4 APRIL 1840, Page 2

Debates anti Wrombinas in Varliament.


Numerous petitions in favour of and against the Corn-laws have been presented to both Houses of Parliament. One from Liverpool demands particular notice. If was presented to the Lords on Monday, by the Earl of CLARENDON ; who stated that it bore the signatures of more than 1.500 persons connected with the trade of Liverpool, who represented a capital of thirty millions sterling : moreover, a majority of the petitioners were Conservatives ; they did not pray for a total repeal of the Corn-laws, but for such an alteration as would remove the evil effects of the existing scale of duties, and at the, same time secure just protection to the agriculturists. On several occasions brief discussions or rather 'conversations on the Corn-laws have taken place in the House of Lords. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER, the Duke of CLEVELAND, and the Earl of RAnNon, have declared in favour of an alteration of the laws ; which Lord ASH- BURTON, the Duke of RICHMOND, and the Duke of BUCKINGHAM earnestly deprecated, maintaining that the existing system works well for all elas,es. In the course of one of these conversations, the Duke of BUCKINGHAM made use of an expression which has excited much remark. Lord RADNOR having presented a petition from agricultural labourers against the Corn-laws, and having stated that the petitioners' wages were 9s. a week, the Duke of BUCKINGHAM is reported to have said, "11 !hell arc so well paid, what cause of complaint have they against the Corn-laws? " [The Duke of Buckingham has denied that be used this expression, which was attributed to him in•all the morning papers.] Mr. VILLIERS was prevented by indisposition from bringing forward his motion in the House of Commons on Tuesday, according to his notice : but on Wednesday evening, though still very unwell, he ap- peared in his place and moved,

" That the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into consideration the Act 9th George IV. regulating the importation of foreign grain." In the opening of his speech, Mr. Villiers apologized for the post- ponement which had arisen from his indisposition ; an excuse which

he might still plead, but fearing that it might occasion inconvenience to some who expected the discussion this week, lie determined at all events to delay it no longer-

,. This, however," said Mr. Villiers, " only adds to the many considerations that now present themselves to my mind for deeply regretting that it is still in my hands to make this proposition to the House. This question is now assum- ing a very serious aspect ; it is engaging the attention as it is affecting the in- terest of the great mass of the people ; and, whatever the House may think, questions of this character, bearing as they do upon the commerce, employ- ment, and condition of the people, outweigh every other, in the interest which it excites among them. I wish, therefore, it was in the hands of those who had more p..iver to do justice to the question, and still more with those who had power to do justice to the people." He had hoped that the landowners, in consideration of the deep dis- tress now pervading and bearing clown the productive part of the po- pulation, would have given sonic sign of en intention to relax the rigours of the Corn-law : but three months of the session had passed away, and not a whisper of such an intention had been heard. On the

contrary, the same querulous note had been sounded in another place respecting agitation, and the sante ill-placed and haughty observations on the subject of it ; while in the House of Commons an attempt had been made to procure something like evidence in favour of the Corn. laws, by petitions which rather proved the influence of the landlords on their tenantry and dependents. Notwithstanding these indications of determination to oppose his motion, he called upon the House of Commons to review the grounds on which it had been decided last ses- sion that the Corn-laws worked wcll,—a bold conclusion, as he thought, to pronounce then, but which it would require greater boldness to re- peat ; though he was aware that there were people who talked of the laws not so much as a necessary evil, but as conferring a positive ad- vantage on the community. It seemed almost a mockery of those whom they were elected to represent, to produce arguments and facts in proof of the proposition that abundance of the prime essential of life gave a greater command over the other necessaries of life, whilst dear- ness and scarcity deteriorated the condition of all. But it was neces- sary to perform the task, as a sort of mystery had been thrown around the question, which many were beginning only to comprehend in its simplicity. He proceeded to review the history of Corn-law legislation ; the main object of which was to limit the quantity of corn imported from abroad so as to maintain a high price at home. There had been three attempts to settle the Corn-question—in 1804, in 1815, and 1828. The first bill was obtained by Mr. Western on a statement that if foreign corn were allowed to come in, our lauds would go out of cultivation, and the peasantry thrown out of employment : but from the passing of that bill to the conclusion of the war the ports were never closed, and yet the rent of land advanced 300 per cent. The bill of 1815 was introduced in order to keep the price of corn as high when the currency was sound with bunk-notes redeemable in specie, as during the period of deprecia- tion and the Bank Restriction Act : that law was carried amidst the curses of the people, and expired without support from its original friends. Then came the law of 1828, with its sliding scale ; and though some thought it worked well, he was satisfied that ita had produced nothing but evil. It was injurious to the agriculturis, tube cultivator of the soil; between whom and the owner of the land there was not a com- munity or identity of interest-- "There was no more necessary connexion between the agriculturist and the . landowner than between the owner of a house and the business which was car- ' sisalann Ai, that house. No one would think of confounding the owner of the -boom with the trade which was carried on in it ; no one would think of confound- bar-thiMerchant who carried on business with his banker of whom he might horror mousy. There was the same distinction between them as there was lietweiCti* anufacturer and the person of whom he purchased the raw mate- ' sislo-.Their tercets were perfectly distinct."

- • • - • It was necessary to keep this distinction in view throughout the dis- cussion, although it was usual to talk of agriculturists, as if under that common term were included the landowner, farmer, and labourer-

,. If the agriculturists were able to legislate as they could wish, they would doubtless say what any other capitalist would say, Give me such laws as will insure me the return of my capital which I expect—as will motile me to make my calculation certain, that I may not mime in any undertaking as to the result of which there can be any doubt. That is what any other capitalist would say, and the agricultural capitalist would doubtless say the same. The present Corn-law holds out to the agriculturist a promise of this kind. It promises him a certain price for the produce of his capital ; it promises bin a certain return, and assures him of the price he expects : and the question now is, how far this law has realized these expectations which it has raised. The first fact which 1 have to observe upon is, that since the passing of the Corn. law there has been every variation in the price of produce. The agriculturists have experienced great distress; and this at least seems to lend to the concha sion that the law has not averted the evil anticipated. The next question is, whether the law has not caused the evil? And I think that can be demon- strated ; and 1 collect the proof from the agriculturists themselves. It seems to me tint it has been a great omission in the previous discussions upon this subject, that they have not referred to the evidence collected by this Houle from agriculturists themselves. The fact is, that there have been few discus- sions out this subject. and those who had been opposed to the law bad been only eager to show the injustice of the law generally, and little attention was paid to this evidence ; but there has been a great body of evidence collected in this noose, under circumstances which compel us to give credit to it to which the attention of the public ought to he particularly directed ; and 1 do say, that if there is any conclusion to which a candid inquirer can arrive from reading that evidence, it must lie that the Corn-law has been a positive evil to the agricul. turists; it has grossly deceived them, and caused them the greatest distress."

Here Mr. Villiers read copious extracts from the evidence given be- fore the Committee on Agriculture in 1836, in support of his proposh. tion, that the Corn-laws had not only failed to avert distress from tenants, but had increased their embarrassment and losses, by tempting them to promise rents which prices subsequently did not justify. He had the testimony of the Speaker to this fact ; for the Speaker, who took an active part in the Committee of 1836, had stated in an able ad- dress to his constituents, that the Corn-laws had misled him in the oh tivation of his land, and induced him to expect higher prices than had been obtained. Experience had taught the farmers to withdraw capital from the cultivation of wheat ; and the consequences had been fluctua- tion of prices and scarcity. Either the farmer was ruined or the public was injured. Landowners might derive a temporaitriy1 btheeneitlitiaisti'si:oniolft the e law ; but as their wellbeing could not be separated from that of the rest of the community, they would eventually suffer w people. All the landlords, however, were not of the same opi

" I am not one of those who indiscriminately denounce the whole class of

landed proprietors in this country. Quite the contrary. There are many Men of great intelligence among, that body—high-minded men, non of liberal feel- ings and sentiments—who think it is not to their interest to maiebiii, this law. Some also there are who consider that the maintenance of the law is decidedly to their interest, and yet who will not maintain it. Therelote l do not jots in wholesale deounciations against that class. But I think that much blame and responsibility rest upon those landed proprietors who are interested in the maintenanee of the law, and yet throw obstacles in the wag of any change; for 1 think it' a certain number of landed proprietors were to rise in their place! in this and the other llouse, and admit that the time had come flir a change, 1 believe that there is not a single farmer, from one end of the country to the other, who would not fearlessly assent to the change. Therefore 1 say that not all, but some of the landlords, are to blame for obstructing any change; and I do not think that 1 am unjust or unreasonable in fixing opine those persons the whole blame and responsibility of the consequences of maintain- ing the law." Some of these consequences were visible in the miserable condition

of agricultural labourers. It had been described as a great advantage of the Corn-law that it kept the mass of the people in employment, and that labourers were best off when food was dear : but Mr. Villiers hardly expected to hear these assertions repeated-

" In the evidence I have referred to, there is hardly a witness who does not

state that agricultural labourers had never been so well off as when the prices are low ; and the farmers themselves say that they never knew the agricul- tural labourers so prosperous as when wheat was at 36s. Han inquiry wire to be instituted by this House, could the farmers say with truth that the labourers

are in a prosperous condition now ? No human being can be produced to say that the agricultural labourers are now in a happy and flourishing slide. This is a most unmeant fact, as tending to show that agricultural labourers are never so well off as in the times when food is low. But there is other evidence which tends to indicate their true condition at present. For example, never since there has been the power of emigration have there been so many apples- tions to the Government from persons wishing to emigrate, and those mvsons agricultural labourers. According to the return, there were 62,000 last year, con- sisting pri milts Ily of shepherds, carters, and persons of that class from the districts. Now, if these men got employment in consequence of our-Cora- laws, why are they not content ? But as they do not, they do simply that which it nos most natural and in the order of things they should do: finding that they could obtain no employment for their industry in this country, they go from the farm-house to the poor-house, and from the poor-house to the state to convey them from their country ; and if you will nut allow the produce of other hind to come to them, you must send them to the land shore the food is produced." It had been alleged that if all other arguments in defence of the Corn-laws were refuted, the case of Ireland still remained—that for the benefit of Ireland those laws ought to be maintained. Now of all the unreasonable pretences for refusing to alter the Corn-laws, this scented to Mr. Villiers the most unreasonable- " Ireland, abut since 1832 has sent us gradually ales, and less supply—Ireland, where the poor people cannot consume wheat, where they me too poor to con- sume it—Ireland, where landlords have a larger share of the produce for rent than in any other country, and absent themselves more from their country than proprictorsin any other part of Europe I—why, there is no country which would be so materially benefited by abandoning the cultivation of wheat—no countrY would derive so much advantage from the prosperity of the manufactures of this country as Ireland. Whenever our manufactures have been prosperous there has been a demand for Irish labour and Irish produce. I should like to know whether Ireland will not be in a new situation, now obliged to support her own poor, if the manufactures of England decline, and no longer require Irish labour. That is a question for English landlords to consider. There is evidencegiven by every witness before the Agricultural Committee, that the Irish soil is not suited to the cultivation of wheat. The conclusion from the Irish evidence is, that wherever Irish cultivation has prospered, it hiss been by abandoning the cultivation of wheat, and devoting the soil to other par• 8. If I thought the present law was for the real interest of Ireland, that eitaideration would have great weight with me; but when I see the evidence, and when 1 listen to the opinions of persons of great weight in the sister country, denouncing the Corn-law as fatal to Ireland—I allude more particu- larly to Mr. Sharman Crawford and the honourable Member for Dublin, gen- tlemen disagreeing in some respects, but agreeing iu reprobating the Corn-law tale" king land dear, and repressing manufacturing industry—when I see this, - I t think that the consideration of Ireland should we with me I say, s saline

in discussing the subject of the English Corn-law." He thought he had said enough to show the injurious operation of

the Corn-laws on the agriculturist, and he would proceed to show how they affected the community at large. With this view, he referred to a work entitled Fluctuation of Currency, Commerce, and Illanufiwtures, by a Mr. Wilson— II Mr. Wilson takes as the basis of his calculation, what the public pay for

their fieel in this country ; and he then takes the average of the last seven years of prices of wheat, which he finds to be 52s. a quarter. Ile then adopts the general rstirnate of the present consumption of wheat in this country, which is sistten millions of quarters. We then get the price which the people ray for their food; which will amount to 41,600,000/. That is the average cost which the population pay for wheat. It follows as a consequence, that whatever the people pay more or less than that sum, is so much more loss or gain to the community. It therefore becomes interesting to observe what it is that the public have had to pay in past years, and are paying at the present time, more or less than that sum. Mr. Wilson refers to the price of food at

different periods. For instance : in 1834, the total cost of wheat was 36,03,3334, while the total cost of foreign wheat was 101,7501. ; in 1835, the total cost of wheat was 31,400,0001., and of the latter 34,654/. ; in 1836, of the former :38,800,00uL, of the latter 51,177/.; in 1837, 44,666,000/., and of the latter 499,430e ; in 1838, 51,666,0001., and of the latter 4,594,014/. ; in 1839, 66,533,0001., end the latter 7,515,8001. This shows, that during the last three years, we have nationally spent in wheat 45,733,000/. more than in the three preceding pews, and paid the sum of 12,420,0001. more in the latter than the former period fur foreign wheat. Perhaps it will be better to take the two last years as Liu, tritting the position more clearly. In the beginning of the year 1838, we tint the price of wheat is at the average 52s.; in the autumn M the same year it suddenly rose to 75s., being a little more than 20s. a quarter higher. 'fi (Telles: taking the consumption at sixteen millions, the country was, in Seeisnilier 1838, called upon to pay 303,0001. a week more for food than they pain in the preceding six months. That is a sudden abstraction of capital and lifetime to that amount which, under existing arradgements, was finding ustful and convenient employment elsewhere."

This writer had placed in different columns, in a tabular form, the amount of the additional sum paid for wheat, the amount of the bullion in the Bank of England, the amount of deposits in the Bank, and the amount paid for tbreign wheat- " It appfeirs from this table that there is an exact correspondence between the additional amount we have been obliged to pay tar food imported from abroad, the eflditional price we have paid tile food, and the amount of bullion and deposits in the Bank of England—a c onnexion su close that it is impossible not to hellsve it to he necessary. We find that, as we import more and more from abroad. :Ile hellion in the Bank decreases. From 1817 to the present time, whenever we have been obliged to pay the food, there has been a gradual decline in the bullion atul deposits. The sinking of the deposits seems to indicate that the community suffer from the increase of payment flu their food."

A contraction of time currency had immediately followed an obstruc- tion of bullion and diminution of deposits; and that evil, therefore, of which all men, and the mercantile classes particularly, complained, was to be traced to the operation of the Corn-laws. He would now show how the mercantile interests had been affected by these circumstances. Although time exports of manufactured articles bad increased, the home consumption had been reduced. The home market had failed, and goods had hems sent abroad and sold at a loss to provide the means of meeting engagements in this country— In the yea,• the cotton-wool exported in a manufactured state amounted to 369,00oessi pounds, in1839 to 382,000,000 pounds; the deficiency between the two year a mean ti fig to about 7,000,000 pounds. Tlic cotton-wool consumed at home in matudiletured goods amounted m 1838 to 155,000,000 pounds, and in 1839 to 124(100,000 pounds; showing a deficiency of about 33,000,000 pounds, adeficiency equal to the increase in the exports of manufactured goods. The home consumption of wool in the year 1838 was 56,000,000 pounds, iu 1839 it was 53,000ano pounds; showing a decrease in one year of 3,000,000 pounds ; while on the other hand the woollen goods exported in 1838 amounted to 6,000,000 pounds, mud in 1839 to 6,600,000 pounds, being an increase in ex- ports of 6110,000 pounds. Again, in flax the exports in 1838 amounted to 1,600,000 pounds, in 1839 to 1,200,000 pounds, being a decrease of 396,000 pounds. With respect to the article of silk, in the quantity taken into home consumption there was a deficiency lasty•ear as compared with 1838 of 129,000 pounds. Hardware, and all other articles contributory to the above staple manufitetures, had in like manner greatly fallen (a in the home consumption. On the elude, the returns showed, that while the home consumption had greatly iifflen o11, there had been a considerable increase in the amount of the eras of manutitetured goods. From that increase of exports some persons erred that the country had been prosperous ; but he should only wish those persons to cousult any one of their manufacturing friends on the subject, and ask him whether the increase of exports was a sure indication of the prosperity of the country, or whether it arose from the manner in which business was now done in this country, namely, that when the manullicturers could not disposed their goods at home, they made consignments of them abroad. On looking to the revenue returns, he found that the more that was paid for bread, the less was paid for other things. The following table of duties paid on hops, malt, soap, and spirits, in 1838 and in 1839, in- dicated the decrease in the consumption of those articles—

Hops in 1M8 £298,343; in 1839 £280,079 Malt 5,211,798 4,845,948 Soap 1,047,545


Spirits 5,451,792

lie availed himself of the testimony of Mr. Jones Loyd in support of his opinion that the Corn-laws aggravated tile evils of bad harvests. In a recent pamphlet Mr. Loyd spoke of- " The nieces-Me of two bad harvests in a country afflicted with laws which render such apt occurrence peculiarly oppressive to the community, and by a peculiar felicity in mischief contrive to make monetary derangement, and consequently commercial pressure, the inevitable accompaniment of the mis- fortune of the seasons. The poison of impolicy is thus thrown iuto the fiendish cauldron of injustice,

' For a charm or powerful trouble.

tako ft hen broth to boil and bubble.," Now this was the opinion of a gentleman as cautious and careful as he was enlightened and able, and who was probably the possessor of more property of every description, not only in money but in land, than any of those who would take part in this discussion.

The lamentable effect of a stoppage of demand for manufactures, coupled with a high price of provisions, was manifest in the distress of' the manufacturing population. The result of inquiries made a few weeks since at Bolton, showed, that during the last twelve months, 95,000/. less than formerly had been paid in the cotton-mills; that many mills had been stopped ; that, except two, all were working short time; that 1,125 houses, of which 50 were shops, were untenanted ; that auction-sales of furniture and stock occurred daily ; scores of families were without bedding, crowded in miserable rooms and cellars under- ground, receiving pittances of sixpence and a shilling a day from the parish officers. In Wolverhampton, Birmingham, and other manufac-

turing towns, distress to the same extent existed; and when that distress was caused by a law, Mr. Villiers felt justified in calling upon the Le- gislature to alter the law—

The people were suffering from high prices. Lower the price of provisions, and relict' would be immediately extended to them. It was notorious that this

country was largely a creditor of the United State of America; that many

orders were sent here from that country which the people mild not execute, because the debt was not discharged. America had a large amount of flour in bond in this country, which the people could not touch. Release that flour, and the hills of the manufacturers would he paid, the orders front America would be execined, and instant em plotinent tt mild he riven to the people now starving and in it destitute and wretched condition in all parts of the country. Was it then unreasonable, under such a state of circumstances, to ask the Le-

gislature to interfere ? Not only could they give iint.utt relief; but they could, by abolishing these laws, effect that which the country eefiiiii-..a—namely, the extension of Its commerce and the removal of all restraints which now pressed upon it and cramped the energies of the people.

Ile referred to the evidence collected by Dr. Btevring, and to Mr. Poulett Thomson's speech delivered last year, for proof that the Corn- laws prevented a valuable commerce with the North of Europe and South America, and that their mischievous (Teration had been very extensive.

The state of the revenue had excited much attention. How was the deficiency to be supplied ?—

Whilst the present Corn-laws continued in force, and whilst the price of provisions remained so high, it was absolutely utely impossible that one single litrthing in the shape of additional taxation cfmlil be wrung from the people. For his own part, he saw no ',reliability of a reduction of prices for the next eighteen muntlis,—believing, from the best information he could obtain upon the subject, that the next harvest would be mu better than the last. Then, what were the prospects of trade? It seemed to hits, that as long as the Corn-laws continued, the only iiesuurce to which Hwy could turn was a tax upon property. In the year 1S:i0 the country was to somewhat the same situation as at present. The price of food was very high, and the productive

classes were in a had state. Slr. lInildt,son, in viewing the state of the

country, 111 which the 1-cVe■IIO2 was collected, the mode of taxation,

and the Fospects Which they had, made a most able (and it was his last) veer!) upon the state of the nation. It was to this eller1 : that if things were 10 go on as they did—if they were to go on to collect the sane amount of revenne, and it' trade did not improve—they would have no other alterna- tive hut that of impositer a rax em property. He called the attention of the House to the folFuving facts " Th, more g,ateral considerations to which I now claim the attention of the House art these—First, that no other country in Europe has so large a proportion of its taxation bearing directly upon the incomes of laboar ,ltd productive capital. Secondly, that in no other country of the stone extent—I think I might say in none of five times the extent of this kingdom—is there so large a mass or income belonging to those classes who do not dileetly employ it in bringing forth the produe... ut labour. Thirdly, that no other c ointry has so large a proportion of its fa:so:ion I:met-gaged: in proportion to the amount of that mortgage are we interested in any measure w without injustice to the mortgagee, would tend to lessen the absolute herds:lot' the mortgage. Fourth- ly, that from no other country in the world d,res SO liege a proportion of the class not engaged in production (including many of the wealthy) spend their incomes in foreign parts. I know I may be toll that by taxing that income you run the risk of driving them to withdraw their capital altogether. My answer is, first, that ninety-nine out of every hundred. of these absentees have no such command over the source ref their income ; secondly, that the danger is now of another and more alarming description—that of the produc- tive capitals of this country being transferred to other countries, where they would he secure of a more profitable return. The relief of industry is the remedy against that danger." Thus tar Mr. Hoskisson : Mr. Villiers-could not conceive that the people of this country would tolerate any tax lint a property- tax. It was utterly impossible to improve the reventie but by '111.11 a tax. In conclusion, Mr. Villiers called upon the House to pause before they rejected his motion. lie certainly- admired the bold injustice of Mr. Ileatheote, who had announced his intention of moving a direct negative, more than the insidious proceeding of Mr. Pryme but before either proposition were adopted, lie hoped Members would ask them- selves what they could gain by such conduct. By staving off a settlement of the question, they would bring the middle and the work- ing classes into hearty union, and the distress which ensued would be laid to the door of every one who voted against the motion for inquiry.

Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND followed and seconded Mr. Villiers, in a long speech. He called particular attention to the progress of the feel- ing against the Corn-laws among different classes of society : he had presented petitions from Ripon, from Doncaster, and the tell surround- ing parishes of Doncaster—places which have never petitioned against the Corn-laws before. Ile dwelt upon the injurious effects of the system upon the manufacturers of Yorkshire and Lancashire ; support- ing his statements by illustrative facts and figures.

The Earl of Deursixwrox regretted that the agitation against the Corn-laws should have been resumed after the decisive In:1j 'city of 147 against Mr. Villiers's motion of last session, and the remarkably able speeches in which Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Cayley had supported the existints. laws. However, it was a fact that the agitation had been aug- mented; and that the monied classes, who formerly kept aloof, had now joined it. He knew that very active exertions had been made by un- scrupulous agents of the Anti-Corn-law League to induce various classes to join the agitation. These agents went not only into the ma-

nufacturing, but into the agricultural districts, to preach to the popu- lace ; in whose ears they instilled every kind of filth and abomination.

He much regretted that merchants and lawn of wealth and weight should, for a temporary gain, unite themselves with persons whose ultimate objects they must regard with disgust. The unsoundness of their case was manifest from the necessity they had felt of taking up new ground. Last year they complained of the diminution of their exports to foreign countries ; they said, " Only give us back our exports, and we shall have nothing to complain of." Now, however, since it appeared from the official returns that there had been no diminution, but an increase of the foreign trade—that the exports of 1839 had exceeded those of 1838 by two millions—then those gentlemen changed their tactics, and declared that large exports were the signs of distress. A very remark able paper had been sent to him, in which this theory was ingeniously supported by Mr. Edward Baines, son of the Member for Leeds; and so much to the satisfaction of the petty Parliament in Palace Yard, that

the Delegates had ordered it to be printed and extensively circulated. Lord Darlington quoted severat passages from Mr. Baines's speech ; ad- mitting the truth of his statements as to the distress of the manufac- turing population, and the coincident increase in the exports, but attri- buting the distress and difficulty to overtrading generally, and especially with America, which everybody- knew was in a state of bankruptcy. This young gentleman said, the distress arose from a diminished de- mand at home: but who were the principal home customers, if not the landowners and shopkeepers ? and yet it was proposed to improve the home market by diminishing the means of these persons to make put-- chases,—for such diminution would be the result of repealing the Corn- laws. There was a time when agriculture and commerce flourished together : why should they not now ? If', however, that was " impos- sible," he should say, " Live agriculture and perish commerce."

Mr. GROTE said, it was no new thing for the people of this country to be dissatisfied with the decision of the majority of the House of Com- mons ; and the union of several classes, to which Lord Darlington had alluded, sprung from a deeply-rooted conviction that the decision of last session was wrong. He felt that it was utterly impossible to produce any thing like new argument on either side of the debate : but, be- lieving that the present laws for regulating the importation of foreign wheat were extremely pernicious, he could not be debarred from insist- ing upon the main objections to them, though the same objections may have been enlarged upon by others. Mr. Grote proceeded to describe the effect of the Corn-laws in deranging the currency, to such an extent that serious apprehension must be entertained for the maintenance of the monetary standard unless the present system were abandoned. Com- mercial embarrassments were deducible directly from the same cause; but the capital and primary evils were an aggravated price, and, worse still, aggravated uncertainty with regard to the purchase of the prime necessary of life. Mr. Grote showed how the Corn-laws produced both these evils- 4' Gentlemen do indeed tell us, in defence of the Corn-law, that the present system ceases to impose any duty at all so soon as prices rise to an incon- venient magnitude; that the duty becomes smaller and smaller as the price becomes larger and larger, and that when the price once reaches 73s. per quarter, no part of the burden borne by the consumer is to he considered as arising out of the Corn-law. This is what gentlemen often tell us ; and they seem some- times to take credit to the landed interest for something of the nature of ge- nerosity in permitting the scale of duty gradually to decline mid vanish in pro- portion as the price of corn rises. Sir, I do not know how others may be affected by this reasening,, but to me it seems to imply an unusual confidence in the indulgent dispositions of the audience ; tier what reflecting man will be in- duced to believe that the total addition to the cost of procuring foreign corn is measured exclusively by the amount of duty actually levied, and comprises no• thing beyond ? There are many and various ways of enhancing the cost of commodities, and direct taxation is only one of them. If you twectunitlate difficulties and uncertainties in the course of any particular trade—if you deter merchants front purchasing on your behalf, at the time and place when the article is the cheapest--if you will cuter into 110 regular commerce, and give no deliberate order beforehand—all this vicious management will impose upon you the necessity of pay ing an additional price fur what you buy, as infallibly as if there were a tax charged upon you at the moment of purchase. All vexations or impediments in the way either of the nromfacture or the purchase of an article, will make themselves felt in the price just as certainly as a tax imposed upon the article only at the full period of its completion."

Now the present scale of duties produced greater uncertainty, was more replete with variability, than any other scale which had ever been adopted. Parliament ought to legislate for two objects--

" The first is, that corn should he affordtd to the consumers at the lowest cost of production : and gentlemen will recollect that the consumers are. in point of fact, the entire cation, er at least the overwhelming majority of it. The second iv, that the price of corn should he steady, and subject to as little fluctuation as possiltle. I combine these two objects together in my view of what is desirable, and I firmly believe that you cannot disunite them in prac- tice try oil legi,late with a view to raise the price of corn above its free and natural level, von will icy the very sane act render its price more variable and unsteady. If.you are to raise (Inc price of grain artificially through the means of legislative enactment, for the benefit, real or supposed, of British cultivators, this can only be done by embarrassing or preventing the foreign supply and the more we narrow the surface from which our sults!stenee is derived, the more we stand exposed to injury from the fluctuation of the seasons. Thus— to put an extreme case—if our hIl dud relit were to call upon us to prohibit foreign grain altogether, after a certain linaler tte interval, it would perhaps be possible that British agriculture might be pedal so far that it would supply us with a'l the food for our population, at the expense, indeed, of enormous cost and ufferii,g in many ways to tie community, but still such a guard ity of food mig'it perltart be suplilied. But I eittertain as little doubt that if this suppo-anon wire realized, or tl if British •;:rown corn were forecil front our soil in stalk:vitt ehttitMrce Mr our population during very bad seasons, there would

be, under such a prodigious and extreme superfluity

Mea,flitS, and the, tcmild be fluctuation in the price of grain to an em-tit haul' e have nee e r y, t v. it itessed. There w mbl be prices occasionally exorbitant,

and generally high, but ZdAti i 10::01.1Sly IOW in seasons of abundance ; and in such the agrictdturikts would sutra even more I Ilan they did in 1834 and

Ile explained the operation of the present scale of duties in raising

and expresing prices--

"Tire ptesent law contaimin it-elf a certainty that the price will Ilse up to rtv. at particular epochs during every short cycle of years; but it dues nut contain any certainty that the price may not fall even below :His, (hiring }cars of abundance. It Mrees a teemorars i tic ; but it does not, and cannot, MIS-- tain the ri,e, and the extent of rt•,.thitat to which the tall will go is generally proportioned to the magnitude and violence of the forced rise by w Well it hut been preceded. hr both ways our present Corn-law contributes to aggravate the extremes of fluctuation, nut to abate slime. W hen prices have a tenth nu to be high, our Corn-law lender- them still higher ; when they have a tendency to become low, our Cunt-haw do,!. not in any degree mitigate the full, but tends indirectly to aggravate the downward movement. NV hen gentlemen praise so touch the beauty of the sliding scale of duties, on the ground that the consumer is benefited by it, I nor fellipied to believe that they can never

have inquired how this scale actually works in respect to purchase and sale

a the corn-market. The benefit arising from tile tall of duty is almost univer- sally a boon, not to the consumer, but to the importer or the speculator. ir the duty falls, the importer may make a large profit ; if it does not fall, be makes no profit, or may probably incur a severe loss; but in neither case will the consumer gain by the transaction. In general, it may be stated broadly, that the consumer can never gain except from the greatest possible freedom of competition in respect to the furnishing of the supply, and from the greatest possible certainty and most exact foreknowledge of the circumstances of the market."

A fixed duty would he an improvement on the present system, if it were low enough-

" A fixed duty would remove to a great degree the clement of artificial un- certainty out of the trade, and would so far put an end to one sort of mischief But it would, in my opinion, substitute mischief under another form ; and it will depend upon the amount of the fixed duty which you impose whether such a change shall be for the better or for the worse. A fixed duty may be better or worse than a varying duty, according to the absolute magnitude of the ere as measured against the magnitude and rates of variation of the other. toy opinion is opposed both to the one and to the other. I think that the impor- Wien of grain ought to be free, subject only to a nominal duts. of Is. or ed, per quarter; and if 1 ant required to take my choice between a fixed duty aka varying scale, 1 am unable to determine the question, without being informed of the precise figures which it is intended to place on each side of the account. The object Malik I seek is. to lessen as much as possible the obstacles in the was- of procuring corn fur the consumer at the lowest cost of production, and to bring the corn-trade into a state of as much regularity and steadiness as pos. stole. A fixed duty, if it were. high in point of amount, would defeat both these objects hardly less than the present varying rate of duty. It would be equally burdensome to the consumer, and it would have no other effect than that of rescuing importers from the serious hazard of ruin to which they now stand exposed."

Sir Robert Peel had declared himself opposed to a fixed duty, and in favour of the varying scale. So far Sir Robert had put his positive • opinion upon record; but in other respects he had left his views in the dark. Now, Mr. Grote thought, Parliament was entitled to an explicit declaration of Sir Robert Peel's opinion upon this subject-

" Considering the very eminent position which the right honourable gentle. man occupies in the country, and the number of persons to whom his tit:elan- tions serve as a beacon of guidance and authority, I do think that he ought not to content himself with sample negative and refutation, but that he ought to tell us plainly whether, in his opinion, the present Corn-laws arc perfect, and admit of no improvement, or what modifications he thinks might be advantageously adopted. I repent, Sir, that the importance of' this question— the prolonged excitement which is sure to subsist with regard to it, and the ascendancy exercised by the right honourable baronet's opinion, upon what- ever subject it is proclaimed—all these considerations appear to me to impose upon the right honourable gentleman an obligation to declare what extent of modification, if any, he is prepared to accede to in the present system."

Mr. D'Isemsla maintained, that it was an unwise policy which would make England the workshop of the world ; and he advised Members to discard the arrogant aspiration. He was convinced that the trade of England with the Continent of Europe was not materially affected by the Corn. laws. [Mr. D'Israeli is said to have been in- audible during the greater part of his speech, and the report suffers accordingly.]

Mr. LA BOUCHERE was strongly opposed to the present law ; which admitted the widest oscillation and secured no steadiness of price. He maintained that the Legislature, by repealing the Corn-laws, ought at least to put the country -in the position of being an extensive seller. There was great danger that America and other countries would pro- hibit the importation of British manufactures in retaliation for the high duties on their produce. He recommended a moderate fixed duty, with ports always open. The duty ottght not to exceed 7s. or St. a quarter, and when the price reached 70s. a quarter, that duty shoal" fall in a rapidly descending scale.

It was nearly one o'clock when Mr. Labouchere sat down ; and Mr. Bawls EltTON carried adjournment.

Previously to the resumption of the debate on Thursday, ninny peti- tions on both sides of the question were presented. Lord JOHN hits. SELL was intrusted with one from Manchester, signed by bankers, mere chants, and manufacturers, the aggregate of whose property was estimated at thirty millions sterling : they were of various political opinions, but united in a prayer for the " total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws." Mr. 11.u.sinin presented a petition in favour of the existing scale of duties, signed by 3,528 inhabitants of Leicester.

Mr. Worosnovsii was the first speaker on Thursday. He assured the House, that the itinerant orators against the Corn-laws had proltwed no impression on the minds even of the distressed artisans in Norfolk. He read several extracts from Mr. Tooke's work on Prices, and from Parliamentary documents, in support of his opinion that the safety of the constitution depended upon the preservation of the Corn-laws; but the House was inattentive, and Mr. Wodehouse was inaudible amidst the general huz of conversation.

Mr. Rien entered into a history of Corn-low legislation, to prove

that unsteadiness of price had been the consequence of Parliamentary interference with the trade in grain. Would the landlords accept a mo- derate fixed duty ? Ile warned them that this was their " East. 'let- ford," and that 'it would be wise to yield in time, anti not ay: alt the crash which dogged resistance to just demauds would render inevitable before many years elapsed.

Captain IIsm slats contended that the Corn-law Repeaters, in order

to make a fitir showing, were Ibreed to suppress one side el the account. They withheld from Parliament the ease of those who would sutler by repeal—I he nom gagers and mortgagees, the farmers and the htlottrers, who would be ruined if the inferior soils were thrown out of cultivation. lie also was prepared to maintain that the artisan and the operative would be injured, though the outgoings of the great manufacturers and capitalists would be diminished. Lord Moitessrii thought it superfluous, and almost impertinent, in any one to detain the IIouse long opon the subject unless lie had some- thing 111.111' to state ; and therefine he would not make a

protracted speech. lie regretted that he could not appear as representative of the Ca- binet united against the Corn-laws; but he did not believe that a Govern- ment prepared to carry out his views on the subject could be ffirtnedin the present state of parties, and he certainly preferred au undecided Ca-

binet to one prepared to act on the basis of opposing all alteration in the Corn- laws. He referred to the distress prevalent among his own consti- tuents,as a strong inducement to come forward on this occasion ; and so pressing had been the application to him to support the motion for inquiry, that even were his views the reverse of what they were, he did not see how he could vote against it. For his part, he could not conceive how the opponents of the motion could with any consistency put up a prayer to }leaven for " daily bread." He considered the Corn-laws at variance with the obvious design of the dispensations of Providence—

"Those dispensations, which had varied the growth of every clime and the staple of every soil, and thus appeared to invite every kingdom of the earth to the fullest and freest interchange of their respective produce ; and which made it as much a duty to exclude monopoly from the family of nations, as it was to exclude selfishness and from the families of individuals—in one word, which made patriotism and philanthropy the same things."

The house might be sure that the agitation of this question would not be stopped— It was with this question the same as it was with the Catholic question, and the questions of Slavery and the Slave-trade; there was no other ray of put- ting an end to agitation except by removing the grievance. if the people o this country were suffering—or, what upon this pomt was the same thing, i they thought they were suffering from any particular cause—did honourable gentlemen think that they could stop their complaining? if the people felt that they were starving, how could that House prevent their cry for fool? They were told that

" The flesh will quiver where the pincers tear. And blood will follow where the knife is driven."

This complaint of the constant recurrence of the agitation of the question put him in mind of nothing so much as what they rend of the indignation of the parish authorities in one of the tales of one of the must consummate describers of every-day MI!, where they were told that " the whole board-room WilS in a date of consternation, because Oliver Twist had asked for more." This demand for more on the part of the people, be believed, was one which could not be stayed or circumscribed. It was a demand that was coming from almost every quarter where industry resided. It came from the factories tutu flour the work- shops; and, in his belief, the evil that gave birth to that demand was fist tra- velling to the remotest villages and hamlets of the land, and that it would ere long visit every cottage.

Mr. GALIN KNIGHT spoke with much indignation against the at- tempts made to get up popular agitation on this question ; and the scurrility to which the landed gentlemen were subjected by the itine- rant orators employed by the Anti-Corn. law League. He also ex- pressed his regret that a majority of the Cabinet were arrayed against the agricultural interest. He was for continuing protection to the landed interest ; and recommended those who wished to improve the preaent system of duties, to commence operations by bringing in a bill to alter the seasons and supply just proportions of sun and rain.

Mr. PIIYME was ready to maintain that the landed interest ought to be protected; and although Mr. Villiers had styled his proposition an insidious one—by insidious, something more was meant than met the ear—he was prepared to propose an alteration which would tend to check fluctuations of price awl at the same time give protection to agri- culture. Mr. Pryme proceeded to argue, that when any class was sub- jected to greater taxation than the rest of the community, it ought to receive counteracting protection ; that the landed interest was in this position on account of its liability to contribute more Mail miler classes to tithes, church-rates, highway-rates, poor-rates, county-rate3 that it was desirable fin. all classes to prevent fluctuations of price ; and that the graduated scale he proposed would have that etreet, He theo briefly explained the purport of the amendment with which he concluded his speech—namely,

That the duty (one shilling) which was now paid when the price was 73s. should lie paid when the price should be at 70s., and that the duty which was now paid when the price was 72s. should be odd when the price should be GJ.s. He proposed a graduated scale, because a fixed ditty was ol:jected to and the ground of that objection he took to be that it way impracticable when cora

was high, and that when corn was very low it would be nugatory. • Mr. Mei:Jest Dusuromne would not have addressed the house, had not his colleague, Mr. Cayley, been absent. Ile had presented a great number of petitions, in the prayer of which he entirely concurred, against any alteration of the Corn-laws. 'alr. Villiers's motion seemed to involve two propositions—one for a total repeal, the other for a fixed duty ; and a member of the Cabinet had avowed Iii uself an advocate for the fixed duty, which both Mr. Canning and Mr. Haskisson had declared to be impracticable. As for a total repeal, he was certain that the working classes would not be satisfied with it. They went much further, and demauded the abolition of taxes upon many other neees- series : and Mr. Duneombe agreed that it' there was to be free trade in corn, there ought to be free trade in silk, linen, cotton, glass. iron, and other articles, now heavily taxed. But Members were not prepared for a free trade in every thing ; and the landed gentlemen were not so "soft" as to relinquish their protecting-duty on corn.

Mr. CLAY was very reluctant to trouble the I louse with the repetition of arguments formerly used on this exlmus:ed subjeet ; but old NI:ivies reappeared, and must be met with the old renitation. To .how how injuriously the Corn laws had operated, he referred to the 11 ue.use iu of price, the stagnation of trade, the derangement of the numetary sys- tem. and the uistressot the working classes. These were circumstances which had increased the agitation against the Cosn-la WS far more (Aloe- tually than the exertions of the itinerant orators, who had given anvil ofl'ence to Mr. Gaily Knight. There were symptoms or doubt among the leading supporters of the Corn-laws whether the system could he maintained. lu the debate on Sir John Yarde Bullets motion, Sir Robert Peel had used significant language—

The SPEAKER interrupted Mr. Clay, who was about to reed the pas- sage he referred to; it was out of order to refer to any debate which had taken place during the resent session. Mr. CLAN a:tetupted to go on, by the aid of a supposition, which the .SPI.:.11:Elt, ag.tin interrupting him, pronounced irregular and improper : bet Sir Rims:ter Peel, having said that he had no objection to the passage being read, Mr. CLAY proceeded to quote the following front a pamphlet con- , taming a report of Sir Robert's speech- " On that great question, my opinions rentain unchanged. 1 adhere to those which I expressed in the discussion of last year. I did not then profess, nor do I now profess, an unchangeable adherence to the details of the existing law—a positive ratted, under any eircainstances, to ;Liter any figure of the The debate wits again adjourned, oil Mr. BitontEttioN's motion ; and the House rose at twelve o'cluele ClICHCII OF SCOTL.1ND.

The Earl of ABEL:DEES. on Al:outlay, ques:iereal Lord Melbourne as to the intentions 01' Dove:mimeo rsspectlue the Clinveli of Scotland— About eight months ego, the noble Viscount it assured. a deputation from the Church that the Guvecontent he l taken Ills saljset into its serious con- :eters:ion, with a view of applying it rranaly. Two mouths ;11;14 after Parlia- ment had met, when lie had put a pi...stk.:1 to the noble Viscount, the answer wig cif lie received was that probably suite 11142:1:41:1: would be ne- cessary, but he could nut siy. of vInit description. Oa a repetition of that

gm:stint!, Lord 31elbourne hr, t -al.' he could not make up his mind

whether any legislative measure 1,:• int,,,,luced or nut. Now, he could

understanl that the noble Viscount make up his mind to do nothing, or that he might not have any tnemnre an the vt i.repared, in consequence of the difficulties which sneroundv.: i : 1m; to be prvparLd to say whether be would do something or do tint proper was it decent' was it honest? Was this a Governme p..ace of the country, as well as the state of its must import:rat vvcia• involyeal in the settlement of this

iplesCon. An answer or some 11.•.'1•:pCJII they had to rii±lit to expect, and he

Itopea that the noble Viscouni r in doubt whether he would

do :lity thing or nothing. lie urgv.: IL, iii tee now. be7deveil that

by tits time Lord Melbourne tnignt hare v...ne to sum.: eon: in slam. lie bad at all events reason to supp:s:. th it he Lad abandon:al his fast inttration t and he

should he Catd if the 1101.1C ViL;Cuttilt W WILL 110tlF.0 to what determi- nation lie lied come.

Loot Aleenourtee could say no mere :"Isn he had already said; and he would not be moved by Lord .a: :r sue:ts to take steps before

he clearly saw his way. Ile had see, eseae C0117,t!kiqences of undertalsine to brine in measures to s Ilt uucsron. me the measures themselves 1.,cre 1L..

" I the ditterences Id' men, appear ti II....,

:1:::1 hing abut) to the as..1 to lie prvcipitate it at present to pl. .

■ iaWeell the S: : • ; a : 40. have exceeded which it possesses to the loin nl niner. point to point, r..11., r helm: prepared or oiler;i. roolid upon 11,5 8114.1 1,1 IiiiS inattor in to too Is that ail easy taJe ••‘ of.101:1y, much as 1 be! tbv lord, iv ho says. • bring in a that a measure will 11 it. if it could I emir, :y

tee no .

; Is'at .Iny

1,;:ia!It v. be

w,. •■ an; ii0fiate the healing 1...1 a bill on this subject .• •.,I .

cousistentlY with my I:•• • ..te (■, . •

measure. '

Lord A find:lees had 1\ i,' it not occur to Lord Me:.rsiltrill.' 111,:i. 11..1;. 'Phis : was not a speenlali‘ III that parr of tile vet:1,1r., withDuke on the eross-b..uell.s. it I i...

V iscount said, had ear. ied 114 ir 1. - 1.10 the country the law iemainol um • . .. t titre Male • to execute it thvre bbss.:slied nanl . armed. and Featly ti:t',i,t any ;I" despised ; leant thell, tbe Haiti' of the t■oyertom.:: execution ? Aim:- all ibis delay. t.• cipitate :it lt•t ans. ' e till sac 111,t

Governim.ht not to ta'.0 same sm.. a this .:. Ilene the co:Ives-aeon dropped.

it 01..t many were la.. was \..eus, I. \S :t not.

11' ' pro'" ns--1 du:y of a

scale which regulates the duty on foreign corn. I did profess, and I now re- peat, that I consider a liberal protection to domestic agriculture indispensable, not merely to the prosperity of agriculture, but to the general interests of the community ; that I think a graduated duty, varying inversely with the price of corn, far preferable to a fixed duty ; that 1 object to a fixed duty, first, from the great difficulty of determining tie proper tunuant of it on any satisfactory data; but secondly. and chiefly, because 1 fore-cc that it would be impossible to maiutain that fixed duty under to very high price of corn, and that, once withdrawn, it would be extremely difficult to ri.ist:iblish it.'' Mr. Clay did not wish to extract from the passage lie had read any stronger meaning than Sir Robert Peel himself' would avow, but he thought lie was entitled to draw from it this inference, that the right honourable gentleman did not feel quite confident that the Corn-laws, in their present shape, could be maimained. He, however, pressed Sir Robert to dciiver his opinion more explicitly on this question; and avowed his readiness to agree to a compromise. lo Committee, some middle term might be agreed upor.

Mr. SIFAW wished to correct some misstatements of Mr. Villiers respecting the export of wheat from Ireland ; and lie read official re- turns of figures to show that dashts a number of years since the Union, though not since 1832, the import of a heat from Ireland into England had increased.

Mr. \rime:ens remarked. that :qr. Shaw had only confirmed his statement, as it appeared that to cry year except one since 18:32, there bad been a progressive decline in tee exports of Irish wheat.

.e and t ,•, two • sale to take- s iesse us. by no make-1 alto not give any measure on

svrious of "1 the ..bapr,:me -ay sa-111 ry t!unt_11 others 1 11:e powers

..m.1 this way, neither !:e other, turn . party, now t,s both of us.' .. I feel the evils sm...ver tbe noble

L 7 hint

.:: pro- . iere ..•:. from t s.1:1111Jt, .1 ,1 any I lid noble noble 1 sir of

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose and said, that although he could not doubt the Committee's compliance with the request in her Majesty's most gracious message, be thought it due to the distinguished person on whose behalf he was about to move a resolution, to make a brief state- ment of the eminent services he had rendered to his country— Lord Seaton entered the Army in the year 1794, and joined the Twentieth Regiment in 1796. In 1798 and 1799, he was employed under Abercromby and the Duke of York, and was engaged in the general actions under those commanders. Afterwards he was stationed at Malta, as Military Secretary to the General cemmanding in chief. Subsequently be was appointed Lieu- tenant-Colonel and Military Secretary to Sir John Moore ; and in that capa- city accompanied that great commander during the expedition into Portugal, entered Spain, and was present throughout the war. -Upon expressing a desire to go again into the Peninsula, he was sent there unmet the command of Sir Arthur Wellesley, and served with great distinction. The gallant officer then rose to the command of that highly distinguished regiment the Fitly-second, and served at Algarve. In 1813 he rejoiLed the Army, and was present at the celebrated actions at Orthes, and also at Toulouse, at the close of the war. Thus, during the whole of the eventful period from 1706 to the conclusion of the war in 1815, this brave and di:Ft iaguished officer was found bearing his full share in all the honours, all the da veers, and all the privations endured by our gallant army in verious quarters (.1' the elobe, and found inferior to none in gallantry and skill. Since that tier, he had been emploved upon other sta- tions in the Colonial service. In Is23, he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor and Commander of the troops in Upper Canada; and was soon afterwards pro- moted to be Commander-in-Chief of all the truops in the colony. Then, when troubles arose in Canada, he was the principal person upon whom rested the whole weight and respomibility of preservilig those provinces to the Crown of Great Britain ; and when traitors appeared in arum against their Sovereign, Sir John Colborne evinced the same high characteristics which had distin- guished him when opposed in battle to a foreign enemy. At the same time, he must observe, that in addition to his great military qualifications, Sir John Colborne was remarkable for humanity and moderation. Some time after- wards, on the retirement of Lord Gostord, Sir John Colborne tilled the high And responsible office of civil Governor of those Provinces; and in the course of another year, on the resignation of the Earl of Durham, the sole responsi- bility a second time devolved upon Sir Join Colborne. In that high situation he remained, and successfully put down all i:hellions attempts. At the same time, the gallant officer did not desire to remain Governor-General, and the post was consequently filled up by the right honourable gentleman who now held it, Now, lie felt that, after all these eminent seevie. s—services extending over a period of forty-live years—he should meet •vith the ready concurrence of the Douse wilco he proposed that they should meet her :klajesty's wish to confer marks of her favour upon the gallant and distinguished officer referred to. He felt also that it was man cessary for him to enter upon any detailed description of the conduct of Lord Seaton throughout the various events he had slihtly alluded to, for the purpose of convincing the House of the pro- priety of the resolution lie was about to propose.

Lord John concluded by moving-

" That the animal SUM Of 2,000t, net, lie granted to her Majesty, nut of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the said annuity to colnineoes from the 2:al day of March 1540, and to be settled in the most beneficial manner upon Lieutenant-General john Lord Seaton, late Governor-Gemral of Upper and Lower Canada, and the two next sur- viving heirs male of the body of the said John Lord Seaton, who may succeed to the title of Lord Seaton."

Sir ROBERT PEEL had grant 1,1,:sure in seconding the motion, and in listening to Lord John fte,sell'•• record or Lord Seaton's military

services. One part of his civil services, however, Lord John Russell had not referred to--

When Sir Robert was Secretaiy of State, lie was in correspondence with Sir John Colborne, then Lieutenaht-Governor of Canada ; and he must say that his con.'uct, in the limited sphere in which lie was then acting, was such as to give universal satisfaction. The prudence, the firmness, the moderation and humanity he then displayed, were such as to induce Sir Robert to form the opinion, that he would infallibly greatly distinguish himself if he should ever be called upon to act in a more extensive sphere. It was, however, a vain en- deavour to exalt the character of Lord Seaton; and it only remained to convey to that distinguished officer the expressions of national gratitude for the im- portant services he bad rendered.

The question having been put,

Mr. Humt: said, he thought that unless Lord Seaton had a fortune to support the rank, the Queen would have done well not to have made him a Peer— All such creations were improper ; they only tended to raise pp a class of persons who in a short time v.ould become burdens upon the State. There were enough of them already. (Laughter and "Hear, hear!") Ile, therefore, hoped that Lord Seaton bad an ample fiwiline to maintain his dignity ; and then the questi,n arose, whether that firtune, with a Peerage, was not amply sufficient without a grant of the public money.

He diff,..red with Lord John Russell and Sir Robert Peel as to the value of Lorrl Seaton's services— True, th.• noble lord had stated the prior services of that officer, but the noble lord forgot to mention that he 1V:04 removed as unfit to rUnli the duties of Governor of Upper Canada. Let the holde lord produce the correpondence now in the Foreign Office, provilig the (-impiety incompetence of Sir John Colborne to con- duct the government of that province. Ile would ask Lord John Russell if he was not : %sate that that was the ease ? The noble lord bad not been long con- nected with the Colonial Offiee, but he was one of those who concurred in the recall of Sir John Colborne, 1nstiadof belug recalled, however, he returned to Lower Canada, %slier,: was appointed Commander of the Forces. Mr. Hume therefore took it fir grant(1, that the pension was not to be granted to Lord Seaton on account of sir viees rendered on an occasion when her Majesty's Ministers thought fit to remove him for incompetercy. The question for the House to col,-id..r was, hat had 1-eil the conduct of Lord Seaton during the time he Comoc.:01.:r-i..-CLief or Lower Canada. Mr. Hume con- sidered that the IA.:Ilion in that ',loth:cc eas attributable to the conduct of' Lord Seaton ; and he •••,..111 liather s•.y, that he was utterly at variance with the noble lord iu the (Ili ■g, he Lad I or.,1.'111Y:,(1 I111011 Sir 10101 C01110nIU j for he thought there hal ti co all 1i. ;rc ofjudgment, and ffirethought on the; t of th• t W1,0 Leen the consequenve in Ireland if the Luz,1-1.i:.,,tci,,nt of the day i.seed orders to arrest ,1/1111: forty or fifty of the le:,dicv men of that country, without any charge made against them, with halter- iihout their neeks ? Why, there would have been an instant outbreak. It wa- the condnet of Sir John Colborne that had induced the

outbreak in Canada ; he it u;is who sanctioned the isiMing of warrants against fifty or sixty id oals—of %Obeli proceeding no explanation had ever been although Mr. flume had moved for a return of the groutid- upon which it had been taken. Ile keew a1,0 that a party of Yeomanry, called Volun- teers, had gone out to arrest two Magistrates—men highly beloved and re- spected in their district, and had placed them in open carts, and carried them round the village.., for the purpoae of exposing and disgracing them. That measure led to the outbreak. So far, therefore, from rewarding Sir Joh; Colborne, lie ought to have been removed from his situation as unworthy to fulfil its duties.

However, Lord Seaton had the support of her Majesty's Ministers, who had gone on and on, till they had got into a pretty mess— They had come down to the House to propose a vote that perhaps might amount to 150,0001. of the public money; and he would ask, if, at this time and in the present position of the country, it was proper to vote away that sum, under circumstances, to say the least, so extremely doubtful? Ile con. ceived that the manner in which that unfortunate rebellion had been put down—the way in which the villages had been assailed, and the inhabitants butchered—was disgraceful, and without parallel in modern warfare. Woe distinction to be conferred upon Sir John Colborne for acts such as these, placing him on a footing with the most distinguished officers—men without stain or reproach? He never would believe that honourable gentlemen, if they would look at the whole proceedings that had taken place from the outbreak in Canada, as they appeared in the public despatches laid uponiitchsehtoatbaldetohfetreheft

. House, could think Sir John Colborne entitled to the character that had he given to him as a man of humanity, wisdom, and discretion.

fore feel it his duty, if any individual of the House would second his motion, to oppose the present grant ; and lie would be prepared at a future time to place upon record an account of those proceedings which he thought rendered Lord Seaton unworthy of the honours conferred upon him. He knew nothing of that indviclual but as a British officer; but, on public grounds alum, ho thought that this grant was ill-advised, and ought not to receive the sanction of the House. lie should, therefore, oppose it.

. Sir IlExity HARDINGE had heard Mr. Hume's very characteristic speech with great regret, because he had expected an unanimous vote: at the same time, he was glad to find that Mr. Hume doubted whether he could prevail upon one individual in the House to second his amend. intent— He could very well understand that Mr. Hume felt considerable objection towards any reward, either of honour or by a vote of this House, towards his noble and gallant firiend; because, although he was ilot very intimately ae. quainted with the affairs of Upper Canada, he had some recollection of a cor- respondence of the honourable Membqg for Kilkenny, in which he boasted to the traitor Mackenzie of his hope that the colony would throw off the yoke of the Mother-country. When Sir H. Hardinge remembered this, and remem- bered also that Sir John Colborne put down that traitor, he could understand that the honourable Member fur Kilkenny had no great sympathy with the conqueror of his friend. He could say, from his personal knowledge of Lord Seaton, that the British Army did not possess an officer who had gone through all the gradations of his profession with greater honour and success. Whether Le considered him as the commander of the Fifty-second Regiment, or as the friend and coinpanion in arms of Sir John Moore, or us the commander of the forces in British North America, his career had been distinguished by every military honour and accomplishment. By sheer dint of personal merit, he had forced his way to the highest rank and honours of the Army, which he entered in 1794; and had not only distinguished himself as a military mall, but by his kindness and humanity during all thePeninsular war, and was universally be- loved by both officers and men. From personal regard and professional admi- ration of the merits of Lord. Seaton, he had been induced to express his sense of the services rendered by that distinguished individual to his country ; but after the manner in which the noble lord and right honourable baronet had spoken, it would he useless fog him to add more. He would however say, that he particularly admired one trait in the character of Lord Seaton—namely, that when he was suspended from his civil command, he cheerfully resumed his military (hake, thus separating himself far from all suspicion of selfish consi- derations, and holding out to the officers of flue Army the brightest example.

Mr. WILLIAM WILLIAMS, who had seconded Mr. IIume's motionfdid not think Lord Seaton's conduct had displayed wisdom or humanity. . It was easy to vote large sums of money, but not so easy to pay them; and it ought to be remembered, that the expenditure exceeded the revenue, and that the mass of the population were in a state of extreme distress.

Sir HussEv VIVIAN and Sir CHARLES GREY eulogized Lord Seaton's services, and supported the grant.

Mr. Hum; defended his correspondence with Mackenzie ; and charged the Colonial Office with all the troubles which had occurred in Canada.

Mr. IlAwEs admitted Lord Seaton's skill, bravery, and humanity; but thought that Parliament was too prone to bestow honours on merely military services— lie objected to this whilst the services of other men who had exerted them- selves iar more advantageously to the country were left wholly without reward. lie objected, too, to the term to which the pension in this instance was to extend ; Ihr if he understood the noble lord correctly, it was to con- tinue for three lives. He should like, however, to be more distinctly informed upon that point. Looking to the services of Sir John Colborne, and com- paring them with the services of other distinguished persons, he must say that there never appeared to him to he a case in which a pension or a Peerage limited to a single life could be inure properly bestowed. Lord J 'Its RUSSELL said, he had followed the precedents in the cases of Lord Hill and Lord Lynedoeb, and other distinguished soldiers, in 1814. The pensions then granted would extend to two lives beyond that of' the present possessor. • The Committee divided—

For Lord John Russell's resolution 82 Against it 16 SALARY OF Tsui ADMIRALTY JUDGE.

The Commons went into Committee on Monday, on the bill to fix the salary of the Judge of the Court of Admiralty, at 4,000/. a year. Mr. Hume moved an amendment to reduce the sum to 3,0001. Mr. WILLIAM WILLIAMS, Colonel SHITHORPE, and Mr. WALLACE considered 3,0001. an ample salary. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Mr. MORE O'FEieRALL, and Dr. NICHOL, dwelt upon the necessity of obtaining the services of a distinguished lawyer for so important an office; and maintained, that with reference to the former emoluments of the appointment, and the salaries of other Judges, 4,000/. a year was not too much.

The Committee divided ; and Mr. Rune's amendment was negatived, by SS to 17.


Mr. PAKINGTON, on Tuesday, moved the second reading of his bill to regulate the sale of beer. [This is the second bill introduced by Mr. Pakington, the first having been withdrawn in consequence of an informality.] Mr. ALSTON moved that it be read a second time thatday six months. It would virtually repeal the Beer Act. He did not think that mo- rality or social order would be promoted by this kind of legislation.

The amendment was supported by Mr. JAMES, Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. GILLON, Mr. HUME, Mr. MUNTZ, and Mr. BENJAMIN WOOD. The speakers on the other side were, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. DARBY, Mr. MARK PHILLIPS, Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE, Mr. EST. COURT, Mr. PaomEnoE, Sir CHARLES BURRELL, and Lord GRANVILLE Scummier. Several of the Members, however, guarded themselves against being supposed to concur in the details of the measure ; and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he only supported the second reading to show that, in his opinion, an alteration was necessary in the existing law. On a division, there appeared—

For the second reading 110 Against it 30 Majority



Mr. CHARLES BuLt.En moved for a return of important documents relative to Educational Charities— An analytical digest of the whole body of Reports made by the Commis- sioners for inquiring. into Charities, upon the plan adopted in a digest relating to certain counties, in pursuance of an order of this House made on the 27th day of March 1835. Also a particular digest of all schools and charities for education reported on by the said Commissioners, setting forth, as flir as ap- pears horn the said Reports--1. The date and mode of foundation. 2. To what persons the government is intrusted. 3. To whom the patronage be- longs. 4. NVIiether there is any special visiter. 5. The qualifications re- quired in the masters. 6. The instruction prescribed. 7. Who arc entitled to the freedom of the school. 8. Whether any exhibitions are attached to it, and whether they arc made available. 9. The amount of the income, distin- guishing whether it is improvable or not. 10. The state of the school at the time of the inquiry, with the date thereof, as regards the instruction afforded therein, and the number of free and other scholars, with a note of such obser- vations as the Commissioners may have made on the case; and that such di- gest may distinguish and classify such schools and charities in the following manna—first, all schools in which Greek or Latin is required to be, or in fact is taught ; secondly, all other schools; thirdly, all charities for the purposes of education not limited to any particular local. establishment. Also, return of all charities for the poor of any parish or district, the income whereof is or may be distributed in money, fuel, or other articles, with a note of such observa- tions as the Commissioners may have made on the case, distinguishing and classifying such charities as follows—first, those given for the poor, or the use or benefit of the poor, without any directions or reputed directions by the donor as to the description of poor persons, or the mode of distribution ; secondly, those as to which the donor has or is reputed to have limited the application only by describing the objects as poor and receiving parish relief; thirdly, those in which the donor has or is reputed to have given some other directions as to the selection of the objects of the charity, or as to the mode of distribu- tion. Also an alphabetical index to the whole.

Sir Rolle or PEEL, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, Mr. Hoes; Mr. EST- coma, Mr. SLANEY, and Mr. J. STEWART, agreed that the further interference of Parliament was necessary to prevent the continued abuse of educational funds.

The papers were ordered, on Mr. Bailer's motion.


THE KING OP HANOVER'S APARTMENTS. Colonel PERCEVAL, on Tuesday, being questioned by Mr. HottsMAN, admitted that the King of Hanover had refused two applications, one from Lord Duneannon and another from Lord Melbourne, to give up his apartments in St. James's Palace ; but he repeated, that no application had proceeded from the Dutchess of Kent, who had objected to the apartments as inconvenient and unsuitable.

ELECTION COMMITTEES. Mr. One, on Tuesday, presented the names of the following Members as a Committee to try the Ludlow Election petition—Sir Thomas Ackland, Mr. Wrightson, Mr. William Bingham Baring, Lord Howick, Lord Sandon, and Mr. Horsman ; Mr. Sanford to be Chairman.

Mr. One also presented the following, to try the Ipswich petition— Mr. George Wilbraham, Sir John Pollen, Mr. Wodehouse, Mr. Spencer, Mr. George Evans, and Lord Henniker ; Lord Elliot to be Chairman. [Mr. Gibson has withdrawn his petition against Sir Thomas Cochrane's return.] CANADA. On Thursday, the Reunion Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday week. Lord Joust Russias. took the opportunity of correcting a misrepresentation of what be had said in a former speech on the subject of the Clergy Reserves Bill. It had been reported that he charged the Governor-General with acting in opposition to the Government at home in proposine.r. that bill ; but he had said nothing of the kind: the fact was, that the Governor- General was left to act on his own discretion in the matter ; beim:: at the same titne informed, that, if practicable, it would he highly satisfac- tory to have the question settled by the present Legislature of Upper Canada. At first the Governor-General had no hope of inducing the Legislature to pass a bill ; but at length he had succeeded, with the approbation of her Majesty's Government.

CHINA. On Wednesday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, being called upon by Mr. Ilene, read the resolution he intended to propose, unless papers not then produced should contain any matter which required him to alter it- " That it appears to this House, upon the consideration of the papers re- lating. to China, presented to the House by command of her Nlajesty, that the interruption in our commercial and friendly intercourse with China, and the hostilities whirls have since takenp. 1 ace, are mainly to be attributed to want of foresight and precaution ou the part of her Majesty's present advisers with reference to our relations with Chinn, and more especially their neglect in not furnishing to the British Superintendent at Cation powers and instructions • calculated to provide against the growing evils arising from the contraband traffic in opium, and adapted to the novel and difficult situation in which the Sup, rintendent was placed."

CLAIMS OP THE OPIUM-TRADERS. On Thursday, Mr. JOHN ABEL SMITH, in the absence of Mr. Crawford, proposed that the tellowing gentlemen should compose the Committee on the claims of the opium- merchants- Mr. Crawtfird, Lord Viscount Palmerston, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Charles Buller, Mr. Herbert, Sir George Staunton, Mr. Cowper, Mr. Robert Clive, Sir George Grey, Mr. llogg, Mr. John Elliot, Mr. John Abel Smith, Mr. Parker, Lord Viscount &union, Mr. Strutt, Sir William Somerville, Sir Robert Harry highs, Sir Charles Lemon, Mr. Edward Buller, Mr. Cloy, and Mr. Herman. Lord SANDON, Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET, Sir ROBERT PEEL, Mr. GOULBURN, Mr. BERRIES, and Sir HENRY IIARDINGE having Com- plained that the proportion of Ministerial to Opposition Members-15 to 6—was unfair, and much larger than usual, it was agreed to post- pone the appointment of the Committee to the following day.