But I will add, 666 May I be cold before that dreadful day, [The mock-heroic tone in which the Hon. Member read this extract threw the House into convulsions of laughter.] After this poetical fervour, the Right Hon. Baronet concluded his speech thus,-" It now only remains for you to decide whether I shall return to the House of Commons as your representative. The Right Hon. Baronet then sat down amidst most vehement and long-continued shouts of applause. As no other candidate presented himself, Sir J. Graham was pronounced duly elected, and was afterwards chaired through the town, with the usual honours." Mr. Ferrand concluded a long and powerful appeal in favour of Protection to native industry. DR. BOWRING moved the adjournment of the debate to this day (Wednesday). MR. M. MILES begged upon that to move an amendment, that the debate be adjourned to Thursday evening. He did not think that it would make the slightest eventual difference, and he was of opinion that the business for which, as he understood, Wednesdays had been set apart, should not be interfered with. If his wish had been consulted, a division would long since have been come to; but on a question of such importance, one, as all agitating the country, east, west, north, and south, it would have been impracticable, and, perhaps inadvisable, to close the debate before this week. It had certainly already been sufficiently discussed, as far as that side of the House was concerned; and there would therefore be no objection to an adjournment to Thursday. He sincerely hoped the discussion would not be continued over Friday night (hear). The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had that day presented a petition from Liverpool, containing a prayer to that effect, from merchants engaged in the American trade, and also representing the great impediments which the delay in a settlement presented to mercantile business (hear, hear). That might be looked upon as the general feeling on the subject; and the sooner a settlement was effected the better for Ireland (hear). If, in reference to that country, the Right Hon. Baronet introduced a short bill, the object of which should be to give an immediate supply of food, his (Mr. Miles') consent should be cheerfully given to its passing (cheers). If famine, while the debate was going on, did come on the Irish people, and if the price of provisions did rise, upon the Right Hon. Bart. would rest all the responsibility (hear). SIR R. PEEL was understood to assent to the adjournment to Thursday. The debate was then adjourned to Thursday. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26. The adjourned debate was resumed by MR. D. Ross, who commenced by referring to the speech of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Ferrand). If that Hon. Member had addressed himself to the question, he (Mr. Ross) would have felt it his duty to answer him; but he did not feel himself called on to follow the Hon. Member into the subject of the West Riding election, nor to defend the manufacturers, nor to prove that the Hon. Member for Stockport had never sold milk to his workmen (hear, hear). The Hon. Member had declared that the labouring classes felt that they would be injured by this measure; but he had failed to prove it. The Hon. Member for Northamptonshire, in his speech,-which, had it been as cogent in reasoning as it undoubtedly was beautiful in diction, would have deserved the cheers it received, had argued that labour was entitled to legislative protection. Was the Hon. Member prepared to follow his argument to its legitimate conclusion? Was he prepared to make it penal in any one to interfere with the labour of the workman? The whole speech of the Hon. Member appeared to him to be filled with similar fallacies-propositions of which his own understanding must have disapproved. The principles of Free Trade were by no means new to the Legislature. Two hundred years ago they were announced and defended by Pym and by other distinguished Parliamentarians of that day. He denied that the prosperity of the country depended on the preponderance of agriculture. On the contrary, he held that agriculture and manufactures were mutually dependent on each other for their prosperity. In Ireland a regular rise and fall of each, as compared with the other, was observable; and on this fact he confessed were based many of his hopes for the successful working of this measure. In Scotland the same results were to be seen. In Roxburghshire, and also in the Lothians, increased demand had led to a keen competition for land, to the great benefit of the landholder, and he hoped to see the same effect produced on a larger scale by this measure in the competition between the home-grower and the foreigner. A stimulus was necessary to both the quality and the quantity of production. Without some such stimulus the natives of Great Britain would be as inert as South Sea Islanders; and he would take on himself to say that there could have been no good farming in the golden age (a laugh). The advantage of relaxation of duties had already been shown in the case of the flax trade in Ireland, and this he conceived to be a good answer to the alarms of the Right Hon. Recorder. The reduction of duties had not only increased production, but had also increased the price of home-grown flax. £1,800,000 yearly was paid in wages in this branch of manufacture, £5,000,000 of capital was employed, and 500,000 people drew their subsistence from the cultivation of flax. Great advantages would result to Ireland from extending the cultivation of flax. Butter was another article of produce which deserved attention. Every week 6,000 barrels of Dutch butter were brought here; but were Carlow, Tipperary, and Limerick less fertile than Holland? Then much might be done to improve agriculture; from the application of guano, in one instance, he had got 16 tons of potatoes per acre, on which he made upwards of £16. Under the Ministerial measure the farmers would be able to purchase various articles more cheaply, while, with the exception of corn, their produce would sell at a dearer rate. MR. B. DENISON said, that when he had the honour of seconding the address, he did expect, from what the Right Hon. Baronet communicated, that measures would be brought forward of the same character and description with those his Right Hon. Friend had propounded to Parliament in the course of the preceding three or four years, and which he (Mr. Denison considered so successful. He certainly thought a discussion would take place on the subject of the Corn Laws; but he frankly owned that he was not prepared to expect that the Right Hon. Baronet would propose the total abolition of the Corn Laws, even with a sliding scale which was to last for three years, accompanied also with compensatory provisions; and he begged to say that the Right Hon. Baronet in so doing had committed a great mistake, which many people would regret, if the Right Hon. Baronet did not live to regret it himself. Though he (Mr. Denison) would oppose the measure, he wished it might, if carried, be successful in promoting the public advantage in the way which the Right Hon. Baronet anticipated. Unless the Right Hon. Baronet had a strong conviction that the measure was called for, and felt himself compelled by a sense of public duty to propose it under such circumstances, and at such a time, be never would have ventured to do so. It was as much the business of Government and of Parliament as it was of a private individual to exert themselves as far as possible to promote the welfare of those around them, and to furnish them with abundance of food. He had supported the Corn Laws on that principle only. He had never advocated the Corn Laws on the ground that they were for the advantage of the landlords. He had not advocated them solely, though he had partially, for the sake of the tenantry, who were the hard-working men. But he held that great consideration should be given to the state and wants of the working classes; and if Honourable Gentlemen could convince him that the health, comfort, and happiness of the people would be promoted by the removal of Protection, then he should be in favour of the measure. But till he was so convinced, he must remain of his original opinion, that the Corn Laws were for the benefit of the working classes (cheers). What had been the state of matters for the last few years? The price of corn had fallen nearly fifty per cent. At the present time there was not a larger proportion of the population fed by foreign wheat than at the commencement of the session. In regard to pauperism, the money raised to meet it had within the last century gradually decreased. The country was raising less money in 1841 than it raised in 1810 (hear, hear); and, notwithstanding all this, it had been under the operation of those laws. Between 1791 and 1800, the average annual importation of foreign corn was 470,000 quarters; between 1801 and 1810, 555,000 quarters; between 1811 and 1820, 429,000 quarters; between 1821 and 1830, 534,000 quarters; between 1831 and 1840, 980,000 quarters ; and for the last five years, from 1841 to 1845, the average annual importation was 1,500,000 quarters each year. But during many of those years to which this statement in decennial periods referred, the harvest at home was so abundant that there was no importation. In the last two years the impor tation of foreign corn entered for home consumption was comparatively small; in 1845 it amounted to 136,000 quarters. And yet it was said the Corn Laws must be taken off, that the population might be supplied with food. If ever there was an interest hard driven, hard spurred, it was the agricultural interest. The protective duties had undergone a succession of changes. Yet improvement in agriculture had been going on at the same rate as the population (hear, hear). He understood that cheer, but he had no reason to think that agriculture would not continue to improve; he would give his Honourable Friends on the Treasury bench all the advantags of the admission that the science of agriculture was in its infanro(hear, hear, and cheers). But in the mean time let them beha to frankly and fairly with the agricultural interest; they ought y have given them at least some time under the bill of 1842. H could not accept the invitation to vote for the total abolition o the Corn Laws. It was taking them by surprise, and placing some 300 gentlemen who were most anxious to support the Government, in the awkward position of voting against their Leaders, against their consciences, or against their constituents (hear, hear). He must take one course, and he preferred voting against the Government that had brought forward the proposition (hear, hear). In 1841 he was pressed to become a candidate for the West Riding, in order to prevent two of, he might say, the most popular men in the kingdom from being returned- Lord Milton and Lord Morpeth; the electors returned him in the belief that he would maintain the Corn Laws, and he felt as much compelled to keep his word as if it had been his bond; nay, more, for he might break his bond-his word he would not break (cheers). The Hon. Member for Halifax and others had laughed at the idea of two Conservatives being returned for the West Riding at that election; with an appeal of cheap corn, cheap sugar, he asked, what chance had they? (laughter.) However, he (Mr. B. Denison) told the Hon. Gentleman to take care, or they should thrash both the Free Trade candidates; and so it came off (laughter). Then, without a single reason assigned for the sudden change, even by the Right Hon. Baronet himself, how could he justify himself for voting, in 1846, for the total abolition of the Corn Laws? How could he justify himself in doing so, having, on those grounds, opposed the Noble Lord (Morpeth) who was now his Colleague? (hear, hear). If he had changed his mind he should have felt bound in honour to have resigned his seat; he could not content himself with merely saying, "I have chauged my mind, and that disposes of all the speeches on the subject" (cheers and laughter). He intended to stand by all the speeches he had ever made, and not having changed his mind he could not vote for this proposition. He regretted his Noble Colleague (Lord Morpeth) was not in his place, as there was another point to which he wished to allude; the Noble Lord seemed to fancy that his not being opposed at the late election was a sign of a great change of feeling in that constituency; let him not deceive himself too much on that point; various circumstances had induced them, he might say, not to offer any opposition; what those circumstances were he need not state; but had it been a general election, with the proposition of the Government made known, the Noble Lord would have had to look very sharp about him indeed; and he could tell him this, that when the subject was discussed, a great number of gentlemen of considerable influence and E property said they had worked night and day in 1841 against Mr. Wortley and himself, but that now he (Mr. B. Denison) was welcome to use their purses and their services (hear). He thought it only fair to the Noble Lord to advertise him of this, that he might not wrap himself up in the idea that supporting the repeal of the Corn Laws would carry him over the course at the next election. He had stated the reasons that led him to oppose the plan of the Government; he had promised to stand by the Corn Laws, he had not changed his mind, and if he had he would have given to the freeholders who elected him the opportunity of saying, they took him on his word of honour, he had changed his opinion, and they were deceived (cheers). corn. MR. BROTHERTON said, the Hon. Member who had last spoken seemed to think it derogatory in a man to change his mind. Now, he had read in a book remarkable for its wisdom, that "a wise man doubteth oft and changeth oft;" but that a man of a different description" continueth in his perversity" (hear, hear). The Hon. Member said his only motive for supporting the Corn Laws was because he thought them beneficial to the working-classes, and to a certain extent, to the tenant-farmer, not that they were beneficial to the landlord. He had also adduced certain figures to prove that they must be beneficial to the community at large, because fewer persons were now fed on foreign corn than at the time the Corn Laws were enacted. He was at issue with the Hon. Member upon that point. If he examined the returns made to that House, he would find that from 1815 to 1821, 1 in 30 of the population was fed with foreign corn; on the average of the ten years from 1821 to 1831, it was 1 in 22; and in the ten years from 1831 to 1841, 1 in 16; and if they took the quantity imported for the last eight years, they would find that 1 in 10 of the population was fed with foreign He believed that many did honestly support the Corn Laws, believing they were a benefit to agriculture, that they were not enacted merely to keep up rents, (though Lord Liverpool said they were), but that their object was to encourage agriculture, so that the supply should always be sufficient for the population. Now, the question was, had they answered that object? More people were fed with foreign corn now than when the Corn Laws were enacted, and this fact disposed of that argument. Again-let Hon. Gentlemen consider whether there were not reasons that compelled the Government to change its opinion. There were 4,000,000 of people in Ireland living on potatoes; the Prime Minister had stated his belief that they were on the brink of a famine in that country, and he was surprised that under such circumstances Hon. Gentlemen could resist the propositions of the Government. They had been made familiar recently with the speeches of farmers and the speeches of labourers; and they had now an opportunity of judging of the component parts of the rhetoric of country gentlemen. The effusions of the latter said "The land is our own, and we have a right to do what we like with our own; we have a territorial constitution-ergo we have a right to govern you; we have fed and employed you, they are worse off in Russia and Poland, and so what do you complain of?" In conformity with such political principles had been their E E |
