picious in their motives if their object and effect were to keep up rents; that was all he meant. He called upon the Protectionists no longer to interfere between the people of this country and their supply of food, but to allow them to avail themselves of the bounty of Providence and the fruits of their untiring industry and unexampled ingenuity.

MR. NEWDEGATE said that the Hon. Member who had just sat down had taunted the Hon. Member for Knaresborough for violating his principle of Protection in the materials of the dress he wore. But the Hon. Member (Mr. P. Scrope) laboured under a misapprehension, common with his school; he would assume that they (the Protectionists) were advocates of prohibition, not protection (hear). He (Mr. Newdegate) acknowledged that the true principle of trade was to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest; but he denied that it was the true principle of a Government, the function of Government, to produce wealth, but to provide for the happiness and comfort of the whole kingdom (hear, hear). He could not understand that the doctrine which was true as applied to trade was true as applied to Government. If so, why did they not act upon it in providing for the national defence? Why did they not buy their army in the cheapest market? Men could be procured cheaper abroad than at home. The Hon. Member who had just sat down had said that the repeal of the Corn Laws would reduce the price of corn or it would not, and if not, there was no ground of complaint against their repeal. But he forgot that the law was enacted to insure a steadiness of price (hear, hear). Then, he said, that it was hard that manufacturers who paid a tax in the price of corn were called upon to pay other taxes. He was prepared to prove that the manufacturer did not pay such double taxes. In the next place, the Hon. Member said it was a mere question of justice; but the political economists were to prove that the manufacturers were the majority; whereas there was evidence before the House that they were not the majority. He regretted to differ from the Right Hon. Baronet; he was in some measure his representative, as the Right Hon. Baronet had large property in the county he represented. But neither this consideration nor ties of friendship should deter him from doing his duty to his constituents. It was a fact well worthy of attention, that amongst the vast variety of trades which were exercised in this country, there was not one the wages of which would not be affected by the proposed measure. It was a measure in which they could not proceed by halves, and it was one the operation of which time alone could fully develope; no man could calculate its remote consequences. He should not trouble the House with any very long calculations, but should briefly call their attention to a few facts:-In the year 1814 the rental of this country was, in round numbers, £39,000,000; in the year 1843 it was, £45,000,000, being a difference of £6,000,000; or, to state it more exactly, of £6,347,910. Now, that was the sole increase in the income derived from land, notwithstanding the enclosure of waste land, and notwithstanding the large investments for the improvement of land. a contrast to that state of things did the value of house property present! The value of houses of all sorts, including factories,

What

was, in the year 1814, no more than £16,259,399, whereas, in 1843, it amounted to £38,430,730. Thus it might be seen that the land had only been augmented in value to the extent of 12 per cent., while the houses had been raised considerably upwards of 100 per cent. By every variety of plan that could be adopted for that purpose the value of agricultural produce had been diminished-the value of our exports had been depressed, and now it was proposed to put an end to the only remaining protection which the industry of the country possessed. He should now say a word or two with respect to the peculiar burdens upon land. Including tithes, those burdens could not reasonably be estimated at less than £12,000,000. That tithes ought to be included in the burdens on land was a position laid down by Mr. Ricardo, and he presumed that his authority would not be disputed by Hon. Members, if they admitted any authority whatever. Then Mr. M'Culloch quoted Dr. Paley, to show that which a Churchman would probably not be over anxious to display-namely, the evil tendency of tithes in discouraging the improvement of land. Hon. Members might dispute the pressure of this burden, and they might do so with respect to any of the imposts under which land suffered; but they ought to go through them item by item, as the onus rested upon them. He had expressed opinions which had not been taken up lightly, and while a majority of that House had maintained those opinions for years, he did not consider it profitable in a constitutional point of view to yield them up at the dictation of any Minister, though he proved himself the master and dictator of his Cabinet (hear). It was true that his tone had been somewhat modified lately, but when he heard his first address coupled with strange terms applied to the aristocracy and the monarchy, he could not help looking at the emblem of the authority of the House on the table (the mace), and thinking it was well that the statute-book stood between that and the Right Honourable Baronet. He could not believe that overcoming his colleagues, changing his opinion, taking the country by surprise, going over to his adversaries, and adopting their policy, was the conduct of a Constitutional Minister ("hear, hear," from Colonel Sibthorp); nor could he approve of it until he saw him submit the question for the opinion of the Constitutional Tribunal by an appeal to the people. He must say that the Right Hon. Baronet was the Minister of Her Majesty's necessity, for she had indicated her opinion by calling for another, and a minister for the necessities of the country, and not for its interests. Although he might be the same man, he was not the same minister. An unusual tone had been adopted on this question and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War had used the argument that if they did not yield now they would have to yield to force. He should not have been surprised to hear such an argument used by the leaders of an agitation, but when Her Majesty's Ministers turned round, and, seizing them by the throat, said to them, "Yield up your principles, or you must yield to force," he could but ask where that force was to come from, and declare that such terms ill became an English Minister (hear, hear). He was rejoiced to see the talent and determination displayed by a broken party, which had been

taken at a disadvantage; but he must tell them that they still had need of perseverance, and that, with that perseverance, the country would hereafter appreciate their conduct. They had been told that they were raising dissension among different classes; but against that charge he had a right to appeal to all the former conduct of the agricultural interest in Parliament. The Noble Lord who had moved the address had told them that they would create a modern war of the roses, and set class against class; but did not the constitution of the party give the denial to that? Had they not a Plantagenet and a Baring (laughter), a Granby, a Miles, and an Arkwright? And the argument implied an utter want of knowledge of those with whom they had to deal, not only in point of character, but of pursuits and habits.

MR. BARKLY, who spoke in so low a tone of voice as to be frequently inaudible in the gallery, said, that though he represented an agricultural constituency he came to the consideration of this question as calmly as to any question of social improvement. It was true he was connected wich the Protectionist party, and that his constituents sent him as a Protectionist, still they only behoved him to be more careful that the judgment to which he came should not be guided by prejudice or self-interest. The question was,

whether it would most conduce to the interests of the British empire at large to maintain Protection for some time longer, or whether it was wiser at once to abandon it? All that had been stated in favour of a continuance was, that the Protection of native interests had been for centuries mixed up with the policy of this country. Now, his opinion was, that the rules of political economy were as true, and as capable of proof, as any proposition in Euclid; still he had held, with the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, that those principles ought to be applied with great care. He saw that Right Hon. Gentleman now coming forward with a broad and systematic plan, and though the change of opinion of one man, however eminent, or of twenty men, could not induce him to support a measure which he thought wrong in principle, yet the only question now to be determined was the rate of progress at which they should return to sounder principles, and the state of parties in that House did not render it any longer feasible or possible to retain restrictions upon the trade in corn. He did not consider the present proposal as any change of opinion or any conversion, but only as an advance. He did not think that the country or the farming interests would after all suffer much from the introduction of foreign corn, and indeed any apprehensions were exceedingly foolish, because we had always imported foreign corn, and between 9,000,000 and 10,000,000 quarters had been brought in within the last five years; and whenever there was a bad season here, 2,000,000 or 3,000,000 quarters were usually brought in from the foreign market. In fact, it was not an exaggerated statement to say that 1-10th of our population on an average were dependent on foreigners for their supply of food. With res

pect to the condition of the labourer, the only way in which any improvement could be effected was by improving his moral relations; and he earnestly hoped that measures would be taken for that purpose.

Y

If they had cheap food the Government might take whereas, in 1843, temporary cheapness, and propound measures to impu that the land tion of the labourer. They had been told that, by b2 per cent., labourer of this country into competition with those off 100 per countries, they would be reducing him to the condition of purpose sian serf; but for the last forty years the farmers of this country lue of been in open competition with labourers who were worse fed anẩ” worse clothed than any other people in the world-he meant those of Ireland; but if competition with them had not reduced the condition of the labourer in England, why should competition with the labourer of Russia or other countries have that effect? In conclusion, he would say that he did not feel the same apprehensions that some entertained as to the effect this measure would have on the landed interests of the country.

MR. BENNETT (the new Member for Suffolk) and several other Hon. Gentlemen rose together. The prevalent cries were for the new Member, and Mr. Bennett proceeded to address the House, but was very indistinctly heard in the gallery. He was understood to commence by claiming that indulgence which ever was shown to gentlemen who addressed the House for the first time. He expressed himself opposed to the opinions which had been delivered by the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and his great surprise at the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet, in proposing such great alterations affecting the landed interest, and the welfare of the country. Knowing the great ability and high standing of the Right Hon. Baronet, he must confess that he was greatly grieved to see him desert those principles which he considered of even more importance to this country than all others, the protection and maintenance of the Protestant religion of this kingdom (ironical cheers). The return of Members for five counties without any attempt at opposition from the League was significant as to the feeling of the agricultural districts. He wished he could see the Solicitor-General in his place, as he wished to ask the Hon. and Learned Gentleman if he was prepared to assist him in defending agriculture; because when the Solicitor-General was a candidate for the borough of Cambridge he made a speech in which he alluded to the folly of the Free Traders, and of those who would introduce such a measure as that which would do away with Protection to agriculture, in favour of which he spoke in the strongest terms. He did not know that the Solicitor-General, like the Right Hon. Baronet, had pronounced himself wrong upon every former occasion; and, therefore, he wanted to ask him, would he now assist in maintaining that Protection? After some further observations, which were inaudible in the gallery, the Hon. Gentleman resumed his seat. MR. MUNTZ rose with other Hon. Members, who gave way. The Hon. Gentleman exclaimed "Mr. Speaker!" in a stentorian tone of voice, which elicited a burst of laughter, and then, with much more than his usual rapidity of utterance, which rendered it exceedingly difficult to understand him at times, proceeded to say that the House was surely in a rather unfortunate state; but he was one of the most fortunate in it (a laugh). He had no change to make in his opinions, those which he had asserted for the last twelve years (hear,

taken at a disadvao speech to apologise for, and no fear of being conneed of persey of his own mouth. Last, not least, he had no quarrel would hereight Hon. Baronet ("hear, hear," and laughter). It was they were that if he could have had his own way the Right HonourchargeBaronet would not have been in the House, and he had done agriat he could to keep him out. But he was most happy to see him where he was, and what he was doing (laughter and cheers). He differed from many gentlemen near him, and around him, and many opposite. But, with all that difference of opinion, he ventured to say that there was not a man in the House more anxious for the passing of the measure with a triumphant majority than he was (cheers). The passing of the measure would tear away the veil that concealed all the mischiefs that had afflicted this country for many years; and it would enable men to say whether or no this or that one was owing to the Corn Law. It was impossible for him to say that those mischiefs were coming to an end. He had often told the Right Hon. Baronet that he must take one of two courses. One was to reduce things to a continental level. Let the Right Hon. Baronet take what course he pleased. His opinion was that he had taken the wrong course; but, as he had taken that course, he would do everything he could to carry out his views (great laughter). Gentlemen might laugh; he was very glad to see them laugh. He was certain that anything was better than the present uncertain state of things, and that that uncertainty should come to an end (hear, hear). He apprehended no cause for regretting their repeal (hear, hear). But another subject, and not the least important, which they must take into their consideration, was the effect of the extension of railway communication. He (Mr. Muntz) resided in a central part of the kingdom, where railways had been very generally established, and where one of the principal articles used in the construction of railways was extensively manufactured. did not hesitate to say that if railway speculation ceased to-morrow, the rate of payment for labour and the value of iron would fall fifty per cent. The amount of labour employed in the manufacture of various articles used in the construction of railways had a very important bearing upon this question. It appeared to him that the effect of these circumstances was fully equal to that of those referred to by Adam Smith, as affecting the remuneration of labour in connexion with the price of corn. He must ask the indulgence of the House, for he did not often trouble them (hear, hear), while he alluded to two other subjects. The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had stated the other night, and had challenged contradiction, that the reduction of Protective duties had not produced any injurious effect upon articles of home manufacture. He (Mr. Muntz) could show that this statement was incorrect, by referring to one article which was used in that branch of manufactures with which he was connected-he alluded to zinc. In 1815 the whole of the zinc consumed in this country was manufactured here. About that time, however, a considerable reduction of duty was effected, and the price fell from £75 to £45 per ton. In 1824 a further alteration was made, and the price was reduced to £15 per ton. The present price of zinc was £20 per ton; but it was not worth the

He