had induced him to speak so strongly. If in doing so he had said any thing that was unparliamentary, he was sorry for it; but he had felt strongly, and he could not avoid giving expression to his feelings. He would now make a few observations with regard to the currency question. It was not pretended that those who had borrowed in a depreciated currency could pay their debts under the standard established by the bill of 1826; but it was said that every pound note had been replaced by a sovereign. He might be misinformed, but he had made inquiries into that subject, and the bankers of the West of England had given him a very different account. It was said also, that the landed interest must make sacrifices. He did not know why, and why they had not received some information on that question. There was a reason given for the distress that happened in 1816, for that which took
576
place in 1819, and there was an evident reason for the panic of 1825; but no reason whatever was given for the distress that now weighed down the productive classes of the country. What a farce, then, was it to sit there and refuse a committee to inquire precisely, because no invidual could state the cause of the distress. Why, what was the object of a committee, but to find out that which no individual could of himself explain? A committee would see what was feasible in such a case, and for that reason he should support the amendment for a Select Committee. They must take care that the capital of the country was not destroyed. The land, the labours, the products of the country, were its wealth—the credit of the country might be destroyed, but the wealth would remain the same. The measures adopted within these few years had much diminished, and had gone near to destroy credit. The legislature would not allow of credit under 100 l., but there had been a time when credit was given on so low a sum as 20 l. He believed that one of the great causes of existing distress was, not that there were more or less sovereigns in the country, but that the bill of 1826 had annihilated a great portion of the representative property of the country. The Government admitted that there ought to be a representative property of 5l. and 10 l. notes, but they insisted that the circulating medium should have a metallic basis. And so it might have with a less strict limitation of paper currency. There was no such thing as a fixed standard of value; because even gold itself, which was popularly considered as a fixed standard, varied with different circumstances in different countries. They had heard that a great part of the present evils arose from our National Debt—a debt which had been, it was alleged, contracted by a profligate aristocracy and an obstinate government. There was no man who had seen the result of that war, and who had benefitted by it (and there were many such in that House), who could lay it to the charge of Mr. Pitt, that he had unjustly entered into that war, unless he meant to say, at the same time, that he should have been prepared to consent to a change in the monarchical representative and religious system of this country. Fifteen years had now elapsed since the conclusion of the war—its effects we still felt, and could not get rid of them—our efforts, however, must be strenuously

577
directed to alleviate the evil consequences of the war. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had endeavoured to pursue a certain plan, part of which was to reduce the public funds. It had been said by some, that the fact of the public funds rising was an undoubted indication of national prosperity. He disagreed with that opinion. It was a well-established fact, that the public funds might rise in national prosperity and in national adversity—in prosperity on account of public confidence, as in the year 1825; and in adversity on account of the want of confidence, and the feeling among men that they had no other profitable means of investing their capital. He believed that money, to a large extent, had been sent up from the country to be invested in the funds, with the view of creating that rise in the price of stock which was said to be an index of public prosperity, but which, he contended, indicated no such thing. It was said that the re-issuing of paper money would bring this country into the same state as that of France just previous to the Revolution; and that if the Minister were allowed to pay the claims on the Government with Exchequer Bills, and to make them equivalent to money, he would not resort to taxation to furnish him with funds. The Government expenses were not merely those which the service of the country called for, but the payment of the interest of the National Debt. The whole of those expenses were raised from the people—the interest of the debt in the shape of Excise and Customs. The latter were now much diminished, and he must declare his firm conviction, that, sooner or later, the Government must resort to the measure of a depreciated standard—they must have a paper currency—or commit a direct and open bankruptcy; for they never could go on in their present course. In this condition of the country, what would be the consequences if we were compelled to go to war, or even if we could remain at peace? It was foolish to blind ourselves to the real position of the country. There was a work, an extract from which he would read, though he had little doubt that all the Members of that House were well acquainted with it, because it appeared to him particularly applicable to present circumstances. It was nearly at the end of Mr. Hume's "Essay upon Public Credit." Mr. Hume had, indeed, been a prophet; but he had never calcu-
578
lated that there would be at last found a Government that would, out of an unheard of principle of generosity, pay more than it had borrowed, and place the country in such a situation as that in which it stood at this moment. Mr. Hume said—"I must confess that there has a strange supineness, from long custom, creeped into all ranks of men, with regard to public debts, not unlike what divines so vehemently complain of with regard to their religions doctrines. We all own that the most sanguine imagination cannot hope, either that this or any future ministry will be possessed of such rigid and steady frugality, as to make a considerable progress in the payment of our debts; or that the situation of foreign affairs will, for any long time, allow them leisure and tranquillity for such an undertaking. What then is to become of us? Were we ever so good Christians, and ever so resigned to Providence; this, methinks, were a curious question, even considered as a speculative one, and what it might not be altogether impossible to form some conjectural solution of. The events here will depend little upon the contingencies of battles, negotiations, intrigues, and factions. There seems to be a natural progress of things which may guide our reasoning. As it would have required but a moderate share of prudence, when we first began this practice of mortgaging, to have foretold, from the nature of men and of ministers, that things would necessarily be carried to the length we see; so now, that they have at last happily reached it, it may not be difficult to guess at the consequences. It must, indeed, be one of these two events,—either the nation must destroy public credit, or public credit will destroy the nation." He thought these opinions were perfectly true, and what was the consequence? We were now at peace, but it was impossible that any man could say we should not soon again be involved in war. If we were, we must then be forced upon the consideration of the question of the currency. We must again go into the market—we must increase the amount of the National Debt—and finally, we must follow the system which all other nations had adopted, we must make a compromise with the public creditor. That was a part of the question on which it was a matter of great delicacy to speak. Those men were no patriots—they had no regard for the honour of their

579
country (an honour above that involved in keeping up the payment of the full interest of its debt), who, when large fleets and armies were wanted, would not keep them up, and put themselves to some inconvenience to maintain them. Before he sat down, he wished to call the attention of the House to the state of public fueling out of doors. It was most depressing—it was a state that must soon have an end, and he besought them to consider it with the most deliberate attention. If, in the course of the observations he had made, he had wounded the feelings of any individual, he was sorry for it, and he should much regret if he had said anything that would tend to diminish the value or importance of public credit. The circumstances in which we were now placed were stronger and more imperative than any common rule of action. We must trust for our deliverance to Providence, in some respects; but we must endeavour also, by our own exertions, and by the readiness of all to make sacrifices for the common good, to escape from our present difficulties. The public feeling out of doors had been sufficiently manifested by meetings and petitions without number, and it was their duty to respond to that feeling by a proportionate alacrity in examining into the sufferings of the people with a view to their relief, thereby demonstrating that the charges of apathy which had been brought against them were unfounded.
Mr. Courtenaysaid, that nothing could be further from his intention than to say any thing personally offensive to the hon. Member for Newark, and if he had in his remarks passed beyond the fair line of controversial debate, he was bound to say that he was sorry for it.
Mr. Bullersaid, it was their part to consider, first, what were the nature and extent of the distress; and secondly, what was the remedy which it behoved them to apply. The hon. Member for Cornwall had observed, that the Ministry themselves admitted the fact of the distress by their remission of taxes. But who, he asked, had been ever found to deny it? The gist of the question was, whether it was distress of a nature for the Legislature to control, or rather of a kind to be remedied by the natural operation of events. He certainly thought that it had been very considerably exaggerated. The petitions were at least of a very unselfish character,
580
as they chiefly complained of the sufferings of parties unconnected with those who were annexed to those documents themselves. The hon. Member for Newark had represented the statements of the President of the Board of Trade as contrary to the evidence of the nation, and referred at the same time to a petition from Leeds, signed by 1,500 of the inhabitants. He, however, taking this mode of computation for his example, thought he had an equal right to draw a negative inference from the numbers there and elsewhere, whose names were not attached to petitions. Now, the population of Leeds was estimated at 80,000, and the manufacturers themselves might be reckoned at 20,000; yet but 1,500 complained. Those hon. gentlemen who joined loudest in murmur, and reproach, and expostulation, it might be observed, still kept their eyes fixed on their favourite monopoly, with a constancy worthy the imitation of lovers, despite all the sympathy and patriotism of their professions. They talked of a change in the circulating medium, and were, no doubt, ready to maintain that Cobbett was the brazen serpent to which the children of Israel were to look for healing in the day of their distress. The agricultural distress might be imputed, in his opinion, to the operation of local causes,—causes of a temporary description,—and the distress in trade, he sincerely believed, was not so great as represented.
Mr. Huskissonspoke in substance as follows:—Sir; The principal arguments which have hitherto been adduced in favour of the Motion,—I might, indeed, say the whole—by those who have given it an unqualified support, turn upon some undefined alteration which they wish to effect in our Currency. The hon. Baronet who lately preceded me (Sir Richard Vyvyan) has ventured into the field of prophesy. He predicts, that we must, ere long, come to one of these alternatives—either a depreciation of the Currency, by a return to an inconvertible paper circulation, or a national bankruptcy. The hon. Baronet fortifies himself in this prediction by quoting one from Mr. Hume, whom he describes as a true prophet, for having foretold, in his Essay upon Public Credit, that bankruptcy would be, at no distant period, the inevitable result of the extension of our debt. Many years have elapsed—more than seventy—since this prediction of the philosopher was given to

581
the world. I hope that the hon. Baronet may, for as many years, continue to survive his prophecy, and to serve his country; but however long his life may be, I trust that many more years will pass away, as in the case of Mr. Hume, before the hon. Baronet is found to have been a truer prophet than his predecessor has proved. Now, Sir, I trust that neither the hon. Member for Shaftesbury, who has originated, this motion, nor my hon. friend, the Member for Shoreham, who has moved the amendment, will consider that I am wanting in respect to them, if I decline to argue, at any length, the state of our Currency, in reference to the alterations which were made in it between the origin of its derangement in 1797 and its final restoration in 1819. From the period of the Bullion Committee, of which I was a member, in 1810, I have so often had occasion to state my opinions on this—the great, though not the only, source, of the difficulties of the country—that I willingly leave to others the task of following the hon. Gentlemen upon this exhausted subject. I will only state, that in 1819, when the bill, now called Mr. Peel's Act, was brought in, I was unavoidably kept away from the House by illness; otherwise I should have given to that measure my active and cordial support. In 1822, when a motion was brought forward by the hon. Member for Essex, for revising that Act, and altering the standard of value, I had an opportunity of stating very fully my sentiments upon the subject. To that motion I moved an amendment in the following words, "That this House will not alter the standard of the gold and silver coins of this realm, in weight, fineness, or denomination." In this amendment, after two nights' debate, the House concurred, by a majority of 194 to 30. If this, Sir, was the resolution of the House, three years only after the Act of 1819, how much more ought we to adhere to it in 1830! The greatest of all curses, to an opulent and commercial country, is a system of vacillation, unsteadiness, and alternation in its standard of value, frequently disturbing and unsettling the property and fortunes of individuals, and destroying the foundation of confidence and security in all contracts and pecuniary dealings between man and man, as well as in the honour and good faith of the Government. I wish I could say, that there are no other causes connected with our
582
Currency (even as it now is), which, by affecting commercial credit, render alternations in its value far too frequent, and which I think it ought to be our duty to endeavour to correct. Were I prepared to admit—which I certainly am not—that in 1819 we should have been justified in lowering the standard of our Currency, instead of simply restoring it, I must not the less contend, that we can exercise no such discretion now. I know there are many well-informed persons who take a different view from me of the course which we might have pursued in 1819, when we had to make a choice upon this subject. It is quite consistent in them, thinking that we committed an error in 1819, to maintain as most of them, I believe, do, that it is now better to endure the evils which that error has brought upon us, than to venture to disturb the settlement once made, at the risk of all the disquietude, alarm, and derangement, which would inevitably attend such an attempt. From the prevalence of this feeling, I am not afraid that any such attempt will find many partisans in this House; and I own that I consider it a necessary preliminary to the efficacy of every suggestion of relief, that we should, if possible, pronounce ourselves so decidedly on the permanence of our present monetary system, as finally to set at rest all hopes and fears on this too long agitated question. There is one branch, indeed, of this subject which docs not, I admit, involve any necessary alteration in the standard of our Currency: I mean, the circulation of one pound notes, convertible into coin upon demand. Their suppression rests upon distinct grounds. It is manifest that notes, of the same denomination with our principal gold coin, cannot be allowed, without the effect being to drive the latter out of circulation. Such, therefore, would be the consequence of small notes being again permitted. Upon the first excitement in trade, leading to a general improvement in prices, these notes would be largely issued to facilitate speculations. The foreign exchanges, for a time, would not be materially affected, because these speculations, as far as they led to payments abroad, would be provided for by the exportation of our gold coin. In this mode, the greater part of our coin, as well that deposited in the Bank, as that in circulation, might gradually disappear, the exchanges still re-

583
maining very slightly affected. The importation of foreign goods would be promoted by this large exportation of our coin, and by the rise of all commodities in this country. Every thing would appear prosperous; but the prosperity would be short-lived and delusive. The time would come, in which the Bank of England, alarmed for its own safety by the lowering of its treasure, would be under the necessity of taking decisive measures to protect itself. The effect would be a renewal of the panic of 1825, and of all the miserable consequences by which it has been followed. If, therefore, we make up our minds again to encourage the circulation of small notes, we must be prepared for one of these alternatives—either their paving the way for, and gradually leading to, another Bank Restriction (from which we so narrowly escaped at the end of the year 1825),—or for alternations of fictitious prosperity, such as immediately preceded that crisis, to be followed by overwhelming distress, such as that by which it was terminated. Upon this ground, it is a great satisfaction to me to find, that his Majesty's Government have resolved to maintain the suppression of one pound notes in England; not because they are in themselves depreciation, but because, so long as they are suffered to exist, you can only escape the greater calamity of restriction, leading to an inconvertible paper currency, by the evil only second to it in degree, that of such a calamity as befell us in the autumn of 1825. Looking to the Motion, however, in its more general character, I am not one of those who have underrated the present distress. The numerous petitions attest its existence, and a document, recently distributed to the Members of this House, is unfortunately no slight confirmation that their allegations are but too well founded. The document to which I allude, is "an Account of the monthly amount of the sums paid in and paid out, on account of Savings' Banks, for the two last years." The year 1828 exhibits the following amounts—paid in, 945,448 l.—drawn out, 678,420 l.:—the year 1829, paid in, 449,493 l.—drawn out, 1,444,937 l. The figures,* and the comparison which
* This difference has, in some degree, been since accounted for, by a change in the law, and in the reduction of the rate of interest allowed by Government, which took place in November 1828.
584
they afford, speak for themselves, and must be taken as a strong indication of the increasing difficulties of the laborious classes in the year 1829. But whilst I acknowledge, and deeply lament, the intensity of suffering and misery which have been endured in many quarters, especially during the last severe winter, I cannot take that gloomy and hopeless view of our situation to which some appear to yield themselves up. I never can believe, that a country like England, however crippled for a time by some derangement in the system of its interior economy, can be reduced, all at once, to a state of helpless weakness, and irremediable decay. I have a more just reliance upon the sources of our wealth and power, in every branch which constitutes the substantial riches and real strength of the country, its agriculture, its commerce, its manufactures, its immense accumulation of fixed capital, the energy of our national character, and the indefatigable industry of an ingenious, enterprising, and orderly population. I have a further ground of well-founded confidence for the present, and of sanguine hope for the future, in an enlightened public opinion, exercising every year more and more, under the benefits of free discussion, its salutary influence upon the councils of Ministers, as well as upon the deliberations of Parliament. There is no man, I think, who can read the signs of the times, who can recollect the occurrences of the last, or who witnesses those of the present Session—those I might say which have marked the present week—without feeling this consolation. This growth of intelligence, it is true, is not in itself either productive industry or national wealth: but it is the shield which protects both against the encroachments of power, and the errors of empiricism. It is the finger-post, which, in the hour of doubt and difficulty, points the path of safety, and guides us in the career of rational improvement. Admitting then, as I do, the existence of distress, but hoping, at the same time, that, for the present at least, we have seen its worst, it still becomes my duty, whilst I cling to that hope, to inquire into the causes which, in the midst of profound peace, have produced such frequent recurrences of public embarrassment. It appears to me, Sir,—and it is well known to several of my right hon. friends, that my opinion is of much longer standing than the present emer-

585
gency,—that the main difficulty, not an occasional, but rather an habitual difficulty, under which this country labours, is the too great pressure upon the springs and sources of productive industry: and that this pressure, from the very circumstance of its being too great in ordinary limes, becomes excessive, and is subject to fits of exacerbation, from any incidental casualty, such as an ungenial season, or a temporary derangement in any considerable branch of our manufactures or trade. To a casualty of this description we must always be liable, but it ought not to reduce us to suffering like that which we now endure, if we had been before in a robust and healthy condition. If I am asked the cause of the habitual existence of this too great pressure, I can only state the impression of my own mind.—It is simply this, that, in the distribution of the annual income of the country, by which I mean everything, having value in exchange, that is raised and produced by the labour of its inhabitants, and from which fund are derived the subsistence, the comforts, and the enjoyments of all, from the monarch to the peasant,—I say that, in its distribution, the portion of it reserved for reproduction is now, and has been for some years, less than it ought to be, either for the well-being of the labouring classes,—the immediate instrument of that reproduction,—or for the due maintenance, and progressive growth, of the capitals by which their labour is called into active exertion. I am aware that, in this statement, I have only said in other words, that the wages of labour have been too low, and the profits of fructifying or productive capital less than they ought to be: but there is an advantage, in a discussion like the present, in describing these evils, so as to trace them to their elementary causes. Many concurrent circumstances have contributed, since the restoration of peace, to produce this unsatisfactory state of things. Over some of the causes to which it may be traced, we have, from different reasons, little or no control: for instance, we cannot regulate the course of the seasons, or the competition of other countries with the products of our own in the foreign market. Neither can we interpose our authority—God forbid we should!—to slop the progress of improvement in mechanical or chemical science, or to interfere between landlord and tenant, or in the other pecu-
586
niary dealings of society. To the consequences of other causes of difficulty we have deliberately submitted, as the only way of escaping from far greater evils; for instance, in putting an end to an inconvertible paper currency. But there are causes which, if they have produced any part of the evil, are completely within our control. I allude now to that change in our commercial policy, to which so much of our present distress has been ascribed by clamour out of doors, and by more than one speaker in this debate. When people are suffering, nothing is more easy, and, with superficial observers, more common, than to raise, or join in, any cry which saves the trouble of thinking. Free Trade, as it has been absurdly nicknamed, by those who use words without knowing what they themselves mean, has in this way been denounced by the disappointed selfishness of some, and adopted without consideration by others, as the source of all our difficulties. It has been so designated by the honourable Alderman Waithman, one of the Members for the City of London, by the honourable Members for Cornwall and Newark, and by others; but none of these honourable Members ever condescend to tell us what they mean, or understand, by Free Trade. It is of this that I have before complained, and that I again complain on this occasion. Do they know the changes which have been made in our commercial policy, since the restoration of peace? If they do, why not point out to this House specifically the alterations of which they disapprove, and move, as it is fully competent for them to do, for the repeal of the particular Acts by which they have been effected, and for the revival of Acts, now no longer upon the Statute Book, by which industry and trade would again be placed under their former regulations? Would not this course be more consistent with the strait-forward duty of legislation, than to give their countenance to a senseless clamour, and to keep up delusion and irritation among a suffering people, instead of making any attempt to administer that relief, which, if they have faith in their own declamations, it is in their power to propose; I say now, as I have said before, it is the duty of those Gentlemen to toll us, intelligibly and in detail, what it is that has been done which ought to be undone, and what they would substitute for that which is now in existence. Every challenge of this sort

587
they have hitherto declined, forgetting that it is scarcely fair to arraign a system which they are not prepared to amend, and that they are sent here, not to aggravate what is wrong by inflammatory denunciations, but to correct it by calm counsel and appropriate remedies. This is a duty which they cannot expect to devolve upon those who differ with them in principle; and if they are not prepared to act upon it themselves, their omission is equally unjustifiable towards those who concur in their opinions, and towards Parliament, of which the measures are the objects of their obloquy and abuse; and when I say Parliament, perhaps, as the individual in this House most immediately responsible for those measures, and who, as such, has come in for the greatest share of that obloquy and abuse, I too may be allowed personally to complain of the injustice towards myself of this continued dereliction of their duty. Six or seven hundred statutes, passed for improving the commerce and industry of the country, by a system of protection, prohibition, restriction, and interference, have been repealed. How many of these laws do they propose to re-enact? Or do they wish to revive the whole, with all their vexatious, conflicting, frequently contradictory, and invariably absurd, regulations? Do they wish again to introduce prohibition as a principle for the encouragement of trade, and to revive monopoly as a benefit to the consumer? If they do, in God's name, let them make the attempt, and let Parliament, under the guidance of common sense and public opinion, decide between the advocates of such a system, and the support of what they deride, but dare not discuss, as the system of Free Trade. The honourable Baronet who spoke last, indeed, the Member for the county of Cornwall, has denounced that system as one which has for its sole object to force exports. There cannot be a more mistaken view of the subject. A forcing system, either of exports or imports, is altogether at variance with the policy which it has been my duty to recommend. That policy has been rather to put an end to such a system, and without any forcing, to leave to individuals to follow their own views, to regulate their own speculations, and to consult their own interests. This I consider to be a general rule, applicable alike to the industry and the commerce of the country. Exceptions to it may be justified upon grounds of special expedi-
588
ency; but they ought to be watched with the more jealousy, as every such exception is a departure from that course which, in the long-run, must be most conducive to public prosperity. We are told, indeed, by the honourable Alderman, and others of his school, who cannot deny that the quantity of goods exported of late years has greatly increased, that the more you export, the greater your loss; and the foundation of this almost ludicrous doctrine is, that the aggregate value of such exports has diminished in a greater proportion than the quantity exported has increased. Do the advocates of this doctrine seriously mean to contend, that our export trade, upon an average, is a losing concern, and that it goes on increasing, year after year, in proportion as it becomes more and more unprofitable? When I ask them this question, I do not mean to deny that some adventures have been attended with loss; that upon others the profit has been very small; but I cannot believe that men of common sense, prudence, and calculation, would, for a great length of time, persevere, much less that they should voluntarily increase their speculations, in any trade, when the amount of loss and not of profit (however low the latter) was to be measured by the scale of such speculations. In fact, Sir, I have one short answer to the tenets of that school of which the honourable Alderman and the honourable Member for Newark are now the acknowledged chiefs. It is this,—If you resort at all to the foreign market, you must be content to sell your commodities for the prices which you can procure in competition with the like articles, the produce of any other countries. You cannot control their capital,—you cannot regulate their industry—and do you expect to improve the chance of meeting them at equal prices by subjecting your own people to restraints and burthens, from which those with whom they have to compete are free? The honourable Alderman, therefore, must make his election;—either our export trade must cease, or we must be content with the price which the foreign market will yield. The purchaser in that market concerns himself very little about the cost of production here, or elsewhere; quality and price are the considerations by which he is governed in his choice between the British and the foreign competitor. Now, if this be the principle which regulates every foreign market to which our mer-

589
chants resort, does it not follow, as a necessary consequence, that the price, in our own market, of every article, the like of which we export for foreign consumption, must be regulated by the selling price abroad? If the price abroad be permanently depressed, the home price must partake of that depression. This must be my first answer to those who tell us, that the home market of the country is every thing, the only market deserving of encouragement. The home trade must, of necessity, be of great importance and value; but it has been sacrificed, ruined, and put down (we are told) by the forcing and encouragement given, under the new system, to our export trade. To maintain this position the following argument, if argument it can be called, is had recourse to. The increase of our export trade has been followed by a more than proportionate decrease of the home trade; by forcing the one you have injured the other, and the result is, that both have become unprofitable. I know not how to measure the home trade, except by the home consumption. It may be difficult, especially for an individual like myself, unaided by the facilities which office affords, to ascertain accurately the amount of that consumption. I have, however, endeavoured, by a reference to the returns to this House, and with the aid of some most intelligent friends in the mercantile line, to collect information upon this point; and I will now, with the permission of the House, state the result. I have selected articles of the most extensive use in the manufactures of this country, and I have made my comparison upon the consumption of five years; namely, from 1816 (I select this as the year of the highest return) to 1820, both inclusive, and in like manner for the last five years, from 1824 to 1828.
The first article to which I shall refer is Cotton-Wool. The average annual importation, from 1816 to 1820, was 139,141,646lbs.;—the average annual importation from 1824 to 1828 was 210,886,992lbs. The average annual exportation of Cotton-Wool for the same periods was, for the first, 1l,873,800lbs.,for the second, 21,298,800lbs.; leaving of Cotton-Wool for manufacture in this country, an annual average, for the first period, of 127,267,846lbs.; and for the second, 189,588,192lbs. These respective quantities were disposed of in each period, in the manufactured state, as nearly as can be ascertained, as follows; first—Cotton-Yarn
590
exported (one-eighth being added for waste), the annual average of the first period being 19,984,664lbs.,—in the second, 48,472,202lbs.;—secondly, Cotton-Cloth exported (computing six yards of cloth of all kinds to be produced from one pound of cotton), annual average of the first period 255,507,058 yards—in the second period, 360,265,256 yards:—thirdly,—Cotton Cloth retained for home consumption (computing one pound of cotton to make five yards of cloth) in the first period, 227,003,484 yards—in the second period, 399,678,923 yards. I may here just observe, that the estimate of six yards to the pound of cotton for foreign, and of five for home, consumption, is supposed to be the nearest approach to accuracy, by those who are practically most conversant with the manufacture. The next article is Sheep's Wool. The annual average importation of the first period is 14,443,834lbs.;—of the second, 28,356,417lbs.: retained for home use, in the first period, 14,430,917lbs.;—in the second, 27,629,561 lbs.: official value of woollens exported in the first period—annual average, 5,313,429 l.;—in the second, 5,763,632 l. Now, the principal quantity of the wool imported is of the finer qualities; and as the increase of export in the manufactured articles of woollen cloth is very trifling, it follows that a great increase of consumption must have taken place in this country; unless it be maintained (which it certainly cannot, the reverse being the fact,) that the growth of British Wool has been diminished in a degree corresponding with the increased foreign supply. The increased home consumption is principally in fine cloth made of Saxon and the highpriced wools. The next article of import is Silk. The averages are as follows. Raw and waste, from 1816 to 1820, l,444,000lbs.—thrown ditto,303,126lbs.—from 1824 to 1828, raw and waste, 3,437,432lbs.;—thrown,447,504lbs.:—the export of manufactured silk goods has varied very little, upon a comparison of these two periods. The importation of Flax is, for the first period, 368,371 cwt.;—for the second, 830,421cwt. I have not been able to obtain any satisfactory information as to the quantity of Linen Cloth exported, but there can be no doubt of a greatly increased consumption at home. Hides, in the first period, imported, 679,996;—re-exported 221,200; retained for home use, 458,796;—in the second period, im-

591
ported, 1,873,314;—re-exported, 211,448;—retained for home use, 1,661,866. The next articles are Tallow and Palm Oil, for the manufacture of candles and Soap. Imported in the first period, of tallow, 545,540cwt:—palm oil, 34,910cwt.—soap exported, official valuation, 116,037 l.;—candles exported, weight, 4,931,597lbs.:—second period, tallow imported, 946,760cwt.—palm oil, 95,942cwt.—soap exported, official value, 183,849 l.; candles exported, weight, 7,818,718lbs.
The last article which I shall mention is that of fir timber; the annual average import of the first period was 289,379 loads:—in the second, for four years ending 1827 (I have not been able to procure the return for 1828) 541,654 loads. There remains, however, one other branch of our national wealth and industry, to which I must advert before I quit this part of the subject. From its importance, both in a commercial and political point of view, I could not pass it over, even if it had been omitted by the hon. Members who have preceded me in this debate. I allude, Sir, to our Shipping, which is stated to be fast verging to decay and ruin. If it had been asserted that the profits of the ship-owner were very greatly diminished, as compared to the period of war, and that they were small, even when calculated upon the present reduced value of the ship, I certainly should not deny the position. I regret that the returns of capital in this, as in other branches of productive industry, are less than I could wish them to be; but when the interest of money and the profits of stock are generally low, it would be vain to expect that the capital employed in shipping should form an exception. Indeed, from circumstances peculiar to the shipping interest, it was likely to suffer a greater revulsion than any other from the restoration of peace.
At the close of the war, our shipping had engrossed the navigation of other countries; and near one-sixth of the tonnage of our merchant ships was employed in the public service as transports. The commerce and navigation of other nations are now returned to their usual course in peace, and nine-tenths of our transports have been discharged from the public service. By the Returns which were laid before the House of Commons in the course of last Session, it would appear that, in the year 1816 we had 25,864 registered vessels, measuring 2,783,940 tons;
592
—and that in 1828, the number of registered vessels was only 24,095, measuring 2,508,191 tons. This diminution has been commented upon as showing conclusively the gradual and melancholy decline of the shipping interest. It is, perhaps, scarcely worth while to observe, that by the same return, the tonnage appears to have been reduced, so early as 1823, to 2,506,760 tons:—that in 1827, it is stated at 2,460,500 tons; being, in the first of these two years, a trifle, and in the second 48,000 tons less than in the year 1828. But it is more material to state, that in the year 1816, the amount of tonnage was swelled by returning many ships which had long ceased to exist, and that at present the returns are accurately made. There is another parliamentary paper, however, which was also furnished last Session, and which, if properly considered, in conjunction with that to which I have now referred, will throw great and satisfactory light upon this subject. It is the paper which exhibits the number and tonnage of British vessels entered inwards and cleared outwards, in our trade with all foreign parts, for the same period as the former paper, namely from 1814 to 1828, both inclusive. We have already seen, that in 1816 the total tonnage of our registered shipping was 2,783,940: now, in that year, the total tonnage entered inwards from all foreign parts was 1,415,723—cleared outwards to all foreign parts, 1,340,277 tons—making together 2,756,000—being a fraction more than one ton of shipping for every ton of goods entered inwards and cleared outwards. In 1828 our whole tonnage, as I have already stated, was 2,508,191; but in that year the entries inwards were 2,094,357—and the clearances outwards 2,096,397—making together 4,190,754 tons, being somewhat less than five-eighths of a ton of registered shipping to every ton of goods entered inwards and cleared outwards, and being, moreover, a positive increase upon the entries and clearances of 1816, to the amount of 1,434,754 tons;—rather more than either of them separately amounted to in that year. I might further state, that the account of vessels entered inwards and cleared outwards for 1829 has been delivered this morning, and is as follows—inwards 2,184,535—outwards 2,063,179, making together 4,247,714 tons,—an increase, as the House will perceive, upon the antecedent year. Now I need scarcely remark to

593
the House, that the quantity of goods, carried to and fro' between this country and all foreign parts, in British ships, within a given period, is the true measure of the degree of employment and activity of our commercial marine. If our ships had been navigated backwards and forwards, at the same rate of movement in 1828 as in 1816, it would have required upwards of 4,200,000 tons to have executed the transference of goods, which, in 1828, was performed by 2,500,000 tons of registered shipping.—On the other hand, if the accelerated movement of 1828 had prevailed in 1816, the transference of goods which, in that year, required 2,783,940 tons, might have been accomplished by about 1,700,000 tons of registered shipping. If Gentlemen think this change a misfortune, nothing can be more easy than to rectify it. We have only to restore the vexatious and contradictory laws, partly fiscal, partly protective, as they were called, partly commercial, which threw impediments and delays in the way of our commerce and navigation. We have only to take care that ships should not load and unload, make their entries, and obtain their clearances, with the present ease and dispatch. We have only to restore in our Custom-houses the regulations which harassed the ship-owner and the merchant, and to provide that the convenience and expedition, now so conspicuous in our commercial docks, should be so checked and encumbered with dilatory forms and useless interference, as to bring us back to the more sober pace of our former system. This is a task which I can scarcely be called upon to undertake; let those who arraign these improvements as ruinous innovations, propose their repeal, and thus bring the two systems to a fair issue. But, before they attempt to effect their purpose, let them calculate the results to the shipping interest. In trade the economy of time will always be found to be the economy of money. Every restraint is an increased expenditure of the one or the other. It adds, in more ways than one, to the charge at which the raw material can be delivered to our manufacturers, and the manufactured article conveyed to the foreign market. It operates as a premium in favour of rival manufactures, and as a tax upon our own. From what fund is that premium to be drawn, and that tax paid, except from the profits of the manufacturer's capital, and the wages of the labourer whom he employs?
594
For, as was well observed by the gallant Member for Windsor, the price in the foreign market, be it what it may, must determine the price in our own market. If we are beaten in this race of competition, we shall want fewer carriers to effect the interchange of the products of our industry, against the raw materials of other countries. And how is the shipping interest to be benefited by the curtailment of our foreign trade? The truth is, that, under all the difficulties with which our general industry, including our shipping, has had to contend, since the restoration of peace—difficulties growing out of the enormous expenditure of war—the necessary restoration of our currency—and the active rivalry of other nations—nothing but a timely relaxation of our restrictive and expensive system, would have enabled us to bear up against the complicated disadvantages of our situation. That relaxation, so far as it has gone—and it ought to go further—has been gradually introduced, with due regard to the interests and arrangements which had grown up under a different system. But for the intervention of so many years of war, and of a war so peculiar in its character, these improvements would have been introduced, not only at an earlier period, but with less of friction and embarrassment in carrying them into effect. For I can take upon myself to affirm, from personal knowledge of Mr. Pitt's sentiments and views, that there was nothing which he more regretted, in the derangement of war, than the interruption which it gave to the improvement of our commercial policy,—an improvement which he looked to in the temperate and cautious liberation of trade and industry from all unnecessary shackles and impediments. These arguments, Sir, may have little weight with that select class, who claim to be, exclusively, our practical guides in political economy. With them, foreign commerce is a matter almost of indifference; according to them, England can be great, happy, and flourishing, within herself. Of what England they are speaking, I know not; certainly not of this country, as it now exists. The raw materials of every great branch of our industry (mineral wealth excepted) are derived, either wholly, or in great part, from foreign soils. Cotton,—which gives employment to perhaps two millions of people—wholly. Silk, which employs about I five hundred thousand—wholly. Wool,

595
in great proportion. Hemp and flax, in a proportion still greater. Fir timber, for all building purposes, nearly the whole. Dyeing drugs, the same. I say nothing of luxuries, such as wine, &c. But, looking only to the articles which I have enumerated, I would ask—are Gentlemen prepared to dispense with the comforts which the use of them here affords to our population? And if they are, are they still further prepared to tell us how that population could be maintained, if the conversion of these raw materials did not give employment to their industry? With what but that manufactured industry can we purchase them from other countries? Have we any superfluous raw materials of our own with which to make the purchase? Where is the spare corn, or the spare produce of our soil, which can be sent abroad for this purpose? No, Sir, of these productions we do not grow enough for our own wants. Our population, then, so far as it is employed in working up the raw materials of other countries, must find in its own industry the means of procuring those raw materials. Without them, that industry must cease; that population (it amounts to millions) must perish; and then, indeed, England—but not England great, happy, and flourishing—England, reduced to its former insignificance and barbarism—may disregard foreign trade. If, then, relief is not to be looked for by undoing, but rather by persevering in and extending, our present system of commercial policy; our next inquiry must be, how far that relief is attainable by a revision of the finances of the country. Within the limits of public faith, the amount of our taxation is under our control; and in respect to the mode in which it is assessed, distributed, and raised, the whole public revenue may be considered as liable to whatever alterations the wisdom of Parliament may find expedient. First, then, with respect to its positive amount, under the altered circumstances of the country, since the restoration of peace. I had occasion to state my opinion on this subject to the Committee upon Agricultural Distress in 1821, and as it is recorded in their Report, I beg leave very shortly to refer to it. It is as follows:—"Your Committee cannot disguise from themselves, that the weight of the public burthens of the country, their nominal amount remaining the same, must be more severely felt, in proportion as the money incomes de-
596
rived from trading, farming, and manufacturing capital and industry are diminished. No exertion, therefore, should be omitted to endeavour to reduce those burthens, as nearly as circumstances will permit, in the degree in which such incomes have been reduced: for, in considering this subject, it is important to bear in mind, that the general amount and real pressure of taxation have been positively increased in the proportion of the improved value of our currency." I still retain that opinion; indeed, every thing which has since occurred has only tended to confirm it. The course at which it points is obvious. It is that which, I willingly admit, is now followed by his Majesty's Government. Credit is due to them for the retrenchments, certainly not inconsiderable, which they have already made, as well as for the new checks which they have established, and the further ones which they contemplate, for repressing that tendency to the growth of expenditure which constantly prevails in every department of the public service. A tendency which, as it pervades all branches of expenditure, requires to be steadily watched, and kept within bounds—of late years it appears to have been most vivacious, if I may use the expression, in that branch which is familiarly called the Dead Weight. After all the details and explanations upon this subject, which I have heard with satisfaction from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I remain of opinion, that the proposed regulations ought, in some instances, to be drawn somewhat tighter, and that retrenchment may be carried considerably further. The Government has once gone over the wide field of expenditure, but what they have cut down is not adequate to the wants and expectations of the country. Let them repeat the operation, and they will find that more than gleanings are left behind. In the collection and management of the revenue, it was admitted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, there is still room for reduction and reform. The diplomatic and consular establishment may be pared down without detriment to the public service. The door of admission to half pay, retired allowances, and super annuations of every sort, must be further straitened and narrowed. A careful revision of the Colonial establishments will afford a considerable saving. The expenses incurred on the coast of Africa ought, on every con-

597
sideration, to be greatly diminished. The laxity of control over the appropriation of the revenue arising from Crown-lands calls for revision. This branch of the revenue, as much as the Customs or Excise, constitutes a part of the Consolidated Fund, subject to the expenses of management, Under this head of management it may be proper to include the expense of the maintaining, repairing, and keeping up that part of the Crown estate, which is expressly reserved for the recreation or state of the Monarch, such as parks, lodges, &c.; but as in the Civil List, so in this instance, a specific annual sum ought to be allotted for that purpose; not to be exceeded without an application to, and an express vote of, the House of Commons. There are also the savings which may, I hope, be effected in the great heads of our expense, the military and naval establishments of the country. I have made no objections to the estimates for the army and navy this year. In fixing the numbers, the Government, acting upon their information and responsibility, have a right to expect some degree of confidence from the House; especially if, from circumstances of notoriety, it should appear that, in the pending concerns of the world, some matters remain to be adjusted, and that every thing is not in its right place. If, by the next year, the mists which surround us shall be dissipated, if the political horizon shall be, on every side, clear and bright, if Ireland shall continue—as I am confident it will—to improve in its internal tranquillity, and in good feelings towards this country, I should, in the ensuing Session, expect no inconsiderable reduction in the amount of our public force. Whatever savings may be effected in all these branches of expenditure, or in any other, they will add so much to our relief. But, when the whole of the charge over which we can exercise any immediate control, is not more than 11,000,000 l., the further reduction which remains practicable, to be consistent with the public safety, and the efficiency of Government, cannot be very considerable. Indeed I much doubt whether, if we are to retain a reasonable surplus of revenue—I will not say upon the principle of a Sinking-fund, but as the necessary guard and provision against the effect of those fluctuations to which our public income is liable—any further absolute reduction of taxation can be anticipated, from the utmost amount
598
of retrenchment that can be made, unless the produce of the remaining taxes should be very greatly increased, in consequence of the relief now to be given to the people. I will shortly state the grounds of this opinion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer estimates the surplus of the present year at about 2,600,000 l. I will take for granted the data upon which this estimate was made. I hope my right hon. friend will not think that I am doing him a disservice, when I remark that he has understated the extent of relief which he is about to give to the country. He estimates it at 3,400,000 l.: now the average nett payment into the Exchequer from the duties about to be taken off, for a period of the last five years, was 3,737,000 l.; and as the barley crop failed in one of those years, 1827, I think it may be taken in round numbers at 3,750,000 l., leaving, consequently, a deficiency upon the estimated surplus of this year of 1,150,000 l. Now, if the reduction of the four per cents, taken at 700,000 l., the new taxes proposed by my right hon. friend, estimated at 400,000 l., and the further savings to be made, should amount altogether to 2,000,000 l., our surplus would be rather less than 1,000,000 l., being an allowance of about two per cent, upon our income, to meet all the incidents and casualties to which it is liable. Assuming, then, that absolute abatement of taxation cannot, for the present at least, be carried further, the question which remains for consideration (and I can assure the House that I have anxiously turned it in my own mind in the interval since the Budget was made known to us) is, will the proposed remission be all that is requisite for the effectual and permanent relief of the country? I am sorry to say that I incline to think it will not. In the view which I take of our present difficulties, the main cause of them, in my opinion, as stated at the outset of what I have now addressed to the House, and which that I may not be misunderstood, in substance I repeat, is this—that in the distribution of the annual wealth of the country, taking it according to the ordinary and admitted division into rent, profits of stock, and wages of labour, the two latter, from a complication of concurrent circumstances, of which taxation is one, are now in the receipt of less than their just share. I may further state, that such a condition of society cannot long be continued, with-

599
out its laying the foundation of national impoverishment. There is a short passage in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, which so forcibly points out the calamitous tendency of this condition of society, that I cannot forbear pressing it upon the serious attention of the House. "To complain," he says, "of the liberal reward of labour, is to lament over the necessary effect and cause of the greatest public prosperity. The condition of the labourer is hard in the stationary, and miserable in the declining state. The progressive state is in reality the cheerful and the hearty state to all the different orders of society. The stationary is dull—the declining melancholy."—If we are in danger of falling into this state of things, and if we cannot be adequately protected against the risk by any practical diminution in the positive amount of our burthens, may we not guard ourselves against it by some change in the principle and distribution of the remaining taxation? In approaching this part of the subject, I am aware that I am treading upon tender ground. I know that I shall not only meet with great difference of opinion, but that I shall expose myself, probably, to considerable clamour and obloquy. It is impossible to touch upon it without coming into collision with the interests (at least as the parties understand them) of many, and those, perhaps, the most powerful both in this House and in the country. But, Sir, when I am addressing you upon a subject of such deep importance, I feel myself bound by a sense of public duty, be the consequence to myself personally what it may, to state a strong doubt (I wish to put it no higher), whether we shall afford adequate relief, without removing a larger amount of those taxes which press directly upon income arising from capital engaged in industry, and upon the income of labour to which that capital gives employment;—transferring, as far as may be indispensable, the burthen upon all that class of income which arises from capital not so employed.
Sir, my gallant friend, the Member for Windsor, has called upon us to compare the habits of society, in the higher walks of life, with what they were fifty years ago. Like him, and with him, I have lived long enough to bear testimony to the change which has taken place. Let any man compare the Metropolis now with what it was at that period; not only its positive growth, but still more the extension of
600
splendor in buildings, in furniture, in plate, in the habits of luxury, and in display of every description. Having mentioned plate, Sir, I may remark, as a striking evidence of this change, the difference of the amount of the duty upon that one article between the year 1804 and the last year. The rate of duty upon silver wrought plate in 1804 was 1s. 3d., upon gold 16 s. per ounce; it was afterwards raised to 1s. 6d. upon silver, and to 17 s. upon gold. But what has been the increase in the nett produce of the duty? It has risen from less than 5,000 l. in 1804, to upwards of 105,000 l. in 1828; a rise of more than twenty-fold, notwithstanding the greatly diminished supply from the mines, and the consequent increasing value of the precious metals. It may be further remarked, that this augmented consumption shows how large a portion of gold and silver is annually diverted from the purposes of coin to those of ornament and luxury. Have the articles most necessary to the scanty comfort of the humble dwellings of the labouring classes been multiplied in the same proportion? I am afraid that, in too many cases, an inverse ratio would rather be the correct answer. Look at the earnings and condition of that population which raises the produce of the soil, or from early dawn till midnight throws the shuttle, for bare subsistence, and compare them with those of the artisans who minister to all the various enjoyments and gratifications of wealth in this great town. Contrast the hourly dealings for millions, at that great mart of money, the Stock Exchange, with the stinted transactions and falling off of our country markets. In London the bankers, the monied men of all descriptions, complain of the glut of money. We hear of seven or eight millions deposited, for want of employment, in the Bank of England alone. Ingenuity is incessantly at work in devising new and tempting speculations, to call forth these locked-up capitals, of which too large a portion has already been thrown away upon rash and gambling speculations, or placed at hazard upon the precarious security of foreign loans. In the country, you hear of nothing but the be wailings of industry, and the want of money, confidence, and credit. The country banker reluctant to make advances, and the prudent man, who is still solvent, cautious and tardy in applying for them, because productive speculation, however carefully conducted, holds out too little

601
prospect of gain to compensate for the risk of loss, with which, more or less, it must always be attended. It is notorious to all who know what is passing in the different counties of the kingdom, that country banks,—in better times those salutary reservoirs for the alternate deposit and distribution of circulating wealth, through all the ramifications of active industry—now send that wealth up to town, to be lent for short periods upon stock, and other floating securities upon the Stock Exchange. This system is, perhaps, safe for themselves, but, at best, of very doubtful benefit to the public; affording, for aught I know, to a few individuals increased facilities for gigantic speculations; swelling; still further the already overgrown fortunes of some, but bringing misery and ruin upon others; and diverting the thoughts and aspirations of all who come within its vortex, from the sober and steady courses of their fore fathers, to pursuits as little conducive, I believe, to individual happiness and moral worth, as they certainly are to the growth of wealth in the country; pursuits which, were they multiplied even an hundred-fold, could never add the value of one pepper-corn to our national resources, whilst all the classes, from whom alone wealth can really flow, are labouring under difficulties, and complaining of distress. In considering the effects of our present taxation upon the productive industry of the country, we must constantly bear in mind the necessary consequences of a state of peace, and of a free competition of the industry of other countries with that of our own, in the general markets of the world. These consequences, as it has been already so well stated in this debate, are, first,—that we cannot obtain for our commodities a better price than that at which, in this race of competition, the like commodities can be raised, produced, and brought to market, by other countries; and, secondly,—that the price at which we can sell abroad must determine the price in the home market. Now, Sir, let us follow out these admitted axioms in all their necessary and legitimate bearings and results. It will not be denied that a spirit of improvement, an anxious desire to promote industry, zeal for the diffusion of knowledge in all pursuits connected with mechanical and chemical science, and in the beneficial application of them to the useful purposes of life, are now the pervading feelings, not only of every people, but of nearly every government, in the civilized world. Nei-
602
ther can it be denied that, in several countries, a greater degree of freedom in their institutions, and a greater security for property, have, under the uninterrupted enjoyment of peace, promoted the growth of capital, and the other facilities which are necessary to manufacturing and commercial enterprise. This is the rivalry, every day growing more formidable, with which our capital and industry and skill have to contend. If we meet it under some advantages, we have also great and growing disadvantages to encounter. Do not let us lose sight of the fearful consequences which must ensue, if we are distanced in the race. The greatest of all follies, on such an occasion, would be to shut our eyes to difficulties which, taken in time, we may, perhaps, overcome, but which, by procrastination, we cannot evade. For a long time we have been the greatest manufacturing and trading nation in the world. We export for sale abroad, in a manufactured state, more or less of almost every thing which we raise or pro- duce. Of the raw materials of our soil the export is next to nothing. They are barely adequate, indeed I might say inadequate, to the subsistence of our population. Upon an average of years, we cannot do without a supply of foreign corn; and of cheese, butter, and other articles we have a large annual importation. Our Corn-laws, however expedient to prevent other evils, in the present state of the country, are in themselves a burthen and a restraint upon its manufacturing and commercial industry. Whilst the products of that industry must descend to the level of the general market of the world, the producers, so far as food is concerned, are debarred from that level. If the price of subsistence,—that is, the price of those particular articles which we never export, and are frequently compelled to import—be materially dearer here than anywhere else, that dearness cannot be shifted to the articles which we do export. It must fall in the way of deduction, either upon the wages and comforts of the labourer, or upon the profits of those who afford him employment. Here, then, is one inevitable cause, constantly operating to keep alive a struggle between productive capital and productive labour, with a constant tendency to bring both to a lower level:—because the disadvantage, under which they have to contend, arising from a difference in the price of the necessaries of life, is

603
increased in proportion as the progressive improvement of rival nations approximates their manufacturing skill and industry more nearly to our own. Are not, then, the circumstances, which enhance the price of subsistence in this country, a strong reason why we should endeavour to lighten, as much as possible, other burthens which, by their direct operation, tend to aggravate this disadvantage? See, to what an extent your Excise and Customs prove that you do not sufficiently attend to this consideration! Full three-fourths of your revenue are levied under these two heads; and by far the greatest proportion of that amount upon articles necessary, either for the subsistence, the clothing, or the humble comforts of the labourer; or of use in the fabrication of those articles to which his industry is devoted. Let any man look through the list of the Excise and Customs, even now that the Beer and Leather Taxes are removed, and he will find in how great a degree this observation still applies. Candles, hops, licences, malt, printed goods, soap, British spirits, tea, sugar, tobacco, rum, hemp,timber:—here is an enumeration amounting to near 30,000,000 l.; but the incidental burthen of which, in restraint, impediment, and vexatious interference, may well be estimated at 10,000,000 l. more. These are the consequences of monopoly in some cases, as tea for instance, and of the charge of collection, regulation, drawbacks, and such like interference in others. They are, perhaps, unavoidable under the complication of a system, which can only guard against fraud and evasion in the collection of the revenue, by impeding the development of industry, and sacrificing the improvements of science. It is a common remark, that the rich man does not require more food than his poorer neighbour; the difference between them must be in the quality. But, in many of the articles which I have enumerated, the consumption of the rich is less than that of the poor man. In others, his consumption may be greater, but in an amount altogether disproportioned to their relative means. The proportion, however, in this respect, is not so much the question now, as the different mode in which this system of taxation falls upon realised wealth, and upon productive industry. Every man's observation must satisfy him of the general truth of these remarks. It can scarcely be necessary that I should illustrate them in detail. In proportion as prices and
604
wages have fallen, has this class of taxes become not only more burthen some, but more vexatious, and more liable to evasion. Take for instance soap; the duty during the war might be about 70 per cent upon the raw materials; it is now from 120 to 140 per cent. If wages have fallen in the same proportion, how much heavier does this tax now press upon the labourer, and how much greater must be the temptation to resort to any means by which the duty may be avoided? If we advert to sugar, we shall find that the duty, which was formerly one half of, now exceeds the selling price. Looking to this article, upon which there has been no reduction of duty since the war, and considering the severe and general distress in which all West-India interests are involved, I cannot but regret that a reduction of the sugar duty seems now to be indefinitely postponed. As a measure of relief it is urgent. I still retain the opinion, which I have more than once pressed upon his Majesty's Government, that this relief might be given, without any great or permanent sacrifice of revenue. It is not to sugar only that this observation would apply. A general revision would point out many other articles, but the subject is one too extensive and too minute for the present occasion. The more general considerations, to which I now claim the attention of the House, are these: first, that no other country in Europe has so large a proportion of its taxation bearing directly upon the incomes of labour and productive capital:—secondly, that in no other country, of the same extent, I think I might say in none of five times the extent of this kingdom, is there so large a mass of income, belonging to those classes who do not directly employ it in bringing forth the produce of labour: thirdly, that no other country has so large a proportion of its taxation mortgaged;—in proportion to the amount of that mortgage are we interested in any measure which, without injustice to the mortgagee, would tend to lessen the absolute burthen of the mortgage:—fourthly, that from no other country in the world does so large a proportion of the class not engaged in production (including many of the wealthy) spend their incomes in foreign parts. I know I may be told, that, by taxing that income, you run the risk of driving them to withdraw their capital altogether. My answer is, first, that ninety-nine out of an hundred of these absentees have no such

605
command over the source of their income;—secondly, that the danger is now of another and more alarming description,—that of the productive capitals of this country being transferred to other countries, where they would be secure of a more profitable return. The relief of industry is the remedy against that danger. One of the objections made to any direct tax upon income, even limited, as I have described, to capital not directly employed in the pursuits of industry, is, that it may be very fit as a war measure, but that it is not suited to a state of peace. My answer is, that this proposition is too general:—what may be very well adapted to a state of peace or war under given circumstances may become inexpedient when the bearing of those circumstances is altogether changed. In war, the wages of labour and the profits of capital may be high. In peace, they may be greatly depressed. In the former supposition, taxes bearing upon industry will be more lightly felt; in the latter, their pressure will be very severe; and, if not alleviated, will daily become more so, by exhausting the very springs of that industry from which they are derived. Let Gentlemen seriously weigh in their own minds, whether this be not the risk against which it is most urgent to provide. I have already shown, upon higher authority than my own (that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer), that the amount remitted by a change in our taxation, would be a very inadequate measure of the real saving, and contingent relief, to industry; whilst, on the other hand, the produce of the tax to be substituted would be commensurate with what it might subtract from the incomes of the classes by which it would be paid. The landlord, the fund holder, the mortgagee, the annuitant of every description, would moreover be directly benefited, to the extent of his consumption of the articles upon which the present taxes might be reduced or abolished. Each would be indirectly benefited by the stimulus and additional ease which would be given to the industrious classes. Take, for instance, the landowner. Can any man doubt, that, in proportion to the relief afforded, would be the means and desire of the industrious classes to consume more of all the productions of the soil, which constitute their habitual comforts and luxuries:—more meat, more malt, more cheese, more butter, and more of all the other articles
606
which cannot be said to be of absolute and primary necessity? Can any man doubt, that the consumption of these articles is now checked, if not actually diminished, by the straitened circumstances of our labouring population? Should their condition become still harder,—and, in order to maintain our competition in the foreign market, I fear that, without the relief which I have suggested it must,—is it not obvious that the consumption of these articles, and, with the consumption, the price, must decline? Should this be the unfortunate career in which we are proceeding, we may have gleams of sunshine, but their transient brightness will not be sufficient to disperse the thickening gloom which will be gathering round us, and in which all interests and all classes will be finally enveloped. For the contentment of the poor man, for the comfort of the middling classes, for the enjoyment of the rich, for the security of all, it becomes the paramount duty of those, to whom the welfare and happiness of the country are committed, well to probe the sources of our present difficulties; and if they are satisfied that they are produced, in any considerable degree, by the causes to which I have adverted, not to be tardy or timid in applying the remedy. If I have dwelt upon these subjects at a greater length than I had intended, I have done so because I have thought it my duty, as an unconnected Member of Parliament, not to shrink from stating my views respecting them. The position of a Minister in this House is very different from that of an individual. I know how difficult a thing it might be for Government, even if they concur in my views, to carry them into effect; and I am fully aware of all the inconvenience which would arise from their at all hinting at that concurrence, unless they were prepared to act upon it. All I can say is, that ours is a choice of difficulties, and that the course which I have suggested would, I sincerely believe, be most beneficial to the country. If these views are not entertained by others in this House, or sanctioned by public opinion out of doors, it would be vain to expect that they should lead, at present, to any practical result. But if, at any future day, a sense of the public interest should induce his Majesty's Government to act upon them, I shall be prepared to give my most cordial assistance and support towards overcoming the various difficulties, which I

607
am fully sensible must arise in carrying those views into effect, and towards conciliating the feelings of all who might continue adverse to their adoption. In the course of this debate, allusion has frequently been made to possible improvements in the banking-system, as one means of affording some relief to the country: and I understood my right hon. friend, the President of the Board of Trade, to say, that he expected much benefit from a revision of the system of country banks, and from giving publicity to their proceedings. I am friendly to publicity. But if it be required from banking establishments in the country, I trust that the same rule will be applied to the bank of the State—the Bank of England. Had that system of publicity, of which my right hon. friend is the advocate, prevailed between 1824 and 1826, it would, in my opinion, have guarded us from the risk of such a calamity as that which was upon the point of taking place at a period of profound peace, towards the close of the year 1825. Far be it from me, in making this observation, to cast any reflection upon the Directors of the Bank of England. I know that they are zealous and disinterested in the management of the great trust reposed in them. But it is their duty in that management to look to the interests of the body of proprietors whom they represent. It is the duty of this House, on the other hand, if they think fit to grant a monopoly, to surround and fence it with such regulations as may prevent the public interests from being prejudiced by being placed in collision with the interests of those upon whom the monopoly is conferred. The first of all our cares, in revising the banking-system of the country, must be to satisfy ourselves that nothing is omitted, in the way of precaution, which may tend to secure the public against a possible recurrence of that greatest of all calamities, another suspension of cash payments. I cannot pass over even this opportunity of repeating my doubts, whether the affairs of the Bank are conducted with a sufficient regard to this paramount object. With their original capital all locked up upon loan to Government, they have, at the same time, nearly the whole of their outstanding credit resting upon securities equally unavailable. The sound system of banking, on the contrary, would appear to require that the amount of their issues should be more im-
608
mediately within their command, as the only certain protection,—for themselves, against those emergencies that will occur, even in time of peace,—for the public, against a recurrence of the dreadful effects of such a panic as that of 1825. There is no saying how soon, should trade revive with more than its usual activity, we may again witness another season of excitement, and extravagant speculation. Should an unfavourable state of the foreign exchanges be the consequence, their turning against us would, for a time, rather encourage than repress that spirit of speculation. The salutary check, under such a contingency, can only be applied by the prudence of the Bank of England. But how is that check to be called into action, without the risk of panic, if both the capital and credit of the Bank are locked up in Dead Weight, in Exchequer-bills, in mortgages upon land, in an advance to the rebuilding of London Bridge?—all of them, I admit, assets most perfectly solid and secure, but all of that inconvertible description, upon which no banking establishment, I think, having the whole of its outstanding engagements payable upon demand, ought to rest so large a portion of its liabilities. This, however, is a fit subject for a separate investigation, and into which, therefore, I will not go more at large on the present occasion. I have detained the House, I am aware, longer than any Member having no official duties to discharge, can be justified in claiming their attention. My apology must be, in part, that I have had to defend measures, for which I am more immediately responsible, as having brought them forward when I was in office; and, partly, that I have thought this a fit occasion for stating the views which I entertain of the present condition of the country. I cordially thank the House for the indulgence with which they have heard me upon these important topics. After all, do what we will, say what we may, the immense sacrifices and unparalleled exertions of the last long war must tell, in abridging the comforts, and adding to the difficulties, of the present generation. Fifteen years have now elapsed since that war was brought to a glorious termination. From its commencement I have been more or less in public life. In the course of it, there is scarcely a conceivable trial of fortitude to which the country, and those who administered its affairs, were not ex-

609
posed. Mutiny in our fleets,—civil war in Ireland,—the stoppage of the Bank,—defection of our allies,—the overthrow and subjugation of all the great powers of Europe by the enemy to which we were opposed,—our commerce placed under an interdict in every part of the civilized world,—these are some of the evils of which, having witnessed the first overwhelming shock, I shall retain through life a vivid recollection. But, amid all the scenes of alarm and despondency, I might almost say despair, occasioned by this succession of calamities, I tax my memory in vain for one single act of weakness or dishonour, of spoliation or bad faith. Never did such expedients suggest themselves to those great and firm minds that then presided over the destinies of the country. If in vain I tax my memory for one act of that description, upon which any man, the most envious of my country's fame, can put his finger and say, "this is a blot in your annals," give me leave to add, that should you, in an evil hour, venture to debase your currency, you will commit an act of fraud at which that finger of scorn will point for ever after, as the hour of your shame and humiliation; and that the period will not then be distant in which you will deeply repent, but repent too late, the irretrievable consequences of so ruinous a proceeding. For myself, I once more enter my protest against such an infringement of the national faith. I cannot vote either in support of the original Motion, or of the amendment. Taken abstractedly, they both embrace too wide a field for any useful inquiry. But my greater objection is, that I cannot separate the wish for inquiry, from the grounds upon which that wish stands recommended to the House, by almost every Member who has supported it. Again, to the form of the inquiry, as recommended in the original Motion, I have an insuperable objection. In the mode recommended by the amendment I might have concurred, had it been brought forward upon different grounds, and been more limited in its objects. From inquiries of this latter nature I expect much benefit; and his Majesty's Government do not appear to be adverse to them. They have already consented to grant a committee to inquire into the condition of the poor in Ireland. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has given notice of his intention to bring in a bill to regulate the Dead Weight system; and has
610
said that he shall have no objection to refer that bill, together with the whole subject, to a committee up stairs. My hon. friend, the Member for Dover, has a notice on the Order-book, for a select committee to investigate the effect of the present system of our taxation upon the productive classes of the country. Whether the proposed committee will be granted or not, I cannot tell; but this I know, that whenever my hon. friend shall bring forward his Motion, he shall have my warmest support. We have already a committee sitting to inquire into the affairs of the East-India Company, and into their monopoly of the trade with China. In like manner, I hope we shall have a committee to inquire into the Banking-system of the country, in connection with the renewal of the charter of the Bank of England. It is by inquiries thus limited to specific objects that we shall arrive at more satisfactory results than by going into a committee purporting to be for an inquiry into the causes of distress generally,—a species of inquiry, which, in my judgment, could not possibly lead to any good, but which, in the expectation of its promoters, might lead to what I consider the greatest possible evil,—the unsettling and disturbing the present monetary system of the country.
Lord Althorprose amid loud and general cries of "Adjourn." After some difficulty the Speaker obtained order, and the noble Lord proceeded. He should have felt great difficulty in rising after the very able and eloquent speech of the right hon. Member for Liverpool, had he entertained any intention of following him throughout its various topics. But he had no such intention, for he nearly concurred in every syllable that the right hon. Gentleman had said. It had been stated by the hon. Member for Wootton Bassett, (Sir G. Phillips) that all the hands in the manufacturing districts were at present in employment, and in employment, too, at good wages. Now, if that were the case, it was quite impossible to believe that any distress existed in that quarter. He was afraid, however, from the general body of information which had been poured into the House from those districts, that the statement of the hon. Member was much too favourable. He believed, however, that it must be admitted that some improvement had commenced to exhibit itself in the country. He hoped that it would long continue; but he must say that his hopes

611
were not very sanguine, as he recollected that there had been before several symptoms of improvement, which had subsequently disappeared. He was therefore obliged to assume, for the purpose of argument, that there was great distress in the country; and then the question came to this—"Are the modes now proposed to us the best modes for obviating that distress?" or "Are we obliged to admit them to be such, in order to show that we have some sympathy for the people?" Now, for his own part, he had no hesitation in avowing that he had such confidence in the good sense of the people of England as to be convinced that they would not accuse their representatives of a want of sympathy with their feelings if it were made evident to them that the mode proposed for their relief was ultimately the best for their interests. Most, indeed all the speakers in this debate had declared the state of the currency of the country to be their main reason for seeking to go into a committee. They had said that the want of the 1l. notes was the cause of the distress. But if they were to enter into the discussion of that subject in the committee, it was necessary to see how the issue of 1l. notes at present would operate on the existing distress. It could only operate by raising the price of commodities, and depreciating the standard of value. Then the exchanges would turn against us, and a re-action, like that which was witnessed in the year 1825, would take place, unless we were prepared, which he hoped we were not, to tamper with the standard. Any measure which had the slightest appearance of tampering with the standard in a rich and commercial country like this was fraught with imminent danger. It was said, "Oh! but you will only make one alteration!" If they made one alteration, how could the public trust that they would not make another, and another even upon that, when another period of distress should come to pinch them? But it was said that such an alteration had been made before, in the year 1797. He admitted it; but all who had observed the conduct of the legislature in that year must be aware that the alteration then made in the standard was not foreseen—it was therefore unintentional. If the House made such an alteration now, it would be made knowingly and intentionally, and would therefore be a downright fraud. After the commission of an intentional fraud, they would have no right to
612
expect any longer the confidence of the public. If they went into the committee for the express purpose of inquiring into the state of the currency, the country would expect that a change in the currency would be the inevitable consequence. Confidence would be immediately destroyed, and a confusion would arise worse than any thing which the country had hitherto witnessed. He could not separate this motion from the question of currency, and he should therefore give it his opposition. It had not yet been explained what good this committee could produce; it might produce great evil; and therefore, though he was anxious to relieve the people from the burthens under which they laboured, he still felt it impossible to vote in favour of this committee. Besides, a motion to inquire into the state of the nation had generally been considered as a motion of hostility against the Government. He had brought forward and supported several motions of that nature on former occasions from such motives; but he felt that he could not support this Motion with any such hostile views. Towards the present Ministers he entertained no feelings of hostility; their conduct deserved no such attack as this Motion made upon them. He differed from them as to the amount of taxation and expenditure which it was possible to reduce; he thought that they might have gone further than they had done in those respects; but he saw no insincerity, nor any thing like insincerity, in what they had done. They had endeavoured to cut off a large amount of expenditure by casting a great mass of additional labour upon themselves. With regard to the taxes which they had taken off, he thought that they had acted wisely in the selection which they had made. They had also acted with great disinterestedness, for if they had sought to conciliate a powerful party in that House, they would have taken off the duty on malt and also upon sugar, by which they would have obtained the support of two distinct and powerful interests. Seeing no reason to think that the Ministers were insincere in their professions of economy, though he did not think that they carried their retrenchments and reductions far enough, he could not vote in support of a motion which was always based in a feeling of hostility towards the existing Administration.
Colonel Sibthorp Colonel Sibthorp moved the adjournment of the debate to the next day.
[Considerable confusion ensued and prevailed for some minutes in the House. During the continuance of it, we saw Mr. Attwood and Mr. Alderman Waithman on their legs; but their words were completely drowned in the general turmoil.]
Mr. Peelat length obtained a hearing. He said that if there were several Gentlemen still anxious to address the House on this subject, he should be the last man in the world to throw any obstruction in their way. The cries of "Adjourn" drowned the remainder of the right hon. Gentleman's observations.
The Question on the adjournment to the following day was then put and carried.

MINUTES.
Returns presented. Accounts of the Profit or Loss on the Trade of the East India Company between Europe and India, &c. during the last ten years:—Of the Sales of the East India Company from the year 1822, describing the Quantities and Qualities of the Teas:—Of the Rate of Freight per Ton paid by the Company from China, on the average, since 1822:—Of the Quantity of Tea exported by the Company from Canton since 1822:—and of the Expense of the Company's Establishment at Canton since 1822:—Of the Quantities of Wheat entered for Home Consumption under the Act Geo. IV. c. 60, with the amount of Duty.
Petitions we represented—By the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, from the Counties of Chester and Lancaster, against the East India Monopoly:—By Earl FITZWILLIAM, from the Borough of Malton, Yorkshire, praying for a revision of the Criminal Code:—By the Earl of FALMOUTH, from Truro, against inflicting the punishment of Death for Forgery:—By Lord KING, from Kingston-upon-Hull, against the infliction of Capital Punishment for offences against Property:—By Lord WHARNCLIFFE, from Selby, Yorkshire, against the East India Monopoly:—By the Earl of MORLEY from Plymouth, praying for a revision of the Criminal Code:—

475
By the Marquis of BUTE, from Glasgow, against the East India Monopoly.
The Mutiny Bills, and the Pensions' Duties, &c. Bill, went through a Committee.

NATIONAL DISTRESS.
The Duke of Richmondpresented Petitions from Barnes, and two other places in Surrey, praying for the repeal of the Malt Tax; from three hundreds of Newport, Bucks, complaining: of Distress, and praying for relief; and from Spilsby, Lincolnshire, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and particularly of the Wool Laws.
The Marquis of Lansdownpresented a Petition from Dursley, Gloucestershire, complaining of Distress, and praying for relief. Also a similar Petition from Frome, Somersetshire, pointing out the opening of the trade with India as one of the means of relief.
The Earl of Caernarvonpresented a Petition to the same effect from the merchants and manufacturers of Manchester, assembled at a public meeting. This Petition was signed by 10,000 persons; and the reason the number of signatures was so limited was, that the petitioners were anxious to send it up in time to be presented before the Noble Duke (Richmond) made the Motion, the notice of which stood on their Lordships' Table for discussion this night. It was placed in his hands the day before the first notice of this Motion was given. The petitioners set forth what they conceived to be the causes of the present distresses of the country, and also suggested what appeared to them to be the most appropriate remedies. Two remedies had been suggested—one was the opening of the trade to China, and another was the reduction of taxation to that state in which it stood in the year 1791. They complained of the keeping up an enormous standing army, which swallowed up so much of the revenue of the country, and prayed for a reduction of the taxes in that respect, and also for a reduction in the salaries and allowances of public officers, and generally in the amount of expenditure of every description. The great, enormous, and unnecessary load of taxation they represented as the main cause of their grievances, and they contended, that after all the reductions which had been made, there were many articles in which a great reduction of duties might still be made, and great relief given; and they instanced particularly those cases in which the
476
amount of the duties exceeded the price of the commodities. The duties on tobacco and sugar, for instance, might be reduced, and that, too, without much, if any loss to the revenue; for the increased consumption would probably keep the revenue as high as before. There was one circumstance connected with this Petition to which he was desirous particularly to call the attention of the House, and that was, that it did not contain a word of angry complaint and invective, nor did it recommend unions of men for purposes which had a tendency to produce revolutions and the subversion of the laws. This was a remarkable feature in the petition, considering that it came from such a populous place and at a time of such general distress; and it certainly recommended the case of the petitioners to the favourable attention of the House.—Petition read.

STATE OF THE LABOURING CLASSES.
The Duke of Richmondsaid, that he rose for the purpose of calling the attention of their Lordships to a Motion of which he had given notice. In doing so, he must confess that he could not avoid looking with great apprehension at the task he had undertaken,—not because he entertained any doubt of the propriety, nay, of the absolute necessity of the inquiry he meant to propose, but because he was fully sensible of his own want of ability, of his own want of experience, and of his own want of information, to cope with a question of so much importance, and of so great extent,—a question worthy to engage the splendid talents and the great acquirements of many of the noble Lords whom he saw around him, and whose assistance and support he trusted he should receive on the present occasion. The Motion he should have the honour to submit to their Lordships was, "that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the internal state of the country, so far as it related to the condition of the working classes, and to the effect of taxation on productive industry." In order to entitle himself to call upon their Lordships to give their support to this Motion, it would be necessary that he should prove that there was something peculiar,—something which, while it was productive of present mischief, was pregnant also with future calamity, in the condition of that portion of his Majesty's subjects to which his Motion related. Many cases of severe dis-

477
tress—many cases of miserable suffering, both in the agricultural and in the commercial districts of the country,—had been brought under the notice of their Lordships during the present Session of Parliament; but as those cases, which he considered to be more than sufficient to make it imperative upon their Lordships to grant an investigation into the causes of these calamities, had totally failed to move them to give that substantial proof of the compassion which he had no doubt they all felt, he could not help seeing that the difficulties of the task he had undertaken were thereby materially increased. This difficulty again became the more embarrassing, from the circumstance that, in all the discussions which had taken place, he had not been able to discover what exact measure of distress it was, which his Majesty's Ministers and the House conceived would justify them in instituting an inquiry into its causes. Under these circumstances, he was sorry to say that he felt it necessary to trouble their Lordships with what he was afraid they would find a tedious, as he was sure it must be a painful statement of that misery and degradation into which the labouring classes were sunk; and which, as it had been ably stated by; a noble Earl opposite, threatened the breaking up of the very foundations of society. The very day after he had given notice of the Motion to which he was then calling the attention of their Lordships, he had sent to a number of parishes in order i to procure information respecting the number of persons who had been out of employment from 1826 to the present time. He had received forty answers to his inquiries, and by those answers it appeared, that in no one case were there a less number of persons receiving parish relief now than in 1826. Their Lordships would recollect that the year 1826 was the year immediately succeeding the year of panic,—a year in which the country was supposed to be at low-water mark; but the fact was, as their Lordships would see, that we had been gradually sinking lower and lower since that period. He would begin his statement by calling their Lordships' attention to a parish in Sussex, which he had selected because it was mentioned in the Emigration Report of 1827. In that parish the money paid for the relief of the poor in 1826, amounted to 2,314 l. in 1829 it amounted to 2,960 l.; and before the Emigration Committee, the
478
rental of this parish, in 1827, was estimated at 2,599 l.,—so that the Poor-rates in 1829 amounted to nearly 400 l. more than the rent in 1827. He had also selected seventeen principal towns in eight counties, and he begged to call the attention of their Lordships to the average number of paupers in them at the respective periods he had mentioned. At Andover, in 1826 there were in the workhouse sixty-two paupers, in 1830 there were seventy; out of the workhouse there were 310 in 1826, and 430 in 1830, the number casually relieved in 1826 was forty; in 1830 the number was 117; the number of paupers not included above was fifty in 1826, and 112 in 1830. At Bradford the following was the proportion:—

1826.

1830.

In the workhouse

95

140

Out-door paupers

326

400

Casually relieved

170

226

At Coventry the proportion was—

In the workhouse

171

458

Out-door paupers

605

620

Casually relieved

446

1,395

Not before included

40

160

At Congleton the proportion was—

In the workhouse

41

62

Out-door paupers

125

158

Casually relieved

150

179*

At Huddersfield the proportion was 66 and 128, with 174 and 209; and so it went on till they came to Leeds. Before he spoke of Leeds, to which he wished particularly to call their Lordships' attention, let him observe, that it had been stated by one of his Majesty's Ministers (Mr. Herries) elsewhere, in a speech which somehow or other had found its way into the papers, that Leeds was in a most flourishing condition. The right hon. Gentleman he alluded to had been so informed, it appeared, by Mr. Gott, who was an old friend of his on the Wool-committee; and therefore he knew what reliance to place on his testimony; but their Lordships should judge for themselves of the correctness of his information. The document he meant to quote from was, an official return signed by the clerk to the township of Leeds, and according to it, the following were the numbers of paupers in the two years at Leeds:

1826.

1830.

In the workhouse

156

220

Out-door paupers

900

1,010

Casually relieved

700

1,230

479
Such, then, was the state of a town which was described as being in a flourishing condition, and such were the statements on which his Majesty's Ministers believed that distress was not general. In Manchester, again, which, according to another statement of the same right hon. Gentleman, was in a flourishing condition, the pauper account ran thus—and this account was also official, being signed by the overseer of the township.

1826.

1830.

In the workhouse

547

598

Casually relieved

2,706

3,359

If these towns, in which there had been such increase of poor since 1826, could be said to be flourishing, notwithstanding this vast increase of pauperism, what must be the abject misery of those parts in which all agreed that distress did exist,—of those parts where the admitted partial distress prevailed? How the Ministers could get rid of the facts he had brought forward,—how they could persuade their Lordships, in spite of those facts, that the country was not distressed,—he could not imagine, unless the speculations of Mr. Gott were thought better than the returns of the overseers of the parishes which he had mentioned. Not to detain their Lord-

• The following is the Official Return from which the noble Duke quoted the facts mentioned in his speech.

A Comparative Summary of the Average Number of Poor weekly relieved in the two periods 1826 and 1830, in the Towns of Andover, Birmingham, Bradford, Coventry, Congleton, Huddersfield, Leeds, Manchester, Mangotsfield, near Bristol, the City of Norwich, Portsea, the Parish of St. Nicholas (Nottingham), St. Martin's (Leicester), the two Townships of Sutton and Hurdsfield, near Macclesfield, and Wigan. N. B. The year 1828 is substituted for 1826 in the particular case of Norwich, in consequence of no earlier return than that of 1828 having been received.

——

Paupers in the House.

Paupers out of the House.

Poor casually relieved.

Paupers not herein before included.

1826.

1830.

1826.

1830.

1826.

1830.

1826.

1830.

Andover

62

70

310

430

40

117

5

112

Birmingham

443

569

2,748

3,876

Bradford

95

140

3,000

4,000

170

250

Coventry

171

458

605

620

446

1,395

40

160

Congleton

41

62

125

158

150

179

Huddersfield

66

128

164

209

36

137

Leeds

156

220

910

1,010

700

1,230

Manchester

547

598

2,706

3,359

Mangotsfield

18

40

126

13

30

40

10

30

Norwich

555

383

3,776

5,928

6

8

Portsea

544

638

710

734

St. Nicholas (Nottingham)

40

80

96

120

5

St. Martin's (Leicester)

50

70

660

706

20

40

12

16

Sutton and Hurdsfield

7

48

81

222

13

47

40

37

Wigan

118

152

400

880

6

250

Total

2,906

3,656

10,963

15,155

6,958

10,678

325

610

Showing a Weekly Increase

740

4,192

3,720

285

ships by reading all the returns he had before him, he would content himself with stating, that the total weekly average of poor relieved in all these towns amounted to 2,906 in 1826, and to 3,656 in 1830. He would beg leave, however, to refer their Lordships to another return concerning the township of Hurdsfield, adjoining Macclesfield, in the county of Chester, in which the Poor-rates collected in the year ending March 1821, amounted to 140 l. while the amount for the year ending at March 1830, was 711 l. The gentleman who signed the return stated, that since 1826 some portion of the wages had been paid out of the Poor-rates to enable the manufacturer to keep his ground in the home market. He added, that 150 cottages were unoccupied, and seven factories of different sizes had stopped work. But if his Majesty's Ministers thought the distress of the distant town doubtful and not worth inquiring into, they could not be ignorant of the distress which prevailed in London. Moreover, to shew this, which was not difficult, he had brought together some facts. He had applied to the Mendicity Society for information, and he found, that the number relieved by that Society in the two first months of the year was 3,207 in 1826,
and that in 1830 it was no less than 45,219.* In the first two weeks of March alone no less than 3,570 had been relieved by that society. In the parish of St. Mary, Bethnal-green, the number of the poor in the workhouse in 1826 was 500, and about the same number of poor out of the workhouse: in 1830 there were 1,400 in the workhouse, and nearly 5,000 who received parish relief out of the workhouse. He thought that he had now clearly shown that the distress of the labouring classes had been increasing since 1826. and he would detain their Lordships no longer on that point. But if, in addition to these facts,—if, in addition to the fact that the progress of the remuneration for labour had been declining until it had reached almost to the point of starvation,—if, he said, in addition to these facts, he required any further justification for his present Motion, he should find it in the proceedings of the other House of Parliament, in which two measures were in progress, and would probably soon be sent up to that House, which would require their Lordships, before they gave their assent to them, to make themselves well acquainted with the condition of the poor. A practice had grown up in some parts of the country of paying the wages of labourers by truck instead of in money. Concerning this system, and the bill to remedy it, he could not pledge himself by giving a positive opinion, because he knew little of the circumstances connected with it, and because he knew that it was a recognized principle, that the legislature should interfere as little as possible between the master and the workman. It was clear, however, that the system was very repugnant to the feelings of the labourers: and an hon. Member of the other House had introduced a measure of which the object was to compel the payment of wages in money. Whether that measure were desirable or not he was not able to decide, but the subject would very properly fall within the inquiries of the committee he proposed. Another measure, intended to put a stop to the practice of paying wages out of the Poor-rates, had originated with Mr. Slaney,—a gentleman
* In order to make the information conveyed in the noble Duke's speech as accurate as possible, the editor thinks it right to add that the number of persons said to be relieved by the Mendicity Society is calculated by the number of meals given, so that if one person receives three meals, he would appear in the report as three persons. The winter of 1830 also was peculiarly severe. See the 12th Annual Report of the Mendicity Society.
482
whose benevolent exertions to ameliorate the condition of the poor deserved the highest praise. For his own part he did not object to the principle of the Poor-laws, but when their Lordships considered the extent of the evils derived from them, and the increasing amount of the Poor-rates, it was their bounden duty no longer to avoid going into the subject with a view to inquire whether the present administration of the law tended to demoralize the population rather than to benefit the country. If no other anomaly existed than that of the working people of England being exposed to an extraordinary competition with other labourers, the matter would be worth inquiring into. It might be an unpopular topic with many of their Lordships to allude to the irruption of Irish labourers into this country; but he would observe, that what they received from the Poor-rates was a bounty on their coming. He would give Irish labourers free permission to come into the English market, but they should speculate on finding employment at their own peril. He would place them upon the same footing here as an Englishman was placed on in Ireland: the fact of their being Irishmen should preclude them from obtaining a settlement in this country, from receiving parish relief, or being passed back to Ireland at our expense. The report of a committee of the Commons, generally known as Lord Stanley's Committee, stated that 20,418 Irish had been passed from the county of Lancaster alone within the five years ending with 1827. The average charge for removing each of these paupers from London to Liverpool was 4l. 11 s. 3d., while the price of a place in the mail was only 4l. 4s. Ought such a system to be allowed to continue? What made this drain upon the Poor-rates less bearable, were the gross frauds frequently committed by those persons who procured a livelihood by vagrancy, and obtained relief intended for Englishmen. It often happened that while they managed to be sent home as paupers they possessed considerable sums, the profits of their labour, which they carefully remitted to Ireland. The noble Duke proceeded to refer to the

483
accounts of the Savings' banks as affording proofs of distress, and observed, that those banks were in precisely the same state as our merchants, ship-owners, manufacturers, and agriculturists,—their capital was diminishing every day. He had a return of their receipts and payments in the year 1828, but should not quote it, as it might be said that the law relating to Savings' banks had been altered since that period, and consequently that the accounts of 1828 afforded no fair test of prosperity or distress. But in 1829, the payments into Savings' banks had been 419,493 l., while the sum drawn out amounted to 1,444,937 l.; and in the first seven weeks of the present year the sum paid in was 92,751 l., while that drawn out was 117,510 l., making a diminution upon the amount of deposits of 24,759 l. within that period. It was evident from this, that Savings' banks could not last much longer, except their Lordships should be enabled to put the country into a better state. With respect to the second part of his Motion, which related to the effect of taxation upon productive industry, after the reductions recently made by the Government it might appear ungenerous and ungrateful in him to press the noble Duke at its head further on the subject. He should not enter into detail upon this part of the question. He felt great gratitude to the noble Duke for the relief already afforded, but regretted that he had stopped short in his wise career; he regretted that other taxes had not been repealed which curtailed the comforts of the working classes and crippled our manufacturing and commercial interests,—when he considered the privations and distress of the working-classes,—when he recollected how many thousands were obliged to exist with their families on a pittance of 4d. or 6d. a day, he thought that every tax which pressed heavily upon those classes ought to meet with serious consideration, with a view to its reduction or repeal. In alluding to the price of the necessaries of life he meant not to re-agitate the question of the Corn-laws, after years and years of discussion. Into that subject he did not propose to enter, nor did he suggest it as a matter for inquiry before the proposed committee. He might mention, however, the duties on tea and sugar as pressing heavily upon the productive classes: the amount of duly levied on the poor man's lea, which seldom exceeded 2s. per lb., was ninety-six
484
per cent. The price of sugar in bond he believed was 25 s., and the duty amounted to 27 s.; here was a tax of above 100 per cent upon this article. In speaking of the taxes that pressed severely upon productive industry, he might mention the tax on candles: the poor man was frequently obliged to work many hours before daylight and after dark, and therefore felt the pressure of that duty severely. But he would not go into detail on these points: if he were to introduce the subject into a committee it would be with a view to ascertain which taxes pressed most upon the poor, and how they might most advantageously be remitted—if taxation to the amount of them could not be abolished. However, he felt sure that the noble Duke had every desire to make further reductions, and he hoped that he would soon see clearly how much the state of the country demanded that this should be done. He thought, that by reducing some taxes, consumption might be increased, and that the revenue, instead of losing, would be benefitted. The noble Duke had anticipated, by his reductions, some of the points which it had been his intention to press upon the House on a former evening, if he had not been prevented by illness from then bringing forward his motion. He was unwilling to allude to matters personally affecting himself, but he trusted their Lordships would excuse him for doing so, on the ground of his anxiety to place himself right in their good opinion. He had been charged with a supposed inconsistency between his language in that House and his acts out of it. It was supposed that he had connived at the practice of employing labourers to do the work of beasts of burden. The only instance of such a practice which came before him in his capacity of a magistrate was the following:—He had been called on, some time before the last Session of Parliament, by some men belonging to Bognor, nine miles from his residence, who complained that they were compelled to drag carts laden with stones. He met them the next day at Chichester, where he acted as chairman of the Petty Sessions. The overseer of Bognor was summoned before them, but he and his brother magistrates found, on examining into the subject, that they had no legal means in their power to prevent such a practice. He remonstrated, however, with the overseer, and he had hoped the remon-

485
strance had been successful in putting an end to the practice, as he had heard no more about the matter till recently. Since the subject had been referred to by a noble Earl (Stanhope), he had inquired into it, and ascertained that daily, at the watering-place of Bognor, two carts were employed, each dragged by four men, in conveying stones and gravel from the shore; each cart was attended by a person whom they called a foreman, but who, he believed was, in point of fact, a driver. Would not their Lordships inquire into matters such as these, and give magistrates the power to prevent a practice so pernicious and demoralizing in its effects? He had heard with pleasure from the noble Duke, who was the best authority upon such matters, that England, which heretofore had seldom or never engaged in war but with honour to herself, was in a more effective state now than ever, as respected her establishments for the purpose of defence. No doubt this was the case—every body recollected our past achievements; but did noble Lords believe, if our armies had been composed of men thus degraded, that even under the command of the greatest general of this or any other age they could have stormed the ramparts of Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajoz, scaled the Pyrennees, conquered at Waterloo, and placed the standard of England in the capital of France? Their Lordships might be assured, that if they allowed the people to be degraded and demoralized our whole happiness and prosperity—nay, our existence as an independent nation—must cease. He had intended to enter much more into detail, but felt unequal to the task in consequence of his late illness; however, he felt less regret at having been obliged to curtail his observations, as he was aware that his omissions would be amply supplied by noble Lords who agreed with him as to the absolute necessity of a free, a full, and a fair inquiry into the whole state and condition of the unfortunate class of men whose cause he had so feebly advocated. The noble Lord concluded by moving "for the appointment of a Select Committee to take into consideration the internal State of the Country, more particularly with respect to the condition of the Working Classes, and the effect of Taxation upon productive industry."
Earl Bathurstsaid, if his noble relation had moved for a Select Committee to ex-
486
amine into the state of the Poor-laws, and the manner in which they were administered, he should have thought that there were strong grounds for such a motion, and should, perhaps, have felt disposed to agree to it; but in the present Motion he found it impossible to concur. His noble relation had gone into a variety of statements with respect to the amount of relief given from time to time to the poor in different places, for the purpose of proving the existence of great distress; but before their Lordships could determine how far these statements formed a correct test of the state of the working classes, it would be desirable to know on what principle, and under what circumstances, the returns had been framed. Noble Lords must know that there had been frequent departures in the mode of administering the Poor-laws from the true principle of the law. A practice had arisen (he spoke not now either in approbation or disapprobation of it) of overseers paying a part of the wages of workmen out of the rates, the farmers employing these men paying the remainder. Now, according to these returns, the description of persons receiving parochial relief was left undefined, and it did not appear under what circumstances the increase had taken place. It might be that it was owing only to the improper, at least irregular, mode of paying a part of the wages of labour out of the rates, which was a relief not to the labourer but to his employer. His noble relative laid great stress upon the increase of the Poor-rates in certain places during the last winter, but he should recollect that the last winter was one of unusual severity; and that we could not possibly judge of the state of the working classes throughout the country by the distress that look place under such circumstances in particular districts. The noble Lord endeavoured to prove the distress of the working classes by the diminution in the amount of deposits in Savings'-banks; but he should be aware that a law had been passed, not long since, by which no individual could have more than 200 l. in Savings'-banks, or deposit a larger sum than 30 l. in one year. When this fact was considered, the diminution was at once accounted for, and it appeared that it afforded no proof whatever of distress. His objection to the Motion was, that although it was apparently confined to the appointment of a committee to examine into the stale of the working classes, the actual

487
inquiry would be as extensive as that recently proposed to be instituted by a noble Lord, and rejected by the House. In fact, this was precisely the same proposition as the former, with this difference—that in the one case the inquiry was to have been at the Bar of the House, and in this it was proposed to institute it by means of a Select Committee. There was no real limitation in the noble Duke's Motion, although there might be an apparent one: it involved an inquiry into the whole internal state of the country, and was not confined to the condition of the working- classes. If the Motion were agreed to, their Lordships must go into every county and district for the purpose of making an investigation into the state of the working classes in each. They would first have to inquire into the number of agricultural labourers wholly out of employment—into the number only enjoying partial and occasional employment what wages both classes received; and then it would be necessary to ascertain whether wages were so reduced as to deprive these individuals, or a portion of them, of sufficient means of subsistence. Their Lordships must ascertain what amount of wages was contributed by the farmers, and how much was paid out of the poor-rates. Could they stop there? No; in justice to the farmer and landlord they must examine into the cause of the reduction of wages, and see what had obliged the farmer to diminish the amount of employment and the price of labour. The farmers would complain of taxation, of the pressure of the Poor-rates, and talk of rents not being sufficiently reduced. What did this involve but an inquiry into the whole state of the agricultural interests, and the causes of its depressed condition? The same thing applied to the manufacturing interests. Their Lordships would have to inquire, in every manufacturing town, into the amount of wages, and it would be said they were insufficient. They would hear of the great numbers out of employment, and it would be necessary to investigate the causes of low wages and want of employment. The manufacturer would say his profits were so small that he could not afford higher wages, and that his only chance of disposing of his goods at home or abroad consisted in bringing them into the market at a low price, which could not be effected unless wages were low. He would say, that such was the redundancy of manufactures brought into the home
488
market by reason of the extensive use of machinery, that he could not sell except at a low price: and he would add, that he was exposed to the competition of foreign manufacturers, who could bring their goods into this country under the existing system, which did not afford the home manufacturer a sufficient protection. Then their Lordships would have the whole of the system foolishly called Free Trade to inquire into. The manufacturer would say, that as regarded the foreign market, he could only sell at a price that afforded little or no profit, and that if he were to increase the rate of wages, even in the smallest degree, he would be driven out of the market. Thus this inquiry, professing to be simply an investigation into the condition of the working classes, amounted, in point of fact, to an inquiry into the state of the whole of our agricultural and manufacturing interests, and in what manner they were affected by the existing laws. But the House was not only called upon to appoint a committee to enter into the state of the working classes, but also to investigate the manner in which taxation affected productive industry. What item of taxation did not this inquiry include? Every tax, every item of the Customs and Excise, more or less affected productive industry; so that we must inquire into the whole state of our financial system. His noble relation stated his anxious wish for a reduction of taxation, and mentioned taxes which he appeared to think ought to be reduced;; but where was the substitute for these taxes? It was said "there are a great many taxes which you may reduce, and increase the revenue thereby." That was a hazardous speculation, and it would hardly be pretended, whatever might be the final result of such a course, that for the first year or two, at least, there would not be a decided loss, which must necessarily be supplied. The noble Earl re-stated his opinion as to the too extensive nature of the proposed inquiry; and observed, that to any motion of such a nature he must object, on the ground that great expectations would be excited, and disappointed as certainly as excited. His noble relation did not include the tax upon Corn in considering the taxes which pressed upon the working classes; but other noble Lords might not be so forbearing. After observing that the Corn-laws were yet a source of contention in the community, the noble Earl went on to say, that if he were asked what would

489
afford the greatest present relief to the working classes, he should say a free trade in Corn; but if he looked to their permanent interests, his reply would be very different. If he were asked what would ultimately be most injurious to the interests of the country at large, and therefore to the working classes, by ruining the home market, his answer would be, opening the trade in Corn, and leaving the British agriculturist without protection. There might be, and there would be, different opinions on the subject, and if this committee were appointed it would be impossible to shut out a discussion of the Corn-laws,—a discussion which, on every ground, was to be avoided if possible; but ought particularly to be deprecated, as fomenting a division between the two great interests of the country. Neither could their Lordships, in the proposed inquiry, shut out the great question of the Currency. The noble Marquis opposite (Lansdown) would probably be upon the committee, and his opinions as to a standard of value were well known to their Lordships. The noble Earl proceeded to comment upon the Marquis of Lansdown's opinions on the subject of a double standard, and observed, that the noble Marquis had spoken of the relative supply of, and proportion between, gold and silver, and of the advantage of recurring to what he considered the ancient standard. The noble Marquis stated, that up to 1797, silver was the original standard. He did not wish to put his opinion in competition with that of the noble Marquis, but he had always thought that since the year 1717, when an Act was passed on the subject by the advice of Sir Isaac Newton, gold had been rendered the common coin of the realm. He maintained that at that time gold became as much a standard of value as silver. The practice as well as the principle bore out the assertion: from 1717 to 1797 the whole amount of silver in circulation never exceeded 550,000 l., and in fact gold was the current coin. From the moment that a limitation was fixed upon payments in silver it then ceased to be a standard. True, it might formerly have been received to any extent, but that was not now the case. But what, he would ask, was the value of silver? The real value was thirty per cent below the nominal value. In other words, if a man had collected a certain quantity of silver, and had a bill of 70 l. to pay, he was compelled to pay in
490
that silver to the nominal value of 100 l. At the same time, however, what was the state of the people respecting the silver tokens? It might be illustrated in the same manner. For if a man having this bill of 70 l. to pay, and a quantity of silver on hand, went to the Bank, he there received 70 l. in sovereigns to discharge his debt. At present we had gold as the sole standard, paper convertible into gold, and silver tokens, also convertible into gold, but not constituting a legal tender in payment of a sum above 2l. The amount of silver in circulation formed, in fact, as to value, no inconsiderable part of the whole currency. The effect of the noble Marquis's principle might be, to change the standard, and pay with a lower standard debts contracted in a higher; putting the difference into the debtor's pocket. To a proposition such as that, if made, he must always be opposed. But why did he allude to the subject? Simply because their Lordships must go into the state of the currency if a committee were appointed, for half the petitions that had been presented attributed the distress to the state of the currency. The noble Earl recapitulated his former statement as to the extensive nature of the inquiry, which, if entered upon, would keep the country in a state of suspense for a longer period than the present Session, upon subjects the most important, and would, in the end, be of no advantage to the country, but terminate in producing general dissatisfaction and disappointment. Upon these grounds he should oppose the Motion.
The Earl of Mansfieldexpressed his entire concurrence in the Motion of his noble friend, whose arguments, he hoped, when their Lordships came to vote upon the question, would be found to have made as great an impression on the minds of other noble Lords, as they made on his own. They appeared to him so convincing, that he thought the noble Karl's objections to the proposition entitled to but little consideration. His noble friend's proposed inquiry divided itself into two branches—first an investigation of the internal state of the country, with reference to the condition of the working classes; and secondly, an examination of the effect of taxation upon productive industry. He thought that no valid objections could be taken, either to the subject or the manner of the inquiry. The subject he had just stated, and as to the manner of the

491
inquiry, it was proposed to refer it to a Select Committee, which was better calculated to manage such an investigation than a Committee of the whole House, and could, with less show of reason, be objected to by Ministers. The noble Earl's objection to the subject of the inquiry was, that although apparently a simple Motion, it was likely to open up too many topics: and there might be a latent fear lest we should discover that the distress which had been represented in the royal Speech as partial and temporary, was general, and likely to be unfortunately too permanent. But even if this Motion were to have such an unfortunate result, the question was, whether they could, consistently with their duty, refuse it? When, upon all hands, it was admitted that at least some distress existed, was it not proper that they should investigate its nature and extent, the circumstances which had caused it, and endeavour to devise some remedy for it? He had not the advantage of being present in his place when his Majesty's Speech was road on the first day of the Session, but he confessed that the light manner in which the prevailing distress was touched did strike him with some surprise; although perhaps those light touches cost more labour, and were attended with more difficulty, than the more grave and weighty portions of that Speech. Their Lordships would recollect, however, that it was not the Speech of his Majesty, but of his Majesty's Ministers. There were, perhaps, some ministerial emoluments, in the amount of which, at the time the Speech was delivered, the Government had no idea of proposing any reduction, and they, being quite exempt from distress themselves, disbelieved that any distress existed with respect to others. They thought, he supposed, considering the situation in which they were themselves placed, that general prosperity prevailed throughout the country. If there were any misconception or misrepresentation of the real state of the country, Ministers were alone responsible for it. Considering the time and circumstances of the meeting to which that Speech was submitted, not for discussion, but for approbation, he was very much reminded of a saying of a certain king of Persia, who never felt more convinced of the happiness and prosperity of all mankind than when his own appetite was satisfied. The
492
Speech no doubt was agreed to at a Cabinet dinner and their Lordships had the authority of a proverb for saying that 'Un homme riche, quand il a bien diné, voit tout le monde heureux.' So it appeared to be with Ministers—they were well rewarded, and they took it for granted that every body else must be as well off as they were. That there was distress amongst those classes to whom his noble friend's Motion extended could not be doubted: and their patient endurance of that distress deserved the utmost sympathy of the legislature. Some persons would, perhaps, say that their patience arose from the confidence which they placed in his Majesty's Ministers; others might be of opinion that there was no confidence in Ministers themselves—that they were viewed like the National Debt, or any other grievance, which could not be removed suddenly, but which the people would be glad to get rid of. He would not say, and he hoped he should not be misunderstood, whether he partook of or rejected that opinion. At the same time, he wished to observe, that he would, with their Lordships' indulgence, at any time state his sentiments, and nothing should induce him to adopt the opinions of any other man. He attributed the patience of the people to another cause: first, to that energy of mind which was so justly alluded to by his noble friend; and secondly, to a great increase of common sense, which prevented the people from being seduced by factious demagogues. They looked to Parliament for relief, because they knew that in Parliament there was always a body of men anxious to investigate their circumstances, and to protect their interests. They knew that seditious language, or acts of violence and insubordination, could have no other effect but to neutralize and render ineffectual the efforts of their advocates, if not to cause the continuance of those measures of which they might have most reason to complain. This statement might not be so flattering to some individuals as they could wish; but in making it, he placed the patience and forbearance of the people on their just and proper grounds. In the midst of the gloomy views by which that class of the community was surrounded, he could not look upon their improved loyalty without experiencing the most consolatory feeling. But he wished again to impress on their Lordships, that

493
the patient endurance of the people gave them a great and serious claim on the attention of the legislature; and he trusted that Parliament would at least manifest the wish, if it had not the power, to relieve them. He called on their Lordships, therefore, not to refuse to take all the circumstances of the times into consideration. It might be thought that he argued the question as if their Lordships viewed the distress from an exalted height, where it never could reach, being themselves free from the contagion. But was this the case? In other countries, where the superb palace, resplendent with every ornament that art could furnish, and loaded with every luxury that Europe could supply, stood by the side of the lowly and wretched cottage, which appeared before it like Lazarus pining at the rich man's gate, there was no community of sentiment between the tenants of such opposite dwellings, founded upon the consciousness of equal rights and freedom and protection by the law. No! They had no common interest or feeling—the discrepancy between them in all things was as great as it was in wealth and station. But it was far otherwise in this country, at least it had formerly been so. No traveller could then pass through England (and the fact ought not to escape their Lordships' observation) without perceiving, that though wealth was unequally distributed, as it must be more or less in every country, yet that there was a greater and more general diffusion of property, and of the advantages of property here, than in any other quarter of the world. True it was, that objects of misery would sometimes meet the sight, but there formerly was not (he wished he could say that there is not) that stamp of misery impressed on the common class of people which was to be seen elsewhere. This was to be attributed to that feeling of universal interest which pervaded all ranks of society. But now whole bodies of people were in misery, and this could not long exist without affecting all classes proceeding from the manufacturing and agricultural labourers till it reached the very highest. He was convinced, to use the prevailing language of the day, that the productive classes could not long remain in a state of misery and distress without seriously affecting every class of consumers. He would assert that the manufacturing labourer could not
494
suffer long without affecting the agricultural labourer—until, finally, the owners and occupiers of land, and, in short, every class of proprietors, would become included in one universal distress. He held this to be a certain, though perhaps not an immediate effect. There was one point to be ascertained which, in his opinion, ought to be developed in the committee; and that was, whether the misery which bore down different classes of people had one common cause and origin, or whether the misery of one class was reflected from the misery of others; and that would be one of the most difficult and important parts of the investigation. He looked to the chain of interest—he looked to the links of that chain, which, though not perhaps visible to all, yet bound the community together, and which, therefore, was a proper subject for investigation. Taking the question in that point of view, it was not the interest of the lower classes, but their own interests, to which their attention was called. If this inquiry were agreed to, he hoped that many of the statements of the existing distress would turn out to have been overcharged; but if the allegations contained in the petitions which were laid on their Lordships' Table were at all supported by facts (and of that he had little doubt), then their Lordships would be imperatively required, for their own sakes, to save the labouring classes from the sad degradation to which they were hastening. In looking to the real wealth and prosperity of a country, he contended that it was not to be found in the concentration of great riches in the hands of a few individuals: it was not to be seen in the profligate display of luxury, while the suffering poor were wanting bread; the sure test of national wealth was the degree in the scale of comfort and happiness which the lowest class of the people maintained. The second branch of his noble friend's inquiry was as to the effect of taxation on productive industry. Here he must say, whatever advantage might be taken of the observation, that the widest possible field of inquiry presented itself. He thought that their Lordships could not go into that examination without investigating the whole financial system of the country—the amount of taxes, the operation of the Corn-laws and of the Poor-rates—and last of all, and, he would say, the most important of all, the effect of the great alteration in

495
the currency. It might seem that an inquiry so multifarious would be interminable; but their Lordships should recollect that reports might be made from time to time, and different subjects could thus be gradually and successively brought under their Lordships' attention in such a manner as would best enable them to adapt legislative measures to the peculiarities of each subject. He had turned his attention very seriously to many of the matters into which it was proposed the committee should inquire—but he would not, at present, state his opinions respecting them to their Lordships; because he felt that it would answer no useful purpose. His sentiments might be met by the statements and opinions of others, so as to furnish grounds to some of their Lordships, and excuses to more, to refuse this committee. They would be very apt to declare that there was no use in granting a committee, when the subjects to be considered were so numerous. If any noble Lord entered into the committee, determined to assume, instead of endeavouring to ascertain, facts—determined to adhere to preconceived opinions, as if they were immutably established—an inquiry conducted by such individuals would be worse than useless. The duty of that committee would be, he apprehended, first, to ascertain the facts; and he would appeal to every noble Lord who heard him, whether that was an easy task? The next point would be, to look to the cause of the distress, and to suggest, if their Lordships could, a proper remedy. He felt it to be his duty to agree to the appointment of this Select Committee. He thought, when there were so many objects to be inquired into, that a Select Committee was, if not the best mode that could be adopted, at least the best that had been proposed, and therefore he should support it. He should, however, have been much better pleased if the inquiry had proceeded from Ministers themselves, who had much greater facilities for investigating the several subjects, and submitting them to a committee, than Peers not connected with the Government. They had instituted such inquiries on former occasions. They might, after investigating the subject, declare whether a remedy could be found, or what measures were necessary for the preservation of the country. Looking, however, to the system which Ministers pursued, he did not know how else
496
his noble friend could proceed, except by moving for a committee. If Ministers met the present distress with stout denials—if they refused an inquiry by which alone the discordant statements of those who rejected the idea of distress, and of those who loudly proclaimed its existence, could be brought to the test—if they would not allow Parliament to ascertain the state of the country, but let the matter just remain as it was—the people would, he conceived, have just cause for dissatisfaction. Under all the circumstances, he saw no other fair mode of proceeding but that of instituting the inquiry which his noble friend had proposed. He hoped, that on this occasion, his noble friend would have the support of some noble Lords who, in former times, were very acute in discovering the distress of the country, and very anxious to remove it. He was the more desirous that his noble friend should receive that assistance, because he observed, that for some time past—owing, he supposed, to the force of their eloquence—they had a very considerable influence on the measures of that Government to which they formerly were in direct opposition.
The Earl of Eldonrose, with great regret, he said, to address their Lordships for a short time. But, however painful the subject was, he could not avoid delivering his sentiments on it, as he felt a most sincere desire to make one struggle more for the relief of his country. If their Lordships wished to preserve the link which connected the highest and the lowest class in the empire, they must investigate the distress which now existed, and they must make plain and intelligible what the causes of it were, and point out the remedy by which it might be alleviated. They ought to prove to the people that they entertained a real desire to remove their evils. The great peculiarity of this country, beyond all others, was this—that we were, from the lowest of us to the highest, dove-tailed into one common connexion with each other, and one class could not suffer without affecting the others. He did most sincerely hope and trust that their Lordships would endeavour to satisfy the people that they would do their utmost to ascertain the cause of the distress, and that they would, after mature deliberation, declare whether some mode of relief could or could not be devised. He should support the present Motion, remembering the

497
mischievous projects that were afloat in the years 1792–3–4 and 5, and remembering how Parliament, by its exertions, had then succeeded in putting an end to discontent. He hoped that their Lordships would, by the vote of that night, be enabled to terminate any projects of a similar nature which might then be in agitation, and by satisfying the people, put an end to their complaints. He trusted, accordingly, that there would be no longer any objection upon the part of the House to the Motion, for a committee. They were told on a former night, by several noble Lords, that their only objection to the proposition then made by a noble Earl was founded on the mode of inquiry which he recommended. They were opposed to a Committee of the whole House, but now that a Select Committee was proposed, their objections should be removed. He was not one of those who supposed it was in the power of Parliament to give entire relief to the people, but it was of the last importance to have them satisfied, if it were not in its power to comply with their wishes, that at least it was anxious to inquire into the causes of their distress, and to afford them all possible assistance. He was encouraged to hope, from what had passed upon a former occasion, that this inquiry would not now be denied—an inquiry which the assertion in the King's Speech, that described the distress as only partial, did in itself, after the many documents to a contrary effect which had been laid before the House, render necessary. Ministers had found out that the country might be relieved of taxation to the extent of three millions and a half, in one Spring morning, and they even doubted whether the relief might not extend to five millions; he, therefore, felt confident, that as the weather improved, the country might expect further discoveries of this sort. The same objections that had been urged against an inquiry at the Bar of the House, were now urged against an inquiry by a Select Committee. In his opinion, many important things might be stated to a Select Committee as to the causes of distress; whilst individuals might be able to ascertain which of them admitted of relief, which of alleviation, and which were beyond the power of remedy. He had no hesitation in saying, that if inquiry were denied, it was neither more nor less than a total abandonment of all the duties of Parliament. But he had confidence in
498
the people of this country. They were well disposed in their periods of distress, and none but Englishmen could suffer as they had done; nor could they have borne their suffering but from a love of that Constitution which they knew would sooner or later make them happier than any other people in the world. He had guarded himself against anything that could lead to a supposition that he was a friend to a change of the present system of Government. He thought, however, that an alteration of the currency might afford some relief. In Scotland the people were indulged with a small-note circulation, and they did not seem so much distressed as the other inhabitants of the empire. It was extraordinary that in his native county, Northumberland, the Poor-rates were only at 1s. 6d. in the pound, whilst in some of the southern counties they were as high as 20 s. in the pound. He could very easily account for this, for the small notes would no more stay in Scotland than any thing else [a laugh]. In that part of the country, the people were too far north for the southerns, and they managed better than to want small notes, merely because Ministers said they should not have them. Considering the alterations of the currency since 1797, he should say, that their effects upon contracts made in the interval of those changes amounted to a violation of honesty and good faith. He denied that he was an introducer of the measure of 1797; all that he had then done was to propose that people should not be relieved from paying creditors in gold any longer than there was a necessity for it [a laugh]. But by the bill of 1797, although the power of arresting the debtor was taken away, yet gold could be demanded in payment when execution was sued out. It was a subsequent Act which obliged creditors to take payment in Bank-notes. He now thought that small notes might be issued, under proper regulations, without any detriment to the public interests. It was advisable, he thought, to make bankers' estates chargeable for their simple contract debts, but it would be necessary to know what were the embarrassments previously upon them. He recollected when this country was at peace with Spain, and the Parliament of England was passing Acts to prevent men enlisting in the South American armies. At that time British subjects were sending large sums of money to those colonies, before they had been

499
recognised as Independent States by the; Sovereign of this country, and they were likewise sending out goods; but unless he was very much mistaken, all these transactions had proved more or less disastrous; but this was the fault of the individuals, and let them suffer; it would teach them that capitalists ought to employ their capital as much as possible to the improvement of their own country; and if they sent to foreign states, they must take upon themselves the blame and the consequences which they wished to throw upon Parliament. In the disturbances that took place in 1792, 1793, 1794, and 1795, the affections of the great body of the people were not disturbed by the distresses which oppressed them, for they saw that Parliament was anxious to relieve them; and they therefore concurred in that war which Parliament, by their concurrence, was enabled to carry on, and by the successful termination of which the noble Duke opposite had made himself so illustrious. The state of England was like a great and glorious pillar—the people formed its base; then came those of a little higher rank; then still a little higher, until it reached the apex, on which stood the Monarch of the country. If the distresses of those who formed the basis of that pillar were entirely neglected, he need not tell the House what would ensue. There was not an Englishman of that class that was not enduring, in the most exemplary manner, distresses difficult to conceive, and too painful for him to describe; and he thought the people were entitled to have those distresses patiently and carefully investigated by their Lordships.
The Earl of Roseberyobserved, that the noble Earl (Bathurst) who had alluded to what fell from him on a former night, relative to the silver standard of coinage, had not met his argument fairly. It was very true, as the noble Earl said, that in 1717, when Sir Isaac Newton settled the currency, gold was made the standard. He had not disputed that fact. But the noble Earl must know, that the current gold coin was made conformably to the price of silver. The noble Earl stated what was perfectly correct, when he said, that in 1774 an Act of Parliament was brought in, limiting to the sum of 25 l. the legal tender of silver coinage. But the noble Earl forgot to state, when mentioning that fact, why it was so limited. The reason was, because the silver coinage was
500
then debased considerably below the value which it represented. The noble Lord admitted, indeed, that silver, to any weight, was allowed to be taken by the same Act. Now, if he were not mistaken in his opinion, that regulated the price of commodities, and was, therefore, a standard of value in the country. The noble Earl had stated, that if any man now went to the Bank with 70 l. in silver, he could easily obtain for it 70 l. in sovereigns, but that was merely from the civility of the Bank, arising from their want of silver in their current transactions. They were not under any obligation, that he was aware of, any more than any body else to accept more than 2l. in silver in the payment of a debt. With respect to the question immediately before the House, he begged leave to state, that he acquiesced most heartily in the Motion of the noble Duke. On the former occasion, when a motion for inquiry was under consideration, he had addressed their Lordships, and the noble Earl (Eldon) had entirely misconceived the speech he made, and the conclusion at which he had arrived on that occasion. The tenor of his speech was in favour of inquiry, which he thought indispensable, although he voted against the proposition of the noble Earl. He did so because he thought that an inquiry at the bar of their Lordships' House would be most unsatisfactory. He felt that such art investigation would take up the time of their Lordships, and of his Majesty's Government, most uselessly, and that it would excite expectations that, in the end, would be disappointed. He was of opinion that the course now proposed was perfectly exempt from that objection; and he was sure the inquiry would, if properly conducted, be eminently conducive to good. He perfectly agreed with his Majesty's Speech where he recommended the House to separate those causes of distress which were beyond legislative control from those which might be within the reach of Parliament. He also agreed with that part of the Speech in which was recommended the greatest degree of caution in any inquiry into so delicate and intricate a subject; but he could not acquiesce in the opinion, that because some of the causes of distress were beyond legislative control, that therefore the House was not to make any inquiry into those causes that were, or might be, within the reach of Parliament. This would amount to an

501
absolute prohibition of all inquiry. Every attempt to obtain inquiry in that House had failed of success, and he therefore could not understand why caution in inquiry had been recommended in the Speech from the Throne. Although a relief from taxation might benefit the country, he thought that nothing could be of great and extensive good, unless the supply and demand of labour in the market were regulated; and if emigration were to be the relief, the vacuum must not be filled up. One important point, therefore, for inquiry was, the administration of the Poor-laws, and to ascertain whether some means could not be devised for preventing the frequent inundations of Irish labourers, which, in his opinion, was one great cause of the disproportion between the supply of, and the demand for, labour in this country. The noble Earl (Eldon) was totally mistaken in his ideas of the reason why the Poor-rates in Northumberland were so much lower than in the South. It was solely from the poor not being paid their wages out of the Poor-rates, as was the custom in the southern counties. The noble Earl, he also believed, was not correctly informed, either as to the effects of small notes, or as to Scotch one pound notes circulating in Northumberland. He acknowledged that Scotland was not so distressed as England; but that was more owing to the habits of her people than to the small notes; and he did not believe that they circulated in the North of England. Whatever might be the conclusions to which a committee of their Lordships should come, he was sure that its recommendations, on the various points brought under their consideration, would be highly beneficial to the country.
The Marquis Camdensaid, that after the best consideration which he had been able to give to the subject, he had come to the conclusion that the distress of the country was by no means so general as it was attempted to be made out. He felt it due to those who framed the Speech which was delivered from the Throne at the opening of the Session, to state that the nature of the existing distress was, in his opinion, correctly described in that document. If he were to contrast the present situation of the country with what it was in the year 1822, he should say that the comparison was in favour of the present period. In 1822, the complaints pf distress amongst the farmers were much
502
more general than now, and many landlords, himself amongst the number, were then obliged to forgive their tenants a year's rent. In the present year he had not received a single notice to quit from any of his tenants. Under those circumstances, he could not believe the distress was so general as had been described. The distress of the country was spoken of in a manner which induced him to suppose that those who dwelt upon it so much, considered it no bad sport to distress the Administration. Their Lordships were divided into a variety of parties, and distress seemed to be the text on which they all preached. There was not only Ministerial and Opposition benches, there were ultra-tory benches, the discontented benches, and the cross-benches, where the neutrals generally sat, and which were now nearly deserted. With respect to the meetings that were held out of doors, they seemed to be formed for the purpose of backing opinions which were delivered in Parliament, and in most instances the petitions which proceeded from them did not express the real feelings of the persons assembled. He was sorry to hear it stated by a noble Earl, (Mansfield) that his Majesty's Ministers were not aware of the distressed condition of the country. It was impossible that they should not be aware of the distress if it existed. That distress did exist to a certain extent Ministers admitted, and they had resorted to the reduction of taxation, and the enforcement of economy, as the best means of alleviating it. The remedy for such distress as existed, was unquestionably economy and reduced taxation; and he was sure that the present Government had evinced a strong disposition in favour of both. A prudent economy had been both professed and practised. Upon the question of the currency he did not intend to touch further, than to say that he conceived some benefit would result from permitting country bankers to issue more paper, upon giving adequate security that they would be able to take it up. He placed great reliance on the good sense of the people, and believed the period was not far distant when the complaint of distress would cease.
The Earl of Winchilseaexpressed his cordial satisfaction at the able and feeling manner in which his noble friend had brought under the consideration of their Lordships the faithful picture of the distress which pervaded the great body of

503
the labouring classes of the community, which had entitled him to the gratitude of his country, and had established for him a character which was more to be envied than even the high honours which he had earned in the field. What did his noble friend's Motion call on their Lordships to do? To inquire into the distress which pervaded the great body of the labouring population, as well manufacturing as agricultural. Could any individual who was aware of the unhappy situation of the great body of his countrymen, and had one particle of feeling about him, deny the justice and expediency of such an investigation? His noble friend proposed the inquiry with the view of tracing the distress to its sources, and of applying, as far as was in the power of Parliament, a remedy for them. He had heard with surprise a member of the Government—the President of the Council—assert that an inquiry into the state of the agricultural and manufacturing population could not be entered upon without also going into an inquiry into the distress which affected every interest in the empire. Because other classes were distressed, was that a reason why no inquiry should take place into the condition of the classes which were the object of his noble friend's Motion? He could not conceive that the House would refuse their assent to the Motion. A noble Lord had stated, that he considered the Poor-laws as one of the chief causes of the present distress of the labouring classes. He could not imagine on what ground the noble Lord founded that opinion. If the distressed labourers did not receive the 7,000,000 l. of Poor-rates, their condition would be much worse than it was at present. He believed that if the Poor-laws were administered in their real spirit and intention, they would prove to be the finest code ever framed by the wisdom of man. It was the abuse of the laws, and not the laws themselves, which should be condemned. He firmly believed that there was but one interest in the country—that all were desirous to place affairs upon the best and most prosperous footing; but he thought, at the same time, that mistaken notions prevailed; and if it were true, as was asserted by some, that distress was by no means general, let the Motion be carried, and an opportunity would be afforded of ascertaining, beyond contradiction, the real condition of the people, and the true extent of the distress. No
504
man in the country would receive with more heart-felt gratification the proof that the distress was limited, than the humble individual now addressing the House. He was prepared to admit, that if the Motion were carried, the inquiry would embrace a considerable number of important questions; but, as it seemed to him, that was the very reason why the investigation should be undertaken. Was the House to say to the distressed, who were earnestly beseeching relief, that because the Motion, confined as it was to the labouring classes, would include other topics of great interest and importance, it was not fit that any investigation at all should take place? Notwithstanding what the noble Marquis who had last addressed the House had stated, he must declare his opinion, that the distress of the country had been gradually augmenting for years past. If the noble Marquis would take the trouble to investigate the subject, he would find that the distress now existing in Kent exceeded any thing of the kind within the memory of man. He had heard from a gentleman connected with that once flourishing county, that numbers of farms were occupied at no rent at all. He had also heard from an acting magistrate of the county, that his land was occupied by tenants who had paid him no rent for the last seven years. A few days ago one of that gentleman's tenants came to him and told him that he was indebted to him for seven years' rent. The landlord supposed that he had come to pay him; but he placed some money on the table, and said—"If you take that, I have not a farthing left to purchase seed with, and I will give up possession of the farm as soon as you please." He could, if he pleased, mention numberless instances of this description. The class of freeholders who composed the link which connected the peasantry with the higher classes of society had, in that part of the county where he resided, been reduced one-half in the last six years, and at the present moment half the property of those remaining was on sale. If such a state of things were allowed to continue, it must end in the breaking of all the bonds which held society together. He wished he could coincide in the opinion expressed by some noble Lords, that the country at large felt confidence in the present Ministers; but he could not shut his eyes to what had passed at a late meeting, where he had been present, and

505
where anything but confidence in Ministers had been expressed. He begged, at the same time, to disclaim any wish to have his opinions backed by meetings out of doors, or any intention of attacking Ministers, or rendering their situation more distressing than it was, for, in his opinion, it was one which was far from being enviable. He did not attribute the situation of the country to the conduct of the present Government. It had arisen from causes as to which he would not, at that moment, attempt to offer an opinion. He was averse to the meeting which had taken place in Kent, because he thought that the petitions of the people had not been received in Parliament with the deference and respect to which they were entitled; but as he was determined never to separate himself from the great body of the freeholders, he told them, as they wished to express their sentiments, that the only constitutional mode of doing so was by a county meeting; for he hated what were called hole-and-corner meetings. He implored their Lordships to give their support and approbation to the Motion of his noble friend, and to avail themselves of this opportunity of showing that they sympathised with the people in their sufferings, and were willing to do their utmost to afford relief. It was to be recollected that the proposition now submitted did not impugn the conduct of Ministers; for he agreed with his noble friend, that it ought rather to have originated with them as the anxious guardians of the national prosperity. In conclusion, he would express the strong feelings of gratification he experienced, which he was certain would be participated in by every man who heard him, at seeing his noble friend who had brought forward the Motion restored to health.
The Duke of Buckinghamsaid, that no one could join more cordially than he did in the sentiment of satisfaction expressed by the noble Earl, at the manner in which the noble Duke had been enabled to perform his duties, after the indisposition which he regretted, both on public and private grounds. The noble Duke's proposition was divided into two parts—one embraced the consideration of the labouring poor, the other an inquiry into the state of taxation, and its effects on the productive industry of the country. His objection to the Motion was, that it was too comprehensive. If either of the two questions had been proposed, the House might have
506
entertained it; but both together were too much. The question was, not whether it was right to enter upon the inquiry proposed by the noble Duke, but the quo animo in which the subject had been brought forward. The noble Duke's object, of course, was, as he had himself stated, to impress on the public and their lordships the idea that the distressed state of the labouring classes was occasioned by the weight of taxation. The present, however, was not the only occasion on which the country had heard the cry raised of we, destruction, and ruin. For the last hundred and fifty years Parliament had rung with the same statements. Whenever rents had fallen, and the Poor-rates pressed heavily, the country had been described to be in a state of distress and ruin, and the labouring classes in a state of degradation. Even the amiable and excellent George Earl of Middleton, had fallen into that delusion, and declared in his day that the weight of taxation was so great that it was impossible any class of the community could survive it; and Sir John Sinclair, in one of his publications, had shewn that, according to the various declarations, the country had been ruined and bankrupt no less than twenty-two times between 1688 and 1723. In treating of the condition of the poorer classes of the community, it was necessary to exercise the utmost caution, and their Lordships' discussion sought to be managed with the utmost delicacy. The poor were always prone to believe that every thing which was done by the higher classes was done for their own interest, and not for the welfare of the poorer classes. They eagerly snatched at any hope which was held out to them, and bitterly regretted any disappointment. He objected to the Motion, because it would excite hopes which could not be realized. If he thought that it was in the power of Parliament to remedy the situation of the poor, he would cordially support the Motion; but he would never lend his sanction to a proposition which would excite hopes that must be disappointed. He was willing to do justice to the motives of the noble Duke, and congratulated him on having, thus early in his political career, come forward in behalf of the poor. But all persons would not do him that justice, and he ought to be aware that many individuals would be found out of the House, who would make use of his name and authority

507
to excite expectations which they knew could never be realized, with a view to profit by the subsequent discontent. For his own part, he did not think that the poor only were deserving of attention. It was impossible for their Lordships not to know that other classes were deeply affected. When the labourer had no employment, the landlord was obliged to support him. So long as the land existed the pauper's claims could not be denied. They were attended to, indeed, before the landlord could put a single pound of rent into his pocket. What did the labourer care for the distress of the farmer, for his wants were supplied, though the other might have his house sold over his head? The situation of the poor alone, therefore, ought not to be inquired into, but rather the situation of all classes. In his opinion, the present sufferings of all classes, in various parts of the country, was attributable to the altered circumstances of the country as to our foreign relations, and even to our being in a state of peace. For example, something had been said by the noble Earl near him of the decay of opulent and respectable freeholders; but it was obvious that much of the distress was caused by their produce coming into competition with the cheaper produce of other countries. When farming produce bore a high price, they had large incomes; and now that its price had fallen, their incomes had been reduced in proportion. When prices were high they contracted expensive habits of living, and continuing to indulge in them when prices fell, they were unable to meet their expenses. Their distress arose from their inability to live as they had lived. Formerly, the greater part of the Metropolis was supplied with butter and cheese from the counties of Buckingham and Essex; but now those articles were brought to London in steam-boats from France and Holland. The butter which the noble Duke had eaten at breakfast that morning was most probably the produce of Holland, and thus he had assisted in adding to the depressed slate of the agricultural interest. The second part of the Motion was an inquiry into the subject of taxation. Now, in the first place, their Lordships should look, not merely at the state of taxation, but what proportion our taxes bore to the income of the country, and how far the revenue had diminished or increased; because, if our revenue had increased, and our trade had increased, the argument as to the amount
508
of the taxation would go for very little. The most productive year before the war was 1790, and after the war, the year 1823. Now, in the year 1790, the quantity of cotton wool consumed in this country was 31,400,000lbs.; in 1823, it was 249,700,000lbs. In 1790, the quantity of sheep's wool consumed in this country was 3,200,000lbs.; in 1823 it was 30,200,000lbs. The quantity of British wool exported in 1825, the last year that our paper currency was in existence, was 18,367lbs., in 1829 it was l,669,389lbs. The quantity of cotton goods exported had probably doubled since 1819, while the price of the raw material had sunk to one half. Now what was all this a proof of? It was a proof that consumption had increased, and that taxation had had no sensible effect upon our trade. He would further observe, that taxation had been as heavy in 1823, 1824, and 1825 as subsequently; and, indeed, it was heavier, and then the country did not suffer from distress. Taxation was not, therefore, the cause of the distress. But probably his noble friend would say that then we had paper money to pay taxes; (he saw paper money smiling in his face) but the distress of which noble Lords complained was far too general in its nature to be caused by a circumstance so limited in its operations as our change of currency. What, then, were the limits of the distress? was it confined to our country? Far from it. The same distress experienced here was felt throughout the world. If it were said to be occasioned by taxation, go to Switzerland, where there is no taxation—go to America, go to France; the distress would be found the same. If it was contended that the distress was occasioned by the weight of our debt, go to countries not encumbered with debt—to America, where there is no debt; to France, where the debt is small; to Switzerland, where, perhaps, as in olden times, they may have money in their treasury, the distress is the same. Then it was said, that our distress was occasioned by Free Trade. He had heard much of the principles of free trade, but he had not seen them often acted on. But let their Lordships go to those countries where there was no free trade—Germany, the Netherlands, France—distress would be found to prevail in all. Then it was absurd and mischievous (if he might say so of anything which occurred in their Lordships' House), to say that the distress arose from causes

509
which did not exist in other places where the distress was at least equal to that which prevailed in this country. Then the paper currency had been cited as a cause. If his noble friend wished to return to those times of confidence, as he called them, between the farmer and the banker, he (the noble Duke) could not participate in his wish. Some noble Lords wished for a restoration of the paper currency; but to that he could not consent. If, in 1825, the last year of the bubble speculations, 165 bankers became bankrupt, the credit of the country, instead of being distressed by a metallic currency, as was contended, must be restored. The paper currency led to speculation, and that was followed by failure and general mistrust. Since this; metallic currency was restored, 160 out of 165 bankers were enabled to pay 20 s. in the pound. This proved that a paper currency was not necessary to keep up the credit of the country, when, during a metallic currency, these individuals could pay, in full, debts which they had contracted in paper. It was easy for the noble Duke to sit at the Custom-house, calling out for complaints of grievances. If the noble Duke heard from the north any unfavourable accounts of the state of the Tallow Trade, he called out for inquiry. If there was a pressure of French Silk in the market, the only remedy was a committee. The distress was general all over the world, and yet inquiry was called for as if it had been exclusively British. He granted that distress did exist, and to some extent; it was vain to deny it, and folly to conceal it. This distress was owing mainly to the breaking down of the barriers of that commercial monopoly we had possessed during the war; and also to two bad seasons, with which Providence had visited us, after one bright one. It was partly owing, likewise, to the gradual resumption of cash payments, which could not be returned to without some inconvenience. But these causes were temporary, and so, he confidently believed, the distress would be. In the manufactures of the country there was already an increase of improvement and prosperity; and the times were, he trusted, coming round, when those who supported this inquiry would rejoice at their own disappointment and want of success. There was no reason for despair; and it was satisfactory to know that our manufacturers were rising from their late depression; that they were now getting full
510
employment, and that it was daily increasing. With this conviction, he (the noble Duke) could not doubt that the evil was passing away, and that he should soon have to congratulate the noble Duke on the return of prosperity. He considered this Motion to be brought forward in an extraordinary state of the country and of parties. If their Lordships went into any club, they would find a moderate Whig holding this language: "We must have free trade, and a metallic currency; nothing but that will save the country." "But," said his noble friends, "do not think of these things; they are the causes of our distress, of our particular distress; these are what we mean to make speeches about." They were joined by the true-blue Tories, who were now advocates for Radical Reform, and down they came to the House of Lords, or to the House of Commons, whichever it might happen to be, and one and all joined in a league to support a motion for a committee of inquiry. Such was the state of parties, under which the present Motion was brought forward. Believing, then, that the Motion was brought forward by an unwholesome and unconstitutional junction of parties, and that the effect of it would be, to excite and flatter the hopes of the poor, and afford no remedy to the disease complained of, he must oppose it.
The Marquis of Salisburyobserved, that it was a good system of parliamentary tactics to endeavour to draw away the attention of the House from the subject of debate; which had been done by the noble President of the Council and the last speaker. The question had nothing to do with currency or free trade; even these and several other topics had been debated. He had nothing to do with the question of a constitutional or an unconstitutional state of parties, but was willing to give Government his support where he could. He felt some difficulty in forming his judgment so as to guide his vote on a motion for an inquiry into the state of the poor, after a debate on taxation, paper currency, manufactures, and the various subjects which had been brought before the House. With respect to the distress of the country, he had heard, with surprise, from the noble Duke (Buckingham), that the labouring classes felt less distress than any others; that as long as the Poor-rates existed they had no reason to complain, for as long as any thing could be got from

511
the land they were the least subject to distress.
The Duke of Buckinghamexplained. He had stated that the labouring poor considered and believed that they had a claim upon the land,—not that they had really a right to the land.
The Marquis of Salisburycontinued. The explanation did not much alter the state of the ease, because it did not touch upon the important point whether the poor were in a state of distress or not. He contended that there was no period in which the poorer class had suffered so much. No parliamentary return indeed had been made to show the extent of the distress; but when he heard the notice of the noble Duke's Motion, he took measures to inform himself on the subject, and he had applied to every parish in the county in which he lived (Hertford) in order to obtain the number of persons unemployed. He would state to the House the result. Out of the whole population of the county, which, by the population register of 1811, was 62,920, the number of males between fifteen and seventy was 34,874, and the number of the working classes out of employ in the county amounted to the alarming sum of 2,200 persons, being six and a quarter per cent on the males, or three and a half per cent on the whole population. Taking this to be a fair criterion of the state of the country, and the Poor-rates were far less in Hertford than in several other counties, being 5s. 8d. in the pound; and supposing the number of males between fifteen and seventy to be 2,700,000, it might be concluded that the enormous number of 170,000 able-bodied men were at this moment out of employ.
The Earl of Rosslyninquired to what period this account was made up.
The Marquis of Salisburyreplied, to the 1st of March: and if that number were unemployed on the 1st of March, the number during the winter,—inclement as it was,—must have been more considerable. But even if it was anything approaching to this number,—one-half or one-third,—there never was a subject which called more for parliamentary inquiry. With respect to taxation, the country, as far as he could judge, was grateful for the relief which his Majesty's Ministers had afforded it; but in his opinion, a parliamentary inquiry into the state and nature of the existing distress was, nevertheless, necessary.
The Earl of Wicklowwished for an opportunity to explain why he had supported a Motion of his noble relative, for a Committee to inquire into the state of the poor in Ireland while he meant to oppose the present. The Motion of his noble relative was for an inquiry into an evil which was permanent in its nature and duration; the noble Duke, however, wished to inquire into an evil which was new and temporary. With respect to the existing distress, great difference of opinion prevailed as to its causes, extent, and duration. Though several causes had been assigned, yet there was one which appeared to have been generally overlooked. This was the peculiar circumstances attending the last harvest, which had been gathered in, owing to the state of the weather, at a far greater expense than usual. Perhaps this had not been sufficiently considered by landlords when the rents became due, after paying which, the farmers were so exhausted, that they were compelled to dismiss their labourers. This accounted in a great measure, for the increased number of paupers. As to the extent of the distress, a great deal of severe remark had been made on the word partial, which was found in his Majesty's Speech. It was highly creditable to Ministers that nothing better could be found to say against them than this minute criticism about a word. But it would not much alter the matter, although the negative form had been used, and his Majesty had been made to say that the distress was not general. A short time since there was a good deal of wit displayed on the word "untoward," which was used in one of the Speeches from the Throne, but he really thought that all such observations were for the most part thrown away. The quarrel in this instance was with a word in the affirmative, but he had no doubt that the Ministers would have been willing to have inserted a negative in its place, and instead of calling the distress "partial" to have described it as "not general," and in that phrase he should have agreed, because he believed that the Ministers were the best judges of the real state of the country at the time the Speech was framed. The extent of the distress, however, he was happy to say, was diminishing; from his own knowledge in the county in which he resided, he could assure their Lordships that the distress was not general, or so great as it had been on former occasions in

513
that county; and though the grazing farmers suffered, the agricultural farmers, on whom the poor chiefly depended, had no reason to complain. Was the distress likely to be permanent? He believed not. All ranks of society appeared to be in a sound and healthy state, and well disposed towards the Government. It was impossible, however, that rents could be kept up, now that the prices of all commodities were reduced. Those who suffered from the reduction were to be pitied, but the necessity was inevitable. He hoped his Majesty's Ministers would be firm, and not give in to any measure like the Motion of the noble Duke, which instead of satisfying the people would spread alarm throughout the country.
The Earl of Radnorobserved, that he rose principally to make some remarks on what had fallen from the noble Duke opposite (Buckingham). He had objected to the Motion because it was proposed in an unwholesome and unconstitutional state of parties. He (Lord Radnor) could not understand what this meant. The noble Duke said, that such was the state of parties, that a moderate Whig agreed with a true-blue Tory, and therefore the Motion was an unconstitutional thing; but this rather appeared an argument in its favour, and showed that it was so just and proper, that persons who differed upon all other subjects agreed upon this. If the noble Duke's statement respecting the improvement in the manufacturing districts, were correct, and there was really no distress, he wished that the noble Duke would go into the committee, if it were only to show how greatly the people were mistaken. Their Lordships had had a voluminous Petition laid upon their Table that night, signed by 10,000 persons, from no unimportant place—Manchester,—which proved that this great town had not yet discovered that improvement in the stale of their business which the noble Duke had announced. The noble Duke had said, that the class who suffered the least from the distress was the poor. The noble Duke was, he believed, an active magistrate; but he must say that in his magisterial capacity be found the case to be very different, and that the distresses of the poor were increasing. It was not long before the time when he began to act as a magistrate that the plan was introduced into his neighbourhood, by a benevolent individual in
514
Berkshire, of making up the wages of the poor out of the rates. He admitted that this plan had led to infinite mischief; but when he heard it asserted, that it had been introduced fraudulently by farmers, he was bound to say that the assertion was not correct. The first person who introduced that system was a clergyman of the name of Watts; but there was no intention whatever, on the part of the farmers, that it should lead to its present melancholy results. In contradiction to the statements of the noble Duke that the labourers were not the greatest sufferers; he begged leave to remind their Lordships of a Petition he had presented from Dursley. He was not acquainted with that town, but he understood that it was conveniently situated on the banks of the Severn. The Petition, however, set forth that the number of rateable acres in the parish was 694, and that the sum raised in the current year for the relief of the poor, independent of 350 l. the result of charitable contributions, was 3,000 l. This sum was levied on 400 persons, 750 being too much reduced to contribute, and 1,500 being in such a state that without relief they must have starved. Of those who received relief, many got only 15 d. per week. He begged to draw their Lordships' attention to a statement from the people of Manchester. Mr. Potter, who was his informant, said, that there were a great number of persons there living on the miserable pittance of 2½d. a day. At a public meeting at Huddersfield, in December last, it was stared that out of 29,697 persons, 660 persons were living on 6s. 11 d. per week, 439 on 7d. per day, and 13,226 on 2½d. per day. This was on the 11th of December; but by letters dated the 28th of February, it appeared that the number of poor had been more than doubled. At Macclesfield, the wages of the silk weavers in 1828, were fifteen per cent; in 1826, thirty per cent; in 1825, forty per cent; and in 1824, sixty per cent higher than now. It was stated too, that these people had been generally obliged to sell their bedding and clothing; that they slept on straw, and were huddled together by half dozens to keep themselves warm. But were these the only places in which they had heard complaints of distress? No: there had been public meetings in almost every county, at which the same cry of distress had been raised. The cry of reform had been mixed

515
with the cry of distress, but that was because the cry of distress had been disregarded. The petition presented from Manchester that night did not pray for reform; but let their Lordships look at what was going on at Birmingham. A political union had been established there by men of great talents, of great knowledge, and of great influence. That union was agreed to with only one dissenting voice out of 12,000 persons. The burden of the song of that union was Reform in Parliament. A noble Lord had told them that the people would look up to Parliament for relief; but he believed that the people were nearly tired of that prospect, and that if relief did not come speedily, they would cease to look to Parliament, The object of the union at Birmingham was parliamentary reform, but the groundwork of that union was the inattention of the House of Commons to their interests. He was a radical reformer,—yes, he was a radical reformer,—he had long since been so, and he became so because he saw that the people were not properly represented in Parliament, and that their petitions were not properly attended to. In these reasons for being a radical reformer, he saw nothing deserving of reproach. He was ready to admit that much relief would be effected by the proposed reductions in taxation; but that relief he was sure would be insufficient to meet the wants of the country. They were promised more next year; but if more could be given, why should it not be given now? The relief that was to come next year would be of little benefit to the people who were living on 2½d a day. As to the Motion before their Lordships, he thought the noble Lord who had spoken second, had made the best speech for the noble Duke's Motion. That speech reminded him of the saying—"My wound it is so great, because it is so small." The noble Lord told them they had so many people, 2nd therefore so many classes of distress, that this inquiry would be interminable. The noble Lord, too, had said—he did not know with what design—that one of the consequences of this inquiry would be, that they would be compelled to consider of the propriety of lowering their rents.
Earl Bathurst.—I never used the word "compel."
The Earl of Radnordid not mean to lay any stress on that word: but allow him to express his opinion, that the noble Lord
516
was right, and that they would be compelled to lower their rents; but not one bit the less if this inquiry were refused, nor one bit the more if it were granted. Whether the Ministers relied on a change in the seasons, or a new organization of the world, to remove the distress, he could not divine, but it was obviously their principle to let things mend themselves, and they held out hopes to their Lordships, as they could not be worse, that they must be better. He did not exactly agree to their conclusion, and therefore he meant to vote for the Motion.
The Earl of Rosslynsaid, that the noble Earl had misrepresented his noble friend in the greatest possible manner, when he said that his (Earl Bathurst's) speech went to support the present Motion. His noble friend had complained, and very properly, that the terms of the Motion embraced every possible subject of inquiry, and had said that consequently the inquiry would be interminable. The Motion extended to an inquiry into the condition of labourers of all classes, whether in agriculture or in commerce: it extended to artisans of all descriptions; and in order to make the inquiry at all satisfactory, the nature of the employment of such labourers must be examined. Again, the inquiry, by embracing the operation of taxation on productive industry, involved that which was confessedly the most difficult question in the whole range of political economy. This was his noble friend's objection to the committee, and in that objection he fully concurred. The noble and learned Lord at the Table had said, that he should be happy to vote for an inquiry limited in its nature and duration; and they had also heard admissions from other noble Lords, that the various subjects included in the proposed inquiry, ought to be investigated separately. These seemed to be so many reasons against the Motion. But the real question was,—would this inquiry prove satisfactory to the country, or beneficial to the labouring classes? He had no hesitation in saying it would not. Suppose it should be granted, and suppose the noble Lords who were inclined to support this Motion by their speeches as well as by their votes, were all members of the committee; the noble Earl (Stanhope) at the Table would begin by proposing the unlimited issue of paper, the natural effect of which would be the expulsion of metallic currency; another Bank restriction,

517
and a depreciated standard. But then he would be met by the noble Earl (Radnor) opposite, who would call a paper currency "filthy rags," and say that the reversion to such a currency would be an odious and detestable fraud. He should like to hear the noble Earl opposite say to the noble Earl at the Table, "No, I cannot listen to any alteration in the Currency, or to what you call an equitable adjustment; but I am ready to repeal the Corn-laws, and to effect the subversion of all monopolies." Such propositions would be received with horror by the noble Earl at the Table. Then would come his friend the noble Marquis (of Lansdown) opposite, with a recommendation in favour of a silver standard; but here again would ensue an opposition between the noble Marquis and the noble Earl near him, who would contend that silver should be taken at the market price, and that, consequently, the standard should be depreciated six per cent as compared to the Mint price.
The Earl of Rosebery, interrupting the noble Earl, said, he never proposed that silver, as now coined, should be the standard, but that gold and silver concurrently, at the market-price, should form that standard.
The Earl of Rosslyn, in continuation. Even that depreciation would be a relief, he was ready to admit, but then, it would be a relief of the same fraudulent nature as an alteration of greater extent in the standard. He preferred the bolder proposition of the noble Earl at the Table, and would rather say at once, we could not pay our debts, and, like other bankrupts, openly cheat our creditors than do it, to a certain extent, by these covert means. But the point from which he had been drawn was this—the various, the discordant opinions of the noble Lords who would meet upon the committee. This discrepancy of opinion appeared as strongly as to the extent and nature of the proposed inquiry, as it appeared in the topics to which he had alluded. The noble Lord had told them that this committee might propose a commutation of tithes; and as if this were not wandering far enough from the mark, another noble Lord had suggested, that the committee might make many useful suggestions to landlords as to the management of their property and their estates. Thus, every interest, commercial, manufacturing, and mechanical,—the commutation of tithes,—the operation,
518
direct and indirect, of every tax,—and lastly, the management of private property by private individuals, were all to be included within the range of this committee of inquiry. Now, independently of the objection which he had already expressed to the appointment of this committee, he had yet another objection. He was one of those who believed that a great portion of the distress now existing in the country had arisen from the fluctuating state of affairs at many periods, and in various respects. He believed that the 1l. notes had little to do with the dangers of 1826; and that the country banks were pretty solid had been proved, he thought, by the fact, that 160 out of 165 had paid twenty shillings in the pound. At the same time, however, he did not believe that the restoration of the 1l. notes would place England in its former situation. He believed that the apprehension and the want of confidence which had produced the withdrawal of deposits and of accommodations, had been the causes of the mischief; and he believed those causes to have resulted from the fluctuations to which he had alluded. He, and others with him, had fortunately resisted interference with the banking-system of Scotland; but he thought the present comparatively prosperous condition of Scotland had arisen from that mutual confidence which had never been disturbed there. He believed, therefore, that the mischiefs they had witnessed in England had arisen by that interruption of confidence which was naturally produced by fluctuating and uncertain prospects. His position was, that there had been vast uncertainty, at various times, in the prospect of affairs in England. Changes in the law, which had been changes for the better—and promised changes, which might also have been for the better—had, nevertheless, produced uncertainty and speculation. The Corn-laws he believed to be not yet firmly enough established to give confidence in their operation, and changes in them are continually spoken of. His opinion was, that certainty as to legislative measures was almost better even than improvement, because he thought security essential to the welfare of a country. What had been the consequences of uncertainty with respect to the Corn-laws? Why, land was in the market and found few purchasers; the value of land was lower than the funds. This must be be-

519
cause capital was withheld, in the hope of employing it more advantageously, or because distrust had taken possession of the capitalist. The wild notions respecting free trade had caused all retail stocks to be kept as low as possible. If there were any foundation for these opinions, see what mischiefs would result from the speculation which so extensive a committee of inquiry as this would give rise to. When he looked at the discordant opinions of the noble Lords who supported this Motion, he could consider it only as the single, the isolated point, upon which those who were not satisfied with his Majesty's Ministers could be brought to agree. He could rather wish, that if accusations were intended to be made against the Government, they should be brought forward openly and specifically; and as this would be much more fair, so it would prove the sincerity of noble Lords, if they brought forward separately each of the questions which were included in this inquiry, and took a discussion upon each, dealing with it according to its own merits. But such a mode would separate the upholders of the present Motion; for no two of them could agree upon the points included in it it taken by themselves. He thought, however, looking at the reduction of taxation which had already been effected, and at that which had been promised, the time was unfavourable for opposition to the Government. In the two great branches of the collection of the revenue, and of colonial expenditure, every possible reduction had been promised. A commission, which would cost the country nothing, because it was to be formed of members of the Government, would inquire into the means of reducing the colonial expenditure. He thought that such a course was much more wise than it would be to make reductions blindly, and at one sweep, as the noble Earl (Radnor) opposite recommended. He could not agree with the same noble Earl in the assertion, that the country had no confidence in the present Administration, nor could he admit to him that the distress which did unhappily exist, had been of so great duration, or that it was so intense now as the noble Earl had represented it. The consumption of tea in the last year had been equal to that of the preceding year; the consumption of coffee had increased; the consumption of sugar, it was true, had decreased, but to no great extent; and the
520
consumption of spirits had increased 2,000,000 gallons. This, he admitted, was not a proof that distress did not exist, but it was a proof that the distress could neither be so general nor so intense as it had been represented to be, for otherwise, the consumption of articles of universal use must have decreased. So, again, there had been an increase in our exports of manufactured goods, which proved that there must have been employment for labour, though the profits of the manufacturers, and the wages of the labourers, might have been small. The noble Earl, alluding to what some noble Lords had called "the irruption of the Irish," which, he said, was not disadvantageous to the English farmers and landlords, for by cheap labour the profits of the farmer and the rents of the latter were increased, added, that he could never consent to make a distinction between English and Irish labourers, and concluded by declaring that he should vote against the Motion.
The Earl of Carnarvonsaid, that he had proposed to recur to a silver standard, and he did it partly from thinking that the present standard was so completely an experimental one, that we could not permanently adhere to it. What he wanted was, that silver, not gold, should have been made the standard of the currency. As far as a concurrent standard of both metals was concerned, one must be subordinate to the other; and he would have had silver, allowing gold to pass at an agio. He would also say one word on the subject of small notes. He attributed the present distress, which was different from that of former years, inasmuch as it affected both farmers and manufacturers, to both classes being deprived of their usual home market, which grew, in his opinion, out of the distresses of the agriculturists, caused by the alteration relative to the small notes. He had anticipated, in 1826, these results, and had then pointed out the danger to credit, and the general distress which must ensue, if their Lordships put an end to the small notes. As he had then anticipated also, the people had been reduced to paupers. He believed that there were more small notes in circulation than the Ministers thought, and that their measure was more sweeping in its consequences than they had expected. This state of things might, he confessed, have been advanced or influenced by other causes, as well as by the currency. He

521
thought that the greatest been the country could at this time receive, would be to forward those negotiations with the Bank of England which could not long be delayed, and to do so with a view of assimilating our banking system to that of Scotland, by placing; it upon a broad and secure basis. If they were also to allow an issue of small notes—such an issue as would make the 5l. notes circulate as easily as formerly—he thought that an additional benefit would be conferred upon the country. He would now detain the House no longer. Allow him, however, to say, that in voting for the Motion, he did so from a conviction that this inquiry was due to the wants and to the wishes of the people, and that he was far from being influenced by any desire to harass the Government.
Earl Gowersaid, he should vote against the Motion, because he thought it could lead to no beneficial result, and because he was of opinion, that the conduct of Government, in the reduction of taxation, and in the promise of farther reduction, deserved and invited the confidence of their Lordships and of the country. By the appointment of such a committee as that now proposed, he was very much afraid that they would only excite hopes which they would find it impossible to realize.
The Earl of Darnleysaid, he should also oppose the Motion, because he could not bring himself to believe that it could lead to any good practical result.
Lord Hollandsaid that, after the vote he had given on a former occasion, he felt it necessary to trouble their Lordships for a few minutes in explanation of the reasons which induced him to vote in favour of the noble Duke's Motion. He must confess that he was a little surprised at the course which his noble friend (the Earl of Darnley) near him, had declared that he should adopt; for, if he were not very much mistaken, the last time he had heard his noble friend speak, he had taken credit to himself for having proposed an inquiry into the condition of the labouring classes of Ireland, which inquiry the other House of Parliament had just consented to institute, though their Lordships had refused to follow its example. But his other noble friend (the Lord Privy Seal) had surprised him still more, when he painted the evils and dangers which would result from the institution of the inquiry proposed by the noble Duke; for his Majesty's Ministers, as he understood, had already agreed elsewhere to appoint a
522
committee to inquire into the condition of the labouring classes of Ireland. His noble friend had said, that he knew of no distinction, and that he would hear of none, between the English and Irish labourer; and yet his noble friend, with great inconsistency, made this remarkable distinction; namely, that the English labourers were full of hope, violent, sanguine, quick of imagination, and therefore no inquiry must be made into their condition: whereas the Irish labourer, forsooth, was a quiet, unhoping, unthinking person, and therefore his condition might be inquired into. If any thing were to be done, he would wish Parliament to have some share in it. He was not a radical reformer, though he had been supposed to have the taint of radicalism in him; yet he should not be prepared to urge such arguments as some noble Lords, in high situations, had done in favour of radical reform, which amounted to this—that Parliament had nothing to do, and was not to sympathize, with the people—that the forms of Parliament were such, that in proportion to the degree of distress existing, in the same proportion Parliament became utterly impotent and useless. What was that but an argument for radical reform? But the noble Lord asked, of what use would a committee be, composed of persons of all opinions? Let him look to his own committee. Did he choose for it persons of one opinion? The noble Lord's argument went to the complete annihilation of the functions of Parliament. It was asked, what was to be the practical result of the committee? Why, if he knew that, he would not ask the House to go into a committee at all. The great merit, he thought, of the present Motion, unlike, in that respect, the motion lately brought forward by a noble Earl (Stanhope) was, that it excited no expectations. He thought it showed a want of feeling in a popular Government not to enter into an inquiry on which the feelings of the people were excited. It might be very agreeable to noble Lords on the other side to have every thing emanating from the Government, and not from Parliament, and to say that such a man did this, and such a man that; but he did not wish to give up what he considered his right—that of counselling his Majesty in what concerned the interests of the State. He believed that the Crown had been lately addressed to reform the Parliament, and even that the

523
noble Duke opposite had been solicited, from populous places, to redress the grievances of the nation. These he considered as extraordinary signs of the times, which it was their Lordships' duty to investigate, and try to correct. This was the duty of Parliament, not of individuals. Noble Lords over the way might hold the opinion, Omnia bene acta nostro Marte agentur, but in that he could not concur, and desired, not that the Crown alone, or the Ministers alone, should promote the happiness of the people, but in every act for that purpose he wished the Parliament to concur. He had said thus much to vindicate the vote which he should give in favour of the present Motion, but in doing so he did not mean to join the noble earl (Stanhope) in tampering with the Currency. He begged to add, that he did not agree with that noble Earl as to the causes of the distress. What they were, he who ran might read. They had originated with those who now lamented their effects. He could say "my withers are unwrung;" he had no hand in those causes, but as the distress existed, he was ready cordially to join with those who proposed to try if it could be alleviated. Although he was not sanguine as to the result, he considered that inquiry would be useful, and the evil of refusing all inquiry great and certain.
Lord Ellenboroughagreed with the noble Baron who had just spoken, that this was not the country in which it would be proper to adopt the principle of absolute government, but he thought that the noble Lord could not impute to the Government any intention of arrogating to themselves the right of doing every thing that was to be accomplished for the people. The Ministers objected to the appointment of the committee moved for, because they thought that the object proposed could not be accomplished by means of that committee. The appointment of the committee would hold out expectations which could not be realized. It had been said, that noble Lords of all opinions had been appointed as members of the committee sitting on the East India affairs; but let their Lordships remember, that that committee was to deal with facts, and the one moved for now was to deal with opinion. He never knew a committee, the business of which was to examine into facts, which thoroughly investigated the subject; and he would ask their Lordships, what would be the result, if a committee was appointed to
524
deliberate on opinions. He thought the appointment of the committee would create great mischief, as it would lead to the apprehension of change; and what the country required now was stability. The committee would be called on to investigate all the questions which had been submitted to Parliament for the last ten years, Agricultural Distress, Free Trade, Poor-rates, Game-laws, Artizans, Machinery, County-rates, paying labourers out of the Poor-rates, Prisons, Combination-laws, Parish Vestries, Emigration, Friendly Societies, Parish Settlement, and Irish Vagrants. It would be a committee co-extensive with the whole science of political economy, and would last during the life of the longest lived member of the committee. On three subjects—the Poor-laws, Corn-laws, and Currency—no less than thirty-two writers had written pamphlets within a short period. On the Corn-laws there were fifteen, on the Currency seven, and on the Poor-laws ten. These persons must be examined; and as the Currency seemed to be one of the principal objects of inquiry, he thought that MY. Tooke's pamphlet, called "The Currency free from all Mystery," would be a good thing to begin with. He asked their lordships how the businesss of committees were conducted? After the first few days, the whole business was done in the presence of two or three Peers. Several of those who attended entered into private conversation, and the whole scene exhibited so much confusion, that the short-hand writer was quite in despair and agony while attempting to write down the answers to the questions put to the witnesses. He objected to the appointment of the committee, because it would be a gross, wilful, and mischievous delusion; and after the announcement made to Parliament respecting the intention of the Government to reduce the taxation far beyond what any person had expected, he did not think that any noble Lord would come down to the House with the present Motion. If noble Lords were desirous of maintaining the honour, character, and respectability of Parliament, it was not by a motion, having no public end in view, that such an object was to be gained.
The Marquis of Lansdownhad at first only intended to state his reasons for supporting the Motion before the House, but after the speech of the noble Lord, he felt bound to stand up in favour of the practice of Parliament, and to maintain the utility

525
of committees of their Lordships' House. The noble Lord had, by throwing ridicule and contempt on committees in that House, furnished the best argument possible to the radical reformers, who could now tell the people of Manchester and Birmingham, to inquire themselves respecting their own distresses, for that inquiry by Parliament was useless. But such had not always been the opinion of the noble Lord, for he remembered that the noble Lord had concurred with him, some years ago, as to the propriety of appointing a committee on the whole state of Ireland. Did the noble Lord do so, he would ask, because he thought that all opinions were alike on the subject? The noble Baron objected to the Motion that it would be necessary; to read all the books which had lately been published on the multifarious topics it was supposed would engage the attention of the Committee, and to examine all the authors of them. But how was it, he would ask, that the noble Baron made no such objections when he voted for the Committee to inquire into the affairs of Ireland, and when he proposed the committee to inquire into the affairs of India. On both these subjects there were as many pamphlets and books written, as on the Currency or on the Corn-laws. The noble Baron had not, when he moved for the Committee on Indian Affairs, mentioned one work (he did not know if the noble Baron meant to make the members of the Committee read it) which would put to shame all the puny pamphlets he had just referred to; he meant the mass of 90,000 pages, which he said had passed through the office of the Board of Control. Did he think that all these pages must be read by his Indian Committee, or did he suppose that they would be less useful to elucidate the inquiry than a few anonymous pamphlets on the Corn-laws? He meant to support the present Motion, because it was a practical motion for a practical purpose. He had opposed the motion of a noble Earl (Stanhope) because he considered it to be of too general a nature. In opposing that motion, he stated, that if any specific inquiry should be proposed for a practical purpose, to that inquiry he would give his support; and he thought it his duty now to redeem that pledge. All those who knew the manly character of the noble Duke who made the Motion, could not suspect that there lurked behind the terms of the Motion
526
any concealed design, and therefore he felt no hesitation in supporting it, especially as he considered the present time well fitted for a dispassionate inquiry. He begged to be allowed to say a few words in reference to some previous observations of his which had been commented on by the noble President of the Council. He deemed the opinion which he had formerly given relative to returning to the old silver standard of currency, of such little importance, that he should not have again adverted to it had it not attracted the noble Earl's attention and his remarks. He had formerly, he admitted, made a mistake in saying that before the year 1795 silver was a legal tender up to 5l., whereas, in fact, it was then a legal tender up to 25 l.; but he had then also stated that silver by weight might be tendered to any amount. He had stated that there was a difference between the standard and currency, and that then we had, in fact, a double standard; for if a party could tender silver by weight when it was cheaper than gold, there was a silver as well as a gold standard. The noble Earl might perhaps remember, that he was a member of the Committee, to which he had also the honour to belong, which recommended that a bar of gold should be made the standard: the proposition was adopted by the legislature, and the bar governed the Currency till Ministers found it necessary to come to Parliament and have it altered. While it remained the standard, however, and this was a curious fact, only one bar of gold was ever asked for, and that by a noble Lord who probably meant to preserve it in his family. That standard however did for a time govern the Currency, and so would silver, while it could be paid in weight, and was cheaper than gold. He hoped that when their Lordships considered the slate of the labouring poor of this country, they would not be induced to abstain from attempting to ascertain the causes of it by the apprehension of being led away by other subjects. The noble Lord said, that the great object of the country was to enjoy stability. But it must be stability in good, and stability of useful institutions, which the noble Lord had described in a way not calculated to ensure their stability, not—stability of the state in which the poor of the country now were plunged, and of the unnatural relation which at present existed between the poor and their

527
employers. The noble Duke (Richmond) had said, that it was not an alteration, but a different administration of the Poor-laws which he wanted; but he (the Marquis of Lansdown) thought, that that system which forced magistrates in different places to adopt different plans of treating the paupers, required alteration. He called their Lordships' attention to a statement of the system, as exhibited in Dorsetshire. A magistrate in that county had made inquiries on the subject, and the result of his labours was, that out of twenty-four parishes which came within the scope of his investigation, twenty were nearly in a similar situation. In each there was one-third more of labourers than could find employment in cultivating the land. This superabundant population—it was a curious circumstance—was composed of the youngest and ablest men. The overseers maintained the married men and their families, but refused to give any thing to the unmarried and young men, in the hope of thereby driving them out of the parish. The result of this system was, that the farmer gave the minimum of support for the minimum of labour; and the consequence was, that the cultivation of land suffered considerably. He did not at the present late hour intend to enter fully into the question of settlement, but would merely observe, that that was one which required great attention on the part of their Lordships. He was glad to learn that the taxation of the country was to be reduced; but he hoped Government would not stop where it had begun. He wished to see the duty on sea-borne coal repealed, as he thought that a great impulse would be given to trade by taking off that duty. The sugar-duty was another tax he should like to see diminished, and he believed that the revenue would not be thereby diminished. While in England each individual consumed 22½lb., in Ireland each individual only consumed 4½lb. In 1824 Lord Liverpool, taking into consideration the state of Ireland, reduced the Assessed Taxes and the taxes on spirits, and the following was the result:—In January, 1823, the payments into the Exchequer amounted to 3,528,000 l., and in January 1829, after the reduction of taxation, the payments amounted to 3,749,000 l., being an increase of above 200,000 l. He thought that, in the present state of the country, Parliament was bound to show itself alive to the distress of the
528
people. He was one of those who indulged the hope that a great part of the distress was of a temporary character. He would not be so sanguine as to state that the whole was; but how much of this distress was temporary, and how much permanent, was a subject which ought to engage the attention of Parliament. He gave his support to the Motion of the noble Duke (Richmond), because he believed that in relation to some portion of the pressure, a committee might be enabled to suggest measures that would effect a considerable improvement in the state of the working classes.
The Duke of Wellingtonquite concurred with the noble Marquis who had just sat down, that it was desirable for their Lordships to adhere to the usual practice of Parliament, in making inquiries, such as that proposed, by means of committees; but he was also of opinion, that in these matters their Lordships ought to adhere to the practice of Parliament entirely and closely, and that practice had invariably been to this effect;—That when a noble Lord moved for the appointment of a committee of inquiry on any particular subject which he wished to bring under consideration, he stated specifically to the House what was the object which he intended to effect by means of a committee. That was the invariable practice in moving for such committees: and when he found it departed from in the present instance,—when he observed that it was very doubtful what was to be the particular object of the proposed committee, and that several noble Lords who had supported the Motion had each stated a different subject forinquiry,—he thought the House had reason to doubt whether there was not some object in the present Motion beyond that which appeared on the face of it. The noble Duke, in bringing forward the subject, stated that it was a motion for inquiring into the internal state of the country, with a view to the condition of the labouring poor, and in order particularly to ascertain the manner in which taxation affected productive industry. As the noble President of the Council truly stated, there was not a single branch of the Government, or of the internal policy of the country, which might not, and would not, come under discussion before a committee appointed according to the terms of this Motion. Each of the noble Lords who supported the Motion stated a

529
different object for the Committee; he had taken the trouble to write these objects down as they were mentioned, and he declared he believed there were not less than twenty important subjects proposed for consideration, including even a measure relative to the management of private property; and three or four questions concerning currency and coinage, some requiring the adoption of a silver coinage on one system, and others upon another. When he found a motion thus proposed and supported,—when he found that the words of it might be made to include every thing,—he concluded that the purpose of noble Lords was to go into what inquiries they liked, or if not, that there was some ulterior party object in view, directed against the existing Government. The noble Baron on the back bench had misunderstood his friend the noble Earl who opposed the Motion. The noble Baron was mistaken when he assimilated the committee moved for by the noble Duke to a committee lately appointed on the Motion of an hon. Gentleman in another place. That was a committee appointed to investigate the expediency of establishing Poor-laws in Ireland; and the Gentleman who moved its appointment stated specifically—at least so it appeared, as far as the report of what he said upon that occasion went—what object he had in view in his motion, and to what points he intended to direct the inquiry which he proposed to the House of Commons to institute. The conduct of the noble Duke (Richmond) was very different. A noble friend of his, it was true, had complained on a former night that the same Ministers who now consented to that inquiry in another place, had objected to a similar motion of his own two years ago. This was perfectly true; the ground of objection which he had stated to the noble Lord's Motion at the time was, that the noble Lord intended to propose the establishment of poor-laws in Ireland; and as he, in common with their Lordships, were not prepared to consent to the establishment of poor-laws in Ireland, he had opposed the motion, and the House agreed with him in rejecting the noble Lord's proposition. A noble Lord, in alluding to the recent reductions of taxation, stated that he felt full confidence in the intentions of his Majesty's servants to make further reductions if they found it possible to do so. The noble Lord thought proper
530
to state his confidence in Ministers,—a confidence which he (the Duke of Wellington) trusted they would appear to merit,—and the noble Lord refused his assent to the Motion now before the House on the ground that it implied a want of confidence in his Majesty's servants, which was not warranted by their acts. The Motion was neither more nor less, in point of fact, than a demand upon their Lordships, within eight-and-forty hours after the Minister had come down and proposed a large reduction of taxation, to agree to a declaration of want of confidence in the intention of Government to carry on the public service as economically as possible, and to do every thing in their power to relieve the country. The noble Marquis misunderstood what had been stated by his friend the noble Baron. He described the number of subjects proposed by different noble Lords for inquiry, and he went further, and said, that no doubt each of these noble Lords thought he should be a member of the Committee if appointed, and he stated the inevitable consequences of such a committee being established, and the manner in which the business would, in all probability, be done under such circumstances. The noble Marquis must have seen the conduct of his noble friend upon different committees, that it was that which became a Minister of the Crown performing his public duty, and endeavouring, by every means in his power, to elucidate the subjects under consideration upon such occasions. The noble Marquis forgot a material feature in the committee appointed a few years ago to inquire into the whole state of Ireland: he was a member of that committee, as well as a noble Earl who had taken a part in the discussion, and he begged leave to remind the noble Earl, that there was one subject which, on account of the difference of opinion existing upon it, was wholly excluded from consideration.
The Marquis of Lansdown.—It was excluded one year, and included the next.
The Duke of Wellington, in continuation, thought the noble Marquis would find that his statement was correct, and that the matter in question was excluded from the inquiry, because it was considered impossible at the time to come to an agreement upon it; and besides, it was thought a subject too important to be

531
taken into consideration by the committee. The same might be said, to a certain extent, with respect to the great and important question of Taxation. He must here observe, with respect to this committee, upon the appointment of which so many noble Lords had spoken, and to the Motion for forming which so many noble Lords had given their support, that in point of fact many of those who had said that they intended to vote for the noble Duke's proposition had declared their opinion that it would never produce any result. The noble Lord who sat on the cross-bench had stated that it was probable there would be no result from the appointment of a committee. The noble Lord appeared to dissent from this; but he begged his Lordship's pardon, he had taken down his very words, and they were, "it cannot be expected that relief should be given." But it was to afford relief that it was proposed to appoint the committee, and if "relief cannot be expected," for what good object move for its appointment? It was not, surely, in order that the discussion of a variety of questions before the committee might excite in the minds of the people hopes of some favourable result, which expectations, according to the noble Lord, must necessarily be disappointed! Surely their Lordships would not appoint a committee in order merely to give noble Lords an opportunity of discussing a variety of subjects in the committee without the prospect of any solid advantage arising from their discussions. Nor could it well be believed that this last effort of the noble and learned Lord was made with a view to annoy and derange the King's Government. Supposing that no result could be expected from the labours of a committee, was a committee to be appointed to try this question—did Government, or did it not put the truth into the King's Speech with regard to the state of the country? On former occasions he had stated various reasons for believing that the truth was stated on the subject in his Majesty's Speech, and he had not since altered his opinion—he was fully convinced that there was great distress in the country; but he did not believe that the distress was general, and he did believe that it was gradually subsiding: such was his belief at the present moment. But a noble Lord who formerly attacked Ministers for stating that the relief of many of the evils
532
complained of was beyond the power of Parliament had stated to-night that a committee might not be able to afford relief. Ministers stated, in the King's Speech, that his Majesty was convinced no pressure of temporary difficulty would induce Parliament to relax the determination it had invariably manifested to maintain inviolate the public credit, and thus to uphold the high character and permanent welfare of the country. The King's servants had thought it their duty to propose a large reduction of taxation, in order to lighten the pressure of the public burthens, a measure that he was happy to say had given great satisfaction to many, and which had been handsomely mentioned by his friend, the noble Duke at the Table, and by a noble Marquis and Baron who took part in the debate. In executing this project, Ministers had done no more than what they thought to be their duty on this occasion, with reference to the public advantage; and if, instead of a remission of taxation, they had been under the necessity of maintaining the Revenue, and keeping up the taxes of which they had been enabled to propose the repeal, they would have endeavoured to prevail on Parliament to maintain these taxes as readily and manfully as they had proposed their repeal. It afforded him great gratification to believe, as he conscientiously did, that this measure would give relief to the country without impairing the necessary efficiency of the public establishments. He thought Ministers had chosen the best mode of affording relief that was in their power; they had repealed precisely those taxes that, as compared with others, would take the smallest sum out of the Treasury, and put the largest amount into the pockets of the people; he was satisfied that the repeal would be a great relief to the country. The noble Marquis, and other noble Lords, stated their expectation, that the repeal of taxes would be carried further. He would not, at that hour of the night, go into calculations which induced him to believe that, certainly at the present moment, reduction of taxation could not be carried further consistently with a due regard to the security of the country. As Government had proceeded hitherto on the principle of reducing every establishment and office as far as possible, which was not necessary to the public service, it would continue the same practice, and endeavour to reduce every

533
branch of expenditure not absolutely necessary for the attainment of that object, hoping thereby to produce such a saving as might place other resources of economy, and the means of a further reduction of taxation, at their disposal. If Ministers succeeded in this object, so much the better; but if not,—if the public service prevented it, they would throw themselves with confidence upon Parliament, and in the discharge of their duty trust to its aid for support. If the motion of the noble Duke had been a motion to inquire into the state and administration of the Poor-laws, it might have been worth while to consider whether or not it ought not to be adopted; but at the same time he begged to remind the House, that the subject of the Poor-laws had been already repeatedly under consideration,—that there were now upon the Table of the House of Commons, and he believed upon that of their Lordships' House, reports of two or three committees, some of them detailing the very facts contained in the letter which the noble Marquis had read to the House: consequently Parliament, Government and the Public, were in complete possession of these facts, and the ends of inquiry, as far as the attainment of information was concerned, had been accomplished. It should be recollected that some of the greatest statesmen that ever lived in England—that Mr. Pitt and Mr. Windham, had attempted to deal with the difficult subject of the Poor-laws without success. It was a subject equally important, difficult and complicated; the system, as far as local practice and arrangements went, varied almost in every parish in England, more or less, and, he repeated, it was almost impossible to deal with it successfully. He appealed to the noble Earl whether it were not a subject which Parliament should approach with the utmost caution, and meddle with only after a most deliberate inquiry; they ought not to enter into it hastily, or at an inopportune period like the present: it would be better to wait till the country was restored to a state of complete prosperity, and then investigate the subject with a proper degree of attention.
Earl Stanhopegave his cordial support to the Motion of his noble friend, the Duke of Richmond. The question was, whether the country were not afflicted from one end to the other with distress unparalleled in our history—of intolerable pressure, which
534
it was impossible should continue without exciting in all classes, even amongst the most loyal and well-affected to our established institutions, a spirit of discontent which might ultimately lead to their overthrow. The noble Earl having recapitulated the two objects of the noble Duke's motion (which have been already frequently alluded to in the course of the debate), proceeded to say, that he never thought taxation, per se, the cause of all our difficulties, and of the dangers by which we were menaced: at the same time, if it were practicable at once to return to the expenditure and taxation of 1791, the change might afford us some relief; but as that was impracticable without a convulsion of society, the only thing that could be done was to replace the country in its former situation in other respects, so as to enable it to bear up against taxation without suffering an overwhelming pressure. Unlike the political economists of the day, he proposed no untried theory, no crude system of his own, he merely asked Government to return to the political principles of Lord Liverpool, previous to 1819, after which period, unfortunately, his whole political life exhibited a strange and pernicious contrast to the principles he had formerly professed. He called upon those who reverenced the memory of Lord Liverpool, and supported him by their votes in his best days, to pursue that line of conduct which could alone ensure prosperity. Expectations had been held out, but without assigning any sufficient or well-grounded reasons for entertaining them, that the distress now generally experienced would pass away. That it would at last pass away he had not the least shadow of a doubt; but, unless the evils complained of were remedied, other things would also pass away along with it; the debt and the taxes would pass away first, and it was doubtful whether the Constitution of the country would not pass away also. It was vain for the House to flatter itself with the hope that with the existing pressure of public grievances, it could refuse all inquiry, and still preserve the confidence and affections of the people. From all the information which reached him from every quarter, and seeing the indisposition of Ministers to afford adequate relief or inquiry, he considered (pray God the fear was unfounded!) that the present state of things would be best described by the pithy sentiment

535
of a celebrated foreign statesman (prince Talleyrand), who in reference to the political aspect of affairs at a certain period, declared that it was "the commencement of the conclusion." That conclusion, however the noble Duke might be confirmed in his course by majorities that enabled him to stifle inquiry, would at length arrive if he persisted in his present measures. Not being a radical reformer, like his noble Friend near him, but being attached to moderate and salutary reform, he viewed such a state of things with feelings of great apprehension.
The Duke of Richmondsaid, in reply, that he could not help expressing the feelings of astonishment with which he had heard the speech of the noble Lord, the President of the Board of Control. If that speech had been uttered out of the House, he should have designated it a libel on Parliament. If it were spoken out of doors, and there was no law sufficiently strong to reach such language—language in the highest degree inflammatory—he should then wish that a law might be framed for that purpose. That was the feeling with which he heard the speech of the noble Lord. But, on reflection, he feared that he had misunderstood the noble Lord; for surely the noble President of the Board of Control could not have been speaking of the House of Lords. No; he was opening the doors of the Cabinet—and informing their Lordships, that there presided in that Cabinet one man of great and commanding talent, who carried every thing as he pleased. He admitted the great talents and industry of that noble Duke, and he believed, that if he were properly advised and informed, he was the man who would do essential service to the country; but, unfortunately, that noble Duke was not so advised. The noble President of the Council, though he said that he would vote against the Motion, conducted his argument in such a way, that many noble Lords must have thought that he had risen to second it. Ministers did not oppose the Motion in a plain and direct manner; but they met it by the hacknied plea, that it ought to be refused, not because it did not rest on sufficient grounds, but because, forsooth, it was got up from factious motives. Was that an answer which would satisfy the country? Was it an answer which would satisfy any man with an upright, honest, and feeling mind? If it were got
536
up in the spirit of party feeling, then he was the guilty man; but he disdained, and he wholly disclaimed, the imputation, as perfectly unfounded. His character—if an humble individual like himself might speak about character—ought, he thought, to shield him from such a charge; and he hesitated not to say, that acting conformably with the character which he had borne through life, if he had wished to make a motion to turn out his Majesty's Ministers, he would have done it in a manly and straightforward way, and not by a contemptible side-wind. It might be parliamentary, for aught he knew, to make charges of this description, but he was sure it would not be allowed in civilised society to impute motives to a man which did not belong to him, and with which he was totally unacquainted. He spoke strongly, because he felt strongly, well knowing that the charge had no foundation in reality. Before their Lordships could negative his motion with propriety, they had to get rid of this one appalling fact—that there were at this moment thousands of Englishmen in a state of misery and degradation so melancholy, that the slaves at Sierra Leone were absolutely better off. They were compelled to live, if it could be called existence, upon 2½d. per day; and, therefore their Lordships were bound to inquire into and ameliorate their situation. The noble Duke (Buckingham), as a consolation to the people of this country, had stated that there was great distress in France, and also in America. With respect to France, he had not the means of judging of the correctness of that statement; but as to the situation of America, he believed the noble Duke was mistaken. He would, even at that late hour, refer to a document, which would prove that he was mistaken; he meant the speech of the President of the United States to the Congress at the opening of the Session: "The task," he said, "devolves upon me, under a provision of the Constitution, to present to you, as the federal legislature of twenty-four sovereign States, and twelve millions of happy people, a view of our affairs." He called on their Lordships to notice that; twelve millions of happy people! "Would to God," exclaimed the noble Duke, "that the King of England could state, that out of the twenty-four millions of subjects over whom he reigned, twelve millions were contented and happy; but,

537
instead of that, they were surrounded with the most deplorable misery and distress—a degree of distress which Ministers themselves did not dare to deny, although they would not inquire into it.' The First Magistrate of the United States went on to say, "In communicating with you for the first time, it is to me a source of unfeigned satisfaction, calling for mutual gratulation and devout thanks to Providence that we are at peace with all mankind, and that our country exhibits the most cheering evidence of general welfare and progressive improvement." Thus it appeared that thanks were given to Providence in America, whilst in England Providence was graciously permitted to bear the imputation of causing national distress. This was the case with America, and therefore he had a right to say that the noble Duke had been very much misinformed. But perhaps the noble Duke thought that the speech of the President was not worthy of more credit than speeches delivered elsewhere. One cause assigned by the noble Duke was, that we got fresh butter from Holland by steam. Now he would read an account of the butter from the Netherlands. In 1826 there were 160,000 cwt.; in 1827,136,000 cwt.; in 1828, 143,000 cwt.; and from other countries there were imported, in 1826, 273,327 cwt.; in 1827, 291,579 cwt.; and in 1828, 278,000 cwt. Here, therefore, was a decrease, and thus the argument founded on the butter melted away. A noble Marquis (the Lord Lieutenant for Kent) had adverted to the different parties in the State. Now he begged leave to declare under what party he ranked himself. He was not of any theoretical party; he was of that party—of that class of men, if such a class existed—who, in their public actions, had no other object in view but the good of their country. He belonged to that party which had the welfare of the country most warmly at heart: he would toll the noble Lord, and all who talked of factious motives being the foundation of his conduct, and that of his noble Friend who supported him, that he would never be able to influence his vote in that House, or to intimidate him and his noble friends by calling them ultra-tories, ultra-whigs, or whatever other name they might be pleased to use. He would vote for Ministers when he thought they were right, and he would oppose them in every fair parliamentary way when he thought they were
538
wrong. He trusted that the mere imputation of being actuated by factious motives would not be deemed sufficient to induce their Lordships to say 'Not-content' to his Motion. He implored them to pause and consider this subject well. He conjured them not to give the radicals abroad this additional reason for reproaching them, that when a case of distress was fully proved and substantiated—as he had a right to say it had been by himself, and still more ably by his noble friends who had supported him—they had, without assigning any reason, refused inquiry. He pledged his honour that he had no motive in bringing forward this motion but the good of his country. Neither had those who supported him any object but the public benefit. They had come forward from a sense of duty, to support this question, and for them he demanded that justice which he called for for himself,—namely, that their Lordships should believe that this was a straightforward, plain, and manly Motion.
Their Lordships then divided, when the numbers appeared—Content, present 39, Proxies 22, Total 61, Not Content, present 69, Proxies 72; Total, 141.—Majority 80.

List of the Minority and Majority.

MINORITY.

Dukes.

Eldon

Cumberland

Rosebery

Gloucester

Falmouth

Richmond

Stradbroke

Argyll

Kinnoul

Marquisses.

Viscounts.

Lansdown

Granville

Salisbury

Goderich

Clanricarde

Melbourne

Sligo

Maynard

Ailesbury

Barons.

Earls.

Teynham

Winchilsea

King

Carlisle

Holland

Ferrers

Vernon

Cowper

Calthorpe

Tankerville

Lilford

Stanhope

Redesdale

Radnor

Rivers

Digby

Seaford

Mansfield

Bishops.

Carnarvon

Bath and Wells

Romney

Llandaff

PROXIES.

Dukes.

Marquis.

Newcastle

Anglesey

Grafton

Earls.

Devonshire

Guilford

Marlborough

Orford

539

Sheffield

Churchill

Bradford

Northwick

Manvers

Lorton

Lords.

Haddington

Walsingham

Howard de Walden

Wodehouse

Yarborough

Stowell

Feversham

Kenyon

Duncan

MAJORITY.

The Lord Chancellor

Darnley

Archbishops.

Clare

Canterbury

Clanwilliam

York

Fife

Dukes.

Viscounts.

St. Alban's

Arbuthnot

Buckingham

Hereford

Gordon

Melville

Wellington

Barons.

Marquisses.

Arden

Bute

Bayning

Bath

Clifden

Conyngham

Clifford

Hertford

Colville

Camden

De Dunstanville

Cholmondeley

Dunally

Earls.

Ellenborough

Bathurst

Farnborough

Rosslyn

Forrester

Shaftesbury

Glenlyon

Pomfret

Harris

Malmesbury

Hill

Charleville

Manners

Jersey

Maryborough

De La Warr

Montagu

Dudley

Prudhoe

Wicklow

Saltoun

Hardwicke

Stourton

Verulam

Wallace

Glengall

Wharncliffe

Westmorland

Willoughby d'Eresby

Cornwallis

Bishops.

Chesterfield

Bristol

Huntingdon

Rochester

Amherst

Chester

Aberdeen

London

Gower

Winchester

Cassilis

Oxford

PROXIES.

Dukes.

Tweeddale

Clarence

Winchester

Beaufort

Earls.

Bedford

Abingdon

Buccleuch

Aboyne

Leeds

Ashburnham

Manchester

Balcarras

Montrose

Belmore

Northumberland

Breadalbane

Rutland

Brownlow

Marguisses.

Caledon

Cleveland

Cardigan

Donegall

Cathcart

Downshire

Chatham

Lothian

Courtown

Stafford

Elgin

Thomond

Errol

540

Glasgow

Clinton

Harcourt

Dormer

Hopetoun

Douglas (of Douglas)

Howe

Dufferin and Claneboye

Lauderdale

Macclesfield

Le Despencer

Morton

Monson

Poulett

Plunkett

Scarborough

Ravensworth

Somers

Rolle

St. Germans

Scarsdale

Waldegrave

Selsey

Warwick

Skelmersdale

Wilton

Stafford

Viscounts.

St. Helens

Beresford

Stuart de Rothsay

Exmouth

Bishops.

Gort

Carlisle

Northland

Chichester

Sidney

Hereford

Barons.

Lichfield

Abercromby

St. David's

Bagot