Sitting of 19 April 1842

MINUTSS.
BILIS. Public.—1°. Punishment of Death (Ireland); Civil Bill Decrees (Ireland); Turnpike Roads (Ireland).
Private.—2° Slug Road.
Reported.—Kingsclere Inclosure; Ormesby Inclosure.
3°. and passed:—Westoin-super-Maro Improvement and Market.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Comber, and Kilmore, against the present system of Education (Ireland).—From Ballydown, and Moneyrea, for Rendering Valid Marriages solemnized by Presbyterian Ministers in Ireland between Members of the Established Church and Protestant Dissenters.

KINGSCLERE ENCLOSURE.
Mr. Laboucherebrought up the report of the

805
Kingsclere Enclosure Bill. On the question that the amendment made by the Committee be now read a second time,
Mr. Godson> said, the intention of this bill was to enclose a certain tract of common land. A similar measure had been before the House in 1834, when it was defeated; and, such being the fact, he begged leave, as shortly as possible, to advert to the circumstances of the case. The common fields in question consisted of 1,700 acres, and a few rich farmers and others who did not reside in the immediate neighbourhood, but who would be benefitted by it, were favourable to the bill; but a number of poor persons, he would say some hundreds, would be deeply injured if the measure were passed in its present form. To the following clause he wished to call the particular attention of the House, as being in his opinion most objectionable:
"And be it enacted, that all encroachments and enclosures which shall have been made by any person from or upon any part of the lands to be enclosed within twenty years next before the passing of this act, whether any amerciament, annual rent, or any money payment or acknowledgment, hath or hath not been paid in respect of the same, to or for the use of the lord of the soil or any other person, shall be deemed parcel of the lands to be enclosed, and shall be divided, allotted, and enclosed accordingly. Provided always, that it shall be lawful for the several persons who shall be in possession of any such encroachment or enclosure, or in the receipt of the rent thereof, at the time of the passing of this act, to take down and remove all such buildings, fences, and other erections as shall then be thereon, and to convert the materials thereof to their own use, provided such removal take place within a certain time, to be limited by the commissioner for that purpose, by a notice delivered to the persons respectively in possession of such encroachments, or affixed upon-some conspicuous part of such encroachment or enclosure."
He had read this clause to the House for the purpose of showing how unjust was the principle on which it proceeded; for nothing could be more unjust than that the lord of the manor or the freeholder should see individuals, from time to time, expending money on the ground, for five, ten, or perhaps fifteen years, and then turning round and telling them that, because they had not held it for twenty years, it should be taken away from them and enclosed; this was a proceeding which, he thought, ought not to be per-
806
mitted. The people ought to be allowed to have a portion of this land at a moderate price; and he believed that in the committee on the Ormsby Enclosure Bill a proposition of that nature was carried; but no such thing was to be found in this bill. He should, therefore, move "that the bill be recommitted."
Sir W. Heathcotesaid, that with regard to the justice of the clause to which allusion had been made, he dissented wholly and entirely from the observations of the hon. Member who had just sat down. He did not see the necessity of drawing a distinction in this case other than that which the law of the land had generally laid down, which required a possession of twenty years; and he could see no ground for giving to wrongdoers advantages which the law denied to them. With respect to the light in which the measure was viewed, he begged to observe, that he had presented a petition in favour of the enclosure signed by 200 labourers. Those persons knew that work and employment were wanting in that neighbourhood, and they felt that this measure would immediately bring a considerable quantity of land into cultivation. He had also presented a petition, signed by seventy-seven individuals of the higher class, in favour of the bill, which they approved of with reference to its general principle. The general principle of the bill had been sanctioned on the second reading. It was then sent to a committee, where there were two points to be considered;—1st, whether the preamble had been proved; and 2d, whether the clauses were proper for carrying out the object contemplated by the preamble. The committee, after due inquiry, were unanimously of opinion that the preamble was proved, and that the clauses were proper. The only point of difference arose as to the reception of certain evidence. One Member was of opinion that the evidence in question should be received; but the chairman and the other members thought that it should not. Now, he would take upon himself to say, that if the committees of that House were to be guided by any of the ordinary rules of evidence, the evidence tendered in this case, and refused, must be, and was rightly, rejected. That evidence consisted of a copy of a paper that had been burnt when the House of Commons was destroyed by fire; a copy of a re-

807
port that bad been formerly made by a surveyor on this subject. The committee were expected, without any one being called to prove that this was a correct copy of the report laid before a former committee, to receive it at once as evidence. With regard to the course taken by the committee on that point, he saw no reason whatsoever for altering his opinion. Then the parties opposed to the measure asked for the re-committal of the report, on the ground of the necessity of further time being allowed, for the purpose of enabling them to bring forward evidence in support of their allegations. Now, he contended that sufficient time had been allowed, as would appear by a' reference to the proceedings. The bill was read a second time in February, and it stood for committal on the 15th of that month. The committee was not appointed till the 12th of April. The opponents of this measure had all that interval to take such steps as they might deem necessary. They, however, made no proposition to the committee for the withdrawal or the alteration of any clause, but objected to the preamble altogether; and they now came forward on the ground that time had not been given them to do justice to their case. If the House granted further time on such a plea as that which was now put forward, then they would have every bill, after its merits had been fully discussed and fairly decided in committee, subject to be again opened for re-argument, whenever any party chose to insist on fresh inquiry because some difference of opinion existed. Mr. Brotherton said, it was the duty of that House to throw its shield over these poor people. In 1834, it appeared so clearly that the cottagers would be injured by the measure then introduced, that it was thrown out. In 1835 a similar measure was, he believed, abandoned. It was now made matter of charge against these poor cottagers that they had not employed counsel to oppose the bill. But where were they to find money for that purpose? From all the circumstances which had come under his observation with respect to this case, it did appear to him that it had not been sufficiently inquired into, and therefore the report ought to be sent back. The committee had, it appeared, refused to adjourn a day or two, in order that they might procure the necessary evidence to authenticate the report which they wished the committee to take into consideration.
808
When all the circumstances were looked into he conceived that the House was bound, before they agreed to a bill like this, which was calculated to injure many poor persons, to give them every opportunity for the defence of their just interests. If they had not been able to offer an effectual resistance to the bill on account of their poverty, that was the very reason that ought to induce the House to assist them.
Mr. Laboucheresaid, he had no personal interest whatever in this matter, but as he had happened to be chairman of the committee he wished to say a few words in explanation of his opinions. He conceived that the measure would, generally, operate in a beneficial manner. It should be observed that the place proposed to be enclosed was not in the neighbourhood of any great town, and it was situated in a part of the country where there was a very great want of employment. The land intended to be enclosed was good land, capable of being cultivated, and he had no doubt whatever that the interests of these poor people would be greatly assisted, instead of being deteriorated by a measure that was calculated to bring that land into cultivation, and of thus affording additional employment. Certainly they would reap more benefit from it when enclosed than any which they could hope to derive from it in its present state. With respect to the amendment of the hon. Member, he saw no necessity for it. The question had been aheady fully examined; and he denied that the measure tended to deprive any individual of the smallest possible right to which he could exhibit a just claim. Persons had encroached on this common; but they had not held those encroachments for twenty years, and therefore, they could advance no proper claim to that which they had enclosed. Those Gentlemen who supported their demand wished to give to them a legal right, which he held to be a most dangerous principle to advance. So far from those persons having any just right to complain, he contended that it was perfectly competent, at any moment, for the lord of the manor to proceed against them, and to eject them, they not having been in possession of the ground encroached upon for twenty years. He, therefore, did not conceive that they were inflicting any hardship on those parties which the law, if it were put in force, would not also inflict. The bill then before the House provided for them

809
as far as it possibly could, by indemnifying them for any expense which they might have incurred. But it went no further than the law went, and very properly refused to give those people a freehold where previously they had none.
Lord G. Somersetwas of opinion that the House ought not to agree to the amendment of the hon. Member for Kidderminster. The rights and claims of the parties had been fairly and properly considered. Everything they had to allege in support of their case had been heard, and as the matter had been before the House repeatedly, they could not justly say that they were unprepared. They certainly had not made out to his mind such a case of hardship as called on that House to interfere with the report of the committee.
Mr. Fieldenwas of opinion, that the parties complaining ought to be allowed to be fully heard. It was the especial duty of the House to protect individuals situated as these poor people were. He saw very good grounds for sending the report back to the committee. Those who resided at a distance from the place were, he believed, likely to derive advantage from this measure, but those who lived on the spot would, on the contrary, be seriously injured by it.
The House divided on the question that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question—Ayes 137; Noes 15; Majority 122.

List of the AYES.

A'Court, Capt.

Campbell, A.

Aglionby, H. A.

Christopher, R. A.

Aldam, W.

Chute, W. L. W.

Allix, J. P.

Clive, hon. It. H.

Antrobus, E.

Cochrane, A.

Arbuthnott, hon. H.

Copeland, Mr. Ald.

Astell, W.

Courtenay, Visct.

Bagge, W.

Craig, W. G.

Bailey, J.

Cripps, W.

Bailey, J. jun.

Darby, G.

Baillie, Col.

Denison, E. B.

Baillie, H. J.

Dickinson, F. II.

Bankes, G.

Divett, E.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Douro, Marquess of

Baring, H. B.

Drummond, H. H.

Barnard, E. G.

Duffield, T.

Barrington, Visct.

Dugdale, W. S.

Beckett, W.

East, J. B.

Bernard, Visct.

Estcourt, T. G. B.

Blake, Sir V.

Fitzroy, Capt.

Bowes, J.

Fleming, J. W.

Bradshaw, J.

Forbes, W.

Broadwood, H.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Bryan, G.

Gore, hon. R.

Busfeild. W.

Granger, T, C.

810

Greene, T.

Parker, J.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Patten, J. W.

Grimsditch, T.

Philips, M.

Hamilton, C. J. B.

Pigot, Sir R.

Hamilton, W. J.

Plumptre, J. P.

Hastie, A.

Plumridge, Capt.

Hay, Sir A. L.

Ponsonby, hon. C. F.

Hayes, Sir E.

A. C.

Henley, J. W.

Price, R.

Hepburn, Sir T. B.

Pusey, P.

Hill, Lord M.

Reade, W. M.

Hillsborough, Earl of

Rolleston, Col.

Hogg, J. W.

Rous, hon. Capt.

Hornby, J.

Rushbrooke, Col.

Howard, hn. C.W. G.

Scott, hon. F.

Howard, hon. H.

Shirley, E. P.

Humphery, Mr. Ald.

Sibthorp, Col.

Hutt, W.

Smith, A.

Irton, S.

Somerset, Lord G.

James, Sir W. C.

Stuart, W. V.

Johnson, W. G.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Johnston, A.

Thesiger, F.

Kemble, H.

Thompson, Mr. Ald.

Lambton, H.

Towneley, J.

Lefroy, A.

Trench, Sir F. W.

Liddell, hon. H. T.

Trollope, Sir J.

Lockhart, W.

Trotter, J.

Lowther, J. H.

Tufnell, H.

Lowther, hon. Col.

Vane, Lord H.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Vere, Sir C. B.

Mackinnon, W. A.

Verner, Col.

Mahon, Visct.

Vernon, G. H.

Mangles, R. D.

Waddington, H. S.

Manners, Lord C. S.

Wall, C. B.

Manners, Lord J.

Wawn, J. T.

March, Earl of

Wilshere, W.

Marton, G.

Winnington, Sir T. E.

Martyn, C. C.

Wood, C.

Maunsell, T. P.

Worsley, Lord

Miles. W.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Mitcalfe, H.

Wyndham, Col. C.

Mundy, E. M.

Yorke, hon. E. T.

Murray, C. R. S.

O'Brien, A. S,

TELLERS.

Ord, W.

Labouchere, rt. hn. H.

Packe, C. W.

Heathcote, Sir W.

List of the NOES.

Baskerville, T. B. M.

Muntz, G. F.

Bowring, Dr.

Murphy, F. S.

Butler, hon. Col.

Rundle, J.

Crawford, W. S.

Scott, R.

Duncombe, T.

Thornely, T.

Elphinstone, H.

Williams, W.

Fielden, J.

TELLERS.

Harris, J. Q.

Brotherton, J.

James, W.

Godson, R.

Amendment read a second time, and agreed to. Bill to be engrossed.

SOUTHWARK IMPROVEMENT (No. 2) BILL.
Lord J. Mannersmoved the third reading of the Southwark Improvements Bill (No. 2.)
Bill read a third time.
Mr. R. Palmermoved the following clause to be added as a rider to the bill,
"And be it enacted, that every lessee for lives of Church property, purchased under this Act, shall receive compensation from the Commissioners for the loss, injury, or damage he shall sustain on account of his being deprived of the usual and accustomed expectation of renewal, or successive renewals, of any subsisting estate or interest in any lands or premises required for the purpose of this Act; and that for the purpose of settling the amount of the compensation to be paid, the powers and provisions in this Act applicable to settling or assessing of other cases of compensation, shall apply and extend to compensation under this section.
Clause read a first time.
On the question that the clause be read a second time,
Lord G. Somersetsaid, the House perhaps was not aware of the important principle involved in the clause moved by the hon. Member, and on that account he thought that they should not be called upon to adopt or reject it without further consideration. He should, therefore, propose, that the debate be adjourned for a few days, and that the clause be printed with the votes.
Mr. R. Palmerwould at once acquiesce in the proposition of the noble Lord.
Sir R. Inglissaid, he should oppose the adjournment, as it would only have the effect of raising the whole question upon church leases in reference to a private and local act. A similar clause to the one now moved was introduced into the Farnham Rectory and the Southwark Improvements (No. 1.) Bills, and what was the consequence? That both those measures were abandoned. If the hon. Mover wished for the decision of the House upon the subject, he could ask it in a more formal manner; but let him not endeavour to establish a proposition by adding to a private bill a clause which indirectly went further than was connected with the bill.
Lord G. Somersetmoved that the debate be adjourned until that day se'nnight.
Motion agreed to.
Debate adjourned.

COLONIAL EMIGRATION.
Mr. P. M. Stewart,wished to put a question to the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies, on a subject of great importance to this country as well as to our different colonies— that of emigration. He was intrusted with petitions from many hundreds, he might
812
say thousands of persons, who were unable to obtain employment in this country, and who were extremely anxious to seek employment in our colonies, if they could gain the means of transporting themselves to those colonies. Those persons had heard that the demand for labour in the colonies was very extensive, and that the rate of remuneration was at a tempting height, compared with that which they had any chance of obtaining at home. He hoped his noble Friend would give explicit answers to two questions which he would propose. He wished to know first, whether it was true that there was in the colonies a great demand for labour, and that high remunerating wages were given; and whether there was an intention on the part of the Government to afford any facilities in the means of transport to persons desirous of emigrating from this country to our colonies?
Lord Stanleysaid, no one could entertain a higher sense than he did of the importance of the questions which had been proposed by the hon. Gentleman; and he trusted he should obtain the indulgence of the House, if he gave a somewhat detailed reply to those questions. The first inquiry of the hon. Gentleman was, whether there now prevailed in our various colonies an extensive demand for a number of emigrants who might obtain high remunerating wages? Although he was aware that it was a delicate matter for a member of the Government to state his opinion as to the comparative demand for labour which existed at any particular time in different possessions of the Crown, he thought it was right that no misunderstanding should be allowed to prevail on a subject of such high importance, especially at this season of the year, to a large portion of the labouring population of the country. He would, in replying to the question of the hon. Gentleman, leave out of consideration our West-India colonies, and confine his remarks to our Australian and North American colonies. For the last few years the rule had been to apply very considerable portions of the sums derived from the sale of land in those colonies to the encouragement of emigration. In some cases these sums were applied under the direction of the Government at home, and in other cases under the direction of the local Governments of the colonies, tickets being issued to shipowners for the con-

813
veyance of emigrants, on whose arrival in the colonies a stipulated sum was granted. He had been informed by his noble Friend who preceded him in the Colonial-office (Lord J. Russell), that there were outstanding bounty orders for the conveyance of emigrants to the colony; of New South Wales, available for two years from November, 1840, applying to from 40,000 to 50,000 emigrants, and involving an expense — supposing they were all acted upon—of from 800,000 l. to 900,000 l. He had felt it his duty to adopt stringent regulations for checking this system. He had received a communication from the Governor of New South Wales, stating, that in consequence of the great number of emigrants introduced, a heavy amount of debt had been entailed upon the colony, and entreating that steps might be taken to prevent an enormous; influx of immigrants, which might be productive of most serious results. During last year the number of emigrants to New South Wales was 22,750. When com.; munications were received from the Governor, 12,750 of those emigrants had arrived in the colony, and 10,000 were on their passage. This influx of immigrants would involve the colony in debt to the amount of 111,000 l. The Governor stated that, even before the 10,000 emigrants had arrived in the colony, there was no demand for labour, but, on the contrary, there was a difficulty in obtaining employment. He thought it right to make this statement publicly, that the labouring classes might be aware of the true state of the case; for if capital did not emigrate in proportion to labour, those who sought employment in the colonies might involve themselves in more calamitous distress than that which they suffered here. He believed the state of things to which he had referred as existing in New South Wales was not permanent; it was probably only temporary. It arose from the almost entire cessation of the land sales a short time back, which had produced embarrassments in the colony; and he believed that emigration to that country might be very efficiently conducted, if its amount was duly regulated. The Governor had stated, that he considered that the colony—the population of which was 130,000—was capable of receiving annually from 8,000 to 10,000 immigrants with great advantage. During last year, however, as he had stated, the number of immigrants into that
814
colony was nearly 23,000, more than double the number which the Governor considered ought to be introduced. He could not, therefore, on the part of Government—even if they had funds at their disposal, which they had not—recommend the encouragement of extensive emigration on the part of the labouring classes. Emigration to Van Diemen's Land was now conducted to a considerable extent; and during the last year about 1,500 immigrants had entered that colony. The colony of Western Australia possessed very limited capacity for receiving immigrants, though he believed it was in a prosperous state. The demand for labour was to the amount of 150 to 200 emigrants; and preparations were already made for sending out that number. He need scarcely say, that South Australia had [during the last year been in a very disastrous condition; the land sales had ceased, and the financial affairs of the colony were in a deplorable state. The population was 14,000 or 15,000; and owing to the abandonment of Government works, and the enormous expenditure which had been indulged for some time and had given a false appearance of prosperity having ceased, 1,200 persons in that colony were actually living as paupers, maintained at the public expense. He could not speak with confidence of the colony of New Zealand. He believed that if a sum of 10,000 l. or 12,000 l. was available for the transport of emigrants, New Zealand offered a better prospect than any of our colonies in that quarter of the globe of affording employment to the labouring classes; but he spoke only of present appearances, and gave no opinion as to its permanent prosperity. He abstained from expressing any opinion as to thos settlements in New Zealand which were under the management of the New Zealand Company, and who were the best judges of the proportions of labour to capital which would be most suitable to their own settlement. He had recently been led to think that a greater number of immigrants had been introduced into some of those settlements than was warranted by the amount of capital employed, and the consequent means of labour afforded. The case of the North American colonies differed entirely from that of those to which he had been alluding. In the North American colonies the Government had not any funds, nor means of raising funds,

815
which could be applied to the purposes of emigration. The proceeds of the land sales were paid over to the local Legislature, and it rested with the local Legislatures alone to decide whether any portion of those proceeds should be devoted to the purposes of emigration. He believed, that at this time those colonies exhibited a very favourable prospect of affording employment to great numbers of the labouring class of emigrants. The result of experience proved, that the least extent of hardship and difficulty was sustained by emigrants who went out to those colonies early in the year, and who had thus an opportunity of obtaining employment during the summer, and of establishing themselves in the colonies. He would recommend emigrants to apply for advice and assistance to the Government emigration agent at the port at which they arrived, for though the agent could not afford them any pecuniary aid, he would be enabled to give them information as to the best means of obtaining employment, and on other subjects, which might prove extremely useful, especially as emigrants of the labouring class, who arrived late in the summer or autumn, were frequently quite unprepared to encounter the severity of a Canadian winter, and consequently suffered great distress. He thought it right, while alluding to emigration to Canada, to inform his hon. Friend (Mr. P. Stewart) that, though the general condition and prospects of the emigrants who went out last year had been favourable, the class which had suffered the greatest hardships and privations was the weavers from Paisley and Glasgow, who were not accustomed to out-door labour. Although such persons were, in the end, likely to be most valuable settlers, they were in the first instance exposed to great hardships. He hoped he had given a full answer to the questions proposed by the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. P. M. Stewartthanked the noble Lord for the information he had afforded the House on the subject of emigration. With respect to the observation of the noble Lord in allusion to the weavers of Glasgow and Paisley, he could assure the noble Lord that many of those persons were accustomed to out-door employment.

ARNAUT TROOPS IN SYRIA.
Dr. Bowringsaid, last year a great number
816
of irregular Arnaut troops were stationed in Syria, and were guilty of such gross outrages that representations were made to the Porte, which led to their withdrawal. It was now rumoured that it was the intention of the Turkish Government to send a body of these troops into Syria, to occupy the fortresses along the coast; and he wished to know if her Majesty's Government had received any information on the subject.
Sir R. Peel:Besides the question which the hon. Gentleman who spoke last' has put to me, the gallant Commodore on the other side has given a notice; and perhaps those two hon. Members and the House will think it convenient that I should give an answer which may suffice to supply the information which both hon. Members require. The questions which have been put on this occasion are such as I should hot have thought it necessary or fitting to answer under ordinary circumstances; but I am sure the House will feel that I, as a Minister of the Crown, am placed in circumstances of rather an anomalous kind. It must be well known to every one present that Syria and the Porte stand in relation to each other in a very peculiar position; and I am sure the House will also agree with me that nothing could be more impolitic than for us to interfere in the domestic arrangements of any foreign state; but still it is not altogether inexpedient that I should say a few words in reply to the questions which have been put. One of them is this—Does the Porte employ a certain description of force in Syria? Does the Porte employ a certain officer in Syria? In the first place, I need hardly remind the House that it is utterly impossible for me to undertake the administration of affairs in Syria. And if it were practicable, I must be allowed to say, that it is a task above all others open to various and insuperable objections. To attempt any thing of the sort would be at once to paralyse the authority of the Porte, and to make us wholly responsible for the administration of public affairs in that part of the world. I am quite sure the House will agree with me that we are bound in a most especial degree to guard against the admission of the principle that we have anything to do with the domestic affairs of Turkey; but, nevertheless, I readily acknowledge that the hon. Member

817
and the gallant Officer opposite were perfectly justified in putting the questions which they did. The information that the gallant Commodore requires relates to the employment of a certain officer, Omar Pacha, by the Porte as governor of Lebanon. The gallant Officer has asked whether the Turkish government have made that appointment and refused to cancel it. Now, I do not hesitate to state that the appointment of that officer was a most improper appointment. The ground upon which I answer the question of the gallant Commodore is this:—That during the Syrian campaign assurances were given by the Porte to the British authorities upon the subject of the government of Lebanon, which gave to those authorities a claim to the intervention of the British Government to see that the engagements of the Porte were fulfilled. The British Government has accordingly remonstrated with the Porte against the continuance in office of Omar Pacha. There are circumstances in the life of that officer which make his appointment a very unwarrantable one. Assurances had been received from the Porte that Omar Pacha should be removed, and that some other arrangement should be made for the administration of the affairs of Lebanon. As to the question put by the hon. Gentleman opposite, respecting the despatch of troops by the Porte to Syria, I have only to state, that on the 6th of April instructions were sent to Sir Stratford Canning, our Ambassador at the Porte, desiring him to represent to the Government at Constantinople our strong conviction that nothing but evil and confusion could result from the sending of Albanian troops to Syria; but, in anticipation of those instructions, Sir Stratford Canning, without waiting for authority from home, had earnestly deprecated the employment of those troops in Syria, and he received an assurance that they would not be employed in the interior of the country; that they should be confined to garrison duty, and not sent up into Lebanon; that their services would be limited as much as possible to St. Jean d'Acre, and other towns, and that the people of Lebanon would be protected from them. I am bound to say, it was stated to our Minister at the Porte that—
" It was with astonishment and deep concern we beard of the employment of Albanian troops by the Porte in Syria, and that it was
818
thought by her Majesty's Government most essential that the Sultan's pleasure should be taken with as little delay as possible, and taken in connexion with our representation on this subject."
Feeling as we did great alarm at the possibility of a repetition of the scenes which have occurred, we thought it our duty to lose no time in addressing a strong representation to the Porte, for we conceived that putting an end to such a state of things was essential to the tranquillity of Syria, and the welfare of Turkey.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
Mr. Huttrose for the purpose of inquiring from the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he was prepared to lay before the House any information respecting the administration of justice in boroughs since the passing of the Municipal Corporations Act.
Sir J. Grahamreplied, that the hon. Gentleman had given notice of a motion on the subject of the manner in which magistrates were appointed in municipal corporations, and that would afford a convenient opportunity for replying to the question which the hon. Member now put. He would have been prepared to give to that question a fitting reply if the hon. Member had furnished him with any previous intimation as to the nature of the question. For the notice of motion which the hon. Member had given, he was greatly indebted to him. This day fortnight, when that notice came under consideration, he should perhaps be prepared to give him a reply to the question which had now been put.
Mr. Aglionbysaid, that certain complaints had been forwarded to the Home-office, and he wished to know whether they might expect to have those laid on the Table of the House?
Sir J. Grahamobserved, that it might be more agreeable to the hon. Member than useful to the public that papers impugning the conduct of the Home Secretary should be laid upon the Table of that House; but of this he could assure him, that nothing should be withheld which could with propriety be communicated.
Mr. Huttsaid, he did not ask what complaints had been made against the right hon. Baronet—his question merely related to the manner in which justice had been administered in boroughs since the passing of the Municipal Corporations Act.
Sir J. Graham;If the hon. Member

819
made a motion, it should receive the fullest attention—if he moved for returns, they should be granted as fully as was consistent with the public interest—and if he put a specific question, he should receive a specific answer.
Mr. Aglionbybegged to explain, he never meant to express a wish for the production of complaints against the right hon. Baronet He merely referred to complaints against the system.

INCOME-TAX (IRELAND).
Mr. O' Connellwished to know from the right hon. Baronet opposite whether the salaries of the Irish judges, which were paid out of the consolidated fund, were to be made liable to the Income-tax?
Sir R. Peel;I am not yet quite prepared to state to the House what may be done with reference to the salaries of public officers, and therefore I have to request that a locus penitentiœ may be allowed me; but I can venture to say that, with respect to all appointments in Ireland of a permanent nature requiring that the holders of them should be stationary in that country, the Income-tax is not to be charged. With respect to those public functionaries who are not stationary, they are to be liable to the Income-tax. Thus, a commissioner of customs might have to pay the tax though resident in Ireland, while an Irish judge would not be liable.

IPSWICH ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Mr. Wasonrose, pursuant to notice, for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to the injustice practised by the majority of the Ipswich Election Committee, in the different conduct pursued by them towards the witnesses before them, as such witnesses happen to give evidence for or against the political party to which the majority belong.
The Speaker:The motion of the hon. Member is in all respects so irregular and so unparliamentary, that I have thought it necessary at once to interfere and stop the hon. Member. His motion implies a censure upon the conduct of a committee which is still sitting. It is contrary to the rules of proceeding in this House to arraign the conduct of any committee until after it makes its report, and it is in the highest degree irregular to allude to its proceedings in the manner proposed by the hon. Member; and I wish to put it to the hon. Member that the committee to which his notion refers stands in a peculiarly inde-
820
pendent position towards this House. Its proceedings are conducted under an act of Parliament to try the merits of a controverted election. It is, therefore, clearly not decorous to allude to the conduct of Members composing that committee.
Mr. Wasonsaid, that, of course, it was his duty to bow implicitly to the decision of the Chair; but he thought he had sufficiently guarded himself by the terms of his notice, and he wished to add, that he did not intend to conclude with any motion. All that he wanted to do was to call the attention of the House to that, which he conceived to be a breach of privilege.
Mr. Pakingtongreatly regretted that the: forms of Parliament rendered it impossible for the hon. Member to bring forward the; motion of which he had given notice, and therefore prevented his repelling with the utmost indignation the calumnious and unfounded charge which such a motion involved. It was his painful duty to preside;over the proceedings of a court which had to investigate the manner in which the late Ipswich election had been carried on, and, i though on account of the formal objection stated from the Chair, such a motion could not be entertained; the committee courted investigation, and they did most earnestly hope that at some future period an opportunity would be afforded them of vindicating their own conduct and motives by allowing the hon. Member to bring forward his motion. He thought it right to add, that though the committee were unanimous as to the character of the evidence, they, were not unanimous as to the manner in which it should be followed up.
Mr. Renniedid not concur with his hon. i Colleague; but he felt that it was out of, order to proceed with the matter.
Sir R. Inglisthought, that the words which fell from the Chair ought to be re corded, or the motion ought to be expunged, as was the case in the year 1835.
The Speakersaid, mere notices of motions were never entered in the journals.

FRAUDS OF MANUFACTURERS—THE TRUCK SYSTEM.
Mr. Ferrandrose, pursuant to notice, to move the following resolutions:—
" That this House considers as highly criminal the conduct of any person or persons who may attempt to induce others to give false evidence before a committee of this House, I and will inflict condign punishment on all such persons, and will also direct them to be prosecuted.
" That this House will protect and bear

821
harmless every working man who gives true evidence before any committee which may be appointed to inquire into the frauds committed by manufacturers and others, to the injury of the trade of this country, and of the labouring classes.
"That a Select Committee, to inquire into the existence of frauds in the various manufactures of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; also to inquire into the existence of frauds and oppressions, either directly or indirectly, committed by certain manufacturers of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, upon the persons, employed by them; and also by the workers of mines, collieries, and railways, upon the labourers in their employment."
The hon. Member said, that in rising to perform the duty which he had undertaken, he felt, that he had placed himself under a heavy weight of responsibility. Every class of manufacturers in Great Britain and Ireland had their eyes on him. It was felt by the whole community, that we were not in that position to which our skill, capital, and industry entitled us; and it could not but at the same time, be felt, that the motions which he had submitted to the House, ought to have proceeded from certain hon. Members at the other side. But though, perhaps, it might be thought, that the motion ought to have proceeded from others rather than from him, he yet trusted to the kind attention of the House to grant him a favourable hearing. When he first brought forward the charges which were involved in his motion, he was induced to do so in self-defence—he was driven into it by the accusations brought against the landed interest—throughout the whole country, men were hired for the purpose of using the most violent language—placards of the most inflammatory nature were posted in every town and village. The working classes were told, that the evils which they had to endure, were not imputable to any accidental occurrences—were not, in any respect, imputable to their employers, but were solely owing to the conduct of the lauded interest; it was the landed interest, they were told, which deprived them of food—it was the landed interest, they were told, which dried the mother's breast, and excited the outcries of the famished infant, and no one was found to urge the truth upon the attention of the working classes. He and those who generally coincided in opinion with him, did not subscribe to those assertions. They repu-
822
diated the assertion, that the landed interest were the parties to blame, and, on the contrary, affirmed, that the manufacturers themselves, were the causes of that distress under which the working people suffered. The motion of which he had given notice comprehended two resolutions, one of which undertook to deal with a matter which had already been made the subject of a Standing Order of that House. It was important, he conceived, to let the people know, that they would be protected from the effects of any false evidence which the manufacturers might get up against them. It was also important to let the people know, that the House of Commons would really protect them from the consequences of freely and faithfully giving evidence before a committee of that House. They should be assured of enjoying absolute and perfect security for such of the working classes as might be examined before a select committee. The fact was, that the working classes would not venture to come before a committee of that House, if they did not receive such an assurance, for otherwise the prevailing opinion amongst them was, that their utter ruin must ensue. It was well known, that the late Mr. Sadler had done much with a view to improve the condition of the working classes, and they had his testimony to show, that those who were called upon to give evidence, bad been severe sufferers from the consequences of their temerity in so offending those from whom they derived their means of employment. They obeyed the summons of the Speaker, and, for doing so, they lost the means of subsistence; and if they refused to obey the Speaker's summons, they were condemned to prison and to misery, and their families to distress. Two petitions had been presented to the House by Mr. Sadler, stating all the facts which he had now stated. And what now was the language of the working classes? Why, finding that 20,000,000 l. of money had been voted by that House to put down slavery and oppression amongst the blacks, and 17,000 l. had been granted for the purpose of enabling the hon. and learned Member for Bolton to go to the continent for the purpose of extending trade, commerce, and manufactures, they could not for one moment believe, that the House would refuse them protection whenever they were summoned to appear and give evidence before any of

823
its committees. He thought the House would agree with him, that there was nothing more requisite for the extension of the trade and commerce of this country, than that the manufacturers and merchants employed in it should be persons of unsullied character and undoubted worth, and that in all their various transactions in every quarter of the globe, they should act with justice to themselves and to the honour of their country, not attempting, either directly or indirectly to practise any deceits either upon their fellow-countrymen at home, or their customers abroad. He found, that our ancestors were of the same opinion, for the Legislature of this country, being jealous of the national honour, considered it their duty to pass stringent laws to prevent any attempt at fraud either abroad or at home amongst their fellow-countrymen or foreigners; for in the preamble of the 13th of Richard 2nd, cap. 2, it was declared:—
" Forasmuch as divers plain cloths that be wrought in the counties of Somerset, Dorset, Bristol, and Glocester, be tacked and folded together, and set to sale, of the which cloths a great part be broken, broused, and not agreeing in the colour, neither be according in breadth, nor in no manner to the part of the same cloths showed outwards, but be falsely wrought with divers wools, to the great deceit, loss, and damage of the people, insomuch that the merchants buy the same cloths and carry them out of the realm to sell to strangers, be many times in danger to be slain, and sometimes imprisoned and put to fine and ransom by the same strangers, and their said cloths burnt or forfeit, because of the great deceit and falsehood that is found in the same cloths when they be untacked and opened, to the great slander of the realm of England."
In the preamble of the 5th and 6th of Edward 6th, cap. 6, entitled—
"An act for the true making of woollen cloth," (it is stated), "Where heretofore divers and many goodly statutes have been made for the true making of cloth within this realm, which, nevertheless, forasmuch as clothiers, some for lack of knowledge and experience, and some of extreme covetousness, do daily more and more study rather to make many than to make good clothes, having more respect to their private commodity and gain, than the advancement of truth and continuance of the commodity in estimation, according to the worthiness thereof, have and do daily, instead of truth, practise falsehood, and instead of substantial making of cloth do practise sleight and slender making, some by mingling of yarns of divers spinnings in one cloth, some by mingling fell-wool and lambs-
824
wool, or either of them, with fleece-wool, some by putting too little stuff, some by taking them out of the mill before they be full thicked, some by over-stretching them upon the tenter, and then stopping with flocks such bracks as shall be made by means thereof; finally, by using so many subtle sleights and untruths, as when the clothes so made be put in the water to try them, they rise out of the same neither in length nor breadth as they ought to do, and in some place narrower than some, beside such cockeling, bandoning, and divers others great and notable faults, as almost cannot be thought to be true, to the great slander of the King our Sovereign Lord, and the shame of this land, and to the utter destruction of so great and notable commodity, as the like is not in any foreign nation."
He found again, in the 43rd of Elizabeth, cap. 10, entitled—
" An Act for the true making and working of woollen clothes," (these words) "The Queen's most excellent Majesty, with the advice of her Highness's Lords spiritual and temporal, and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, weighing and considering the good and godly purposes of divers and sundry statutes heretofore made and ordained for the true making and working of woollen cloth, to be frustrated and deluded by straining, stretching, want of weight, flocks, sollace, chalk, flour, deceitful things, subtile sleights, and untruths, so as the same clothes, being put in water, are found to shrink, be rowey, pursey, squalling, cockling, bandy, light, and notably faulty, to the great dislike of foreign princes, and to the hindrance and loss of the buyer and wearer,"
The 10th of Anne, cap. 16—
" An Act for regulating, improving and encouraging the woollen manufacture of mixed or medley broad cloth, and for the better payment of the poor employed thereon," (states in the preamble), "Whereas by the ill practices of some makers of mixture or medley broad cloth, and the unskilfulness of others, by excessive straining such clothes, and other abuses committed in working the same, great damages and disappointments have happened, not only to the buyers and weavers of the said cloth, but much to the disreputation of the said manufacture, both at home and abroad; and the workers or poor labourers employed in working and making up the said manufacture have been impoverished, and are daily discouraged by imposing on them goods and wares of several kinds for their labour instead of ready money, which practices have been great discouragements to the good makers of, and fair dealers in, the said mixture or medley broad cloth."
He had read to the House certain clauses of acts of Parliament which were passed by our ancestors for the protection

825
of the public as well as of the working classes. It happened, however, that, about fifty years ago, such new and enlightened principles burst upon this country, that all protective laws were to be thenceforward laid aside, and those laws which restrained the dishonest and made them honest, which protected the working classes, and which our ancestors thought it their duty to pass, were to be removed. Our ancestors knowing, that the labouring people had not an opportunity of voting in that House, they came down, like upright, honourable, and honest men, feeling that the working-classes were imposed upon and robbed and plundered of the just reward of their labour, and did not hesitate to assist in passing acts of Parliament that would protect the working man. But these acts were suspended about fifty years ago. What had been the consequence? Frauds of the most gross description were practised by some of the manufacturers in all the different trades of our country, to the great injury of the character of British merchants and manufacturers, both at home and abroad, and to the certain ruin of those manufacturers in this country, of whom he was prepared to say there were many, who were anxious to be upright, honest, and honourable men, and who wished to carry into market an article for sale which would do them credit and give them a justly remunerating reward for the employment of their capital, as well as enable them to pay just and liberal wages to their workpeople. But the new and enlightened principle which had burst upon the country and had made such rapid strides, day by day, had now opened a new arena for the manufacturers to walk about in. It was the new principle of many of these men to try who could undersell his neighbour, who could compete with his brother manufacturer at home and abroad, and who could produce the greatest quantity of goods at the lowest cost, both in price and labour. He had been told by hon. Members of that House, that the Corn-laws were the drag-chain of the commercial and manufacturing interests of this country; and he had been informed, both in the House and out of it, that the agricultural and landed interests were the causes of the distress which prevailed in the country, and that if free-trade in corn were permitted, the commerce and manufactures of England would spread into
826
every clime; that, in fact, there would be no measurement —if he might use such an expression—to the extent of British commerce and manufactures. Why, he found that the merchants and manufacturers of this country were in possession of the South American market, from the year 1809 to 1822 or 1823. At that time Mr. Canning came down to the House and declared that we had called a new world into existence; and many of the manufacturers and merchants thought it would be a boundless sphere for the trade and commerce of this country. But what was the consequence of the frauds which had been committed by the manufacturers of this country? They themselves were the first cause to a great extent of our loss of the South American market. He had heard it stated by some hon. Members on the opposite side of the House, that the use of flour was indispensably necessary in making calico; but he believed, that the use of it was formerly unknown, and that it was never made use of until introduced by the manufacturers for the purpose of cheating and defrauding their customers. He would no longer make use of those expressions upon his awn authority; but he would tell hon. Members who denied his statements, and said they were not true, that they ought to call a committee and prove them untrue if they could before that committee. He was asking for a committee for the very purpose of proving that his statements were true. He would produce the evidence of persons of great experience and influence even amongst hon. Gentlemen opposite, and other evidence of manufacturers of the highest respectability, men of fifty years' standing in business, and also of working people, who would come before the committee, if proper protection were afforded them, and prove the truth of every word he had uttered. He felt so strongly in his own conviction of the rectitude of the position he now held, that he fearlessly asserted, if any rule of the House would prevent his second resolution being granted, he would ask for a committee without it, and he would prove his case by the evidence of merchants, manufacturers, clergymen, tradesmen, artisans, labourers, and others. A late Member of the House, Mr. Baines, had published a work, A History of the Cotton Manufacture, which was reviewed in Tait's Magazine for April, 1835. It was considered a work of great merit, and

827
had been consulted by all persons connected with the cotton trade. He bad never heard of any one attemptiong to depreciate the work. The reviewer in Tait's Magazine said:—
" We shall extract but one sentence upon a practice which, we have heard, is banishing foreigners from our market, and leading them to countries where this disgraceful practice is unknown:—' To improve the appearance of the cloth, it is usually passed through starch, made of wheaten flour, often mixed with porcelain clay and calcined sulphate of lime, by which the cloth is made stiffer, and appears to have greater substance and strength than it proves to have after being washed,—a con trivance originally devised for the purpose of fraud, and which, though now too generally understood to be regarded as fraudulent, it would be creditable to the trade to lay aside.' How a fraudulent practice ceases to be fraudulent when it becomes general, we do not pretend to understand. In another instance Mr. Baines places, to the advantage of the English manufacturer over the manufacturer of America, that the latter does not, or cannot, use any but good cotton in his yarn, while the former, ' owing to the climate,' can use some of the waste. This is not sufficiently clear. Is the yarn not worsened by using a proportion of what in the United States is accounted waste?
That proved that paste was first adopted for the purpose of fraud. He would now submit other evidence to the House, for he was not going to make assertions on his own authority merely, but upon such authority as he trusted would induce her Majesty's Government and the House to conclude that it was high time for them to interfere. He would now read to the House the letter of a gentleman who had paid great attention to this process. He wrote—
"In your speech, as reported, mention was made of the iniquitous stretching of cloths, and the vast quantities of wheat paste used to disguise that villainous practice; but I do not recollect the manner in which the stretching, alias tearing, is effected, was described by you. Now, as I have several years ago witnessed the whole operation, I will request permission to describe it, as shown to me by Messrs.—, bleach works, not mills, at —. The cloths, if intended to be stretched in width, say from 11-16th to f, or 15-16ths to 1 yard wide, are tentered out on a frame of the required width, and then driven between two grooved rollers or cylinders, the convexities of the one fitting closely into the concavities of the other, thus effecting a series of minute tearings, so as scarcely to be seen; for the sly rogues know well that the widening could not be accomplished by one pull without destroying- the cloth. On witnessing this operation I
828
observed, that it must surely weaken the fabric; ' Oh, certainly,' was the answer, ' but this we make good by the bleachers' worf;' then showing me a large long trough, filled with wheat paste, the machinery was then set going, and the cloth passing between the two grooved or knuckled rollers, by them singularly and appropriately enough called the ' Devil,' it became saturated with the paste, and then passing on through a series of rollers, came out fine glazed calico or muslin. I was next shown the machinery for folding and packing up the cloths, which was exceedingly curious, particularly an assemblage of wooden beaters, about two inches square, and about three feet long, working vertically or endwise in a very rapid manner; such of the goods as were intended for our own colonies, or home consumption were packed with the utmost neatness, and need no description; but, besides these, I observed a number of pieces packed up in a comparatively slovenly manner; on inquiry, as to them, I was told that they were for the Spanish market in South America, (in imitation of some which were shown to me, and really of Spanish manufacture), as on account of the inferiority of our goods and other fiscal regulations they were scarcely saleable, or almost prohibited, and, therefore, these imitations became necessary; but in order to obtain their introduction among the Spaniards an additional and crowning piece of villainy was required,—namely, the stamping them. I was then shown a stamp in exact imitation of those on the genuine Spanish pieces, as, for instance, though I have forgotten the real names, say, ' Jose Pintado, a Sevilla;' "Bartomeo Spinona, a Malaga,' &c. I then naturally remarked, that such a practice differed in no degree from forgery with intent to defraud, and expressed myself with much surprise at such a procedure. 'Oh! we all do it,' was the reply."
He would now beg the attention of the House to an extract from a work by Messrs. J. P. and W. P. Robertson, entitled, Francia's Reign of Terror, being the continuation of Letters on Paraguay. One of these writers was a merchant who had traded in that country for many years. They say, vol. 3, pp. 227–229,
" Not a piece of linen for soldiers' shirts or trousers was purchased without previous inspection by his Excellency; and often, distrustful of Irish and Manchester manufactures, did he unrol with his own hands the piece of goods submitted to inspection. By application to it of the vara, or yard, he ascertained that it was of the length, twenty-five, twenty-six, or twenty-eight yards, labelled on the ticket. So quick-sighted did he become in the quality of manufactured goods, that finding a great many of them had wide interstices between the threads, filled up with starch, he had one end of the piece washed, and then

829
viewing it through a microscope, ascertained the nature of its real texture. If he found, as it must be confessed he often did, the gaps between the thread to be rather yawning, he allowed the owner half of the prime cost for it, and told him to thank his stars, for that he ought to be imprisoned as a knave and impostor. ' This is the way,' said he, on one occasion, to an English merchant, ' that you hucksters of rags vend your unsound and deceitful manufactures over the world. The Jews are cheats, but the English are downright swindlers."
What a disgrace was it to this country, that British merchants and manufactures should merit such a rebuke ! When he read that language he declared that his blood boiled in his veins to think that Englishmen should traduce the character of their own country several thousand miles from home. But this reprover of British dishonesty proceeds thus:—
" With your labels, and your tickets, and your gilt finery upon your goods, your colours that are ' warranted fast,' and yet fade upon a first washing, you are the veriest mountebanks and pedlars that traverse the earth. There is nothing noble in your souls; for filthy lucre, filthily gotten, is the rotting disease of your heart's core. Look ye, Mr. Merchant, for these ten boxes of cotton platillas (they were spread out in the Dictator's audience chamber), for which you asked me 1s. a-yard, you shall have 6d,; and think yourself well off that, I do not send you to some of the Paraguay looms, (no doubt you understand how to manage a shuttle), that you might there learn how to make honest cloth. I am hot, Mr. Pedlar, like my countrymen, to be caught by fine outsides, quack commendations, or the nick-nackery mode of packing up your flash wares. Pan, pan, y vino, vino; [when they say to me, ' there is bread,' let it be bread, and when ' wine,' let it be wine.] If you think that, because Francia is a Dictator, he cannot look after his own affairs, you are a little out of your calculation. Go about your business; and the next time you come to Paraguay with linens, bring them from honest Ger many."
What had arisen from this conduct? British manufacturers had lost their trade and commerce in foreign climes, because they had ceased to be honest, because they were covetous and unjust, and cared not what frauds they committed, and encouraged each other by saying—" It will suit our purpose." Would the House know the manner in which these tricks and frauds had been carried on in Switzerland? He would refer them to No. 4 of Chambers's Edinburgh Journal of the 19th of February last, where, in an article en-
830
titled" A few Weeks on the Continent," he found the following passage:—
" The bulk of the Swiss, it would appear, clothe themselves in materials made by the hand in their own humble dwellings; and what they buy must be substantial and worth the money. English printed calicoes are rarely seen, although they are much lower priced than those of Switzerland, because the people have no confidence in the durability of the colours. The Swiss goods of this class are not only beautiful, but strong and durable in colour—qualities now rarely found in the produce of English factories. There are articles called Swiss prints sold in England, but we were informed by a manufacturer at Zurich that he did not believe a single piece ever was sent to this country, the whole that were passed off as Swiss being mere counterfeits. I am unable to say with what degree of truth this allegation was made; but it is very certain that the growing trashiness of quality of most English tissues is excluding them from the only open market in Europe."
He would now read to the House a letter from a highly respectable shopkeeper in Liverpool, who forwarded him a piece of what was called the lower sort of white shirting. When he received the sample and the letter, he could scarcely believe that the poorer classes were so cheated and plundered by the manufacturers; and he wrote down to Liverpool to ascertain the character of this shopkeeper, and was informed that he was a person of the highest respectability. He says:—
" I have this day had the pleasure of reading the speech delivered by you in the House of Commons on the evening of the 24th instant. In proof of your assertion that a large quantity of flour is used in the manufacturing of calicoes, &c., I beg to hand you a fair sample of the lower sorts of white shirtings, manufactured in this county, and of which you will perceive the poor man's food forms the greatest proportion."
One portion of that piece of cloth he sent to the right hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) and another to the noble Lord opposite (Lord J. Russell). Although an attempt had been made to fasten upon him the accusation that he had charged the manufacturers generally, nay universally, with being dishonest, be had only declared that there were fraudulent manufacturers, and he was sorry to say that their number was increasing, and that they were driving the honest manufacturer out of the markets. He would trouble the House with an extract from a work by Mr. Babbage, The Economy of Manufac-

831
tures, respecting the frauds in the lace manufacture, as brought under the notice of that House by a committee appointed to investigate the subject:—
" The lace trade affords other examples; and in inquiring into the complaints made to the House of Commons by the frame-work knitters, the committee observe, that, ' It is singular that the grievance most complained of 150 years ago should, in the present improved state of the trade, be the same grievance which is now most complained of; for it appears, by the evidence given before your committee, that all the witnesses attribute the decay of the trade more to the making of fraudulent and bad articles than to the war, or to any other cause.' And it is shown by the evidence, that a kind of lace called ' single-press' was manufactured, which was only looped once, and which, although good to the eye, became nearly spoiled in washing by the slipping of the threads; that not one person in a thousand could distinguish the difference between ' single-press' and 'double-press lace;' and that even workmen and manufacturers were obliged to employ a magnifying glass for that purpose; and that, in another similar article, called warp lace,' such aid was essential. It was also stated by one witness, that' the trade had not yet ceased, excepting in those places where the fraud had been discovered; and from those places no orders are now sent for any sort of Nottingham lace, the credit being totally ruined.'"
What said the book on the stocking trade?
" In the stocking trade similar frauds have been practised. It appeared in evidence that stockings were made of uniform width from the knee down to the ankle, and being wetted and stretched on frames at the calf, they retained their shape when dry; but that the purchaser could not discover the fraud until, after the first washing, the stockings hung like bags about his ankles."
He begged pardon of the House for detaining them by quoting so much, but as there was no important public business before them that night, and as the question he was urging was so very important, and as he was most anxious to discharge his duty, he trusted they would permit him to occupy their time for a few moments longer. He was anxious to substantiate every word he had uttered in that House. They had often heard it asserted that there was much distress in the country, and they had as often heard it imputed to the Corn-laws. He emphatically denied that statement, and would read a paragraph from the Nottingham Journal of April 15th, to show how
832
trade was ruined by the frauds of the manufacturers:—
" The cotton cut-up hose trade, which has now become an extensive manufacture in this vicinity, has somewhat improved, whilst the system of drop-offs is fast extending in some of the villages south of Nottingham. These drop-offs are stockings made without narrowings at the heels and toes; instead of which, the heels are made full width of the usual length, the web that should have been narrowed two stitches at a time gradually, is then pressed off wholly, a slack course is made in one of the heels in the usual way, and the heels are joined and turned off, by looping the slack course in the usual manner. The fraud now commences; the two flaps of the heels are turned inwards, and are somewhat neatly basted down by the seamer, the heels are then seemed, or rather sewn, in the usual method, and to a casual, inexperienced, or inattentive observer, have all the appearance of being full-wrought hose. Nothing can be more unpleasant to the wearer; the joining of the toes being effected in the same manner, by dropping off, instead of narrowing—the deception being, that the toes and heels are turned off in the usual way, to deceive the purchaser. By these practices, one stockinger is made to produce three or four times as many hose as when they are made in a proper manner. This has a greater tendency to curtail employment in the hosiery, than steam or any other invention has in other manufactures, with this marked difference, that the superseding of human labour in most other branches of industry is the result of ingenuity and an extension of the arts; in hosiery it is quite the reverse, as these frauds are a retrogradation in ingenuity and skill, tending to produce inferior workpeople as well as inferior manufactures. The hosiery villages in the vicinity are fast getting isolated, or rather selected, in their employment. Thus, the hands in Bulwell are principally employed in making cotton gloves; Ruddington, in making drop-offs and fancy-caps; Carlton, in making socks, principally worn in the United States; Hucknall, upon cotton fancy hosiery; Arnold, Calverton, and the villages to the east, are most employed in making full-fashioned hose; whilst Stapleford and Sandiacre are engaged principally in making warp lace; but in most of these villages the stockingers are in a most destitute situation, arising from scanty employment and low wages."
It was on behalf of these men that he asked for the committee—on behalf of those men who could not protect themselves, and he trusted that no man who had heard the statement but would cheerfully assist him in his object. The hon. Gentleman opposite, who were engaged in manufactures, had promised that no impediment would be thrown in his way;

833
he hoped they would now perform their promise, grant him the committee, and he would prove every allegation he had made. Then, as to watches, the deception was just as bad; he had a letter from a manufacturer which, with permission of the House, he would read:—
" Sir,—I speak of the disclosures you have lately been making in Parliament as to frauds in manufactures. It is now long time since I broached that subject, and suggested that the old plan of stamping our cloths and linens, &c, should be resumed; using in aid the argument that unless this were done, the character of the country would be lost, as each successive swindler would say to himself, 'It will serve my turn.' I believe the cloths sent out are often only fit for wadding. That the prints become blanks at first washing, I know, but I had no suspicion that even the cloth itself was equally infamous. I have heard that millions of needles have been sent out without eyes; scissors made of virgin steel, that remained virgins in all points, refusing to be of the slightest use; that watches from this country go only half an hour, and are losing all character, that clocks only go once round; that our muskets were only dangerous to the owners till the Tower proof was restored, and that the American woodsman has found our axes such, that he has found it indispensable to decline to use them. These things are so serious, that I think they should at once be taken up; it is thus we are losing business, and deserve to lose it, for we are risking the ruin of millions of the honestly industrious, rather than repress the villanies of a parcel of scamps." [Laughter.]
They might laugh, but it was those frauds that had ruined the trade of the country, and it was high time for them to show that the Legislature of the present day were as jealous of the character of the country as it was 500 years ago. He had also a letter from a most respectable manufacturer of Yorkshire, of fifty years' standing, and he said—
" You have not overstated anything as respects this neighbourhood, for I do not think there is a manufacturer of flushings, druggets, paddings, or pilot cloths, but who uses less or more of the ground-up rags called generally shoddy, or resurrection wool—indeed, so much is it in use, that even the carpet manufacturers are now consuming considerable quantities, and the rugs making for Government are not free from it. Some few years ago these rags were imported from Hamburg and other parts of the Continent; then, of course, this country derived some advantage in pulling them up; latterly they have come pulled up ready for use, they on the Continent having obtained from this neighbourhood the machines for pulling up the rags. You will excuse me, but
834
in my opinion, unless Government imposes some restriction upon the use of such materials, we may cry out for want of trade or business for ever; it is not the Corn-laws which are the cause of our want of business, but it is our manufacturers and merchants who are the cause, for who will come a second time to our markets to purchase goods which when they get home are not worth the carriage. I have seen pieces of druggets stiffened with flour and other things, that were you to set a 6-4 piece to stand on the list, it would do so of itself; besides, this is not the worst evil— for when these goods come to lay some time, they generate a worm or moth, which will very soon consume a whole piece; in fact, such goods get worn out in passing from one to another without any making up, and probably get returned again to this country in the shape of rags, to undergo a second resurrection, or perhaps a third. I have that confidence in our present Government and in Sir R. Peel's measures, that I am sure there is no man but himself can save this country. If Sir R. Peel was to bring in a bill to prohibit the use of rags in any shape in the manufacture of cloth, or any description of woollen goods, I believe it would give most general satisfaction; it would also be an advantage to the agriculturist, as more wool would be wanted; and if the country was not able to produce all the wools necessary for our consumption, we could import any quantity from countries that would take our goods in return. I am of opinion that restrictive measures of this kind might be carried into effect with very little expense to Government. An inspector, appointed by Government, might overlook a very extensive district, and let any penalty which might be thought proper be recoverable before the magistrates. This, I think, would be a complete check against the use of this material, and would be the means of bringing back our trade to a healthy state again, which I am persuaded will never be the case until some measures of this kind are adopted."
I have another letter from an old manufacturer in Leeds, who said—
" I have a fact connected with the woollen manufacture which you are at liberty to make any use of you think proper. There is a manufacturer in this town (who is a; present a member of the Whig-Radical town-council) who has made it a regular practice to buy old stockings and grind them up, and mix them along with his wool in manufacturing blue cloths. He was thus enabled to undersell his honest neighbours, who used nothing but wool. Well may our manufacturers lose their character in foreign markets."
But he had still higher authority, for the manufacturers of the north had been committing such disgraceful frauds, that the Government had been obliged to take the

835
matter up; they found it necessary, in order to protect themselves, to take measures for preventing the frauds; they had another duty to perform—they ought to take measures to protect the public. They had found it necessary to issue a circular in order to protect themselves; he called upon them to extend that protection to the country at large. The circular he alluded to was as follows:—
" The whole of the cloth of which the supply is to be made is to be manufactured from new sound wool; if it is discovered to contain any portion of wool made from woollen rags known by the terms ' woollen waste,' or ' shoddy,' or other than new wool, it shall subject the whole of the supply to be rejected, and the hon. Board will not have any further dealings with the parties so offending."
These were the practices of these rogues —the scoundrels[Laughter]—the infamous rogues, for he could call them nothing else; and instead of laughing, hon. Members ought to blush for shame that their countrymen were capable of committing such infamous frauds. Having laid such shameful cases before the House, they would agree with him that he had proved all the charges he had brought against the manufacturers. But if the House had still any doubt upon the matter—if they thought the evidence was still deficient— then let them grant the committee. Was it not high time that the Government should interfere in order to put a stop to those practices which were ruining the trade of the country, and punish the guilty. A poor man committing even a trifling fraud was punished heavily, while those who were fraudulent by wholesale escaped. There was, indeed, one law for the rich, and another for the poor, so long as such a system was allowed to go on. He would now say a few words on the infamous truck system. It was now even of more importance than the frauds, because in consequence of that infernal system thousands of the labouring population were dying; the misery caused by the cruelty of the masters—by their heavy oppression—was incalculable. He had stated before, that a large portion of the manufacturers were in the habit of paying in goods, in place of money, and many firms settled with their workmen only once in three, six, or eight months. On that subject he had a letter from a highly-respectable gentleman, who said—
" SIR,—In consequence of the spirited part
836
you have taken on a recent occasion, and for which, with every friend of humanity, I feel indebted to you, I beg leave to lay before you the following statement?—On Monday last, March 21st, application was made by a poor weaver, named Irwin, to the Board of Guardians at Cockermouth for relief. He is in the employ of the firm of —, Carlisle, gingham manufacturers. It was stated as a reason why relief should be afforded him, that the material recently given out by that firm to their operatives was so wretchedly bad, that it took six weeks to weave what, if the material was good, they could readily do in three. Two of the guardians conversant in such matters were deputed to examine into this statement, and report to the Board. Their report fully confirmed the poor man's statement, and they produced a specimen of the warp fully corroborating this. Yet such is the thraldom in which these unfortunate creatures are held, that the wife most earnestly entreated that no steps might be taken under the act of Parliament, lest her husband and a crippled son should be thrown in consequence out of bread, as they could do nothing but weave. I have since visited the weaving place, and have obtained from this roan's loom a specimen of the material, taken at random, which I enclose. Much of it appeared greatly worse than what I send, but it was dyed, and the effects of the colour might (as I supposed) have further injured the texture."
He had told the House that these poor men were paid in goods in place of money. He had a blank form which was used in many factories, in which there were charges for rent, fuel, cash stopped, and cash overpaid—that would happen very seldom, he thought; but then followed fines, the most iniquitous of all things; for the masters hung up a set of rules, which the poor labouring man could not understand, if he did nothing else from Monday till Saturday, nor could he by any possibility help infringing some of them, by which money was stopped from him. On the truck in cottages he had a letter from a working man, but he must not disclose his name, or he would become a marked man, and would not get work at any factory, unless he changed his name. He said,
" Masters of one of the largest mills have houses, and compel their work-people to live in them, or whether they do or not, they must pay for them, and well too; and those who do not live in them, let them to other people. The masters stop their rents out of their wages, for these tyrants have the power to do so—some about 3s., others 3s. 6d., 4s. per week, and so on. The oppressed get them let, some for about 2s., some for about 1s. 6d, others 1s. per week, and, in two instances, they have

837
let them for 4d. a-week. Until lately, they kept cows, and forced all that lived under them to have one quart of milk a-day, and, in some cases, three quarts a-day, because they have had three workpeople of a family. When they kill their cows, they compel their workpeople to have shares of it; they sell it at the very top price, whether it be good or bad, and they force them to these things, or they must turn face about. If they happen to speak a word, they will give them a character with which they cannot get any more work in the town or the country either. These are some few of the glaring tricks of these Corn-law repealers, these hypocrites, who tell the working slaves, that they wish them to have their rights, that they wish them to have their liberty; but it is all fudge, they are the same as their leaders, the Anti-Com-law League, they are downright impostors. One of them is now raising his rents for voters, while his hard-working slaves had hard work to keep body and soul together before."

Was that a system that the Government ought to tolerate for any longer period, now that it had come to their knowledge? He would next read some letters from a clergyman of the Church of England:—
" Wolverhampton, April 2, 1842.
" SIR,—I am sure I need not apologise for the intrusion of a perfect stranger upon your valuable time, if my statement will tend, even in the slightest degree, to further the praiseworthy object you have in view, of exposing the iniquities of the truck system. I regret to say, that I have too many opportunities of witnessing the working of this tyrannical system in my own parish, and Mr. Villiers need go no further than the borough which he represents, for proof, that a great portion of the distress now existing amongst the poor, is caused by the payment of wages in provisions instead of money.
" I will mention one instance with which I think you should be made acquainted; others can be brought forward, if required: but this is a case which I have taken particular pains to investigate.
" One of the most active partisans of Mr. Villiers, and a principal member of his committee at the election, who was, by the late Administration, made a magistrate for the county of Stafford, is a chief partner in the —colliery, where the truck system is carried on more infamously than in any other works in the neighbourhood. The men are paid once in four and sometimes five weeks, when they may receive their wages in money if they demand it, but the man who made such demand, would, in all probability, be dismissed; but as it is not possible for their families to wait till the expiration of the month for the means of subsistence, they are compelled to go to the ' Tommy shop,' as it is called here, a ticket to which is given them
838
for any goods they may require. The price of some few of the articles at this shop, compared with that asked by the shopkeepers in the town, I have ascertained, and it will show you at once the dishonest advantage taken by the oppressors of these poor men—

At Tommy shop. Per lb.

In the town. Per lb.

Sugar

9d.

7½d.

Salt butter

15 d. & 16 d.

10 d. & 11 d.

Bacon

9d.

7½d.

Tea

8s.

5s.

there being a difference of more than 50 per cent, on the article of tea.
" I shall not object to your using my name as the author of this information should its truth be disputed, but at the same time, I may add, that I would not willingly have my name made public.
" My attention has long been directed to this horrid system, and in July last, a letter of mine, under the signature of 'The Miner's Friend,' appeared in the Wolverhampton Chronicle, but no good resulted from it.
" I shall have great pleasure in giving you any further information on the subject.
"During the severe weather in 1841, when soup was distributed to our poor at 1d. a-quart, it is a fact, which came to the knowledge of my curate, that some of the families, in the receipt of nominally good wages, actually declined a ticket for the soup, on the plea that they had not the penny to pay for it, as they received their wages in goods."
"Wolverhampton, April 13,1842.
" SIR,—In reply to your inquiry respecting the quality of the goods sold at the truck shops, I have frequently seen bad salt butter from these shops at 15 d. and 16 d., while at the retail shops, good was sold at 10 d. and 11 d. a-pound; the sugar at 9d., and in one instance at 10 d. per pound, not so good as at 7½d.; flour of a very inferior quality at 11 s. a-bushel, while I find, that at the very time, the best was 10s. at the mill.
" Since my last letter, I have ascertained from a huckster upon whom I can depend, that she is in the constant habit of receiving goods bought at the truck-shop in exchange for milk, potatoes, &c, as the men in some instances never receive money ; of course, such barter is not made without a loss to the labouring man."
He begged to call the attention of the House to the following communication he had received as to the city of Carlisle:
" Hundreds of the working classes are grateful for the fearless exposure of the deceptions and villanies practised by the master manufacturers and cotton-spinners of this country. The truck system has been carried on for eighteen years by one of the largest firms in this district; they have some hundreds of cottages, which they force their workpeople to occupy, for which they have to pay 30 or

839
40 per cent. more than others. The master manufacturers, who employ weavers here to the number of 3,000, supply them with shuttles, hiddles, and brushes (all of which the weaver has to find), and for which they charge enormously high. You might be furnished with a full and accurate exposure of the truck system, and other matters of deception as practised here, provided the parties furnishing it, were secured against future persecution. Protection is absolutely necessary."
Then as to Scotland, he would lay before House the following statements:—
" Coatbridge, near Glasgow, nine extensive ironworks, at which an immense quantity of people are employed. Each ironwork has its store, and a considerable portion of the wages are paid in goods at a profit to the masters of 15 to 20 per cent, above the common retailer. Some of these masters have acted as conspicuous members of the Anti-Corn-law League."
" Paisley.—Working man. Specimen of the nefarious system pursued by our Corn-law repealing masters. Most of them have stores, or cottages, for their workers, particularly those who are the greatest repealers, and their workers are obliged to purchase from such store, and take their cottages, or if not no longer work for them. They are charged about 20 to 25 per cent. above the market price for their goods, with an inferiority of article. The master printers in this country, not content with the above system of robbery, adopt another system of robbery more grievous than the above. They make them work from one to four hours extra per day, what is called overtime, and give them nothing for it. Be so good as not to give up my name, as the master printers would punish me by not employing me."
He had also received this letter from a poor miner, which he would read,—
" Sir,—It is with inexpressible pleasure I write to you, having carefully read all the speeches and remarks you have made in Parliament, and find that you are one who wishes the welfare of the toilworn and cruelly-used British artisan. I see you mean to bring on a motion before the House on the 19th inst., which, if carried, will be the cause of bringing to the world an exposure of the robberies and cruelties played off by our employers upon us miners. Every coal and iron master in and round this extensive mining district are lawmakers; and believe me, the laws they make and put upon their office-doors are of the most hideous caste. We are obliged to bend under them, for should any of us resist them, as some actually does, we are pounced upon by them, carried before the sheriff or magistrate of the district, who never fails to decide against the miners, on the ground, that ' these are the rules of the work, and you must abide by them. In consequence the victim has either to go to bridewell, or pay 2l. or 3l. of ex-
840
penses; the latter he is not able to do, so he is imprisoned, and his family starved. There is a general law practised at all these works which I will take the liberty of exposing. If any miner allow his father, his brother, or his son to sleep one night under the roof of his house, and they are employed at any other work but the work he is employed at, the unfortunate miner is charged double rent for each fault, and compelled to pay, it being a rule at the work ! Our employers have almost all victualling stores at their works; the miners are compelled to take all the provisions they need from these stores, at a rate price far above the market or any grocer's shop. They wish the miner to have nothing left at payday, yet they strive to have him out of debt with them also, by keeping his belly to match his earnings. I know many industrious miners who have not handled a shilling of their own earnings these four years; and it is a general feature in the trade, when they wish to reduce the wages, or introduce any new rule, that they shut their store, and never fail to gain their point, by starving poor men into their measures. At works where there is not a store, the miner has to pay his employer 1s. for every pound he lifts, at any other time than payday, which is bad enough, but nothing to a store."
The pernicious system he was exposing extended also to Ireland:—
" In Portland, county of Waterford, said a letter, which he had received, a wealthy firm, who lately offered 80,000 l. for a property, carry on the infamous truck system in full operation. The operatives are compelled to live in houses built by their employers, exorbitant rents are demanded, which are stopped out of their weekly wages, and a shop, with numerous articles for sale, is attached to the premises. The poor people are not paid their miserable earnings in money, but in bits of printed card paper (marked with the name of the firm) called ' tokens,' which will only pass as an equivalent for goods at this truck shop belonging to the mill. I need not tell you exorbitant profits are made."
But what would the House say, when he told them, that under this system, which extended through England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, the workpeople were compelled to pay for Anti-Corn-law pamphlets, fined 6d. for speaking, and 1s. for singing; called upon to obey rules which they could not help breaking, and fined enormously for doing so; for money lent, usurious interest was exacted? He wished particularly to draw attention to the following:—
"On the 14th December, a manufacturer was convicted before the Sheffield magistrates for paying wages in cloth; he asked 2l. a

841
yard; the workman gave 1l 15 s., and sold it for 11 s., proved before the magistrates to be its full value, and a quarter of yard not fit for use; fined 10 l. and costs. Two more, 5l. and costs."
No doubt the right hon. Gentleman, at the head of the Home Department, would talk about the law having been enforced; but his case was, that for one case in which the law had been enforced, in ninety-nine it had been successfully evaded. Now, he wished to observe, that when the hon. Member for Wolverhampton had, on a former occasion, read a statement from a person residing in his part of the country, that statement asserted what was utterly untrue,—namely, that he had applied the charges he made to all the manufacturers of Yorkshire, whereas he had only applied them to some, and those belonging to the League. This statement, moreover, had been supported by fraud and forgery, for many of the signatures were positive forgeries; and some of those who signed were making 70 per cent. on the poor. He would also read a passage from the report (p. 552) of H. S. Chapman, esq., of the Middle Temple, an assistant commissioner for inquiring into the condition of the handloom weavers in the United Kingdom, in 1838. It would show, that not only does the truck system prevail in the West Riding of Yorkshire, but that any complaint on the part of the weavers was generally followed by loss of employment, as he had stated in the House.
" At Idle, where I held a public inquiry for the townships of Idle, Shipley, Eccleshill, and Bolton, a written statement was handed in, complaining of the existence of the truck system at a small hamlet called Windhill, in the first-named township. It is a fact worthy of notice, that I was begged not to ask questions on the point, as any testimony on the part of a weaver who had suffered from the custom would have been followed by loss of employment. I was, however, assured by many persons, both employers and weavers, that the allegation was correct. This shows how completely impotent is the law, howsoever stringent it may be, where both employer and employed will consent to violate it. The employed is compelled to submit; the constantly overstocked state of the labour-market places him at the mercy of the master, and the same condition prevents him taking a single step to expose the fraud to which he is subjected. At Churwell, south of Leeds, another form of truck was exhibited to me, as existing at Beeston, where there is a factory employing between twenty and thirty hand-bring in the Labourers' Wages Bill, on loom weavers. It is the practice of the
842
owners of this factory to oblige their weavers to take part of their hard earnings in cloth, in some cases less than half being paid in money."
And now as to Birmingham he would read the following:—
" To THE EDITOR OF ARIS'S GAZETTE.
" Small Arms Department, Birmingham,
March 10, 1842.
" SIR,—Great complaints have been made to me lately by the labouring men in the gun-lock trade, and I yesterday visited the neighbourhood of Wednesbury and Darlaston, where that branch of manufacture is principally carried on, and I find that the practice of paying the workmen by truck, or' tommy,' as it is called amongst the men, has been, and is at the present moment, carried on to a ruinous extent.
" To all those persons who are employed as contractors for the supply of musket locks for her Majesty's service (many of whom, however, I must say, have not lent themselves to the practice), I have given notice that I am determined to put down such a nefarious and illegal system in every way in my power; and that so far as those supplies are concerned, I shall insist that the lock-filers do receive the wages agreed upon in money, without subterfuge, trick, or evasion, either by tickets upon other parties, by discount, by pretence of loan, or by any other dishonest contrivance. The labourer is worthy of his hire. A fair allowance is made for it in the contract price, and he has a right to spend his money as he will in the best and cheapest market.
" If you will have the goodness to make this, my resolution, more extensively known through the medium of your widely-spread publication, it may be the means of benefitting a very deserving class of workmen by drawing attention to this destructive practice; and you will at the same time confer an obligation on your very obedient, humble servant,
" GEORGE LOVELL,
" Her Majesty's Inspector of Small Arms."
If he wanted any confirmation of the justice of his motion, he need not go far for it. He would remind the House that this was not the first time the working classes had, by their advocates, appealed to the House for protection, and that their claim had, ere this, been recognized. On the 17th of February, 1795, a motion was made by Mr. Whitbread for a protection of labour, seconded by Sir R. Peel (the present right hon. Baronet's father), supported by Fox and Sheridan, and admitted to be just by Pitt, who sanctioned the payment of wages out of the poor-rates. Then in July 5, 1830, Mr. Littleton moved to bring in the Labourers' Wages Bill, on which Mr. Huskisson said—
"If any hon. Gentleman would take the trouble to inform himself as to what was passing in Staffordshire, and in part of the cotton and clothing districts, he would find that a very great portion of the distress now prevailing there was not so much owing to want of employment as to the undue and unfair competition to which the truck system gave rise, by making the whole trade a struggle between the avarice of the master and the necessities and comforts of the workmen. Why should we not extend the same protection to those who had no friend to guide them, and who looked up to the Legislature as their shield against the extortion of those who regarded only their own advantage, and never thought of the sufferings and afflictions of those whom they employed? It was upon these grounds he was ready to acknowledge that on the score of humanity and feeling he gave his support to the bill, and should do so even if it were opposed to the doctrines of political economy, with which, however, he contended it was perfectly consistent."
On the 3rd of May, 1830, Lord Stanley presented a petition from the manufacturers, tradesmen, and others of Heaton Norris, against the truck system, and stated—
" That this system gave great advantage to a few rich men, who acquired immense profits at the expense of the labourers—a system that was as injurious to the manufacturers who did not adopt it as to the workmen who were its immediate victims."
On the 5th of July, 1830, Sir Robert Peel said—
" The great evil of the present day was a tendency to diminish the enjoyments of the poorer classes; and he could conceive nothing more likely to reduce them to a state of servitude than that their master, who might be getting 8,000 l. or 10,000 l. a-year by his manufactory, should take from them 2,000 l. or 3,000 l. more by dealing in bacon and cheese, He hoped that if this bill were lost by the means which the hon. Member (Mr. Hume) possessed, and might use to defeat it, the working classes would understand that it was he who was responsible for the consequences."
The hon. Member concluded:—Sir, I have done my duty in bringing this question forward. The responsibility rests on the House and on the Government, of dealing with the claims for justice and redress of honest manufacturers and distressed workmen. If the Government resist the motion, the responsibility of rejecting it will be theirs. There is, let me assure them, an intense feeling abroad upon the subject. There are not far distant honest manufacturers, who have come from the north at their own expense
844
to give evidence upon this committee, and to declare that they must either be honest themselves and retire from trade, or be as dishonest as those who have till now oppressed the poor and disgraced the country. There are those, not far distant, who are ready before a committee of this House to substantiate those claims for justice which there, and there only they can assert. In their name I appeal to your justice for that protection which here alone they can seek, and which here they have an inalienable right to claim. This motion may be lost; but if it be, it will be lost to the serious injury of trade and commerce; it will cause heartrending affliction to thousands of the working classes who are anxiously awaiting your decision. And ardently I do hope that the Government will discharge the duty they owe to the public as the guardians of the country's honour, and of the Sovereign's dignity (feeling that dishonour at home or abroad must sully the lustre of that Sovereign's diadem)—that they will discharge that duty by agreeing to the motion, which I urge on the unassailable principle that the labourer is worthy of his hire.
Mr. Feildensaid, if the practice had taken place which the hon. Member had described, it was a disgrace on the English nation, and a remedy was required. It was high time that the Legislature of the country should make an inquiry into the practices said to prevail, and if such were found to be the case, to apply a remedy.
Mr. Wallacewas exceedingly desirous that this committee should be granted. He believed that there was a good deal of truth in what the hon. Member had stated, and he believed also that there might be fallacious statements mixed up with the communications of the hon. Member, be (Mr. Ferrand) believing them to be perfectly true. He hoped the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) would grant the inquiry in whatever form it might be thought most desirable. He believed that it was very unwise to continue the truck-system in any form, and he believed that the Government would do well, if satisfied that the evil existed, if they could provide some easy and cheap means by which those who offended against the law might be prosecuted. The great evil in this country was the difficulty of obtaining cheap justice.
Mr. Wakleyhad felt surprise at the apparant reluctance of the Members of the Administration to address the House after the speech of the hon. Member for Knaresborough. What he gathered from their silence was this, that there was a desire on their part to ascertain what was the feeling of the House with regard to this proposition. If that were so, nothing could be more commendable. He considered that a motion of this kind could scarcely be granted with a strong feeling of the House against it, and he also thought it scarcely possible that the Government could resist the motion with a strong feeling in the House for it. The charges of the hon. Member for Kuaresborough were of the most serious character, and affecting the comforts and the happiness of millions of our fellow countrymen. Even if these charges were made on false testament of the most heinous description, he considered this House would not be discharging its duty to the working people of the country if it did not insist on inquiry into their truth or their falsehood. It was stated that the working people were completely the slaves of their employers—that they were in such a state of dependence and destitution that they could scarcely be said to be living in a country in which freedom was a part of the constitution. He sincerly hoped that the Government would not oppose a motion of this nature; but in order to make the inquiry effectual, and to do full and complete justice, the investigation must not be a partial one—it must be levelled against all classes of employers, and extend to the employers of agricultural labourers. £" Cheers."] He was glad to hear that cheer; it showed that hon. Members were actuated by far higher motives than self-interests, and that their desire was to do full justice to the working people. The gravamen of the hon. Members charge was that the manufacturers were paying their workpeople in kind, and giving them food instead of money. How was it that the hon. Member had not acquired further information on this subject? Was be aware that in Scotland, and to a very considerable extent in the north of England, the truck-system prevailed on farms as well as in manufactories? Did hon. Members deny his assertions by shaking their heads? He assured them that there was more in his statement than was to be found, in their heads. What he
846
was stating was the plain and naked truth, and hon. Members connected with the north of England would not deny, that it had been the practice, time out of mind, to pay the labourer on farms in kind, and not in money wages, both in Scotland and England. He would not assert that this practice had operated unjustly; but, in order that an inquiry of this nature should be full and complete, and give satisfaction, the investigation proposed should not be partial. He, therefore, wished to introduce in the motion after the word "railways," the words "and by occupiers of land in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland." He hoped the hon. Member for Knaresborough. would not object to this alteration, and that the right hon. Baronet would not object to it, because if they limited their inquiry to the manufacturers, they would be prejudging the case, and assuming that they had been acting in this unjust and oppressive manner towards their labourers, and would cast a stigma on the commerce of the country which it would be difficult to remove. But if they introduced the words he proposed, it would show that the inquiry was to extend to the payment of all labourers. He, for one, tendered his thanks to the hon. Member for the exertions which he had made in the cause of the people. From the fervour of his feelings the hon. Gentleman had occasionally been led into the use of harsh terms, but he believed, that it had arisen from his anxiety for the working people, and that it was not his intention to cast unjust allegations. He most cordially supported the motion, and should feel most grateful to the Government if they acceded to it.
Colonel Sibthorpmost cordially seconded the amendment. He thought it was but fair that the inquiry should be general. With regard to the charge that the truck-system was practised amongst the farmers of the north of England, he had never known a single instance of it though he had property in various parts of the north of England. He sincerely hoped her Majesty's Government would assent both to the motion and to the addition moved to be introduced into it.
Mr. Brothertonshould wish that the amendment proposed by the hon. Member for Finsbury should not be persisted in, for two reasons: one was, the act which was passed two years ago for preventing the truck-system specially excluded the

847
agricultural interests. To the manufacturers it was made illegal, but legal to the farmers. He believed, that the practice was very general in Scotland, and in many parts of England; and if the words moved to be added by the hon. Member for Finsbury were inserted in the motion, the committee would never finish its labours; and, therefore, he wished the inquiry to be confined to the manufacturing interests. He would add his request that the committee might be granted. He believed, that there was considerable oppression exercised by the manufacturers. There was no doubt of it; and he did say, that the system ought to be put down if possible. At the same time he wished that a fair committee might be chosen, and that it might be clearly ascertained whether those engaged in the truck-system were members of the Anti-Corn-law League or not. He believed from all the information he had, that where one manufacturer in the Anti-Corn-law League practised this system, there were ten not connected with it who did. He was exceedingly anxious that the whole truth should come out, and that a committee of inquiry should be appointed, and that whether this system were practised by members of the Anti-Corn-law League or not, it should be put an end to.
Sir J. Grahamsaid, he had anticipated, after what had taken place on a former evening, when very strong assertions had been made by the hon. Member for Knaresborough, which were as strongly contradicted on the opposite side of the House, and when hon. Members had been almost taunted to move this inquiry, that the motion would not be objected to. He certainly should not have thought it consistent with his duty to consent to a motion, the terms of which were calculated to convey a stigma upon the manufacturing interest, because, as had been truly stated by the hon. Member for Fins-bury, the adoption by the Government of this motion, upon the presumption that this practice was common amongst the manufacturers, was a step which would be derogatory to the honour of the commerce of this kingdom, and which he should be very sorry to give countenance to. He was certain that both in the home and in the foreign market, the natural effect of honest competition would be to put an end to these fraudulent practices, and that the fraudulent manufacturer and
848
tradesman would not long be enabled beneficially to persevere. He believed, that these were household truths familiar to all Englishmen, and that a departure from these rules was the exception, and the strict observance of them the general rule. He could not, therefore, concur in any sweeping condemnation of the class of manufacturers in this country. He must say, that he saw something to regret in the terms of the motion as they now stood on the orders, in the frequent repetition of the word "fraud." With respect to statutory enactments to prevent those frauds which did occasionally occur, the hon. Gentleman had shown that they were abortive. With regard to the first part of the motion of the hon. Member, he thought it unnecessary, in consequence of the sessional orders which already stood on the journals relative to witnesses to the same effect. He would beg that the sessional order on the subject should be read. [Sessional order read.] He was satisfied (the right hon. Baronet continued) that inquiry as to the necessity of further legislation to prevent frauds in manufactures would be fruitless. He (for one) should altogether despair of the success of any attempt of that kind; and he repeated, that the real remedy would be found in the competition of honest tradesmen. The question then narrowed itself to inquiring as to the payment in goods and not in money. Several acts of Parliament had been passed to prevent this. The last measure of that kind was brought in by Lord Hatherton, then Mr. Littleton, and the act now upon the statute-book had been passed with very general sanction and concurrence. He confessed, that at the time that act passed he did not think it possible not to favour the principle of it. In prosperous times, when the demand for labour was increased, the workman was master over his employer; but in less prosperous times there would always be a strong temptation in the employer to reduce the workman's wages. It was most painful to a master to say, to his workman who had been working for him twelve or fourteen hours per day, "I am paying you too much." He was naturally driven by the pressure of the times to find evasions to reduce his workman's wages; and what was the natural mode to which he resorted? He had recourse to that which the law prohibited. The workman was then no longer the

849
master; he was absolutely dependent on his employer, and his employer, either directly or indirectly, gave him to understand that if he did not consent to the charge he made, either for rent or goods, he should no longer be employed by him. Under the pressure of such circumstances the labouring man submitted, and hence, as had been truly said in one of the letters which had been read to the House by the hon. Member for Knaresborough, the existing law was impotent. The Legislature might make the law as stringent as they pleased; still, when the demand for labour was not effective, whatever enactment might be placed upon the statute book, still, indirectly, wages would be lowered in the way complained of by the hon. Member for Knaresborough. He was aware of the exemption as to farm labourers mentioned by the hon. Member for Salford; and one of the objections he had to granting the committee was the fear that the Government might contribute in the least degree to the perpetuation of those angry feelings which recent discussions in that House had occasioned between the manufacturing and the agricultural classes, and that if the enquiry were limited, the concession of the committee would have the air of partiality. But while he had, in concert with his right hon. Friend at the head of the Government, been listening to the present discussion it had occurred to him that it might be possible to open a limited inquiry not subject to the objections he had shortly stated, and which at once would be fair, equitable, and comprehensive. And with this view he was prepared to move that,
" A select committee be appointed to inquire into the operation of the law which prohibits the payment of wages in goods or otherwise than in the current coin of the realm, and into the alleged evasions and defects of the present enactments."
He did not anticipate any disadvantage would arise from the most rigid inquiry of the character he had suggested. In the north of England, in Northumberland, and in the Cheviot-hills the shepherds were paid in kind by certain quantities of oatmeal, flour, and other commodities, and he thought it would be found that there was no evil arising from the system, but the contrary. On the other hand, he
850
thought upon an inquiry into the subterfuges of certain classes of manufacturers, it would be found that there were great abuses in the evasion of the statute known as Mr. Littleton's Act. He thought that by a committee impartially and in a fair and candid spirit appointed, so far from evil, good might arise; and, if in the midst of the existing distresses of the working classes this inquiry might be soothing to their feelings—if it would be satisfactory to them, and would allay anything like angry feelings, which, notwithstanding the patience they had exhibited might exist, he should rejoice that he was able consistently with his sense of duty to give such an inquiry his support. There was already an amendment before the House, but, if without impropriety, he could do so, he would move the amendment he had suggested, and which he fancied was in accordance with the general sense of the House.
Mr. Wahleysaid, he should most willingly withdraw his amendment.
Amendment withdrawn.
Sir J. Grahamsaid, that being the case, he should move his amendment,
[Amendment before given moved accordingly].
Mr. Wakleyasked, whether the amendment which the right hon. Baronet would substitute would extend as far as his amendment would have carried it?
Sir J. Grahamsaid, he conceived that the clause of the act to which the hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Brotherton) had referred, and which exempted domestic servants and servants in husbandry might be considered in the terms of his amendment as one of the defects of the existing enactment, and therefore the committee would have the power of going into that question.
Mr. Ferrandinquired if the investigation as proposed by the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, would extend to the frauds in manufactures of which he had spoken?
Sir J. Graham:No. I have endeavoured to explain that I did not seek to go into that subject.
Mr. J. S. Worthysaid, that when he had risen a short time since, it was with the intention of offering to the House a few observations very much to the same effect as those which had just now been made by the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, and he

851
had intended to suggest the appointment of a committee, in terms nearly coincident with those submitted by him, but at the same time comprising expressions which he thought it desirable to add to the terms of that appointment, with a view to extend the inquiry to a particular issue. The right hon. Baronet by his amendment would appoint a select committee for the purpose of inquiring into the evasions and defects of the existing law, but he did nothing which would practically direct the attention of the committee towards the improvement of that law. The terms which he had intended to submit to the House were, that a select committee be appointed to inquire into the operation of the statute 1 and 2 William 4th, chap. 37, with a view to ascertain how far it was possible to render that act more effectual for the protection of labourers from the abuses in respect of the payment of their wages. The attention of the committee would thereby be more especially directed to the remedy of the abuses of the law as it at present stood. He was afraid the provisions of that law were in spirit most extensively evaded, and that the right hon. Baronet took too favourable a view of the matter when he supposed that the abuse was confined to times of distress. If the hon. Member for Marylebone were present, he must admit, that in the districts connected with the iron trade, the abuses prevailed to a much greater and a more deplorable extent than the right hon. Baronet seemed to imagine. He did not mean to say, that such evasions and practices were universally prevalent, or that the manufacturers generally might not be able to stand the test of such an inquiry; but nevertheless, he could not help thinking, that when this House had declared its intention, so far as in it lay, to interfere for the purpose of preventing practices of this kind, and to interpose the arm of its power to resist abuses of the nature spoken of, and when it had already interposed by legislation to resist abuses which pressed so heavily on that extensive class of the community, the working class, it was a fair and legitimate object for inquiry how far the statute had been effectual in the accomplishment of the objects for which it was placed upon the statute-book. He had intrinsically no objection to an inquiry of the largest description; for if these illegal practices prevailed to the extent asserted, and when the hon.
852
Member for Knaresborough stated he could prove all he had stated, that fact alone, affecting as it did the industry, the commerce, and the honour of this country, was deserving the most serious consideration of this House. When he said thus much, he must add, that he doubted whether he could proceed as sanguinely as his hon. Friend, the Member for Knaresborough bad done. When his hon. Friend talked of frauds, he doubted whether it would be right so to interpose as to place an effectual check or guard upon practices so vague and complicated. His hon. Friend had quoted instances of different descriptions, collected by him with great industry, but with which it would be extremely difficult to deal. For instance, his hon. Friend had spoken of watches, manufactured and sent to foreign markets, professed to be of the best description, but on trial it was found that the hands would only go once round. Now he should be glad to know by what means his hon. Friend the Member for Knaresborough would prevent the maker from manufacturing such articles. But there were many other manufactures in which the vigilance and ingenuity of the Legislature might be utterly and entirely evaded. On the whole, he thought there would be so much difficulty involved on the part of his hon. Friend's motion, that there would be no chance of the committee coming to a satisfactory conclusion, and therefore it would be better to confine the inquiry to the limits proposed.
Mr. Muntzwas perfectly convinced, that no legislative enactment could prevent or put down the truck-system. He had himself been extensively and for many years engaged in manufactures, but he bad never practised it, and he was convinced it never permanently could answer the purpose of any man who adopted it. It was not necessary in order to carry the truck-system into effect, or to commit this crime, as he supposed it must be called, that the party should appear in the matter. All that the party adopting the truck-system had to do was to support a shop in the neighbourhood of his own manufactory, and to take care that his workpeople were recommended to that shop, and that those who did not buy there should have no employment. No law could prevent this; and therefore it was that he contended the motion in its present

853
terms would prove an abortion. He hoped the right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Graham) would extend this inquiry, and give the hon. Member for Knaresborough full scope to prove all the exaggerated charges he had made against the manufacturers of the country. He did not hesitate to say that the hon. Gentleman had been grossly made use of on this question. It had been stated, that in Wales the truck-system was extensively practised. Now, he lived near Swansea Heath and other places where the iron trade was carried on, and he knew only of one party who adopted it, and that too in so easy, plain, and proper a manner, that it was praised and eulogised by the workmen themselves. They derived an advantage rather than otherwise from it. It was true there was distress now in the country, and that distress naturally gave the power to the masters to take advantage of the truck-system. But he could only see one way of remedying the evil complained of, and that was by legislating so as to place the country in that situation which would render the men independent of the masters. The committee proposed would be utterly useless, and no good end would be derived from it. The trouble would be thrown away, and the hon. Member for Knaresborough would be prevented from proving the case, -which he was bound, after the charges he had brought, to make out. He was extensively connected with the export trade, but he had never heard any complaint against the manufactures of the country. It was true, that pen. knives had been made from cast iron, but they were sold at a penny a piece, and nobody expected they were made of refined steel. He had bought thousands of gross of scissors at 3s. 6d. a gross; it was true they were not finely polished, and it was quite enough that they would cut. They were made at those low prices in order to meet the competition with foreign manufactures. He repeated, that the hon. Member for Knaresborough had been grossly made use of, and if he had spoken the truth, he ought to have full scope to prove the charges he had made against the manufacturing interests.
Mr. M. Philipsthought the amendment of the right hon. Baronet (Sir J, Graham) extremely judicious. He was not there to palliate the practice of fraud in any branch of manufactures; but he must say, he thought a discussion like
854
the present would tend very greatly to the injury of the trade of this country by lessening this nation in the eyes of foreigners. On these grounds he should deprecate any inquiry into the allegations of the hon. Member for Knaresborough. With reference to the truck-system, he was not aware that it was practised in the district with which he was connected; but he candidly admitted it was adopted in many districts. There were numerous concerns in this kingdom, situate at such distances from towns that the workpeople employed were in a state of complete isolation. If the hon. Member for Knaresborough proposed to make any inquiry as to these alleged frauds, he would only complete half the investigation if he limited it to those branches of trade to which he had alluded; but if he extended it to others, he might consider his committee a permanent one, and might find frauds to the same extent in every trade. He thought, too, that the hon. Member, in some of his observations with reference to foreign trade, had much mistaken the position of this country with regard to that trade. The hon. Member had referred particularly to the trade between this country and Brazil, and seemed to think that it was owing to some imperfect—fraudulent, he believed, the hon. Member called it— mode of manufacturing British cotton goods, that we were losing our trade with that country. Now, the hon. Member must recollect that the manufacturers of this country were not allowed to send what quality of goods they pleased, but must submit to foreign orders, and he would only point out the peculiar character of a great part of the Brazilian trade to show that the British manufacturers were innocent in following the instructions that were sent to them. There had been, he regretted to say, an enormous slave traffick between Brazil and the coast of Africa, and many of the articles sent to the Brazil markets had been manufactured for the purposes of exchange between those sordid individuals, the slave-owners of Brazil, and the traffickers in human blood. He had himself been engaged in the Brazil trade, and it was with a Brazil merchant that he commenced his commercial life; but he had the pride of being able to gay, that the firm he joined, although engaged in that trade, never would sully its character or honour, or Christian feeling, by sending

855
one article of British manufacture to the Brazilian market which it knew would be destined to the African trade. He therefore felt that he came out of this question with clean hands. We had been driven from the continental markets, the most valuable for the sale of British cotton goods, to the most distant and poorest markets in the world, and the tendency had been to deteriorate the quality of the articles manufactured. The cause of that was, he thought, our having pursued an unwise policy in not exchanging our articles for the produce of the continent. We bad also not only been driven to those distant markets, but had been placed in competition with continental manufacturers. With regard to using paste in the manufacture of cotton goods, he would recommend the hon. Member for Knaresborough to visit the manufacturing districts, and to inquire whether it was possible to weave certain cotton fabrics without flour or paste. Recently, in consequence of the high price of flour, the article of sago had in some manufactories been substituted, for it. But he wished to point out the extent and importance of the use of flour as a necessary article in the manufacture of cotton goods, and for that purpose he would refer to the evidence of Mr. W. Graham, of Glasgow, who was examined before the committee in 1833. In his own firm that gentleman said they paid as much as 600 l. or 700 l. per annum for the flour they used, and he considered that on an average in the year not less than 41,050,000 lb. of flour were used in manufacturing cotton goods. The hon. Member had employed exceedingly strong terms in his condemnation of the manufacturers, and he thought that the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department had taken a very proper course in regard to the hon. Member's motion. He did not think that any legislative enactment could put down the frauds described by the hon. Member; but, knowing bow much this subject affected the happiness and prosperity of the working classes, he thought such an inquiry as was proposed by the right hon. Baronet would not be useless, and so far, therefore, he agreed with him on this subject.
Mr. Plumptredoubted whether the practice of using paste in the manufacture of cotton goods justly came under the denomination of fraud; for he believed it
856
was the practice of the manufacturers to use it for the purpose of thickening certain cotton goods, and they did it openly and without concealment. As to the inferior nature of the articles, it must be remembered that inferior prices were paid for them.
Mr. R. Yorkethought the original motion of the hon. Member for Knaresborough was the best form in which this question could be put; and recollecting, as he did, how the Government, as a body at least, cheered on the hon. Member when he made what were doubtless very strong allegations against the manufacturers, it was their bounden duty to leave the question in its original form.
Mr. Cobdensaid, the question of the truck-system was first mooted on the fifth night of the discussion of the Corn-laws, and was mixed up with that discussion by the hon. Member for Knaresborough, who closed that night's debate with one of the most extraordinary and extravagant speeches ever heard in that House. It was full of charges against the Anti-Corn-law League, or those persons who advocated free-trade in corn, and the hon. Member was cheered on by hon. Members opposite. The hon. Member had repeated those charges that evening, but had included in them the iron-masters in the neighbourhood of Glasgow. He had, indeed, gone further, and embraced within his charges the whole of the manufacturers of Ireland. He had taken down the words and distinctly stated that those were the words of the hon. Member. He had been so often subject to this recantation, that he took down the words. But what he wished to say was, that the manufacturers of Ireland, and the iron and coal-masters of Lanarkshire, who were not Members of the Anti-Corn-law League, were included in the charges. The hon. Member also took in the Midland counties, and included the iron-masters of Staffordshire and Wales, who were not prominent supporters of free trade doctrines. It appeared, then, that the charge was comprehensive and fair; that all manufacturers and miners were included in this charge of the truck-system. And what did he find on the other side but that a perfectly fair spirit prevailed. The right hon. Baronet had fairly laid the question before the House, and he approved of the whole plan laid down by him. But he would ask the right hon. Baronet why he

857
had not shown the same fairness before when the accusations were levelled at a political party? The right hon. Baronet then sat with a smile upon his countenance as complacently as on this occasion, when there was no longer any reason for allowing those charges to go forth. And what was the effect of the hon. Member's charges? They were printed and circulated throughout the manufacturing districts; and the organs of the press took up the subject and attacked the Anti-Corn-law League as being persons addicted to the truck-system. He did not attach much importance to the hon. Member's statements, because he feared that they were made on insufficient evidence, as he had proved in his own case. but he looked with considerable pain at the conduct of Members of the Administration, who allowed those calumnies on a great part of the manufacturers to go forth to the civilized world, and did not say one word in discouragement of the rapturous applause with which they were received on the other side. But it was no longer a party question. The whole of the manufacturing and mining interests were included in it. [" No."] Did the hon. Member charge the Anti-Corn-law party exclusively. [Mr. Ferrand, "No."] Then the hon. Member included all manufacturers and miners. But the question was taken out of the hon. Members hand's, and they had the motion of the right hon. Baronet before them. He therefore presumed that the committee would be fairly appointed from both sides of the House, and that the inquiry would embrace all parties. As to the consequences of the inquiry, he was perfectly at ease. With respect to the accusation of adulterating manufactures, he did not fear that any statements that were made in that House would have the least effect on our foreign trade. We were exporting more manufactured goods than all the countries of the continent put together, and did they think that if all the goods were spurious the sale would continue? If it was in regard to the home trade, then the remedy was in their own hands. The manufacturers said, "Give us free trade in corn, and you shall have free-trade in manufactures." If, again, labour was redundant in this country, let them widen the field of industry, and open greater sources of employment. The inquiry that was to be made could not affect those gigantic
858
capitalists of whom he had heard so much as being implicated in the truck-system, but would affect the indigent manufacturers, who were only able to keep themselves by the truck-system, which virtually had the effect of lowering wages.
Sir Robert Peelwas surprised at the tone in which the hon. Gentleman had spoken, and at the charges he had brought forward against his right hon. Friend (Sir James Graham). He did not know under what peculiar obligation was his right hon. Friend to vindicate the Anti-Corn-law League. He had understood that this body had been pretty well represented in that House, and if they were charged with malpractices, surely these hon. Members would speak for them. How could his right hon. Friend, who knew nothing of their affairs, rise to defend them? A more intolerable inquisition than the hon. Member had established over the cheers and smiles of that side of the House he could not conceive. The hon. Member said—" You cheered, you were absolutely guilty of cheering; there was a smile upon your countenances, and therefore you sanctioned these imputations." Then it was said that this great party had circulated the speeches of the hon. Member for Knaresborough He had never heard of it, and he could not be responsible for such a distribution. It was just as unreasonable to say that the party took great interest in that speech, because it was distributed, as to make a reference to the Anti-Corn-law Circular, or some such publication, and inquire what part the hon. Gentleman took in its circulation. He thought it would be better if they left out those references to smiles and to cheers. If a motion had been made affecting the Corn-law League, he would have made proper inquiry, and would have acted from no party feeling, but upon the Corn-law debate it was not for him to vindicate the Anti-Corn-law League. This was the first time he had been called upon by any motion before Parliament to express his opinion, and he was now quite ready to say what course the House ought, in his opinion, to pursue in relation to the motion of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Knaresborough. He was not prepared to go into any inquiry such as was proposed, nor into any inquiry into the frauds which were said to have been committed by members of the Anti-

859
Corn-law League; for he was not prepared to throw any such imputation upon them as was made, but he was prepared to go into any inquiry upon the principle upon which the House of Commons ought to undertake it. It was not sufficient to say that an hon. Gentleman had made a speech which contained matters of grave charge; because, if the House were to yield to every such provocation, hon. Members might at any time command an inquiry into any subject upon which they chose to make assertions in the nature of charges against any body of men; but they had to determine whether, upon other grounds, this inquiry was to be had. With regard to the first branch of the proposition of the hon. Member, he should be exceedingly sorry to be a member of a committee having to make such an investigation. First, he could not acquiesce in a course, the effect of which would be to throw such an imputation upon the great body of the manufacturers of this country; for the House of Commons to presuppose the manufacturers of this country, with qualification or exemption, to be concerned in the commission off frauds such as were suggested, would be to sanction an imputation to which he could not lend himself. He had no doubt that frauds were committed; and so long as the world existed such frauds would continue to be carried on, and dishonest men would be found, whose criminal ingenuity would evade the operation of any law which might be adopted. The best security against such frauds was that which was afforded by free competition, and by the preference which the exertions of an honourable and an honest man would always gain over those of a person whose conduct was characterised by fraud. And the second ground On which he should oppose this part of the motion was, that precautions such as those proposed to be taken very frequently defeated themselves—that when the legislative precaution was supposed to be sufficiently strong, private care and attention was in a great degree lost sight of, and so the door was opened to increased frauds!. He recollected that when he first went to Ireland the butter trade was one in which great frauds were supposed to exist, and, in order to provide against the evil effects produced by the system which had been carried on, it was determined that a butter taster. should
860
be appointed, and there was not a single firkin of butter went into the market which was not tasted by this officer, and stamped with the Government seal. The consequence of this was, that the tasted butter always fetched its price, and the ordinary precautions of the public against frauds being no longer employed, a false reliance was placed in the legislative precautions used, and the frauds in the trade increased tenfold. Depend upon it, the natural interest of the purchaser was his greatest security against fraud; and the man in whose conduct, both as respects the home and foreign consumer, the greatest integrity and honesty was displayed would eventually succeed the best. Therefore it was that he should decidedly object to any proposition which would bear upon the face of it a general imputation against the whole of the manufacturers of this country. He firmly believed that the manufacturers of the country were exempt from that imputation; and he never could consent to hold it out to foreign countries that the House of Commons had thought it necessary to institute an inquiry into the frauds of our manufacturers. But another reason for which he should disapprove of such an inquiry as was proposed was, that he was sure, that even confined as it was proposed to be by his right hon. Friend (Sir J. Graham), it would be exceedingly difficult to see when there would be any probability of its termination. Referring to the truck system alone—that was a subject upon which he had had some experience, and upon entering into the discussion of such a question, it appeared, primâ facie, that the principle of any law to be agreed upon, should be, that all wages should be paid in the current coin of the realm. But he cautioned the House not to adopt any such view, because he believed that it would be found that it could not be sustained. Why, the Government itself was the largest truckmaster in the country. Let them take the navy or the army of this country; rations were paid to them both, and they were both supplied with clothes in lieu of pay, and this was a case in which the principle of the truck could not be departed from. In the course of any inquiry instituted into this subject, they would find gross and unwarrantable frauds, and he could imagine nothing worse than the conduct of a master who abused the

861
power which he possessed over his work-men, compelling them to purchase of him articles inferior to those which they could obtain elsewhere, but at the full price. He believed, however, that that was a state of things which existed, and he believed that even where a demand for labour existed, the master might yet possess the power to continue a system so obnoxious. It might be very difficult for the labourer, fixed by any ties to a particular spot, to escape from such a system; and when a master, directly or indirectly, compelled his workmen to deal with him without necessity, he said that it was a gross offence against society, and that he should rejoice to find that some law could be framed, which such a system could be effectually stopped. Cases would be found, however, where a system of truck was necessary; for in cases of mines and other works carried on in a part of the country remote from towns, and in a position where a daily visit to a town four or five miles distant, for the purchase of food, was requisite, for each of which a deduction would be made in the amount of wages to be received by the labourer, he thought that it would be admitted to be for the benefit of the workmen, that shops should be established in their own vicinity, even though it was by their masters, to supply their daily wants. Cases of this kind would be found, even where the masters had pursued a system of this kind to their own loss, the charges made by them for their commodities being perfectly fair and equitable. If such a system was contrary to law, undoubtedly it ought not to exist, but he believed that the result of any inquiry would show the extreme difficulty of getting rid of a mode of proceeding, in some instances so favourable to the men, whom it was supposed to injure. But taking the case of the rural labourer; he had heard it said that the measure the most prejudicial to the interests of this class of persons, was that which drove the farm labourer from the house of the farmer, and who by that means removed from him that moral check to which hitherto he bad been subjected by the watchful eye of his matter. But it was necessary to observe, that even this system of maintaining the labourers in rural districts had partaken of the truck system. While he Consented to this inquiry, therefore, in its modified form; while no one could repro-
862
bate more than he did the oppressive use of the authority of the master over his workmen, and still more the conduct of those men who passed off an inferior article to the labourers whom he employed, without affording him any option of purchase at the full price, he felt it his duty, in the first place, to notify to those who had had less experience than he had, that he thought that the time when the report of this committee would be made would be a very remote one; and that he also thought that they ought not to be too confident in their expectations of being able to put an end to the practice of paying wages in any way other than with the current coin of the realm.
Sir John Gueststated, that he entirely concurred in the appointment of the committee, but knowing the time which must necessarily occur before the committee could report to the House, he felt it necessary to repel the charge brought by the hon. Member for Knaresborough against the whole of the iron trade of South Wales. He could most positively assert that in the iron works within the borough which he had the honour to represent, and which contained six of the largest of the iron works in the kingdom, not one farthing was stopped for goods, but the whole of the wages were regularly paid in the current coin of the realm; indeed he could say for himself, and which he would not do hut for the charge brought against him, that he employed about 5,000 workmen, and paid in wages last year 250,000 l., every farthing of which was paid] in money. But although he exculpated the proprietors of works in Glamorganshire, he was bound to say that the truck-system did prevail in a very extensive degree in his neighbourhood in Monmouthshire, and his constituents were exceedingly anxious to have a stop put to it. Nor was it at all confined to bad times but prevailed always. Much had been said at to Members on that side of the House being parties to the truck-system; but he must say that an hon. Gentleman on the Ministerial side of the House, who had been so actively employed in prompting the hon. Member for Knaresborough, knew perfectly well that an iron-work in his immediate neighbourhood was most deeply implicated in this practice of the truck-system; indeed, so far did they carry it, that they not only compelled their workmen to purchase food, but they bad erected a brewery to supply the work-

863
men with beer also. He also stated that it was not done directly, but by advancing money in their shop, which they were compelled to buy goods with, or were discharged.
Mr. Alderman Copelandhad no hesitation in taking to himself the observations of the hon. Baronet (Sir John Guest) who had just sat down, in reference to the connection which he had with extensive iron works in Wales, or in stating the circumstances under which the shop to which the hon. Baronet had referred was carried on. The right hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had well stated that there were occasionally circumstances which would justify the adoption of a system very like truck, and where the interests of the workmen themselves demanded that such a plan should be carried out, and he had instanced the case of mining operations carried on in the midst of a barren country, at a distance from any of the ordinary means of supplying the daily wants of a large body of persons. So far from the workmen of the iron works with which he was connected, being at all treated upon what was called ordinarily the truck system, he might venture to assert that each workman received his wages in the current coin of the realm, and that if he chose to deal at the shops established for his convenience he might do so, but that he might go elsewhere if he pleased; he denied that he was compelled to lay out his money in the particular way which had been asserted. The hon. Baronet (Sir John Guest) had spoken of his having prompted the hon. Member for Knaresborough in bringing this subject before the House; he had no hesitation in saying that he had been endeavouring to persuade his hon. Friend to accede to the proposition of the right hon. Baronet, but he for one would most cordially have seconded the motion of his hon. Friend, for an inquiry, had he been in his place, and that it was only to the unavoidable circumstance of his having been absent from the House, that he had not presented himself as its seconder. But although he denied the existence of what was properly called the truck system in the iron works of Rhymney, he could not but state, that in the Staffordshire Potteries, and iron districts of South Staffordshire, with which he was also connected, it did exist to a very con-
864
siderable extent. He believed that in these districts it was not only carried on to a great extent as regarded the provisions of the labourers and the renting of their cottages, but that the working men were compelled to go even to the place of worship which their employers pointed out, and that the rental of their seats in chapel was deducted from their wages. This was an astounding fact; but be believed that if the inquiry took place, he should have no difficulty in proving it. The hon. Member concluded by expressing a hope that the hon. Member for Knaresborough would accede to the proposition of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department.
Mr. E. Turnerprotested against the supposition that the wages of the working classes of Cornwall were paid in any way except in the current coin of the realm.
Mr. C. Villierssaid, that after all that had been stated with respect to the truck system, and with respect to the admission that it did exist, and that to a considerable extent, as well as with respect to the circumstances under which it did exist, and the great difficulty of preventing its continuance—and feeling that he was in some degree answerable for this motion having been brought forward, he thought that he was called upon to say a few words to the House. He thought, that the hon. Member, for the satisfaction of his own mind and of the House, after the charges which the hon. Member had brought forward, the hon. Member was bound to move for this inquiry in the terms which he had originally proposed. The hon. Member had proposed an investigation into the question of whether these frauds did exist, and whether those persons whom he charged with them did evade the law. The hon. Member had proposed to prove the affirmative of these two propositions: that was what the hon. Member ought to be allowed to prove. He should support the motion of the hon. Member, and he could not think that the hon. Member would act wisely as regarded his own character, and the interests affected by this inquiry, if he confined the investigation to anything short of that which he had originally proposed. The hon. Member for Knaresborough had thought proper to make personal allusion to him with respect to a memorial which he had asked permission to read to the House, but which he had been unable to read in consequence of the etiquette of the House; and the hon. Gentleman had said,

865
that he was surprised that he should have brought a memorial from Yorkshire to which forged signatures were attached. The memorial which he had produced had been prepared in consequence of the statements made by the hon. Member when a similar memorial had been presented by him on behalf of 106 manufacturers in Lancashire, that he dared not attempt to bring such a memorial from Yorkshire. He had, in answer to that taunt, produced this 'memorial, in which it was distinctly denied, that there was one word of truth in anything that the hon. Member had said. He knew nothing of the parties who signed this memorial at the time, and as it had been decided that it would be out of order for him to read it to the House, he had sent it to the public newspapers, in order that the hon. Gentleman might refute the allegations contained in it, if they were untrue. The hon. Member not only charged the parties who had signed this memorial with practising the truck system themselves, but he had said also that some of the signatures appended to the document were forged. This, he thought, afforded an additional reason why the committee which he sought to obtain should be granted. With reference to this allegation of the hon. Member, to which he had last alluded, he had not only letters from the persons to whom this conduct was imputed, denying the truth of what the hon. Member had said, but he had had other memorials sent to him supporting that which he had first received, but which, of course, he could not produce to the House. He thought, therefore, that it. was incumbent on the hon. Member to press his motion in its terms on the attention of the House, and that he could not, in justice to himself, withdraw any portion of it.
Mr. Hardyobjected to the motion in its present form, for there was no knowing to what extent it would go; and he thought, that under all the circumstances, it was most inexpedient to agree to such a proposition. It had been justly said, that the frauds which our manufacturers might practise abroad were of a nature that must soon remedy themselves; but there was another part of the inquiry which appeared to him most material, and that related to the frauds practised by master manufacturers on the persons whom they employed. Into that subject it was high time that they should institute an inquiry for the immediate purpose of ascertaining if there were any means by which frauds of that nature
866
could be prevented. There was no one who took the trouble to make himself acquainted with the real condition of the manufacturers, who [could for a moment doubt, that they were to be found in some places in a state of perfect oppression, and they might, to some extent, be considered in a state of slavery, which one could not suppose to be possible in such a country as England. For the purpose of putting an end to that, and for the purpose of preventing its recurrence, some enactment might probably be deemed necessary. Much had, in former discussions on this subject, been said against the truck system, but he must be allowed to say, that that system was not altogether without its advantages: in many places it proved of great use, for it protected the working man against the frauds of small shopkeepers, who gave him, whenever they could, bad articles at a high price, and frequently contrived to get the working man into his debt, and to exercise over him an unendurable tyranny by means of law expenses and their inevitable consequences. To counteract those frightful mischiefs the master manufacturers in several places had established warehouses, where in many cases they sold goods to the working people in their employment, not merely without profit, but frequently at considerable loss, and that from no other motive than to save those poor persons from the frauds of shopkeepers, or the necessity of travelling great distances to market towns. Though he was not favourable to going so far as a portion of the motion proposed to carry them, yet he thought a case had been made out. for agreeing to the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the operation of the law as suggested by the right hon. Baronet. On the whole, he was opposed to the revival of those absurd regulations interfering with the freedom of trade by which the legislation of our ancestors were so disadvantageously marked. Having troubled the House with these few brief observations, he should merely say, that he intended to vote for the amendment proposed by the right hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department. If the hon. Mover went further than that, he would aim at accomplishing impossibilities —if he wished to be useful, he would content himself with the amendment proposed by the right hon. Baronet.
Dr. Bowringobjected to the generalisations in which hon. Gentlemen on the other side so largely dealt; the effect of

867
them was more pernicious than perhaps many Members at all supposed—nothing could be more injurious to the interests of this country than to have it supposed that our merchants were in the habit of vending bad articles, or of committing frauds upon their customers on the continent. He had had many opportunities of estimating the character of our merchants and manufactures; of comparing their character and their conduct with those of the merchants of other nations, and he did them no more than bare justice when he said that their honour and reputation stood higher than those of the merchants of any nation on the face of the earth. He thought, therefore, that it was alike unjust and unwise to indulge in any complaints against the quality of the merchandise sent abroad, and he always was of opinion that nothing could be more absurd than any attempt to imitate the pernicious interference which our ancestors were so ready to practise in all that related to commerce and manufactures. Instances could be adduced in which manufactures had actually perished from unwise but well-intended interference. Our object should be to emancipate, but not to enthral, our manufactures.
Sir C, M. Burrellconfessed, that he did not think the assertions made by the last speaker were at all borne out by the facts; he thought, on the contrary, that the speech of the hon. Member for Manchester, and the speeches of other Members of that House, could leave no doubt on the minds of those who heard them that frauds were occasionally committed by British merchants, and upon that ground, as well as for other reasons, he did think that the hon. Mover was fully justified in the course which he had taken, and he sincerely wished that the House would afford the working classes an opportunity of being heard before a committee. The hon. Mover had done his duty by manfully and fearlessly bringing the question under the consideration of Parliament.
Mr. Ferrandobserved, that the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Dorchester had said that his second resolution was useless—that the standing order was sufficient for all the purposes which could be required; but he would ask how were the suffering parties to be indemnified? To that it was necessary that a reply should be given. He was extremely anxious that the working classes should derive some benefit from the motion which he had made, and rather than lose the advantage
868
of it altogether he should agree to the proposition of the right hon. Baronet. It was said that the people might make their complaints known by means of the right of petition; but let it not be forgotten that even petitioning was attended with a degree of expense which poor men could not always defray. But the main question was this, did the standing orders sufficiently protect those witnesses who might come before committees, and who were disposed to speak the truth? In his opinion, it was absolutely necessary that they should have more protection than the standing order in its present state was capable of affording to men who, the moment they returned from London after giving their evidence, were in danger of losing their employments. He, under all the circumstances, thought it best to accept the proposition of the right hon. Member for Dorchester; but the House might rest satisfied that that would not supersede the demands of the people. Those demands would go on from day to day, increasing and gaining ground, until at length Parliament would see the necessity of granting the sort of inquiry which he wanted.
Amendment agreed to, and select Committee appointed, in accordance with the motion of Sir J. Graham.

PUNISHMENT OF DEATH (IRELAND).
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonmoved for leave to bring in a bill
"To assimilate the law in Ireland, as to the punishment of death, to the law in England; and to abolish the punishment of death in certain cases in Ireland, and to substitute other punishment in lieu thereof."
The bill, he said, would contain some further provisions than were barely necessary for effecting the assimilation which it was its chief object to produce. In the reign of George the 2nd, an Irish act was passed, rendering it a capital offence for any person to remain in Ireland who was in the service of the French King, and any one receiving or harbouring such a person incurred capital punishment. It was proposed by the present bill to repeal that act. In many respects the bill would accord with the measure introduced by Mr. F. Kelly.
Leave given.
Bill brought in, and read a first time.

GRINDING BONDED CORN.
Mr. Huttmoved for a select committee, to consider

869
the expediency of renewing any of the provisions of the act of George the 4th., commonly called the Grinding Act, and under what modifications.
Agreed to.

CIVIL BILL DECREES (IRELAND).
Lord Eliotmoved for leave to bring in a bill
" To amend and explain so much of the two acts of the 6th and 7th years of his late Majesty, and of the 1st year of her present Majesty, as relates to the execution of civil bill decrees for the possession of land in Ireland."
The noble Lord stated, that one of the objects of the intended measure was to enable sheriffs to appoint sufficient deputies for the execution of decrees.
Mr. M. J. O' Connellsaid, heretofore the special bailiffs were appointed at the re- commendation of the plaintiffs, and that the decrees were executed at the peril of the plaintiffs. The result was anything but satisfactory, and he thought, therefore, that provision should be made for the appointment of respectable persons.
Lord Eliotfelt assured, that under the bill, respectable persons would in future be appointed.
Leave given.
Bill brought in and read a first time.
House adjourned.

MINUTES.
BILLS, Public. —2a. Mutiny; Marine Mutiny.
3a and passed:—Indemnity; Public Works.
Private.—2a. Sir J. Cass's Charity (Shaw's) Estate; Birmingham, and Liverpool Junction Canal.
Reported.—Wakeyhill Inclosure; Benecke's Naturalization; Fierville's Naturalization; Duke of Bedford's Estate (H.C.); Stanhope and Tyne Railway; Severn Navigation; Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway.
3a. and passed:—Brandling Junction Railway; Cottenham Inclosure.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By the Earl of Radnor. Earl Fitzwilliam, and Lord Kinnaird, from Stroud, Warminster, Strafford, West Ham, Falkirk, Mansfield, Plaistow, Bromley, Marsden, Colne, Forfar, and a great many other places, for a Repeal of the Corn-Laws.—By Viscount Melbourne, from Harleston, for a Fixed Duty on Corn.—By the Marquess of Downshire, from Sligo, for a Revision of the Marriage Law.—By the Earl of Mountcashel, from Millowners in Queen's County, Moate, Kilbride, and other places, against the Importation of Foreign Flour into Ireland; and from the Mill-owners of Sunderland, against the Importation of Foreign Flour into the United Kingdom—From the Confectioners of Manchester, for Inquiry and Protection.—From Members of the Rutland Agricultural Society, from Lincoln, Cirencester, Warwick, Aberdeen, and other places, for Protection to the Agricultural Interest.—From Knock, Breda, and Templemore, for the Encouragement of Schools in connexion with the Church Education Society (Ireland).—From Dissenting Congregations at Atrogill, and Cork, that Marriages solemnized by a Dissenting or Presbyterian Minister between Members of the Church of England and Dissenters and Presbyterians may be Valid.—From Alloa, against the Income-tax.—From Pembroke, Swansea, and Haverford West, against the proposed Removal of the Irish Mail Packet Station.

CATTLE — THE TARIFF.
A petition having been presented from the Rutland Agricultural Society, for protection to the agricultural interest,
The Earl of Hardwickesaid, he would take that opportunity of making a few observations, and of referring to certain returns, for the purpose of showing, that the fears of the petitioners and others who concurred with them as to the danger of any extensive importation of live stock from the Continent were unfounded. He held in his hand a return which would show the great increase in the importation of cattle, sheep, &c, from Ireland to England, by Liverpool, and coastwise, between the years 1826 and 1839. In the former year the—

Black cattle were

57,395

Sheep

62,819

Pigs

73,912

Bacon and hams (cwts.)

338,218

Beef and pork (barrels)

143,725

In the year 1839 the importations were—

Black cattle

169,892

Calves

1,566

Sheep

252,057

Lambs

28,351

Pigs

390,561

Horses

5,674

Mules

434

The total value of these amounted to 3,330,857 l. The number of oxen and sheep sold in Smithfield, from 1833 to 1839, both inclusive, were as follows:—

Years.

Oxen.

Sheep.

1833

152,093

1,167,820

1834

162,485

1,237,360

1835

170,375

1,381,540

1836

164,351

1,219,510

1837

172,435

1,329,010

1838

183,362

1,403,400

1839

180,780

1,360,250

This showed an average increase of 3 per cent, on oxen, and of 2¼ on sheep. He would now beg to call the attention of their Lordships to the imports and exports of live cattle in some of the continental states for given periods. From this it would appear that—
In 1837, France had of live cattle:—Imports, 587,554; exports, 422,136. In 1836 Denmark exported 28, 323 oxen, 5,009 cows, 6,903 calves, and 13,028 pigs.
From the years 1832 to 1836, both included, the imports and exports of the "Prussian Commercial Union" of sheep, pigs, calves, cows, oxen, and bulls, were as follows:—

Years.

Imports.

Exports.

1832

182,878

72,204

1833

207,528

79,208

1834

287,345

180,423

1835

279,200

135,678

1836

336,700

129,746

In Prussia generally the imports and exports of oxen, cows, and calves were as follows:—

Years.

Imports.

Exports.

1828

19,752

8,197

1829

20,342

7,971

1830

17,901

9,012

1831

13,556

8,062

Of sheep and swine in the same years there were—

Years.

Imports.

Exports.

1828

371,730

118,426

1829

324,116

107,712

1830

361,422

140,549

1831

197,625

93,598

In the years 1832 to 1836, both inclusive, the imports and exports were—

IMPORTS.

1832.

1833.

Oxen

17,606

18,387

Cows

6,437

7,179

Young cattle

3,067

3,240

Pigs (fat)

15,698

14,826

Pigs (lean)

102,278

117,516

Sheep

37,792

46,380

Total

182,878

207,528

In 1834 the total imports of all the above oxen, cows, &c, were 287,345. In 1835 the total imports were 279,200. In 1836 they were 336,700. The exports were in the same year as follows:—

EXPORTS.

Oxen, Cows, Young Cattle, &c.

1832

72,204

1833

79,218

1834

180,423

1835

135,678

1836

129,746

In the year 1837 Sweden imported 1,139 horned cattle from Finland, and 800 other, but she exported none in that year.
It would be seen from those returns, that the imports of all the countries he had named were much greater than the exports, and that from that circumstance, and the continued increasing consumption of the countries themselves, there was no ground for apprehending any influx of foreign cattle into England. Let it be remembered, that of all the exports of cattle from foreign countries none as yet could come to England, and that the exports
720
which he had read were to supply other markets, in which the demand, there was no reason for believing, would be less henceforward than it had been heretofore. Under these circumstances he could by no means concur with those who apprehended any injury to the agricultural interests from an importation of foreign cattle.
The Earl of Yarboroughdid not take the same view of the case as the noble Earl. He thought the tariff would be made use of for an extensive importation of foreign cattle and provisions.
Petition laid on the Table.

FRUIT—THE TARIFF.
The Earl of Radnorbegged to call their Lordships' attention to the new duty on the importation of foreign apples, pears, &c., and said, that the change of duty from 5 to 15 per cent, ad valorem was injudicious and unjust to the consumer in this country. Notwithstanding the low duty, the price of apples had risen in the last two years.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, that this had arisen from two successive deficient crops in the last two years. He thought that the protection given to the home growers of apples by the tariff was only what they had a fair claim to.
The Earl of Radnormoved for some returns showing the amount of foreign fruit imported since 1833, and the duty paid.—Ordered.

CORN-LAW — FIXED DUTY.
Lord Broughamwished to give notice of the course he intended to take with respect to the bill on which they would soon be called upon to go into committee. After the debate of last night, which went on the question of restriction or no restriction, and after that which his noble Friend (Lord Melbourne) was about to raise on the question as to the manner in which a certain restriction was to be carried into effect, he did not think, that he should discharge his duty if he did not give their Lordships an opportunity of recording their opinions as to the great and important question of any duty on the importation of human food. It was perfectly clear that neither on the debate of last night, nor on that which was now about to come on, could their Lordships come to a satisfactory decision so as to affect what he considered the great question. It was his intention to give their Lordships that opportunity, and would therefore, as soon as the motion

721
of his noble Friend should be disposed of, take the sense of their Lordships on each of the three resolutions which he would read. The question which they would decide this evening would be as to the preference to be given to a fixed duty or a sliding-scale; but the question which his resolutions would raise would be as to the principle of any duty in any way on the introduction of foreign corn. His resolutions would be—
" 1. That no duty ought to be imposed upon the importation of foreign corn for the purpose of protecting the agriculturist by taxing the introduction of food.
" 2. That no duty ought to be imposed upon the importation of foreign corn for the purpose of regulating trade by taxing the introduction of food.
" 3. That no duty ought to be imposed upon the importation of foreign corn for the purpose of raising the revenue by taxing the introduction of food."

CORN IMPORTATION BILL.
The Earl of Riponmoved the Order of the day for going into committee on the Corn Importation bill.
Viscount Melbournesaid, he wished to bring on the motion, of which he had given notice, before the Order of the day should be read.
The Earl of Riponhad understood that the motion was to be made as an amendment to the Order of the day, but if the noble Viscount wished to bring it forward before the Order of the day was read, he had not the slightest objection to offer to the arrangement.
Viscount Melbourne:I think the course I propose will be more convenient, and therefore, with the permission of the House, I will proceed. If the resolution which I am about to submit to the House be carried as a substantive motion, it will, of course, have the same effect as if carried as an amendment; but in again bringing under the attention of your Lordships a subject which has been so repeatedly discussed, and so recently debated, it would be unpardonable in me if I were to urge any topic upon your Lordships which I do not think necessary to explain my own conduct, or to have an effect upon the decision of your Lordships. It is hardly necessary for me to declare that I mean to bring forward this resolution as calmly and impartially as I can, without any party allusions, or any party object whatever, and without indulging in any observations
722
of a criminatory or recriminatory character. My noble Friend opposite, who opened the debate last night (the Earl of Ripon), in the course of his speech, divided the subject into two parts: first, the question whether there ought to be any duty whatever on the importation of food; and secondly, if that question should be decided in the affirmative, under what regulations a duty ought to be imposed. Strictly speaking, it is only with the second branch of the question I have to deal. At the same time it is, doubtless, necessary for me to make a few observations upon the general question in vindication and explanation of my own opinions. The question to which I now refer, is one which has been much discussed throughout the country, and has deeply interested the feelings of the people, namely, the question as to whether there should be any duty at all upon the importation of corn, or whether it ought not to be allowed to be imported free from all parts of the world. I am a warm friend to the principles of free-trade, but I am not so friendly as others are to the immediate and decided recognition of those principles in the present circumstances of the world. I certainly think that, from the beginning, it would have been a far better arrangement for the human race if every nation had cultivated only the productions for which its own climate was fitted, and only such manufactures as the industry and skill of its inhabitants are calculated to produce with advantage, and had bartered those productions for others which other nations could produce more advantageously. That is a view of the question which is supported by all reason, all argument, and all regard for the general interests of the communities of the world; but I cannot conceal from myself, that all custom, all usage, all practice, all law, all national institutions, and consequently almost all feeling, have been on the other side; and the consequence is, that whilst the principle of free-trade is generally admitted to be correct, yet the feelings to which I have adverted have got such strong hold of the public mind that, though there are to be found persons ready enough at public meetings to profess their admiration of free-trade, and to sign petitions in its favour, nevertheless these same persons, in conversing about the taking off of any particular duty, invariably consider the question solely with reference to the interests of the home producer of the article to which I the duty applies, and without any regard

723
to the interests of the consumer. There is a strong public feeling upon the subject, and that is the difficulty with which we have to deal in introducing and carrying into practice the principle of free-trade. With respect to free-trade in corn, I wish to say that I certainly am not prepared to adopt the resolutions about to be proposed by my noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), and for that I will presently give my reasons, I will now, however, advert to some arguments which are advanced in justification of protecting the agricultural interest, and particularly to one which has a great effect upon the minds of many persons, as, I confess, it once had upon mine—I mean the argument founded upon the exclusive burdens said to be borne by agriculture. Upon full consideration, I think that is no reason for maintaining the present system. I Will not now stop to inquire whether the alleged exclusive burdens really exist; but I say, that if they do exist, We ought to compensate the landed interest in some other mode, and that they form no sufficient reason for inflicting upon the community generally the evils attributed to the Corn-laws. Nor do I think there is much weight in the argument that we should be independent of foreign supply. We find, if we go bark to ancient history, that it was not acted on in former times. The great and powerful states of Athens and Rome were both of them, and Athens more particularly dependent on other countries for a supply of corn, and the great orator, of the former, in that oration of which my noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) has lately given a translation to the public, lays down the principle, that to all mankind his countrymen must look for a supply of corn. And if you say, that the splendour of Athens was of a transitory description— and that her great power quickly passed away—what can you answer in the case of Rome, the most strongly established empire, and the greatest monument of human strength, wisdom, and power, that ever existed on the face of the earth? I dismiss those examples, with the remark that the decadence of those states can in no respect be ascribed to their dependence on foreign countries for a supply of food. My noble Friend (Earl Ripon) argued last night that, supposing the increase of the population to go on as it proceeded, we could never rely on foreign countries for giving us a supply of food adequate to the wants of the population. I should say the situation of foreign countries is fat more a subject for complaint,
724
as they are rendered dependent upon us. I take it the tradesman is a good deal more dependent on the customer, than the customer can possibly be on the tradesman. And in the same way, those who sell are much more dependent on those who purchase than the purchaser is on them. As I fear that no regulations between mankind can prevent those differences and feelings between nations which unfortunately cause quarrels, and ultimately lead to war, I should say that nothing is better calculated than commercial relations and mutual dependence for the produce of each to prevent war in the first instance, to mitigate its evils when it does occur, and to bring it to a speedy conclusion. Well, then, my Lords, it may be said, "With all these arguments in favour of free-trade, why are you not for it?" I shall state very shortly the reasons. I should be for it, if 1 could place any confidence in the arguments of my noble Friend (Earl Ripon) last night, that the supply from foreign nations must be very small and inconsiderable. I own it is not that I fear that we shall get too little. My noble Friend maintained that we should get but a small supply, but still a supply sufficient to depress agriculture, and to throw land out of cultivation, without relieving the wants of the community. I think that the demand and supply would soon adjust itself in a satisfactory manner. But, I admit, my fear is, that foreign countries would not send too little, but that they would send a great deal too much. I have read something on this subject. I have listened to the arguments which have been urged respecting it. I have looked into many pamphlets and documents which treated of it; but, I own, I cannot find a resting-place for the sole of the foot—I cannot find any sufficient foundation for the assumption, that we could not hope for any considerable supply from other countries. A noble Lord delivered last night a very able argument on this subject, in which he stated, that if he could believe that foreign nations could send as much corn, and at such a price, as to displace the whole of the corn grown on our poor lands, or a great part of it, he should be in favour of such a change. That is the real question—how much com can you get from abroad, and at what price? I do not believe that question can be answered beforehand. It can only be ascertained (and I am not in favour of trying it now) by making the experiment. The noble Lords opposite will, I am sure, agree in the prin-

725
ciple that this is not the time to shock public opinion and feeling on this question, and which I certainly take to be this, that it is not safe at once to do away with all protection. This is the proposition which has been relied on throughout this discussion. Well, then, the question remains, how we may best regulate that protection. I have no question whatever in my own mind that the best course on this subject is the imposition of a fixed duty; for the sake of the certainty it will give to trade, and the removal of all the restrictions which at present impede it. It will give an equal amount of protection to agriculture, it will be more productive in point of revenue, and it will avoid all the frauds which it is alleged have taken place with respect to the averages. I know it has been said, that those who have examined this subject are convinced that frauds have not taken place to the extent alleged. However, it is certain, that a very strong opinion prevails on the subject, and that very great discontent was the consequence. If fraud has existed, it will put an end to it, and if it does not prevail, it would put an end to what is very nearly as injurious as fraud itself—namely, the suspicion of its existence under a system to which no certainty can belong. But, throughout the whole of these discussions I think it has been admitted, that a fixed duty would be more favourable to trade. But, then, says the noble Lord who spoke with so much ability last night, "After all, the principal objection to a fixed duty is, that it cannot be maintained when corn rises to a high price." Now, the answer to that is, that it never would rise to so high a price as was supposed. No man certainly can answer what the price may be, but at the same time it must be admitted, that under the system I propose, you would be more likely to have a certain and steady price of corn than under the present. Why cannot you make the attempt to solve this difficulty by maintaining such a system? You have maintained a system infinitely more objectionable. Why not change it for One founded on the grounds of sense and reason—much more prudent and rational, and free from the objections which can be urged against the present scale. |The people of this country have great power and influence. They have made no rash use of the weapons in their hands. Their efforts with regard to this law have been hitherto marked with great prudence, though sufficient
726
pains were taken to excite them on the subject. All these appeals have failed, and I do not believe that if there was a bad harvest immediately after such a change as I propose, and that there was temporarily a high and distressing price of food, that you would have any more difficulty in maintaining the fixed duty than you have in preserving your present scale. I know very well that great attempts might be used to inflame the public mind; but I do believe the people would be found fair and reasonable, and that you might adhere to the new system. I have not stated the amount of the duty I propose. I merely call on you to affirm a resolution, that the change I submit would be more advantageous to trade and the general welfare of the community. I have not inserted the amount of duty, because, in the first place, it is contrary to the usage of Parliament to do so in this House; but my opinion is in favour of the amount of duty proposed by the late Government, and which, if it had been entertained by the representatives of the landed interest in a friendly spirit, would have given a far greater hope of all differences being compromised, and a final settlement arrived at, than the proposal which is now submitted. I much fear that the opportunity for conciliation is passed. The grounds on which I recommend this bill appear to me clear and intelligible. I recommend it, as it will have the effect of preventing fraud, and the suspicion of fraud; and I recommend it generally as a great improvement on the present system. I make this motion, and I move this resolution, with reference to the past, with application to the present time, and with the prospect of the future. With reference to the past, in justification of the Government which brought it forward: with respect to the present, because I think it the best course that can be adopted; and-though I have little hope of being able to induce your Lordships to accede to it— with respect to the future, I have a perfect confidence that you will one day sanction it, and that it will become the law of this country. The noble Viscount concluded by moving the following resolution:—
" That it is the opinion of this House that a fixed duty upon the importation of foreign corn and flour would be more advantageous to trade, and more Conducive to the general welfare of all classes of the people, than a graduated duty varying with the average of prices in the markets of this country."
The Earl of Riponsaid, that the manner in which his noble Friend had introduced his resolution to the House rendered it unnecessary for him to trouble their Lordships at any length on the proposition which his noble Friend had submitted for their Lordships' consideration. Nothing could be more fair, nothing could be more candid, or more reasonable, than the mode in which his noble Friend had brought his resolution forward; but, at the same time, he could not forbear from impressing on their Lordships how exceedingly unwise and imprudent it would be in their Lordships to accede to that proposition. In the course of last night their Lordships had rejected propositions, the object of which was to stop the progress of the present bill. They had not only done that, but they had by a specific vote in favour of the second reading so far confirmed the principle on which the bill was founded. The present proposition of his noble Friend went the length of calling on their Lordships to rescind the vote they had already come to, for the purpose of adopting an entirely new principle for the purpose of regulating the trade in corn, though his noble Friend had, at the same time, abstained from giving their Lordships any glimmering of the mode in which he proposed to carry his resolution into effect. He did not think that their Lordships could be prepared, in reasonable consistency, to agree to that resolution. What would be the first effect of the carrying of that resolution? If his noble Friend succeeded in passing his resolution, then there was an end of the bill before the House; and their Lordships would be giving a triumph to the noble Earl (Earl Stanhope), who last night in vain tried to extinguish the bill. And when the present bill was thus got rid of, their Lordships would be no further advanced on the subject. Every body admitted that some measure with regard to corn was necessary. All, but a very few, whose number last night did not exceed seventeen, conceived it to be necessary to come to some settlement of this question. But suppose their Lordships were to determine that his noble Friend's proposition was a wise one, and that the present bill ought to be extinguished, they would still leave the existing law, with all its deformities, whatever they might be, in full force, and what ground would their Lordships have to anticipate that they
728
would be, in the course of the present Session, or at any period that could be named, in a condition to alter the law, even according to the views of his noble Friend? He was, therefore, of opinion, that no possible practical result of any beneficial kind could follow from the adoption of his noble Friend's resolution. At the same time he should not wish to put his objection to the resolution on the mere ground of technical inconvenience in reference to the actual state of the question. He confessed he did object to his noble Friend's proposition on principle. He believed that it would not be found to effect its object; that it was liable to great practical difficulty and evil in its execution. He thought it would not relieve the country from any inconveniences which might be alleged to belong to the present system. On the contrary, he believed that it would be found, in some respects, to aggravate those evils, and its disadvantages would more than counterbalance its advantages. His noble Friend said he declined entering into any details, or stating any specific plan, but that he remained attached to the scheme proposed by his own Government last year, which went to the imposition of a protective duty of 8s. His noble Friend, in the course of his speech, had stated many good reasons, though he had at the same time thrown overboard some equally sound arguments, for objecting to what was called a free-trade in corn. Therefore, he said, that his fixed duty was to be established on the principle of protection; but he had never told the House on what ground it was, that he conceived that a permanent duty of 8s. would or could give the necessary protection. To propose a duty which would not give the protection which the noble Lord admitted to be indispensably necessary was worse than useless. It would mislead those for whose benefit it was intended. In his opinion a permanent fixed duty of 8s. appeared in the present state of things no protection at all. If they adopted the principle of protection, they must assume this—that up to a certain point protection was really prohibition. On what ground, then, was the amount of protection to be calculated? The basis of the calculation must, he conceived, be a combination of the price at which the article might be introduced from foreign countries, and the price at which it could be produced, in an adequate amount, in this country. If the

729
price at which foreign corn could be imported into this country upon an average of years should be 40 s., and if the remunerating price here (whatever difficulties might exist in precisely ascertaining the particular amount) should lie between 56 s. and 60 s., it was manifest that a duty of 8s. was no protection at all; and it would therefore be a delusion to offer to the growers of corn a protection which, in reference to the remunerating price here, would end in being no protection at all. There was another objection to this plan of a fixed duty which in his mind appeared insuperable. He did not deny that there was a simplicity and uniformity of operation in fixed duty which recommended it as a general principle in any other matter except one of such vital consequence as the food of the people. This, he repeated, was a subject of such vital consequence that it seemed to be exempted from the ordinary principles which governed commercial matters. He believed, indeed, that this fixed duty would be no protection at all at the time when protection was essentially necessary, namely, when prices here were very low. No one, of course, presumed to complain, or to insinuate the most remote shadow of complaint, against a low price of corn, if it arose from the bounty of Providence and the abundance of our own production. But if it were not so produced, but occasioned by an abundant supply, which might not be wanted, poured in from other countries, then it would create that discouragement which the noble Lord was anxious should not be given to the agriculturists of this country. The noble Lord said there was something advantageous to the operations of commerce in a fixed duty, which did not belong to the graduated scale of the present law. But their Lordships must argue this question on principle, and not on the mode in which his noble Friend wished to apply it. They must argue it on the principle that the protection to be given must be sufficient. If, then, the protection was to be sufficient, it must be of such an amount as would insure to the growers of corn a reasonable prospect of being able to obtain that which was held to be a remunerating price. His noble Friend could not escape from this question of a remunerating price, and it must be one of the elements of his plan. If the protection offered was sufficient to insure, as far as
730
any law could, a remunerating price (though, in his opinion, no law could insure it, and he never proposed any Corn-law for such a purpose, but with the view of not admitting foreign corn when prices were low in this country), still prices might rise so high as to make the protective duty of 8s. a grievance. His noble Friend said, that there could be no difficulty in maintaining the duty; and that he was confident that the good sense of the people would not object to the fixed duty when prices were high, in consideration of the advantages which he presumed they would get from it when prices were low. But would it not be most imprudent to act on such a reliance? His noble Friend had not shadowed forth even the most misty view of the mode in which he was prepared to meet the case of prices rising very high, but he seemed to anticipate that it would then be necessary to take some measure to put an end to the duty. If this were so, the duty was not a fixed one; but something which vanished— something which was extinguished by a necessity, and it wanted the essential quality of a fixed duty—that of being unchangeable. By the way, his noble Friend had let out that he might have been disposed, if circumstances had been favourable, and if the agricultural interest had been a little more squeezable, to have offered them a greater protection, say 12 s. or 14 s. [Viscount Melbourne: I named no sum.] No, the noble Lord named no sum, and there was the ingenuity of his proceeding; but that constituted a reason why their Lordships ought not to agree to a proposition about which they knew nothing. What did the noble Lord propose to do when corn rose so high that it would be impossible to maintain the fixed duty? He had not told the House that the law which he proposed should enact his principle would contain in itself any provisions which would meet this case. Was the remission of the duty to be dependent on the will of the Government? Was it to be an act of authority on the part of the State? If so, where was the certainty on which the framer of the resolution had so much relief? At one time an Administration might think a certain price exorbitantly high, which at another time another Administration might deem a moderate price. Thus, instead of having a law which everybody might watch, and the operation of which might be foreseen by

731
every one, the people would have to calculate on that which they could not fore-see—namely, the disposition of the Government for the time being to deal with the question according to their own opinions, or according to that pressure from without which might force them against their better judgment to withdraw the duty. What was the objection to the graduated scale? The great rapidity in its changes, and the inducement thereby held out for parties to speculate, and unduly influence the averages. But the noble Lord's plan would produce a much greater rapidity of change. There would be a change from 8s.. to nothing, and back again from nothing to 8s. The whole plan would be from the beginning to the end a matter of uncertainty; consequently this principle of a fixed duty could not be made to work satisfactorily; and it did not appear that the graduated scale, the intrinsic abstract justice of which the noble Lord had not denied, could be less satisfactory to the producer, and less calculated to give relief, as regarded time, to the; consumer, than the other plan of a fixed duty, if established on the principle of protection. If the noble Lord were to say that, instead of giving a duty for protection, he would impose a moderate duty for the purpose of revenue, which would have little or no effect on the price of the article, he could understand, though he should object to the principle, that it would not be liable to the particular objections urged against a fixed duty given for protection. It did appear to him that the plan of the fixed duty had none of the advantages which the noble Lord ascribed to it; for it would leave every thing in a state of uncertainty. Nobody would know the amount of protection under a fixed duty, and they would have at an early period to do again that which some noble Lord said they must do again if the bill now on the Table passed,—.namely legislate anew on the subject. It was possible. they might have to legislate again. No persons supposed that any law would last for eternity, except those foolish people the Medes and the Persians; and something had fallen from the noble Lord opposite, from which it appeared that he did not look upon his proposition as one that he could permanently maintain; because he said, that in regarding the various considerations which led him to object to the motion of a noble and learned Lord, he
732
did not think that the state of things now would warrant the absence of all protection. The use of the word "now" in connexion with the plan which the noble Lord proposed was an argument of its instability, and brought him to the conclusion that those who thought that protection must be given to agriculture would, of necessity, vote against his resolution.
The Earl of Clarendonsaid, as he had long been convinced of the great and increasing evils of the Corn-laws, he was desirous, not only of stating the grounds of that opinion, and the reason why he supported the resolution of his noble Friend; but also of congratulating the House and the country upon the time having at length arrived, when by the common agreement of all parties, with the exception of seventeen noble Lords who voted last night with the noble Earl, some change had become indispensable, and an adherence to our present system into all its train of attendant misfortunes, was no longer looked upon as possible He only wished he could also congratulate the House upon the bill which his noble Friend had last night introduced, being calculated to satisfy public expectation, or alleviate the unparalleled distress under which so large a portion of their fellow-countrymen were labouring; but it appeared to him, that it no more required the noble Duke (the Duke of Bucking-ham), to make the sacrifice, (and a painful one it was, no doubt, to him), of abandoning his colleagues on the eve of the meeting of Parliament, than it justified the visions of ruin and revolution which the noble Earl Stanhope conjured up, and compared to which he insisted that the horrors of the French Revolution were but "milk and water," His noble Friend, (the Earl of Hardewicke) had proved last night in the clearest manner that this measure would not deprive the agricultural interest of an atom of the real protection which they now enjoyed, and would not abate a single one of the evils with which the present Corn-laws are chargeable. He rejoiced, however, at the introduction of this measure, which he looked upon as a great and important event, because it was an abandonment of all those positions hitherto, held by the party now in power, but which they had deserted in order to seek others from which they would be still more easily driven, The positions upon which they

733
last year, in opposition, took their stand were, that the Corn-laws worked for the good of the community—that they gave no more than the just protection to the farmer—that they secured to the country a sufficient supply of corn, and that they prevented fluctuation in price, and dependence upon foreigners. All these had now been abandoned, and the real benefit to be expected from the measure was to be looked for in the debates which had taken place upon it; they were altogether composed of concessions on the part of those who introduced and supported the bill in the other House—it was now discovered, that the protection was excessive and unnecessary—that the fluctuation in price was great, and ought to be diminished— that the supply of food was regulated by gambling, and that between two and three millions of persons, more than one-tenth of the population of England and Scotland were absolutely dependent upon foreign countries for the bread they eat. Now, no argument had been more used in that House, than that we should be independent of foreign nations for our supply of corn, in total disregard of the fact that, of all countries, this was the one most dependent on other nations, and that this very dependence was one of the chief sources of our greatness and power, Were we not dependent upon foreigners, for the 50,000,000 worth of British manufactures and produce that we export annually, at least half of which is paid in the wages of labour, Without the manufactures that we export, how could we import the raw materials necessary for them—the cotton, the silk, the hemp, the timber, the wine and oil, and tea, the very necessaries, as well as luxuries of life? Could we maintain our three millions of tons of shipping, if we were independent of foreign nations? Did not the existence of the navy itself depend upon foreign nations? And yet, whenever the question was raised of how we could best import a certain quantity of foreign corn that we must have, and which is over and above what we can produce, we are then always told that we ought to be independent of foreign nations. As a noble Earl (Earl Winchilsea) had said, we ought not to be dependent upon a country which, at any time, owing either to political circumstances, or to domestic, or fiscal regulations, might interfere and deprive us of what we wanted when at the
734
time of our utmost need. But the true way to be independent of foreign nations, was to have commercial relations with them all; far better was it to be constantly dependent on all than to be occasionally dependent upon any, Then we could reckon on a regular supply for our wants; then we might reckon on a regular demand for our manufactures; then we might guard against that drain of gold and derangement of the monetary system, which, only three years ago, brought the Bank of England to the very verge of insolvency, and that national calamity would beyond all question have occurred but for the assistance afforded by the Bank of France—an instance, by the way, of the use of being dependent on foreign nations. But above all it was in that mutual dependence among nations which the provisions of nature point out as clearly as we are permitted to comprehend anything of the intentions of the Almighty that we shall find the surest guarantee for that greatest of blessings, the maintenance of peace, which to us is a mark of first necessity, and which would be cheaply purchased by any sacrifice short of national honour; and in illustration of what his noble Friend (Lord Melbourne) had said upon that point, he might cite the events which had occurred in Canada four years ago. Their Lordships would recollect, what was the state of matters then upon the Canadian frontier. They would remember the crowds of "sympathizers" which swarmed upon the American side; they would recollect the impotence of the American government to maintain order or to enforce the law they would remember the ease of Mr. M'Leod, and the manner in which he, a British subject, had been thrust back by a furious rabble into the prison from which by the law of the United States he had first been liberated; they would remember the language held by the press— the language uttered in Congress—the excitement which prevailed throughout the states, and the eagerness apparently uncontrollable for the blood of that unfortunate man; and he would ask them, remembering all these occurrences, whether there did not appear every chance of a war between the two countries breaking out? He would ask also why it did not take place, why it was never seriously apprehended, why no preparations even were on either side made for the oncoming catastrophe?

735
The answer was to be found in the word "commerce." It was to the fourteen millions worth of raw materials which we imported from America, and the still greater amount of manufactures which we exported to it that we were indebted for the preservation of peace. It was owing to the mutual dependence of England and America (and long might that dependence continue !)—and the impossibility in which each country knew itself to be of doing without the other that both, without the slightest degradation, without the shadow of a stain upon their national honour, tacitly, he might almost say instintively agreed to compound their differences, and refrained from inflicting upon themselves the ruin and calamities of war. He had alluded to these facts as illustrating the observations of his noble Friend, as he was certain there could be no instance more striking of the benefits of mutual dependence; but he maintained, that this country could not reap all the benefits which would accrue from such a system as long as a graduated scale of duties should be maintained on the introduction of that first great necessary of life, the food of the people — which his noble Friend (Lord Ripon) had justly characterised as the most important subject that could command the attention of the legislature. There was no country with which Great Britain carried on a more extensive trade than with America; there was no country, the continuance and increase of the trade with which, was more easy of attainment than with America, if we took but the proper means for it while they were yet in our power—while Americans were yet the producers of raw materials, and we of manufactured commodities—while in short we were mutually necessary to each other, and before we compelled them as we did the Germans twenty years ago to become manufacturers by our obstinate refusal to take for our productions the only commodities they had to give in exchange. But we excluded ourselves from commerce with the corn producing states of America by means of the graduated scale of duties exactly as we should with the Southern States if we applied a sliding-scale to the importation of cotton. His noble Friend had stated last night, that we could not reckon on any supply from these states? And why? Because our markets were entirely closed against them. If we admitted their corn,
736
there was evidence to show, that we might expect large supplies from those countries. It was of these prohibitory laws that America complained. They complained of these enactments, and justly said, that the treaties by which we were bound to place them on the same footing with more favoured nations, were evaded; yes, and they would continue to be evaded, until the three months which it took to bring cargoes from America should be made equal to the three weeks' passage from other countries, as far as regarded the chance of finding the duties the same after the expiration of the longer period, which other parties had of finding them similar at the end of the shorter time. In August last, the duty on wheat was 22 s. 8d.; in September, it fell to 1s., and in five weeks was again up at 22 s. 8d.; and the few shipments made in New York arrived in this country after the duty had regained its prohibitory point, in consequence of the quantity of corn poured in from the countries of Europe, and which derived an advantage from which America was excluded. This was an instance of the injurious effects of the sliding-scale on our commerce with distant countries, and it must be remembered that our remittances to the United States in payment of corn, would be almost entirely made in manufactures; whereas for the corn received from the continent, bullion was almost always demanded in return- Now, suppose America were to adopt the sliding-scale with reference to our manufactures, and to admit our cotton fabrics at a rate of duty varying with the quantity produced in their own country—what would be the consequence? Our trade in the article would absolutely cease. None would make shipments under such circumstances, when the amount of the duty, which might be exigible when the goods arrived at their destination, was utterly unknown. And yet this was the system which was adopted with reference to America; the consequence was, that no corn was grown for our market—none was brought here and we deprived ourselves of a trade which would support and give employment to thousands. A noble Lord had asked what were the mischiefs of the sliding-scale? He had pointed out some of them with reference to distant countries, and a repetition of them would probably take place this year, for as long as the sliding-scale was maintained, so long will

737
there be no natural exchange of foreign corn for British commodities; by that he meant, that the trade can be upon no regular nor natural footing and no previous preparation can be made to meet it in the ordinary course of commerce. One year we might want ten times the amount of corn that we did the year before; but this would not create in other countries a corresponding demand for our manufactures. The corn, however, must be had, and it must be paid forin the only commodity available for the purpose, which was in bullion. Neither could any modification or form of the sliding-scale produce regularity of supply from abroad; the foreign grower cannot cultivate his land for the English market as the manufacturer here produces goods for a foreign market, our demand is sudden and unexpected; the price rises by our competition, and if it be true as it is generally said, that a short harvest here usually takes place when the same happens on the continent, it follows, that the foreign supply is deficient in the market to which we have restricted ourselves and thus, by suddenly raising the price of the food, which we must have, we inflict a grievous injury upon ourselves, and are an absolute curse upon the countries from which we draw our supplies; and by the very arrangements which we make for rendering ourselves independent of all foreign countries, we secure our dependence upon a few, and that on terms most onerous to ourselves. Now, to not one of those evils did the bill before the House propose to apply any remedy, yet her Majesty's Government must be well aware of the character and extent of those evils, otherwise why make any change in the law? It could not be merely for the sake of that occasional revision of laws to which his noble Friend had alluded last night, which in other words, would be a premium on constant agitation by giving the people to understand that there is nothing settled nor final in the laws which most affect them. Surely the Government must be aware, that in the words of Mr. Alexander Baring, in one of his many admirable speeches in the House, of Commons upon the subject,
" The Corn-laws are intimately connected with the progress of manufactures; that they are to be found in the beginning, the middle, and at the end of every question in which the price of labour entered."
Surely the Government must have felt
738
as Mr. Huskisson felt, that if the price of subsistence, i. e. the price of all those particular articles which we do not export, but are compelled to import, be materially dearer here than elsewhere, 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 give him employment. The Government must have felt (and the new tariff affords proof of this) as all practical and reflecting men have long felt, that the protective system affecting as it does every branch of our industry—paralyzes our national resources, and is fast drying up the springs of our national prosperity; yet, if such considerations have had any weight with her Majesty's Government, how could they expect that a bill built upon the ruins and animated by the principle of a law which they had deserted—how could they expect that it would be more defensible or more durable; the Government must know that the prices of food, like all other prices, were independent of legislation, and they had seen, with the present law, prices vary from 39 s. to 90 s. per quarter. But the measure which was proposed would not take the corn trade out of the hands of speculators, but it would, like the present law, serve the interests of the continental corn-grower and the English corn-jobber. These men desired nothing better than the continuance of the sliding-scale, and dreaded nothing so much as a fixed duty and the competition of the whole world in our markets, to which it would expose them. He had no hesitation in avowing himself opposed to all protection as a system. While he desired to see duties imposed for revenue, he did not by any means advocate the withdrawal of all protection from the agricultural interest; and he thought that the experience of the last few months had fully proved the expediency and the soundness of the measure which the late Government proposed last year, it would have been good for the consumer beneficial to the revenue, and whatever they might think to the contrary, he was sure it would eventually have proved the best measure of protection to the agriculturists. The consumer would have had his supply much earlier in the year, and as soon as it was necessary, instead of having to pay from 80 s. to 90 s. a quarter for the best English wheat at a time

739
when a million and a half quarters of foreign corn were locked up in bond waiting for the inevitable fall of duty. The revenue would have gained about 1,100,000 l. instead of 570,000 l.., not one atom less corn coming in on account of the duty, for after paying it, there would have been a great profit to the importer, whereas the knowledge that the duty must fall by the operation of the sliding-scale, so raised the price of wheat at the Baltic ports, that we just gave a bonus of 20 s. a quarter to the foreigner or the jobber; for while the duty here fell from 24 s. 8d. to 1s., the price of wheat at Dantzic rose from 40 s. 6d. to 60 s., and this took place upon nearly a million of quarters in the month of September; and the consumers here actually paid a million sterling more than was necessary for the corn; that sum of money was absolutely wasted and thrown away. Then as to protection to the landed interest, which it is most false to say the late Government intended to withdraw, but which his noble Friend opposite (Lord Ripon) seemed to think was altogether illusory—he was convinced that, at the remunerating price of 56s. fixed by the right hon. Bart, at the head of her Majesty's Government, it would have been found abundant, taking into consideration the freight and charges, and rise of prices on the Continent that steadiness of demand here must have created; bearing in mind alga that the average duty paid upon all the wheat imported under the present law was only 5s. 9d,—that the proposed duty would have therefore exceeded the duty actually paid by 2s. 3d. a quarter, or nearly 40 per cent. The measure would have been accepted as a boon by the whole country; it would have saved that excitement of public opinion, all that agitation of the fast ten months, which have compelled her Majesty's Ministers to admit the necessity of a change, and to bring in a bill which, while it unsettles and alarms, and will effect no good, is still at their hands a most important concession. The measure of last year respecting corn resembled the question of East Retford and Basset-law, as regarded Parliamentary reform: both were timely measures, such as public opinion demanded, and would have been satisfied with; and if those places had been disfranchised, and representatives given to Birmingham and Manchester, schedule A might have been averted for
740
many years; so, if the 8s, uniform duty had been adopted, agricultural protection might have been reckoned upon for a much longer period than it now can be; but the present Government had dealt with the Corn-laws in the spirit with which they met the question of reform, rather than with the vigour and manliness which characterized the abandonment of all their former opinions with respect to the Catholic question. The landowners might at first have thought themselves aggrieved by an 8s. duty, but they would have found that it afforded them ample protection, and the question would have been set at rest for several years at least; but could they say as much for the bill now before the House?—could they look upon this bill, when it has passed into law, as safe for the next five, or four, or three years? — could they believe that every evil complained of under the present law would not equally occur under the future law, or that the same means that had been resorted to for shaking off the old law, would not be adopted, and with the same success, to get rid of the pew one?—could they doubt that the whole system of protection had now received its death-blow, or that it could survive the announcement of the right hon. Baronet, that the cost of living was so much increased by it, that, by a trifling reduction of it, the tax on income would not be felt, and its odious character be forgiven? And if the landowners did not, as they could not doubt all this, let them ask themselves whether the next concession will not place them in a far worse position, This bill, however, was framed on no solid basis, and effected no finality; it contained, therefore, within itself the germs of future improvement, and he had no doubt that the next law for regulating the importation of corn, which the Government introduced, would be one better adapted to meet the necessities of the people, He only hoped it might not come too late; for pur position was most critical, The industry, and capital, and skill, and stupendous powers of production, of this country, forbade us to despond, but our position was still most critical. The appalling distress which every where prevailed was of no temporary character; he wished he could believe, as it had often been stated in that House, that it were attributable to overproduction, or to the failure of the American banks, or to any of those fluctuations

741
incidental to trade and manufactures; but he feared it was attributable rather to the change of circumstances that had been rapidly taking place—to the springing up of manufactures in Germany and Switzerland, and to the States that twenty-five years ago hardly existed;—to the active competition we now meet in all the markets of the world, and to the spirit of hostility in other countries towards our trade, that has been engendered by our own restrictive system. It was a total change of this system, which should give employment to our industry and create markets for our produce, that was now indispensably necessary. It was only by wise, and prompt, and vigorous measures of commercial reform that the future prosperity and greatness of this country could be effectually secured; and it was because he believed that an uniform duty upon the first necessary of life would be a most important step towards the accomplishment of that object—because he believed that it would create a regular and profitable trade, and that, while a due protection would be afforded by it to the landed interest, it would, at the same time, by means of competition, give the most effectual stimulus to the skill and industry of the British agriculturist. It was upon these grounds that he cordially supported, the resolution of his noble Friend.
The Earl of Wicklowmight have experienced some difficulty in disposing of his vote on the discussion of the previous evening if he had entered the House. He believed that nothing could be more injurious than to excite hopes in a country by the changing of a law which would not be gratified by the success of the alteration proposed. It was the expectation of the country that the bill before the House would reduce prices, and he should be very sorry that these expectations should be disappointed. He would not support the bill oh the grounds of his noble Friend, who had trusted that it would become an established and permanent law. The present measure would never become a permanent law. La w after law had been en acted for the purpose of reducing the prices of food, and he believed that the present measure would prove a stepping stone to still greater changes. It would prevent that too sudden alteration which his noble and learned Friend's resolution of last night went to establish, and it would prepare the agriculturists gradually for greater
742
changes. Laws had been enacted for the purpose of keeping corn at 80 s. and 90 s.; they had been altered; other enactments had been introduced; and he would ask —had the agriculturists suffered by the change? Agriculture was now in a greater stale of prosperity than it was when prices were far higher; and he thought that the result of the present bill would not be to interfere with the interests of the farmer. On the contrary, he believed, that by this gentle mode of descent, they were enabled to try to what extent they could make reductions without injuring the agriculturist. But the arguments of his noble Friends on this side of the House had not operated on his mind in giving the vote which he had recorded. The arguments of a noble Baron connected with Essex (Lord Western), it was true, had a considerable effect in influencing him; but these arguments were intended by the originator to influence him to pursue quite an opposite course. That noble Baron had said, that the agriculturists of England were able to raise produce quite as cheaply as even those of any other nations. He hoped that the noble Lord was correct in that statement, and if such was the case, did it not constitute a strong argument in favour of the measure and against the proposition of high duties and high prices which he meant to support? But he (Lord Western) had added, if it were not for the taxes with which the people were burdened. He might appear to be a bad political economist to the noble Lord, but he was sure that taxes had no concern with the matter. Taxes were borne by the wealth of the country; and by an increase of wealth, which would spring from increase of commerce and manufactures, the weight of taxes could be best reduced. If, indeed, the whole of the taxes fell on agriculture, there might be some weight in the arguments of the noble Baron; but, as taxes fell upon wealth, it would be the duty of Government to apportion the burden equally. He would now advert to the question between the sliding-scale and a fixed duty, or, as a noble Lord (Earl Stanhope) had expressed it, between having his head chopped off by a guillotine or a hatchet. The noble Lord had stated that he should not care which mode of operation was adopted in his own case; but for his own part, he thought that there was a very great difference. He would certainly prefer the well-finished,

743
highly-wrought instrument that was well adapted to the object in view, rather than the rude uncouth instrument, caught up on the moment, and intended, perhaps, as much by its employer to defend himself, as to be applied to its legitimate purpose. But between the two modes of levying duty now under their Lordships' observation, he could concur that there might be great differences of opinion, because opinions would differ according to the object principally kept in view. If that object was to increase commerce, to promote manufactures, to increase our communications with other countries, a fixed duty would be the better measure. Under its influence trade would be more fixed and regular. But, on the other hand, if protection to agriculture were the object in view, and that it is so is admitted by all, the noble Viscount stated it to be his object in his measures of the last Session; then that would be best attained by means of the sliding-scale. Under it agriculturists would feel more secure. Its operation, as regarded their interests, would be more certain and efficacious. It was then clear that the present measure would give more protection to agriculture than that proposed by the late Government. With respect to Ireland, he had often heard it stated in discussion upon the Corn-laws, that even although individuals would be ready to give them up as regarded England and Scotland, they thought they must keep them up for the sake of Ireland. Now, if he believed that the proposed alteration would have the effect of injuring Ireland, he would be bound to vote against them, not only from his connection with that country, but from a consideration of the way in which she had been treated by this country, not lately, but at the most critical periods of her history. He felt that Ireland had been reduced by this country to become solely an agricultural nation. If she had been fostered and fairly treated at the time she most needed it, she would now be a source of wealth and credit to Great Britain, instead of being, as she was, a millstone round her neck. But, reduced as she was by the policy of Britain, it became the bounden duty of Britain to protect her; and if he thought that the measures proposed would have any evil effect upon her interests, no argument could induce him to accede to them.
744
But he did not believe, that from the proposed measure any portion of the kingdom would suffer less than Ireland; those districts would suffer most in which skill and capital had been employed in bringing poor land into successful cultivation. But such had never been the case with Ireland; the fruitful soil of that country, to which neither skill nor capital had been applied, was particularly fitted for improvements, of which it was impossible to foresee the limits, and the more prices fell here, the more capital and skill was likely to be employed in Ireland, in order to make up in quantity for the diminution in the price. Allusion had been made to the decrease in the exportation of wheat from Ireland for the last three years, as a proof of the growing prosperity and increasing comforts of the people. But the fact was, that the seasons for the last three years had been so very bad, that little corn fit for exportation had been grown, and it therefore became necessary to apply it either to the use of the distillers, or for the support of the poor. The former mode failed in consequence of the closing of the distilleries, and consequently the use of wheat became more prevalent amongst the lower classes in Ireland. At least, from the causes he had heard stated, it was much more used than it had been before. It would make him very happy to think that it should become much more used than it had been; but it was not from the cause which his noble and learned Friend had supposed. He had often stated to his farmers, when he heard there was a bad wheat harvest, that he considered it a favourable circumstance for the poor, because it would keep the wheat in the country, and it would be rendered cheap for their use. There was, however, one circumstance connected with these measures which he very much deplored, namely, the duty proposed upon oats. He regretted that the proposed duty was so small, in comparison with that which was imposed upon wheat; and his reason for saying this was, not because he wished to have the price of oats higher, but because he was afraid that there would be an inducement to the Irish farmer to cultivate wheat, and abandon the cultivation of oats, for which the climate was much better suited. The soil of Ireland was suited for wheat, but not the climate; and the consequence was,

745
that not one harvest out of six in Ireland turned out to be a good wheat harvest. It was for these reasons that he hoped her Majesty's Ministers would consider that it would be a much better policy in them to raise the price of oats, so as to induce the people of Ireland and Scotland to cultivate it. This he believed they could have done without any danger; for there had been no clamour on the subject. The people of this country would have been satisfied with a decrease of the duty on wheat; and the sound policy, he was sure, would have been, in lowering that, to have raised rather than lowered the duty on oats. There was one other circumstance to which he wished to allude; — it gave him great satisfaction to know that this bill was to be accompanied by other measures contained in the tariff, and especially this, that there was to be a reduction in the duty on foreign cattle. Ireland was peculiarly favourable to the growth of cattle; it was so, both by its soil and climate; and there was, therefore, every inducement to turn it into a pasture country. He thought there could be no evil so great, no system so ruinous, as exciting that tendency so to apply the land in Ireland. Before the war Ireland had, for the greater part, been a grazing country. It was the high prices of the war- it was the high prices since the war, that had led, in a great degree, to the cultivation of corn. That it was which had produced a superabundant population in the country, and now that they had that superabundant population, anything that could induce the owners of land to convert it again into pasturage must become an evil that, in its results, it would be impossible to describe. Therefore it was, that when he found there was an alarm as to lowering the duty, when he perceived that there was an alarm as to a greater importation of cattle, he felt gratified —and he did hope there would be an importation of them — although he feared it would be but too soon discovered that the alarm was groundless, and that the hopes entertained on the subject would never be realised, still, when he heard of these things, he was not without hope that they would tend to improve the condition of the people of Ireland. It had been said, that the measures proposed would not have a
746
tendency to lower prices in this country-that there were no countries on the Continent from which they could have a sufficient importation of cattle to be felt in the markets in this country. Now, when this was said, and admitting it to be true, yet there must be one most excellent effect of the tariff and the alteration of the Corn-law, which had not been sufficiently alluded to, and that must be of vast importance to the people of this country—that effect would be to increase the prices of articles on the Continent. They had often heard that the manufacturers here were unable to compete with those on the Continent, because the prices of food were so much- less. It was true that the prices of food were less; but then, if they looked to the prices of lodging, of firing, and other articles, he believed it would be perceived that the artisans on the Continent were not much better off than they were here. The effect, then, of the proposed measures would be to raise prices on the Continent, and in this way to bring the artisans here nearer to a par with those on the Continent. These were amongst the reasons that justified him in supporting the measures of the Government on the preceding night, and that induced him now to vote against the proposition of the noble Viscount opposite.
Lord Vivian,in rising to address their Lordships, promised to trespass but a very short time upon their attention. He wished to explain the vote that he had given for the motion of the noble Baron behind him (Lord Brougham), and the vote that he then meant to give for the motion proposed by his noble Friend. He hoped that he need not state to their Lordships, that in coming to the consideration of this most important question, he had endeavoured to divest himself of everything like party feeling. The subject, in his opinion, was of too much importance to be stained by party feeling. He could assure their Lordships, that whenever he had taken part in this question, as a representative of the people, he had done, as many of the supporters of noble Lords opposite in the other House were now doing, acting against what were the feelings of their constituents. Many years ago, in consequence of alterations of parts of the tariff, his attention had been called to this question of protecting duties. His profession as a soldier, although he was otherwise

747
much interested in it, had prevented him from giving his full attention to the matter. When then he examined the question, he was soon convinced that protecting duties were of little importance and of little advantage to those who were most protected, while generally they Were a great disadvantage to the public at large. If he were right in this; what must he think of a protecting duty that raised the price of an article that was the first necessary of life in a country like this, where the population was so rapidly increasing, where the supply of labour was greater than the demand, and the supply of food was less than the demand? It would be more just, in his opinion, to fix a minimum price upon labour, than a minimum price on food. With these feelings, and having heard the speech of the noble Earl who first moved this question, and who, as it appeared to him, entertained no sort of apprehension as to any extension or freedom of trade being injurious to the agricultural interest; and having heard then the speech of the noble Earl, and recollecting that this was a question that had been agitated for 180 years, and that there had been no less than thirty-eight acts of Parliament passed respecting it, ail endeavouring to come to a satisfactory arrangement; and yet finding that no satisfactory arrangement had been, or could be come to, he, with these feelings, must say, that he wished to try what would be the effect of no legislation, and this with the hope, that allowing a free importation of foreign corn would tend to the quiet and tranquillity of the country. He had the most anxious desire to see the question settled. He should be glad to see a compromise satisfactory to all classes, and he hoped it might be effected by permitting foreign corn to be introduced on a fixed duty. He thought that would be much better than the present system. He knew that there was a feeling throughout the country that the higher, or richer classes, derived a benefit from the present system at the expense of the lower classes. He did not mean to dispute the apprehensions that Were entertained On this subject, as they were so very powerfully expressed in a pamphlet, published some time since by the right hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, entitled "Corn and Currency." That right hon. Baronet expressed the feeling which he himself Was now expressing. In his opinion, it
748
was a very serious evil that had arisen out of this discussion of the Corn-law—namely, that it was possible for the agricultural and commercial interests to thrive and prosper as separate and distinct interests from each other, He had never entertained that opinion; for he thought them to be so dovetailed with each other, that the one could not well flourish without the other prospering. There were however, intemperate advocates upon both sides, who declared that they could be two separate and distinct interests. On the one hand, it was said, that the manufacturers only looked for a free-trade in corn, in order that they might amass a larger fortune, and that they cared not how others suffered, so that they might attain that object. On the other hand, it was said, that the landed proprietors only looked to their own selfish interests; that they did not care for the happiness of the manufacturing classes, provided they could but hold their stations ill society. Both assertions, he was convinced, were equally unjust and equally untrue. When the manufacturer looked for the introduction of foreign corn, he looked certainly to his own advantage but also to that of those whom he employed, and also to the advantage of the agricultural interest. It was to be remembered, that no man ever yet could get rich in the midst of poverty, and unless manufactures flourished, agriculture could not flourish. On the part of the landed proprietors, he said, though he differed from the views of many of them on this subject, that they considered the agriculturists the very best customers of the manufacturers, and that, therefore, keeping up the price of corn was of the greatest advantage to the manufacturing classes. He was sure that their earnest Wish was to do good to the manufacturing classes. He could not but think, However, that while they said this, and so felt as they said, they forgot one very important consideration, that a large portion of their manufactures were intended for the foreign market; and that, if they were unable to compete with the foreigner, their trade must decline—they themselves suffer; and if they did so; the landed interest must suffer also. If any blame were to be" cast upon the present state of things, it was his opinion, that it must attach equally to both parties. At the close of the last war all parts of the world were open to their manufactures. The fault

749
was, however, that they wished to maintain the monopoly of the war prices, and manufacturing and other interests then looked for protection. It was then that they had their import duties, and to them should they, to a very great extent, attribute their present difficulties. He was delighted now to find that her Majesty's Government were about to make alterations in the tariff. He did not complain of the right hon. Baronet for going too far on this subject; all he complained of was, that the Government did not go far enough. It did, however, appear to him, that there was some little degree of inconsistency in the proposed legislation. He asked why Was the country to be now saddled with an Income-tax?—a tax of all Others the most offensive, the most obnoxious, and one that, above all others, in his opinion, ought to be specially avoided. In making so great an alteration as that, and in touching upon such questions as these, he asked, why was corn excluded, or why was that second necessary of life, he meant sugar, excluded? He rejoiced at the alterations that had taken place, but then why did not the Government go further? If he might be permitted to do so, he would wish to venture to say one word in favour of a fixed duty. It had been said, what would they do with their fixed duty, supposing corn rose to a famine price? The very argument so put implied that very little apprehension was entertained, that under such circumstances, corn could rise to a famine price. It was his impression that it never would do so. In the case of the sliding-scale, they saw that its effect was to force prices up, while, on the other hand, a fixed duty would enable the dealer to go into the market and purchase at any time. The argument so put by the supporters of a sliding-scale reminded him Of a gallant friend of his, who had served with great distinction in the Peninsula, and who afterwards left the army, The regiment that his friend commanded had distinguished itself at Waterloo, and meeting him a short time after, he said he was sorry he had not been present at that great engagement. His friend said, he was very glad he had not been there, because if he had he should have been killed, because his successor had been killed—his friend supposing that he should have been in the exact position Which the colonel ocupied when wounded. So it was with this noble
750
Lords opposite, that under a fixed duty there must be a famine, because there had been a famine under the sliding-scale. An advance was, however, now made. He was glad to see some progress attempted, and he hoped the Government would not stop there. He was sure they Would hot do so, for last year things that they were told were not to be touched—things that it was declared were not to be taken into consideration—these were the very things on which they now found new laws were proposed, and that it was now said were ho longer tenable. As it had been said ill the other House, and he might professionally use the same language, "the ground had been broken, the outworks had been taken, a breach had been made, the fortress of monopoly had surrendered, and the giant commerce had been set free." It was his hope to see such measures carried as would contribute to the welfare and prosperity of all classes of the community.
The Duke of Clevelandsaid, he feared from having so lately taken his seat in that House he might be deemed guilty of presumption in offering a few observations upon the subject under consideration, but he could assure their Lordships that it was with the greatest reluctance that he did so—not from any Wish of his own, but from a paramount sense of duty. He feared that, after the frequent discussions of this question, in which he had taken part in the other House, if he were now to give a silent vote, it might be liable to some misconception, and he might be accused of some want of integrity in his public conduct, or default of political consistency. During the twenty-eight years that he had been a Member of the other House it had been his constant endeavour to maintain a character of political consistency, and he should be sorry now to be supposed to forfeit his title to it. On every occasion on which he had taken part in the discussion of the question, it had been brought forward, not with a view to a modification of the law, but to its total repeal—a measure which he trusted he should never see. He had always been in favour of the maintenance Of the existing law, not because he considered it perfect, or the scale established by it the wisest that could be devised, but because he had apprehensions that if the ice were once broken it would be mage the stepping-stone to further altera-

751
tions, which would lead in the end to total repeal. He had always felt it his duty, out of regard to the interests of the agricultural classes, and not for any personal object of his own, to resist the propositions made for a repeal of the Corn-laws; but we came now to a different question. A Corn bill was now introduced on the same plan as the existing one, but with a modification of the scale. When he was first made acquainted with the alteration, he confessed he was startled, and thought it went further than the necessity of the case required. After due consideration, however, he did not think that it would have that injurious effect upon the agriculturists which some persons apprehended from it; he did not think that under the proposed scheme the British agriculturist would be rendered unable to compete with the foreigner. He certainly felt the objection stated by the noble Earl behind him (Earl Wicklow), as applicable not only to Ireland but also to many parts of England. In several parts of the country, and particularly in the county of Durham, there was a great deal of wheat grown on land which ought not to be made to produce wheat, and which might be brought into much better cultivation with oats, and when he heard of the alteration, and before he knew precisely what it was, he intended to have induced his tenantry to grow more oats and less wheat. Much as he had heard of the necessity of lowering the duties on wheat, he had never heard anything about oats. If there should be so large an importation of oats as was expected by some under the new scale, he had no hesitation in saying that that, coupled with the import of foreign wheat, would affect most injuriously the agricultural interest. He freely admitted that after the great outcry on the subject of the Corn-laws, if the duties on wheat were to be altered at all, a less change could not be made than was proposed in this bill. Though he very much condemned the great reduction of the duty on barley and oats, yet he considered it on the whole to be consonant to his duty to vote for this bill, and certainly his anxious wish was, that it should pass into a law. He confessed that after what had fallen from some noble Lords, and especially after the noble Earl's remark relating to the laws of the Medes and Persians, he would have been rather staggered on the score of the finality
752
of this bill if brought forward by an individual Member of Parliament; but when a measure of this kind was brought forward by Government, to settle a great question and reconcile the conflicting interests of the manufacturers and agriculturists, the case, he thought, was different. He did hope, and he certainly understood that it was the intention of the right hon. Gentlemen in the other House to frame such a measure as should be satisfactory to all parties, and at the same time be considered a final settlement of the question. He was very much surprised that the noble Lord should not have said it was to be a final measure. It might be argued, that Ministers had no power to insure the finality of the measure; but a Minister might say, "Although I cannot control Parliament, I never will make any further alteration." He had always understood that the Ministers who passed the Reform Bill stated that it was to be a final measure, and that they considered it as such. If such a statement had been made by the noble Earl (Earl Ripon) on the present occasion, he should have been much better satisfied. He should, however, certainly vote for going into committee; but he hoped that the Corn-laws would never experience any further alteration during his own life. He was convinced that a fixed duty could never be carried into effect with any regard to equity or justice, if it were meant as a protection to the agriculturists, although as a source of revenue, he admitted that it would be more suitable and more productive.
The Earl of Riponwould take this opportunity of saying a word in explanation of the remarks he had made on the subject of the finality of the measure, to which the noble Duke had alluded. He certainly had not had the arrogance to state that any law which Parliament might pass on this subject, or on any other, must be taken as final, but there was nothing in that which should be thought threatening to those who might be apprehensive of ulterior consequences from this measure. All he could say for himself was this, that if he brought forward the measure, intending or wishing it not to be final, he would say so. He had never said that with respect to this measure. He hoped that it would be final. He thought it would be a good thing if it were, and and it would not be his fault if it were not.
The Earl of Roseberywould shortly state his general views on the measure of her Majesty's Government. He thought that, in making a great change in the law relating to the introduction of foreign corn, the best plan to be brought forward was one which would be not only immediately beneficial but also of a permanent character, or which, if it had not that distinctive advantage, should contain such provisions as would constitute the best preliminary and intermediate steps between the present law and a law to be established on a more broad, comprehensive, and durable basis. The present proposition, it appeared to him, would not give satisfaction on either of these grounds. With regard to its permanence, however its authors might have deluded themselves before they had proposed their scheme, they had before now had sufficient reason to discover that in its present shape it would have a very brief existence, and if the object were to take a preparatory step in advance of a law which was now discovered by all —except those who considered themselves agricultural patriots, headed by the noble Earl at the Table (the Earl of" Stanhope) and the noble Duke (the Duke of Buckingham) to require immediate alteration, even as a preparatory step it would be a failure. With respect to a most important point involved in the consideration of a change of the Corn-laws, he had of late seen reason to change his opinion. He had formerly thought that in making any extensive alteration, it would be better to proceed on the principle of a varying duty, which he would have wished to arrange at very different rates from those proposed by her Majesty's Government. His plan, indeed, would have partaken in one part of the nature of a fixed duty, as he should have proposed that the minimum duty of the sliding-scale be 4s or 5s. But, considering what was demanded by the present circumstances of the country, he was disposed to think, after much reflection, and as patient an examination of the subject as any of their Lordships could have given it, that a fixed duty was the scheme most likely to be permanent, most free from objection, and best calculated to satsify all parties. Having the markets of the world at all times open to them, the price would rarely, if ever, rise to such an elevation as would make it necessary to repeal or relax the duty. A fixed duty appeared to him also to present the only means of putting
754
an end to the speculations and frauds which were now carried to such an extent, and were so pernicious to both consumers and producers. It would remove, also, one of the most important causes of that distress which had prevailed of late years to an extent so much to be deplored, by preventing those extensive demands for bullion, falls in the exchanges, and derangement of the currency, to which the present system of carrying on the Corn-laws more than anything contributed. Among the several causes leading to that periodical distress, he should place the sudden derangement and contraction of the currency from the present mode of importing foreign corn, as one of the most direct and mischievous in its nature? It was not surprising that new light should have broken in on his mind lately on this subject, when that had been the case also with all her Majesty's Ministers, and most of the noble Lords opposite who, last year, would have opposed and rejected this bill, in the same way as they defeated the measure of the late Government. He had been of opinion, that a duty of 10s. or 11 s. might at first be advisable to prevent the evils of too sudden a change, reducing it by 1s. annually, till it fell to 8s. or 7s. there finally to remain. Though favourable to a change in the existing Corn-laws, and desirous of relaxing the duty on the introduction of foreign grain, he was still, from the peculiar circumstances of the country, willing to afford a certain protection to the home grower. He would not countenance a total repeal, because he considered there was no fairer subject for an impost than the importation of foreign commodities; and he thought that the duty on corn should be fixed at a higher rate at present than might be found ultimately desirable, in order to prevent the shock and disorder which might attend a too sudden change. Even to the consumer a duty would be found a protection, as it would tend to preserve a constancy of supply by giving encouragement to agriculture, and preventing the evils of an extravagant price in a time of temporary scarcity. Among other leading provisions of the bill which he disapproved of was that of the admission of a large number of towns into the schedule of places by which the averages were regulated. He did not believe that any one of their Lordships really knew what would be the effect of

755
that addition. His noble Friend, at the head of the Board of Trade, thought it would produce no great change, but there were others whose authority was entitled to considerable weight upon the question, and who were under the impression that it would operate to reduce the averages, and thereby increase the duty. Many were of opinion, that the proposed addition to the towns would alter the whole range of prices, and he believed that they were all in total ignorance of what the effect would be; and on those grounds he should certainly object to that provision. He confessed that, looking at what would be the probable operation of the bill, he could not bring himself to vote for the second reading last night, and had abstained from toting, although he was ready to admit that it was a very great improvement in the existing system. He thought the bill would make a very considerable change in price, but it would not effect the main object which he for one desired to see accomplished by an alteration of the Corn-laws—viz;, a steady, regular, and wholesome trade in corn, while it would generally exclude, and always perplex the commerce id grain with distant countries. He did not think that it would do away with speculation and fraud, or any of those evils which existed under the present system. Believing that a fixed duty would place the producer on a safer and better footing, and that the revenue would be in a better condition, believing that, it would improve their trade and be conducive to the advantage of the public generally, he should on these grounds give his support to the amendment of his noble Friend;
The Marquess of Salisburycould not but congratulate his noble Friend who had just sat down, on the fact, that he considered the bill as a great amendment upon the law which was at present in operation. His noble Friend, he believed, had expressed his disapproval of every single provision of the bill, while, as a whole, he had considered it a great amendment on the present law. It appeared to him, that there were two grounds on which the Government was bound to give protection to the agricultural classes Of this country—one was, that by encouraging native agriculture they would render themselves independent of foreign nations; and the other was, that the agriculturists
756
were entitled to the same protection which was enjoyed by other trades. He believed it would not be denied, that there were special burdens imposed upon the land, and if the burdens on all classes were equalised, he had no objection to give up every protection which the landed interest at present enjoyed; The question was, what protection was necessary to enable the home-growers in their own markets, to compete with the foreign grower? Under the former law, the average price of corn was somewhere about 56 s. the quarter, and the proposed law would maintain it at something like the same price, and less than that would not, he thought, be a sufficient protection to the English farmer. There was a great reduction in the amount of the duty to be levied under the new bill, but he believed the price would remain at something like the average of what it had been for the last ten years. With regard to the addition that had been made to the list of towns which Were to regulate the averages, he entirely approved of it, because he did not think, that the averages could be more fairly taken than by adding as many towns as possible where bonâ fide sales of wheat took place; But, it was said, the Government would not have proposed this measure, had it not hare been forced upon them by the country. Now, it was perfectly true, that the agitation which had been raised on this subject had necessitated this proposition, but was it not extraordinary that noble Lords opposite should blame the Government on that account? Why, they were the prime movers of this agitation. It was the late Administration which first proposed a change in the existing law; and with regard to the character of that change, he would say, that he thought nothing could be more delusive, than the proposition for a fixed duty. A fixed duty would be no protection to agriculture. Let them put it at a high rate, or at a low rate, it would be equally inoperative. In fact, the only efficient means of protecting the farmer was by the graduating scale—by an adherence to the principle at present enforced. He believed, that the measure before the House went to maintain that principle, and that the alterations made in the details were calculated to benefit the country; On the whole, he must say, that he was satisfied with the plan, and that he should Vote in favour of the bill most willingly;
Lord Portmanobjected to the present bill as being of an unsatisfactory character, and, therefore, a bad measure. He considered that it in no way tended to settle this momentous question, the importance of which had been described so adequately by his noble Friend Opposite (the Earl of Ripon); He believed, that the question never could be settled satisfactorily to the agriculturist or to the consumer, until it was settled on the principle embodied in the amendment of his noble Friend; The measure could not satisfy any class, and it would unsettle the transactions of all classes. He should have thought, that his noble Friend, the President of the Board of Trade, would have been the last person to have approved of this bill, when he recollected that his noble Friend was the leading person in drawing Up the report of the Committee of the other House in 1821 On this subject. In that report the agriculturists were told that the time would come when the only protection which they must look to was in the shape of a fixed duty. They were also told, that that time would be when there was no glut in the home market and no glut in the markets of the world. He had always considered that the recommendations and arguments Were sound and Unanswerable, and in consequence of the impression Which that report bad made on his mind, he had always been ah advocate for a fixed duty on corn. He had entertained hopes, from the opinions expressed by the noble Earl on former occasions arid last night; that he Was prepared for a more extensive change; but his noble Friend had that night intimated that they should regard this as something like a final measure. He agreed With the noble Earl (Earl Hardwicke) in believing that the cultivators of Wheat would not have less protection Under the proposed bill than Under the present law; but he did not think that this would be altogether the case as regarded barley; The cultivators of barley, no doubt, had reason to be sorry that the noble Duke (the Duke of Buckingham) did not remain in the cabinet, for he might by his exertions have succeeded in obtaining an equal share of protection for the barley grower, as a right hon. Baronet, his Colleague in the Cabinet; and also in ardent supporter of agriculture; had induced the Cabinet to agree to for the producers of apples and hops; With respect to the report of the committee, he would beg the attention of noble Peers to an extract from
758
it which he Would read. The committee in allusion to the present system of the sliding-scale, say:—
"This system is certainly liable to sudden alterations, of which the effect may be at one time to reduce prices already low, lower than they would probably have been under a state of free-trade, and at another, unnecessarily to enhance prices already high;—to aggravate the evils of scarcity, and to render more severe the depression of prices from abundance. On the one hand, it deceives the grower with the false hope of monopoly, and, by its occasional interruption, may lead to consequences which deprive him Of the benefits of that monopoly; When most wanted;—on the other hand, it holds out to the country the prospect of an occasional free-trade, but so regulated and desultory, as to baffle the calculations and unsettle the transactions both of the grower and the dealer at home;—to deprive the consumer of most of the benefits of such a trade, and to involve the merchant in more than the ordinary risks of mercantile speculation. It exposes the markets of the country, either to be occasionally overwhelmed with an inundation 6f foreign corn, altogether disproportionate to its wants; or, in the event of any considerable deficiency in bur own harvest, it Creates a sudden competition On the continent, by the effect of which, the prices there are rapidly and unnecessarily raised against outselves. But the inconvenient operation of the present Corn-law, which appears to be less the consequence of the quantity of foreign grain brought into this country, upon an average of years, than of the manner in which that grain is introduced, is not confined to great fluctuations in price, and consequent embarrassment, both to the grower and to the consumer; for the occasional prohibition of import, has also a direct tendency ft) contract the extent of our commercial dealings with other states, and to excite in the rulers of those states, a spirit of permanent exclusion against the productions or manufactures of this country and its colonies."
Could any man predict more accurately the state of things that had arisen under the present Corn-law than the authors, of the report of 1821; and if they prophesied so rightly as to the result of the then law, why did noble Lords refuse to go with them in adopting their recommendations. In a subsequent part of the report, the committee said,—
"Your Committee are the more anxious to impress upon the attention of the House the real state of our trade in foreign corn, between the years 1773 and 1814, as it appears to them; taken in connection with the progress of general prosperity of the country, and more especially with the great improvements in agriculture, and its highly flourishing condition during that period, to suggest to Parliament,

759
as a matter highly deserving of their future consideration, whether a trade in corn, constantly open to all nations of the world, and subject only to such a fixed duty as might compensate to the grower the loss of that encouragement which he received during the late war from the obstacles thrown in the way of free importation, and thereby protect the capitals now vested in agriculture from an unequal competition in the home market,—is not, as a permanent system, preferable to that state of law by which the corn trade is now regulated."
Did not the committee then distinctly tell the agriculturists, that the only protection they must ultimately look forward to was a fixed duty. The noble Earl said, that he was desirous of preventing frauds in the averages; but was he likely to do so by means of the present bill? The noble Lord said, that the grades in the sliding-scale were not so great in the bill before the House as they were in the present law. He admitted, that although the differences in the proposed scale, when corn rose to a certain price, were not so great as at present, still the scale was constructed in such a way, that it would still hold out inducements to speculators; and, indeed, this must be always the case where the average system was adopted, nearly as great now as formerly, to indulge in frauds to raise the averages. It was proposed to add sixty-two new towns to those from which the averages were now taken, but you still had London in the list, which was the great market for speculators and for fraudulent sales. When the former Corn-bill was before Parliament, he had moved, that London should be left out of the list of markets from which the averages were to be taken, but he was left in a very small minority on the occasion. He found, that at Liverpool, London, and Boston, at least one-fifth of the whole quantity of corn disposed of was sold. He found also, that in forty towns the return of sales of corn was less than that quantity. Under the present law, and under the operation of the proposed bill, the dealer in the great markets still depended on the foreign speculator, and they must buy when it suited them for the purpose of carrying on their gambling transactions. Another evil of the operation of the Corn-laws was, that the small farmer must sell his crops between the gathering the harvest and Lady-day, so as to enable him to pay his rents and tithes. But the chief portions of the speculations and the high prices of corn took place between Lady-
760
day and the harvest. The farmers, therefore, did not get the benefit of high prices from the Corn-laws, as they were forced to sell their produce at a period of the year when there were comparatively low prices. The present bill was also bad, because it unsettled existing bargains between landlords and tenants; and it was utterly impossible, that under its probable operation any man could tell how an agreement or bargain should be made. He believed, that this measure had given a shock to the landed interest of this country of a most serious character. He believed, that every man, poor or rich, labourer or master wished to give adequate and fair protection to the producer of corn; but how could they maintain that protection to him when he was exposed to competition with the foreigner by bringing forward a measure which would keep up all the fluctuations of the old bill, and which would tend to prevent altogether their making a fixed duty? They had lost good terms when they rejected the propositions which his noble Friend (Viscount Melbourne) had offered to Parliament last year, and which he was prepared to offer them again at present. He did not believe, that by this measure they would succeed in putting a stop to agitation—on the contrary, they would encourage it. It had been admitted, that it was yielding to agitation in bringing forward this measure, which could not be defended on principle.
The Earl of Winckilseasaid, he had endeavoured to follow the noble Lord who had last spoken, but he really had left him at an entire loss to know what his opinions were as to the protection, or preference, as he styled it, which ought to be given to the British agriculturists. The noble Lord appeared to argued, first of all, that the Government measure would give no protection. Why, was not its principle the same as that which characterised the protecting measure at present in operation? It was true some alterations were proposed in the scale of duties; but he was prepared to contend, that those alterations would give greater protection to the agriculturists than, in point of fact, they had ever before obtained. He did not mean to say, that the measure would enhance the price of corn, but certainly it would not expose the grower to the frauds practised upon the averages, as to the sudden alterations in the scale of duties which were constantly occurring under the plan at pre-sent in existence. He would assure noble

761
Lords, that he was not one of those who desired to raise prices. It was only his wish to give every fair protection to the agriculturists. He looked on the question as one affecting every class in the nation, and his only object was to give bread, the chief necessary of human existence, to the great mass of the people of this country, at the lowest possible price compatible with a fair profit to the grower. He must say, that he did think the measure before the House a very considerable improvement on the existing Corn-law. It would cure the evil of the jumping duties —the sudden change from high prices to low prices. A great improvement would also no doubt be made by the additions to the towns in which the averages were to be taken, but at the same time he quite agreed with the noble Lord who had just sat down, that the market in Mark-lane should be left out of the list altogether. As to the proposition embodied in the amendment, the fixed duty was in point of fact a perfect fallacy if viewed in the light of a protection. He looked to the consequences of a fixed duty upon corn not merely as immediately affecting that article, but ultimately involving the security of all other taxes; because, when the price of wheat was high, the Legislature would be compelled to abandon the 8s. duty, and the clamour of the people, when successful in getting rid of one tax, must exercise a most injurious influence with reference to every other available source of revenue. At the same time, he felt it to be an imperative duty to oppose the imposition of a fixed duty on corn as a protection to agriculture, because when corn was low it would afford no protection, and when prices were high, the Legislature would never be able to enforce it.
Lord Monteagle:I am anxious to confine the few observations that 1 wish to address to the House to the question immediately under consideration. I admit, that the proposed bill is a considerable improvement on the existing law, above all in those provisions of the bill by which the duty on import is diminished, which will prove a relief to the consumer. The new scale will also lessen the inducement to hold back foreign corn, and will thus diminish the fluctuations of price. At the same time, however, when I admit this, I must state, that if ever I was persuaded of one fact more than of another, it is, that according to the opinion expressed by a noble Friend of mine,
762
who spoke early in the debate (Earl Wicklow) this bill cannot be considered a final measure on the subject. It is founded on arguments and admissions, that must lead to its future modification or repeal. I do not attribute any want of candour to my noble Friend (Lord Ripon) nor suggest, that bringing forward this bill as a definitive measure, my noble Friend does not believe it to be such. But my noble Friend also considered the act of 1815 as final, yet how little has it deserved that title! I beg your Lordships to recollect, that you are now arguing the corn question on grounds on which it has never been argued before. It is now admitted on all hands, though formerly as strenuously denied, that we must seek from abroad a considerable portion of corn for home consumption. The notion of independence of foreign supply formerly once so much relied on, is now abandoned on all sides; and the only question remaining for argument is how our deficiency of food can be supplied, in the most advantageous manner. This deficiency must annually augment. In looking to the facts of the case, I will refer to the rapid increase which is continually taking place in the population of this country. If noble Lords will consider the returns of the population laid before Parliament, it will be seen, that the population of Great Britain has increased between the years 1801 and 1841, upwards of 78 per cent. From these returns, it appears, that in the period of forty years, the population has increased 8,200,000; an increase equal to the population of a considerable European state. The progress of our population is as follows:

"POPULATION OF GREAT BRITAIN, AND, IN THE THREE LAST CENSUS, THE CHANNEL
ISLANDS:

Year.

Population.

Per Ct. Incr.

1801

10,472,048

—

1811

11,964,303

14·2

1821

14,161,839

17·6

1831

16,366,011

15·5

1841

18,664,761

14·

Increase on the 40 years, 8,200,000 or 78.2."
It is plain, therefore, that the country has to provide means of subsistence for a rapidly increasing population. Do noble Lords believe, that from the present time the population will remain stationary? I doubt it much, and experience justifies me in such doubts. During the

763
last forty years, there have been times of great commercial prosperity, followed by periods of mercantile embarrassment, and of agricultural prosperity followed by agricultural distress; but still there has been an increase of population steadily going on during all these vicissitudes. It is admitted, too, by all rational men, that this country cannot go on increasing its production of corn in the ratio with the increase of population; we must, therefore, necessarily look to foreign countries, for augmenting supplies of corn. I repeat it, we must look to foreign countries, and your Lordships will find, that a greater portion of foreign corn will he required, year by year. If, then, this, bill is considered sufficient for the, exigency of the present state of things, an allegation which I do not admit, yet even then, from the facts which J have stated, it will soon become necessary for Parliament to reconsider the question, within a comparatively short time. I hope it may be reconsidered wisely and temperately hereafter, however imperfect may be our present legislation. There is another point of view in which this question may be considered as having during these discussions assumed a new feature. Heretofore it has been the practice to appeal to Ireland and to Irish interests as an argument for maintaining the Corn-Jaws; but that argument has now failed, because Jess and less corn is imported from Ireland every year. The House can no longer look to Ireland as the source of an increasing supply, It has even been stated by a noble Earl (the Earl of Wicklow) and by many other persons well acquainted with the fact, that the probability is, that very shortly, Ireland will consume all the wheat which she produces, This state of things does not arise from the circumstance that less wheat is produced in Ireland, than formerly, but that more is consumed; it is a proof of the improvement in the condition of the people of Ireland, and a proof that must be most gratifying to your Lordships, I refer to these facts, to prove that it will be utterly impossible for Parliament to abide by the present bill, as a permanent settlement of the Corn-law. If, then, this country is obliged to depend upon foreign states for a portion of the supply of corn necessary for our subsistence—if the proportion brought from abroad is likely to go on increasing, the question to be answered is, What are the best means by which we
764
can procure the foreign grain we require for the support of our population. In reply to this question two propositions have been made: the first, the sliding-scale, and the second, the fixed duty, There is undoubtedly a third proposition, namely, the abolition of all duty, which my noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) intends making, but with respect to which I will not make any observations for the present. I have come to the conclusion, after the best reflection that I can give to the subject, that it is inexpedient to adopt the sliding-scale, and that in its operation it is alike inconsistent with policy and justice. I should have been glad to have had a committee of this House appointed to investigate the relative merits of a sliding-scale or of a fixed duty, before which committee practical men of all opinions could have been examined, and where the matter could have been inquired into, divested of all party excitement, and where it could be treated as a question of political economy or commercial science. I should like to know where you can find any practical and experienced man who will defend the sliding-scale? Noble Lords opposite have boasted, and boasted with some degree of truth, that a large portion of the most wealthy and intelligent commercial classes coincided with them in their political views. I am willing, for the sake of argument, to admit this, and I will ask noble Lords opposite to appoint a committee, and I will challenge them to produce any commercial men of knowledge and of experience who will venture to defend the continuance of a sliding-scale. I will go farther, and will challenge them to name any one person who has practical experience in matters of finance, or who is extensively acquainted with the commerce of the world, the principles which regulate our foreign exchanges, or the interests of the public as connected with the Bank of England, who, on being questioned, would not repudiate this sliding-scale as a most monstrous anomaly, This is a fair challenge, to which I invite the attention of noble Lords opposite. I will also undertake to prove the impolicy of this system, not merely on authority, but by a reference to a few and simple facts which can be relied on. The Customs' tariff embraces 1,000 or 1,200 separate articles. It has more than once undergone the supervision of some of the most able and most experienced men; very great im-

765
provements have beep made in the tariff by persons connected in politics with noble Lords opposite; first, in 1827, by Mr. Herries, and now again, much to the credit of the Government, by the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury. I ask them if, in the whole revision of the tariff, or looking back into the history of this country, or of any other, they can point out any such vicious principle as a sliding-scale applied to any other article but that of corn? Where has such a scale—the very opposite of an ad valorem scale—or, as it has been well designated by the noble Earl (Earl Ripon), where has such a contra valorem scalp been suggested with reference to any other article? If the principle were in itself a good one, why should it have were thus uniformly rejected? But I contend that it is specially objectionable as applicable to corn. I object to it first on account of its uncertainty, which exposes the merchant, in making his arrangements, to the double contingency of a changing duty and a changing price. I object to it, also, on the special ground that has been adverted to by a noble Lord near me (Lord Clarendon)—namely, its unjust operation upon our commercial intercourse with the United States of America. To countries in our immediate vicinity it holds out advantages withheld from more remote markets, like those of the United States. During Mr. Webster's visit to this country I enjoyed some intercourse, which I shall ever remember with the greatest pleasure, with that distinguished statesman now at the head of foreign affairs in the United States. At that period the distress arising in our American commercial relations was extreme. It was a time of immense pressure on the whole of our American trade. And what was the position of parts of America with which Mr. Webster was acquainted or connected? It was, that the harvest remained without value upon the ground, because its owners could find no profitable market; and this, whilst our commerce was languishing by the check to our trade with America, and the people were suffering from a want of the food which America was willing to send to us, both parties were thus suffering from the fatal laws which prevented the transmission of that agricultural produce which would profitably have been sent by America and consumed by us. I also ob-
766
ject to this sliding-scale, on a ground of objection which must be incident to this bill and to every other bill founded on the same principle. No system founded on averages can work well. You are now endeavouring to botch up the system by the introduction new towns into the averages. The very step you have taken with a view to improve the law, proves the vice that is inherent in that part of the scheme. I will ask the noble Lords around me whether, having read this bill a second time, any one of them can, on going into committee, put his hand upon his heart and say, that he understands in the least degree what the effect of the introduction of these towns will be? Then I say you are going to effect a change, not on any principle that ought to direct the resolves of wise and prudent men, but at chance and upon hap hazard- To this evil every alteration of average system was exposed, as no à priori reasons could show how the alteration would Work, But again, as was stated on a previous occasion, there was another vice from which the average system was never free. It proceeded upon an entire fallacy, It assumed that a given quantity of com was always of the same value, never taking into account the condition of the corn; so that, while the state of the averages as exhibited by price was apparently favourable, the people might be in a state of starvation; it was forgotten that a defect of quality would lower price as certainly as abundance in quantity. In this, as in every other case, much of the evil you inflict will recoil upon those who cause it. There never can be a stronger illustration of this great truth than is furnished by the Corn-laws. Assume the case of a bad harvest at home, and ask the practical agriculturists whether it is not equally beneficial to the consumer and producer, that the damaged grain and flour shall be rendered most available for food; and I will tell your Lordships, that the introduction of dry and fresh wheat from abroad to mix up with the low-priced and damaged wheat at home, will be a boon to the community and even a benefit to the farmer, At the period of discussing the Cora-laws in 1815, there were two gentlemen in Parliament connected with the city of London, Alderman Atkins and Sir W. Curtis, both of whom spoke from experience on the subject, and they stated, that when grain was on the

767
average 85 s., 95 s. was the real average price of grain fit for making bread. Lord Grenville, to meet this inconvenience, proposed that the averages should be taken not on grain, but on bread. Let Parliament do what it will, this is an evil from which you cannot wholly escape so long as you adhere to an average system at all. Another objection to the sliding-scale is the bounty it affords on holding grain in hand till the duty falls. The sliding-scale is an inducement to keep corn back, till prices reach their maximum, and the duty reaches its minimum. I admit that the present bill is in this respect a great improvement on the existing law; and so far from objecting to the "rests" in it, I only wish that there were a few more of them; for just in proportion as you introduce and extend the rests, you approach to what I consider to be a better system, the system of a fixed duty. At this hour of the night, I have to apologise for detaining your Lordships, as I know the House listen with impatience to written statements; but I must take the liberty of reading one short passage from an admirable work, which will in some measure repay your Lordships for the inadequate manner in which I have expressed my opinions. It is the opinion of an enlightened author given on this very subject, and describing the effects of a sliding-scale as compared with the effects of a more settled system of law. The writer to whom I refer is Mr. Tooke, whose authority would be admitted to be entitled to the greatest weight by the noble Lord who introduced the bill, as well as by all who like myself, enjoy the advantage of his acquaintance. Mr. Tooke said, in his work on prices (vol. iii. p. 48,)
"The averages, and the uncertainty and manœuvring connected with them, would be done away with; as would, likewise, the mischievous anomaly which, by the effect of low condition on the averages, excludes foreign wheat precisely at the time when it is most wanting for mixture with our own. In the next place, this country would present a constant market, instead of the present capricious one, and would afford an opening for return of exports beyond that which at present exists, except in the uncertain intervals when the duty is approaching its minimum, and there would be less liability to disturbance of the value of the currency."
Having thus alluded to some primary evil consequences of the average system, perhaps the House will permit me to state in a few words a further objection to it,
768
arising from its obvious tendency to increase the fluctuation in price. There are several returns on the Table of the House, showing the fluctuations in the prices of corn abroad and at home, but some of these returns and calculations are made on a principle which is irreconcileable with a just comparison of the merits of the two systems. An attempt is made to compare the fluctuations by reducing them to percentages. To this I must object as delusive. Undoubtedly the proportion between zero and one, as compared with the proportion between sixty and a hundred, is very different, it being, in the first case, that of infinity and in the other that of less than one-half. But if you increase the price of bread in these two proportions, the effect is totally different — the percentage proves nothing. It is the difference between the higher and lower number that is material, rather than the percentage increase, and the latter computations are all foreign to the real question. But in the ten years from 1829 to 1838, the average annual difference between the highest and lowest price was 31 per cent., in 1829, 1830, 1836, and 1838, the average annual difference between highest and lowest weekly average was 47½ per cent.; and in a single year, it amounted to 68 per cent. A Table has been prepared by order of the noble Earl (the Earl of Ripon) on this subject, and I do not believe that so palpable an exhibition of the defects of a law can be made in any other country in the world. A still more fatal objection to a sliding-scale, is its obvious tendency to extend this fluctuation of prices all over the globe. The evils of vicious legislation, do not confine their mischief within the four seas that encompass these islands. The irregularity of prices in this country reacts upon the whole world, upon Dantzic as much as upon London. Every market to which the influence of a bill of exchange can reach is disturbed, and that disturbance reacts again upon the people of England, both as consumers and as merchants. How does this tell upon the revenue? Was there ever such an anomaly as that part of the revenue which includes the corn duties? In the years 1833, 1834, 1835, and 1836, the duty received on the importation of foreign wheat was but 1,646 l.; in the years 1838, 1839, 1840, and 1841, the same duty swelled to upwards of 2,000,000 l. I will

769
ask the noble Earl—but I am afraid that the noble Earl will not answer — still I ask the noble Earl what estimate he has made of the produce of the new corn duties as likely to be received as revenue? I am anxious to know what the noble Earl expects to receive. But the noble Earl will not gratify my curiosity. The fact is, the noble Earl has placed himself and his Colleagues in some difficulty by disclaiming the corn import duty as a measure of finance. Such are his scruples on this subject, that all the world will not induce the noble Earl to charge one single sixpence in the shape of a tax on food. The same opinion has also been repeated by a noble Earl (the Earl of Winchilsea) who has said, that the Corn-laws could only be maintained as a measure of protection, but that they would be indefensible as a means for raising revenue. It is difficult, except in the extreme case of prohibition, to separate these objects. The fact being, that no revenue can be derived from corn without being pro tanto protective, so that in reality many who discuss these questions, are fighting more for words than for things. The mass of consumers, there cannot be a doubt, would prefer to have corn on the cheapest terms; that is, without any duty on its importation; but if these consumers are to be allowed at their choice, to pay a duty for the purpose of protection, that is, for the purpose of enhancing the value of land, or to pay a duty which, by increasing the revenue, may allow the other burdens of the country to be lessened—your Lordships may rely upon it, that if such a choice were given to consumers, they would not hesitate one moment in giving their answer. It is the price of corn, that affects the public as consumers. A rise of price, as the consequence of protecting duties, is very different from a rise of price, the consequence of a revenue duty. It has been said, and undoubtedly such a statement forms an important branch of the inquiry — it has been said, that as a protection a fixed duty would be a delusion, since it could not be maintained by the Government during a period of very high prices. Now, assuming that a fixed duty of 8s was in force, and that the supposed exigency had arrived, assuming, also, that there arose a clamour for a repeal of the duty, I am asked, what would the Government, what would Parliament
770
do? If I were speaking, either as a Minister or a Member of Parliament, I should most decidedly reply, "Adhere to the duty." And this for the most obvious reason. If a Minister or the Legislature were to give way, it would not be the consumer who would benefit by the relaxation. Of this we had an illustration the other day, when during a period of distress there being a great quantity of foreign grain lying in bond at Glasgow, a most earnest entreaty was addressed to the Government to give up the grain that was in bond, and allow it to go into consumption duty free. If Government had yielded to this demand, what would have been the consequence? Do you suppose that the owners would have sold the corn at 20 s. less, in consequence of having been excused from the payment of the duty? Not at all. By dispensing with the duty the Government would only have put so much into the pockets of the proprietors of that grain. The same principle would apply if the owner and the corn were at Dantzic. By giving up the duty, you confer no benefit upon the consumer, any further than is measured by the increase of quantity brought into the market; and the people would not obtain their bread cheaper by the amount of duty, if the Government were to be so inconsiderate as to authorize the duty to be remitted. The same remark would not apply, in the same degree, to the proposition of his noble Friend for repealing the whole duty; such a measure, if permanent, would increase the growth of corn abroad; and on the increased supply, compared with the capacity of the people to buy, the price alone depended. There is another subject to which I feel it my duty to call the attention of your Lordships, namely, the fatal effect on trade which the irregular importation produces by its action on the currency of the country. This effect must continue so long as you adhere to the present system. On. this subject I will appeal to the authority of the right hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, and his authority is one of no trifling weight on this subject, for few men can claim a brighter honour than that right hon. Gentleman has achieved in restoring the currency of the country to a healthy condition. I know how much that right hon. Gentleman has exposed himself to attack from his own Friends for his act of 1819; but,

771
in disregarding the reproaches of prejudicial men, he has deserved well of his country. In speaking thus, I feel that I am only rendering justice to the right hon. Baronet. In 1827, the Government was pressed to consent to a committee in consequence of the agricultural distress which then prevailed—for be it remembered, that notwithstanding the Corn-laws the country has been repeatedly visited by agricultural distress. Nothing is more certain than that these laws are occasionally productive of agricultural distress by causing over-production. Well, the pressure was very great upon the Government of that day, and a motion was made with a view to obtain some increased protection. On the 8th of March, 1827, Sir Robert Peel expressed himself thus:—
"The bank having returned to cash payments, by being obliged to pay in gold, nothing could be more likely to injure that measure and to cause a run upon the bank than the system of 1815. In the case of such a scarcity as opened the ports in this way (for three months), speculations would be indulged in, and must be paid for in gold, so that a run would be caused on the bank, which must disturb the present currency of the country. The demand for foreign corn roust necessarily raise the price, and, therefore, it was a fallacy to suppose that, because corn was at this moment or any other at a certain price at Dantzic, that price would not be increased by the increased demand from this country."
Such were the effects which Sir Robert Feel apprehended if the ports were opened for three months to meet a sudden demand for corn. But the ports had been practically open for the importation of grain at low duties during the greater part of 1838 and 1839, and all the anticipations of Sir R. Peel have been fully realised. I will show what has happened. I moved for a return of the fluctuations of bullion in the bank of England since the last Charter Act. But, in referring to this return, I beg to state that I am not so blind as to suppose that in all cases when a diminution of bullion takes place, there has never been any other cause for such diminution than the Corn-laws. To attribute that diminution to one cause only would be mere pedantry; but, with the exception of years where other causes might easily be shown to have existed, I find that it is always at the time when there is the greatest importation of foreign corn that the amount of bullion is most affected;—

QUANTITY OF WHEAT IMPORTED AND FLUCTUATIONS OF BULLION.

Wheat & Wheat Flour imported.

Bullion in Bank.

Highest.

Lowest.

£

£

1834

109,000

9,948,000

6,720,000

This was the period of Foreign Loans.

1835

43,000

6,741,000

6,150,000

Joint-stock Bank extensions.

1838

234,000

7,801,000

4,545,000

1837

544.000

8,172,000

4,032,000

Failure of American House

1838

1,355,000

10,126,000

9,339,000

1839

2,862,000;

9,336,000

2,525,000

1840

2,284,000

4,500,000

3,454,000

1841

2,524,000

5,170,000

3,557,000

And if you will go through the monthly averages for 1838 and 1839, the effect will be shown
still more strongly:

CORN IMPORTED, AND BULLION IN BANK.

Wheat and Flour Imported.

Monthly Averages.

Bullion; Average of 13 Weeks Antecedent.

1838:

Qrs.

s.

d.

£

January.

5,212

54

2

8,395,000

February

4,708

55

3

9,543,000

March

2,543

56

6

10,015,000

April

,6,269

59

0

10,126,000

May

35,446

62

7

10,002,000

June

69,717

65

5

9,722,000

July

101,781

68

7

9,749,000

August

257,181

74

8

9,746,000

September

562.376

64

9

9,615,000

October

20,277

66

10

9,437,000

November

46,205

73

3

9,339,000

December

243,596

78

1

9,362,000

1839:

January

164,000

79

9

9,336,000

February

234,000

72

0

8,910,000

March

494,000

71

0

8,106,000

April

228,000

70

0

7,073,000

May

312,000

70

7

5,119,000

June

298,000

68

6

4,344,000

July

121,000

69

9

3,785.000

August

243,000

71

9

3,265,000

September

427,000

70

6

2,816,000

October

145,000

66

4

2,525,000

November

76,000

68

0

2,545,000

December

115,000

66

2

2,887,000

The bank began with ten millions of bullion in their vaults, and this treasure was in the Autumn of 1839, reduced to 2,800,000 l. There was but this pittance of 2,800,000 l. in the vaults of the Bank to meet alt liabilities, public and private, to pay the dividends, to pay the army and navy, and to supply the deficiency bills that were required in order to maintain the credit of the country. Now every British statesman, every me-chant, every subject of her Majesty who loved his country, ought to congratulate himself, and to be grateful to Providence that this demand for foreign corn did not occur simultaneously with the American

773
disasters! Had the failure of crops occurred at that time, which so shortly after did occur when the Bank of England was only saved as if by a miracle, by the assistance of the Bank of France—and what an illustration did that event afford of the boasted independence of foreign nations which these Corn-laws were supposed to secure—if, I repeat, such an event as the American commercial disasters had occurred at the same time when those demands were made for gold in order to pay for foreign corn imported,— if as a necessary consequence the Bank had been compelled to stop payment, let the House imagine how awful would have been the amount of commercial distress that would have ensued, not to speak of our national disgrace in the eyes of Europe. We are proud of declaring our determination to maintain the public faith. We somewhat ostentatiously contrast our conduct with that of some bankrupt states of the new world, but it behoves us to think of the imminent danger to which we have been exposed, and to congratulate ourselves that we have been saved by Providence from that disgrace which bad legislation occasioned to this, the first commercial country in the world. I am ashamed of having occupied your Lordships so long; but to say the troth, my mind is so full of the argument, that I feel as if I have only as yet, approached the boundary of the question. If I had been allowed a fuller opportunity of going into the subject, I conceive nothing more capable of actual demonstration than the absurdity of attempting to regulate, by duties, the price and the supply of the food of man. Yet this absurd and fruitless attempt is the only aim, object, or justification of this sliding-scale. On this the real question at issue rests. I will trouble your Lordships with a reference to but one passage more, and to this I am only encouraged by your Lordships undeserved kindness. The document I am about to read may, perhaps, be objected to, because it proceeds from men not more eminently practical than they are philosophic. The extract is from the hand-loom weavers report, a report which bears the signatures of Mr. Senior and Mr. Jones Loyd. Mr. Loyd is one of the most experienced merchants, and one of the wisest men of the day; Mr. Senior, one of our most enlightened economists, and if on such a question you will not
774
consult such men, where are we to look for higher sources of information? What was stated in their report was the more important, because it was written before the scheme of the late Government was made known. I know, at least, that, those who prepared the report were not aware when that report was proposed what would be the nature of the financial measure of the late Government. The report describes an improved sliding-scale like that of the present bill in the following terms:—
" It is clear that this plan is affected by nearly all the vices of the present law. Like the present law, it endeavours to keep corn at an artificial price. Like the present law, it must prevent any steadiness in the corn trade. A duty rising as the price of the commodity falls, and falling as it rises, that is to say, diminishing as the value of the article increases, and increasing as the value of the article diminishes, is a monster of fiscal legislation reserved for the corn trade. Such a measure might have been supposed to be intended for the purpose of excluding from that trade all men of capital and prudence, and tempting into it the gamblers of commerce. The two great evils of average high price and fluctuation would probably continue if Mr. Canning's bill, or any other measure founded on its principle, were adopted, though, of course, in proportion as the scale of duty were lowered those evils would be diminished in degree."
Such are the opinions of practical men, expressed before the change of Government, and therefore wholly uninfluenced by party considerations. It is to opinions like these, and to such authorities, that the attention of Parliament should be directed. There are, however, more important interests connected with this question than the mere interests of finance. The permanent prosperity of England depends upon the maintenance of her commerce and manufactures. True, it is, that certain politicians and certain theorists consider that we should have been a happier, though a poorer nation, had we continued in a simple social state. Such persons are ready to suggest that we have done wrong in fostering a large manufacturing population. But what would have been the result of such a destiny had it been our's. We might, indeed, have been
" Mild Arcadians ever blooming, Nightly nodding o'er our flocks"—
but we never would have become a great nation. To enable this country to make head against its enemies in perilous times

775
—to enable the noble Duke opposite to achieve those triumphs which led to the peace of Paris, and restored the balance of power in Europe, it was necessary to put forth all the resources of the country in support of the mighty destinies which it has been the pleasure of God that England should be called upon to accomplish. But to pass over the question, whether Manchester and Birmingham, and the great marts of our domestic industry, ought to sink into the condition of deserted villages, to pass that over as a question which does not deserve a serious discussion, still there are other considerations to be disposed of, of yet more awful import. We might possibly, though I do not believe it could be so, afford to part with our wealth and to cast away our power; we might, if we were mad enough to do so, lay aside all our splendour, all our glories —but there is one sacrifice we cannot make, one risk we dare not incur, we cannot, with any safety, allow a system to continue long which separates the higher and the lower classes—which places the Legislature, the highest authority in the State, in a position of appearing to make laws for the benefit of its own members, against the feelings, against the interests, and against the very existence of the mass of the people. This is the danger which you have now to consider. Sooner or later, and may it be sooner rather than later, the corn question will be set at rest. That question is sinking on a sliding-scale at the present, and must ultimately sink to its natural level, before it could remain in repose. I believe, that repose will only be found by the entire abandonment of the very word protection. My noble Friend near me (Earl of Rosebery) has this night declared a change of opinion; so I may be permitted to acknowledge a change of opinion likewise. I am on reflection persuaded, that there can be no permanent rest, no quiet, no safety with reference to this subject, until the trade in corn shall be as free as air, so far as protection is concerned; and I am as thoroughly satisfied that, looking to the natural consequences of the increasing wealth and advancing population of the country, the agriculturists are the individuals who, of all others in the community, will have the least cause for regretting such a result. I do not believe, that the effect of throwing open the trade in corn will be the cheap-
776
ening; of bread to the consumer to any very considerable extent. Lord Ashburton had contended, that the law of 1815 would increase the price to the consumer to the extent of twenty-two millions sterling. That appeared to me a great exaggeration. I believe nothing of the kind. The benefits which I expect to derive from a free-trade in corn are, a settled trade, steady employment, the absence of any disturbance of the monetary system, and, to the agriculturists, all the advantages which must result from an improved home market. Your Lordships may struggle against this measure as you have done against many others, but this struggle, however prolonged, will be ineffectual, and in the end freedom of trade will be established.
Lord Broughamsaid, that upon the whole he approved his noble Friend's resolution, and was prepared to vote for it; but he did so comparatively, in the same way as he had voted on the bill of last night, as compared with the existing Corn-law. In like manner he regarded his noble Friend's resolution as a considerable improvement on the bill then before the House. He preferred a fixed duty to a sliding-scale, because he thought a fixed duty had some, not very many perhaps, but some characteristics which sufficed to distinguish it from, and give it the superiority over a sliding-scale; but, notwithstanding this, if he were to say, that he regarded a fixed duty as framed on any scheme of sound policy, or that it was according to sound principles of commercial legislation, or according to sound principles of legislation for agricultural protection; above all, if he were to say, that it was framed on sound principles of legislation as regarded revenue and finance, he should say, that which was perfectly foreign from his thoughts and should, out of courtesy, towards his noble Friend, act contrary to his sense of duty. As regarded protection to agriculture, he had always held that we had no right to give agriculture such a protection as was given by the sliding-scale; and, that agriculture had no claim to it at our hands. That was his opinion of the sliding-scale; and with respect to a fixed duty, he could not see that it gave much protection either to the consumer or the agriculturist. But he had to complain that the resolution of his noble Friend avoided specification; it simply called upon the House to affirm the abstract proposition that a fixed duty was

777
better than a sliding-scale. It might be said, he thought, without captiousness, or hypercriticism, that the question depended a good deal on what fixed duty and what sliding-scale meant. Both ought to be ascertained before we are called upon to choose between the two. He could prefer a fixed duty of 8s. to an unknown sliding-scale, or he could prefer a known sliding-scale to an unknown fixed duty; but he felt that considerable difficulty was imposed by the vagueness of the resolution on those who were most unfavourable to the sliding-scale; and most favourable to a fixed duty. However taking the fixed duty to be one of 8s. a quarter, and the sliding-scale to be that in the present bill, then he thought, that the fixed duty was somewhat the better of the two; because it was not subject to all the same disadvantages of shifting prices, and particularly, because it did not give the same facilities to jobbers, and still more, that under a fixed duty the country between harvest and harvest of any particular year, might be better supplied than under the present system. These advantages entitled his noble Friend to his vote in support of a proposition asserting the preference of the one over the other. But their Lordships must not deceive themselves, and so lay the foundation of future disappointment by exaggerated hopes of the effects of a fixed duty. As compared with a sliding-scale, in increasing a permanent supply of foreign corn, he thought a fixed duty would have no beneficial effect whatever. It mould not promote a free-trade in corn, nor be the means of increasing the cultivation abroad, for the purpose of carrying on that trade, and of supplying our market; for he was as convinced of this as he was of any prosition in arithmetic, that there was no difference between a fixed duty and a sliding-scale in this respect, that is to say, in extending our resources in the foreign market, or increasing the quantity which would be grown abroad to supply the English market. For on what did the quantity imported depend? On the estimate formed by the grower and the merchant of the profit which they were likely to make by the growth and transport of their corn to this country. That calculation must depend on the price at which they would be enabled to grow the corn, ship it, and convey it to this country, and the sliding-scale was said to sin against our interests and theirs (which were identical in this respect), by making
778
it impossible for these parties, namely, the grower and the merchant, to ascertain what amount of duty he would be called upon to pay here on any given shipment. Now, there was no doubt that under the sliding-scale these parties could not know this, because the sliding-scale apportioned the duty according to the existing price in this country, and unless the foreign merchant could ascertain what that price was, it would be impossible for him to ascertain what duty he would have to pay. But suppose the foreign merchant could know what duty he was to pay; that is, suppose he knew that he was to be subjected to a fixed duty, would the knowledge of what he had to pay as duty and the price to the grower, and the cost of shipment and transport, make him ship his corn any the more readily, unless he could be sure of getting a price at which he could sell his corn to advantage when it had arrived here? Certainly not; but if he knew what the price was to be at which he was to sell as that price governed the duty, it was utterly immaterial to him, in this point of view, whether a sliding-scale or a fixed duty were established. If he knew or could estimate what was the price at which he was to sell here, then the sliding-scale told him the amount of duty, because that duty was apportioned to the price, and, therefore, having the price, he would know what was the duty; and if the price was unknown, a knowledge of the fixed duty was wholly useless. To take an illustration. The price of wheat at Dantzic being 40s. a quarter, and the merchant and grower were about to calculate what would be the cost of shipping and landing it in this country. Putting the cost of the conveyance at 5s., the question would be, what was to be the duty? "Then," said the advocates of a fixed duty as preferable to a sliding-scale, "the foreign merchant cannot ascertain what he must add to the 45 s., in order to find what ought to be the selling price, because ho don't know under the sliding-scale what the duty is to be when he gets here." But suppose there was an 8s. fixed duty, then the foreign merchant knew exactly what was the whole cost of bringing his corn to market, by adding 8s. to the 45 s., that is to say, that 53 s. was the whole cost. But would that enable him to tell whether he could afford to bring his corn to this country? No such thing. He had yet only got one side of the account, because he had only calculated the cost, not

779
the profit; and therefore he could not tell whether the speculation would be profitable, or whether there would be no profit, or a positive loss. But he knew this as well from a sliding-scale as from a fixed duty, if he knew the price in this country. It was necessary to know the remainder obtained, by subtracting the whole cost from the gross price. Part of the subtraction being variable and depending on the price, did not make it at all now difficult to tell the amount of that remainder. The subtracting was just as necessary to be known as the subtraction; till that was known the remainder could not be ascertained; and the moment it was known, the subtraction and consequently the remainder became known as well by the sliding-scale as the fixed duty. For these reasons, he was not one of those who expected that a fixed duty would increase the amount of foreign corn grown, which would be obtained for this country. Now, with reference to the bearings of his noble Friend's resolution on the three resolutions which he (Lord Brougham) was about to propose. As to the first,—namely, that which stated that no duty whatever ought to be imposed on the importation of corn for the purposes of agricultural protection—having so lately as last night addressed their Lordships on that question it would be unbecoming in him to add another word; but with respect to the financial question, he knew that some persons had preferred a fixed duty with a view to not to protection, but to revenue. Was corn a fit subject for taxation? Was that article of prime necessity, which formed the bulk of the food of the people, a fit subject for taxation, whether taxed in the dark by a graduated scale, or, he would not say in the light, but in the somewhat less thick obscurity of a fixed duty? He declared it was not a fit subject for taxation, because the tax was a poll-tax, paid by the poor and the rich, but much more by the poor than the wealthy, and falling more heavily on those whose resources were the more slender. It formed a considerable portion of the expenditure of the poor man, but was, as compared with the luxurious expenditure of their Lordships, a paltry trifle. It was also a poll-tax eminently uncertain in its operation, whether going under the name of a graduated scale or a fixed duty. It depended on the winds, the weather, the seasons, whether the Government should levy one farthing of this duty. He had always understood, that one great quality of a tax
780
was, that it should enable you to be sure of it when you wanted it; but it might happen, in the case of this tax, that the fates, that was to say the wind and the weather, would order that not a farthing should be levied. The expenditure of the country, however, did not wait on the seasons; there was a pretty steady current of expense always setting in, and the Treasury could not depend for supply on the steadiness of the winds. Beside the quality of certainty, he had always understood that one of the best characteristics of a tax was, its taking the least out of the pockets of the people, in proportion to what it put into the coffers of the Treasury; and he had always been accustomed to look upon that as the worst tax which took the most from the people, in proportion to what it gave to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. How did the tax on corn operate in this way? In order to raise, say as much as 8s. per quarter on foreign corn, they taxed all corn, not only foreign, but also the corn grown in this country. To raise 1,000,000 l., they must import 2,500,000 quarters at a duty of 8s. per quarter. The Treasury got the 1,000,000 l., but was that all that was paid? True, it was all that was paid at the ports, but not all that was paid by the consumer. Besides this, the people on every one quarter of home grown wheat had to pay, he would not say the whole 8s., but a proportion amounting probably to 3s. or 4s. per quarter. And thus the operation of this tax of 8s. per quarter on foreign corn raised the price of wheat grown at home by 3s. or 4s. Thus, in order that the Treasury might obtain 1,000,000 l. from foreign corn, 4,000,000 l. or 5,000,000 l. were taken out of the pockets of the people. Another objection to this tax was, that it had a tendency to raise the price of food all through the year, and if it did not, it would not operate as a protection. This effect, too, was produced, even where no revenue was raised from the tax. Now, when the price of food was raised, the revenue was injured in another particular; for the rise of the price of food had a tendency to lower the produce of the Excise, and even the Customs. Thus, a tax on food, whether imposed through the medium of a sliding-scale or a fixed duty, had a direct tendency, besides its pressure on the people, to lower the public income of the country. For all these reasons, he concluded, and the constant uniform experience of

781
past times bore him out in the opinion, that if there was any one subject or article which ought to be exempted from taxation, it was that bread which formed the food of the people.
The Duke of Wellington;The noble and learned Lord who has just sat down, says, that this tax pressed on the food of the people. That assertion may be abstractedly true, but the question before the House has no direct connection with it. The noble Viscount (Lord Melbourne), in bringing forward his resolution, never contemplated leaving the agriculture of this country without some protection; particularly at this moment, and considering the state in which this country has been for some time. The noble Viscount thinks the best mode of protecting agriculture is according to the measure proposed by himself and his Colleagues at the end of the last Session of Parliament, instead of the bill as proposed in the other House of Parliament, and also submitted to your Lordships by my noble Friend near me. The noble Viscount looked at this, and very properly looked at it as a corn measure—as a measure for regulating and protecting the agriculture of the country. The noble Lord himself, and other noble Lords, looked upon it as a commercial measure, and argued both the measure of my noble Friend and that proposed by the noble Viscount opposite as commercial measures. The noble Viscount who has addressed your Lordship lately in a very able speech has argued it upon all grounds, financial as well as others, and he has in a certain degree been replied to by my noble Friend who has lately spoken; but, my Lords, that which we have to discuss tonight is what is the best mode of giving to agriculture that description of protection which appears to be generally understood in this House and the country to be necessary. To those who entertain that opinion there are a few exceptions. The noble and learned Lord who has lately addressed you is one. The noble Baron (Lord Western) is one of those who considers that corn ought to receive protection, and he objects to this measure as likely to be the cause of corn losing that protection; but the question which we have before us to-night, is to consider what will be the best mode of giving protection to agriculture. I confess, my Lords, I have always considered a graduated scale as the best mode of protection for the internal agriculture of the country, a scale of duties levied upon
782
the importation of foreign corn, varying in amount according to the price of corn in the country at certain periods, to be ascertained by averages. It is perfectly true that, under the act which is now, I hope, about to expire, great frauds have been practised in taking the averages. Possibly the scale of duties gave occasion in some measure to those frauds, but I believe there can be no doubt whatever that great frauds have been committed, and complaints also have been made of the law in consequence of the existence of those frauds. Other complaints also have been made of the law, and for that reason I have consented to the adoption, or the proposition of this law, and I hope this law is so framed as to be free from the objections made against the other; that the averages will be more honestly taken and given to the public than they were heretofore; that the graduated scale of duties has been improved, so far as to avoid giving facilities to the practice of frauds, and at the same time to afford an adequate protection to agriculture—a protection which will give a price in this country nearly of the same amount as it has been known to be on an average of the last thirteen or fourteen years since the passing of the law which is now about to expire—that price which has been taken as the average, according to which a final arrangement ought to be made and constituted as the law of the country. My Lords, I say that, considering the arrangement has been made with the sanction of Parliament and the Government at a particular time, it is expedient, in considering the Corn-law of the country, and in making an arrangement for the supply of food to the people, it is desirable to consider that the arrangement has been made between these two sets, and not to allow, certainly, of such changes as would make any material alterations in the fundamental principles and provisions on which that arrangement was carried into effect. My Lords, I am one of those who have always considered that the law of the 9th George 4th has acted beneficially in attaining the objects which those had in view who recommended it to Parliament. The principle had been recommended some years previously to the adoption of the law of the 9th George 4th. It had been proposed during the administration of my Lord Liverpool. The principle was recommended in the administration of Mr. Canning; and a law was proposed on that principle, and the principle

783
finally carried into effect in 1828, by the act of the 9th George 4th. I say that that measure has acted beneficially, according to the views of those who introduced it, in preserving the price of corn at a steady rate, from the period of its enactment nearly up to the present moment; for, notwithstanding what has been said by the noble Viscount at the Table, I contend that the price of corn has been as steady in this country as it has been in any other part of the world. Of course there have been variations. In any article which must vary according to the seasons, and the great element of the value of which is its quantity, the price must vary every year; but I say, that the variations in price have been as little as they have been in any other part of the world. The noble Viscount has stated that the variations in other parts of the world have been occasioned by the variations here; but I say, my Lords, that the noble Viscount in saying that, stated that which he could not exactly prove. There were parts of the world in which variations of price are given as having occurred between which and this country there was no relation whatever in corn. For instance, France. There was no relation between this country and France whatever with respect to corn. There are other parts of the world with which we have very little intercourse in corn. There is very little intercourse of that nature between this country and Holland, and there are variations in Holland. The price of corn stands in Holland very much on the same ground as in this country, a great deal is grown, and a great deal is also imported. At Rotterdam it depends solely on commerce. At Amsterdam a great deal of corn grown in the country is consumed as well as a large quantity imported. Therefore the corn trade in Holland stands pretty nearly on the same ground as in this country; and the fact is, (I am now arguing against the statements that variations of price here have been the cause of the variations in other parts of the world), it can be no such thing, and the noble Lord, said what he had no authority for, because in many places with which we have no communication, variations have occurred. In any of these cases there can be no communication between this country and those countries in which these variations take place. Therefore, I say, the bill has produced as steady a price in this country as has been known in other parts of the world. Go
784
where you will, go to the United States, go to Russia, go to Prussia, or to the other parts of Europe, go where you will, and you will find a great variation of price, a variation exceeding that existing in this country. But, my Lords, then the noble Viscount who spoke lately has thought proper to announce an opinion regarding the sliding-scale, which he calls an absurdity. The noble Viscount may have very good reason for stating so; but, begging the noble Viscount's pardon, it has been always known in the corn-trade of this country. There was a corn-law in this country previously to the year 1794. That was a corn-law also depending on a graduated scale of duty, depending on the state of the prices in this country. It has been invariably the case, and it is applicable to every article the quantity and quality of which depends on the state of the seasons. I say that a price graduated according to the price existing in the home market is actually necessary in order to be able really and truly to give protection. Now, my Lords, the noble Viscount opposite, and the noble Lord who has supported him, insist upon it that a fixed duty would answer the same purpose. My Lords, I will not now complain that we have no knowledge of the amount of fixed duty. I argue for the principle. The amount would, doubtless, have some effect on the question; but what I contend is, that a fixed duty could not be maintained at a time when prices became high, a circumstance which was so strongly felt that I understand recently, when the question was discussed in another place, the noble Lord who discussed it there admitted that when prices came to a certain rate it would be absolutely necessary to reduce the duty by degrees, which is by gradation, in proportion as the price should approach the highest price at which corn ought to be sold in this country. But, my Lords, I say that a fixed duty, when corn comes to be at its maximum price, which I take at 70 s. or 72 s.— a fixed duty in that case is very much like that state of legislation in which corn is protected by a prohibition till it comes to a certain price, in short, as it was during the period when the law of 1815 was in force—that is, when the price approached 80 s. the ports were to be open. My Lords, I have had a little experience in office in this country, and I confess I should be very sorry to see similar circumstances existing in future of which I have seen the

785
example heretofore. My Lords, on several occasions, notwithstanding that the law required that the ports should continue closed until the price came to a certain amount, I have known the Government under the necessity of opening the storehouses, allowing the corn therein stored, and kept under lock and key, to be sold in the market, as those who should administer the Government under the system of a fixed duty would find themselves under the necessity of doing, and of allowing the corn to come out of the stores without the payment of duty, when it should come to be beyond a certain price. When it should approach the price of 70 s. the duty, I say, could not be maintained, and the Government would be under the necessity of doing that to which I have seen Governments driven heretofore—to open the doors in order to set free the corn which should there remain until the payment of duty. Then, my Lords, I say that those who apprehend that a fixed duty could not be maintained are quite right; for there is the example of what was the course pursued when the law was in a similar state to that in which it would be under the system of a fixed duty, when the price should be high. Now, the advantage, my Lords, of a sliding-scale is, that it executes itself. The price of corn is ascertained by averages published in the Gazette, and the law executes itself. As the price rises, the duty falls and comes at last to nothing; the Government need not interfere in any way at all. In the other case the Government would be called on to interfere. The noble Viscount said just now that the Government would not be required to interfere; that the consumer would gain nothing by its interference; that the person who would gain would be the proprietor of corn. That is exactly the case, my Lords. I am afraid that suspicions were entertained with respect to these transactions to which I have referred during the period when the law of 1815 was in existence. It was suspected that large fortunes were made, and that the Government were parties to it. There certainly was no foundation for the suspicion; but we ought to take care not to adopt a system of laws which may place the Government in the state of being obliged to adopt such measures, and thus to become liable to such unfounded suspicions. I therefore contend that, as a measure of protection, the fixed duty would become nugatory, and those who, like the
786
noble Viscount, to do him justice, who wished to see the existing relations between landlord and tenant maintained, should take care lest they expose themselves to disappointment by adopting a fixed duty as a protection to agriculture, instead of a duty based on a graduated scale varying according to price. We have heard of the interference of the Corn-laws with the commerce of the country. My Lords, I have no reason to believe, and the documents laid on the table give no reason to believe, that that was the fact. No man laments more than I do that the commerce and manufactures of the country should be in a state of embarrassment; but I believe that if the Corn-laws were repealed to-morrow, not a yard more of cloth, or a pound more of iron, would be sold in any part of Europe or the world, over which this country does not exercise control. The states of the greater part of Europe have adopted measures to encourage manufactures. These measures had not been adopted, as was stated by some persons, in consequence of the English Corn-laws. They were to be attributed to the feelings excited by this country in the course of the last war; by its great and noble exertions, and the power and expense which it exhibited on all occasions. Those who contemplated those exertions, and those who were relieved and assisted by them, thought that they might as well follow the example of such a power, and establish and encourage among themselves a system of commerce. They followed our example, and they established for themselves manufactures and commerce. I believe that in those countries, do what we will with the Corn-laws, repeal even all duty, we may purchase their corn with our money, but as to getting it by way of barter, or selling to them a yard of cloth, or a pound of iron, or any other article of merchandise, it is out of the question, except under special conventions and bargains respecting our commerce. In respect to the commerce and manufactures of the country, I must say that the state in which they appear to have been hitherto, according to the papers laid on the Table of your Lordships' House, is no proof of the injurious operation of the Corn-laws. Since 1828, the period at which this law was enacted, the exports of the produce of the looms and forges of this country are ascertained by the accounts of the official value, which is the only way of judging of them, to hare been nearly quin-

787
tupled. It is true that individuals connected with manufactures are in distress. 1 hare been concerned to read the reports of the commissioners who inquired into the state of the hand-loom wearers, and also the reports of the conversations which had occurred between some of my hon. and noble Friends and certain gentlemen who were lately in this metropolis, on the state of the commerce and manufactures of the country. If any man reads those reports, and considers the statements in them, he will see clearly that the distressed state of the manufacturers is to be attributed to anything except the Corn-laws; and that it is to be attributed chiefly to the increase of machinery, which has come into competition with individual manufacturers, put them out of employment, and reduced their means, and not to the price of corn or the state of the Corn-laws. My Lords, I do not complain of machinery. I consider that machinery has advanced the manufactures of the country, and has been the cause of the state of the export returns to which I hare just now adverted. But we must not conceal the fact that, in their progress towards that state of improvement, they have reduced individual manufacturers, and that the improvements in machinery, which are continuing daily, are one of the causes of the competition which exists, not only between one part of the country and another part, and one townland and another, but between individuals in each town. So that it is difficult to find markets to take of all the merchandise and manufactures which are produced by this machinery. Those countries which are supposed to be now become the rivals of this country in consequence of the state of our Corn-laws, hare found markets for the produce of their manufactures through the political operation of measures of ours, and not by means or in consequence of the Corn-laws. They have found markets in the South American states, Nearly about the time those manufactures were established in Germany, Russia, and elsewhere, the South American states declared their independence, and that independence was recognised by this country and the United States. Immediately after we had recognised their independence, their ports were opened to the merchandise of Germany and Russia. Markets were thus found for those manufactures which were established on the example of our own, and not on account of the existence of the Corn-laws, I shall now say a few words as to
788
the views of those who desire that we should depend solely upon our own supply of provisions for the people of this country. I am one of those who always wished that the agriculture of this country should be promoted as far as possible, with a view to render this country as nearly independent as could be of supplies from foreign countries. I know that, with our population increasing as it does every year, and increasing also as it does in wealth, it is impossible to expect that we should at any period hare our agriculture in such a state as to enable us to rely upon it exclusively for the supply of our wants. But I beg your Lordships not to lose sight of the necessity of maintaining the prosperity of the agriculture of the country; and your Lordships must never forget facts which are important to this part of the question. The noble Viscount (Viscount Melbourne) has compared the state of the country to the state of the Romans and Athenians in former times. I beg your Lordships not to look quite so far back. You will find an example more analogous to the question in the situation of this country within the last few years. If I mistake not, you have on the records of this House an instance of one sovereign in Europe levying a duty on the export of corn from his dominions purposely because he found the price of corn was high in this country. I beg your Lordships also to recollect the state in which the great source of supply, Poland, was during the whole course of the late revolutionary war in Europe. I would have your Lordships recollect what was the state of Poland only in 1830, during the insurrection, in that country. I would hare your Lordships recollect that your supply of corn depends upon the state of tranquillity of the people residing upon two or three of the large streams running to the Baltic. I would hare your Lordships recollect that only last year, when this country was in want of a supply of corn, supplies of corn were nearly at the same time required in different parts of Russia, and that proclamations were issued forbidding the export of all sorts of grain from Russia. These are circumstances which I beg your Lordships to bear in mind in deciding upon this question; and do not imagine that you can at all times hare from all parts of the world all the corn which you may require. I do not mean to say that you should depend solely upon your own resources. On the contrary, I know you cannot go on without having a

789
supply from foreign sources of at least 1,000,000 of quarters annually, and in all probability the necessity for such a supply will go on increasing to a still further extent. But I entreat your Lordships to provide for the prosperity of the agriculture of the country—to maintain it in the state in which it has been for the last fourteen years, and not to imagine that you can venture to rely entirely upon the supplies which you may derive from other parts of the world. There is only one other point to which I wish to advert; and that is to the influence of these laws upon the state of the currency of the country. It is perfectly true, that when large sums of money are required to be exported from this country at a period in which the bank is in a state of difficulty, in exchange for foreign corn imported, the sending out of those large sums of money must necessarily aggravate the difficulties of the moment. But I believe that it remains to be proved, that the state of the Corn-laws has been the cause of many of these inconveniences. I believe that they have been produced by other circumstances. I certainly admit, that if large sums of money are required to be sent out of the country in payment for foreign corn, the difficulties of the Bank would be aggravated. But I really believe it will be found, that foreign corn under the system of the graduated scale is always in the course of being imported into this country, and that the demand for corn —that is to say, the demand for the introduction of foreign corn into the home market, by any failure of the English harvest, or from any circumstance giving rise for an extraordinary supply of corn in any particular part of the country—does not require the transmission of any large sums of specie to foreign countries. Whatever foreign corn may be required is introduced into the market simply by opening the doors of the magazines and store-houses. It is paid for by the internal currency of the country. It is true, that to replace it, would require the transmission of money abroad; but that is done by degrees. It is not proved that the introduction of large quantities of foreign corn into the consumption of London at certain periods, has, at the same time, required the transmission to foreign countries of very large sums of specie. Therefore, I contend, that here again there is no ground for opposition to the graduated scale. The old law appears to me to have been the means of maintaining the prosperity of the
790
agriculture of the country for the last fourteen years—the means of maintaining it in that state in which the noble Viscount (Viscount Melbourne) very properly declared he wished to see it continue. I believe, that the system proposed by my right hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel) is the system upon which your Lordships ought to act. Therefore, under all the circumstances, I recommend your Lordships to say "not content" to the resolution proposed by the noble Viscount (Viscount Melbourne), and to support the motion of my noble Friend for the committal of this bill.
The Marquess of Lansdowneassured their Lordships that they had the best security for his not troubling them for more than a very few minutes upon this question, important as it was, in the speech of his noble Friend who sat behind him (Lord Monteagle)—that speech being in his (the Marquess of Lansdowne's) estimation unanswered and unanswerable—a speech pursuing the subject into all its ramifications, into which no person had attempted to follow, and which, if it had not convinced their Lordships of the fundamental vice of the system which at present prevailed—of its mischievous tendency and utter inefficiency, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) knew of no arguments that he could use which would bring them to a conviction upon the subject. But it might save their Lordships' time on future occasions if he took that opportunity of stating in a very few words why he intended to vote for the motion of his noble Friend (Viscount Melbourne), and voting for that motion refused to concur in any proposition for doing away at once with all duties upon the importation of foreign corn. He entirely agreed with those who wished the application of the principles of free-trade to be universal upon all subjects and all commodities, corn, included; for he should not doubt the power of the agriculturists of this country to contend with any grower of corn in Europe, were it possible at the same time so to reform the financial system of this country at one sweep as to make the application of capital upon free and equal terms to all manufacturers, corn included; for the growth of corn was to be considered a manufacture as much as any other branch of industry requiring the investment of capital. But he could not admit that it was a fair application of the principle of free-trade to say to the man who invested

791
his capital in the threshing machine, in draining machines, in any of these appliances to which in a rich country, capital was directed to promote the growth of corn —that he should not be protected in the same degree as the man who employed his capital in other branches of manufacture. On the contrary, he conceived that upon every principle of free-trade, their Lordships ought to remove all partial interference with the course and direction which capital might take, and that they should deal out with an equal hand the protection which the necessity of collecting the revenue of the country imposed upon them under the existing financial system. He should hold it as the most fortunate circumstance that could occur in the history of this country, were they able to dispense at once with a system of finance which required them to raise a revenue from the application of all capital to all purposes of manufacture; but he should only be prepared to do away with it in any one branch of manufacture, when he was enabled by the state of the country (a state which he feared was far off) to make such a revolulution in the financial system as to do away with all customs duties, and to relieve the application of capital from the imposition of any tax of any kind. The impossibility, in the present state of things, of adopting such a sweeping course, would prevent him from giving any vote in favour of immediately doing away with all duty on the importation of foreign corn. But with the admission that night made by the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington), and recently made by other eminent persons, that it was no longer an object attainable by the act of legislation, as had sometimes been hopelessly held forth in both Houses of Parliament, to render this country wholly independent of foreign nations for a supply of corn. With that admission from the noble Duke, he could not conceive that their Lordships could hesitate to adopt as an immediate consequence the expediency and necessity of making the country depend for the supply its wants demanded upon the soundest principles of commercial intercourse. He owned he was astonished when he heard from noble Lords, and especially from the noble Earl at the head of the Board of Trade (the Earl of Ripon), the extraordinary proposition that, whereas in all other articles which the necessities of the country did not absolutely require, it was expedient to rely upon the broad principles of commerce, because they were
792
the best; yet, when they came to that particular article which of all others was the most needed, they were to discard those broad and wholesome principles, and to have recourse to an experiment—ingenious enough, no doubt, but which in practice had been found to be an utter and hopeless failure. The noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) in defending the present measure, had declared that the effect of the old law had been to maintain the average price of corn in this country at a more equal rate than in any other country in Europe. He did not know upon what authority the noble Duke made that declaration; but he had in his hand a carefully prepared statement drawn up by Mr. Hubbard, an adherent of the noble Duke's and connected with those who supported the present Government, but who had sifted this subject in every one of its branches; and Mr. Hubbard, in that statement, comparing the average prices during the whole range of the period that the noble Duke's bill had been in operation, that was to say from 1829 to 1838, and comparing the variations of price in England with the variations of price in ten of the other countries of Europe, distinctly showed that the variations of price in England had during that period, been much greater than the variations in any other country of Europe. Mr. Hubbard showed that whilst in England the variation had been from 48s. to 64*., being a difference of 16 s., the variation in the other countries of Europe had not exceeded 10 s. or 12 s. This statement was before the public, and afforded a striking illustration of the defective and injurious operation of the system of the sliding-scale. After the vote of the previous night, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) looked upon the old Corn-law as abolished; and he certainly was not surprised at the evident anxiety of the noble Lords opposite to get rid of it; for however much those noble Lords might desire and endeavour to disguise the fact, it was manifest that the old law in every part of it had been completely wrong. And he might perhaps, with the more propriety, speak of the bill as nearly defunct, because, although another and a similar bill was to be constructed on the foundation of the expiring measure, yet he had an admission from noble Lords on the other side that in coming down to their new fortification they were choosing a fortification differing in dimensions, differing in extent, and differing in position

793
from that they had previously occupied. It was now admitted, too, that the existing bill was wrong in all its points of detail. He remarked, that when, on a previous occasion, he had pointed out the faults of the system of averages, the noble Duke had said, that those faults were faults which the Government should correct, which it was their office and their duty to amend. Why, the noble Duke was now in his own person finding fault with the system of averages. He now said, it was out of the power of the Government to correct the evil, and he came down to solicit their Lordships' assistance in providing a remedy. It was now found out that averages were wrong and defective—(hat the list of places at which they were taken was wrong and defective—that the rests in the scale were wrong and defective, and that different rests ought to be substituted. These new discoveries were well worthy their Lordships' admiration, but what he admired even more was, the extreme confidence with which some noble Lords seemed to expect that this law, which had been again and again, and so repeatedly amended and tinkered up, was after a last repair to prove everything that was admirable, everything that was efficient. When one sliding-scale was found to have failed, they had had recourse to another—when one suit of clothes were found not to fit, they had made an exchange for another suit—they had gone in fact from pillar to post—within a comparatively short number of years they had had no less than six Corn-laws, every one of which had elicited the same warm approbation—the same confidence as to its being a final settlement—the same conviction that it would secure a remunerating price to the grower—the same hope that it would exclude foreign corn from our market; and every one of which had also proved in the end to secure no remunerating price—to shut out no foreign corn, and, at the last, to embody no final settlement. And, let him tell their Lordships, this would also be the case with regard to the measure now before the House. If there was one striking proof more than another, that such would be the result—if there was one thing more than another which showed that the public could not be expected to form a correct judgment of this bill until it was brought home, and until growers and consumers both began to feel its effects—if, he said, one thing more than another proved these things, it was that the development of the principles and de-
794
tails of the bill by the noble Earl, partial and incomplete as that development was, was attended with the remarkable circumstance, that among the supporters of the measure there was the widest possible difference of opinion as to what would be its probable ultimate effects. No two supporters of the bill appeared to be agreed in the estimate they formed of it. One noble Lord said, it would diminish the protection to the grower; another noble Lord, who, he believed, held a place in the household, was of opinion that it would take away no protection at all—or, at any rate, that it took away nothing but superfluous protection. It must be exceedingly gratifying to the feelings of the people to see these shillings taken off from the protective duty, whilst it afforded no advantage to them. They perceived that bread was not a bit cheaper, and that no more foreign corn came into the country; but they had the advantage of looking into the statute-book, and finding that some 56 s. protective duty stood for some 60 s., and this ought to satisfy them for paying the same amount for their loaf. The noble Lord's argument really reminded him of the old lines,—
" The wound is great because it is so small."
The boon is great because it is so small. And the manufacturers might well say, —
" It would be greater were it none at all."
Some noble Lords had said the bill would effect no protection; others had said that it effected an immense protection. He referred to this difference of opinion, not because he thought it surprising or unnatural, but because the bill exhibited such complex machinery, that people drew different inferences with regard to its effects. He would ask their Lordships, they who had studied the subject, and some of whom were presidents of agricultural societies, others of them engaged in agricultural pursuits, and all of them acquainted with the subject, if they could not come to an agreement as to the effect which this measure would produce on corn, how were the farmers of England to tell beforehand what would be the effect of the law in making their leases and tilling their ground; and the chief object of the bill was to give confidence to the farmer in the relation of landlord and tenant. This measure would bring in corn in irregular quantities, and not as a regular trade, and would reduce the trade to gambling transactions. Though the advocates of the bill admitted the importance of the supply,

795
and that the country could not do without it, they at the same time enacted that the import of it should be by gamblers, who ran the risk of double loss in order to make double gains to what they would under a regular system of trade. He therefore thought if this country was, as admitted by the noble Lord, destined by its position, wealth, and population—by a population which, far from being injured by machinery, was created by machinery, supported by it, and must depend on it for its future existence,—to depend on foreign countries, they must rely upon the regular course of direct trade, subject to those salutary and wholesome influences which had at all times made trade beneficial to all countries, and not to that uncertain, precarious, irregular supply, which it was the nature and object almost of this bill to perpetuate, as the mode by which this country was to be supplied, attended by the inconveniencies which he had pointed out to the merchant and farmer, and which his noble Friend behind him had so well elucidated. America and Russia had been referred to. America had supplied corn to other countries, when from the pressure of our Corn-laws we could not get any from her. The effect of the present system of Corn-laws was to narrow the field of supply as much as possible. It seemed to be obvious, that if we were to have any trade in corn at all, that trade should be founded on the principle of obtaining the returns as quickly as possible, and from as wide a field as possible, which the sliding-scale prevented. Even noble Lords themselves so discussed their own system. Were not butcher's meat and cattle partly the supply of this country? In God's name, then, if there were any inherent virtue in the sliding-scale, why was it not applied to oxen and sheep, and beef and mutton? Why not let the poor grazier have the benefit of the sliding' scale, as well as the poor farmer? But no they were to be left to the ordinary rules of commerce. If there were any choice between the two, the sliding-scale would be far preferable as applied to sheep and oxen, as it would only affect the supply from countries near home; whilst a satisfactory supply of corn must come from a very wide field, and from distant countries. He therefore, said, that noble Lords were afraid of their own system; and the reason they had for introducing the sliding-scale into this bill was because it had been introduced before. The sliding-scale was
796
not connected with anything like steadiness of price in this country, but it had created greater unsteadiness in price in this country, than had prevailed in any other country during the same period. He must implore their Lordships, while he admitted the necessity of retaining some duty on corn in the present state of the finances of this country, to recognize in the trade in corn the principles of trade which prevailed in our commerce. He knew that it was flattering to the ingenuity of a Chancellor of the Exchequer to invent a system of rests and stops, which it was supposed would insure a regular supply; but that system had failed in the hands of others, and it was no disrespect to those at the head of affairs to say that it might fail in theirs also. Whilst he admitted in some degree the necessity of retaining some duty upon the importation of foreign corn in the present state of the agriculture and of the finance of the country, he implored their Lordships in respect of that particular commodity, to rely upon the same ordinary, sound, and recognised principles of trade as were applied to other articles. He had once heard a remark made by a very eminent man, well known to the noble Duke opposite, he alluded to Talleyrand, which had struck him much at the time. It was, that there was a certain person more clever and more wise than the wisest and the cleverest man the world ever knew; wiser than Newton, Bacon, or Locke; and that person was "everybody" —a personage, who in the end, prevailed over the most ingenious individuals; and so he feared that it would be found in the present case. The provisions, the cunning ingenious provisions of the bill might meet with great applause in that House, but they would come to be sifted, to be examined, and in the end, defeated; and the country would not have the benefit of that regular supply which it should be the object of their Lordships to procure to it. He had heard in the debates which had taken place upon the question much said as to what was a remunerating price. He confessed that he never could understand what the meaning of the term was. To whom was it intended to apply? To the farmer on clay soils or on flinty soils— to the farmer with a large, to him with a small, or with no capital at all employed in his operations? These were all different contingencies which might, and which did happen, and he defied their Lordships to lay down any price, as a remunerating

797
price, which could be secured by act of Parliament. If there was any meaning in remuneration, it must mean that remuneration secured to the grower of wheat by the capacity of the people to purchase it, and it was by promoting that capacity, by supporting manufacturers, by securing a good mart for their wares abroad as well as at home, that the Legislature alone could secure to the agriculturist that return for his capital, which was the foundation of his real prosperity. Let the people be enabled by means of brisk and extended trade to purchase wheat, and all remunerative prices provided by acts of Parliament would be unnecessary; but if the people were not able to purchase, if manufactures fell off, then that remunerative price would also die away, and all the clauses, acts, rests and averages, by the contrivance of which a certain price was vainly sought to be created and maintained, would be found to be utterly useless. It was by these means, by extending trade, that the prosperity of the country was to be maintained, and the increasing population, which could not subsist upon the resources of this country alone, but which must depend upon the resources of others —upon resources which had never as yet, even when this country was assailed by its greatest enemy, failed, and which would not fail them now—he said that it was only by applying to these resources that that increasing population could be maintained; for if it was wrong to allow any foreign country to have the means of exciting dissatisfaction in this, it was in the power of America—of that country sometimes suspected—he trusted she was not —but which was sometimes suspected of being hostile to them, it was in her power if she was willing for the purpose to sacrifice her own interests, to excite, by stopping the supply of cotton for one year, more dissatisfaction, more tumult, more starvation than would be occasioned by the stoppage of the supply of corn from any one state of Europe in ten years. But yet they were actually told in the face of facts like these, that this country ought to be independent of foreign nations ! It was on entirely different principles they must rely. It was by adopting the principles of his noble Friend (Viscount Melbourne) that they would perform their duty in a way the most reconcileable to the principles of sound trade, and the ultimate prosperity of the country. But if they adopted the principle of the bill before
798
their consideration— a bill which he admitted to be certainly better than its predecessor, they were adopting a principle and a measure which would neither be satisfactory or final.
The Duke of Wellingtonrose to explain a statement which had been made by the noble Marquess with reference to what he (the Duke of Wellington) had said in regard to the mode of preventing frauds in taking the averages. He had not said that it was the particular duty of the Government of the day to put an end to them without the interference of any legislative measure; what he said was, that, if it should be found necessary to introduce a new measure upon the subject of the Corn-laws, he trusted that they would have the assistance of the noble Marquess in modelling the measure, so that the frauds committed in taking the averages would be prevented.
Lord Fitzgeraldthought the whole character of the proposition of the noble Viscount (Viscount Melbourne) depended upon the degree of protection which should be afforded; and as there was nothing definitive in it upon this point, it was impossible to discuss the proposition. The noble Viscount stated the amount of protection which he would afford at 8s., but added, that if the landed interest considered that was not sufficient, a larger amount of protection might have been given. The noble Viscount being then the First Minister of the Crown made this admission; but how could he reconcile this with the speeches of the noble Lords by whom he was supported, some of them being in favour of a complete free-trade in corn? Why, with this fact before them, did noble Lords taunt those on his (the Ministerial) side with supporting the present bill by conflicting arguments? His noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) expressed it as his opinion, not only that a fixed duty could be maintained, but that it could be maintained with the consent of all parties interested. Did his noble Friend still continue of that opinion? He would ask his noble Friend how he would maintain a fixed duty under such a state of circumstances as existed between the years 1790 and 1800. When the Legislature had almost, as it were, prohibited the consumption of wheaten bread, did his noble Friend think the Government could or ought to maintain a fixed duty? There were two or three other points which had been

799
urged with considerable force by his noble Friend, which were entitled to considerable weight. His noble Friend had illustrated part of his argument by the circumstances under which America had been placed; and his noble Friend as well as the noble Earl who had spoken early in the evening had dwelt upon the inequality of the laws as affecting America, compared with other states with which this country had a more rapid communication. His noble Friend had referred in pathetic terms to a conversation he had had with a most distinguished man, Mr. Webster, at a period when America was in debt to this country—when she was panting to pay that debt and desiring to liquidate what she owed to the British capitalist. His noble Friend had stated that Mr. Webster had mentioned that corn was uncut in America, which under other laws would have enabled that country to have paid her debt. Might he ask his noble Friend at what period that conversation took place? He believed that Mr. Webster visited this country in 1839 or 1840, and it appeared that in those very years 1839, 1840, and 1841, the ports of this country were open to the importation of American corn, and during those three years corn was every month taken out for home consumption. He remembered that in the last session of Parliament it was stated by a noble Lord in that House that a complaint had been made by a manufacturer in this country that his trade was interrupted, and his debt from America remained unpaid, in consequence of the proprietor of corn-lands in that country being unable to find assets, while if his corn had been allowed to come to England he would have been enabled to pay his debts. In answer to this, another noble Lord, who had since proceeded to America upon as honourable a mission as could be confided to any individual—he meant Lord Ashburton—observed, that he could ill understand the statement made, because, though it certainly might have been more convenient to the debtor to remit his corn to this country at the value he placed upon it, yet, at all events, he might have sold his corn and got rid of his liability, though he might not have been able to have remitted so much. It must have produced, if sold, a representative value which might have been remitted to this country, and have afforded (with all respect for Mr. Webster's opinion) some means for getting rid of
800
that debt which America professed so earnest an anxiety to pay. Again, it was rather remarkable that his noble Friend opposite should have forgotten that America herself had Corn-laws in force, and that while she complained of the Corn-laws of this country, her own wheat-growing states had a duty of 8s., for the purpose of keeping out from her markets Canadian wheat! In the first place, then, he contended that it would not have been very difficult for America to discharge her obligations, and in the next place that the complaint of the English Corn-laws came with a very bad grace from those who themselves had an 8s. duty to exclude wheat grown in an English province. There were other points which had been urged by a noble Earl who had spoken early in the night, and who had argued the question upon grounds entirely of a different character, but upon grounds of an important character, and which ought not to be kept out of sight on the present occasion, he meant the great commercial policy of this question. His noble Friend had adverted to the impolicy of this country excluding the produce of other nations, and had argued that one of the consequences must be, the limitation of the exports of British manufactures to those countries. But his noble Friend ought to bear in mind that there was one country in Europe from which England took all the produce, except corn, it was able and capable of sending. From Russia, for example, this country received tallow and other produce without restriction and without restraint, and not only to an amount much larger than they received from England, but it so happened that Russia was the very country to which England exported least, though from her she received the most. And he doubted, with respect to Russia, seeing that England took so much larger a portion of her produce than she sent manufactures in return, whether the admission of corn from Russia would produce any larger exportation of those manufactures to that country. That must very much depend on the commercial policy of other countries as well as our own. The argument of his noble Friend was, that they only required to offer a steady trade in corn at a fixed duty to have an almost unlimited accession of exports to foreign countries. But with respect to Russia, he must say, that looking to the consular returns from Riga, there appeared

801
little reason to suppose that there would be, at least for some time to come, any available increase in the quantity of corn to be exported to this country, and certainly not at the present prices, while, as he had already stated, our exports to Russia were by no means in proportion to our imports from that country. The noble Marquess had complained of the noble Duke in stating, that under the present system there had been less variation in the price of wheat here than in other countries; but he observed from a return which had been laid on the Table of the other House of Parliament, that taking England, Dantzic, and Rotterdam, the variations had been much greater in the two last than in England, so that the noble Duke was perfectly justified in his statement. The noble Marquess had asked why, if the sliding-scale were applicable to corn, it should not equally be extended to beef and other articles in the tariff? The simple answer was, that beef, cattle, and other articles of that description were not subject to the same variations with corn, caused by the vicissitudes of the seasons. And if this sliding-scale were applied to cattle, the lowest duty would attach to the dearest animal. The noble Marquess had concluded his speech by protesting, that he did not understand the meaning of what was called a remunerating price to the grower of corn. Undoubtedly it was extremely difficult to define what was a remunerating price, and how much of it belonged to the cultivator, how much to the landlord, and how much to the other parties engaged in the production of that article of sustenance; but if the noble Marquess admitted that any protection at all should be given to agriculture, the same objection applied whether a fixed duty or a sliding-scale were adopted. Upon the whole, he felt a strong conviction that the interests of agriculture, of commerce, and of the great body of the consumers would be better promoted by the adoption of the present bill than by any other proposition which had been made, and he therefore hoped their Lordships would support it by a large majority.
Their Lordships divided on the resolution; Contents present 49; Proxies 22— 71: Not Contents 117; Proxies 90: 207: Majority 136.

List of the CONTENTS,

DUKES.

Somerset

Norfolk

Sutherland.

802

MARQUESSES.

Worcester

Lansdowne

Derry.

Anglesey

BARONS.

Normanby

Brougham

Clanricarde.

Campbell

EARLS.

Colburne

Charlemont

Cottenham

Radnor

Cloncurry

Clarendon

Portman

Zetland

Lovett

Fitzwilliam

Vyvyan

Cowper

Denman

Fingall

Strafford

Fortescue

Godolphin

Scarborough

Monteagle

Lovelace

Camoys

Rosebery

Poltimore

Uxbridge

Kinnaird

Bruce.

Dinorben

VISCOUNTS.

Lilford

Melbourne

Wrottesley

Duncannon.

Carew

Wenlock

BISHOPS.

Hatherton

Durham

De Freyne

Ely

Lyttleton.

Proxies.

DUKE.

VISCOUNT.

Sussex.

Torrington.

BISHOP.

EARLS.

Hereford.

Carlisle

BARONS.

Fitzhardinge

Bateman

Huntingdon

Foley

Leitrim

De Maule

Gosford

Sudeley

Minto

Leigh

Sefton

Dormer

Albemarle

Berners

Craven

Methuen

Camperdown.

Clifford

List of the NOT-CONTENTS.

ARCHBISHOP.

Londonderry

Canterbury.

Ormonde.

DUKES.

EARLS.

Cambridge

Devon

Beaufort

Denbigh

Marlborough

Westmorland

Rutland

Winchilsea

Buccleugh

Sandwich

Argyll

Shaftesbury

Newcastle

Jersey

Wellington

Morton

Buckingham

Moray

Cleveland.

Home

MARQUESSES.

Haddington

Salisbury

Dalhousie

Abercorn

Selkirk

Hertford

Aberdeen

Downshire

Orkney

Thomond

Hopetoun

Ely

Dartmouth

Exeter

Aylesford

Camden

Warwick

Cholmondeley

Hard wicke

803

Delaware

Winchester

Bathurst

Lincoln

Digby

Bangor

Beverley

Rochester

Liverpool

Chichester

Cadogan

Malmesbury

LORDS.

Egmont

De Ros

Clanwilliam

Beaumont

Mountcashell

Willoughby de Broke

Longford

St. John

Wicklow

Colville

Clare

Rollo

Lucan

Middleton

Bandon

Sondes

Rosslyn

Boston

Wilton

Walsingham

Powis

Kenyon

Charleville

Braybrooke

Verulam

Bolton

St. Germans

Blayney

Bradford

Clonbrock

Eldon

Redesdale

Howe

Rivers

Somers

Sandys

Dunraven

Castlemaine

Cawdor

Churchill

Ripon

Prndhoe

VISCOUNTS.

Colchester

Strathallan

Ravensworth

Maynard

Forester

Sydney

Bexley

Hood

De Tabley

Gage

Feversham

Hawarden

Fitzgerald

Canning

Lyndhurst

Canterbury

Tenterden

Lowther.

Heytesbury

BISHOPS.

Seaton.

London

Proxies.

ARCHBISHOP.

Leven

York.

Balcarres

DUKES.

Dunmore

Richmond

Seafield

Montrose

Harrington

Dorset

Buckinghamshire

Northumberland.

Egremont

MARQUESSES.

Talbot

Winchester

Mansfield

Tweeddale

Courtoun

Bute

Roden

Waterford

Mayo

Donegal

Enniskillen

Wellesley

Donoughmore

Ailesbury

Onslow

Westmeath

Romney

Bristol

Limerick

Ailsa.

Manvers

EARLS.

Lonsdale

Stamford

Harrowby

Essex

Brownlow

Abingdon

Glengall

Plymouth

De Grey

Poulett

Amherst

Airlie.

Ranfurly

804

VISCOUNTS.

Carteret

Hereford

Berwick

Arbuthnot

Montagu

Strangford

Bayning

Doneraile

Wodehouse

Ferrand

Farnham

St. Vincent

Crofton

Melville

Alvanley

Sidmouth

Ellenborough

Lorton

Manners

Gort

Hill

Exmouth

Harris

Combermere.

Glenlyon

BISHOPS.

Delamere

St. Asaph

Downes

Carlisle

Gifford

Oxford.

Wharncliffe

LORDS.

Cowley

Clinton

Stuart de Rothesay

Saltoun

Wallace

Sinclair

Abinger

Dynevor

Ashburton

Bagot

Keane.

Rodney

PAIRED OFF.

Earl of Kinnoul

Lord Langdale

Earl of Cornwallis

Lord Stanley of Alderley

Earl of Carnarvon

Earl of Suffolk

Lord Reay

Lord Montfort

Lord De L'Isle

Earl of Erroll.

Their Lordships then divided on Lord Brougham's first resolution; when the numbers were — Contents 9: Not Contents 96:—Majority 87.
Lord Brougham then moved his other resolution, that it is inexpedient and unwise to tax the importation of foreign corn for the purposes of revenue.
The House divided: Contents 6; Not-Contents 87:—Majority 81.
The House then went into committee pro formâ, and resumed—Committee to sit again on Thursday.
House adjourned.