Sitting of 31 January 1850

MINUTES.
NEW WRITS.—For Kidderminster v. Richard Godson, Esq., deceased.—Surrey (Western Division), v. William Joseph Denison, Esq., deceased.—Cork v, Daniel Callaghan, Esq., deceased.—New Shoreham v. Charles Goring, Esq., deceased.
NEW MEMBERS SWORN.—For Boston, Honourable Dudley Anderson Pelham.—For Surrey (Western Division), William John Evelyn, Esq.—For Reading, John Frederick Stanford, Esq.—For Kidderminster, John Best, Esq.—For New Shoreham, Lord Alexander Francis Charles Gordon Lennox.—For Cork, Colonel James Charles Chatterton.
PUBLIC BILLS.—Outlawries Bill.
The House met at Two o'clock.
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners-,—The House went;—and being returned,
MR. SPEAKERacquainted the House that he had issused warrants for New Writs for several places. (See Minutes.)

OPERATIONS IN THE PUNJAB.
MR. SPEAKERacquainted the House, that he had received from Major General Thackwell the following letter in return to the Thanks of this House, communicated to him in obedience to their commands of the 24th day of April last:—
"Meerut, 27th Sept. 1849.
"Sir—I have had the honour to receive from the Most Noble the Governor General of India, a printed Resolution of the House of Commons, of The 24th of April, 1849, conveying the Thanks of The House for the Victories in the Punjab; and, as a Major General therein named, I had the honour to offer my best acknowledgments to the Most Noble the Governor General for the same, and I now have the honour of expressing to the House of Commons my grateful thanks for such a distinguished mark of their approbation.—I have The honour to be, Sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
"Jos. THACKWELL,
"Major General, late Commanding the Cavalry of the Army of the Punjab.
"The Right Honourable the Speaker of the House of Commons, London."

ADDRESS IN ANSWER TO THE SPEECH.
MR. SPEAKERhaving read a copy of Her Majesty's Speech,
MR. C. P. VILLIERS: I rise, Sir, to move that an humble Address be presented

83
to Her Majesty in reply to the gracious Speech which has been just read to this House. In doing so, I can assure the House that I am fully impressed with my own incompetency duly to discharge this task; and I am sure that no person that has preceded me in this position has ever felt more in need of the forbearance of the House. Indeed, Sir, but for the circumstance that there appears upon all sides a disposition to refer the present condition of the country to those recent changes in our commercial policy which have undergone such frequent discussion in this House, and in which I have borne my humble share, I should have deemed myself the least appropriate person to have been selected for this purpose. However, Sir, I do most certainly agree in the view which I know that Her Majesty's Ministers take of the condition of the people; and, having the most implicit reliance that my noble Friend at the head of the Government will not compromise—that he will not in any way surrender, but that he will maintain entire—those measures which he conceives to be connected with the happiness and well-being of the people, I have no scruple, in other respects, to ask the House to respond to the Speech which has just been read. And, first, Sir, I will advert to those topics in Her Majesty's Speech, which I am sure will unite the feelings of the House. It has been communicated to this House the deep affliction which Her Majesty has experienced from the death of Her illustrious relative the late Queen Dowager; and I think I should only be correctly representing the opinion of the country if I were to say, with regard to her late Majesty, that her blameless life, her unostentatious character, and her numerous charities, as well as the exemplary manner in which she filled the duties of her exalted station, have secured for her memory a feeling of deep respect among the people at large; and the House, will, I am sure, not hesitate to concur in the expression of cordial condolence and sympathy with Her Majesty for the bereavement she has endured. It is stated in Her Majesty's Speech, and the statement is one which this House always receives with the greatest satisfaction, that "Her Majesty happily continues in peace and amity with foreign Powers." It is further announced that Her Majesty has, in conjunction with France, and by means of a friendly mediation, prevented hostilities from "occurring between the Governments
84
of Austria and Russia on the one hand, and the Sublime Porte on the other." The causes of this apprehended rupture are indicated in the Royal Speech, arising, as it seems, from certain persons, subjects of Russia and Austria, having sought refuge and protection in the territories of the Sultan, and a claim having been made by the Emperors of Russia and of Austria, based on treaties of ancient date, that those persons should be surrendered, in order that they might he punished according to the offence with which they were charged. Sir, a doubt having arisen upon the part of the Sultan as to the correctness of the construction of those treaties upon which this claim was made, the Sultan referred to the Governments of England and France to aid him in the solution of his doubts. I believe it is a matter now known, that the Governments of France and England adopted the construction put upon the treaties by the Sultan, that construction being unfavourable to the surrender of those persons; and which construction having been allowed to be just, the final arrangements with regard to the persons who had sought refuge in the dominions of the Sultan were in accordance with the propositions that had emanated from the Sultan. The result, therefore, of Her Majesty's mediation, in conjunction with France, has been to prevent hostilities occurring between the Imperial Governments and the Sultan, involving, perhaps, the peace of Europe; and that friendly relations have been, or are about to be, resumed between those Governments and the Porte. Sir, I believe there never was a time when the interference of this country with the affairs of foreign countries in which we are not directly concerned, was regarded with more objection than at present; but I think that with regard to such intervention a great distinction must be taken with regard to its character, for there is a great difference between an interference which has for its purpose to dictate to a people the form of government under which they shall live, or to contribute force to a Government to resist its people, which it would be otherwise unable to do, and that kind of intervention which assumes the form of friendly mediation, which has in view the cause of peace and humanity and the prevention of hostilities, the issue of which might be dangerous to ourselves. I conceive, in this latter case, that interference is not only justifiable, but politic;

85
and I think it is one of the best consequences of the position we now hold in the opinion of the world, that, when we do intervene in the cause of peace and humanity, we can do so with effect. I refer to the position we now hold in the opinion of the world, because it is with satisfaction that I consider this country has seldom been looked upon with more trust and respect than it is at present; and which I am disposed to explain by the true character of the people of this country being better understood by the world. I believe other countries are perfectly satisfied that the people of this country have no other object but to maintain peace with the whole world: that they have neither a wish to aggrandise themselves, or to take political advantage at the expense of any other country; whilst, as regards power, that they are perfectly satisfied with the vast results of their own peaceful pursuits. And though doubtless we must always sympathise with those people who, following in our footsteps, are struggling to obtain their liberties, yet I believe there is no way in which we can aid those people so well, or influence other Governments so much, as by pointing to our own example, which shows that the greatest amount of liberty enjoyed by any people upon the earth is consistent with peace, with order, and the acquisition of vast wealth; showing to the people what is to be gained by firmness and moderation; and to Governments what is to be averted by timely concession to the people. Her Majesty has announced in Her Speech that She has been engaged in communication with different Powers for the purpose of making arrangements consequent upon those changes which we effected last year in the laws for regulating our navigation; it has been also announced that Her Majesty is negotiating at this moment with other States, who have intimated their readiness to reciprocate the advantages which, by those changes, have been extended to them; and it has been further announced that already the United States and Sweden have reciprocated to us every advantage which we have offered to them by the recent abolition of our navigation laws. It is rather early, perhaps, to express any opinion of what will be the general result of the change which has been adopted in this part of our commercial system; but there is at present every prospect, so far as one can see, of all similar restrictions to the intercourse of nations, originating as they did, at a time far
86
less enlightened than the present, and continued far too long, for the convenience of the world as it is, being swept away. It is gratifying to observe that all the apprehensions which were expressed upon the part of those who resisted that change hero, appear to have been unfounded. It has been seldom we have seen so much sentiment and feeling mixed up with private and pecuniary interest as was evinced upon the question of the abolition of our navigation laws; and I think it has been rarely that the mischiefs and evils of an old system, and the advantages of a change, have been so quickly and clearly brought into view. There is every prospect of the predictions that were made by the advocates of the navigation laws, and their alarms also, proving unfounded; and there is every promise of what was prophesied and expected, as to the advantages of the change, being realised. Perhaps the interest that was most affected by the change, has not been for some years in such a state of activity as it is at this moment. There is general activity in the dockyards of this country. Whether in the Tyne or the Thames, the Wear or the Clyde, the same account is given that the business of shipbuilding never presented a more cheering prospect. I should also mention that some of the persons who were most prominent in predicting evil consequences from the change, are amongst the most busy now, thus showing little faith in the statements they made themselves, and justifying us in the discredit we cast upon them. It is further disclosed, what was perhaps not known before, that we have advantages in building ships that are possessed by hardly any other country; and so far from that interest being likely to suffer by the alteration, we find they can not only build ships at home cheaper than they can be built in other countries, but, what is still more satisfactory, we find that other countries can build their ships cheaper here than they can in their own yards. It does appear also that, whatever advantage we supposed was possessed by other countries over us, resulted from the system which existed in this country; and that, in consequence of the change, we have adopted that system with respect to the structure of our vessels and to secure better character morally, and with regard to knowledge of their business, among our masters and mates, that is likely to qualify us to maintain competition with the ships of any country

87
in the world. I do not intend to weary the House with many details on this matter, but I cannot help reading one letter that I have received from Liverpool on this subject, and the character of the writer may be deemed of sufficient authority. The writer said—
"As regards shipping, there is a much better feeling since it was ascertained that the navigation laws were irretrievably doomed; builders are well employed, new contracts are making freely, both at home and in the colonies, and first-class British-built ships are readily taken up as they arrive. In fact, the supply of 12-year ships fall short of the demand, and advanced rates have been paid in some cases for homeward freight. There are now building on the stocks 2,850 tons, against 2,229 in 1849. Some British ships have been taken up in the Mediterranean and elsewhere, and loaded for the States, and a few foreigners to load for England—the first fruits of reciprocity. I enclose some of the shipping circulars, particularly pointing attention to that of Thom, Currie, and Co., from the importance of that firm."
The hon. Gentleman then read a passage from this circular, to the effect that
—" the prospect of the sweeping measure for the repeal of the navigation laws was accompanied with doubts and anxieties that had had the effect of checking the operations even of the most enterprising; but so soon as it was decided that the old laws were doomed, increased energy evinced itself;' the native hue of resolution,' which had been' sick lied o'er with the pale cast of thought,' again appeared, and in the assurance that the position of the shipowner would not be further compromised, buyers and builders resolved at once to be up and doing."
I have also got a return from the port of Sunderland, and I find that of the vessels building in the port of Sunderland on the 31st of December, 1847, the amount of tonnage was 22,140, and on the 31st of December, 1849, the navigation laws having then been doomed for six months before, it was 29,210. Of ships sold, there were 16 in December, 1847, and in December, 1849, 24. The number built in December, 1848, when there seemed some doubt as to the navigation laws being abolished, was 142, of 37,878 tons, and in December, 1849, 155 of 44,333. I might go further into detail on the subject of the navigation laws, to show that I am right in congratulating the House on the change that has been made; but knowing that there are some Members more perfectly informed on this subject who are likely to afford the House further evidence, I will not longer detain its attention on this topic. I cannot, however, help repeating, that after six months' experience of
88
the certainty of the change, that everything foretold by the opponents of the change has hitherto been falsified, and that everything which was promised by its advocates is likely to be realised. Sir, the Speech has communicated to the House the satisfaction which Her Majesty derived from her recent visit to Ireland. That Her Majesty's reception in that country should have been marked by every indication of attachment and loyalty, I believe occasioned no surprise to those who were best acquainted with the feelings of that people. The people of Ireland, often complaining of this country, and sometimes with reason, have seldom been wanting in respect for the Crown. They cheerfully acknowledge the legitimate right of Her Majesty to the dominion of that country; while of Her Majesty personally they only knew that from the time of Her accession She has manifested a marked interest in their welfare, desiring that all reason for complaint should be removed, and anxious that justice and favour should be dispensed alike in each portion of Her kingdom. It was, moreover, supposed that Her Majesty had long wished personally to visit that country. With these prepossessions with regard to Her Majesty, it was not surprising that among a people of their generous nature, Her arrival among them should have been welcomed with delight. Having been present in the capital myself, when Her Majesty was there, I am bound to say, that I never saw so vast a concourse of people congregated together, who demeaned themselves with so much order, respectfulness, and propriety. People from all quarters of the country, and of all opinions, assembled there on the occasion; and, without yielding to any extravagance of feeling or losing their self-respect, they seemed to have come there for the common object of manifesting respect for the person and character of Her Majesty. From information I have received, I do not think that anything has occurred amongst the people at large in that country, since Her Majesty's departure, to shake those feelings of attachment and loyalty which were evinced in Her presence; and I do believe that in no way could Her Majesty confer more satisfaction upon that people than by intimating an intention of revisiting that country. We are reminded by Her Majesty's Speech that there is still great distress in that country, and vestiges yet exist of the awful calamity with which it was visited. Indeed it is impossible for

89
those who know the extent of distress which the famine occasioned, to suppose that at so early a period all traces of its effects should have disappeared; but it is gratifying to think that in many respects the poor of that country are improving in their condition, and that, owing to the abundance of the necessaries of life, the amount of suffering is less. This is not only indicated by the less frequent resort to public relief, but there are signs of greater contentment, and evidence of less crime and outrage being committed. It is matter of satisfaction, considering the apprehensions that were expressed with reference to the extent and mode of the relief which was afforded in Ireland, it should not have realised the fears of those who were opposed to it. It was imagined that if relief was once given out of the workhouse to the Irish people, they would become generally demoralised, and there would be a habit of dependence on public charity which nothing could check. It is satisfactory to observe that, as soon as the necessaries of life become more reasonable in price, and that more means of employment prevailed, that outdoor relief very greatly diminished. At the commencement of 1849, we find that the indoor relief included 206,254 persons, and in 1850 it is reduced to 204,407. The amount of the outdoor relief on the 1st of January, 1849, was 479,576; and on the 1st of January, 1850, it was reduced to 104,650. The decrease, therefore, of indoor relief was 1,760, and of outdoor relief 364,926. As far as we can ascertain the prospects of the operation of the poor-law, it appears that the administration of the system becomes more simplified, and the means of preventing imposture and the exhaustion of the resources of the country more certain. There is a most striking evidence of this by the increased workhouse accommodation provided in the country during last year, showing that that which is considered in this country a sufficient test of imposture, is likely to be applied there generally and with effect. The workhouse accommodation on the 6th January, 1849, was for 290,720; on the 5th January, 1850, for 251,717. I stated that there was a diminution of crime in Ireland, consequent on the improved condition of the people. I find, by a return of the number of outrages reported by the constabulary in 1847 and 1849, that the number of cases of cattle and sheep stealing which occurred in 1847 was 10,044; in 1849, 8,157; of other outrages, the
90
number in 1847 was 10,142; in 1849, 6,749; the total of offences being for 1847, 20,986; for 1849,14,906. The total number of animals stolen was, in 1847, 15,291, and in 1849, 13,631. I come now to an announcement in Her Majesty's Speech which I am sure will be most gratifying to the House—I allude to the reference that is there made to the condition of manufactures and commerce in this country, as well as the condition of the people generally. Her Majesty is happy to congratulate the House that the state of the manufactures and commerce of the country has greatly improved, and that the condition of the people is very much better than it has been, in consequence of the easier access to the necessaries and comforts of life. This, Sir, is a most important fact—important at any time to those who are aware of the vast consequences that are involved in this consideration, affecting as it does our whole social, political, and financial condition. But though an official announcement of this fact has been waited and watched for with great interest in this country, I believe there never was a time when attention and interest were more directed to that subject out of this country than at this time. Everybody is wanting to learn the present condition of England. The whole commercial world consider that we have lately made a great and momentous experiment on our industrial and commercial interests, and are waiting the result. This announcement, therefore, contained in the Speech, has a peculiar importance. The fact is, that the nations of the earth are beginning, notwithstanding the sneers sometimes cast upon the subject, to direct their attention to political economy. There never was a time when nations were more desirous of acquiring wealth, or when the people complained more of its distribution, than they do now; and the problem that is now seeking a solution, is, in what way nations can accumulate the greatest possible amount of wealth consistently with the fairest distribution of it. I do not dispute that there are two systems totally opposed to each other, each of which has professed to accomplish this object. The one consists in regulating and restricting the trade of this country by the State, and maintaining particular industries and interests that are unable to maintain themselves—this is called the protective system. The other is to leave to the unfettered intelligence and energy, almost the instinct, of a free and civilised people, the discovery of the means

91
by which they can obtain the highest possible reward for their capital, skill, and industry—that is called the free-trade system. What excites the curiosity and interest of the world is, that regarding us, as it does, at the head of all other commercial nations, we have been seen for years past to act on the protective system, and that recently we have abandoned it, for that of free trade. This interest has also been much enhanced by the very confident predictions that were made here and elsewhere as to the disastrous effects that must follow from the change. In this country the great issue upon the protective and free-trade system has been taken on the free introduction of food into this country. Upon this subject there are recorded some most positive prophecies and warnings; and I have no doubt that there are many persons who have been shaken in their faith in what they thought to be a sound principle, by the confidence with which persons of authority and station in this country have spoken as to the results of that experiment. But the importance of the announcement made in Her Majesty's Speech is, that it enables us now to know the results of the change. Certainly, it may be said that the time is rather short to judge of the result of any experiment after the trial of only one year; but if those predictions of evil had been in any measure justified, I think the time has arrived when we should have at least some intimation of the evils that were likely to follow. Now, amongst the objections urged by those who opposed a free trade in corn, the House is, I am sure, very familiar with the following: first, that it would greatly impair the home trade; second, that the condition of the working classes would be greatly deteriorated; third, that the currency must be exported to pay for it; and, fourth, that the revenue would decline. Now, it was said on the other side, that inasmuch as food was the basis upon which all human industry proceeded, that according to its supply—whether scanty, or adequate, or abundant—so would be the means of the community available for the production, distribution, or consumption of all other articles; and that an objection founded on the evils of having more food instead of less, was fallacious; and that as trade only consisted in the exchange and distribution of articles required for human use, or as such articles would be demanded in proportion as the first necessary of life
92
was procured with more or less facility, so must trade be always better when food was plentiful and cheap; and, lastly, it was said that, inasmuch as with our system of taxation, revenue depended more upon expenditure than on income, so would that be greater, and not less, as general consumption was increased. Abundance of food, therefore, said we, must always be a cause of prosperity in such a country as this. These were the arguments put forward for and against that system. Now, I want the House, the country, and the world at large, to judge between us; and I want the world to decide at present by examining the results. And what are the results? We have heard something of them from private sources, but this is the first occasion on which any official announcement as to the state of the country has been made. We are told that commerce and manufactures are thriving, and the condition of the people greatly improved from having fuller command of the necessaries of life. The evils denounced as about to overtake us were to be in proportion to the quantity of commodities, especially food, that were to be imported. Now it was certainly beyond my expectation, that we should so soon have an opportunity of putting this matter to the test. For what am I now in a position to state to the House? Why, that within the last sixteen months we have imported more food than we imported during sixteen years before. Now, if any of the threatened consequences were necessarily to follow from the adoption of free trade in food, surely there would have been some indication of them at present, for no party imagined so soon that the imports of grain would have been so large: nothing approaching to it, indeed, has, I believe, ever occurred in the history of this country, for we have been importing at the rate of 1,000,000 quarters a month. And my honest conviction at this moment is, that not a single thing that was feared by the opponents of free trade has come true, or has the slightest prospect of coming true; whilst the advantages expected by the free-traders have already been felt. The home trade has improved; the condition of the working classes has been ameliorated; not a sovereign has left the country—for there is as much gold as the hon. Member for Warwickshire could wish; while, as we shall be informed by my right

93
hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the revenue is improving. I am in possession of letters, circulars, and documents coming from every part of the country, in which the writers not only admit—a very rare thing with the people of this country—that they are well off, and their condition improved; but ascribe it chiefly to the cheapness and abundance of the necessaries of life. With respect to the home trade, I really had some doubts whether the improvement would be so soon evinced; but only this day I had a letter from the north of England describing the state of the manufacturing interests in a place chiefly concerned in supplying the interior of the country—Bradford and its vicinity:—
"Bradford, Jan. 28th, 1850.
"My dear Sir—In reply to your esteemed favour I beg to say that I have taken considerable pains in obtaining information as to the condition of the working classes in this town and neighbourhood, also as to the rate of wages, and the general state of trade. In all these respects a constant, steady, and great improvement has taken place during the last twelve or eighteen months. The exports to the United States have increased—the demand for the Continent has revived with the more general return of tranquillity, and with regard to the home trade, while a very large increase has taken place in the demand for our goods in the manufacturing districts, the experience of our firm would not lead us to the conclusion that there has been in 1849, as compared with 1848, any diminution in the demand for Bradford goods in the agricultural districts, but quite the contrary. The result has been that new machinery has been so much in demand as to have risen greatly in value; the amount paid for the relief of the poor is not much more than half of what it was two years ago; hands have been so scarce during the whole of 1849 that repeated advances in wages have been given, and I feel justified in stating that owing to the high rate of wages and the low prices of clothing and of food, the working classes as a body were never so well off in this district as at present. These remarks apply to Bradford, Thornton, Shipley, Bingley, Keighly, and the intermediate district. I annex a statement of the number receiving relief from the poor-rates, and the amount paid in Nov. 1848 and in Nov. 1849 in Bradford."
Another letter was from Leicester, where there had been a good deal of agitation on the subject of free trade, and apprehension that the country would be ruined in consequence, and written by a person whose authority and station in that town place his statements beyond question for accuracy:—
"Leicester, Jan. 26th, 1850.
"Dear Sir—The great staple trade of this district, the Leicester and Leicestershire stocking trade, is one of the best indexes that can be found of the condition of the working classes throughout
94
the country; three-fifths of the whole frame machinery of the town and county is employed in the manufacture of wrought and cut worsted, woollen, cotton, and merino stockings, four-fifths or nine-tenths of which are consumed in the home-market, and principally by the operative classes. Dear food, \ want of employment, and its depressing consequences have been for many years so long co-existent in this locality, while on the other hand full employment and increased comforts have so uniformly coexisted with years of cheap food, that we are not at all surprised at the ease and comfort enjoyed by the working population amongst us during the last year, nor shall we be surprised at its permanent continuance.
"The demand for the last year has been fully equal to the manufacturing capability of the district—all the workmen have been fully employed, and two advances in wages have been established and maintained in the staple trade, of the permanence of which there is every indication—indeed from the inclosed printed notice, which has been issued by the workmen this week, it is possible that the spring will not have passed before a third advance will be established:—
"'FRAMEWORK-KNITTERS.—At a general meeting of the straight-down hose branch (middle gauges), it was unanimously agreed that a request be made to the manufacturers for an advance of wages, viz. 2d per dozen up to 50 leads, and all above, 3d. A deputation is expected to wait upon them on Tuesday next, when the workmen hope they will accede to their request; if not, the hands, it is said, will cease to work on the 11th of February.'—Leicester Chronicle, Jan. 26.
"The request of a further advance will in all probability be conceded at once to half the extent proposed (as there are no stocks of these goods on hand), and if so this will be an additional rise of about 5 per cent more.
"In the other departments of the Leicester and Leicestershire hosiery trade there has been similar activity—the underclothing manufacturers have had more orders than they could supply—an increased amount has been ordered for home consumption as well as for exportation, and in this department the wages of the workmen in the town of Leicester have experienced a considerable advance, having improved fully from 12½to 17½ per cent. The wages in the various fancy hosiery ar. tides, all being more highly skilled branches of the trade, are generally higher than the wages of the staple manufacture; but as these departments are dependent upon fashion, novelty, and the taste of the higher classes, it is not necessary to go into detail further than to say that in every department of skilled labour there has been for the past year full employment.
"I assure you nothing has ever been so satisfactory to me as the realisation of the results to the working classes of corn-law repeal—to be responsible for the peace and order of a dense manufacturing population, as I have been twice, during the trying year of 1841, and the still more agitated and depressed one of 1848, is no light matter; nor is it to be wondered at that unemployed, and (from want of employment) half-starved, men, should after a series of years of patient endurance, increase from hundreds to thousands the ranks of Communism, or evince a spirit of discontent dangerous to social security."
Another letter from the chairman of the

95
Leicester board of guardians, stated that the trade of the place had never been in a more prosperous condition. He states, that the population of the borough, which is a poor-law union within itself, is now about 60,000. The poor-rates in 1848 were 37,000; in 1849, 32,000. He says that—
"During the current year of 1847–8, the working population were generally out of employment. The guardians had to provide a temporary union-house, and tests in two mills, and two large stone-yards, in which were nearly one thousand able-bodied men. Disturbances were frequent, and a serious riot took place in May, 1848. In the autumn of 1848, a change took place, and trade began to revive; the stone-yards were soon unoccupied, and the temporary house was relinquished.
"To-day I am informed by one of the relieving officers that there is but one ablebodied framework knitter on the mill, and he is there by an oversight, and will be dismissed this week, as there is plenty of work. The men now on the mill are chiefly outdoor labourers, prevented from working by the severe frost, and they are orderly and peaceable.
"I have resided in Leicester twenty years, and I never knew it in so prosperous a condition as regards its general trade. The wages of the working men of the staple trade, for many years notoriously low, are advanced, and there is a prospect of further advances; and the cheapness of provisions, especially of bread, is regarded as an inestimable benefit.
"May the same gracious Providence which has opened the way to the enjoyment of these blessings, preserve them for the benefit of generations yet toe ome!"
Sir, I merely give these as specimens of the evidence that may be collected in every part of the country, showing that the home trade, about which so much solicitude is expressed in this House, does not suffer. The comparative amount of bankruptcies alone is some indication of the state of trade. In 1848 it was 1,763; in 1849, 1,146, showing a decrease of 617. With respect to the condition of the working classes, the indications are of the most satisfactory description, and as they have a great many friends in this House, I am sure it will be a source of high gratification to them to hear it. Whether we look to the manufacturing or the agricultural class, it will be found that the one have higher wages, and the other can command a larger share of the comforts of life, and uniformly they are far better off than during the past year. I see the hon. Member for Warwickshire expresses some doubt; then let it be ascertained. An important indication on this matter is the amount of public relief given. My right hon. Friends the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or the Chief Commissioner
96
of the Poor Laws, will be able, when they address the House, to inform it whether the poor-rate has increased, and more persons are now receiving public relief. In fact, I trust to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is so able and accurate in statements on these matters, to give details from official sources in support of what I have said. My own impression is, from the reports on the subject, that there is an extraordinary diminution of the number for the past year, as compared with that which preceded it, and a great reduction in the expense of supporting them. I believe that the number of persons receiving relief is between 50,000 and 60,000 less. With regard to the amount of bullion at present, I do not know the exact quantity, but I am informed that there never was a time in the history of the Bank of England at which it was greater. With regard to the revenue, there is actually an increase of 2,000,000 l. in its amount. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: A surplus.] Well, it comes to the same thing; a surplus then of income over expenditure, which we have not heard much of before this year. I have here a comparison of the commitments in the years 1848 and 1849—a subject which is generally admitted as showing the condition of the people at different periods. In 1848 I find that the number of persons committed to prison in England and Wales was 10,352, while in 1849 the number was 9,512. With respect to Ireland, the number of offences reported by the constabulary for the same period was 3,615 in 1848, and 2,501 in 1849; and as poverty and crime have always been justly reckoned as two of the consequences of a want of a sufficient supply of food which always go together, these results tend to confirm still further the view of the increased prosperity of the country which I have been taking. I am prepared also for the argument which I know will be used by hon. Gentlemen opposite, that though they must admit—for it cannot be disputed—that trade is good and flourishing, and the employment of the people general, still that all this results from other causes besides those to which I have attributed it, and that there are other ways by which the general prosperity may be accounted for. But I have here by mo a calculation which I have made of what the country saves in the articles of food—of the difference which it makes to the country in paying for the necessary supply of food, when that food is cheap, and when it is dear. The people have to be fed,

97
whatever the price of food in this country may he; and there is necessarily a certain expenditure required in order to obtain that food which varies according as food may be cheap or dear at different periods. Now what I want to show the House is, the enormous difference in the cost of supplying food to the country when food is cheap and when it is dear; and that when you hear of wages going farther, and the trade being better, at the time that food is cheap, that there is no difficulty in concluding that cheapness of food is the cause. I have here the average prices for the years 1847 and 1849:—

Average price year 1847.

Average price Dec. 29 1849.

Difference.

Wheat

69 s. 5d.

39 s. 4d.

30 s. 1d.

Barley

43 s. 11 d.

25 s. 9d.

18 s. 2d.

Oats

28 s. 7d.

15 s. 6d.

13 s. 1d.

Beans

50 s. 1d.

26 s. 11 d.

23 s. 2d.

Peas

39 s. 1d.

29 s. 0d.

10 s. 1d.

The following is the estimated consumption of all kinds of grain in this country:—

20,000,000 quarters wheat at 30 s.

£30,000,000

20,000,000 quarters oats at 13 s.

13,000,000

20,000,000 quarters barley, beans, and peas, 18 s.

18,000,000

60,000,000

£61,000,000

Estimating the consumption of meat, butter, cheese, potatoes, and other vegetables, to be equal to the total consumption of grain, say 60,000,000 quarters, and estimating the reduction in price to be equal to 10 s. per quarter, the reduction will amount to

30,000,000

£91,000,000

So that there remains on the expenditure of the people for food a difference of no less than 91,000,000 l. sterling between the years 1847 and 1849, as every-body must see, which must leave means to the community available for other objects; and which, from whatever cause it may arise, will always be felt immediately in the trade and condition of the people. If the protective duty on food has had the effect of keeping up the price of food, the people will know how to judge of what they have gained by its abolition, and the people may calculate how much they have lost by protection being continued so long. I do not want to make the people more dissatisfied than necessary with the manner in which they have been treated for the benefit of a particular interest. On the contrary, I should be glad if hon. Gentlemen opposite could show
98
me that I am wrong—I should be glad to find that they could show the people that there has not been injustice done to them in past years, as such calculation tends to show, and that they have not derived so much benefit from free trade as I believe they now enjoy, seeing that in the first year of free trade, which, it is said, has caused reduction of price, such great saving has been made. Why, if 91,000,000 l. had been rendered available to the people by any other means, would anybody be astonished to hear that a state of general prosperity followed? And I say that this economy in the article of food between such years as 1847 and 1849 has been available to the people for the comforts of life; and the state of prosperity which prevails proves that the people have availed themselves of these increased means of procuring comforts of which they would otherwise have been deprived. Any one who entertains any doubt on this subject, has only to look to such evidence as I have read in order to see that such is the case. But I must say, that when that is called an experiment in this country—because I understand that Gentlemen call the liberty to buy food freely an experiment—it seems to me an experiment of justice and advantage not likely to be soon changed or departed from, or, at least not until people prefer less instead of more of what they want, and like to pay more instead of less, for what they wish to buy. Seeing that there are so many others to follow me, likely to be full of information of the kind that I have already adduced, I shall not detain the House longer on this question. My case is, that this great change in the price of food is sufficient to account for the improvement that has taken place in the condition of the people. I would now advert to another topic in Her Majesty's Speech, namely, that which is contained in the following passage:—
"It is with regret that Her Majesty has observed the complaints which in many parts of the kingdom have proceeded from the owners and occupiers of land. Her Majesty greatly laments that any portion of her subjects should be suffering distress."
And I think that any expression of sympathy on the part of Her Majesty with the sufferings of the owners and occupiers of land, will readily be responded to in this House, and indeed out of this House. I share in that feeling largely myself—I never wished ill, God knows, to the landed interest. When I advocated the repeal

99
of the corn laws, I always thought the advantage of that interest was, as much as that of any other class, involved in the removal of what was falsely termed protection. What enhances my regret now for it is, that I cannot hold out the smallest prospect of relief that, with the view to its benefit and justice to other classes, the Legislature can extend to it. There was great difficulty in doing so, and for more than one reason; for what strikes me is, that there has been some experience already in that direction. The landed interest has had great power in the Legislature, and owing to the frequent recurrence of distress notwithstanding protection, there have been great opportunities of considering in what way it should be relieved; and these opportunities have not, I think, been thrown away; it was difficult, indeed, to find an experiment that had not been made of this kind. After considering this subject, I am obliged to conclude, that there are no peculiar liabilities attaching to land from which it could be relieved. There are none, in fact, that attach to an agriculturist in that capacity; the assessments for rates are upon local and visible property in any district. But I have found that there have been constant exemptions made in favour of the agriculturist; for certainly, when it was enacted that the farmer should pay no duty for his horses, none for his dogs, none for his tolls, none for his windows, none for insurance, those were favours; but what made him more despair of proceeding in this direction farther, was, that he was told, that whenever any charge of this sort was removed, it gave value to the land; that in consequence of any such reduction land would always let for a higher rent to the occupier. Now, he understood that what was chiefly desired was to relieve the occupier. He heard that the owner cared little for himself; and that inasmuch as this was not calculated to relieve the occupier, it was of little use. He did not merely state this on his own conviction, but he was fortified by an authority in the other House, no less than the late Lord Eldon—who said, in a corn-law debate, that it would be needless to reduce the local charges on land, for every 6d. that was taken from them, went to swell the rent of the owner. He thought, indeed, this was delicate ground for the landed interest to touch upon, for it would disclose more favour in the way of taxation than perhaps Gentlemen were now conscious of. But still less had he hope
100
of relief being possible, when he observed the claim put forward, especially for the occupiers of land themselves; for, judging by the oratory that had lately been diffused throughout the country, it would seem as if the farmer still called for that which it was impossible to give, and which if given, would only prove, what it had been before, delusive and ruinous to himself; for it was still demanded for him that Parliament should promise him a price for his wheat, according to which price he could bargain for his land: that was the effect of the demand for protection that was now again made at the many meetings that had been held. He was astonished at the infatuation that could make such a claim after what had passed. He thought it a perseverance in delusion that was unequalled. It was worthy of a place in a work he had seen, entitled The History of Human Delusions. This would be among the greatest; for if anything was logically deducible from what had preceded it, it was, that fanners' losses, and sometimes ruin, had been occasioned by this very promise of Parliament not having been realised. The evidence taken before the Agricultural Committees of this House was really nothing else but the details of the farmer's disappointment, given by himself, in consequence of his having bargained for his land at the Act-of-Parliament price; and not having obtained that price, and being obliged to fulfil his contract, was compelled to pay his rent out of his capital, and too often to end in the Gazette; and yet he again required the Parliament to guarantee him a price for his produce, which he had seen was impossible, or at least not to be relied upon. It was just ten years ago, when making his annual address in that House on this subject, the greater part of his speech consisted of evidence which he had taken from those Committees on the part of farmers, describing the manner in which protection had deceived them, alleging, both in the year 1822 and 1836, that they were unable to meet their liabilities, from having contracted to pay for land what the prices of produce rendered impossible. In 1822 the story was, "We were told that wheat would sell for 80 s. a quarter, and we are here, as ruined men, having only been able to get 49 s." In 1836 the story was, "Here we are, deceived again; we have been promised 64 s. a quarter, and we are actually feeding our pigs and horses with the wheat, and malting it, instead of barley, having no better use for it." And

101
what is worthy of notice is, that in 1822 the protection amounted to 50 s, a quarter, and in 1836 to nearly 100 per cent. And let no man imagine that there was hope then among the farmers; it was unqualified despair; numbers were really swept away, and others deemed themselves ruined beyond recovery, because they did not expect to see a higher price again. If hon. Gentlemen opposite will turn to the report, they will see that the language was more desponding then than now; and the question that seems to engross the agricultural thoughts especially again now, was then also occupying them, namely, whether wheat could be grown at 40 s. a quarter. The question is deliberately put in that Committee; an intelligent land agent and farmer is asked what he believed, and what farmers generally believed, would be the price of wheat in future; and the answer deliberately given was, that the farmers did not expect to see it again higher than 5s. or 6s. a bushel. He was then asked whether he thought the farmer could do upon that. "Well," he said, "I think they will, for other things will fall in proportion." And lucky would it have been far the farmers if they had seized that moment to abolish protection, and rely upon the price then, which they must submit to now; they would now probably have been a contented and prospering interest. But, Sir, I cannot lead the landed interest to expect that the House will take this matter into consideration, for I don't think it is a matter it has anything to do with; for if it was to consider that question, and come to a conclusion that wheat could not be produced at 40 s. a quarter, I do not see that it could act upon that conclusion; for the time is past when we can raise the price of food upon the people again for the mere benefit of the producer; and if the other conclusion was come to, that wheat could be grown at 40 s., it does not follow that it would be grown at that price, and the farmer be insured against loss in consequence; for if it required great capital, economy, intelligence, and security on the part of the farmer to produce wheat at that price, looking to the mode in which owners of land dealt with their properties, it did not follow that farmers would be always placed under the circumstances that would enable them to accomplish it, and if any reverse came, they would be as unable to meet it as they are now; for land is not regarded by many of its owners as a means of producing the
102
greatest quantity of produce at the least possible cost. Land has a value to many people quite independent of that consideration. Accordingly, we find that it depends much upon the taste and objects of the proprietor what will generally be the tenure or circumstance of the farmer or cultivator of the soil. One man is a sportsman, and preserves game on his land, which destroys much of the produce. Another man is a politician, and cares more for the vote than the skill of his farmer. Another charges his estate with debt, and has nothing left, after paying the interest, for improvements. Another looks to influence from the possession of territory; while many like to tie up the land or limit the interest of the owner, for the sake of perpetuating the same property in one line of descent; while there are few only who are very ardent agriculturists. But all this shows how difficult it is to calculate upon the result of what could or would be done in farming in this country, and how impossible it is for Parliament to fix a price for produce. The tenant of an improving landlord may be the next neighbour of another who is of a different character, and one will be ruined in a year like this, while another might be doing well; all tending to show that this House cannot relieve any man from those conditions of his success, in this or any other business, in relying upon his own forethought, capital, skill, and industry, without which he will fail. The farmer, then, should be told that, with the best disposition to serve him in the world, this House cannot do it; for Parliament cannot undertake to manage the landed property of the country, or to limit the amount of its produce, without which there cannot be any certainty with respect to price. In the midst of their present distress I will just read a case that has recently occurred, showing how little able that House was to come to any practical conclusion on the business of agriculture from statements of distress made by individuals:—
"A farm in Gloucestershire of 400 acres, the land of medium quality, and distant from a market—which was formerly let at 20 s. per acre, which has been drained and money otherwise laid out in permanent improvements—has quite recently been taken, on a lease for eighteen years, by an experienced farmer, with adequate capital, at a rent of 40 s. per acre, The tenant to be at liberty to destroy game, remove hedges, cut down trees, and, in short, to deal with the land as though it were his own; and if the landlord sees reason to fear that he is not fairly dealt by, the matter is to be settled between him and the tenant by arbitration.

103
No other conditions in the lease. The tenant says he shall be satisfied with 40 s. per quarter for his wheat, and prices for other produce in proportion."
[Cries of "Name, name!"] Gentlemen seem to doubt the correctness of the case. It was given to me by persons who assure me it is a faithful statement of what has occurred, and I have read it believing it to be true; if it is otherwise, I shall be the first to admit that I have been deceived. I do not deny that many farmers are distressed; I believe, that they are. I should be astonished if they were not; for tenants at will, depending entirely on the price of wheat for the year, could not stand if the price fell. But, notwithstanding the reduction of price, I do not think that the case at present of the owners and occupiers is hopeless; for there is still this consolation, that land has not fallen in value, but it is as high now as it has been for the last twenty years, and much higher than formerly—that no farm falls vacant that there are not as many or more candidates for its occupation than ever, but, in some cases, farms have lately let at an advanced rent—and that the agricultural labourers are as well or better off than they have been. And that is the condition of the landed interest after the first year of free trade, which is not one, I think, at present to produce despair, or that precludes persons interested from retiring from a business of which they despaired; and there is this farther consolation, that will, I am sure, occur to them, which is, that, supposing that if the worst came to the worst, and that the owner was obliged cordially to co-operate with the occupier, with the view to improvement, and to conduct the business of farming in the same spirit and with the same economy and energy with which other businesses were conducted, that really and truly the landowner of this country laboured under no disadvantage whatever compared with any foreigner; and that if he was less fortunate in one respect, he was more so in many others, and that there was really no reason why he should not compete successfully with any country on the earth. In most respects, he was superior—he had better climate, better government, better labour, better implements, more manure, superior communication, and the best market in the world at his door. But one thing was wanting, which the landed interest had in its own hands—namely, that
104
the land was dearer here than elsewhere; but here the remedy was always in the hands of the owner, and I am certain, that if he looked at his position fairly in the face, and at the requirements of the community in future, he would come to the conclusion that it was only a reproach to him, and to the agriculturists in Ireland, that they should import any food at all from other countries. It is my deliberate opinion that these two islands could, with ease, maintain a very much larger population than existed at present; and this reproach more particularly applies to Ireland. Why, if any man was calmly to survey the circumstances of these two countries, he would say that Ireland had been laid a-side of England, for the purpose of feeding her—the finest agricultural country in Europe, united to the largest manufacturing and wealthiest commercial community in the world; and yet what was the spectacle presented to the world at this moment?—the owners of land in Ireland more distressed than those of England, and the people of that country better off, simply because there had been a large and free importation of foreign food; and yet this very agricultural interest had been what was called protected. Well, what was it owing to? Is there a man that says, that Ireland could not produce more? or that it has resulted from anything but the mismanagement of landed property, protected highly for forty years? A purely agricultural country, and yet within three years one of the most awful famines that ever visited a country, has befallen it, and the landed proprietors at this moment in a state of ruin. Was ever such an anomaly? I do not wish to reflect severely on the present proprietors, but an awful retribution has fallen upon the ownerships of land, and the owners have been quite unprepared for the visitation: their lands had been neglected, the people neglected; too much of the agriculture in a barbarous state, and the estates encumbered with debt; while the only hope for the country now is, that its recent misery, having revealed to us the real cause of its past poverty, and the responsibilities now cast upon the landed property in case of its neglect in future being so heavy, that it makes it unlikely that the same evils will again be suffered to recur. Yes, Sir, regretting as I do, deeply, the sufferings and sad reverses of fortune to which the people of property in Ireland had been lately exposed, I do honestly

105
and firmly believe, that the regeneration of that country will date from the time that has so fully discovered and disclosed to us the past neglect and sad waste of its resources. I have no hesitation in defending the legislation for that country in the particular which is most complained of by the Irish proprietors—I mean the poor-law; and I never felt more sanguine about the prospects of that country than I do at this moment. I believe that the poor-law was a measure of humanity as well as of policy. I believe that it has already withdrawn from the people the chief pretext for crime; that it has diminished, what was next to crime, the frightful extent of mendicity in that country, and comparative security has been given to life and property; the people have ceased to feel desperate from being destitute; which taken together with the facilities which had been given to the transfer and sale of property, I firmly believe, will very soon tempt men of capital to invest their fortunes in land in that country, and that agriculture there will become a profitable enterprise, engaged in by persons from all parts of the united kingdom. But, of all other things, I should reckon upon the continued prosperity of the manufacturing interests of this country as the most important adjunct to the prosperity of Ireland, as affording a constantly-improving market for their produce, and a great and ready vent for their surplus people; and this, I do firmly believe, will result from the policy that has been adopted here with respect to trade. I expect, and am not afraid to say it, that the prosperity of this country will be steady, referring, as I do, so many of our past convulsions in commerce to erroneous policy with respect to the trade in food. I do believe that prosperity will endure under our present system. I may be wrong, but I regard the affairs of this country now with more confidence and with more hope than I have ever done before; I believe that they rest upon a more solid foundation than they have hitherto done. I ascribe it to the increased intelligence of the people, their constant vigilance in public affairs, the higher moral feeling that pervades all classes, together with the great and useful reforms that have taken place of late years, from all of which has resulted a greater amount of political, religious, and commercial freedom than was ever enjoyed before by any people on the earth. Political
106
and religious freedom we have had for some time past, and nothing but better order and more contentment have proceeded from it; and I can never think that anything but good could result from that other measure of freedom which gave us the strongest interest that there should be peace on earth, good will among men, and that our neighbour should prosper like ourselves. And I trust, now, that I do not place a wrong construction upon the concluding passage of Her Majesty's Speech, when I infer from it that those who are now entrusted with the administration of the country are duly impressed with the truth, that the surest mode of maintaining the institutions of the country in the affections of the people, is by proceeding still, in the progressive spirit of later years, in reforming what is decayed, extending what is inadequate, and showing a confidence in the people, which every extension of their liberties has hitherto justified. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving—
That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, to convey to Her Majesty the Thanks of this House for the gracious Speech which Her Majesty has commanded to be made to both Houses of Parliament:
Humbly to thank Her Majesty for the assurance of Her great satisfaction in again having recourse to the advice and assistance of Her Parliament:
That we condole with Her Majesty on the decease of Her Majesty Queen Adelaide, which has caused Her Majesty deep affliction; and that we entirely concur with Her Majesty in the belief that the extensive charity and exemplary virtues of Her late Majesty will always render Her memory dear to the Nation:
Humbly to express the satisfaction with which we learn that Her Majesty happily continues in peace and amity with Foreign Powers:
To thank Her Majesty for informing us that, in the course of the autumn, differences of a serious character arose between the Governments of Austria and Russia on the one hand, and the Sublime Porte on the other, in regard to the treatment of a considerable number of persons, who, after the termination of the civil war in Hungary, had taken refuge in the Turkish territory; and we rejoice to learn that explanations which took place between the Turkish and Imperial Governments have fortunately removed any danger to the Peace of Europe which might have arisen out of these differences:
Humbly to convey to Her Majesty our thanks for informing us that Her Majesty having been

107
appealed to on this occasion by the Sultan, united Her efforts with those of the Government of France, to which a similar appeal had been made, in order to assist by the employment of Her good offices, in effecting an amicable settlement of those differences in a manner consistent with the dignity and independence of the Porte:
To thank Her Majesty for acquainting us that Her Majesty has been engaged in communications with Foreign States Upon the measures which might be rendered necessary by the relaxation of the restrictions formerly imposed by the Navigation Laws of this Country:
That we rejoice to learn that the Governments of the United States of America and of Sweden have promptly taken steps to secure to British Ships in the ports of their respective Countries, advantages similar to those which their own ships now enjoy in British ports:
That with regard to those Foreign States whose Navigation Laws have hitherto been of a restrictive character, we learn with gratification that Her Majesty has received from nearly all of them assurances which induce Her to hope that our example will speedily lead to a great and general diminution of those obstacles which previously existed to a free intercourse by sea between the nations of the world:
That we unite with Her Majesty in lamenting that in the summer and autumn of the past year the United Kingdom was again visited by the ravages of the Cholera; but we are thankful to Almighty God, who in His mercy was pleased to arrest the progress of mortality, and to stay this fearful pestilence:
That we humbly concur with Her Majesty, in the persuasion that we shall best evince our gratitude by vigilant precautions against the more obvious causes of sickness, and an enlightened consideration for those who are most exposed to its attacks:
Humbly to assure Her Majesty, that we rejoice to be informed that Her Majesty, in Her late visit to Ireland, derived the highest gratification from the loyalty and attachment manifested by all classes of Her subjects; and that we learn with satisfaction that, although the effects of former years of scarcity are painfully felt in that part of the United Kingdom, they are mitigated by the present abundance of food, and the tranquillity which prevails:
That we regard with great satisfaction the improved condition of Commerce and Manufactures; and whilst sharing with Her Majesty in the regret with which Her Majesty has observed the complaints which in many parts of the Kingdom have proceeded from the Owners and Occupiers of
108
Land; and humbly concurring with Her Majesty in lamenting greatly that any portion of Her Majesty's subjects should be suffering distress; to unite with Her Majesty in the feelings of sincere gratification with which Her Majesty witnesses the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life, which cheapness and plenty have bestowed upon the great body of the people:
To thank Her Majesty for having directed the Estimates for the year to be laid before us, and for informing us that they have been framed with a strict regard to economy, whilst the efficiency of the various Branches of the Public Service has not been neglected:
That we participate in the satisfaction with which Her Majesty has seen the present state of the Revenue:
To express our thanks to Her Majesty for informing us that some of the measures which were postponed at the end of the last Session for want of time for their consideration, will be again laid before us, and that among the most important of these is one for the better government of the Australian Colonies:
Humbly to thank Her Majesty for having directed various measures to be prepared for the improvement of the condition of Ireland, and for acquainting us that the mischiefs arising from Party Processions; the defects of the Laws regulating the relations of laadlord and tenant; the imperfect state of the Grand Jury Acts; and the diminished number of electors for Members to serve in Parliament, will, together with other matters of serious consequence, form the subjects of measures to be submitted for our consideration:
That we unite in the satisfaction with which Her Majesty has learnt that the measures which have been already passed for the promotion of the Public Health are in a course of gradual adoption, and that we concur with Her Majesty in the hope that, both in the Metropolis and in various parts of the United Kingdom, we shall be enabled to make further progress in the removal of evils which affect the health and well-being of Her subjects:
Humbly to join with Her Majesty in acknowledging that the favour of Divine Providence has hitherto preserved this Kingdom from the wars and convulsions which during the last two years have shaken so many of the States of the Continent of Europe; and that we heartily concur in the hope and belief expressed by Her Majesty, that by combining liberty with order, by preserving what is valuable, and amending what is defective, we shall sustain the fabric of our Institutions as the abode and the shelter of a free and happy people."
SIR JAMES DUKE: After the very able, full, and successful speech of my hon. Friend, I am sure that this House will feel that I rise under no ordinary difficulty to second the Address which he has moved to Her Gracious Majesty. Sir, though I have had the honour of a seat in this House now for nearly thirteen years, this is the first occasion that I have ventured to offer myself to the notice of the House; and I am sure, under these circumstances, I shall meet with the kind indulgence of the House in the discharge of the duty which I have undertaken with great reluctance—with great reluctance, from a sense of my inability to address the House, but with great satisfaction, as a Member for the city of London, in giving my cordial support and confidence to Hoi-Majesty's Ministers, under the firm persuasion that they will continue to do everything on their part to maintain the high character and peaceful influence of the nation abroad, and the contentment and prosperity of the people at home, while, at the same time, they will enforce reform and retrenchment in every department of the State, consistent with the safety and the honour, and the dignity of this great empire. No one more deeply sympathises than I do with our Gracious Sovereign, in Her deep affliction at the decease of Her Majesty Queen Adelaide. I fully concur in the sentiment that Her late Majesty had justly endeared Herself to this country by Her piety, her charities, and Her exemplary virtues, and that Her name will be long held in grateful remembrance by every man, woman, and child in this kingdom. Her Majesty states that She recurs with great satisfaction to the advice of Her Parliament. The first meeting of the present Parliament occurred little more than two years ago, and I remember that, on that occasion, instead of the hon. Mover congratulating the House on the state of the country, he was necessarily compelled to begin his speech by lamenting the great distress which prevailed in the trading and manufacturing districts of the kingdom, many mills in that part of the country which he represented being stopped, and the operatives thrown out of work. I think I may feel justified in saying that, at no period in the history of the country, has the House met under more gratifying circumstances than at the present moment. When we reflect that two years ago the great commercial interests of this country had passed through an ordeal which shook
110
some of the most potent commercial houses in the world, and threatened others with a similar fate, I think we may congratulate ourselves that in so short a time the prosperity of this country has been so firmly re-established. I am happy to say, as the representative of the city of London, that I believe at no period has the trade and commerce of the city been in a better condition; and not in London alone, or in the other great commercial emporiums of the country, but in the most remote towns and manufacturing districts we have evidence of an increased and greatly extended trade, giving full means of employment to the people, whose improved means and condition are evidenced by the growing state of the revenue. At the same time, I deeply lament with Her Majesty that causes of complaint exist in the agricultural districts. I had the honour to represent a borough closely connected with an important agricultural county, and, from my knowledge not only of the landed proprietors, but also of the farmers of the district, I confess I should be one of the last persons to witness the distress of that body with feelings of indifference. I believe the farmers to he a peaceable, loyal, and industrious class; and, as such, well deserving of the favour of this House. But, though I say that, I fear I cannot go farther and agree with the means which have been suggested as a remedy for the distress which prevails. I fear that if they were led to believe that this House could, by any legislative measure, reimpose the duties which have been taken away, they would find themselves deceived; for I believe that the people of this country could not be prevailed upon again to have their food taxed, nor do I think that any Government would propose it, or any Parliament sanction it. I confess, however, that when speaking of free trade, I am reluctant to say much on the subject; because I have observed, with some pain, that parties who are willing to believe that free trade has benefited the country, are supposed to be inimical to the agricultural interest. I fear it is supposed that the repeal of the corn laws was effected to lower the landed interest and to depress the farmer, but to benefit the manufacturer. So far from that being the ease, I am persuaded that nothing but the most overwhelming sense of public duty, and the stern necessities of the country, could have carried that measure. My hon. Friend has said so much upon this point, that it is

111
unnecessary for me to detain the House further with respect to it; but without referring to returns which were open to every other Member of the House, I may refer to one which I received in my position as a magistrate of the city of London, which shows not only that cheap food affords abundant employment to the people, but that it tends to diminish pauperism and to lessen crime. I hold in my hand an official return, which I received yesterday from the governor of Newgate; and though my hon. Friend has already quoted similar returns, embracing all England, I think that this return is the more striking when we consider that the idle, the dissolute, and the unemployed are generally to be found in the metropolis of the empire. The total number of prisoners committed to Newgate from the 1st of January to the 31st of December, 1849, were 2,464, being a decrease from the previous year of no less than 593, or one-fourth of the whole number. This shows the diminution in a most striking manner, as this gaol includes the whole district within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court. I may also read a letter, which was not sent to mo preparatory to my speech in this House, for I was desirous to confine my observations to what I myself knew, and not to trouble the House with information which was equally open to other Members of the House; but I received a letter yesterday from my hon. friend the mayor of Manchester, which I think of importance sufficient to deserve the attention of the House. He says—
"I have a strong impression that the operatives of this district were never, at any former period, more fully employed, more comfortable in a social point of view, or better disposed than now. The rate of wages is, I believe, satisfactory; and the cheapness of the necessaries of life—in food and clothing—has wonderfully improved their condition. The hat trade is rather an exception to this rule, though but few people are employed therein, and the depression is easily accounted for. I have never, during my mayoralty, had one hour's uneasiness about the peace of this district. The speculation in cotton, and its high price, now interfere with the prospects of our master manufacturers and spinners, and I think few are making money; nevertheless the trade of 1849 must, on the whole, be considered very satisfactory. Our own experience in the home trade leads me also to think that the demand from the agricultural districts has not indicated that distress of which we have recently heard so much."
Now, if the general trade and business of the country continue in this prosperous condition, it is to be hoped that prosperity will speedily find its way to agriculture; end for my part, I see no reason to anticipate
112
that the present low prices for agricultural produce will be continued. I remember when the measure for repealing the corn laws was passing through this House, great apprehensions were entertained of an immense supply of corn from the continent of America; but it happened that I was at Liverpool on the day when Mr. Bancroft, the late American Minister, left this country. I had some conversation with that gentleman before he embarked, and in the course of it he gave it as his confident opinion that it would be impossible for America to send any considerable quantity of corn to this country at a price less than one ranging between 45 s. and 50 s. a quarter. I do, therefore, hope that the demand for food will continue to increase, and that in this fact alone the farmers will find an improvement in their prices. At the same time I am most happy to concur with my hon. Friend as to the results of free trade in reference to the importation of corn; because it was supposed that not one extra bale of goods would be sent out of this country in return for the corn imported; that nothing but bullion would be taken by the foreigners. On the other hand free trade has proved that at no period has commerce made so rapid, so solid, a progress as since the passing of the free-trade measure; while the stock of bullion was never so large, nor capital so abundant and so easy in the commerce of the world. But I will not dwell longer upon this point except to repeat my hope that the prosperity of the manufacturing and commercial classes would soon be shared by the agricultural interest. There is one part of Her Majesty's Speech to which it is my duty to advert—the expression of Her Majesty's gratitude to Divine Providence that the recent visitation of the cholera has so soon abated; and I am sure the House will feel that one of our first and most sacred duties is to endeavour to protect the health of the people, who have shown, by their exemplary conduct, that they are animated by feelings of obedience to the law and loyalty to the Crown. I must also say, that I am gratified to find Her Majesty contemplates an increase in the number of the Parliamentary electors of Ireland; but, I confess I should have been better pleased if we had had some intimation that a similar measure was to be extended to this country; and I do hope that the Government will even yet consider whether or not the many towns

113
still left in this country, which have neither the privilege of a borough franchise, nor of sharing in the county representation, may not now have conferred upon them the privilege of voting for Members of Parliament. I cannot sit down without referring to the navigation laws, because I was one of those who voted against the Government when that question was be-fore the House. I considered at the time that it was a hazardous experiment; but I am now happy to find, from the Speech we have heard from Her Most Gracious Majesty, that several of the foreign Powers have already conceded to us the advantages we have conferred upon them, and that it is hoped others will take steps to follow their example; and I am happy to confirm the statement which my hon. Friend has made respecting the activity and progress that is now apparent in all the dock and building yards of the country, especially in the port of Sunderland, with which I was long connected. At no time have there been so many ships in progress, and at no period have so few been built on speculation, but almost the whole of them to order, being at the same time a class of ships that are far superior to any that have been built heretofore. I may add, that the energy, the enterprise, and the character of British shipowners, as well as the class of their ships, will enable them to maintain their superiority in the carrying trade of the world. With respect to our foreign relations, I heartily share in the feelings expressed by my hon. Friend; and I trust that the noble Lord who so ably conducts our foreign affairs, will still be able to maintain the best understanding with the Government of France, and to leave to us the blessings of peace for ages to come. I am quite sure the House will be as unwilling as I am myself that I should further trespass upon their attention—["No, no!"]—but I cannot sit down without thanking them for the indulgence they have shown me, and without expressing a cordial response to the wish expressed by Her Majesty, that by combining liberty with order—by preserving what is valuable, and amending what is defective—the fabric of our institutions may be sustained, and this country long remain the abode and the shelter of a free and happy people.
SIR J. TROLLOPEsaid, that he felt he ought, in the first instance, especially to claim the indulgence of the House in taking the unusual course—unusual, at least, with-in
114
the last few years—of proposing the addition of a few words to a passage in Her Majesty's Speech. He ought, too, to apologise, perhaps, for intruding upon the House; but he would endeavour to make his statement as brief and concise as possible, whilst he endeavoured to lay before them the case of a very numerous class of their fellow-subjects that were suffering severe distress, and to whose complaints he gave sincere and hearty credence. He felt also that some apology was due from him to the House on another ground, namely, because, with the exception of the point to which he was presently going to refer, there was so much in Her Majesty's Speech in which he heartily concurred, and in which he was sure that concurrence was shared by those who were sitting around him. They felt, in common with all in that House, and with the nation at large, sentiments of the deepest condolence with the Throne on the loss which all had sustained in the death of the lamented Queen Adelaide, for they had all known how extensive were her charities, how great was her kindness of heart, and how exemplary and virtuous her character. In the next passage of the Speech Her Majesty had informed them that she happily continued in peace with foreign Powers. In all that Her Majesty had said on that head they all agreed; and they were happy in receiving the assurance that the differences between Austria and Russia, on the one hand, and the Sublime Porte on the other, had, in some degree, been brought to a happy issue by the employment of the good offices of this country. Her Majesty further stated, that she had been engaged in communications with foreign States upon the measures which might be rendered necessary by the relaxation of the restrictions formerly imposed by the navigation laws of this country; and that the Governments of the United States of America and of Sweden had promptly taken steps to secure to British ships in the ports of their respective countries advantages similar to those which their own ships now enjoyed in British ports. Now, in all this they heartily concurred, and as the measure for the repeal of the navigation laws had passed into a law, it was the duty of every good subject to wish for its success; and he hoped that it might be found that the British marine might not be rendered less efficient in consequence of it. In the next passage Her Majesty had referred to the ravages of that awful disease, the cholera, in the course of the summer

115
and autumn of the past year; and he would say, that he believed that they were much indebted to the Government for the measures which they had taken to stay the progress of the pestilence, and thought he might assure them that they would, if they considered any fresh measures on such a subject essential, and were prepared with any, receive a willing concurrence and support from that side of the House; for the classes of this country who were the least able to help themselves had, it could not but be admitted, the greatest claim on their sympathy and assistance. Her Majesty had further observed, that She had, in her late visit to Ireland, derived the highest gratification from the loyalty and attachment manifested by all classes of Her subjects. That gratification, he was sure, was shared by all who heard him; and when Her Majesty added, that although the effects of former years of scarcity were painfully felt in that part of the united kingdom, they were mitigated by the present abundance of food, and the tranquillity which prevailed, in these remarks they could all sincerely and cordially concur. The next paragraph of the Speech began with the observation that Her Majesty had great satisfaction in congratulating them on the improved condition of commerce and manufactures. Here, too, he could concur, as could also the great party with which he had the honour to act; and he was sure that the large constituency he represented in that House would likewise rejoice to hear that this was the ease; all they asked was, that some portion of this prosperity might be reflected upon themselves, which was certainly not the case just now, except as regarded one article, in which there had undoubtedly been considerable improvement of late. He alluded to the article of wool—in respect of which they had certainly received a considerable accession of price in the last few months; and though the price was very low at the last clip time, it had since risen by some 25 or 30 per cent. But when Her Majesty proceeded to say—
"It is with regret that Her Majesty has observed the complaints which, in many parts of the kingdom, have proceeded from the owners and occupiers of land; Her Majesty greatly laments that any portion of Her subjects should be suffering distress; but it is a source of sincere gratification to Her Majesty to witness the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life which cheapness and plenty have bestowed upon the great body of her people;"—
he must say, he hardly thought that complaints
116
issuing from every county in England and Scotland—Ireland was too much absorbed with an important grievance of her own, the new poor-law, to take up this question—should be treated with so much indifference. There was not a county, from Cornwall to Caithness, but had spoken of the difficulty under which agriculture was labouring. His own county had met last Friday, and a more imposing assembly he had never witnessed than that which he then beheld in the Castle-yard at Lincoln, where not less than 15,000 people were present during the meeting, and no fewer than 20,000 persons had entered the city of Lincoln on that day with the view of joining in the proceedings of the occasion. They had been told there was to be a formidable opposition from some tradesmen in the city of Lincoln, whose opinions were more in accordance with those of the defunct Anti-Corn Law League than of those who were their customers; and he believed that a well-known agitator, who had been a member of that body, came down to Lincoln to take counsel with those who were about to propose amendments on the resolutions at the meeting. That gentleman, however, did not think fit to stay to meet the farmers of Lincolnshire—finding, no doubt, that he must not expect any support, and avoiding, very wisely, giving cause or occasion for the eliciting of angry and acrimonious feeling. The consequence was that that great body of persons had held their meeting in perfect peace—opinions were fairly expressed and discussed, every man was heard, and the majority was uncountable, whilst the minority might be summed up in a very small space. The resolutions might be said to have been carried all but unanimously—and the same proceedings had been adopted in many other counties; in some, he regretted to have observed, with an acrimony of speech, and in some with a violence of conduct, which could not advance any cause. They had in Lincolnshire avoided that, and had discussed the question in a calm but, at the same time, an unmistakeable tone—in a tone, in short, in which they meant to abide, and still further to press their claim to be heard, and to have their complaints considered—for they were of opinion that representing, as the agriculturists did, so numerous and important a body in the country, they had not been met with that attention to which they had so just a claim. They thought those complaints had been treated with

117
something of levity, and, indeed, with a feeling akin to disrespect. They did not find there was any disposition evinced to listen to them. They had not, in this passage of the Speech, one word of redress, though many modes of redress had been pointed out by them. They had scarcely received a word of condolence—but that they did not ask, and they cared not for their pity, if they would only give them the relief they required and were entitled to. The hon. Mover of the Address had referred in the course of his speech, to many written authorities, and to many statistics; but he (Sir J. Trollope) would not on that occasion trouble the House with anything of that description; though, were it necessary to do so, he could lay before them many very important documents with reference to the cost of production and other points connected with this question. Such a course would, however, occupy much of their time, and would not be of service. The hon. Mover had stated that the true reason for the abolition of the corn laws was, that England did not produce enough to feed her own people; but he (Sir J. Trollope) at all events could not plead guilty to that charge—it was a charge that could not by any means be brought against the north-eastern counties of England—because it was with them a pride and boast that they had cultivated every corner of the land—and brought every acre of waste under culture—and all this by the skilful application of great capital. The most sterile heath and boggy fens had been converted into fertile districts through the application of great capital; and now that they asked them to compete with all the world, of course their capital was diminished, for as the returns of their capital were diminished, the consequence was that their capital itself grew less. Indeed, in one of the north-eastern counties, a work of drainage was going on, namely, that of the Middle Bedford Level, on which not much less than half a million of money would be expended, and which would turn the land into a district of the greatest possible fertility. He could well remember the time when that part of the kingdom of which he was speaking was an oat-growing county, it was now a wheat-growing county—a bread-growing county—for more wheat was now sold in Wis-beach and Boston markets than in any markets of the kingdom—and all this, let him repeat, had been done by the large and skilful application of agricultural capital.
118
He asked them, then, was it fair treatment to disregard the complaints of these owners and occupiers of land? But were there no complaints in other quarters on the subject of the cultivation of the land? Let him go to the highest quarter, and let it be asked whether the Crown lands were in a proper condition? Did they make both ends meet there with their 66,000 acres of waste in the New Forest—in respect of which they brought in an annual Bill for expenditure, instead of showing any profitable return from their property? Why did they not turn the Crown lands to good account at home, as they did in Canada and elsewhere? Gentlemen connected with the land in Lincolnshire and elsewhere had been laying out every year for many years past a certain portion of their income in the improvement of their properties; and he could say for himself that, having been a landlord for thirty years, he had laid out a large proportion of his property in improvements. But they did not come there as landlords—they might, as landlords, be able to meet the times. They were not in debt in his part of the kingdom; but it was the small landowners that would be the sufferers. In his own division of the county there was from 5,000 to 6,000 small freeholders, and the House was no doubt aware that more than half of the voters for the county he had the honour to represent were such men—and were unequalled for industry, morality, and loyalty to the Crown—and these were the people who so lately met at Lincoln, and to whom this question was one of almost life and death—whether they should continue or not in the occupation of their properties, or be deprived of their lands and their homes. The hon. Mover of the Address said that lands let as high and sold as high as ever; but he (Sir J. Trollope) could state that one gentleman, an attorney, much connected with these freeholders, who in single parishes sometimes amounted to 200 or 300—a class of men whom the hon. Member for the West Riding, if he really had at heart the extension of the freehold franchise, ought to cherish—that gentleman told him that many of these men, whose estates did not average more than a house and garden, could hardly effect sales of their property at all, and when they did, it was at a loss of from twenty to thirty per cent from the valuation made only two or three years ago. Another gentleman said they could find no buyers at any prices, and that even those

119
which were held with mortgages on them could not be sold for the price of the money lent. So it would appear that this distress would at no distant period affect the moneyed interest and all other classes, as well as the agriculturists. This state of things would, they might depend upon it, reach them all in time, though they had eighteen millions in the Bank of England. Was it not possible they might have again one of those cycles of years of alternate sunshine and cloud?—might they not be some day exposed to another crash in the commercial and manufacturing world? He could not but remember the time when collections were made in the churches in all the agricultural districts in and of manufacturing distress; and he now asked them that their (the agriculturists') case should be considered. He asked them not to put money in their pockets, but simply to take their case into consideration. He was entrusted with the proposal of a few words which he wished to add to this part of the Address they were now considering, after the words "commerce and manufactures." They were in a perfectly respectful spirit, and pledged the House to no policy, and only showed that the case of the agricultural interest was entitled to consideration. Now, there were one or two points in this passage, on which he wished to say a few words. The first point was, that they attributed the distress under which they were labouring to recent legislative enactments. This was admitted, both by the hon. Mover and Seconder themselves. They (the agriculturists) further stated that this distress was greatly aggravated by the heavy pressure of local taxation. They did not, however, complain of that when they had protection, as they were then in a better position to bear the burden of taxation; but now, when the case was somewhat altered in that respect, and prices so much reduced, men cried out lustily on this subject, when they found that they paid more than their neighbours, and remembered that though Ministers last year refused inquiry into it, yet that the House admitted it was possible there might be a heavier pressure, in point of taxation, on one class than on another, but that it was inconvenient to have the subject brought forward. Let them depend upon it, however, that it would be brought forward again—and, when it was brought forward, he trusted the Government would give it more attention than they had hitherto done. Let me now refer to the income tax.
120
Schedule A gave 7d. in the pound on all realised property; and if this great reduction in the value of property continued, the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not, he imagined, be able to boast of much of a surplus under that head. And how would they deal with Schedule B, which proceeded on the arbitrary system of taxing tenants occupying farms on the principle of profits taken at half the rent? But tenants told them they had no profits at all. If that is true, they ought to scratch Schedule B out of the Act, or else place the farmers in Schedule D, and let them make their own return. They would thus arrive at a more accurate view of the truth than they now did. It was, indeed, an arbitrary principle on which they now proceeded with the farmer, to calculate his profits at half his rent, for if he had the misfortune to have a bad landlord, he had a hard Chancellor of the Exchequer into the bargain. No; the right hon. Gentleman must revise his income tax if prices were to remain as low as they now were. But Her Majesty's Speech went on to say that it was a source of sincere gratification to Her Majesty to witness the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life which cheapness and plenty had bestowed upon the great body of Her people. Now, he was not in the condition of having the sight of returns furnished by the Government as the hon. Member for Wolverhampton had been with reference to the returns of the Poor Law Board; but he knew that a certain return had been asked for from the different unions of the country, and he had had the order before him in the union with which he was connected. That return he had not yet seen, but he had paid great attention to all matters connected with the poor-law in his own county, and in regard to the Stamford union, within which he resided, and which comprehended several parishes covering a large district of country, he was enabled to say that they had not long ago from 40 to 50 people more than in any previous year—whilst in the Spalding union—a district favourable to the employment of labour—they had 100 more than at the correspounding period of the preceding year, and in the Sleaford union no fewer than 103 more. Besides this, there were in the gaol for the parts of Kestevan, within five of the greatest number of prisoners that it ever held before, and yet all of them confined for petty offences such as were

121
committed under the pressure of distress—cases of vagrancy, of petty plunder, and poaching. For to the honour of the people of that district he it said, that, in spite of the great prevailing distress, there were only four prisoners for trial at the last quarter-sessions—the united value of the property for which they were tried being not more than 10 s. A man, a mechanic, lately came to him out of work for several weeks, so that he had exhausted his credit, and knew not what to do. He (Sir J. Trollope) was reluctantly compelled to advise him to go into the union house; but the man replied that he had rather starve than break up his home, and go into the workhouse; and he did not go into it. And were they to discourage such feelings as these? The distress that prevailed had been largely met by the farmers and landowners, who had employed the people in works of drainage, and on their farms, and on the highways. And thus the list of the returns from the poor-law unions did altogether indicate the distress of the rural districts. With respect to Leicester and the stocking weavers, who were reported to he so well off, let it not he forgotten that the town and neighbourhood of Nottingham was not very far from it, where there had been, till lately, severe distress for a long time past. Let it, however, not be forgotten that both the Leicester and Nottingham trades are protected trades. They had a protecting duty of 10 per cent, and therefore did not come under the category of free trade; nor, indeed, had they anything that did, except the produce of land, and perhaps cotton. Why, they had no free trade; if they had, why not pull down their customhouses? What would they do with the malt tax? He had never yet advocated the remission of that tax; but now the question was becoming a very different one, when barley, the raw material of which they made the malt, was of very little more value than the heavy duty upon it. It now amounted to 90 per cent upon the price of barley, and under the present condition of the agriculturists it deserved consideration and revision. He himself did not approve of feeding cattle upon malt; but others did, and they should be enabled to make malt of their barley if they pleased to do so. If they were to have free trade, let them have every trade free. The capital applied to land of late years had been greater than it had ever been, and tenant-right was acknowledged
122
and acted upon in the district of England with which he was connected. They had there a system of what was called "free farming," which meant that the tenant was not restricted as to the mode of cultivation to be adopted by him, and taking care to have men of capital and skill for tenants. Perhaps they talked louder than many other parts of the country, but it was because, having done all these things, they were, when the pressure nevertheless came upon them, in a position to call out without deserving the imputations that were so profusely thrown against the owners and occupiers of the soil. With respect, again, to the Speech under discussion, he hoped the House would bear with him whilst he made a few more remarks upon the next passage in that Speech. Her Majesty, addressing the House of Commons, said She had directed the estimates for the year to be laid before them. They had been framed, Her Majesty informed them, with a strict regard to economy, while the various branches of the public service had not been neglected. He was most anxious to impress upon the Government the fact that the general depression of prices must make all of them economical, and those who applied this principle to their private affairs ought to enforce it on the State. When gentlemen found their private resources diminished and deranged, and were thus obliged to economise, could they be blamed for dealing out the same measure to the Government? He, for one, should in future be one of the most rigid economists in that House. The whole body of the farmers of England were of the same mind as himself, and they would enforce the strictest economy in every department of national expenditure. The Government had dealt out a strict measure of justice, as it was called, to them, and they would take care that the expenditure of the country was carried on upon the same principle of strict justice. Talk of feeding the people! Were not the agriculturists part of the people? Nay, more, did they not take the greater share of the national burdens; and who was more interested in a diminution of expenditure than the agriculturists? Depend upon it, the representatives of the agricultural interest would be found the most unflinching economists in that House. He was no practised speaker, and had no claims upon the House in consequence of his oratorical powers; but he spoke from a long experience, and stated only that which his practical knowledge

123
enabled him to ascertain. He could remember, as a landowner and cultivator, the distress of 1822, and the still lower prices of 1835; but those seasons of depression arose from different causes. In 1822 the prices of some kinds of produce, oats and barley for instance, were lower than even at the present time, and the price of meat was not more than from 3d. to 1d. per pound. En passant, he could tell them that in the past year the graziers of England had sold the greater part of their meat at 1d. to 5d. per lb., although the inhabitants of the metropolis had been paying 7d. and 8d. That, however, was their affair. In 1822 there were great reductions of rent all over the kingdom. He had reduced his, and they had never been raised again to the full extent. Many farms were given up; whole parishes went out of cultivation, to his knowledge, in Cambridgeshire and Buckinghamshire, and the inhabitants and the poor had to be maintained out of capital. Might not such a state of things occur again? Would not the present legislation have a great tendency to produce such a result, by impoverishing continually this branch of industry; and must it not also have a tendency to endanger the security of property and of the State? He was aware that the distress then prevalent was attributed to legislative causes, to the effects of the Bill introduced in 1819 by the right hon. baronet the Member for Tamworth. He was not going to make a currency speech, however; he should leave that part of the question for the hon. Member for North Warwickshire. But the principle of that Bill was relaxed, and things went right again. That period of depression was followed by one of prosperity, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer of that day was greatly elated. He trusted his right hon. Friend opposite, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would not find his elation subject to so speedy a fall—for directly afterwards there was then a terrible depression, not only of the agricultural, but of all the industrial interests. In that day, however, legislative relief was afforded, things righted themselves, and nothing more was heard of the agricultural depression. Again, in 1835 and 1836 wheat was almost unsaleable. He could not sell his, but, mixed with other food, was obliged to use it to feed animals. That was not caused by any overwhelming foreign importation, but by that most wholesome of all causes, plenty at home—the unparalleled abundance of the harvests of two consecutive years. That was the true
124
and legitimate source of cheapness, but it led to a great outcry. The farmers struggled on, and after a time prices rose. The next period in which the agriculturists were directly concerned was that of the famine in Ireland; and then they all to a man, and, indeed, he believed every man in the country, raised their voices in favour of opening the ports. But how to deal with present circumstances was now the question, and that without delay, for the difficulties of their position seemed to them every day to be growing larger and more formidable. He saw no way of dealing with present circumstances but that of reconsidering the whole question of imports. The state of the agricultural interest must be fairly met. When a most important interest of the community was suffering, when it experienced a great declension in social position, when its cultivators were no longer able to employ the labourers themselves, and its owners were on the verge of ruin, surely it was time for the Government to do something. Would they leave them to such resources as those offered by the philanthropic right hon. Gentleman near him—the Member for South Wilts—to the distressed needlewomen? a resource which, while it deprived those who were sent from their native land of all the cherished associations of homo and kindred, did not, in his opinion, offer any real relief. If a number of labourers were thus removed, the vacuum would soon be filled up, and those who were gone would probably be those who would be best left behind. Voluntary emigration was going on at an astonishing rate, and that not only took out of the country the most energetic and skilful agriculturists and labourers, but that very capital which should be laid out on the land at home. The skilled artisan, the small landowner, and the farmer, were, he had always been taught to consider, the strength of the country, and in this crisis we could ill afford to lose them. This system had now gone on for some time in Ireland; and did any one suppose that the men thus transported across the Atlantic bore any feeling towards the mother country but that of hate? If ever this country should have a quarrel with that great and powerful Republic the United States, they would find their bitterest enemies were the expatriated Irish—men who, if they had been valued as they ought at home, would have been now the stay of England. He had lived in early life in Ireland, and had frequently visited it since; he had experienced from

125
her people the most generous hospitality, and for their sakes, as well as from the conviction that to legislate so as to stimulate one interest at the expense of another could neither be a lasting benefit to any class, nor ensure the prosperity of all, he pressed the Legislature to reconsider its past policy. He should more, as an Amendment, after the words in the Address, "commerce and manufactures," the insertion of the following words:—
"But humbly to represent to Her Majesty that in many parts of the United Kingdom, and especially in Ireland, the various classes of Her Majesty's subjects connected with the cultivation of; the soil are labouring under severe distress, mainly attributable, in our opinion, to recent legislative enactments, the operation of which is aggravated by the heavy pressure of local taxation."
COLONEL CHATTERTONseconded the Amendment. He said, he would not travel over the ground so well occupied by the hon. Gentleman who preceded him on the topics of Her Majesty's Speech, but would confine himself to the state of the sister Country. In the first place, be begged to disclaim every feeling of partisanship, or any feeling of a factious nature, as he was only actuated by a high sense of duty. Re-turned by men of all parties and ranks, and of various political doctrines, he had pledged himself to represent to the House the difficulties in which Ireland was placed, and to convey to them her weak and almost broken-hearted prayer for the restoration of protection to her commercial and agricultural interests. Men of wisdom and men of religion had, by various endeavours, sought to discover the causes of that wretchedness which made the people of Ireland so wonderfully different from the people of every other country—a people who filled the ranks of the British army, and were at all times ready to maintain the honour of England at the cost of their lives. In that country the suffering and degradation of the people had been beyond all powers of description. It was not for the tongue of man to tell the extent of their sufferings, and it was unfortunately but too true that their sufferings, in every variety of form, had been aggravated by religious differences which no successful attempts had ever yet been used to allay; but for a time, amidst the extremity of the distress which had afflicted them, they forgot those religious differences—they laid them aside and did all in their power to assist each other, and mitigate as much as possible the general distress; but such efforts would not,
126
to any great extent, be successful. Almost every effort would be ineffectual so long as free trade and the poor-law remained in full operation. He believed it would be impossible to continue such enactments in full force, but he should at present content himself with seconding the Amendment.
Question proposed "That these words be there inserted."
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, I have heard with considerable pleasure the address of my hon. Friend the Member for South Lincolnshire in moving his Amendment to the Address moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton. I am glad to find that, on almost every point, there is little difference of opinion in this House. I am glad to find that there is an almost unanimous concurrence in the spirit of the Address. I am glad to find that upon the subject of the disease that unfortunately appeared in this country last year, the House approves the precautions taken by the Government for preventing the spread of that dreadful visitation; and that their best attention will be given to any further measures of this description that may be considered necessary. I am glad, also, to hear from my hon. Friend a disclaimer of that intemperate and ill-judged language which has been used of late in some public meetings in this country—language which, as my hon. Friend observed, can only be injurious to those who indulged in its utterance. I am also glad to find that my hon. Friend has moved the Amendment in the terms he has done. There can be no mistake whatever as to the meaning of the Amendment he has proposed. He says, that be means to urge upon the House the reconsideration of its recent legislative enactments. He proposes to the House that they should reconsider the Act which we believe has contributed much to the welfare of the country, but to which he believes all its distress is owing. And I am glad that upon this, the first night of the Session, that great question is to he brought at once to issue, and that the deliberate opinion of this House is to be called for, and, I trust, expressed, upon the question whether we are to retrace our steps—whether we are to follow the advice of my hon. Friend, and reconsider our recent legislation, or whether we are (as I hope and trust we shall resolve by a great majority of this House to do) to persist in the same course of legislation to which the present prosperity of the country is in a great measure owing

127
I have not heard from my hon. Friend any question as to the prosperity of the trade and manufactures of the country. I perceived in the requisition for calling the meeting in Lincolnshire, to which my hon. Friend alluded, that the farmers of Lincolnshire did not confine themselves to the allegation of the distress of the agriculturists, but included also the distress of the trade and manufactures of the country. I hope that they have been, ere this, convinced of their mistake in that respect. Every hon. Gentleman in this House connected with trade or manufacture would bear me out by their evidence as to the satisfactory condition of trade. They would state that, from one end of the country to the other, trade is in a flourishing condition, and commerce in a state of steady advancement—that the people are universally well employed. And, without indulging in any sanguine anticipations, I am fully borne out in stating that trade and manufactures appear to be in a state not only of present, but of progressive improvement. I have looked over many of those trade circulars which houses in considerable business are in the habit of sending about this time of the year to their customers, both at home and abroad; and I shall indeed be surprised if any one can state to this House that the allegations contained in one of them, which I have here, are erroneous. I shall quote very shortly from it, for the purpose of showing the course of trade during the last twelve months. And I must here observe that it appears to be from one of those houses which are the least sanguine in their language or expectations. It states—
"The year we have just closed was begun by most commercial men with the confident expectation that it would prove the commencement of better times … but it was soon perceived that the disturbing elements, far from being extinct, were still smouldering below the surface, ready to burst forth with more intense violence in different parts of Europe. While a renewal of hostilities on the Continent became inevitable, news from India of an unfavourable tenor reached us early in February, the effect of which was that the slight improvement in trade, scarcely begun, was again checked.… In this fluctuating and unsatisfactory manner we reached the month of March, which was one of the quietest business months we experienced during the past year; the fear of a reblockading of the Elbe and adjoining rivers caused an almost total suspension of business to the Continent."
Now, Sir, I remember that when I mentioned that very fact at the time to the right hon. Member for Stamford, he
128
thought it quite impossible. The circular goes on to state that the home trade had not been so good, but that lately a much better home market had sprung up; and, if the people continued to be kept employed, of which there was little doubt now, a much better home trade was to be expected than had been known for many years. And, Sir, it is remarkable that the Excise revenue of Great Britain fell during the first two quarters of the last year, and increased during the two last quarters, whilst in Ireland it fell during the first three quarters, that is to say, there was a diminution in the consumption of exciseable commodities in Ireland during the first three quarters, and an increase in the last quarter of the past year compared with what the amount had been for the corresponding period of the preceding year—
COLONEL CHATTERTON: There is a diminution on the whole year.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Yes; I said so. I said there was a diminution upon three quarters of the year, and an increase upon the fourth and last quarter only. But it shows that some improvement, even in Ireland, has begun; and that there is ground for hoping that the anticipation of the hon. and gallant Officer opposite will not be realised. But I will particularly call the attention of my hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire to the statement which he made—and which was repeated by the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire—when they said more than once in the course of last Session, that the trade and manufactures of the country were in an absolute state of ruin. It was in vain that hon. Gentlemen on this side of the House attempted to set them right. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Warwickshire took up the table of exports and imports, and said that the trade there set forth was an annual dead loss to the commerce of the country. I ventured to say that the small demand for exports from this country in 1848 was mainly owing to the troubled state of the Continent. So says the circular which I have just read. But the hon. Member for Warwickshire maintained that I was entirely mistaken upon the subject, and that the disturbed state of the Continent, so far from diminishing our trade, had increased it, by causing a greater demand for our goods. What has happened since then? In the course of last year the state of the Continent has been much more settled. What, then, has been the effect

129
upon our own exports? What was the amount of British manufactured articles sent abroad? Why, if it were true, as hon. Gentlemen opposite say, that the prosperity of the country is wholly to be measured by exports—if we are to pay no regard whatever to imports—why, there never was a year of such extraordinary improvement in trade as the last. Month after month the declared value of our exports increased from one end of the year to the other, as compared with the corresponding months of the preceding year; so that when we come to the aggregate value of the imports of last year, as compared with 1848, we find an increase of little less than 10,000,000 l. I take the declared value of our exports for the last three years. In 1847 it amounted to 51,000,000 l.; in 1848, to 48,946,000 l.; and in 1849, to 58,848,000 l. And yet during this last year the Continent has become tranquillized; so that, if the views of hon. Gentlemen opposite had been correct, our exports ought, instead of having greatly increased, to have greatly diminished. I dwell on this topic the longer, and for this reason—because, when Gentlemen have indulged in such very confident predictions as to the ruin of a trade or interest, and when their statements turn out to be so unsupported by fact, and so negatived by experience, I think I have a right to call, not only upon the House, but on those who might have been disposed to place faith in the hon. Gentlemen's predictions, to be more chary in their belief for the future, and not to be so easily frightened at prophecies of ruin. But I proceed to place before the House some details of the improved condition of our trade and manufactures. I have taken from the account of exports for the two years some of the most important items, and the following is the result of a comparison of the quantities exported in those periods:*—I have thus gone through the principal articles of manufacture; and I think it will be admitted that the increase has been extraordinary, and far beyond what anybody could have anticipated. But the hon. Member for Bucks says, "True, you send out a greater quantity of goods, but at prices so low that the labour is not remunerated—the trade is a losing trade." Now, I do not know that the manufacturers are persuaded of the truth of this; but on referring to a document periodically
* See Table in following column.
130
published—I mean Burn's Glance at the State of the Cotton Trade—I find that in every item the prices of manufactured and exported articles have risen. I have here a list of the average prices of the goods exported in 1848 and 1849. I find that colicoes printed have risen from 9s. to 10 s. 3d.; calico plain, from 6s. to 6s. 9d.; cambrics, from 6s. 9d. to 7s. 6d.; mixed cotton and linens, from 9s. to 9s. 6d.; dimities, from 19 s. 6d. to 21 s. 3d.; damasks and diapers, from 18 s. 6d. to 20 s. 9d. The list is a long one: I need read no more of it, as I hope the House will accept my statement, that in every item the price of 1849 is higher than the price of 1848; so that we have had the double benefit of increased exports and higher prices. My hon. Friend who moved the Address has gone into the question of the effect of the repeal of the navigation laws upon the shipbuilding of this country. There again the anticipations entertained by those who opposed the repeal of these laws, urging that any such measure would destroy our shipbuilding trade, and that no foreign country would be found to reciprocate

EXPORTS OF BRITISH AND IRISH PRODUCE AND MANUFACTURES IN YEAR ENDED 5TH JANUARY.

ARTICLES.

1849.

1850.

Cotton manufactures entered by the yard yds.

1,096,751,823

1,335,654,751

Cotton yarn lbs.

135,831,162

149,502,495

Earthenware. pieces

53,286,076

61,605,916

Haberdashery and millinery value

£927,603

£1,183,229

Hardware and cutlery value

£1,860,150

£2,198,597

Leather unwrought cwts.

9,436

16,192

Gloves lbs.

10,475

15,314

Linen manufactures entered by the yard. yds.

89,002,431

106,889,558

Liner yarn lbs

11,722,182

17,668,618

Metals:—

Iron wrought. tons

83,606

121,935

Silk manufactures:—

Silks only—stuffs, &c lbs.

204,483

358,343

Mixed—stuffs, &c. lbs.

206,665

404,417

Silk thrown lbs.

45,693

105,334

Woollen manufactures:—

Entered by the piece. pieces

1,755,099

2,372,345

Entered by the yard. yds.

32,250,822

50,613,578

Stockings, doz. pair

88,201

164,645

Woollen yarn, cwts.

75,260

105,340

the advantages so offered, have been signally falsified. I have here returns from all the shipbuilding ports in the kingdom; and I find that with one exception—the port of Greenock—an exception which can be explained upon local grounds, that, with this single exception, the amount of shipbuilding is uniformly as great, at the very least, as it was during the year before; while in many of the principal ports—in Sunderland, Shields, and some of the Scotch ports—the amount of shipbuilding going on is greater than has marked any former year. And there is a circumstance, too, well worthy of observation in reference to this part of the subject, and that is, that a better class of vessels than were formerly constructed are now being built—a class calculated for what is called the "long voyage." Now it was in reference to what is called the long voyage, that it was anticipated that the repeal of the navigation laws would mainly deprive us of the advantages we enjoyed; and yet we see that our shipbuilders are so little afraid of this, that they are increasing the number of ships especially calculated for this voyage. But there are two other facts of striking import in connexion with this part of the subject. One of these is, that parties who have gone from this country to Baltic ports in order to ascertain whether they could build ships cheaper there than here, have come back with the conviction that they could build them cheaper here; and indeed we are at this moment building ships for foreign countries in the Clyde. The other fact is the one alluded to in Her Majesty's Speech, that intimations have been received, from which there is every reason to believe that almost all the maritime Powers of the Continent are preparing to make such relaxations in their navigation laws as will admit our ships, more or less, to the benefit which we have already bestowed upon theirs. I quite concur with my hon. Friend who moved the Address in believing that foreign countries are looking with great interest on the recent legislation of this country. They long believed that our maritime and commercial greatness was owing to our old system of protection; and when they see that, on the other hand, more rapid improvement in our trade and commerce has followed the relaxation of those laws, we have now every reason to hope that a relaxation of their commercial codes wiil follow the course of legislation in which we have recently been engaged. I now turn to that
132
branch of the subject which is more specially brought under discussion by the Amendment of my hon. Friend opposite—I mean the state of the agricultural interest. Now, I should be deceiving the House were I not to admit, candidly and at once, what, indeed, is stated in the Speech from the Throne, that to some extent, and in some parts of the country, distress among the holders and occupiers of land does exist, and that to a considerable degree; but I utterly deny the expediency or the wisdom of retracing the legislative steps which we have taken. I believe, I say, that distress to some extent exists. A certain degree of distress is indeed the inevitable consequence of such a change in the law as we have made; but I rely on the industry and the energy of the British farmer to overcome obstacles arising from a fall in price—obstacles which he has already, on several occasions, and to a far greater extent than at present, met and surmounted. I believe that it is principally amongst the smaller class of holders that the distress in question exists. I lament that amongst those agricultural labourers who have been discharged, distress also prevails; but I am quite confident that all those who remain in employment find their condition to be very much benefited, while I think I shall be able to convince the House that the actually existing amount of distress has been considerably exaggerated. I admit that in the county of Lincoln there has been an increase of persons relieved; but I confidently assert, taking England generally, that in a majority of even the agricultural counties, there has been a diminution of distress and diminution in the numbers depending on the poor-rates. And here let me remark, that I am not astonished that some distress should prevail in agricultural districts. I never thought, and never said, that a great change could take place such as we have made, without causing some degree of suffering to the agricultural interest. A great branch of productive industry has been called upon to increase and cheapen its products. Sir, I know of no improvement in any trade or branch of industry which has not at first caused some degree of suffering, by which some parties have not been thrown out of employment, although the ultimate result has been a great benefit to the community and the world. But, Sir, it by no means follows, because that is the case, that such improvement should not take place; and I may add that I lay

133
far more stress on what individuals can do than on what legislation can do to mitigate the severity of the present pressure. At the same time, however, it is my belief that the alarm existing is not warranted or justified by the facts which have actually taken place, and that the amount of alarm and discouragement existing has been much exaggerated by language which I have heard used with very great regret. Reference has been made to falls of price which have taken place in former years in this country; and the hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment has pictured the degree of distress existing at former periods in his neighbourhood—a degree far exceeding, I venture to say, that which generally exists at the present moment. The hon. Gentleman referred to the price of 1822. That year was marked by an extraordinary fall of price, although there then existed a law professing to secure a price of 80 s. per quarter. Recollecting that fact, I cannot think but that the hon. Member must entertain some doubts as to the probable success of the remedies which he now proposes to apply. In 1817, the price of corn was 96 s. 11 d. During five consecutive years thereafter it fell at the rate of about 10 s. per year. By 1822 the price had fallen nearly 50 per cent, and under a corn law professing to secure 80 s., the prices ranged from 86 s. 3d. in 1818, to 44 s. 7d. in 1822, the average price of the five years being 65 s. 10 d. But the hon. Gentleman said that there was hope then—hope, I presume, of a return to those high prices which legislation professed to ensure. Why, no such return took place. In 1829, five years afterwards, a corn law was passed—passed with some opposition indeed from the agricultural party—the avowed object of which was to ensure a price, not of 80 s., but of 64 s. Well, what happened under that law? In 1831 the price of corn was 66 s. 1d.; in 1835 it was 39 s. 7d. It fell at the rate of 6s. 9d. per annum for four consecutive years, descending almost, but not quite, as much as 50 per cent. In 1839 the price was 70 s. 8d.; in 1845 it was 50 s. 10 d. In 1847 the price was 69 s. 9d.; and in the month ending November 24, it had fallen to 40 s. 8d., and is now under 40 s.; and surely, therefore, the agriculturist need not apprehend ruin now because a fall takes place actually of smaller amount than those with which they have had at several times to contend—occasions on which their industry and energy triumphed, as their industry
134
and energy will, I am confident, triumph again. But I deny that the present fall in price is to be altogether attributed to the repeal of the corn laws, and I can show what I consider good reasons for holding that opinion. In the first place, we have had a very large harvest at home. It is not very easy to ascertain exactly the produce of different years, but one of the greatest cornfactors in Liverpool estimates that the produce of last year's harvest was 30 per cent greater than that of the year 1848. Now that increased quantity of corn must in no small degree have contributed to reduce prices. But in a neighbouring country, in France, there has been no repeal of corn laws, and yet the prices there have fallen to a greater degree than has been the case in this country. In 1847 the price of corn in France was 69 s. 7d. The lowest duty at which corn can now be imported into France is 25 s. per quarter, and in November last the price was 33 s. 7d., showing a fall of 36 s. France also has had the benefit of English demand, having sent to this country upwards of 700,000 quarters of wheat. In England the fall of price from 69 s. 9d., in 1847, to 40 s. 8d., the average price of November, was only about 29 s., being less than that in France. In that country the fall cannot by any possibility be attributed to any alteration in their corn laws, and I cannot see, therefore, why a less fall in this country can be attributed to no other source than the repeal of our law. But I agree with my hon. Friend the seconder of the Address, that the present is not to be taken as the permanent price which corn will maintain in this country; and I will add, that, great as my estimate is of the benefit to be derived by the body of the people from cheapness and plenty of corn, I am not insensible to the evils produced by a great fall in price taking place suddenly, and causing a widespread discouragement amongst farmers. But I repeat my conviction that the alarm has been greatly exaggerated. I find the Mark Lane Express stating that the prices in the Baltic ports are rising so high that exportation to this country would no longer pay. It is a curious fact, too, that the only country from which wheat is being brought at present is France—in ordinary years not an exporting country. I think then, if this be so, that there is good reason for supposing that the permanent prices of wheat in this country will not range so low as they have stood for some time. The importation has already received a

135
considerable check. Corn which had been sent here under the expectation of higher prices, is necessarily entered for consumption, being actually in our warehouses; but the entries for this year far exceed the importations. The quantity of grain of all sorts imported into this country in the year 1849, is 9,673,000 quarters, whilst the quantity entered for home consumption is 10,655,000: the flour and meal of all sorts imported is 9,479,000 cwt., whilst the quantity entered for consumption is 4,055,000 cwt. The importations, too, for the last six months of the year, are very far below those of the last six months of 1848. In that year, in the six months ending January 5, 1849, there were imported 2,298,000 quarters; in the six months ending the 5th of January last, they were 2,073,000 qua ters; and the falling off in the last three months of that period is still more remarkable. In the last three months of 1848, the quantity imported was 1,438,000 quarters; in the last three months of 1849, 845,000 quarters; showing a diminution of 592,000 quarters. The importations have fallen off most remarkably also during the month of January. In the first week of 1849, it was 246,588 quarters; in the first week of this year it was only 83,952 quarters; in the second week of 1849, it was 275,341; in the second week of this year 92,658; in the third week 303,310 quarters, against 82,615 quarters; in the fourth 293,419 quarters, against 77,670. It is extraordinary to what an extent the importation has fallen off; but it affords, I think, a conclusive proof that the present price of corn does not pay the importer, and that the agriculturist has good reason to expect that so low a price cannot continue for long. What prices wheat may permanently command, it would be rash in me to attempt to predict, especially after the great mistakes upon the subject into which the most sagacious and practical men have fallen; but it is not a little remarkable that from all the countries with which we were threatened, the importation has been very small indeed, while the greatest quantity imported has come from a country from which no one anticipated any supply whatever. The hon. Member for Somersetshire, at a recent agricultural meeting, predicted a rate of 44 s. as one which he thought likely permanently to prevail; and I do not think that agriculture must necessarily be ruined even should be prove right in his anticipation.
136
It was once believed that a price of 80 s. was necessary for the remuneration of the owner and occupier of land. Then they were satisfied with prices at 64 s. And in 1842 a rate of 56 s. was talked of. Taking the three years subsequent to that period, the average price of corn was 50 s. 8d.; and it was not till 1846, when the potatoes had failed, that the price reached 54 s. 8d. These prices were invariably lower than those contemplated by the Legislature. But has agricultural distress always existed since 1815? Has land gone out of cultivation since then? On the contrary, has not capital been expended, largely expended, on the land since 1815? The hon. Member for Lincolnshire has stated that since 1815 a great amount of capital has been expended upon the soil—that the production has been greatly increased—and that a great extent of waste or outgrowing land has been converted into wheat-producing land. Although the prices of corn, then, have fallen from what were then sup-, posed to be remunerative rates—namely, 80 s. per quarter—to 50 s. per quarter and under, yet the rental of the land has increased since 1815. There is only one county in England in which the rental of the land is shown by the income-tax returns to be lower than it was in 1815, although corn has in the meantime fallen from 80 s. to 50 s. If it be so—if energy and industry have enabled the farmers of England as a body to pay more rent with prices at 50 s. than with prices at 80 s., what is there to prevent that self-same industry and energy successfully meeting the demands of the great mass of consumers at prices ranging somewhere between 40 s. and 50 s.—prices I think likely to prevail? It is by increased produce that the difficulty is to be surmounted; and there is nothing I should more wish to see than this country growing a sufficient quantity of corn for its own supply—a result which I believe may be yet arrived at. I have ever tried to disbelieve that the great body of the landed proprietors of England looked upon this question of national food simply as a question of rent. But I have stated that it was possible that any attempt to bring back protection would be treated and met as an attempt to keep up high rents; and it is therefore with the greater sorrow that I have seen, at different agricultural meetings throughout the country, language used by landed proprietors themselves, identifying the protection which they call for with the preservation of high

137
rents. After holding such language as they have done, I must say I think they can have no reason to complain if their rents are not paid. I have recently read a powerful article in a northern periodical, in which it is contended that it is impossible to carry on farming in Scotland under a system of free trade. But I have also made inquiries into the subject of farm-letting in Scotland, and I find that the rents of Scotch farms generally have not been reduced. In one or two instances they have been increased. Without attaching much importance to raising the rents of such farms, I think it is true generally that farms in Scotland now maintain the same rent which they have borne before. What value, then, is to be attached to the argument that it is impossible to cultivate farms on these terms? Do you think that farmers of great experience, possessing great capital, and being actuated, as we must suppose, by feelings of common honesty, intend either not to pay the rent which they agree to pay, or mean to submit to a loss? I find repeated cases of a similar description in this country, and parties who openly state that at present prices they have made a fair profit on their farms. I read a letter the other day in the papers, addressed by the high sheriff of the county of Norfolk to his tenants, in which he states that in spite of the disadvantages under which the system of gentlemen-farming is supposed to labour, he has realised a good rent and a profit into the bargain. This gentleman says—
"In my own occupation of about 580 acres (of which 100 acres, as my steward testifies, yield no profit), notwithstanding the great disadvantages under which a gentleman must always farm, and although I have sustained a loss of five score stock ewes, I have, up to St. Michael last, not only made my rent, but more than obtained 10 per cent for my capital invested in live and dead stock."
Now, if one gentleman can point to such results, I do not see why others should not do the same. I confess that when I hear persons of credit and station speak in this manner, I cannot despair for the British farmer, or feel doubt that he will be able to meet the demands which may be made upon him. It is my firm conviction that, taking the country throughout, and looking more especially at the condition of the labouring classes, a signal benefit has been derived from the cheapness and plenty of food resulting from free-trade legislation. The manufacturing and trading classes of the community have assuredly benefited
138
by such legislation, and no less so the majority of agricultural labourers, who, after all, form the great mass of the agricultural community. Let me now observe, in answer to the argument used in this House, that it is of no use rendering food cheap, for the effect of so doing is to deprive labour of employment, and take away the means of purchasing such food. This argument was constantly pressed upon us last year; now what is the fact? We have imported to an unexampled extent, but we have not only imported, but we have consumed what we have imported. On an authority which I presume hon. Gentlemen opposite are not disposed to dispute—on the authority of the Mark Lane Express—I find it stated that, notwithstanding the enormous imports of the last twelve months, at the end of the year the stocks on hand are but light—that those stocks are diminishing—that the people have found means of paying for the food so imported, and have been benefited by the large importations and increased consumption. It follows, therefore, that the people have derived benefit from the law we have passed, the object of which was to insure a large and cheap supply of the necessaries of life—and have not been deprived of the means of purchasing food, and have not, according to the predictions of hon. Gentlemen opposite, been starving in the midst of plenty. This is, after all, the main element in the consideration of this subject. The ground taken in this House last year, had, if it had been true, some shadow of reason in it. It was contended that large numbers of persons would be thrown out of employment, and that, although there might be cheapness arising from our legislation, it would be counterbalanced by those evils which attend a diminution of employment. In the county of Lincoln, it appears there has been an increase in the number of persons relieved; but taking the whole of England, and including the great majority even of the agricultural counties, it will be found that a diminution in the amount of relief has taken place; and, what is still more striking, a diminution in the amount of relief to the ablebodied. I confess that I saw with the greatest possible pleasure the Address emanating from a noble Lord on a recent occasion in one of the southern counties. We know well that if any counties were likely to suffer more from agricultural distress than others, it is the southern counties. In Kent and Sussex I should have anticipated such distress;

139
but I find that the noble Lord to whom I have referred (Lord Chichester), whose character is above reproach—I find that noble Lord not addressing a county meeting, or popular assembly, but the grand jury of the eastern division of the county of Sussex, from the judicial bench, using language to this effect:—" It was," his Lordship observed, "very satisfactory to find that agricultural labourers pursued their usual avocations, and that when the pressure upon farmers was greater than at other seasons, so few labourers were unemployed. He thought they might conclude thence that there was no great dearth of employment from the fact that the number of offenders from the agricultural districts was so small. Another source of congratulation arose from this—that the workhouses were by no means full, and the number of ablebodied paupers was far from being so numerous as they generally were at this season of the year. These facts were worthy of consideration. It was highly creditable, and must be satisfactory to the farmers and to the country generally to know, that notwithstanding the great difficulties and pressure with which they had been surrounded, they had taken the best and wisest course, both for their own interest and that of the community, in keeping their labourers honest by affording them regular employment. They all knew, however, that they could not employ men unless they had the means of paying them. It was a well-understood fact that there was plenty of agricultural employment in the county, if the farmers had sufficient capital to carry it out. He was of opinion that the landlords and tenants would find that the course they had adopted in providing employment for their labourers was not only their duty, but that it would tend to benefit them and their property." Such has been the language recently held by this nobleman. I was sorry to hear my hon. Friend state that a similar course has not been pursued by the owners and occupiers of land in Lincolnshire. But I am thankful to say that the case of Lincolnshire is one of the few exceptions to the general rule throughout England and Wales. I will now state the expense of maintaining the poor at different and recent periods. The expenditure for the relief of the poor in England and Wales for the year ending Lady-day, 1848, was 6,180,000 l. In the year ending Lady-day, 1849, the amount expended was 5,792,963 l.; or a diminution of 287,802 l., or 6 3–10ths per cent. Now this was the
140
year in which in his speeches of last Session the hon. Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire said there was great agricultural distress. There has been an increase in expenditure on account of the poor in only five counties; and those were comities where the distress could not be attributed to the state of agriculture—Middlesex, Warwickshire, Westmoreland, the West Riding of Yorkshire, and Anglesea. Comparing the expenditure of 558 unions for the half-year ending Michaelmas, 1848 (the others are not audited), with the expenditure for the half-year ending Michaelmas 1849, the sum expended in the first half year was 1,750,000 l., and in the last 1,653,000 l., being a diminution of 97,000 l., or 5 5–10ths per cent. These accounts are, I think, satisfactory enough, as regards the diminution of expense; but I admit that they are open to the objection that the diminution of expense is owing to the greater cheapness of food. This could be no inconsiderable advantage in itself, but it is not conclusive. I do not rest my case on the diminished expenditure; but I will appeal to a more decisive and undeniable test, and that is the number of persons receiving relief at corresponding periods of the last and of the preceding year. The President of the Poor Law Board has had prepared a statement of the number of persons relieved at different periods. The number of persons relieved on the 1st of July, in 538 unions in England, and 42 in Wales, was, in 1848, 892,655; in 1849, 827,150, showing a diminution of 65,505 persons. The number of persons relieved in 560 unions in England and Wales, on the 1st January, 1849, was 987,164; on the 1st of January, 1850, only 923,167, exhibiting a diminution of 63,997, or of 6 4–10ths per cent. Estimating, for the few remaining unions, at the same rate, it would appear that there had been a diminution of numbers of 70,409 persons relieved in January, 1850, as compared with January, 1849. But the diminution of ablebodied persons receiving relief is still more remarkable and satisfactory. Any discharge of labourers would, of course, have increased the number of ablebodied persons out of work, and driven them to the relief lists. Such was the effect anticipated; but I am most happy to say, that the result has been precisely the reverse, and that the decrease of the ablebodied persons receiving relief is proportionally greater than that of other parties. In 590 unions, the

141
number of ablebodied persons relieved on January 1, 1849, was 201,644; in January, 1850, 170,502, showing a diminution of 31,142, or 15 4–10ths per cent of able-bodied persons. This is so important a point, that, even at the risk of wearying the House, I must be permitted to insist more fully upon it; and, that the case may be complete, I will state the per cent-age increase and decrease of persons relieved, and of ablebodied persons relieved in every county in England and Wales. There are fourteen counties in England in which there has been an increase, and twenty-eight in which there has been a decrease in the number of paupers relieved, and hon. Gentlemen will see that this implies a considerable reduction. The 14 counties in which there had been an increase in the total number of paupers were:—Westmoreland, 0.2 percent; Rutland, 0.2; Devon, 0.3; North Riding, 0.5; Worcester, 0.9; Essex,2; Kent,2.3; Cambridge, 3.2; Huntingdon, 4.8; Stafford, 5; Durham, 5; Suffolk, 6.5; Lincoln, 7.3; Northumberland, 7.5. The 28 counties in which there was a decrease in the number of paupers, and the rate of decrease, were—Salop, 0.6; Norfolk, 0.6; Monmouth, 1.2; Northampton, 2.9; Oxford, 3.1; Somerset, 3.3; Sussex. 3.6; Southampton, 3.9; Cornwall, 4; Berks, 4; Warwick, 5; Buckingham, 6.4; Wilts, 6.5; Dorset, 6.9; Glocester, 7.1; East Riding, 7.3; Surrey, 9.1; Hertford, 9.4; Hereford, 9.9; Chester, 10.3; Bedford, 11.3; Middlesex, 11.4; Derby, 11.4; Cumberland, 12.3; Nottingham, 13.5; Leicester, 14.4; West Riding, 22.7; Lancaster, 22.8. In Wales six counties exhibited an increase, and six a decrease. I may state generally, that of the twenty-eight counties which exhibited a decrease in the number of persons relieved, a majority were agricultural. I am now come to what must be admitted as a most important test of the condition of the country—the number of ablebodied poor in the receipt of relief; and I am happy to find that instead of there being fourteen counties in which the number has increased, and twenty-eight in which it has decreased, there are only seven in which the number has increased, and thirty-five in which it has decreased. The greatest increase was in Suffolk, in which it was 17.1 per cent. In Huntingdon, it is 14.9; Lincoln, 10.8; Northumberland, 9.4; Rutland, 8.3; Durham, 5.8; Essex, 2.7. The counties in which there is a positive decrease are as follows:—Norfolk, 0.3; Worcester, 0.6; Kent, 1; East Riding, 2.1;
142
North Riding, 3.7; Cambridge, 4.2; Southampton, 6.1; Dorset, 7.9; Sussex, 8.2; Buckingham, 8.7; Salop, 9.1; Stafford, 9.5; Devon, 10.3; Northampton, 10.5; Westmoreland, 11.8; Somerset, 13.6; Oxford, 14.6; Wilts, 14.7; Glocester, 15.2; Middlesex, 16.2; Berks, 16.8; Hereford, 17.8; Hertford, 18; Cornwall, 19.6; Surrey, 19.8; Leicester, 23.9; Cumberland, 24.3; Derby, 25.2; Chester, 25.2; Nottingham, 25.6; Bedford, 28.3; Monmouth, 29.8; Warwick, 32.6; West Riding, 37.2; Lancaster, 37.2; totals of 548 unions, 16.5. In Wales there is an increase in four counties, and a decrease in seven. The counties in which there is an increase were as follows:—Glamorgan, 28.5; Carmarthen, 8.8; Montgomery, 6.9; Pembroke, 6.9; totals of 42 unions in Wales, 3.2. The counties in which there was a decrease were these:—Flint, 25.6; Denbigh, 25.5; Merioneth, 2.9; Cardigan, 2.3; Brecon, 1.8; Anglesea, 1.7; Carnarvon, 0.7. Throughout England, and including Wales, the total diminution in the number of ablebodied persons relieved has been 15 4–10 s per cent up to January last. Now how is this enormous diminution in the number of persons relieved in the great majority of agricultural counties to be accounted for? I ask whether the agricultural labourer, as well as the interests of commerce and manufacture, has not derived signal benefit from that cheapening of produce which has been secured? From the facts I have stated—and they are facts beyond dispute—I think I am justified in drawing the inference that cheapness of food has been found to confer a great and signal benefit. And taking the condition of the poor alone, and resting my whole position on that, I say it would not be expedient or wise to reconsider or repeal our recent legislation. My hon. Friend stated that there was observable a most satisfactory diminution in the number of persons receiving relief in Ireland. It appears there is a net decrease of 295,000 persons receiving relief as compared with last year. I am happy to find, from information derived from different parts of the country, that not only the owners but the occupiers of land in many agricultural districts are draining their lands, and introducing new improvements, and exerting themselves in every possible way to effect what must be effected—an increase of production. It is satisfactory to receive such information, although it is only what I expected; for I could never believe that the energies

143
of the British farmer would be paralysed; but, on the contrary, I felt convinced that he would show himself prepared to bear up against the pressure, and overcome it. At most of the various meetings which have been held, it is gratifying to find that some one has stood up and stated that, even at present prices, a profit might be made. One gentleman said, that with no greater outlay, but simply the application of more labour, he had obtained a better profit from his farm at present prices than at former ones. My hon. Friend the Member for Lincolnshire has stated truly that one branch of British agriculture, the producers of wool, at least, are suffering no depression. I expected that my hon. Friend might have been induced to see some symptoms of hope for improvement in other branches of industry from a similar cause, the increased and increasing demand of the manufacturing districts for agricultural produce. Considering, however, the Amendment he had to propose, he could not, perhaps, perceive symptoms which, under other circumstances, might have occurred to him. Under other circumstances, perhaps, my hon. Friend will see in the improvement of manufactures a promise of improvement in the condition of agriculture. Now, it is not only the home demand for wool which has risen, but the export of British wool has increased to an extraordinary extent. The quantity exported in 1848 was 3,978,842 pounds; in 1849, 11,083,645 pounds. In the last year, also, when the imports of butter and cheese had fallen off, the exports of British butter and cheese increased. I do not think it necessary, however, to pursue this part of the subject further. I have stated that I do not think the agriculturists have that reason for despair which they seem to think they have; and as for the argument that protection should be restored on account of the condition of the working classes and of the agricultural labourers of England, I think it will be admitted that those classes are in a better position than they were last year, and that there are fewer persons now in receipt of relief than then. I will now turn very shortly to a consideration of the general state of the country, as evidenced by our home consumption. I find that with the exception of coffee, which has fallen off in some degree, the consumption of almost every article has increased. This increased consumption
144
has occurred in the articles of cocoa, rum, brandy, tea, and others. Cocoa, for instance, has increased from 2,936,641lb. in 1848, to 3,233,372lb. in 1849; rum, from 2,987,492 gallons in 1848, to 3,044,758 gallons in 1849; brandy, from 1,609,557 gallons in 1848, to 2,187,500 gallons in 1849; geneva, from 23,765 gallons in 1848, to 27,209 gallons in 1849; tea, from 48,735,696lb. in 1848, to 50,024,688 lb. in 1849; tobacco (unmanufactured), from 27,098,314lb. in 1848, to 27,480,621 lb. in 1849; wine, from 6,369,785 gallons in 1848, to 6,487,771 gallons in 1849. The imports of salt beef and pork have somewhat increased; but not more, I think, than to counterbalance the diminished importation of pigs from Ireland, which, comparing the last six months of each of the last four years, has been—1846, 203,224; 1847,45,664; 1848, 30,414; 1849, 28,640. I will now refer to the consumption of another article, which, owing to peculiar circumstances, had fallen off—it was the article of sugar, which, in a re markable manner, had contradicted all the predictions of those who opposed the relaxations introduced by the Government. The delay which was interposed in passing in the summer of 1848, certain resolutions which I proposed as to foreign sugar, caused a forced entry of foreign sugar in The month of July in that year, and there fore the entries of foreign sugar in the two years do not afford a fair comparison; but the whole falling-off in the quantities cleared for consumption has occurred, not in colonial, but in foreign sugar. The consumption of West India has increased from 2,771,148 cwt. in 1848, to 3,070,273 cwts. in 1849; Mauritius from 812,808 cwts. in 1848, to 997,541 cwts. in 1849; East India from 1,352,599 cwts. in 1848, to 1,356,548 cwts. in 1849; whilst foreign had decreased from 1,225,866 cwts. in 1848, to 497,764 cwts. in 1849. Nor has The increased entry of foreign spirits de pressed the home trade. In the quantity of British spirits which has paid duty for consumption, there has been an increase; for in 1848 they amounted to 22,202,379 gallons, and to 22,920,000 gallons in 1849. The quantity entered for consumption in Ireland had fallen off upon the year; but There has been an increase upon the last quarter ending January 5, for in 1848 it was 287,969 gallons, whilst in 1849 it amounted to 312,696 gallons. There was only one other subject of importance to which he would refer, and that was to raw

145
materials, which were the means of providing employment for our labouring population. I have not the returns for the whole year, but on the eleven months ending December 5th in each year, the following were the results:—

ARTICLES.

1848.

1849.

Indigo

cwt.

56,822

79,976

Madder

cwt.

65,382

61,638

Madder root

cwt.

119,312

141,017

Flax

cwt.

1,315,599

1,676,512

Hemp, undressed

cwt.

698,264

911,120

Hides, untanned, dry

cwt.

96,435

122,187

Ditto ditto wet

cwt.

320,806

506,294

Ditto, tanned

lbs.

953,173

1,545,214

Iron unwrought

tons.

21,608

24,542

Lead, pig and sheet

tons.

3,293

6,902

Spelter

tons.

11,120

14,964

Tin

tons.

4,480

27,326

Oil, olive

tons.

7,125

15,191

Quicksilver

lbs.

1,504,639

2,229,458

Silk, raw

lbs.

3,645,371

4,303,610

Wool, cotton

cwt.

5,769,256

6,255,663

Ditto, sheep

cwt.

60,800,579

70,204,837

Ditto, Alpaca

cwt.

944,769

1,163,317

This table justified the reflection, that whilst the people had been employed in the last year, means had been afforded to them for a continuation of that employment. It had been said that large imports of copper ore, consequent upon removing restrictions, would be fatal to the copper miners of this country. The reverse had been found to be the fact; and I have the satisfaction of saying, that the accounts from the mining districts of Cornwall were exceedingly satisfactory. Employment was brisk, and wages were good. The exports of British copper, for example, in bricks and pigs, had increased, in the eleven months ending January 5, from 85,224 cwts. in 1849, to 153,397 cwts. in 1850; of wrought copper, from 5,156 cwts. in 1849, to 17,835 cwts. in 1850; and the exports of brass of all sorts from 13,094 cwts. in 1849, to 23,636 cwts. in 1850. In fact, there was scarcely an article of any sort or kind as to which ruin and distress had been predicted from admitting foreign produce, which had not utterly falsified that prediction by the facts of increased production at home, increased exportations, and increased employment. The state of the shipping trade afforded exactly the like testimony. Taking the eleven months ending December 5, it would be found that the number of ships entered inwards in the year 1848 had been 24,949, of 5,059,000 tons; whilst in 1849 there were 28,946 ships, of 5,678,000 tons;
146
and the number of ships cleared outwards in 1848 were 23,394, of 4,678,000 tons; whilst in 1849 these were increased to 25,660 ships, with a tonnage of 5,120,000 tons. From the situation I have the honour to fill, my statement would naturally not be complete if I closed it without reference to the condition of the revenue. I am happy to say, there has been an improvement in every branch of the revenue to a greater extent than I had expected. The result of the year, partly owing to increased production, but still more to reduced expenditure, left an excess of income above expenditure upon the year ending the 5th January last, of 2,098,000 l The amount of gold in the Bank was another satisfactory sign, for it amounted in round numbers to 17,000,000 l., against 15,000,000 l in the corresponding period last year. This fact sufficiently rebutted the assertion that it was impossible to have a large import of corn with an increase in bullion. It had been said that much of this amount might be owing to importations from California; but I do not think the whole sum derived from that place exceeded 600,000 l or 700,000 l But, whilst making these satisfactory statements, I heartily concur in the wise advice, that we should not be too much elevated with the present state of the country. I thought it my duty two years ago, when great distress and alarm prevailed, to endeavour to check the discouragement; and I shall think it equally my duty now to prevent, as far as in me lies, any undue excitement and overweening confidence. I have felt it to be also my duty, however, when such words were proposed to be added to the Address, to state what I believe to be the real condition of the country. I sincerely hope, then, that no rash speculation will disturb the general well-doing of the people. We have, in my belief, entered upon a course of sound improvement; and my earnest hope is, that it will, under the blessing of Providence, continue; and that, notwithstanding its present temporary depression, the agricultural interest may participate in the general improvement. When it does arise from that state of partial depression, its prosperity will be based, not upon the delusive foundation of protection, but upon the firm foundation of its own industry and exertion, on which it could never be shaken.
MR. H. A. HERBERThoped the House would not consider it presumptuous in him to rise at so early a period of the Session.

147
He had had no idea of doing so when he entered the House, nor would be now trespass on their attention, if it had not been for some expressions of an hon. Gentleman who had moved the Address. Both the hon. Member and the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had spoken but little of Ireland, and he (Mr. Herbert) presumed it was but little on the old principle, that "least said was soonest mended." One assertion had, however, been made, which evidently seemed to have made a strong impression on the House. The hon. Gentleman who moved the Address said, and the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer repeated, that an enormous diminution had taken place in the number of persons receiving relief in Ireland, and from that was deduced a comparative state of prosperity, or at all events of improvement. The right hon. Gentleman said, "Dispute my facts if you can." He (Mr. Herbert) was not there to dispute the facts, but he was there to dispute the deductions; and he would now show that the facts cited did not necessarily prove an improvement in Ireland in 1849 as compared with 1848. The hon. Gentleman said that from the returns dated December 9, 1848, it appeared that the number of those receiving indoor relief were 187,803. The exact number was only 186,403; but for his (Mr. Herbert's) purpose those figures were near enough. In the same report it was stated that the outdoor relief on the same date was 315,719, but that in December, 1849, the number was only 95,449. He (Mr. Herbert) contended that that did not show any real diminution of destitution. Any hon. Gentleman who read that return would find that there had been additional house accommodation provided for 50,806 persons. Let any hon. Gentleman go into any part of the south of Ireland, and he would find whole streets and every building erected in them for the purpose of trade or commerce converted into workhouses. It was also well known that when once outdoor relief was established in any district, a vast mass of imposture was connected therewith. It was impossible to check that, and consequently the numbers 315,719 did not represent the actual destitution that existed in 1848. He would appeal to the hon. Gentlemen in the House who had been endeavouring to work the poor-law system in Ireland, if that was not notoriously the case? The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, then in his place, stated in an able speech which
148
he made last year, that he believed there would be no safety in Ireland in administering the poor-law, unless they returned to the law of 1836. But he (Mr. Herbert) would call the attention of the hon. Member to another reason for the diminution in the number of Irish paupers. Many of the 315,000 referred to had migrated to England. He would ask any Gentleman who paid any attention to the subject if the highways and byways of England were not thronged with Irish paupers? He, during the autumn spent a few weeks in the south of Scotland, and walked through a great portion of Northumberland, and observed that those places were thronged with his unfortunate countrymen. It might he said that they came over to reap the harvest, but numbers of them told him that they were living on their wits for the last two years; and some of them had so completely exchanged the Irish brogue for the Scotch twang, that until he spoke to them in their own dialect, he could not tell that they were Irishmen. Death had also greatly diminished the paupers. Many districts had been half depopulated by that means. Many hon. Members in that House who had been in Ireland this season could bear testimony to the vast numbers of roofless houses and deserted homesteads which could be everywhere seen. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had therefore no right whatever to infer the increased prosperity of Ireland from the diminished amount of paupers. If the House would look at the figures in the returns referred to, they would find that there had been an extraordinary diminution of numbers in one week. In the week before November 9, they were in round numbers 105,000; the next week they were only 95,000. In the margin he found the diminution accounted for in these words: "This sudden diminution arose from peculiar circumstances in the Kilrush union." He wished to know what those peculiar circumstances were. If outdoor relief were to he taken as a test of improvement, then there must have been some sudden burst of improvement, for there was no outdoor relief at all given at that time in Kilrush, the most impoverished and bankrupt district in Ireland. Having compared the exports of 1848 and 1849, the right hon. Gentleman alluded to the Customs, and admitted there was a decrease. He said there was an increase during the last quarter, but took good care not to give the figures. He (Mr. Herbert) suspected they

149
were so very small that the right hon. Gentleman preferred not mentioning them. In Ireland they would be very thankful to have even a small improvement. They were, however, so accustomed, from day to day, to hear the voice of woe, to see their property passing away from them, to hear well-authenticated accounts of destitution, and to look absolute ruin in the face, that accounts of destitution and misery hardly now affected them. The hon. Gentleman the mover of the Address laid great stress on the diminution of crime. That could be accounted for by the proportionate diminution in the population. The hon. Gentleman alluded to sheepstealing, and stated that there had been a diminution in that description of crime also. He did not, however, allude to the fact that there had been so great a diminution in sheep that there was hardly one left. He (Mr. Herbert) had heard of a dialogue between a Hungarian nobleman and a Scotchman. The Scotchman said he had so many sheep on his estate. The Hungarian said, he could not tell how many sheep he had on his estate, but he could tell how many shepherds were in his employment. If the hon. Gentleman had told the House what diminution had taken place in sheep, it would go far to account for the diminution in sheepstealers. The right hon. Gentleman said, "Dispute my facts if you can." He (Mr. Herbert) was ready to dispute his facts; and he would call on the House to receive with great caution anything coming from the supporters of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the prosperity of Ireland. He hoped the noble Lord at the head of the Government did not think that he spoke with the slightest disrespect of the Government; but he would show the House that the right hon. Gentleman had on other occasions made statements concerning Ireland which were utterly at variance with the actual state of things. In a speech delivered last Session, the right hon. Gentleman said—
"It was certainly very satisfactory to have to state, that, with the exception of a very small portion of Ireland, he did not believe that any assistance whatever was either wished for or necessary. The greater portion of the east and north of Ireland was not more distressed at this moment than the south of England; and in several other parts of Ireland there was not the least need of assistance. He might refer to the case of the union of Listowel, in which the collection of rates had fallen into some disorder. A commissioner had been sent down, and within six weeks the demands due had not only been paid up, but 700 l. remained to the credit of the union."
150
But what were the facts of the case? At the time the right hon. Gentleman was using these words, the debt of that union had increased. He (Mr. Herbert) had no connexion with the union by property, but as it was connected with the county he represented, he had taken much trouble in inquiring into the facts of the case, and, as far as the accounts and the statements of the most intelligent clerk of the union, and the admission of the assistant inspector, Lynch, could go, as well as that of the gentleman who made the report, the union was in debt at that time. The guardians were dismissed and vice-guardians appointed in November, 1848; the debt then amounted to 5,234 l. The right hon. Baronet made his speech on the 7th February, 1849. A week, however, before, the debt had amounted to 5,729 l.; and yet this was the union that the right hon. Baronet had put all to rights—so much so that there was tool in pocket. The vice-guardians continued the management, and by the 4th August the debt had increased to 15,927 l. The rate in and was actually levied in that union, bankrupt as it was. As a proof of what the vice-guardians must have thought of the position of the union, he would mention the fact that they made an arrangement with the Messrs. Russell for a supply of Indian meal, on the price of which they contracted to pay a sum equal to 27 per cent. He did not mean to say anything to the disparagement of these gentlemen; he merely mentioned the fact. When the guardians were restored, the first thing they did was to strike rates, and on one occasion 14 s. 6d. in the pound was actually agreed to be levied. The assistant inspector attended the meeting, and what did he do? Why, he endeavoured to dissuade the guardians from levying so high a rate, and, after some correspondence with the Lord Lieutenant, the guardians were induced to strike lower rates than they intended, and the probability was, that the diminished rate would be referred to in due time as an evidence of returning prosperity. With respect to the Amendment, as an Irish Member he must vote for it. Under no circumstances could Ireland have gone through the crisis without much difficulty and suffering; but his belief was, that the effect of recent legislation had been to aggravate and increase those difficulties. He represented a county (Kerry) in which the local taxation had enormously increased.

151
In 1835, the amount was 30,951 l.; in 1845, 41,095 l.; in 1849, it had increased to 155,417 l.; while in the adjoining county of Limerick it had increased from 45,000 l. to over 200,000 l., while in the same county the cultivation of wheat had fallen off from 1847 to 1848 from 52,000 acres to 32,000. He hoped the doctrine of expediency—the tyrant's plea—would no longer be put forth as a reason why Ireland's interests should be sacrificed to save a Ministry from embarrassment.
MR. W. FAGANsaid, that the hon. Member who had just sat down had not made a single observation pertinent to the subject before the House. Respecting the improvement of Ireland, he differed from the hon. Member, who should recollect what was the condition of that country prior to and during the potato famine. Four millions of the people subsisting on a description of food which failed them during a period of three years, and the tenant-farmers obliged to dispose of their cattle and farming implements for subsistence. A better state of things was now in progress; and although the improvement was not extensive, it was still improvement, and gave good indications for the future. Prices within the last two months had considerably improved. In cattle alone the rise had been equal to 1l. a head. It had been asserted that the Irish workhouses had been considerably relieved by the emigration of paupers to England. He believed that such was the case; and it was with much pleasure he stated that many of these vagrants had met with employment in England—a circumstance altogether owing to free trade. Upon the subject of free trade he entirely differed from his hon. and gallant Colleague, who seconded the Amendment. He could understand the motive and object which Gentlemen opposite had in selecting the gallant Officer for that duty. Personally, no man was better entitled to that compliment, or to any other which could be bestowed upon him; but this was the gallant Officer's first appearance, and he (Mr. Fagan) could not but perceive that the object in selecting him was to indicate that his election was an evidence of reaction against free trade. [Cheers from the Protectionists.] He emphatically denied that such was the case, and he thought he was in a position to make good the assertion that protection had nothing whatever to do with that election. [" Oh! oh!"] He was prepared to make good his assertion. In the Speech from the Throne an
152
intention was indicated of introducing a measure for amending the franchise in Ireland. The miserable franchise which now existed was one of the main causes of the election of the gallant Officer. There was so much difficulty in the present system that people had grown apathetic, and the consequence was that the registry was neglected. In the city of Cork the registry had actually become a nullity. He could show that a great number of those who had supported the gallant Officer were not protectionists; the chairman of his election committee was a free-trader. He did think that the circumstances connected with an election which had made so much noise were altogether misapprehended. The same result would have taken place although protection had never been heard of. In the great constituency of the county of Cork the tenant-farmers were decidedly free-traders. These persons have taken a different view of that question from the farmers of England. Whether that arose from the connexion between the landlords of England and their tenants being closer than that which prevailed in Ireland, he could not say; but the fact he had asserted could not be disputed. He thought the display recently made in many of the districts of Ireland by the landlords, would not prove beneficial to them. The course adopted by many well-meaning Gentlemen of taking advantage of certain political views entertained by Gentlemen who had never expressed any sympathy with the misgovernment to which the Irish people had been subjected, was not prudent. He believed that the very agitation which prevailed in Ireland would of itself compel the landlords to come to a fair adjustment with their tenants, who would then, having an interest in the land, become as industrious as any of the like class in England. He was persuaded that protection never added a farthing to the poor man's wages in Ireland, and that free trade had had nothing whatever to do with the low prices that had prevailed in that part of the kingdom. With cheap food, it was undeniable that both tenants and labourers in Ireland must be better off.
SIR J. B. WALSHcontended, in opposition to the hon. Member who had just sat down, that Ireland had been a peculiar sufferer by the abolition of the duties on foreign corn. He was at a loss to know, notwithstanding the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, where the glowing pictures of

153
prosperity in which the Government indulged were to be found. It was not their (the protectionists') fault that they were not all enabled, on that occasion, to join in a loyal and respectful Address to the Throne, and then to proceed to the business of the Session. The Amendment was in a manner forced upon them by a passage in the Speech, which appeared to have been introduced into it by the Government for the very purpose of provoking a division. Was it only the owners and occupiers of land who were interested in this great question? No man who really understood the connexion between the different classes of society in this country could for a moment believe that the distress and ruin which any injury to the agricultural interest could create, would be confined to the agricultural interest alone. But the Government had not been content with this mode of disregarding the complaints and the meetings of the country; they had actually gone out of their way to declare to the whole country that they intended that the grievances and the distress complained of, should have neither remedy nor consideration. They had chosen to bring forward a gentleman, who, however estimable in private life, was identified with a particular system. It had been said that the name of Napoleon was a system, and if that of the hon. Member for Wolverhampton was likewise a system, it was the system of the Anti-Corn Law League. He wished to know whether it could be considered a prudent or a wise course of the Government not to give to: one from among their own steady and uniform supporters the complimentary offer of moving the Address in answer to the Speech, but to go to the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, one who had been a member of the Anti-Corn Law League, and associated with all the movements of that body. The Ministry that acted thus showed that they were not the principals in this contest, but that the real principals were the landed interest of the united kingdom on the one side, and the spirit and power of demagoguism on the other. He denied all the positions on which the hon. Member for the West Riding and his party had argued this question. If they looked to the people of England and Ireland, they would see the manufacturing interest was con-fined to a very limited area, and that the agricultural interest, on the contrary, comprised four-fifths of the kingdom. If, therefore, any great injury occurred to the
154
agricultural body, all their small towns—their Readings, their Devizes, and such like places—must inevitably be involved in the same common ruin. Even the tradesmen of this great metropolis would be sufferers under any great calamity that happened to agriculture. If the rents on the richest soils must be reduced to meet the reduced profits, everything must not only be reduced, but swept away altogether—capital, scientific applications, and the employment of labour resulting from them on the poorer soils. When this was done, how was the increased poor-rate and the mass of taxation on the land, now found so grievous to bear, to be provided for with the diminished resources resulting from free trade? The peculiarity of the poor-rate was, that it always increased when the means to meet it diminished; and it would soon swallow up the whole property vested in those counties where poor soils predominated, as it had already swallowed up the whole of the property in the south of Ireland. There was one thing he had observed Gentlemen opposite always urged, and that had formed a large portion of the speech of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and that was the supposed power of the soil and the capability of the farmer to increase the quantity of produce. No one was more fully aware than himself of the fact that farming in England was capable of great improvement. He had always encouraged improvements on his own estates, and with some success; but it appeared to him to be a law from which there was no escape, that additional produce could only be obtained by additional outlay of capital. It was a false and erroneous statement to say that the English farmer was deficient in industry—that he was lazy and wanted enterprise. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was true that in some districts the farmer had not profited by all the improvements discovered; but it was equally true that, to enable him to do so, there must be a large outlay of capital for draining, subsoiling, levelling fences, making roads, purchasing expensive manures, &c. The hon. Member who moved the Address brought forward the case of a farm in Gloucestershire, which had let for 20 s. per acre lately, but was now fetching double that amount. But the material ingredient in the bargain, by which the House would be enabled to come to a right understanding in that case, was but lightly touched upon by the hon. Member. He said there had been some draining done; but he should

155
like to know what had been the outlay of capital to enable the owner to command this great additional rent. The House should recollect that the countries with which they were forced into competition were by no means under the necessity of resorting to improvements. On the banks of the Mississippi subsoiling was unknown, draining did not exist, and the cultivation was of the rudest character. They did not read their Professors Low and Liebig, and had never heard of Mechi and Huxtable. They scratched over a piece of ground, threw in the seed, and reaped the crop. This was done for four or five years, and then they treated the next piece of land in the same way. Thus the English farmer was obliged to be at a great outlay, and have recourse to all the arts of science, while those with whom he was brought into competition carried on their business without either the one or the other. The match was therefore a most unequal one. The law of competition was just this:—A little competition, nobody could deny, quickened and stimulated; in the absence of all competition a man became careless, and paid anything but a proper attention to his business. But if competition was carried too far, it injured and destroyed; it plunged individuals or nations into utter despair. They were now about to decide the question whether the English farmer was to have that amount of competition which would give him energy and spirit to overcome it, or a degree which he was not able to encounter, and with which he must be overwhelmed. This question, as far as experience had gone in the present year, seemed to have been decided by the fact that any amount of corn could be procured at such low prices that the resources of the English farmer must be altogether overtaxed, and they must be reduced to the lowest state of depression, and—God forbid he should ever live to see it!—coincident with that depression the manufacturing interests would be entirely dependent on the foreign customer. Hon. Members opposite had taken care that this should be the first subject of debate this Session, but they need not hope to smother it at once by that policy. If they were inclined to let it alone, they would be driven by their constituents to force it on the attention of the House. It was assumed that this was a landlord's question and a landlord's agitation; but he believed that it was totally the reverse. He believed the tenant-farmers and the
156
yeomen were far more inclined to reproach them with remissness, backwardness, and want of energy in their cause, than with an undue inclination to forward their own interests. The agitation had nothing of a factitious or got-up character about it; and it would be continued with that pertinacity which Englishmen always showed when they felt they had a just and good cause. Even if they did not wish it, the Members who represented the agricultural interest would not be able to avoid bringing this subject constantly under the attention of the House, He wished, in conclusion, to address a few words to those who held that most dogmatic pretension that there was something in the decision of the legislation on this subject of a final and irreversible character; that it was not susceptible of reversion. That he utterly denied. The whole character of their legislation for some years past had been purely experimental. They were always trying some new experiment—always acting upon one theory or another—and always casting aside the conclusions of all their experiments. Had a legislation like this the right to arrogate to itself finality? The very circumstance of their legislation being experimental supposed that it must be tested by the result; and they were imperatively bound to change if that result should deceive the expectation or belie the predictions of its projectors. It was sometimes said to be irrevocable because it was founded on the deliberate decision of both Houses of Parliament. The hon. Member for the West Riding, at a recent meeting at Leeds, said that out of the whole House of Peers he believed there were but twelve who in their hearts were favourable to the measure of free trade. That was the only conclusion in which he entirely concurred with the hon. Member for the West Riding; and the first point in this irrevocable and final legislation was, that it was passed against the convictions of one branch of the Legislature. With regard to the section of the Conservative party who fortified by their votes the measures of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, he knew they were placed in a difficult position. They believed, doubtless, that they were forced to sacrifice their own individual opinions to maintain the merits of that great party, the existence of which they believed essential to the good of the country; but, admitting that construction of their conduct, and admitting also that the right hon. Baronet was a conscientious convert

157
to free-trade doctrines, it was impossible that two hundred Gentlemen should, at the same moment, have been also convinced, as it were, by an electric shock. He gave those Gentlemen credit for the disinterested character of their vote; but he could not but believe that vote was given against their own deliberate conviction. And then it could not be alleged that the question was decided according to the opinion of the majority of the constituency of this country. It was certain that an indisputable majority of the constituency were in favour of protection, and returned a majority of that House with the belief that they would vote for protection. It must he owned that the question was carried against the recorded sense of the constituency, and against the real convictions of a great majority of the representatives themselves; and how, then, could it he pretended that this experimental piece of legislation must now be considered as final and irrevocable? With this fresh in their recollections, and, still more painfully fresh, the disastrous results of this experiment, he trusted they would never hear again of its irrevocable character. The House would be forced to record its vote on that question; but the agricultural Members would feel it their duty not only to divide them, but to discuss the question in all its bearings, and to advocate a return to protection again and again during the Session. He trusted they would be met with fair arguments and with a candid spirit; and he hoped no attempt would be made to extinguish discussion, on the pretence that the present debate, and the division which would ensue, would place it in the position of fait accompli, a conclusion at which he could assure them the country would not allow them to arrive.
MR. GRANTLEY BERKELEYmoved the adjournment of the debate. [Loud cries of "No, no!" and "Go on!"] He bowed to the decision of the House, and would take that opportunity of alluding to certain peculiarities of the Royal Speech. He deeply regretted that all mention of one great portion of the British empire was totally left out, just as if the colonies of this great empire were no longer of any importance to the State. He must also make a remark upon one paragraph in the Speech:—
"With regard to those foreign States whose Navigation Laws have hitherto been of a restrictive character, Her Majesty has received from nearly all of them assurances which induce Her to
158
hope that our example will speedily lead to a great and general diminution of those obstacles which previously existed to a free intercourse by sea between the nations of the world."
This passage, of course, excepted the United States, the self-protective character of whose policy was sufficiently indicated by the message of the President, to say nothing of the actual exclusion of British manufactures. Another paragraph was as follows:—
"Her Majesty greatly laments that any portion of her subjects should be suffering distress; but it is a source of sincere gratification to Her Majesty to witness the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life which cheapness and plenty have bestowed upon the great body of Her people."
That, again, must be supposed to intend the exception of that portion of Her Majesty's people the colonists, who were reduced to the lowest state of ruin and distress. He had observed that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester, in a recent speech, had said that it would be a blessing to this country if the colonies could be swept away altogether. He did not expect to hear such a sentiment from one who had enjoyed the honour of a seat at the Councils of Her Majesty. He confessed that be was struck with amazement when he found that the hon. Member for the West Riding—that illustrious disciple of peace—preaching to the people in words which, if he (Mr. Grantley Berkeley) knew anything of the English language, were the words of disaffection and revolution. Having, in the first place, devoted his talents—those talents which they all knew him to possess; and his eloquence—his "unadorned eloquence"—to the abolition of the state, army, and navy of this great empire, he then turned round, and when he found that it suited his purpose to do so, preached up war and disaffection. The hon. Member had tauntingly observed that the agricultural interests had been recently exhumed for a party purpose; but the fact was that those interests had been foully and most unconstitutionally murdered. It was admitted on all hands that there ought to be a reduction of taxation; but in what better way could the Government reduce taxation than by raising a supply from the pockets of the foreigner? It was idle to say it was all a question of rent. He could assure the House that if every sixpence of rent were taken off the light hill land in the county with which he was connected, it would be still impossible to farm the land to profit

159
at the present prices. The Manchester school were endeavouring to stir up ill feeling between the landlords and the tenants on this question, just as they had endeavoured to do on the game-law question; but it was to be hoped that their iniquitous designs would be foiled. The hon. Mover of the Address had alluded, when referring to the game laws, to a tenant in his (Mr. Grantley Berkeley's) county, named Josiah Hunt. Now it so happened, happily or unhappily, that this man was a Quaker, a tenant of a small farm, whose word was not held at the valuation of a single farthing, and who had been employed at the last election to bribe the voters against him (Mr. Grantley Berkeley); and as some of the money had not been accounted for, it was believed that it was still in the Quaker's pocket. Nothing could be more disgraceful than the treatment the tenant-farmers had experienced. If any complaint was made of their distress, or any demand of justice, the hon. Member for Manchester, with that gentleness which so well became his cloth and cut, threatened them with the destruction of the House of Lords. He had never read speeches so fraught with danger and delusion to the people in general as those of the Manchester school; and in reply to these men he would say that free trade had been given to the country when the country was not in a fit state to receive it, and that the burdens of the farmer ought now to be taken off, and the malt tax removed. With reference to the game laws, about which the hon. Member for Manchester, who sometimes overshot the mark, was so fond of talking, it was perhaps necessary to say that another Quaker had given evidence before the Committee upon the subject, in which he declared that he had not taken any part, active or inactive, to get up a cry in the county of Fife against the game laws. He referred to that to show the fallacies which had been resorted to in reference to the game laws by these free-traders when they designed to sow disaffection between landlord and tenant. Did the Government imagine that they had given free trade a fair trial? He was a free-trader, and he answered that they had not. Free trade was hurried on the country in a most unbecoming manner. The country was not put in a condition to receive it, and was no more fit for it when it was passed into law than the colonies had been prepared for abolition at the time that that measure was
160
forced upon them. In order to have fair free trade, the burdens which now weighed so heavily on the farmer should be removed, and the malt tax should be abolished. If Government were not in a position to do so, they were not in a position to institute free trade. He hoped that hon. Members, in recording their votes on this question, would be uninfluenced by the base threats which had been held forth, that in the event of any effort being made to relieve the distress of the agriculturists, riots would spring up in all parts of the country, and that, in fact, England would be on the eve of a civil war. The country was at that moment threatened with more serious disturbance than had ever menaced it before. It was intolerable that the tenant-farmers should not be permitted to meet in a constitutional manner to give expression to their wishes and declare their grievances, without the interference of a vile mob. They found that at Reading, Bedford, and other places, persons were sent to the meeting who had no single stake in the county; and then they were told when these meetings were so disturbed, that these people had been constitutionally defeated by the rabble sent to disturb them. Now he fancied that the farmers of this country had a right to meet and discuss this question. If the arguments were correct, if trade was in a flourishing state, was that a reason why the agriculturists were to be lost sight of? Were they not a vast portion of this empire? Had not our chief prosperity sprung from that interest? Was that to be totally forgotten, and were they to be content with a mere allusion to it in the Speech from the Throne? He held that the agriculturists of this country had been ill used by the present Government, that their interests had been lost sight of. For nearly seventeen years he had been a supporter of the Government, and had never spoken against them before; but, free-trader as he was, he must confess that free trade had been a most deceptive measure. When he was making that assertion, he knew that numbers of freetraders who still adhered to the principle in his own county were of the same opinion. They thought that though the measure might be properly founded on principle, it had been placed on a wrong footing; that much haste had been exercised in the matter; and that unless something was done, the agricultural interest must go to a fast and overwhelming ruin. He, therefore, trusted that the House, in coming to

161
a vote on this question, would do justice to that oppressed and too quiet class; and that they should see the agricultural interest return at last to its proper state in the country.
The MARQUESS of GRANBYmoved the adjournment of the debate.
LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, he would not oppose the Motion for the adjournment; but he hoped that it would be understood that the division should be taken to-morrow night. He would wish to be made acquainted with the feeling of hon. Gentlemen opposite on the subject under discussion, especially of the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire.
MR. DISRAELIsaid, that he shared in the hope of the noble Lord that the debate would be closed to-morrow evening; but he could not be guilty of the presumption of giving a pledge for himself or others. The duration of the debate would very much depend on the conduct of Gentlemen at both sides of the House, and past experience had taught them that the noble Lord did not always find it an easy matter to exercise that influence which he ought to possess over his own supporters.
Debate adjourned.
The House adjourned at a quarter past Twelve o'clock.

MINUTES.
Introduced.—The Lord Dufferin and Claneboye in Ireland being created Baron Clandeboye of the United Kingdom; the Bishop of Chester; the Bishop of Norwich.
Sat first in Parliament.—The Lord Methuen, after the death of his father; the Lord Alvanley, after the death of his brother.
Representative Peer for Ireland.—The Earl of Lanes-borough v. Earl of Mayo, deceased—writ delivered.
Took the Oaths Several Lords.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1aBankrupt Law Consolidation; Select Vestries.

MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.
THE PARLIAMENT, which had been prorogued successively from the 1st of August to the 9th of October, from thence to the 20th of November, thence to the 16th of January, and from thence to the 31st January, met this day for despatch of business.
The Parliament was opened by Commission, the LORDS COMMISSIONERS present being the LORD CHANCELLOR; the LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (the Marquess of Lansdowne); the LORD PRIVY SEAL (the Earl of Minto); the LORD CHAMBERLAIN OF THE HOUSEHOLD (the Marquess of Breadalbane);
2
and the LORD BISHOP OF LONDON.
THE COMMONS being at the Bar, with their Speaker, the LORD CHANCELLOR delivered the Speech of the LORDS COMMISSIONERS to both Houses of Parliament, as follows:—
"My Lords, and Gentlemen, "
WE are commanded by Her Majesty to assure you, that Her Majesty has great Satisfaction in again having recourse to the Advice and Assistance of Her Parliament.
"THE Decease of Her Majesty Queen Adelaide has caused Her Majesty deep Affliction. The extensive Charity and exemplary Virtues of Her late Majesty will always render Her Memory dear to the Nation.
"HER Majesty happily continues in Peace and Amity with Foreign Powers.
"IN the course of the Autumn Differences of a serious Character arose between the Governments of Austria and Russia on the one hand, and the Sublime Porte on the other, in regard to the Treatment of a considerable Number of Persons who, after the Termination of the Civil War in Hungary, had taken refuge in the Turkish Territory.
"EXPLANATIONS which took place between the Turkish and Imperial Governments have fortunately removed any Danger to the Peace of Europe which might have arisen out of these Differences.
"HER Majesty, having been appealed to on this Occasion by the Sultan, united Her Efforts with those of the Government of France, to which a similar Appeal had been made, in order to assist, by the Employment of Her good Offices, in effecting an amicable Settlement of those Differences in a Manner consistent with the Dignity and Independence of the Porte.
"HER Majesty has been engaged in Communications with Foreign States upon the Measures which might be rendered necessary by the Relaxation of the Restrictions formerly imposed by the Navigation Laws of this Country.
"THE Governments of the United States of America and of Sweden have promptly taken Steps to secure to British Ships in the Ports of their respective Countries Advantages similar to those which their own Ships now enjoy in British Ports.
"WITH regard to those Foreign States whose Navigation Laws have hitherto been of a restrictive Character, Her Majesty has received from nearly all of them Assurances which
4
induce Her to hope that our Example will speedily lead to a great and general Diminution of those Obstacles which previously existed to a free Intercourse by Sea between the Nations of the World.
"IN the Summer and Autumn of the past Year, the United Kingdom was again visited by the Ravages of the Cholera; but Almighty God, in His Mercy, was pleased to arrest the Progress of Mortality, and to stay this fearful Pestilence. Her Majesty is persuaded that we shall best evince our Gratitude by vigilant Precautions against the more obvious Causes of Sickness, and an enlightened Consideration for those who are most exposed to its Attacks.
"HER Majesty, in Her late Visit to Ireland, derived the highest Gratification from the Loyalty and Attachment manifested by all Classes of Her Subjects. Although the Effects of former Years of Scarcity are painfully felt in that Part of the United Kingdom, they are mitigated by the present Abundance of Food, and the Tranquillity which prevails.
"HER Majesty has great Satisfaction in congratulating you on the improved Condition of Commerce and Manufactures. It is with Regret that Her Majesty has observed the Complaints which in many Parts of the Kingdom have proceeded from the Owners and Occupiers of Land. Her Majesty greatly laments that any Portion of Her Subjects should be suffering Distress; but it is a Source of sincere Gratification to Her Majesty to witness the encreased Enjoyment of the Necessaries and Comforts of Life which Cheapness and Plenty have bestowed upon the great Body of Her People.
"Gentlemen of the House of Commons,
"HER Majesty has directed the Estimates for the Year to be laid before you. They have been framed with a strict Regard to Economy, while the Efficiency of the various Branches of the Public Service has not been neglected.
"HER Majesty has seen with Satisfaction the present State of the Revenue.
My Lords, and Gentlemen,
"SOME of the Measures which were postponed at the End of the last Session for Want of Time for their Consideration will be again laid before you. Among the most important of these is one for the better Government of the Australian Colonies.
"HER Majesty has directed various Measures to be prepared for the Improvement of the Condition of Ireland. The Mischiefs arising from Party Processions, the Defects of the Laws regulating the Relations of Landlord and Tenant, the imperfect State of the Grand Jury Acts, and the diminished Number of Electors for Members to serve in Parliament, will, together with other Matters of serious Consequence, form the Subjects of Measures to be Submitted for your Consideration.
"HER Majesty has learnt with Satisfaction that the Measures which have been already passed for the Promotion of the Public Health are in a Course of gradual Adoption; and Her Majesty trusts, that, both in the Metropolis and in various Parts of the United Kingdom, you will be enabled to make further Progress in the Removal of Evils which affect the Health and Well-being of her Subjects.
"THE Favour of Divine Providence
6
has hitherto preserved this Kingdom from the Wars and Convulsions which during the last Two Years have shaken so many of the States of the Continent of Europe.
"IT is Her Majesty's Hope and Belief that by combining Liberty with Order, by preserving what is valuable, and amending what is defective, you will sustain the Fabric of our Institutions as the Abode and the Shelter of a free and happy People."
Then the Commons withdrew.

SCOTCH REPRESENTATIVE PEERS.
The DUKE of RICHMONDcalled attention to a great omission of their duty on the part of Ministers, with respect to the privileges of their Lordships, which might and ought to have been avoided. At pre-sent there were two vacancies in the representative Peers of Scotland, in consequence of the deaths of the Earl of Airlie and of Lord Colville. Although the Act of Parliament directed that the proclamation should issue forthwith for the election of representative Peers to fill up any vacancies which might occur, by death or otherwise, no such proclamation had yet taken place in the case of the two vacancies he had just mentioned, and the consequence was, that for twenty-four days after the meeting of Parliament it was not possible for any Scotch representative Peers to be elected. The Peerage of Scotland was not therefore represented in Parliament at present as it ought to be. He wanted to know what his noble Friend the President of the Council had to urge in defence of this omission; for certain it was that the Act of Parliament had not been obeyed?
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that the Government were not to blame for the omission, as they had not received any requisition from the usual quarter; they had strictly followed the previous usage.
The EARL of EGLINTONsaid, the explanation of the noble Marquess was unsatisfactory. The clause in 5 & 6 Anne, c. 8, directed what should be done in the case of vacancies by death, and the words could not well be misunderstood. The Government could not be ignorant of the existence of the vacancies, for they

7
had appointed a new Lord Lieutenant for Forfarshire, in the room of Lord Airlie, and promotions had taken place in the Navy in consequence of the death of Lord Colville.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEcontended that no blame was due to Ministers, who had strictly observed existing precedents, and had no official intelligence of these vacancies.
The DUKE of BUCCLEUCHtook a different view of the subject, and said that, owing to the neglect of Ministers, it could not be said that the Scotch Peers were properly represented at that moment in the House of Lords.
LORD STANLEYsaid, he could very readily acquit the noble Marquess of all intentional fault; but thought the Government ought to have issued the proclamation immediately. He hoped that the notice which the noble Duke had taken of the omission would prevent similar delay in future.
Subject at an end.

THE ADDRESS IN ANSWER TO THE SPEECH.
The LORDS COMMISSIONERS'Speech having been reported by the Lord Chancellor,
The EARL of ESSEXrose to move an Address in Answer to the Speech they had just heard read. He had been too long a Member of their Lordships' assembly to have any claim to that indulgence which it was usual to concede on an occasion like the present. If, however, his seldom having had an occasion to address their Lordships would justify his asking that indulgence, he might assuredly express a hope that their Lordships would listen to him with patience whilst he addressed to them a few observations upon the gracious Speech which had been that day delivered to them on the part of Her Majesty. Since their Lordships last met in that place, it had pleased God to take to himself her late Most Excellent Majesty the Queen Dowager; and he was sure that their Lordships, as well as the other House of Parliament, and, indeed, that all classes, high and low, rich and poor, would sympathise in the deep affliction which the decease of Queen Adelaide had caused to Her Majesty, in common with the people of this country; for never had any foreign princess won so much love from the country of her adoption as Queen Adelaide had won by her exemplary goodness,
8
her unbounded and unostentatious charity, and her universal kindness to all classes and descriptions of persons. So long as those virtues were revered, so long would the memory of Queen Adelaide remain cherished in the breasts of Englishmen. He would now call their Lordships' attention to that paragraph in the Speech in which Her Majesty declared that She continued in peace and amity with Foreign Powers. He sincerely congratulated their Lordships upon that announcement. In the course of last autumn Her Majesty had been called upon, in conjunction with the French Government, to act as mediator between the Governments of Austria and Russia, on the one hand, and the Government of Turkey on the other, in consequence of certain circumstances having occurred which threatened the peace of Europe; and Her Majesty now announced that Her mediation had been attended with the happiest success. It was not for him to make any observations upon the causes of that interference; but, as far as he was informed upon the subject, it appeared that Her Majesty's mediation was a legitimate and solicited interference in the affairs of foreign nations—an interference which, when carried on with impartiality and justice, had ever added to the dignity of this country, and promoted the interests of those other countries which had been concerned in the negotiations. Her Majesty had congratulated the House and the country upon the state of peace which now happily prevailed throughout Europe, and he might say throughout the whole world. That state of peace was, indeed, a noble theme for congratulation; nay, more, when he looked back to the events of the last two years—when he recollected that during that period of time every country in Europe appeared like a revolutionary volcano—when he reflected that each day's post brought us news of the abdication of some living Sovereign, and of the overthrow of some ancient dynasty; and when he considered that the violence of the storm had desolated every nation on the Continent, and that we alone had remained not only unscathed but untouched, he thought it not only a theme for congratulation, but also a subject for deep and lasting gratitude. It was surely a matter of the deepest congratulation and thankfulness that we should have escaped, and that peace, plenty, and tranquillity at this moment prevailed to a greater degree

9
than had been known for a number of years past. He could recall at length to their Lordships' minds the causes to which this result was mainly attributable; but he would not tax their patience to that extent. He could not, however, consent to pass over those causes altogether in silence. He could not but consider that one of those causes was the high-minded feeling which prevailed among the upper classes in this country, which led them to abandon their long-rooted prejudices, and to sacrifice their self-interests whenever they were called upon to do so by the public voice for the public good. Another cause was that sound good sense of the middle classes, which led them ever to avoid extremes, and from which arose a sound and well-directed public opinion, of which it might be said that it almost invariably gained its point, and almost as invariably would be found consistent both with wisdom and justice. A third was the forbearance of the artisan and operative classes, which, though more subject at all times to privations and distresses than others, bore them with patience; and, though often tempted by the examples which had been set them in foreign countries, still always held fast to their loyalty to their Sovereign and to their allegiance to her crown. He could not, whilst he was upon this subject, refrain from expressing his praise of that power omnipotent for good in this country—he meant the public press—the members of which, however they might differ on many points of public policy, were all united in one point, namely, the support of our constitution, and with it the support of peace and tranquillity. He thought, also, that we owed our immunity from revolution to that just and moderate spirit of reform which had prevailed in the Councils and in the Legislature of this kingdom now for so many years. As education and civilisation extended, so also did the wants of mankind multiply and extend; and it became requisite that laws bearing on those wants and requirements, whether social, political, or commercial, should also undergo revision and amendment. When he looked back to the events of the last few years, and saw pestilence and famine existing in this country, and revolution ravaging the Continent, he could not but consider it as a most beneficial occurrence for England that there were in the Councils of Her Majesty men who had the sagacity to see the impolicy of the laws restricting the importation of food, and the policy of abolishing them. Those
10
laws, which would have been pregnant with mischief in a time of universal distress, were now done away with; and, of all the votes which he had ever given in that House, there was none to which he looked back with greater satisfaction than that which he had given in favour of the repeal of the laws preventing the free importation of food. Her Majesty had also congratulated their Lordships on the cessation of that terrible epidemic which had carried desolation into the houses of the people during the last autumn; and after acknowledging that Almighty God in his mercy had been pleased to arrest the progress of mortality and to stay this fearful pestilence, Her Majesty had recommended the adoption of sanitary measures, observing that She "is persuaded that we shall best evince our gratitude by vigilant precautions against the more obvious causes of sickness, and an enlightened consideration for those who are most exposed to its attacks." At all times their Lordships were disposed to pay every attention to promote the interest of those classes who were in less fortunate circumstances; and he was sure the House would feel itself bound to take every step to ameliorate the condition of those who were exposed to evils to which the more affluent classes were not subject. There was a strong feeling abroad as to the sanitary regulations respecting the labouring classes. It was well known that associations had been established for the erection of lodging-houses for the labouring classes, and those lodgings had been much sought after by those classes; and as regarded their promoters, in a commercial point of view, they had given satisfaction. Her Majesty had next expressed her congratulations on the improved condition of commerce and manufactures. If they looked to the immense increase which had taken place in the exports last year, and to other results accompanying it, they would see how greatly the predictions had been falsified of some of the pretended friends of the farmers—for they had asserted that the admission of foreign corn to this country would not lead to an increase of the exports of manufactures, as the foreigners would take nothing but bullion for their corn, and consequently the coffers of the Bank would soon be drained, and the revenue would be affected. The only answer which he would make to these predictions, was by simply stating that during the last year the importation of food had been greater than was ever known before; that the export of our manufactures

11
was greater than was ever known before; and that the coffers of the Bank of England were fuller than was ever known before. Would to God that some of the millions which were now lying idle, could be exported to our countrymen on the other side of the Channel, where it only required peace and quiet to induce capital which would render it the most fertile and richest of lands! He could not help expressing his satisfaction at the kind and cordial reception which Her Majesty had met with in Ireland. If the loyalty there displayed could have been manifested under happier circumstances, he had no doubt it would lead to the happiest results. It was satisfactory to find, with regard to the measures introduced last year for the benefit of that country, for the sale of Encumbered Estates in Ireland, they had given great satisfaction, and that the Rate in Aid Bill had been productive of much good. Her Majesty had also expressed her deep sympathy with the distress stated to exist in many of our agricultural districts. No man could regret the existence of that distress more than he did; but in expressing that regret he must also state his conviction—a conviction which was shared by many wealthy merchants, and by many, he would not say a majority of, landlords—that the distress was not of a permanent but of a temporary character; that it arose in a great measure from the panic which had been so industriously and so unwisely kept up by those who set themselves up as the farmers' friends, but which was not shared in by those owners and occupiers of land who had not allowed themselves to be driven wild, and to have their intellects obfuscated by agricultural agitation. On the advantages accruing from the cheapness of food, he could not refrain from quoting a letter which he had received very recently from a gentleman who took a very active part in the parochial affairs of this metropolis. [Here the noble Lord read a letter stating that in the parish of Marylebone there had been a saving in the rates of 11,000 l. in the year, owing to the extreme cheapness of food; and that in another parish there had also been a saving of 7,000 l in the same time.] On the other great measure of last Session, the repeal of the navigation laws, Her Majesty assured the Parliament that the Governments of the United States of America and of Sweden had taken steps to secure to our ships in their ports advantages similar to
12
those which their ships now enjoyed in our ports; and Her Majesty had further informed them that She had received from nearly every other State still having navigation laws of a restrictive character, assurances that the character of those laws should speedily undergo investigation. It was satisfactory to hear that the repeal of our navigation laws had been productive of beneficial effects. So far from shipbuilding decreasing in our ports, it had increased, as he was informed, at Sunderland, at Hull, and in the river Thames. The shipbuilders in all our ports were in full employment, and were not only building vessels for the merchants of our own country, but were also receiving orders to build vessels for foreign countries. That did not look like despair and ruin; on the contrary, it was indicative of the energy and spirit of our merchants, which had rendered this the first naval country in the world. Their Lordships had been informed that day that one of the measures which would speedily be brought before them would be a measure for the better government of the Australian colonies. Without knowing what that measure was, he would only express a hope that similar measures would be carried into effect with respect to our other colonies. He hoped that the time was not far distant when a greater degree of freedom would be extended to all our colonies in the management of their internal concerns and the nomination to their civil offices. He could not but think that such an extension of freedom would be for the benefit both of the colonies and of the mother country; it would give the colonies the power of self-government, and it would lead them to supply from their own resources those governmental advances which were now pressing so heavily on the resources of the mother country; it would thus induce between both a feeling more like that of child and parent than that of dependant and master, which now existed. Having thanked their Lordships for the patience with which they had hitherto heard him, he would conclude by expressing his fullest concurrence in the last sentence of Her Majesty's Speech, namely, that by combining liberty with order, by preserving what was valuable, and amending what was defective, their Lordships would sustain the fabric of our institutions as the abode and the shelter of a free and happy people. The noble Earl concluded by moving the following humble Address:—

13
MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN,
WE, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal Subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, beg Leave to return to Tour Majesty our humble Thanks for the gracious Speech which Your Majesty has commanded to be made to both Houses of Parliament.
WE humbly thank Your Majesty for the Assurance of Your Majesty's great Satisfaction in again having recourse to the Advice and Assistance of Your Majesty's Parliament.
WE condole with Your Majesty on the Decease of Her Majesty Queen Adelaide, which has caused Your Majesty deep Affliction; and we entirely concur with Your Majesty in the Belief that the extensive Charity and exemplary Virtues of Her late Majesty will always render Her Memory dear to the Nation.
WE beg humbly to express the Satisfaction with which we learn that Your Majesty happily continues in Peace and Amity with Foreign Powers.
WE thank Your Majesty for informing us that in the course of the Autumn Differences of a serious Character arose between the Governments of Austria and Russia on the one hand, and the Sublime Ports on the other, in regard to the Treatment of a considerable Number of Persons who, after the Termination of the Civil War in Hungary, had taken refuge in the Turkish Territory; and we rejoice to learn that Explanations which took place between the Turkish and Imperial Governments have fortunately removed any Danger to the Peace of Europe which might have arisen out of these Differences.
WE humbly convey to Your Majesty our Thanks for informing us that Your Majesty, having been appealed to on this Occasion by the Sultan, united Your Majesty's Efforts with those of the Government of France, to which a similar Appeal had been made, in order to assist, by the Employment of Your Majesty's good Offices, in effecting an amicable Settlement of those Differences in a Manner consistent with the Dignity and Independence of the Porte.
WE thank Your Majesty for acquainting us that Your Majesty has been engaged in Communications with Foreign States upon the Measures which might be rendered necessary by the Relaxation of the Restrictions formerly imposed by the Navigation Laws of this Country.
WE rejoice to learn that the Governments of the United States of America and of Sweden have promptly taken Steps to secure to British Ships in the Ports of their respective Countries Advantages similar to those which their own Ships now enjoy in British Ports.
WITH regard to those Foreign States whose Navigation Laws have hither to been of a restrictive
14
Character, we learn with Gratification that Your Majesty has received from nearly all of them Assurances which induce Your Majesty to hope that our Example will speedily lead to a great and general Diminution of those Obstacles which previously existed to a free Intercourse by Sea between the Nations of the World.
WE unite with Your Majesty in lamenting that in the Summer and Autumn of the past Year the United Kingdom was again visited by the Ravages of the Cholera; but we are thankful to Almighty God, who in His Mercy was pleased to arrest the Progress of Mortality, and to stay this fearful Pestilence.
WE humbly concur with Your Majesty in the Persuasion, that we shall best evince our Gratitude by vigilant Precautions against the more obvious Causes of Sickness, and an enlightened Consideration for those who are most exposed to its Attacks.
WE humbly assure Your Majesty that we rejoice to be informed that Your Majesty in Your Majesty's late Visit to Ireland, derived the highest Gratification from the Loyalty and Attachment manifested by all Classes of Your Majesty's Subjects; and we learn with Satisfaction, that although the Effects of former Years of Scarcity are painfully felt in that Part of the United Kingdom, they are mitigated by the present Abundance of Food, and the Tranquillity which prevails.
WE regard with great Satisfaction the improved Condition of Commerce and Manufactures; and, whilst sharing with Your Majesty in the Regret with which Your Majesty has observed the Complaints which in many Parts of the Kingdom have proceeded from the Owners and Occupiers of Land, and humbly concurring with Your Majesty in lamenting greatly that any Portion of Your Majesty's Subjects should be suffering Distress, we unite with Your Majesty in the Feelings of sincere Gratification with which Your Majesty witnesses the increased Enjoyment of the Necessaries and Comforts of Life which Cheapness and Plenty have bestowed upon the great Body of Your Majesty's People.
WE express our Thanks to Your Majesty for informing us that some of the Measures which were postponed at the End of the last Session for Want of Time for their Consideration will be again laid before us, and that among the most important of these is one for the better Government of the Australian Colonies.
WE humbly thank Your Majesty for having directed various Measures to be prepared for the Improvement of the Condition of Ireland, and for acquainting us that the Mischiefs arising from Party Processions, the Defects of the Laws regulating the Relations of Landlord and Tenant, the

15
imperfect State of the Grand Jury Acts, and the diminished Number of Electors for Members to serve in Parliament, will, together with other Matters of serious Consequence, form the Subjects of Measures to be submitted for our Consideration.
WE unite in the Satisfaction with which Your Majesty has learnt that the Measures which have been already passed for the Promotion of the Public Health are in a Course of gradual Adoption; and we concur with Tour Majesty in the Hope that, both in the Metropolis and in various Parts of the United Kingdom, we shall be enabled to make further Progress in the Removal of Evils which affect the Health and Well-being of Your Majesty's Subjects.
WE humbly join with Your Majesty in acknowledging that the Favour of Divine Providence has hitherto preserved this Kingdom from the Wars and Convulsions which during the last Two Years have shaken so many States on the Continent of Europe; and we heartily concur in the Hope and Belief expressed by Your Majesty, that by combining Liberty with Order, by preserving what is valuable, and amending what is defective, we shall sustain the Fabric of our Institutions as the Abode and the Shelter of a free and happy People.
LORD METHUENsaid, that he was fully aware that the high and distinguished honour conferred on him in selecting him to second the Address, in reply to the Speech of Her Majesty, could have been more worthily bestowed, and that many noble Lords might have been selected, whose competency for the discharge of so important a duty could not for a moment be questioned. He would, however, as briefly as possible, advert to a few topics contained in the Speech. Their Lordships were fully aware that great fears had prevailed in the public mind as to a probable rupture taking place between Russia and Austria on the one side, and the Sublime Porte on the other; but these apprehensions had, through the mediation of England, in conjunction with France, happily been dispelled. It must be a great source of satisfaction to their Lordships that this result had been brought about by the united exertions of those two powerful countries who were formerly the greatest rivals in the arts of war, but who now were happily allied for the promotion of the blessings of peace. The next matter of congratulation was the favourable terms with which the Government of the United States and of Sweden had met us in securing to British ships in their respective ports advantages similar to those which their own ships now enjoyed in British
16
ports. It should be a matter of satisfaction to witness the gradual improvement that was daily taking place in the aspect of affairs; and, when he contemplated the great increase in the revenue of the country—which was an infallible indication of the prosperity of the manufacturing and industrial interests—he could not refrain from congratulating their Lordships on that very visible improvement. He regretted that he could not express the same feelings of congratulation as to the state of the agricultural interest, as he was aware that many complaints had arisen as to its distress from various parts of the country. He was aware that the greatest panic had existed in many parts, which was owing to false alarms in regard to the effect of free-trade measures, and which panic had been greatly increased by the agitation of the protectionist party since last harvest, in consequence of the decline in the price of corn. On this point, however, he would refer to the fact, that in the years 1822, 1823, and 1824, when foreign corn could not be introduced for consumption, unless home-grown wheat was above 80 s. the quarter, prices of agricultural produce were lower than they had been during the last year. This certainly might be attributed at that period to the resumption of cash payments; but the same event also occurred in 1835. He thought there were at the present time several causes to which the lowness of grain might at present be attributed. Let them contemplate the enormous amount of capital locked up in railway speculation, together with the immense sums locked up in the coffers of the Bank of England, as in all the minor banks throughout the kingdom; and then he thought they would be of opinion, as he unquestionably was, that all that amount has been withdrawn from its legitimate course of application, and that the cry that had been raised by the protectionist party could have no other effect than to damage the agricultural interests. It was to be expected that agriculture would have its days of adversity as well as its days of prosperity; but he felt it was the duty of the true friends of that interest to encourage rather than to depress the feelings of the farmer. He could not but express on that occasion his strong dissent from many of the doctrines laid down and promulgated by that party, and equally strongly deprecate the conduct and language of some persons out of doors, who were most opposed to the agricultural interest. Some of these

17
persons were men of acknowledged talent; but instead of promoting the best interests of the country by encouraging confidence, they pandered to the worst passions of the multitude, they exerted themselves to set class against class, and with words of "peace" in their mouths endeavoured to excite the most bitter feelings of animosity between different interests. He should not have ventured to address them in that manner, but that he felt the necessities of the period called for such denunciations of the doctrines and practices resorted to by those who were in truth the worst opponents of the permanent interests of the country. He had much pleasure in seconding the Address in reply to the Speech of Her Most Gracious Majesty.
On the Question being put,
The EARL of STRADBROKEsaid, that he should consider himself to be wanting in his duty, if he abstained from embracing this, the earliest, opportunity of declaring to their Lordships his experience of the result of their late experiments in free-trade legislation—the experience, namely, of deep and great agricultural distress, the existence of which was admitted in the Speech from the Throne, but which, as he gathered from the speech of the Mover of the Address, was to be characterised as merely of a temporary nature. Was he to understand that any such feeling as that expressed by the noble Earl was participated in by Her Majesty's Ministers? His own conviction was, that this distress was not of a temporary character, but would be permanent, at least so long as they persisted in the present course of legislation. In attempting to trace the causes of this distress, it was almost needless for him to refer to what had occurred in the long war which had lasted almost without intermission from 1793 to 1815, in the course of which period such large sums of money were expended in the cultivation of the soil, with the view of enabling this country to produce a sufficient supply of grain, so as to be independent of foreign producers, for the increasing population of the country, the result of which necessarily was an increase in the rental of the landed proprietors. When peace returned in 1815, serious apprehensions were entertained by statesmen of all parties as to the effects that would be produced by opening the ports to an unrestricted supply of foreign corn. So strong was the impression on this subject, that a law was passed by large majorities that foreign
18
corn should not be allowed to be introduced into this country for home consumption unless the price had attained a certain height. When their Lordships considered who were the advocates of that measure of limited protection, they would perceive that it was no party measure. Mr. Coke, then in the zenith of health and power, who was one of the greatest friends of agriculture that this country had ever possessed, strongly supported that measure; and he believed a noble Earl opposite, who was at that time one of the representatives of Yorkshire, also did so. The effect of that measure had been to ensure prosperity to the agricultural interest for several years. He admitted, with the noble Lord who had seconded the Address, that there was a great depreciation in the price of agricultural produce in the years 1822 and 1823. This had occurred, although there had been little or no importations of foreign corn; but he (the Earl of Stradbroke) was prepared to state, and he believed the noble Marquess the President of the Council would not deny the fact, that that state of things was entirely owing to the alteration in the currency. Shortly before that time, one of the most distinguished Members of the late Government had introduced a measure, which he induced the Legislature to sanction, which had the effect of enhancing the monetary interest in this country 25 per cent, and in the same proportion depreciating the value of land. He well remembered the great and grievous distress which pervaded the agricultural interest of this country at that time—he remembered how slow the reduction of rents by the landlords was, and the impossibility which existed after a short time of collecting those rents, resulting in a great number of the landlords of this country being compelled to quit their homes for the Continent, under the pretence of educating their families, but really for the purpose of reducing their establishments. He remembered, too, how many farmers were driven to pass the remainder of their days in the small towns or workhouses, whilst a great portion of the labouring population were doomed to pass their days in idleness and their nights in debauchery. He would now advert to the measure introduced in 1828 by the Government of the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington), whom he had the pleasure of seeing in his place, the principles of which he supported, although he had voted against some of the details, believing that under the altered state of the

19
currency, the protection afforded by that Bill was amply sufficient, and that under reduced rents a certain amount of prosperity had returned, leaving only the sting behind of labourers being paid partly or entirely out of the poor-rates, which misfortune had occurred under the previous distress. The next period to which he would refer was 1834, when the Poor Law Amendment Act was introduced into Parliament by a noble Lord, now no more, than which none more just or more favourable to the agricultural interest and the labouring population was ever brought before the Legislature of this kingdom. The effect of that Act was to improve the condition of the agricultural classes, by increased attention to the aged, by giving better instruction to the children, and, last not least, a great demand for employment, and the immediate effect of which was a reduction of rates to the extent of 40 per cent. That year and the following we had most productive harvests, and prices fell, in consequence, from 60 s. to below 40 s. However, there was no distress. [" Hear, hear!" from the Ministerial benches.] There was no distress; and there was none, because that low price was the result of abundance. He begged their Lordships always to keep that in view, because he could not imagine two subjects more utterly distinct than the present low price, and that of 1835. He now arrived at the year 1839, when, owing to deficient harvests, both in this country and throughout Europe, the price rose to 70 s. 8d. on the average of the year; yet, notwithstanding that high price, the exports of that year amounted to 53,000,000 l.; whilst in 1842, when the price of corn was only 57 s. 9d., the exports were only 47,000,000 l. In 1842 Sir R. Peel introduced into Parliament another alteration in the corn law, to which he (the Earl of Stradbroke) gave his support, conceiving that the time had arrived when a further remission of protection might be safely conceded, the more especially as he believed that that measure would secure greater Steadiness of prices than had hitherto prevailed. In 1846 the whole course of things was changed. The leader of a party, who during a long life had advocated protective duties, all at once turned round and advocated their repeal, and introduced a measure which had resulted in the permanent reduction of the price of corn. In 1848 the harvest was bad, and the agriculturists were told that the deep distress which then
20
afflicted them was owing to that circumstance. In 1849, however, the harvest was abundant; still the result had been, not an equitable return for their labour, but a reduction of prices to their present level. Under these circumstances, could their Lordships doubt that great distress existed? Were they not aware that the union-houses in the agricultural districts were filled with poor? Could they doubt that the natural result of this was to impoverish the land of this country; and was he not justified in stating that the result of free trade must be permanently and in a high degree injurious to the landed interest of this country? Upon this point, therefore, he ventured to move the following Amendment to the Address—namely, that after the word "manufactures," in the third line of the thirteenth paragraph, there should be inserted the following words:—
"We regret, however, to be compelled humbly to represent to Your Majesty that in many parts of the United Kingdom, and especially in Ireland, the various Classes of Your Majesty's Subjects connected with the Cultivation of the Soil are labouring under severe Distress, mainly attributable, in our Opinion, to recent legislative Enactments, the Operation of which is aggravated by the Pressure of Local Taxation."
The EARL of DESARTsaid, that in supporting the Amendment it was not without a feeling of regret that he felt himself compelled to stand in the way of that unanimity which it was so desirable should exist in respect to the Address to be presented in return to Her Majesty's roost gracious Speech. But when he had read over that Speech, and found that a mere regret was expressed for the agricultural distress which existed throughout the kingdom, but more particularly in that unfortunate country with which he was connected, because it possessed less capital to bear up against the heavy restrictions imposed upon her; and when he found that that regret was unaccompanied by any suggestions for its alleviation, but that the acknowledged distress of that most important interest was, as it were, cloaked and passed over by a reference to the prosperity of their commerce and manufactures—that interest which their forefathers considered the great and vital interest of the country, and upon which all other classes rested—an interest upon which was based the security and the well-being of the country—he felt called on to join in the opinion of his noble Friend, and to support the Amendment which he moved. There could

21
be little doubt that agricultural distress prevailed generally in this country; but he could give, from his own personal observation and knowledge, such a picture of its extent and intensity in Ireland, that he was surprised it did not call forth something stronger than a casual expression of regret. As the chairman of a board of guardians in a highly-favoured portion of Ireland, he could state that at that moment, even in that part of Ireland, all interests, landlords, labourers, and tenants, were fast progressing to utter annihilation and ruin, and that there was more distress in Ireland occasioned by the legislation of man than had been inflicted by the visitation of Providence. Of the distress of the fanners there could be no better proof than their inability to meet their engagements to their landlords and their other kinds of liabilities. This was the first year that the landlords of his part of the country had not been able to get their rents. He knew proprietors who made large deductions, amounting to from 20 to 25 per cent, in their rents, and yet, notwithstanding these reductions, they had not been able to get the miserable residue which was due to them. He was not surprised at this when he saw the poor-rate collector anticipating the landlord, and demanding for one rate, to cover about six months, 4s. or 5s. in the pound on the original valuation of the land when prices ranged from 30 s. to 35 s. a barrel for corn, whereas this year they had fallen from 17 s. to 22 s. These collectors go about in some instances seizing the corn crops in the haggard, which were barely sufficient to meet the demand of the poor-rate collector alone. When he saw such a state of things as this, he looked with the greatest dread at the prospects for the coming year. He would not allude to the more distressed districts of the west, because he was sure noble Lords who were connected with that part of Ireland would tell the House with greater effect what came within their own observation. What was the effect of this state of things on employment? They were often reminded that property had its duties as well as its rights; but if farmers were not unwilling, but unable, to pay their rents, how could the landlords or the farmers employ the labouring population? They must, on the contrary, turn out any extra labourers, and retain only such as were absolutely necessary to carry on their occupations. He had received a letter from Lord Shannon, whom he was sorry he did
22
not see in his place, in which he stated that he had undertaken large drainage works in Cork, but he was obliged this year to give them up altogether. Six hundred men were in one fell swoop dismissed, and sent to fill the walls of the already overcrowded poorhouse. They were told that they ought to expend capital upon the land, for the purposes of improving cultivation to meet that foreign competition which you must now undergo. He would ask them, what inducement had they to expend more capital on that upon which they had already lost that which they had invested? He was sick of that cry of "invest capital in the land." Capital would find its own level. It would invest itself where it was most profitable; and if its application to land was not a profitable investment, it was no wonder that persons could not be found so to apply it. A noble Lord who sat near him (Lord Lucan), had, with great spirit and energy, brought some farms of his to rival those in England and Scotland; but, though he offered them, with excellent farm buildings, at from 12 s. to 18 s. an acre, he could not induce any one to invest their capital in them. He did not think they ought to give the farmer that excuse for not paying his rent. Why, they must tell him the truth. When they found that land was depreciated to so great an extent, the truth must be known, that the landlord and the tenant must share the depreciation in the value of that from whence their profits came. When such was the melancholy picture of the whole kingdom, although the farmers of this country might be able to weather the storm for some time longer than others, it is but a paltry comfort to hear that manufactures were in a thriving condition. He, for one, did not place much reliance upon statistics, but he found that the agricultural and landed interests far exceeded in numbers and value the manufacturing interest, and he did not think that a class of such vast importance should be sacrificed to the prosperity of a few. He believed that the prosperity of manufactures, of which they boasted, was but temporary and ephemeral, and, perhaps, would for the future be more so than it had hitherto been. In the history of this country they found that periodical prosperity was followed by a reaction; and at the present time he did not think that there was more prosperity than they experienced on former occasions, which had been followed by great distress and suffering. In answer

23
to those who maintained that the present prosperity of manufactures was owing to the repeal of the corn laws and the other measures of free trade, he would ask noble Lords to compare the returns of five years at different periods—that of five years preceding 1849, and the five years preceding 1838—let them compare the amount of the consumption of that great home mauufacture, cotton, and they would find that in the former period, when the protective system of policy was in operation, the increase in the manufacture of that staple article was no less than 28 per cent; while in the other period, under a free-trade system, the increase had only amounted to 13 per cent:—

Cotton imported for Home Consumption.

1833

lbs. 287,000,000

1834

good harvests

303,400,000

1835

348,100,000

1836.

347,400,000

1837

(panic)

365,700,000

Average for five years

324,320,080

1838

416,700,000

1844

good harvests

544,000,000

1845

606,600,000

1846

614,300,000

1847

(panic)

441,400,000

1848

576,600,000

Average for five years

556,580,000

1849

629,600,000

He would remind the House also that the price of corn in 1838 was not less than 64 s. the quarter, and that a large quantity of it had been taken out of bond at 70 s. in September of that year. That was a proof that manufacturing prosperity was not dependent upon low prices. He did not mean to state that anything had been positively proved, but he thought the argument that the prosperity of the manufacturers was owing to free trade, had been entirely disproved by what had occurred in the previous period. The great advantage the manufacturers had derived from the free-trade system was, that they could send out goods so cheap as to command the markets abroad, although the prices were barely remunerative. It should, however, be borne in mind that that exportation might, at any moment, be stopped by a glut of the markets, or hostile tariffs, which, while adding to the revenue of the imposer, would diminish the consumption of English goods by the consequent rise of price, and bring down the manufacturer to a scale of cheapness unremunerative to him and crushing to the labourer; or compel
24
him to pay for foreign produce in bullion, leaving mills idle and operatives starving, and enabling the foreigner, with raised prices at home, owing to the influx of our bullion, doubly to profit by the unnatural cheapness of our productions. He would not go further into the discussion of the principles of free trade. In conclusion, however, he would say simply one word as to the charge that had been made against them by their adversaries. It was alleged that the landed interest wished to provoke a war of classes. Now, in the name of the noble Lords with whom he acted, he would say that they utterly deprecated any such object. It was not he and the noble Lords who thought with him who were anxious to provoke such a war; but it was the men who, for their own selfish ends, had, by illegal combinations, attacked the other interests of the country. It was they who, for their own selfish purposes, were arraying one class against another. For his part, the only object he had in view was to promote and preserve the best interests of the country. Feeling that the distress of the agricultural classes was not a temporary evil, but likely to be permanent, and being anxious, to the best of his power, to preserve them from annihilation, he should give his cordial support to the Amendment of the noble Lord near him; and he thought that by so doing he would best prevent those who appeared bent upon destroying all that was most sacred in the institutions of the country from succeeding in their designs, and enable England to maintain the rank she had hitherto held among the nations of the earth.
The EARL of CARLISLEsaid, that as an Amendment had been moved to the Address, though in a very temperate, considerate, and able manner, by the noble Earl opposite, perhaps their Lordships would allow him to offer a few observations on the position of the immediate question which they had now to decide—which was, whether their Lordships would do well to alter the Address which had been moved by his noble Friend behind him, and to substitute for it the Amendment of the noble Earl. Now, in adverting to the difference which that Amendment introduced into the substance of the Address, he had to observe that it was confined within a very narrow range. It did not pretend to controvert that which the Address asserted, that Her Majesty was able to congratulate Her people on "the improved condition of commerce and manufactures," which, though it might appear in a paltry light to

25
the noble Earl who had just sat down, he (the Earl of Carlisle) regarded as affecting some of the greatest and most enduring interests in this empire. The Speech adverted also to the distress prevailing among the owners and occupiers of land. The noble Earl complained that the Speech of Her Majesty only expressed "regret" at the distress to which the agricultural portion of the community had been subjected, and thought "regret" was but a cold word to use; but he had to observe that, in speaking of that distress, the actual words used were, not "regret," but "greatly laments;" this, at best, therefore, was but a philological difference in the words of the Address and Amendment. The material difference was this: Her Majesty and Her Government did not deny, but admitted, the distress which prevailed among the owners and occupiers of land; therefore, in dealing with this Address and with the Amendment, he would advise their Lordships to look not so much at the actual expressions contained in either, but to consider the views with which the Amendment was proposed, the hopes by which it was suggested, the construction which might be put upon it, and the results which would follow from its actual adoption. There was no great difference in the actual force of the terms employed in the Address and the Amendment. The Amendment, indeed, referred to local burdens; but he thought their Lordships would agree that any discussion with respect to the exact incidence of local burdens and their distribution, would be more conveniently and properly deferred till the question was regularly brought before the House. The Amendment, however, attributed the distress under which the agricultural interests suffered to recent legislative changes. It was his opinion that if their Lordships sanctioned the proposed Amendment, and agreed to substitute it for the original words of the Address, they would by so doing allow it to be understood throughout the whole length and breadth of the land, that they threw a doubt upon the recent legislation, were prepared to reconsider it, and indeed were willing to reverse it. Now this, he thought, would be a very mistaken and a very disastrous conclusion to arrive at; and it was upon that ground that he called upon them not to temporise upon the subject, and by so doing give rise to such delusions, but to give an unqualified negative to the Amendment which had just been moved. The noble Earl who seconded the Amendment did so
26
with a degree of feeling which he was afraid he had almost drawn from his own experience of the present distressed state of Ireland. No person was less disposed than himself to underrate the distress which prevailed in that country; but he confessed that when, from the experience of the last three years, it was plain that Ireland could be brought through—he knew he could only barely with truth make use of such an expression—that horrible state of destitution and suffering to which she had been subjected only by the plenty and cheapness of the corn brought from abroad, he did not think that it was in connexion with the state of Ireland that their Lordships could quarrel with or censure the system of free trade. He would not pretend to follow the noble Earl who moved the Amendment throughout the very clear and able retrospect which he presented to their Lordships of all the legislation connected with agriculture and corn; but when the noble Earl adverted to the law of 1815, and to the mimimum price of 80 s. per quarter for corn, which was then laid down as the price to be attained before corn could be imported into the country—and then proceeded to allude to the law of 1828, and to the sum of 56 s. which was then calculated as the turning price at which corn might be imported—though if he (the Earl of Carlisle) rightly recollected the discussions of that time, the price was assumed to be rather from 63 s. to 65 s.—when the noble Earl alluded to the effects of this legislation, he surely must have forgotten that when it was proposed to admit corn at a less price than 80 s., or less than 63 s., they constantly and regularly heard the same bodings and anticipations of distress which at the present time so painfully met their ears; and as the agricultural interests and farming energies of this country had overcome the embarrassments anticipated from the introduction of foreign corn at lower prices than 80 s. and 65 s., so he hoped, even if corn was destined not to rise above the average of 41 s. per quarter, yet that, even with that desponding anticipation, the agricultural energies of this country would know how to rise above the difficulty. During the whole of the discussions which had recently taken place upon this subject, and throughout that conflict of opinion which had pervaded the length and breadth of the land, whether in the press or on the platform—and upon some of the platforms there had been some, now here, who had not been backward in expressing their opinions upon the subject—but throughout these discussions

27
there had been a great deal of nice and ingenious calculation bestowed upon the question at what cost corn could be grown, so as to leave a fair profit to the grower, and at what range of prices the cultivation of the land could be profitably Carried on. He was not disposed to deny either the pertinency or importance of such calculations; and it would be a strange thing indeed if he who, like many of their Lordships, derived all he possessed, and all he ever hoped to possess, from the land, and who, like many of their Lordships, had to labour under a very oppressive amount of fixed incumbrance, derived from generations who had gone before him—it would be strange indeed if he were indifferent to the issue of such calculations or speculations as to the value of landed property. He was one, therefore, who could fully acquiesce in that portion of Her Majesty's Speech in which she lamented that any portion of Her subjects, such as the owners and occupiers of land, should be suffering distress. But of course the extent of that concern, and the degree of his alarm, would be somewhat in proportion to the apprehended duration of the distress, and the fact whether it was occasional or exceptional, or whether it was produced by special and exceptional causes not liable continually to prevail or constantly to recur; for in that case it would be plain that the agricultural interest were undergoing that which every other pursuit, every other profession, every other branch of industry, and every source of emolument—seemed destined by the laws of the universe to undergo, and from which laws of vicissitude and change agriculture has, in the most marked degree, whether protected or unprotected, never been exempt. The question, then, which their Lordships had to bear in view, in deciding upon this subject, was, whether it was absolutely certain that the present distress might not be temporary and casual in its nature and duration. It had been already stated, in the course of this evening, that the prices of corn have twice, within the memory of many of their Lordships, been lower even when agriculture was basking under the full glow of protection, and rejoicing in the mid sunshine of legislative favour; and it had been even said that there was, at those periods, no great amount of distress. If he turned, however, to the statements of those Gentlemen who represented the agricultural interest at those periods, if their Lordships referred to their speeches in Parliament, to the Motions
28
which they made, they would at least find that the cry was then very little less loud than it was at the present day. What, however, he wanted their Lordships to bear in mind was, that after a series of discussions, continued through many years, which had engrossed the attention, swayed the convictions, and enlisted the passions of all classes of the community, they had resolved upon trying a great experiment. He thought it had been continually, repeatedly, and most laudably avowed by all parties, by the most friendly as well as the most hostile to the change, that as it was settled by the Imperial Legislature that a great experiment was to be made, it ought to be fully and fairly tested. Now, since the first fair commencement of the operation of the law, not one whole year had elapsed. So much then with respect to time. Then, so far, in his humble judgment at least, from no special and exceptional causes having been at work throughout the period of the application of the experiment, there perhaps never was a time in the whole history of the world in which so many causes, which seemed to him extraordinary and exceptional, had been heaped together, all of which bore in the most marked and prominent manner upon the prices of corn. He needed only to mention to their Lordships the famine in Ireland, the extensive and successive failures of the potato crop—the main article of subsistence for the people of that country, as well as in many other parts of the united kingdom—and the unparalleled revolutionary convulsions which had pervaded every nation and every corner of the Continent, and which in their consequences had most materially interfered with the growth and consumption of corn in all those regions which they had affected. He would leave entirely out of consideration any reference to the nature of the seasons, although they had a marked and most disturbing effect on the prices of the last few years, because they could not be considered as exceptional causes, inasmuch as variety and vicissitudes of seasons must be expected at all times. It was at present a controverted point by all the most enlightened friends and followers of agriculture, whether the cheapness and lowness of prices at present so much complained of, was owing most to the great abundance of the last harvest, or the great deficiency and bad quality of the harvest of 1848. What, however, he had to contend was, that with such very circumscribed limits for the trial of the experiment upon which the country had resolved, and with such a

29
marked prevalence of special and exceptional causes during the time of the experiment, it would be most unfair, and altogether preposterous, in his judgment, to assume, that the experiment had been tested, that it was exhausted, and that the change in the policy of the country was to be reconsidered, condemned, and reversed. They were not, therefore, in his judgment, in a position to pronounce upon what would be the natural and permanent fruits of the great experiment which they had agreed to make. It was impossible to assume at what cost corn could be permanently grown in the country, or whether the same abundance of foreign import would at all times exist. His own impression was not one of despondency, discouragement, or despair, upon this subject. It was a point upon which he had no right to palm any opinion of his own upon their Lordships; all he wished to enforce upon them was, that they were not then in a condition to pronounce that the experiment had been fairly made, and that corn could not be grown so as to realise better profits than at present, or that the same abundance of foreign imports into this country would continue. He owned, however, that he could not honestly stop there, or confine himself within those ambiguous and hypothetical limits; and he felt bound in honesty, speaking for himself, to tell their Lordships that even if he were convinced that the average price of corn would never ascend One farthing higher than at present, still he was not prepared to reverse the policy upon which they had entered, or to revert to the old system of protection. He would tell their Lordships why he would not consent to do so. He had referred to the calculations which had been so largely entered upon with respect to the remunerative prices of farming operations, and had pronounced his own inability to give any opinion upon them; but it seemed to him that to attempt to square any such matter by fixed and uniform rules would be a most delusive operation. Each case must be governed by its own circumstances. Each farm must be considered in its own speciality, with due reference to its position, its nearness to the markets, to the nature of its soil, to the various growths and crops for which it was adapted, the amount of available skill and capital which could be applied to it, and an infinite variety of qualities, dispositions, and means, on the part of both landlord and tenant; and if the imperious dictation of circumstances, and the permanent condition of the farmer's profession,
30
should prescribe permanent alterations in the relations between landlord and tenant, it was between those parties themselves that such alterations in their mutual relations must be adjusted. That sentence in Her Majesty's Speech, which he had already quoted, in which She laments that any portion of Her subjects should be suffering distress, and in which She makes special allusion to the owners and occupiers of land, is followed by another sentence, which states, "But it is a source of sincere gratification to Her Majesty to witness the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life which cheapness and plenty have bestowed upon the great body of Her people." So, too, behind the condition of the farmers and landlords to whom he had already alluded, there loomed forth a far wider and more extensive interest—that of the people at large, to which all other interests must be secondary and subordinate. Now he believed that the Speech of Her Majesty rightly assumed the ease which had been given to the great body of the people by the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life, which cheapness and plenty had bestowed upon them. This cheerful assertion in the Speech of Her Majesty, Her Majesty's Ministers thought they had a right to ground upon the information and advice which reached them from all parts of the country—from the great increase in the imports of those articles which were justly termed "the comforts and necessaries of life." Not only had there been a great increase in the importations of those articles, but there had been also a great and growing increase in their consumption. Her Majesty's Ministers considered themselves justified in advising the expression he referred to, by the statements and details which had reached them from all the great marts of business and of commerce—from all the principal manufacturing and industrial towns, and even from some whose prosperity seemed to have been somewhat oh the wane—he might mention such towns as Leeds and Sheffield, towns which, from local causes, had been looked upon as having suffered permanent declension from prosperity, but from which they now heard that a greater amount of industry and business had not been known in them for a long series of years. But it was not even to the regions of commerce and business, or the crowded marts of industry and employment, that accounts of improvement were confined. Her Majesty's Ministers had procured returns showing the total number

31
of paupers receiving indoor and outdoor relief on the 1st day of Jannary, 1849, and for the same day of 1850, in 602 unions in England and Wales. He did not wish any statement which he might make on this subject to be carried too far. He had no doubt that there were many districts in the country in which the owners and occupiers of land were most laudably exerting themselves, even in spite of, and in the face of, their own distressed and impoverished condition, in keeping the men whom they employed from the workhouse, by employing them upon works which would probably not prove remunerative to themselves—he had no doubt whatever that such was the case, to a considerable extent, and he did not therefore wish greater stress to be laid upon the returns of the number of paupers than was due; but still, in looking to the whole aspect of the country, they had a right to assume, as one material element of its condition, the aggregate sum of relief which at different periods was given to the most indigent classes of the country. From the returns which had been presented to the Government, it appeared that in the number of paupers receiving relief on the 1st of January, 1850, as compared with the same period of 1849, there had been a decrease of about 7 per cent. He was quite aware that it was not so great a decrease as might be desired—
LORD STANLEY: Does the return include the whole of the parishes of England and Wales?
The EARL of CARLISLE: It was a return from 602 parishes, in different parts of the country; no selection had been made of them, and it included all the parishes from which returns can be procured by the Poor Law Commissioners. This decrease in the amount of pauperism was not confined to the manufacturing districts or manufacturing counties. He was quite willing to admit that in the neighbourhood of large manufacturing cities and marts of industry, a decrease might have been expected, in consequence of the increase of business in these places; but the decrease is by no means confined to those places. In Bedfordshire, which was not a very manufacturing county, the decrease within the last year had been 11 percent; even in agricultural Buckinghamshire, there had been a decrease of about 6 per cent. In Cambridgeshire, the variation had been on the other side; in Derbyshire, the decrease had been 11 per cent; even in Dorsetshire, which was generally considered as almost
32
the worst of agricultural counties in point of distress, there was an improvement to the extent of about 6 per cent. In Durham and Northumberland there had been an increase, owing chiefly to unsuccessful mining operations. But, as might be expected, the greatest diminution had taken place in the counties of Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. In the East Riding, which was purely agricultural in its character, there was a diminution of about 7 per cent. In Nottinghamshire, the decrease was about 7 per cent. Thus the agricultural counties participated in the improvement as much as the manufacturing. With respect to Ireland, although he was not able to congratulate their Lordships upon the distress of that country being materially relieved, yet there were many symptoms of amendment. Among other pleasing indications, he found that the expenditure of the workhouses in that country, owing probably to the cheapness and plenty of provisions, had been reduced from 2s. 1d. per head, which it was last year, to 1s. 1d. at the present time. In the face of such results as these, with a general increase of prosperity which marked their commerce and manufactures, and all their seats of industry, and in connexion with this prosperity a great increase in the comforts and necessaries of life, and a decrease of pauperism even in the most agricultural of our districts, he felt compelled, in answer to the noble Earl opposite, to state frankly, that, even if their agricultural prospects were more gloomy and discouraging than they were at present, he could not, under any circumstances which he could contemplate, bring himself to be a party to any measure which would have the effect of checking the present cheapness and plenty in all the great articles of human comfort and enjoyment, and, above all, in the indispensable articles of human subsistence which, without reference to, or distinction between, particular classes and sections of the community, were so well calculated to promote the general well-being of the entire community. Reduce the chief protectionist complaints and demands to their real elements, and what are they? He did not say in the conscious intention of those from whom they proceeded, for he believed that the agricultural body were not one whit more selfish than those who composed any other class or section among the people—perhaps, in some respects, he would be inclined to say they were even less so; for they touched the rest of the

33
community upon more points than any other; but reduce their great complaint to its real element, and what was it but that there was too much to eat in the country? [Laughter and ironical cheers.] If he had not stated it correctly, he really did not see what was the charge against free trade. If the complaint was not of too much corn imported, inducing too much cheapness in the home markets, what was it? He would like to hear one explanation as to where the complaint did attach itself to free trade, if not founded upon the opinion that too much foreign-grown corn was imported, and home-grown corn was too cheap. He knew that it was sometimes pretended that the abolition of protection would have a tendency to throw land out of cultivation, and that, therefore, though they continued to import greater quantities from abroad than formerly, they would not have a greater quantity to eat at home. But that was surely not the case at present; it could not be said that any considerable portion of land had been thrown out of cultivation. If he were informed rightly, there had been a greater breadth of land sown with wheat during the last year than had ever before been the case. There were also not less than seventy-two applications for enclosures of land made to Parliament this year, the Bills for which would provide for the enclosure of 48,065 acres, being a far greater number of separate applications than had ever before been made to Parliament in one year, although it was true that a larger quantity of land was involved in the application for enclosures which had been made last year: surely that was a circumstance from which it was reasonable to infer that apprehension of ruin to the agricultural interest did not greatly prevail. If, then, the quantity of home-grown produce was not to be diminished, and if the same quantity of produce is to come from abroad, and there is matter of blame against free trade, what else can it be than that there is too much to eat in the country? If corn was not too cheap, and not too abundant, what was it that they accused free trade of doing? They could not accuse free trade of having diminished their trade, or of having injuriously affected their manufactures, or that it had sent out of the country a large store of bullion. The complaints of cheapness in the home market, and abundance in the foreign, resolved, therefore, into their natural elements, are simply that there was too much to eat in
34
the country. Now, with respect to any change of policy founded upon these complaints, he did not know how it might be with the well-ordered estates of their Lordships, with their carefully-tended villages and cottages; but he felt persuaded that, apart from any such enlightened and benevolent superintendence, there were scarcely any by-lanes in the rural districts, or back streets in their large towns and cities, and alleys—some of which were to be found at no great distance from the gorgeous chamber in which he was speaking—he wished they were not—which could not give a fearful contradiction to the assumption that the country was suffering from a superabundance of food. Sooner than consent to any measure which should either in seeming or in reality diminish the command over the comforts or necessaries of life of the great masses of the people—sooner than he would give his individual consent to any proposition, or to any change of policy, which would have that effect, he would rather forfeit the place which he had the honour to hold among their Lordships' ranks. With these feelings, and in the hope that they would not reverse the policy which the Legislature had resolved upon—that they would not, by any specious words or amendments, allow it to go forth to the country that they were prepared to revert to the old policy, he called upon them to give a positive, and, in point of number, an overwhelming refusal to the Amendment of the noble Earl.
The DUKE of RICHMOND: I shall begin by thanking my noble Friend who has just sat down for the very important admissions he has made, and which are the real secret of those free-trade movements. Formerly, my Lords, it was thought that the prosperity of the agricultural interest was one of the happiest indications of the improvement of the nation; but now it seems to be altogether disregarded, and my noble Friend tells us that, notwithstanding the ruin which a free-trade policy has brought upon agriculture, he would sooner forfeit his rank and station, and even the office which he holds, than vote for its reversal. But I warn the noble Earl that, if that policy be persisted in, he will have no occasion to make a voluntary sacrifice, for he will be shorn of all his honours and emoluments. I wish my noble Friend to pay some attention to one of the clauses of the Address. Her Majesty expresses regret—observe!—not at the distress and

35
suffering of the agricultural class—no, Her Majesty was not instructed to express any sorrow for their condition. What signify the ruin and misery of thousands of farmers and lahourers as long as the cotton spinners filled their pockets with money, and the Member for the West Riding is satisfied?
EARL GREY: Read the paragraph.
The DUKE of RICHMOND: The Queen does not, I repeat, express regret at the distress of the owners and occupiers of the land. When I say the Queen, of course I mean Her advisers; but I have a right to mention it as the Queen's Speech. What Her Majesty does express is regret at the complaints which have reached Her from many parts of the kingdom, proceeding from the owners and occupiers of the soil. This was neither more nor less than "a slap on' the face" for the owners and occupiers of land for making complaints. Her Majesty, I admit, laments that any portion of Her subjects should be suffering distress. The truth of the case is, my Lords, that I consider this clause as an insult to the agricultural interest. When my noble Friend quoted from any return, I think it was only due to your Lordships that that return should be laid upon the table, so that we might see whether it applied to one day or one year. I could not understand from the noble Earl whether it applied to the first day of January in each year, or to the whole of the years 1849 and 1850.
The EARL of CARLISLE: To one day in each year—the first of January.
The DUKE of RICHMOND: A very material difference indeed. He tells us that the number who received relief was seven per cent less on the 1st of January, 1850, than on the same day in the previous year; and it is upon this notable return—it is upon this evidence—the evidence which a single day affords—that your Lordships are called upon to believe that the poor-rates have greatly decreased. I ask him whether he has seen the returns up to Christmas, 1848, and whether he compared them with those in the following year, for that is the way to make a comparison, and not to take twenty-four hours in each year; for to compare one day with another day is worse than idle when great interests are at stake. But, again, there are many reasons why the state of the country cannot be correctly ascertained from the number of persons receiving indoor and outdoor relief. In my own
36
county, as well as in many others, such a test would not be correct. But my noble Friend made a singular omission. He spoke of pauperism, and of cheapness and plenty, and of imports, but he has not done us the favour of telling us anything about the amount of wages. He did not tell your Lordships that in some counties the hardworking labourer gets only 8s. and in some cases only 6s. a week to maintain himself and family. I ask if the hundreds of labourers now out of the workhouse, and kept out of it by a plan that had been lately acted upon in various parts of the country, have gained by their vaunted cheapness and plenty? When the parish officers found that the rates were increasing under the free-trade measures, while the means of paying those rates were much diminished, what did they do? They went to the way-wardens of the parish, and said, we have eight or ten honest men of good character without employment, don't drive them into the workhouse, but employ them on the roads. The consequence is, that instead of giving a man six days' labour, they employ a man for two or three days in the week, which is just sufficient to prevent that man from having a claim for relief on the board of guardians. The man is employed to work for two or three days; he just gets enough to keep life and soul together, and he has three or four days of idleness to get him into all sorts of scrapes. Of all distressing circumstances to which country gentlemen are exposed, I know none more painful than to be obliged to refuse employment to an industrious poor man because his labour cannot be remunerative. Free trade was called by my noble Friend an experiment; but if so it has most signally failed. The noble Mover of the Address took it upon himself to lecture the protectionist party for the course they have pursued. I own I was not surprised at that; for I never knew a man who left the ranks in which he had long fought, who did not hate most cordially his former friends. The noble Earl was himself one of the great movers of the protectionist policy, but his friendship to protection ceased with the Government of Sir Robert Peel. When Sir R. Peel went out, the noble Earl left his party and became a free-trader. He tells us that we are lowering the price of corn by creating a panic among the farmers. Why, I thought it was free trade that lowered the price of corn. The noble Earl has, in his zeal

37
to advocate the cause he has newly espoused, destroyed one of its supports. The noble Earl argues both ways. He says that two opposite arguments lead to the same conclusion—a course I can quite understand, the noble Earl having sat upon both sides of the House. He objects to protectionist meetings, and the exciting speeches made there. I own I agree with the great body of the farmers of England. They consider that, as free-born Englishmen, they have a right to meet, and give expression to their grievances; and, notwithstanding the displeasure it may give a seceder from the protectionist ranks, be he who he may, I express my unequivocal approval of that opinion, and I will advise the farmers of England, by every constitutional means in their power, to meet and give utterance to their sentiments, that, through the good sense and good feeling of their fellow-countrymen, their grievances may be redressed. But the protectionist party are, forsooth, to be lectured upon agitation. Why who taught them the lesson? Were noble Lords opposite sincere when they brought their free-trade measures before Parliament? I have always stated in this House, and I now repeat it, that a jury of twelve of you could not be found who were, in their consciences, in favour of free trade; and I firmly believe that, if there had been a ballot instead of an open vote, there would have been an immense majority against your policy. When you passed free-trade measures, they were attended by most unfortunate circumstances, to say the least of it. I allude to the means and the manner by which this question was carried. I am not now going to attack individuals, nor to use any strong expressions as to the course then pursued; but I am bound to state that this country has never recovered that confidence in public men which it had previously entertained, and which had been at that crisis so grossly abused. The country knew that those measures were achieved by an unnatural combination of parties, and by an unusual departure from the principles of political consistency. But the noble Earl (the Earl of Essex) claims credit for the courage exhibited by noble Lords in voting for this measure. Courage, my Lords, is the term he gives to cowardice. There was no courage exhibited; but a want of courage in not resisting the pressure from without. The noble Earl blames the protectionist party for agitation. Why should they not seek to recover those benefits by agitation which had been wrested
38
from them by agitation? The farming class is not to be thus put down. Act as you will—refuse protection in 1850—but the demand will still continue. The farmers, when roused—and they are now roused, seeing ruin stare them in the face—will not patiently submit to an injury. I hope they will do their duty, and by every constitutional means seek redress. For my own part, I do not hesitate saying that I will continue to advise the farmers of England to do so, whether noble Lords opposite like it or not. I hope they will make every town and hustings in the country their battle-field—that they will pursue their object, not with violence of language but with steadiness of purpose—that they will state their case, and the grievances under which they labour—and I still cherish the hope that this House, which has never yet been indifferent to their sufferings, will not disregard them now that they so much require legislative aid. Although not connected with commerce or manufactures myself, I feel the deepest interest in their welfare, and am rejoiced to hear that they are in a satisfactory state. I do not wish to see one class depressed at the expense of another. I wish to see all prosper. I do not find any fault with the speech of the noble Lord who seconded the Address, because he spoke more in our favour than in his own; but when he said that the agricultural interest always had a day of adversity and an hour of prosperity, he drew a very gloomy picture indeed of their history. My Lords, I give my cordial support to the Amendment.
The EARL of ESSEXexplained that in what he formerly stated it was his intention to say that the panic which had recently prevailed among agriculturists had paralysed the exertions of farmers. Although the noble Duke had objected to his use of the word "courage," as applied to the conduct of their Lordships in adopting free-trade measures, he must maintain that it was no slight effort of courage for a man to give up his opinions when he was conscious that by doing so he might forfeit the esteem of those with whom he had always acted, without gaining any personal advantage. As to himself, he had changed his opinions because be thought them erroneous; and he would only say that if the noble Duke supposed that his change of opinion was not as disinterested as it was unsolicited, he was never more mistaken in his life.
EARL FITZWILLIAMwas understood

39
to urge that at the present moment for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to think of proposing a duty on corn of 2s., 3s., or 5s. a quarter, was an impossibility; and even if it were not impossible, those who were agitating on the plan which the noble Duke so strenuously advocated, would have rendered it so. Why should agriculture be now protected when all our great manufacturing interests were exposed to unlimited competition? With regard to what had been stated on the subject of the comparison between the number of paupers in the past and the previous years, he held in his hand a report which referred to what was called the Midland District, embracing all the middle of England—an area of 1,400,000 acres, containing a population of above 1,000,000. It included only four manufacturing unions, out of fifty-two. It states the number of paupers in the quarter ending Christmas, 1848, as compared with that ending Christmas, 1849, there being in some unions an increase, and in others a decrease. In some of them there was an increase of 135 indoor paupers, and in others a decrease of 1,051, being on the whole a decrease of 916. In the outdoor paupers there bad been in some unions an increase of 1,902, and in others a decrease of 6,366, making a total decrease of 4,464. It might be said that the decrease in the outdoor paupers was greatest in the manufacturing unions; but even after striking those out, there was a positive decrease of 2,002, of which the agricultural unions had the benefit. With regard to the present prospects of agriculture, he had formed his own opinion. It was true he was not acquainted with the parts of England, south of the Thames, nor with the county (Suffolk) with which the noble Earl who moved the Amendment was particularly connected; but he had a pretty general knowledge, more or less, of all the country to the north of the Thames, and he could see no district in which, in his judgment, there was the slightest reason to apprehend that there would be any abandonment of land. Indeed he saw evidences of a directly opposite character, and he could truly say that he never saw so much preparation for draining and improving the land. He would now call the attention of the House to the different measures of protection, the series of which had been so correctly stated by his noble Friend (if he might so call him), who had moved the Amendment. The first of those measures was the corn law of
40
1815, which he had himself supported; and here, in relation to changes of opinion, he would take the opportunity of informing the House of a circumstance to which most of their Lordships were probably strangers. He was a Member of the Committee which might be said to have been the parent of that measure; but there was another much more important Member of that Committee—Mr. Huskisson—and it was a remarkable fact that in the examination of the witnesses before that Committee, Mr. Huskisson was the Member whose questions were particularly directed to show the advantages of what was called high farming, and of protection. The result of that Committee was the corn law of 1815, which gave the highest possible protection, for it prohibited the import till the price of wheat reached 80 s. per quarter. Under this law prevailed the agricultural distress of 1821·2, the second under which the English farmer had ever laboured. It was the operation of this law that had first opened his (Earl Fitzwilliam's) eyes to the radical defects of the protective system. Then came an Act passed in 1823, which, from the conditional nature of its enactments, never came into practical operation. Next came the Bill proposed in 1827, by Mr. Canning, which introduced the sliding scale, a measure which he (Earl Fitzwilliam) supported, as a great improvement upon the prohibitory law of 1815. Their Lordships were of course aware that it was defeated by a sidewind in that House. In the succeeding year, 1828, came the measure introduced by the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington's) Government, which was also founded upon the system of the sliding scale. This law—they all lasted above fourteen years—remained till 1842, when Sir Robert Peel proposed to take away what he called the superfluity of protection. The law of Sir Robert Peel altered what was called the pivot, substituting 56 s. for 63 s. Now the effect of all these laws had been to impress the farmer, the landowner, and, above all, the land valuer, with the notion, that they would respectively secure the prices of 80 s. 63 s. 56 s. per quarter: they had done no such thing, for, under the exaggerated protection of the first, the price had fallen below 40 s., and under the succeeding laws, it had fallen occasionally to 35 s. or 36 s. Now, what was the conclusion which he (Earl Fitzwilliam) drew from these results? Why, it was that there was something essentially vicious in the protective system, which defeated and

41
nullified every conceivable mode of carrying it into effect. With regard to the present low price of corn, it was attributable to a variety of circumstances—among others, to a superabundant harvest.
The DUKE of CLEVELAND: It was not an average one.
EARL FITZWILLIAMhad asked a tenant of his in Northamptonshire what the average produce per acre was, and tenants were not prone to magnify the amount of their produce, and he replied that the average in the parish in which he lived was five quarters per acre, while in the year before it was not more than three.
The DUKE of CLEVELAND: I will give a whole county (Durham) against a parish, and where the average was not two and a half.
EARL FITZWILLIAMmaintained that the late harvest had been most abundant, except in the unfortunate district to which his noble Friend referred. Besides an abundant harvest, there had been a great importation of corn, caused by the great distress which prevailed in the two or three years previous, and which induced merchants to import. He would say that it would be most unwise to deceive the country again by any recurrence to protective measures; he said "deceive," because it was in consequence of those former measures of protection that the arrangements had been made between landlords and tenants to which he had alluded. There was nothing so injurious as vacillation in legislation. In the legislation relative to the import of corn, whatever other errors there may have been, there had been no vacillation—the stream had always run in the same direction. It had begun with high protection, the next measure relaxed it, and so it proceeded, the stream always tending in the same direction—each measure which was passed giving less protection than the one before; and it was not probable now that the owners and cultivators of land, or the labourers, could derive any advantage from retracing their steps, as noble Lords opposite now hoped to do. What was the law which they wished to propose? He hoped that some noble Lord who followed him in the debate would state what the law was which they wished to enact. He hoped they would not succeed in carrying such a measure, and that they would fail in carrying this Amendment; but if they did they would place themselves in a dilemma from which they could not
42
escape; and let them not deceive themselves with the hope that it would be believed that in proposing a law for the protection of corn, they intended it to have reference to the interests of the cultivators of the land or the labourer, for it would unquestionably be attributed to interested motives.
The EARL of WINCHILSEAsaid, it was impossible for any man to think of the inundation of foreign corn into this country during the last twelve months, and especially from America, and not foresee the destruction of the agricultural classes. He would undertake that, before very long, he would import any number of millions of quarters here at 30 s. per quarter, and what, then, must be the condition of the farmers of England? It was impossible for an English farmer to produce wheat under 50 s. a quarter, upon an average, and how could he compete with the foreigner? He was very glad to hear the noble Earl opposite, Her Majesty's Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests, openly avow what the feelings and intentions of the Government were. The landed proprietors and agriculturists, at least, might infer from the noble Earl's speech what the determination of Government was. The noble Earl plainly said, that the supporters of free trade would not retrace their steps, and that he, for one, would not recommend the Government to do so. The agricultural interests were reduced to the deepest distress by the abolition of protection. They had embarked their capital and applied their industry for years in the cultivation of land, upon the faith that its produce would be protected; and the withdrawal of that protection necessarily brought ruin upon every one connected with land in this country. To such a state were agricultural pursuits reduced, that farms could be had almost for nothing. The noble Earl opposite would find that he could get farms in many parts of England without any rent at all, if he would only undertake to cultivate them and pay the taxes. The Legislature had made a most fatal experiment; but when they saw it was an erroneous step, and that it was bringing ruin upon the country, it was their duty at once to retrace it. For his own part, he should never rest contented until agricultural interests were fairly protected; and he called upon God as witness of his belief and firm conviction that protection was for the general interest of all classes

43
in the country. They might get foreign corn cheap, no doubt; but what would be the consequence if it pleased the Almighty to send a dearth amongst foreign nations upon whom the people of this country must be dependent for food? The position in which England would then be placed was fearful to contemplate. He thought the Legislature were bound to encourage the agricultural produce of their own country, and not to rely altogether upon foreign nations. He advocated protection upon this further ground. It was his firm belief, if agriculture was properly encouraged at home, that corn could be produced cheaper in England than it could be got from any foreign country. He apprehended the worst consequences from the fearful situation in which the labouring population of this country were placed, totally dependent for food upon foreigners. He understood the condition of the landed interests well, and expressed opinions, founded upon experience, for more than thirty years. He was intimately acquainted with the condition, not only of farmers, but of labourers, and every other class connected with land. He had been in the habit of acting as his own agent and steward, and he knew the value of land as well as any man. Now, speaking with all his experience, he had no hesitation in telling their Lordships that if any one would take the trouble to examine the investments made in land in this country, he would find that three per cent even was not made of the capital embarked in it. He would ask their Lordships whether that was the case with the manufacturers. No, certainly not. But their Lordships should understand the real objects of the late revolution in the landed interests. The cry was raised that "rents should come down." English landlords, honest, upright, honourable men, were willing to share in the general distress which existed, and in many instances, they did reduce their rents. The effect of removing protection undoubtedly would be the transference of the property of many within the walls of that House to persons who had become wealthy by mercantile pursuits. The mortgages of landowners would be foreclosed, for land would be unable to bear its burdens, and some fine morning they would find it the property of some prosperous manufacturers. That was the condition to which the landed interests would very soon be reduced by the blind and infatuated policy
44
of the Legislature. He would, therefore, resist it in every way he could, and he was sure the Saxon blood of the honest English labourer would show its determination not to yield quietly to be trampled on and ruined. They might not collect in great masses, but they were capable of feeling a deep injury, and they would not submit to it. He believed the manufacturing population looked upon the landowners and occupiers as their best friends. They now felt they suffered from the condition to which the landed interests had been reduced, for when they had no money they could not buy of the manufacturers. He looked upon the Speech prepared by Her Majesty's Ministers as an insult to the agricultural interests, and he was certain the yeomanry, and people in general, would be of a similar opinion. They were not so blind as to be incapable of understanding the manifest object of the Legislature, and they would express their opinions plainly, as was their constitutional privilege. They had reason to complain of a severe grievance, and they had a right to express their opinions upon the subject. There never was greater distress amongst the agricultural labourers than at the present time, and hitherto they had been employed out of the capital of the landlords and occupiers of land. How was it possible to withhold relief from that large class whose distress was hourly increasing?
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that having listened with respectful attention to the speeches of noble Lords who had addressed their Lordships, he thought it must be matter of satisfaction to find that there was some difference between the language held in that House and the language reported to have been used by the protectionists in the country. At all the protectionist meetings it had been represented that the distress created by free trade was general. But by the Amendment now proposed, though somewhat vague, and entirely omitting all mention of what measures noble Lords who supported it were inclined to adopt, in the event of any change taking place in the policy of the law, and by the speeches which had been delivered that evening, the distress was generally acknowledged to be confined to those classes immediately interested in agriculture. Now, those classes he believed to be the landowners, the occupying tenants, and the labourers engaged in agricultural pursuits.

45
To them might be added the tradesmen living in small towns situate in purely agricultural districts. Beginning with the latter class, it was not unnatural that they should participate in these apprehensions if they believed that the farmers were in a course of approaching ruin. It was a matter of complaint that the farmer now, when he came into these towns, had sold his produce, and made his purchases, after having transacted his business, immediately returned home; whereas, in prosperous times, he was in the habit of dining and spending the evening in the town. Now, although this practice might for a time be injurious to the tradesmen of these towns, it was one of those prudent measures of economy which it was well for the farmer to adopt, and it certainly would not prove eventually disastrous to the agricultural interest. Again, as regarded those small towns which were not far from railways, the consumer now having the facility of sending, within twenty-four hours, for his grocery or other articles to the metropolis, the profits of the small tradesmen were consequently reduced. But he would now come to the most important part of this question of distress, namely, the state of the labourer. It was obviously the interest of the labourer to have his food, his clothing, and all his other comforts, as cheap as possible. "That is very true," admitted the noble Lords opposite, "but if you don't give him wages to purchase this cheaper food and necessaries, the labourer will be worse off than before." He was not now going into a question of political economy, but he did think the question of labour, like all other cases, depended a little on the demand and supply. One fact connected with the labourer should not be lost sight of. They were aware that the increase of population in the agricultural districts was greater than the increase of employment, that superfluity being relieved by those labourers being absorbed by the manufacturing and commercial districts. Now, it was quite clear that any step taken to injure those large interests, must immediately bear on the interests of the labourer himself, by cutting off the means of relieving the superfluity of the labour-market in purely agricultural districts. With respect to the farmer, there was no doubt that he was at the present moment passing through a state of transition. The changes which were now taking place, must materially affect those farmers who had not skill or capital sufficient to cultivate the land they
46
at present held. Whether those changes would have the effect of stimulating them to greater efforts, or whether they would induce them to occupy smaller farms, which it would be more easy to cultivate with limited capital and skill, it was quite obvious that one great advantage would result—namely, an improved state of agriculture. No one in that House would at present, he believed, venture to affirm that agriculture in this country had even approached to anything like a state of perfection; and he therefore thought that stimulus would make the farmer more active in adopting every available means of extracting the greatest amount of produce possible for the soil to yield to his efforts. And now, with respect to the landlords, the question, as it concerned them, was simply one of rent. Some observations were made by the noble Lord who moved the Address about the inexpediency of the course taken by the protectionists at their meetings with regard to the present state of the agricultural masses. A noble Duke had adverted to those observations in a manner more warmly, perhaps, than the very temperate tone of the noble Earl warranted, and had said it was too bad that, after the agriculturists had been driven to a state of despair by the agitation of certain commercial parties, they were now to be debarred from having recourse to similar modes of agitation to obtain, if possible, redress for the injuries those parties had inflicted upon them. Now, he (Earl Granville) readily admitted that the landlords had a perfect right to assert their cause, and what they considered to be their grievances, in every legal way which they believed best for themselves and their dependants. No one denied them that undoubted right; but the only question was, whether they were agitating—but, that being an offensive term, he would not say agitating—but whether they were meeting together to obtain an object which was practicable, or not? Or whether, on the contrary, they were not following a course which was disheartening the farmer from making those efforts which it was most desirable at this moment that he should be induced to do? It appeared to him (Earl Granville) that the course which was now being pursued by the landlords, of acquainting their occupying tenants, and also their mortgagees (for the noble earl opposite particularly alluded to that class of persons), that in their opinion the landed interest was ruined—that the farmer could not cultivate the land

47
with advantage, and that they themselves could not expect any rent, was so entirely contrary to their own interest that it was impossible to attribute any but the most conscientious motives to gentlemen holding such language. There was another class of persons who lately, both in speaking and writing, had held the same sort of language as to the difficulties of the farmers paying their rent—he meant those who were at the same time advocating free trade. Now, in his opinion, those persons were not quite justified in holding that language. He, for one, had always been the supporter of free trade; in the first place, because he believed it was calculated to promote the well-being of the community at large, without ultimately affecting injuriously the interest of any particular portion of that community; and further, he, for one, did not believe it to be true that the land of this country was over-rented, or that rents generally would have to be reduced. It might be thought presumptuous in him to speak on such a subject in the presence of noble Lords whose interests were so much more largely concerned in the matter than were his own. He would not enter into any argument why he held such an opinion, but would state certain general facts to their Lordships. The noble Earl who moved the Amendment went through the history of the different crises of protection, from the years 1814 and 1815 up to the present time. He (Earl Granville) should have been tempted to go through that identical history himself, to show how very little incompatible a reduced price of corn was with the same or even with an increased rent. Since 1815 the general landed rental of this country had increased about 5,000,000 l. yearly. By the Committee which was appointed to consider the corn question in 1845, as stated by the noble Earl, the remunerating price was settled at 80 s. a quarter. He (Earl Granville) believed that some of the witnesses who appeared before the Committee of that day, stated that 120 s. was the lowest remunerating price; but the Committee adopted the opinion of the general body of the witnesses, and recommended to Parliament, and Parliament acted upon that recommendation, that 80 s. should be the price of English corn, below which all foreign corn should be prohibited being imported. In 1822 the price was fixed at 70 s. In short, from the first corn law in 1815, down to the corn law which had recently been repealed, the protecting price
48
had been reduced from 80 s. to 54 s.; and yet all the laws had eminently failed in securing their own practical operation; for the price of corn had invariably been less than the amount sought to be established by law, the prices under the late corn law being, upon an average, 50 s. a quarter instead of 54 s. His argument, then, was this, that if it appeared that the price of corn had been declining from 80 s. to 50 s., while the general rental of the land had increased 5,000,000 l yearly, there was no reason—allowing for an increasing population, and for the increasing prosperity of the commercial and manufacturing interests of the country—why they should not have the price of corn reduced still lower than 50 s., and yet be able to afford a rent equal in amount to the present, or even in some instances greater. But in saying this, he wished to guard himself against any particular instances. There might exist cases where the rent might require to be lowered. He had heard of lands being let, and also of being sold, at very high rates. But it was not fair to argue from special instances. Without venturing to prophesy what might hereafter be the case, he would state that his belief at present was, that 40 s. was an unnaturally low price. He thought there were many reasons to account for the present reduced price of corn; as to its being entirely owing to free trade, he could not believe it. He was in Paris a short time ago, and he spoke to many on this question, and the opinion they held on it was almost universally the same. They said that their country was still almost in a revolutionary state, and that it was of great advantage that the labouring classes should in such a position of things be provided with cheap food. Now, it appeared to him (Earl Granville) that that observation equally applied to a country which was in a state of profound peace. But while the people had this advantage, yet there was no doubt the price of produce in France was so low that it was impossible for the tenants to pay their rents. Now, that circumstance could not be owing to free trade, for the duty on the importation of corn into France at this moment was from 30 s. to 40 s. With regard to the question of competition with foreigners, he felt it unnecessary to go into that point, from the statement which had been made by the noble Earl who moved the Amendment; for that noble Earl had declared his belief that, in the course of years, the English

49
farmer could produce cheaper corn than the foreigner could. As to the inability of the English farmer to compete with the foreigner on account of the peculiar burdens imposed upon him—the allegation being that the English farmer was too heavily taxed—he begged to ask whether the noble Earl had given any data on which that observation was made? He did not mean merely proof that a larger amount of revenue was exacted from the Englishman than from the foreigner; but that the revenue so raised was larger with respect to the English farmer in proportion to his means of paying it, than the revenue levied in any other country. He considered it very natural that noble Lords, after just coming up from the country, and after having been surrounded by their tenants—who were labouring under, as he thought, a panic, but, as they believed, only a reasonable apprehension for themselves, thinking that distress was coming upon them, and believing that there were no means within their own power of alleviating that distress—it was very natural, under these circumstances, that their Lordships should come forward with warm and anxious feelings, and endeavour to devise some means, by legislative enactment, for relieving that distress. But he did trust that when those noble Lords should have more calmly reflected upon this matter—when they should learn, what he had not yet heard the noble Earl or any other noble Lord prepared to deny, that the great mass of the people were in a satisfactory condition—they would reconsider the course they were about to pursue on this question. It appeared by returns that there was 7 per cent less of pauperism in this country on the 1st of January, 1850, than there was on the 1st of January, 1849. He could not agree with the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond)—though he felt the greatest respect for the landed interest, and though he believed it was the source of immense wealth to this country—yet he did not agree with the noble Duke that it was the duty of the Government, by artificial means, to force up that interest, in order that it might become the basis of the prosperity of the country. He did not think it was the duty or the interest of a Government to foster any species of industry by special means. In his opinion, Her Majesty's Government had adopted a much wiser and surer course of policy for insuring that prosperity. He considered that they had arrived at a high and proud station in having
50
secured the tranquillity of the country and bettered the condition of the great mass of the people by more natural and more statesmanlike means. Believing that it was from the prosperous condition of the mass of the people that the prosperity of all other classes in the country could be derived, he hoped their Lordships would reflect, and consider whether it would not be better to give a fair trial to those measures which had been so recently enacted. It was impossible to arrive at a satisfactory opinion as to the merits of those measures by the results of merely one or two years' experiment. One reason why he believed there was so much ground for hope that the farmers of this country would be able profitably to produce corn and food at a cheaper rate, was the fact that, with reference to all other staple manufactures, that result had taken place. The prices of cotton fabrics were about one-seventh of what they were in 1815; it was the same with cotton yarn; there was hardly one article of manufacture that had not been cheapened by competition. He thought, therefore, that if their Lordships would turn their attention to those general measures which affected all interests alike; if they would make those reductions in the public expenditure which were necessary and practicable; and if they would, either by themselves or by their tenants, apply the same amount of capital, skill, and attention to the cultivation of the land which was bestowed on merely manufacturing and mercantile matters, it would be a better thing for the country than if their Lordships should be able to carry the Amendment, which, as he had already observed, was somewhat vague, and which in no way mentioned the course their Lordships were prepared to pursue, except the bit of information given by the noble Earl that he would not rest satisfied till protection was regained. What amount of protection the noble Earl required, he (Earl Granville) knew not; but one thing he was perfectly convinced of, namely, that their Lordships would be labouring under a very great delusion if they thought that the great majority of the people of England would ever consent to re-enact protection again in this country.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he did not mean to delay long upon Her Majesty's Speech, which, by a course both Parliamentary and constitutional, he was entitled to consider the Speech of the noble Lords opposite. But among two or three things

51
which deserved his attention, there was one, namely, the admission that a very great amount of distress existed in this country at the present time; and if the amount of distress existed, as was said, among the agricultural classes, he took it to be a clear and settled proposition that it was a matter deserving the attention of the Government. But he was not at all of those disposed to ascribe this distress to causes he had heard some noble Lords attribute it to, as the agitation of one party, or to a panic among the others in this quarter or in that—the fact of distress might be exaggerated as to its amount by agitation or by means of the panic; but that that fact of distress had had, as far as by possibility it could have had, the effect of producing the unhappy state of things which was to be deplored throughout the country, was a proposition so clear as to be indisputable on either side. He, for his part, should be very far from denying the existence of the distress, or diminishing or correcting the exaggerations made touching it, and for this reason, among others, that he well knew from experience that with individuals as with societies there was no greater difficulty than to persuade a man that he was less ill off than he thought himself, or that the rest of the community was no better off than himself. He could assure their Lordships that he would feel delighted and comforted if he could deny the existence of the distress; but it was his entire and firm conviction that there was no exaggeration whatever in the statements made of its amount. But that proved nothing as to the causes to which the distress was attributable. He was prepared to defend his old opinions on this subject, for they had undergone no change. The measure was an experiment. He contended that all great changes in the internal policy of a Government were experiments, and that all wise legislators, on that ground, ought ever to be ready to modify their opinions or to retrace their steps, or entirely to abandon the course they had adopted, if the consequences were not such upon actual trial as to justify them in persisting in their course. All legislation, all government, all public policy, was necessarily experimental. In saying this, he was only confessing that men were mere finite beings, who never knew beforehand what was to he the result of their most deliberate measures. But then he must have no bias on his mind when he came to judge whether his experiment had succeeded or failed.
52
He must have no sinister motive to prevent him from at once declaring, if he found he had been wrong, that he was wrong, and that his experiment was ill-contrived, or rashly applied, and had been a failure. But if he had obtained a fee, which some agitators had done, and which he must disgorge before he could form an honest judgment, then that fee he must give back before he could say that the experiment for which he had been feed had succeeded or failed. He stood not in that position. He had no bias on his mind. If he thought he had acted wrong, he was prepared to avow it, and ready to accompany their Lordships in retracing their steps. But, if he felt no bias to influence his judgment, so neither did he feel that any argument had been adduced to alter his judgment. Upon the most deliberate view which he could take of the events which had happened in the interval, he was clearly of opinion that they were right in 1846, and that they should be wrong, immeasurably wrong, now to attempt, if it were possible, to retrace their steps. This distress complained of by some of their Lordships, was by no means confined within the limits of this island. He spoke with confidence, because he spoke with knowledge, when he said that in the great neighbouring country—in Prance—with a population of 33,000,000, for the most part agricultural, the very class who were now most complaining in this country, though a smaller class here as compared with the rest of the population—he spoke a fact which came within his knowledge, when he said that in France, and all over France, they were suffering at this hour, and had been for months past suffering, a deep distress, as much as ever this country had suffered in its worst moment, and very considerably more than we were suffering now. He would state to their Lordships the results of his knowledge as to the condition of the corn-growing regions of France. He might most truly say that it was now in the most complete state of agricultural suffering; the rents were reduced, but none, or next to none, were paid; land was thrown out of tillage; the farms were being thrown up constantly, and there was no possibility of even finding successors to the outgoing tenants; and the labourers of course, in very many instances, remained unemployed, without the auxiliary of a poor-law to fail back upon. Now, to show them the cause of this, and how little it had to do with free trade in corn, he might state to

53
them that seeing corn landed at the port one day near his residence, he went down and inquired whether they ever imported any corn from Odessa, or from Africa, once the granary of the Empire? "Oh, no," said they, "there was plenty of corn there for them if they chose, no doubt, but they could not bring it into the country." As the noble Earl (Earl Granville) had truly said, France was a protected country, and had nothing to do with free trade; not one ounce of any grain or flour or meal could now he imported; and yet distress, agricultural distress, was found prevailing in every quarter. Then as to our people being more heavily taxed than others. Being desirous of obtaining the most satisfactory information of the condition of the French people, and the amount of their burdens to the State, he had placed himself under the tutorage of an inspector of revenue for a district near his residence in the south, containing 10,000 souls, and with him he carefully inspected the tax-books and the last year's receipts. Of these 10,000 there were 2,600 proprietors of land, 2,100 of these being owners of mere hits of land, which they called their estates, submitting to the evils of subdivision for the fiction which all Frenchmen hugged to their bosoms under the name of "equality." The direct taxes were levied in these cases on the rental; but as every proprietor was his own tenant, the tax was levied in effect on the estimated yearly value of the land. The land was valued on the books which he inspected at 136,000 francs, yearly value, and the inspector showed him the receipts of last year for about 40,000 francs of direct taxes; that was more than one-fourth, and nearly one-third, of the actual value of the land. There was 11 per cent of direct land tax, 8 per cent on the doors and windows, and 8 per cent on what by a curious speculation of the financial mind was taken as the rent each householder was supposed to pay himself for inhabiting his own house, and on the amount of rent, suppose he let it out: be that rent received from the house or not, the taxgatherers said they ought to receive it. In other words, supposing the yearly value of an estate to be 3,800 l., 2,700 l. was the total amount which had to be paid. It was in the proportion of twelve to nineteen; so that if any one of their Lordships should have an estate of 19,000 l a year, as many of them had estates worth ten times that amount, or at least had before this distress, then they would
54
have to pay 12,000 l. for the support of Government. The French people, however, were quite content to pay that amount, so that they were allowed to have liberty, for which they cared nothing—equality, for which they cared much. Their Lordships must also consider that France, in addition to direct taxation, was also subjected to indirect taxation upon the consumable commodities imported into the country, which also had the effect of raising the prices of the necessaries of life. In Germany the taxes amounted to 25 per cent. They often heard of the light taxation of the United States of America; but the grievous and gross mistake made by those who cried out about liberty and light taxation in the United States was, that they looked only at the federal Government. They said it was a cheap government; and so the federal Government was; but they forgot that each separate State paid for its own government, for its own justice, for its own establishments, and for every one of those things that made it necessary to impose taxes upon the people; so that he did not think that they had much to brag of in the United States as compared with ourselves in point of taxation. This was not immaterial to the present argument, because when it was contended that this country was so heavily taxed that its agriculture needed protection, it was necessary to look into the matter, in order to see whether we were really more heavily taxed than other countries; and when he did so narrowly look, he was satisfied that we were not. Though he did not consider that the distress which had existed had been in any degree exaggerated, he must at the same time disapprove in the strongest manner of the language that had been used at some of the meetings held in the country. He had, with strong feelings of indignation, seen respectable men borne away by this zeal to do all but threaten even assassination. He hoped, however, they would never have recourse to such threats of violence as were, though in general terms, thus openly recommended. He had with yet greater horror, seen yet more plain exhortations to assassination. He had seen deliberate letters written by literary men, who audaciously put their names to them, and published them in the journals conducted by persons in the service of our Government, and in terms and words recommending the assassination of princes on the Continent of Europe, and holding out to the assassins the sure refuge that

55
would await them in the United States of America. It was a foul and monstrous libel on our kinsmen in the United States, for he believed that if any miscreant were to raise an unhallowed arm in obedience to any such fanatical reformer, or falsely pretended lover of peace, against the life of any Sovereign in Europe, instead of being received with open arms by the honest American, he would be rejected and spued out of the country with abhorrence and disgust. There had been sundry disclosures made regarding the distress which affected other portions of the community in this country beside the farmers; and he could not but refer to the manner in which a respectable morning paper had most ably and usefully given circulation to a great deal of curious and interesting information respecting the grievous sufferings of a large portion of their unfortunate fellow-creatures, and, above all, of the women employed in needlework. While he admitted the existence of those sufferings, however, he felt himself most reluctantly bound to dispute some of the remedies which most benevolent and most excellent individuals were proposing for removing the evil. But it was a subject he approached with great pain. The details were enough to melt the hardest heart. He knew that there were numbers of meritorious individuals scarcely able to keep body and soul together on their labours of fourteen hours a day, existing on the smallest pittance of food with which animal life could be supported, and conducting their labours with an industry and assiduity that passed all belief, as it exceeded all praise. All this he felt as strongly as did those benevolent and charitable individuals of whom he had spoken; but, alas! what was the cause of it? It was, that in proportion to the demand for labour there was an overabundant supply. It was, that in proportion to the wants of those who were to be paid for their labour, there was no proportion in the wants of those for that labour who were to pay them. It was, that they were paid 2d. or 2½d. by the day, because their employers would not pay more, and because no law they could make, no lectures on charity they could preach, would ever make the employer pay 4d. when he could get the work done for 2d. But, it was said, what harm was there in taking off a portion of the labourers, and lessening in the market the superabundance of hands? Let us, it was said, take off so many thousands
56
of those hands, and should we not thereby adjust the supply more nearly to the demand? No, indeed, shortsighted charity! Benevolence, more benevolent than beneficent! zeal, but rather without knowledge! Who could doubt that if they took 10,000, 12,000, or 20,000 individuals out of the labour market, the price of labour would at once rise; but did they not see that this very success would bring in twice as many as were taken out, simply because the price of labour had risen? So that instead of the market rising from 2d. or 4d., it would, in the end, after a temporary rise, fall lower than ever. It was like digging a hole, not in wet, but in dry sand, which, the instant it was taken out, was replaced by other sand rushing in. But then, emigration was to be the resource. Emigration had two objects: one was to give labour relief, and raise the price of labour; but it was evident this would be attended with the exact effect he had referred to. The other object was to give labour to the colonies; in that case it might be very useful; but, possibly, the colony might be nice, and refuse all labour but that which could be given by virtuous individuals, so that they must first scrutinise their emigrants and send the best of them abroad, though he did not see why, if they were likely to make good wives, they should not remain at home to get good husbands. According to this mode they were sending away the best part of the population, and retaining the worst. He must say, when on this subject, that he never was more astonished (much as he sympathised with the dislike of receiving convicts) than to hear of one of our colonies refusing to the passengers of an unhappy convict-ship a landing after having been tossed about for three months of a tempestuous voyage. The noble and learned Lord concluded by stating, that having seen no cause why they should retrace their steps on the corn laws, he was unable to vote for the Amendment proposed by the noble Earl.
LORD STANLEYcould only say that he participated in the gratification with which he was sure all must have heard the speech which his noble and learned Friend had delivered upon the present occasion—he was about to say, upon the present question. He confessed that the speech on the present occasion, at least the half of that speech, if not the whole of the speech, had a very indistinct connexion with the subject which now demanded their attention.

57
It might be his ignorance that made him say so, but he must confess, that at least in the one half of his noble and learned Friend's speech, be could not trace the smallest connexion between the Speech of Her Majesty which was then under their consideration, or the Amendment which had been submitted to their consideration with such great good temper and judgment by his noble Friends the noble Earls behind him. Before, however, he adverted to the question which was then especially under their consideration, he wished to be permitted to say a very few words upon topics in the Royal Speech which had hitherto been passed over in the discussion, and on which there could not be the same difference as upon the main subject for their consideration. He was quite sure that there was not one, not only of their Lordships, but hardly an individual in the country, who would not echo—and that not in the mere language of formality, but of perfect sincerity—the hearty expression of condolence to Her Majesty upon the loss which Her Majesty and the country also had sustained in the lamented, and, he might add, the premature death of the Queen Dowager. He was quite sure that they would all concur in believing that the extensive charity and exemplary virtues of Her late Majesty will always render her memory dear to the nation. She had left an example how, with becoming dignity, she could occupy a throne, and with what becoming grace the same individual could retire into private life. It was no formal expression of condolence that was given utterance to on this occasion. It was the manifestation of that which was the universal feeling amongst all classes and conditions of persons in this country. He would also concur with their Lordships in the expression of their gratitude to Providence, who, having visited them with a most formidable disease, had now permitted it to pass away, and had now restored the country to its present state of health. He concurred in thinking that they could best evince their gratitude by vigilant precautions against the more obvious causes of sickness for the future, and an enlightened consideration for those who were exposed to its attacks, and by extending as far as they could the promotion of those sanitary measures in favour of the lower and humbler classes of the country, which were no less conducive to their bodily comfort than to their moral elevation. While he entirely concurred in the propriety of those precautions
58
recommended in the Speech, he thought at the same time there was no subject over which it was necessary to watch with more care than these sanitary measures. There had occurred in connexion with them a great deal of unfortunate mismanagement; and he was much afraid, if great care was not taken, that they might even do injury instead of the good which they hoped to promote by such measures. With regard to the various measures which on the part of the Crown were to be submitted to the consideration of their Lordships during the present Session, they no doubt related to matters of great importance; but, as on all other occasions similar to the present, he thought it would be most improper to express any opinion upon those important subjects till they were in the ordinary way brought under discussion. They would thank Her Majesty that such measures were to be laid before them on the responsibility of the Crown, and they would promise to give them that attention which their importance demanded; but, in the meantime, they would reserve their opinion regarding them till they were submitted in the proper form. There was, however, one topic mentioned in the Speech, on which he should indulge himself by making a remark. It was stated that Her Majesty "rejoiced that the Governments of the United States of America and of Sweden had promptly taken steps to secure to British ships, in the ports of their respective countries advantages similar to those which their own ships now enjoy in British ports." He maintained in the strongest manner all the opinions he had expressed on former occasions with regard to the impolicy, in a national point of view, of that great experiment on which they ventured last Session of Parliament; but if there was to be any modification of the evils arising from the repeal of those navigation laws, it must be from the complete and entire reciprocity of other nations who might be willing to treat with them. He believed, however, there was no country in the world that was able to give to this country full reciprocity under a repeal of these navigation laws. He still believed that measure to have been an injurious one; but if the experiment was to be tried, be should rejoice to see it tried fairly, and in a spirit of reciprocity. The noble Earl who moved the Address in answer to the Speech from the Throne stated, that the very countries which we thought would be the last to reciprocate our advances,

59
were in fact the first to do so; and he instanced the United States of America as one of the last countries expected to reciprocate. Now, the noble Earl must have forgotten that, in the course of the discussion on the repeal of the navigation laws, it was stated distinctly that the laws of the United States would entitle us to all the advantages that this country could give them by the repeal of our navigation laws. He was grateful for the assurance—though certainly it did not convey much news—that we were not at war with any Foreign Power. They were told, "Her Majesty happily continues in peace and amity with all Foreign Powers." Now, in all the Speeches which he recollected to have heard delivered from the Throne, there was language introduced to express in the most confident terms the footing on which we stood with foreign Powers. The Royal Speech used to say that the Sovereign had received from Foreign Powers assurances of friendship; and they were told that they had the most cordial understanding with them, and that they were now on the most friendly footing with the other Powers. On the present occasion Her Majesty told them, no doubt, that they were not at war with France or Spain, or with Russia and Austria; but would Her Majesty's Ministers venture to say that we were on a friendly footing with Austria, and that we were also on a friendly footing with Russia? He rejoiced that they had the blessing of peace; but he should have rejoiced still more if Her Majesty's Ministers had been able to state—and if the fact had been so, they would have stated it—that we had friendly relations with all the great nations of the European Continent. Upon the next topic which was touched on in the Speech, he presumed that some further information would be laid before the House within a short time, as to the circumstances that had actually occurred with respect to the "differences of a serious character" which had occurred "between the Governments of Austria and Russia on the one hand, and the Sublime Porte on the other," and with regard to which he rejoiced to learn that "the explanations which had taken place between the Turkish and Imperial Governments had fortunately removed any danger to the peace of Europe which might have arisen out of these differences." After having told them that explanations had taken place which had removed all danger, they were informed that "Her Majesty having been
60
appealed to on this occasion by the Sultan, united her efforts with those of the Government of France, to which a similar appeal had been made, in order to assist by the employment of her good offices in effecting an amicable settlement of those differences in a manner consistent with the dignity and independence of the Porte." Now, if an explanation had already taken place that had removed all apprehensions of danger to the peace of Europe from any rupture between Turkey and the Imperial Governments, perhaps it was hardly necessary that the French or British Government, by their mediation, should have interposed to effect an amicable settlement of the differences between them. He did not know what were the instructions issued, either to a plenipotentiary or to any other party, with regard to the measures to be taken for effecting an amicable settlement of these differences in a manner consistent with the interest and dignity of the Porte; but on this subject he apprehended they would have papers laid before the House; and, in the present state of things, he was disposed to concur in thanking Her Majesty for the information that Her Majesty had laid before them. Before quitting the subject of our foreign policy, however, he begged to say that there was one question upon which he had hoped for some information, and of which he expected that some notice would have appeared in the Royal Speech. He thought it was whilst Parliament last sat that the French Republic sent a small force to the coast of Italy, which small force was subsequently increased to a very large amount, and which augmented force conducted the siege of the city of Rome, which city of Rome they occupied, and in which city of Rome, under what pretence or reason he knew not, they had continued to exercise power up to the present moment, thus dividing the dominions of the Pope between the French occupation of the western coast, and the Austrian occupation on the eastern coast. He did not wish to add to existing embarrassments arising out of this subject, but he did firmly believe that the French and Austrian Governments were at this period acting in accordance with regard to the affairs of Italy. He did not believe that there was any danger of an immediate outbreak of war; but it was a question upon which this country could not look with absolute indifference, that Italy should, without, as far as he could judge, any ground whatever for such continued occupation, be occupied by two foreign

61
armies—that that occupation should have continued for the space of eight, nine, or ten months—and that it should not have occurred to Her Majesty's Ministers as a matter of sufficient gravity and importance to warrant the insertion of a paragraph in the Queen's Speech, stating that they had received assurances that satisfied them that no evil consequences were likely to arise from that occupation. The noble Marquess told them last year that he had had assurances from the French Government that their troops would be withdrawn as soon as the object they had in view was accomplished, and that he believed that object was the restoration of tranquillity in the Papal dominions and the restitution of the government of the Sovereign Pontiff. What might have been the object of the French Government, he (Lord Stanley) knew not; but it was stated by the noble Marquess that there was a time, and that that time was not far distant, at which Her Majesty's Government expected that this provisional occupation of Italy by hostile armies—that this anomalous state of things—should be put an end to. He now came to a point where he was compelled to object to the terms contained in the Speech from the Throne. He did it with sincere regret, for he could assure the noble Lord that there was no object for which he was more anxious than that the terms of Her Majesty's Speech should be such as not to force upon those who entertained the same opinion as he did himself upon agricultural matters, the necessity of objecting to them. He felt most anxious to concur in an unanimous Address to the Throne; and it was with the sincerest regret that he found the terms used in the Speech to be such that it was impossible for him, with his feelings relative to the condition of the agricultural interest, to agree to the language of the Speech itself, or of the Address moved in 'answer to it. He could not separate the language of the Speech itself, objectionable as it was, from the fact that the selection of the Mover of the Address in the other House had been made by the Government, deliberately, from the strongest and most strenuous supporters of those free-trade measures, which, if not the cause, he believed had greatly aggravated agricultural distress in this country and in Ireland; and, taking also into consideration the speech of the noble Mover, and that of the noble Seconder of the Address in their Lordships' House, if it were the intention of Government, through their
62
organs, to provoke the necessity of discussion and the necessity of an Amendment, that necessity would have been found in the comments with which the noble Earl who opened the discussion had addressed himself to the question. The text of the Speech itself, though not intentionally, was insulting to the agricultural interest as a body, and passed over, in a light and trivial manner, that distress which had been admitted by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) to be most disastrous, and not exaggerated in point of fact by the statements made at the meetings in the country. In what terms had that distress, so general, so prevalent, so severe, and so ruinous with regard to Ireland, been referred to by the Speech placed in Her Majesty's mouth? "It is with regret that Her Majesty has observed the complaints which in many parts of the kingdom have proceeded from the owners and occupiers of land." In the first place, this was not a fair and candid statement of the case. The complaints which had been made were loud and general. The distress was great and grievous. The distress was not confined to, and the complaints had not proceeded exclusively from, the owners and occupiers of land. The distress reached far beyond the owners and occupiers of land. Nay, primarily, and before it touched the owners or the occupiers of land, it touched a class still more numerous and more deserving of their care, because more helpless—it touched the labourers of the soil—it touched the small shopkeeper—it touched the mechanic—it touched the artisan—it touched the numerous classes who were not either owners or occupiers of the soil, but whose all depended upon the well-being of the owners and occupiers of the soil, and who were the first and severest sufferers from the present agricultural distress. Therefore, he repudiated the expressions in the Speech that the distress was confined to, or that the complaints proceeded exclusively from, the owners and occupiers of land. The distress was great, general, and grievous among all those classes who were never, until the speech of the noble Lord the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests, accustomed to be considered as secondary and subordinate interests. The Speech went on to say, that Her Majesty greatly lamented that any portion of Her subjects should be suffering distress. Great distress there certainly was; the owners and

63
occupiers of land were complaining, and She observed their complaints with regret. It was certainly an annoying fact—it was disagreeable that any class, however unimportant, however insignificant, or however fractional in point of numbers, should be suffering distress; "but it is a source of sincere gratification to Her Majesty to witness the increased enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts of life, which cheapness and plenty have bestowed upon the great body of Her people." He trusted that he should not be misunderstood as deprecating, depreciating, or undervaluing the advantages of plenty and cheapness, especially when they gave to the great body of the people an increased measure of the necessaries and comforts of life, in such cheapness and abundance as were produced by a plentiful harvest in the year 1835, which gave the employers of labour ample means to employ those who were dependent upon them, and furnished, at the same time, to the population the means of subsistence at a cheap rate—in such cheapness and abundance that no man living would rejoice more cordially than he (Lord Stanley) should, or regard it more as a matter for sincere congratulation. But he feared the Government had fallen into an error. They had been led by those whose footsteps they had been too easily induced to follow—who, because they made a great deal of noise, considered themselves all in all in this country—that everything must be secondary to them—that they were the people, and that every other class was but a fragment and a fraction of the people. The "great body of the people "were not to be placed where the Queen's Speech placed them—in opposition and invidious contrast to the owners and occupiers of the land. With regard to that great portion of the people whose interests were involved in the cultivation of the soil—and they formed a very large, and hitherto a primarily-important, portion of the population—he contended that cheapness and abundance of foreign imports had not given to them that great command over the necessaries and comforts of life which they were led by the Speech to believe was the case. If, as was the case, the wages of labour throughout the agricultural districts had fallen from 11 s. to 8s., from 9s. to 7s., and from 8s. to 6d. weekly; if it were true that, in order to produce upon the whole community the small fractional diminution of 7 per cent upon the number of paupers
64
actually receiving relief, there were men working on the road at 6s. a-week for three days of the week, and called to subsist on 3s. a week—if there were men who worked upon the roads at reduced wages to keep them out of the union houses, and to spare the poor-rates the cost of their maintenance—then he said that it was a mockery, a cruel mockery, to talk to those men, whose employment was taken from them, and whose wages were diminished, of the additional means which cheapness and plenty afforded them for enjoying the necessaries and comforts of life. The noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) said, that throughout the whole country there was 7 per cent less pauperism in January, 1850, than in January, 1849. But the year which terminated January, 1849, was a year of the deepest depression—a year which he remembered noble Lords opposite always talked of as an exceptional year not to be taken into consideration, and which, from various causes, was a year of the greatest possible distress among the agricultural and manufacturing population. But taking the year 1848—a year of deep depression—a year in which the poor-rates had exceeded by one million sterling the poor rates of the preceding year, with lower prices for agricultural produce, and then tell him that, as compared with the year 1848, there was upon the 1st of January, 1850, a diminution of 7 per cent in the pauperism of the country; and add to that the fact, that whereas the last year was a year of great manufacturing distress, and that the present was a year in which the manufacturing prosperity was so great as to make it a matter of congratulation in Her Majesty's Speech. From the diminution of pauperism to the extent of 7 per cent on the whole country, deduct the large diminution which must have taken place in the manufacturing distress, and upon the figures of which the noble Earl himself had read a few that night he founded an indisputable inference that, great as was the agricultural distress last year, that agricultural distress was infinitely greater this year; and it was with regard to agricultural distress and agricultural pauperism that the Amendment of his noble Friend was directed, and not to any allegations of general distress in the manufacturing and commercial districts. He rejoiced as much as anybody could at the improved accounts of manufacturing prosperity. He took it for granted, upon the statement of the

65
noble Earl that there was a large increase of exports and imports, that the public revenue was flourishing, and that trade was prosperous. He admitted it—he rejoiced in it, and heartily united in the congratulations of Her Majesty upon the subject. But he was not prepared, and Ministers had not called upon them, to attribute this to any specific cause, or to say that it was the consequence of free-trade measures. When he looked, indeed, at the amount of the exports, there were various circumstances which indicated that that increase of prosperity—not reaching, but very nearly reaching, the amount of our trade in 1845 and 1846, and previous to those distressing years of 1847 and 1848—had been wholly independent of their free-trade measures, and arose from totally different causes. It was a remarkable fact, that of their exports of calicoes, in which there had been an enormous increase of something like 128,000,000 of yards in the present year, no less than 89,000,000 of yards were exported—where?—to countries where free trade had been established? No; but to British India; and a very small proportion indeed of their calicoes had gone to those countries which had adopted the principles of reciprocal free trade. He only trusted that this prosperity might not lead to overtrading, to overspeculation, and to the glutting of foreign markets, of which we had already seen some indications, but that it would be permanent and enduring. But if he admitted the existence of prosperity in our manufactures, and that it was owing to the cheapness of food in this country that the manufacturers had been able to produce more cheaply, and to export more abundantly in return for foreign imports, it was not in any invidious sense that he stated that the boon thus conferred upon the manufacturing districts had been so conferred upon them at the expense of agricultural industry; for he did not think that any man would deny that the great reduction which had been caused by free-trade measures in the prices of agricultural produce, had had a very considerable effect in causing that distress which they all deplored, and which, to a greater or lesser extent, they all acknowledged. His noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) said that the distress of agriculture could not be referred to free trade; "for," says he," in France there is no free trade—in France there is strictly a system of protection; yet in France all classes connected
66
with agriculture are labouring under the deepest and most aggravated distress." He would take these facts; and he would agree with his noble and learned Friend thet they were wholly different with regard to France and England. He joined in the expression of sincere gratitude that by the favour of Divine Providence this kingdom had hitherto been preserved from the wars and convulsions which, during the last two years had shaken so many of the States of the Continent. But in those wars and convulsions he saw one cause, and one most important cause, of the agricultural distress admitted by his noble and learned Friend. His noble and learned Friend had told them that the state of the land in France was extremely different from what it was in this country. And in what did the difference consist? Why, that under the principles of "liberty, equality, and fraternity," there had been a minute subdivision of the soil amongst small and poor proprietors, which rendered it impossibe duly to cultivate the soil by laying out a proper amount of capital in its improvement; and yet one of the principal objects of the declamation of certain parties, under whose guidance, unfortunately, Her Majesty's Government appeared too much to be proceeding, was against the class of large landed proprietors in this country, who, they said, had more land than they were themselves able to cultivate, and were, therefore, compelled to screw the rents out of the tenants who did cultivate it. This was no question of rent; but even if it were, he would ask them whether they were prepared to cut down the weight and importance of the landed aristocracy of the country, and to seek to apportion the land of this country, as was done in France? He could tell them they were proceeding in a rapid line towards that to which one of the great leaders of the movement pointed his ambition and aim—namely, a safe, permanent democracy. If they were seduced by any considerations to adopt such measures as were thus recommended for breaking down the great weight, influence, and property of the landed aristocracy of the country, the aristocracy might, no doubt, fall—their days might be numbered; but with the numbering of their days were also numbered the days of the British monarchy. If the views of the people were in favour of a republic, which was almost the avowed object of many of the leaders of this movement, whore, then, were they to look for the security of property, the investment of

67
capital, the improvement of the soil, the extension of agriculture, which was now so loudly called for? There would not he found any of those improvements which were now carried on, but they would find themselves in the condition of France, a condition owing to the entire abolition of the aristocracy, and the minute division of the soil. Then would come the greatest distress upon the small proprietors of land, which had already been so graphically described by his noble and learned Friend. He turned now to the question connected with the crushing weight of taxation. It was true that France had protection, but she had also wars and internal convulsions, from which, with the blessing of Providence, our constitution had as yet preserved this country. The possession of property in large lots, and the existence of an aristocracy, had up to this time secured us from those miseries to which France was a victim. The misery inflicted upon the proprietors in France should serve us as a warning against following this cry of direct taxation, with a view of reducing the agricultural and landed interests of this country. But what reason had they for supposing that the distress which at present existed would be but temporary? What was there to account for the prices of corn in this year and the last year declining? The decline, too, he did not think had ceased at the present time. The noble Lord the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests, gave us an extraordinary reason for this decline—namely, the great failure of the harvest in Ireland, and the fact of half of the food of the people in that country being swept away by the loss of the potato crop. He (Lord Stanley) was, no doubt, a man of ordinary understanding; but he would think that that argument told exactly the other way. He would have thought, indeed, that such a state of things would have had the effect of increasing the price of corn rather than of reducing it. What, then, were the temporary causes of this decline? Last year they had a plentiful harvest—so plentiful that the corn was hardly worth reaping. Last year they had low prices, because they had a bad harvest; and it seemed that this year they were to have low prices because they had a good harvest. In addition to the internal harvest of 1849, which was such a plentiful one, they had imported wheat and wheat-flour to a considerable amount. The price was 69 s. 9d. on the average of
68
1847; 50 s. 7d. on the average of 1848; and 44 s. 1d. on the average of the first four months of 1849. There were imported, in 1847, 4,456,000 quarters; and in 1849, 4,533,523 quarters. So that there was an actual increase in favour of the latter year, with a low price, over the import of the year of famine, 1847. But, it was said, "Surely these people won't continue sending in their corn. They might send it in at 69 s. 9d.; but they won't when the price is lower." However, they had sent it in at 50 s. 7d., and, in larger quantities still, at 44 s. 1d. When discussing the question of protection some time ago, they were met with the argument that the foreigner would not go on importing unless at remunerating prices. At that time a noble Friend of his, now no more (Lord Ashburton), stated, with his usual sagacity, that there were districts whose production was illimitable, and which, so long as England continued at all times, and under all circumstances, to admit corn duty free, would pour in grain continually, glutting our markets at that which would be a remunerating price for them, because they would be only supplying their own superabundant production. But he did not believe that the foreigner was importing at a loss. He recollected when they were discussing à priori, and not with the light of subsequent experience, the question as to the probable price under a perfectly free trade in corn, that he took the liberty, upon the authority of some statements he had, of expressing his belief that, within three years, they would see an importation of from 4,000,000 quarters to 5,000,000 quarters of wheat, at a price varying from 40 s. to 45 s. That prophecy was, he contended, a strong primâ facie evidence that the present low prices did not depend upon temporary causes, but were the natural result of the measures then proposed. In addition to what he then said, he would further say now, that he did not think the price could permanently rise in this country above 40 s. or 45 s. a quarter. At the time of the passing of the measure for repealing the corn laws, there wasn't a man who didn't scout the notion that the effect of that measure would be permanently to bring down the price of wheat to 40 s. or 45 s. The noble Earl opposite (Earl Grey) went so far as to say, that immediately the corn laws should be repealed, he would raise his rents. Now, though he did not admit that the question of rental was unimportant, he

69
did not say that the primary object he had in view was the maintenance of the existing amount of rent. His primary object was to prevent, owing to the diminution of price, large tracts of country being diverted from the cultivation of wheat, which would throw large masses of the population hopelessly out of employment. And if that unfortunate occurrence should take place anywhere, it would be primarily in those districts in which, on the faith of a long series of legislation, the largest amount of capital had been employed, naturally to the poorer soils, where, by the exertions of such men as Mr. Coke, land, naturally sterile, had been brought to a state of high improvement, and where, were such outlay of capital to be discontinued, the land must in a short time revert to its original barrenness, and the population which had been led to establish itself with a view to honest industry upon those lands, be driven from the face of the earth, or led to earn a precarious livelihood at the half-deserted loom. The noble Earl (Earl Granville) stated that the agriculturists first said 80 s. would be a good price, then that 70 s. would be a remunerative price, and now that 56 s. would answer very well. But the noble Earl omitted to state, what he knew would not suit his argument, that 70 s. was demanded prior to the alteration in the currency, and 56 s. afterwards; so that, though there was nominally a difference of 14 s., there was in reality little, if any, diminution. The noble Earl said, "See how the rental has increased—it has increased 5,000,000 l. since 1815." But that was not the rent of the land, but the interest of the capital sunk in the land; and it was an interest which, he would venture to say, if offered to any manufacturing or commercial gentleman, would be scorned by them as an utterly insignificant remuneration for anything like the amount of capital that had been expended by the landed proprietors. His noble and learned Friend said, that nobody would give 1d. for what he could get for 2d. He (Lord Stanley) believed that that was the principle of the party that had recently sprung up into prominence; but he was happy to say that that was not the principle acted upon by the gentry of England, and that they would, when they could get labour for 6d., give 1s. for it; because, though they knew the supply to he such as to enable them to obtain volunteer labour at 6d. a day, they knew that a man could not live upon such a pittance, and would
70
not descend to such starvation prices. And yet those were the classes of persons held up to obloquy, and were told that they must reduce their rents. For himself, he believed if these prices continued, that they must all reduce their rents. He needn't reduce his in Ireland, certainly. It was his full intention to make next year to his property-tax assessment a return of nil; for he assured their Lordships that for the last eighteen months he had not drawn from his property in Ireland one single shilling—not one single shilling had he had remitted him from that property, although he had for a long time past been laying out about one-third of the yearly rental upon the property, and there was not, he believed, a more contented tenantry in Ireland. He had nevertheless at this moment upwards of one-fourth of his land thrown upon his hands, because, owing to present depressed prices, he could not find a tenant to occupy it. This was far from being an extreme case, and this was land so good that he had grown upon it the other day at the rate of 26 tons of turnips to the statute acre. Now, he asked them, was it unreasonable when that was the state of things—when the poor-rates were ranging at from 6s. up to 18 s. and 19 s. in the pound—was it unreasonable, when estates were brought to the market in Ireland in such profusion as to render the chance of purchasers very inconsiderable—was it unreasonable, while estates could he shown highly improved which could not find tenants to occupy them, in consequence of the grievous burdens that were imposed upon them, and the unremunerative price for their produce—was it unreasonable if under these circumstances—more exaggerated undoubtedly at present in Ireland than in England, though that was a state of things to which, if they were not careful in their legislation we should fast approach in this more favoured island—was it unreasonable, if in this state of things, that on behalf of themselves, on behalf of their tenants, on behalf of that large population, whom if they could help it they would not turn out of doors to starve, but with whom they would share the price and the produce, of the soil—was it unreasonable if on their behalf they were not satisfied with the expression that Her Majesty had observed with great regret the complaints which in many parts of the kingdom had proceeded from the owners and occupiers of land? It was with regret that he assented to the Amendment that had

71
been proposed by his noble Friend. He could not rest satisfied with the language of the Queen's Speech, and must, therefore, give his cordial support to the moderate and temperate Amendment moved in the moderate and temperate address of his noble Friend. He was not asking their Lordships to retrace their steps. He retained his own opinion. He believed a system of moderate protective duties would be for the advantage of all classes. But what his noble Friend desired their Lordships to observe was, that in many parts of the united kingdom various classes of Her Majesty's subjects connected with the cultivation of the soil were labouring under severe distress, mainly owing, in the opinion of those with whom he acted, to recent legislative enactments. He could not but attribute a large proportion of the distress prevailing in Ireland to that cause which had been mainly operative in England. It was equally indisputable that those local burdens which had been carefully investigated by a Committee of their Lordships' House, and which did press heavily on landed and real property, and that to the extent of not less than 12,000,000 l., might be borne by an interest favoured for national purposes. But whether the policy of the recent legislation were right or wrong, if they had caused the distress of that class by taking from it the peculiar benefits it had previously enjoyed, it was a matter of gross and flagrant injustice to continue on that class exclusively the burden they had exclusively borne, not for their own advantage, but for objects which involved the common interests of their common country. He and his friends had been invited to say what they desired to have. He made no secret of his own views. He believed a moderate protecting duty would be advantageous to the agriculture and to the revenue, while it would not he injurious to the consumer. He did not ask their Lordships to interrupt the progress of that great experiment which he feared was leading inevitably to the most serious consequences. He asked their Lordships, and he asked them with confidence, not to refuse their assent to the Amendment, which affirmed that there were two causes for the distress of the agricultural interest—causes with which it was the function of the Government to deal; and they were entitled to say that in one shape or other the Government was bound, at least, to take some steps for the relief of that distress.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwas
72
understood to say, that after the manner in which these questions had been discussed, and after the unanswerable objections stated to the Amendment by his noble Friend at the head of the Woods and Forests, he should not have thought it necessary to detain their Lordships; but after the speech of the noble Lord who had just sat down, he felt himself called upon not only to touch upon some questions which had been referred to in the course of the debate, but to apply himself to some of those topics to which the noble Lord had adverted, but which were not connected with the immediate subject under discussion. Noble Lords, he regretted to observe, conceived themselves under the necessity of moving Amendments; but while he cheerfully acknowledged the perfect right of noble Lords to give vent to their opinions, and to embody them in the form of an Amendment, he derived consolation from the reflection that, as affecting Her Majesty's Government and the policy they had pursued, there was out of the various topics touched on in Her Majesty's Speech only one on which noble Lords opposite had thought it necessary to make a substantive proposition. The noble Lord who had spoken last began by stating, that he saw with something like surprise that Her Majesty had been advised to say that she was at peace and amity with other nations. That was not the first occasion on which the noble Lord had dwelt on the Address to the Throne; but, with reference to the omission of any statement that Her Majesty had received friendly assurances from other Powers, was it to be supposed that when Parliament met, every foreign nation in the world was to come forward and express what were their feelings towards this country, in order that a paragraph to that effect might be inserted in the Queen's Speech? But he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) took upon himself to affirm that the statement thus made in Her Majesty's Speech was strictly correct; and, above all, he begged to say in reply to something like an insinuation or question on the part of the noble Lord with respect to Russia, that Her Majesty's Government was not only at peace but at amity with that great country. The passage in which reference was made to the question that had arisen between Turkey and the Imperial Government was alleged to be inconsistent. But where was the inconsistency? Did the noble Lord suppose that there was any, because the good offices both of this country and

73
of France had been energetically employed with the determination to assist the Porte in the position in which that Government was placed, and to do that which the noble Lord, he thought, would agree with him in regarding as important for the peace and safety of Europe—namely, to maintain the honour and dignity of the Porte? The effect of that interposition was, that peace bad been preserved, that the dignity of the Porte had been preserved, that the peace of Europe was not likely to be endangered, in consequence of these explanations thus conducted to a successful issue; and no noble Lord would venture to say the negotiations had been conducted in a manner to derogate from the interests or reflect discredit on the policy of the country. The noble Lord then went on to allude to that part of the Speech which referred to the alteration in the navigation laws. Now, without entering into any discussion on the necessity for the change which was made last Session, he would state that the reciprocity, to which the noble Lord attributed so great a value, had been attained in the short space of half a year to a far greater degree than the most sanguine hopes of Her Majesty's Government had led them to anticipate. That was the case with the United States of America, with Sweden, and in a great degree with Holland, though the negotiations with that country had not yet been completed. He would now say a few words with regard to the Amendment which had been proposed for adoption, though, even after the speech of the noble Lord, he was somewhat at a loss to know with what views it had been brought forward. Of course deep regret must be felt at the distress of any large portion of Her Majesty's subjects; but when the noble Lord, not content with saying that this distress was felt by the owners and occupiers of land, went on to allege that it was shared by the agricultural community at large, he would meet the noble Lord with the assertion that throughout England the condition of the labourer was better than it had been. First of all he would refer to the poor. His noble Friend the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests had cited a return, showing that there was a smaller number of ablebodied paupers on the 1st of January, 1850, than there was on the corresponding day in 1849. It had been objected that this return only related to one day; but if any other day had been taken, it would have been just the same. He could assert, from his own
74
personal knowledge, that in his own neighbourhood the number of poor receiving parochial relief had very much diminished, and in parts of Sussex also it had been greatly reduced. Since he had come into the House, also, he had been informed, that in the union of Henley, where, above all others, the condition of the labourer was stated to be so bad, the number of able-bodied paupers was diminished. The number of persons relieved in that union was 28,327 in 1848, against 19,312 in 1849, showing a diminution of several thousands. Nearly 300,000 less had been spent in 1849 than had been expended in 1848 to maintain the poor. But was this the only test of the state of the labouring population? If the labourer were really so badly off, would not his condition show itself in a diminished consumption? Now, it was a fact that almost every article that constituted a labourer's luxury had been consumed to a greater extent in the last than in the preceding year. The noble Lord would hardly deny that tea was a luxury to the labourer. Last year there was an increase in the consumption of tea to the amount of 3,000,000 lbs.; and with the exception of coffee, which was balanced by an increase of cocoa, there was an increase in all other articles of general consumption by the labourer. He would venture to say that not only was consumption increasing, but would increase. The noble Lord opposite had adverted to the increase of commerce, and had treated that circumstance with something like contempt, as having no sort of bearing upon the landed interest. It was the glory of this country that its commerce could not increase without ultimately benefiting the proprietors of land. During the last year the increase in the amount of exports had been not less than 10,000,000 l. It had been said that a great portion of the exports had been sent to India; but a great part also was sent to the United States; and could it be contended that the landed proprietor was not benefited by that portion of the export trade? It had also been urged in the course of the debate that this increased amount of exports had been counteracted, as affecting the interests of the landed proprietors, by the immense importation of corn which had taken place. He would not dispute the fact that the importation of corn had been very large; but he saw no reason to expect that this importation would be likely to continue upon so large a scale. From information which he had recently received, he believed that

75
there was every probability that the importation had reached its maximum, and was at present very greatly reduced. In the last three months of the year ending January 5, 1849, the quantity of corn imported was 1,438,000 quarters; while in the three months ending January 5, 1850, the amount had been reduced to 845,000 quarters. But this was not all; he had received an account of the quantity of corn imported during the first four weeks of the month of January of the present year, which amounted to 336,890 quarters, while in the corresponding period of the last year the quantity imported was 1,108,650 quarters. So that this importation of foreign corn, against which the farmers were told it would be in vain for them to struggle, was reduced in the proportion of about one-fourth of its former amount. Some allusion had been made to the state of France, but there could not be a more instructive picture than that which the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) had drawn of protected France and unprotected England. The noble Lord said that a great part of this distress in France was owing to the parcelling and extreme subdivision of the land. But that existed long before these extensive importations had taken place. The noble Earl who moved the Amendment referred to former periods, which he described as times of happiness to the labouring classes of the community, under a state of protection of corn laws and of the sliding scale, of which he avowed himself to be still the advocate. One of the years to which the noble Earl referred was 1833. He would quote from a most authentic document the state of England and the landed interest at this period, when protected by the sliding scale. It was the report of a Committee which was composed of the greatest authorities on both sides of the House. After referring to the report of a former Committee of 1821, the Committee expressed a hope that the great body of the occupiers of the soil in this country possessed a power which would enable them to surmount the difficulties under which they laboured; and they then go on to say that they were bound to state that a great many of the difficulties remained unchanged—that the savings of a great number of the occupiers were gone, their credit was diminished, and their resources generally exhausted. This opinion, they stated, was formed not upon the evidence of the ratepayers, but of many of the most respectable gentlemen, as well
76
owners of land as occupiers, surveyors, and land agents. What worse description could the noble Lord give of the state of agriculture and the owners and occupiers of land at the present day? Could he describe them in more simple or more emphatic terms than "that their savings were gone, their credit had failed, and that their resources were exhausted! "And this, too, was under a scheme which he thought so good, that he refused to take an 8s. permanent duty in lieu thereof, believing that the country could only be saved by the and of that defensive system, with this panoply—this fortification of a sliding scale, which exhausted the resources, took away the savings, and diminished the capital of the country. The condition of the agricultural labourer had, therefore, been at various times equally as bad as it is at present; and therefore it was that he hoped noble Lords and hon. Gentlemen who were in the habit of addressing public meetings upon this subject would cease to hold delusive language to the farmers, and forbear to tell them that their resource was only in those protective laws. They deceived the farmers when they held out such delusive hopes to them, instead of telling them fairly that they were not the only body in England who had to compete with the foreigner, and bidding them look to the woollen and silk manufacturers, who were successfully competing with the foreigner, and bidding them "go and do likewise." Instead of adopting this course with the farmer, they deceived him by telling him to go to Parliament, and that Parliament would relieve him. And what, after all, was the relief proposed to be obtained from Parliament? Was it a recourse to a system of fixed duty? If a farmer addressed at one of these public meetings was told that by going to Parliament he could obtain relief and security—if he had the intelligence of a British farmer, and would come and look over the Amendment of the noble Earl, he would ask, what is the relief you promised us? You have nothing here but mere general statements. What do you propose to do? He (the Marquess of Lansdowne) understood that the noble Duke was prepared, if the Amendment was carried, to follow it up by some other resolutions in favour of a return to the old system of protection—
The DUKE of RICHMOND: I am prepared, if this Amendment is carried, to get rid of the present Government; and I have every hope that the Members of a

77
new House of Commons will give their protection to all the domestic interests of this country.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEthanked his noble Friend for stating so explicitly his intentions. It was now clear, that what was intended was to get rid of the present Government, and then to call together a new House of Commons to re-enact the old corn laws. He would be as frank with the noble Duke as he had been with him. There was a time when he considered that a fixed duty was the best mode of meeting the necessity which existed for a great and radical change in the system of the corn laws. That proposition was made, and by the noble Lords opposite it was resisted. It was resisted by them successfully, and the rejection of that proposition placed the country in a situation which compelled it to determine between the sliding scale and no corn duty at all. Whether the farmer was now, upon reflection, grateful to the noble Lords opposite for having saved him from the fixed duty, he did not know; but, at all events, the farmer was so saved by their exertions, and Parliament having once decided between the tee-total repeal of the corn laws and the sliding scale, and that having been decided by large majorities, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) for one—though the noble Lord might be ready for the conflict—was not prepared to engage in that conflict of interests which would ensue if that proposition were now to be carried. He would not be responsible for it. Noble Lords had a right to take the sense of the House upon the subject, and he was glad that they were prepared to take it with the explanation so distinctly stated by the noble Duke. He did not entertain that low opinion of the English farmer which some of those who professed to call themselves his friends appeared to entertain, that he alone who was engaged in the manufacture of the land, was unable to compete with the manufacturers of other countries. He was not speaking lightly when he said that, although the farmers might he rather slower than the manufacturers in embracing improved methods, and in making new exertions, still they did not want the energy which was indispensable to success. Their Lordships would recollect, that from one end of the country to the other, all protection had been substantially done away with, Take the case of silk,
78
for instance. Since the amount of protection was diminished, the exportation had been steadily increasing. During the last year, the quantity of silk exported had increased from 605,963 pounds to 1,231,835 pounds, while the increase in the declared value had been from 466,000 l. to 805,000 l., or nearly double in amount. And a great quantity of this silk was exported to the countries from whence the raw material was imported into this country. Was not this a proof of the injuriousness of the protective duties? Again, in the article of copper, the same results had been obtained from a reduction of the duty. The poor-rates of the county of Cornwall had not been so low for some years as they were at present, owing to the great increase of employment given to the people in connexion with the manufacture of copper. With respect to the public meetings to which he had referred, he had seen and heard enough of them to know that those who addressed them did so not with a view of discussing great questions of principle, but of inflaming the minds and exciting the passions of one part of the country against the other. He (the Marquess of Lansdowne) was not prepared to go back on their past policy; he was not prepared to hold out what he believed to be a delusion. He objected to the Amendment of the noble Lord, which was calculated, if carried, to give rise to general uncertainty and confusion. The way to test the question was to appeal to the energies that distinguish the British character, and which were not confined to one class alone, but extended to every class—energies which at the present moment were exhibiting themselves notwithstanding the change in the navigation laws, for in spite of the predictions in that House, and the declarations of persons interested, or supposed to be interested, in that subject, there was scarcely a port in England at that moment in which shipbuilding was carried on, in which there were not more ships building than at any former time; and at that port which was the emporium of the trade, the port of Sunderland, there was an enormous quantity of shipping laid down. Not only were vessels laid down there of a general description, but also of that particular description, from their size, build, and tonnage, that were destined for foreign voyages, though the foreign voyage was the general question on which noble Lords dwelt during the discussion of the measure,

79
and declared that that was a description of competition in which they would utterly fail. With such an example of what energy could do before him, he could not accede to the proposition of the noble Earl; and he trusted that spirit and energy would redound, not only to the honour, but likewise to the permanent prosperity of the country.
The DUKE of BEAUFORTsaid, that a doubt having been expressed as to their being distress amongst the agricultural labourers, he could only state, in spite of the figures referred to by the noble Marquess, that such distress did exist. When he saw repeatedly at the sessions and other meetings bodies of labourers coming and begging for work and wages, and stating that they could not get one or the other, he could not but believe there was considerable distress. With regard to the statement made as to the decrease in pauperism, there was no doubt of what his noble Friend (the Duke of Richmond) stated, as to the practice resorted to of giving labourers 3s. or 4s. for working two or three days, to keep them out of the workhouse.
EARL GREYwished to say a single word in reference to a statement made by a noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley). The noble Lord had said that he (Earl Grey) made use of a certain observation on the debate of the corn laws; but the noble Lord had quoted inaccurately what he did say. The noble Lord represented him to say that after the repeal of the corn laws he would increase his rent; but he never did say any such thing: what he did say was, that the repeal of the corn laws would increase the value of his property. Noble Lords generally could not attempt to deny the improved state of the country, and its advance, in spite of the difficulties of the last three years, in the career of prosperity; and no one could entertain any doubt whatever that at no distant time the land, like other interests, would share in those benefits. As the noble Lord had referred to his (Earl Grey's) private affairs, he would only say that nothing had occurred within his own personal experience in the slightest degree inconsistent with the public experience, or the expectations that were entertained.
On Question, whether the said words should be there inserted?
House divided:—Contents, Present, 69; Proxies, 34: Total, 103. Not-Contents, Present, 86; Proxies, 66: Total, 152:—Majority 49,

List of the CONTENTS.

DUKES.

Verulam

Beaufort

Warwick

Buckingham

Winchilsea

Cleveland

Wilton.

Manchester

VISCOUNTS.

Montrose

Combermere

Richmond.

Exmouth

MARQUESSES.

Gage

Drogheda

Hereford

Downshire

Lorton

Ely

Strangford

Salisbury.

St. Vincent.

EARLS.

BISHOP.

Bandon

Rochester.

Cardigan

BARONS.

Chesterfield

Abinger

Darnley

Boston

Desart

Castlemaine

Enniskillen

Clinton

Eglinton

Colchester

Erne

Clarina

Egmont

De Ros

Glengall

De L'Isle

Huntingdon

Forester

Hardwicke

Kenyon

Kinnoul

Kilmaine

Lonsdale

Northwick

Lucan

Polwarth

Monteashel

Rayleigh

Nelson

Redesdale

Orkney

Rollo

Pomfret

Saltoun

Roden

Sandys

Sandwich

Sondes

Sheffield

Southampton

Stanhope

Stanley

Stradbroke

Tenterden.

Talbot

Proxies.

DUKES.

Malmesbury

Marlborough

Mansfield

Newcastle

Munster

Rutland

Ranfurly

MARQUESSES.

Seafield

Ailsa

Selkirk

Waterford

Tankerville.

Westmeath.

VISCOUNT.

EARLS.

Doneraile.

Abingdon

BARONS.

Beverley

Bagot

Brownlow

Douglas

Buckinghamshire

De Saumarez

Caledon

Gray

Cathcart

Hastings

Delawar

Hawke

Eldon

Sinclair

Guildford

Sherborne

Leven and Melville

Skelmersdale.

Longford

List of the NOT-CONTENTS.

Lord Chancellor

Breadalbane

Archbishop of Canterbury

Camden

Clanricarde

DUKES.

Donegal

Argyll

Lansdowne

Buccleuch

Ormonde

Devonshire

Winchester.

Norfolk.

EARLS.

MARQUESSES.

Aberdeen

Anglesey

Arundell

81

Bruce

Norwich

Burlington

St. David's

Besborough

Worcester.

Carlisle

BARONS.

Charlemont

Alvanley

Chichester

Ashburton

Clanwilliam

Auckland

Clare

Beaumont

Cowper

Byron

Craven

Camoys

Devon

Campbell

Essex

Carrington

Fitzhardinge

Colborne

Fitzwilliam

Crewe

Glasgow

De Mauley

Granville

Dormer

Grey

Dufferin

Harrowby

Eddisbury

Kenmare

Elphinstone

Lovelace

Erskine

Minto

Foley

Morley

Hatherton

St. Germains

Howden

Sefton

Keane

Strafford

Lilford

Waldegrave

Methuen

Yarborough

Milford

Zetland

Monteagle

VISCOUNTS.

Portman

Canning

Rossmore

Hardinge

Say and Sele

Clifden.

Sudeley

BISHOPS.

Suffield

Chester

Vaux

Down

Wodehouse

Hereford

Wrottesley.

Limerick

Proxies.

Archbishop of York.

Suffolk

DUKES.

Uxbridge

Brandon

Wicklow

Grafton

VISCOUNTS.

Leinster

Bolingbroke

Somerset

Falkland

Sutherland.

Ponsonby.

MARQUESSES.

BISHOPS.

Headfort

Durham

Londonderry

Manchester.

Normanby

BARONS.

Westminster.

Abercromby

EARLS.

Carew

Camperdown

Cloncurry

Clarendon

Dacre

Cork

Dartry

Cornwallis

Denman

Derby

Dinorben

Ducie

Dorchester

Effingham

Dunally

Fingall

Dunfermline

Fortescue

Glenelg

Gainsborough

Godolphin

Gosford

Holland

Haddington

Howard de Walden

Kingston

Kinnaird

Leicester

Leigh

Meath

Lovat

Oxford

Montford

Radnor

Monson

Ripon

Mostyn

Rosebery

Oriel

Scarborough

Stafford

Shrewsbury

Stanley of Alderley

82

Stuart de Decies

Wenlock

Stourton

Wharncliffe.

Vernon

Then the original Motion was agreed to; and a Committee appointed to prepare the Address. Then the Committee withdrew; after some time, report was made of an Address drawn by them, which being read, was agreed to, and ordered to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with white staves.
House adjourned to Monday next.