Debates an laroteebings in Varliament.

CORN-IMPORTATION BILL.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Earl of RIPON moved the second reading of the Corn-Importation Bill—the "bill of the people," as it might be called, for what could be more important than to provide for them an adequate supply of the necessaries of life at a reasonable rate/ He examined at some length the "two great antagonistic prin- ciples" on which it was proposed to secure that object, by removing all restrictions on foreign corn, or regulating that import and partly retain- ing the restrictions ; and then he explained the rival propositions—a duty varying inversely with the price, and a fixed duty ; his speech being a very clear and dispassionate statement of the grounds on which Ministers rest their measure. He did not admit that the principle of the existing Corn-law has failed, but he thought that its working might be improved. It does not follow that the protection that is necessary at one time is necessary at another : during the last ten years, more than two millions of additional population has come into existence and has to be provided for; and the consumption of wheat, instead of rye or In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Earl of RIPON moved the second reading of the Corn-Importation Bill—the "bill of the people," as it might be called, for what could be more important than to provide for them an adequate supply of the necessaries of life at a reasonable rate/ He examined at some length the "two great antagonistic prin- ciples" on which it was proposed to secure that object, by removing all restrictions on foreign corn, or regulating that import and partly retain- ing the restrictions ; and then he explained the rival propositions—a duty varying inversely with the price, and a fixed duty ; his speech being a very clear and dispassionate statement of the grounds on which Ministers rest their measure. He did not admit that the principle of the existing Corn-law has failed, but he thought that its working might be improved. It does not follow that the protection that is necessary at one time is necessary at another : during the last ten years, more than two millions of additional population has come into existence and has to be provided for; and the consumption of wheat, instead of rye or barley, (the use of which by a large_ptsdien of the people he was old enough to ressember,) has given pliee to a more general use of wheat; while the sante process is going on in Ireland, until at last it is very probable that /Ireland will have little or no surplus to export to this country. Fle explained the nature of the bill; and took some pains to show that the agriculturists have little to fear from any excessive im- portation of foreign corn into this country.

Earl STANHOPE said, that a sliding scale was no part or parcel of the principle of the existing Corn-law : that principle was protection to agriculture ; and the sliding scale now offered was equally pernicious with a fixed duty. He quoted Lord Melbourne's declaration in 1840, that a change of the Corn-law could not be carried without a dangerous struggle. An appeal had recently been made to the country, and it had decided in favour of that protection— The Conservative candidates bore on their banners that they were friends to agriculture ; the defence and preservation of the Corn-law were the watch- words of the party ; promises and pledges were given in profusionand, on the eve of the election, the right honourable Baronet now at the head of the Go- vernment, in addressing his constituents at Tamworth, said—" I deprecate a struggle on the subject of the Corn-laws, because I think, as Lord Melbourne did last year, the advantages are not sufficient to counterbalance the risk ; and I ask your free suffrages with this frank and explicit declaration of my opi- nions.' Frank and_ explicit ! He saw no frankness here, for he never recol- lected to have read a sentence that had less. What " advantages "—the ad- vantages of abandoning or of maintaining the present Corn-laws ? What risk did the right honourable Baronet incur with an immense and overwhelming majority in both Houses of Parliament ready to support the Corn-laws ? He deprecated a struggle—with whom ? With the Corn-law League ? With the landed interest ? It would have been very convenient if the right honourable Baronet had been a little more frank. He need not have informed his consti- tuents at Tamworth what his plans were, but if he had only given them a hint that he intended to make a very considerable diminution of the present protec- tion to the home grower—that the importation of cattle was to be encouraged— it would have bad the effect of relieving himself and his colleagues of the cares and anxieties of office. (" Hear!" and laughter.) He cited figures to show that the prices of corn abroad were much lower than had been assumed ; and he came to the conclusion that the bill would only give protection up to 50s. instead of 56:.; while home- grown corn does not obtain a remunerating price unless it is sold in the market for 60s. The ulterior effect of the measure would be to anni- hilate rent. He did not believe, indeed, that land would go out of cul- tivation— Whether the price were reduced to 50s. or 40s., he did not believe that the land would relapse into a state of nature. It would be cultivated for the con- sumption of those who owned, occupied, or tilled it ; and any of these three classes, if they wished to have other articles not produced by that land, would procure them only by barter. The consequence would be, the entire subversion of the whole system now established, the annihilation of all public and private trading, and at no distant period a national bankruptcy. He adverted to the injurious effects of "that monstrous and destruc- five measure known by the name of Peel's Bill"; and, comparing the present measure with previous acts, he observed, that whereas in the time of Charles the Second the duty on wheat at the price of 55s. was 16s. 6d., now it is proposed to be 178.,—an addition of only 6d., not- withstanding the almost incredible amount of the burdens of the coun- try! He asked for a plain answer to the question, whether Ministers did or did not expect a large importation of corn and a large reduction of price ? If they did, what must be the effect on agriculture, and on all other branches of productive industry? if not, where was the advan- tage to the consumer? He attributed the absence of numerous peti- tions against the measure to the contempt with which such documents are treated by Parliament, and also to dislike on the part of the farmers to risk the reinstatement in power of their political adversaries— He must, however, observe, that when a man was sentenced to death, it did not much import to him whether the executioner were a Whig or a Conserva- tive; and to carry the simile a little further, if he should be sentenced to have his head cut off, whether the instrument employed for that purpose should be a guillotine or an axe—a sliding scale, or a fixed duty. (Great laughter.)

He was grieved to say, that nothing but mischievous measures had yet been propounded by the present Government, and he should stead- fastly resist not only the Corn-importation Bill, but also the new Tariff. He moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

The Earl of HARDWICKE denied that Sir Robert Peel had deceived the country : he had pledged himself to adhere to the broad principle of the sliding scale, but he reserved to himself the power of making what alterations he thought fit. That the farmers so understood, the Earl had evidence in the county with which he was connected : they felt that the Corn-laws were in an unsettled state. He thought indeed, that after the decision of the House of Commons, the Lords were not left to form an opinion whether the Corn-laws should be altered or not : they might reject this bill, but the question of alteration was already deter- mined by the voice of the country ; and no Corn-law could be so bad, no protection so inadequate, as that which was always questioned and debated. The Earl proceeded with a general defence of the measure, and some exposition of the correction which was expected for existing evils ; maintaining that the best interests of the people had been pre- served, as they were themselves intelligent enough to perceive.

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM regarded the measure—produced, no doubt, from the best of motives—with a feeling of deep alarm. The progress which agriculture had made for a number of years past would be checked ; the farmer's spirit of enterprise would ere long be extin- guished; and the foreigner would soon meet him in his own market and overpower his competition. If they pauperized the agricultural interest, on what support would they lean in times of difficulty and danger? The bill would satisfy no party, nor would it settle existing differences. Ministers were giving up a law which had worked benefi- cially; they were risking more than they were aware of; and ere long they would be called upon to yield a little more.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA was glad that an agitation which had shaken the confidence of the agriculturists in their prosperity and the

permanence of the laws was about to be brought, so far as human pru- dence could foresee, to a final settlement. There was no question on which it was more easy to excite the labouring classes ; none on which they were more unqualified to come to a just and accurate conclusion. Such, however, was his confidence in the capabilities of the Boil and in agricultural improvements, that if England proceeded for the next fif-

teen years as she had done for the last, he thought she could not only supply her increasing population, but become an exporting instead of an importing country. In an entirely new country a free trade in corn might be advocated ; but here a cord-law is needed to sustain the country under its burdens. The fixed duty, however, was a perfect fallacy. He declared the accusation that Ministers had deceived the country a gross misstatement. Government had maintained the prin- ciple to which it was pledged.

Lord WESTERN said, that the statement of Lord Ripon had been made so fairly that it had almost changed his opinions upon certain points. He wished he could vote in favour of the principle of free trade : but he believed that agriculturists could bear no reduction of price; and if prices fell, so would the wages of labour. He did not say that wages always rise with the price of food; but certainly they always fall in proportion to it. He had been about to withdraw his support from the late Government when they brought forward their fixed duty scheme : he certainly should take care how he did any thing of that

sort again—how he withdrew his support from one party before he had

tried another. He certainly did expect from a Conservative Govern-. meat that they would have conserved existing institutions. A new

Tariff to follow the 88. duty was looked for from Lord John Russell ; but who ever expected a Tariff from such a quarter? What did the Government expect by such a measure ? Popularity ? They might obtain the votes of the people, but they had lost their hearts— There would be other and greater effects: the country could not resume the confidence it previously felt in its own powers and resources. The people

would not know what next to expect. It would be almost better to have a free trade at once. (Loud cheers from the Opposition Peers.) A free trade would raise the energies of the people ; it would necessitate them to exert them- selves to the utmost ; and he dui not really know what they might not accom- plish; for certainly, freed from the burden of taxation, the agriculturists of England might, with their skill, their capital, and their science, produce grain as cheap if not cheaper than any other country in the world. (Renewed cheers from the same quarter.) If, he said, they took off the burden of taxation, or if, unable to do that, they gave them a currency to meet that taxation—(A loud cheer from Lord Stanhope)—the people of England might do wonders; for the contraction of the currency by the .Bank, when it found it necessary to replenish its coffers, was the real cause of the "distress."

Lord Frrzimisim, first picking out palpable inconsistencies in Lord Western's speech, adduced evidence from Sir Robert Peel's former speeches to exonerate him from the charge of deception.

Lord BasumoxT admitted, that after the change proposed by the late Ministry, their successors must inevitably take up the subject ; but he did not anticipate that, at one fell swoop, half the protection would be removed from wheat and two-thirds from barley ; and he complained that the intentions of Ministers had been kept so secret that they had taken the country by surprise : Lincolnshire, Buckinghamshire, and Essex, however, had protested against the measure ; and in other coun- ties it was regarded with dismay.

Lord Mum:Tamils neither concurred in Earl Stanhope's opposition nor altogether in the measure itself; and he should move an amendment asserting what he considered to be a right and just principle—the total and absolute repeal of the duty on foreign corn. Comparing the bill with the existing law, Lord Brougham judged it to be an improvement in the removal of obstacles to the importation of corn, and that it would, to a certain extent, render more difficult the trafficking and jobbing in the averages ; though he doubted whether the addition of one hundred and fifty towns would have the effect expected. The measure was but a step in the right direction, which would open the gates to further im- provement. In a final settlement of the question the agriculturists were most interested, for until that was effected no man knew the real value

of land. To show the groundlessness of alarm at the total repeal of the Corn-law, he explained how small the supplies were which could be

brought from abroad. In Jersey, where there is perfect freedom, the price of wheat in 1840 was no lower than 51s., while it was 578. in England. If there were free trade in England, either there must be a great demand, and then prices abroad would rise considerably, or there must be no such demand, and in that case no harm could be anticipated. In improving our commercial intercourse with foreign states, the con- dition of those states must be bettered, and the consumption of corn there would increase ; a process illustrated by the course of the trade with Ireland and the diminished importation from that country. The distress had been attributed, not to the Corn-laws, but to the currency ; but the evil influence was only imputed since 1885; and the measure which altered the currency was passed twenty years before, and could not have any thing to do with it. And was it desirable to issue Govern- ment assignats ? was there no fear of a recourse to a system under which in France 500,000 francs worth of assignats had purchased only a pair of gloves? He argued that the price of provisions and of labour bad no mutual dependence ; and he concluded by moving an amend- ment to Lord Stanhope's, that no duty ought to be imposed upon the im- portation of foreign corn.

Earl Frrzwmixtus would vote for the bill, as bearing within itself the seeds of future amendment— He held it to be impossible for any one to believe that the right honourable Baronet, who by propounding this bill and the Tariff in connexion with it proved that he was not the nominal head merely of the Government, but its real head, did not see much further into this question than those gentlemen who thought it would be a final settlement. A final settlement of this question there could be but one, and that was by the adoption of perfect free trade.

Viscount MELBOURNE could neither approve of the principle nor the general provisions of the bill ; but he would not deprive the country of the advantages which it undoubtedly offered as compared with the pre- sent system. On a division, Lord Stanhope's amendment was rejected, by 119 to ; Lord Brougham's, by 109 to 5. The bill was then read a second time.

On the motion to go into Committee, on Tuesday, Viscount MEL- smarm moved the amendment of which he had given notice. He had always been a friend to free trade, and he was so still. It would have been much better for the world if trade had been free from the be- ginning—had all nations applied themselves to the cultivation and in- terchange of the commodities which each could produce under the most favourable circumstances, reciprocally : but while all sound argument, all good sense, all clear reason, all the well-understood interests of man- kind were on that side, all usage, all custom, all prejudices, and with but few exceptions all feelings, were on the other. Ile therefore could not adopt the resolution which Lord Brougham was to move against all restriction on corn. He did not arrive at that conclusion by the argu- ment that the agriculturists were entitled to protection on account of exclusive burdens: if they had such burdens, they ought to be removed. Neither did he rely on the objection to dependence on foreign countries: two of the greatest republics, Rome and Athens, were wholly dependent on foreign supplies. Even if we did depend on foreign countries for corn, foreign countries must depend on us for payment ; and nothing would more tend to preserve peace than thus establishing the relation of tradesman and customer. He was not prepared, however, by re- moving all restriction on importation, to make experiments in throwing inferior lands out of culture. How then to impose that restriction ? He thought that the best way would be by a fixed duty ; which would have the effect of giving freedom to trade, remove the opportunity to fraud, or, what was almost as bad, the suspicion of fraud, and would at the same time assist the revenue. It was said that a fixed duty could not be maintained : but they had adhered to another plan ; the excite- ment which pains had been taken to get up had failed ; and, if so un- likely an event occurred as the price rising under the fixed duty, there could be no more difficulty of maintaining it than with a high price under the existing scale. Lord Melbourne moved, " That it is the opinion of this House, that a fixed duty upon the importa- tion of foreign corn and flour would be more advantageous to trade, and more conduce to the general welfare of all classes of the people, than a graduated duty varying with the average of prices in the markets of this country."

The Earl of Rirow said, that the House could not rescind the decision of the previous evening in order to adopt an entirely new principle for the regulation of corn ; while as to the mode of carrying it into effect, Lord Melbourne had not given any glimmering of intimation. The only effect would be to extinguish the bill ; but when that was got rid of, the question would not be advanced one jot. Everybody ad- mitted that some measure was necessary ; all but seventeen had on the previous evening conceived it advisable to come to some settlement of the question. But Lord Melbourne, though he named no sum, hinted that he was still attached to the 8s. fixed duty ; and that, Lord Ripon contended, would not be sufficient protection, since, if corn could be im- ported into this country at 40s., it would sell at 488., some eight or ten shillings below the point at which the remunerating price had been taken. Then, when prices rose very high, the 8s. duty was to be re- moved—sliding or jumping down from 8s. to nothing : but how it was to be removed, Lord Melbourne did not explain.

The Earl of CLARENDON congratulated Lord Ripon on the unanimity which prevailed as to the necessity of changing the Corn-laws. He did not think that the measure was such that the Duke of Buckingham need have seceded from his colleagues on account of it, or that Lord Stanhope need have conjured up visions of revolution and ruin : still he rejoiced that Lord Stanhope's motion was not successful ; for he looked on the introduction of the bill as a great and important event, and as the aban- donment of all those positions hitherto held by the party in power. He was not for withdrawing all protection : and he thought that if the 88. duty had been adopted protection might have been prolonged for some time to come. But that measure has been dealt with as the Reform Bill had ; and if the present bill passed—maintaining as it did the essential evils of the existing system, based as it was on no solid arguments, and accompanied by examples of a different kind in the Tariff—it must only lead to agitation for further changes.

The Earl of WICKLOW accepted the measure as leading to greater changes. At one time Lord Ripon himself was anxious to maintain the price of wheat at 808.; and Lord Wicklow thought that by successive measures they might gradually discover to what extent reduction could go without injury to the agricultural interest. After referring to a few smaller points, he acknowledged that he was glad, for the sake of Ireland, that the measure was accompanied by a removal of the prohi- bition on the importation of live stock. Before the war, Ireland had been principally used for pasturage ; but war-prices had promoted corn- tillage ; that had led to a denser population ; and for Ireland now to re- turn, with a redundant people, to pastoral employments, must be a great

Lord Vrvisx thought, that after one hundred and eighty years of le- gislation on corn, with thirty-eight acts of Parliament, and no satis- factor7 result, it would be as well now to try the effect of a free im- portation in settling a question which had deranged the currency, shaken credit, and disturbed the country.

The Duke of CLEVELAND wished to explain the vote which he was about to give— He had contended for the maintenance of the existing law, not as believing it perfect, but because he thought if the ice were broken further alterations would lead to a total repeal. Now a Corn-law is proposed on the same prin- ciple as the present, but with a modification of the existing law. When first he was made acquainted with it, he was somewhat startled at its extent; but on reflection became to the conclusion, that, although it effected a considerable alteration, yet that the agriculture of the country would be able to compete with the difficulty as far as wheat was concerned. In several parts of the country, and particularly in the county of Durham, there was a great deal of wheat grown on land which ought not to be made to produce wheat, and which might he brought into much better cultivation with oats ; and when he heard of the alteration, and before he knew precisely what it was, he intended to have induced his tenantry to grow more oats and less wheat : but if there were so large an importation of oats as some expected, he had no hesitation in say- ing, that, coupled with the importation of foreign wheat, it would seriously injure the agricultural interest. He freely admitted, that after the great out- cry on the subject of the Corn-laws, if the duties on wheat were to be altered at all, a less change could not be made than was proposed in this bill. Though he very much condemned the great reduction of the duty on barley and oats., yet he considered it on the whole to be consonant to his duty to vote for this bill; and certainly his anxious wish was that it should pass into a law. He should have been better pleased if Lord Ripon had said that the measure was a final measure; and he hoped that the Corn-laws would never experience any further alteration during his own life.

The Earl of Ripobt put in a few words as to the finality of the mea- sure— He certainly had not had the arrogance to state that any law which Parlia- ment might pass on this subject, or on any other must be taken as final; but there was nothing in that which should be thought threatening to those who

might be apprehensive of ulterior consequences from this measure. All he could say for himself was this, that if he brought forward the measure, intend-

ing or wishing it not to be final, he would say so. He had never said that with respect to this measure. He hoped that it would be final : he thought it would be a good thing if it should be so, and it would not be his fault if it were not.

The Earl of ROSEBERY thought that it would have a very brief existence, and that even as a step towards further measures it would be a failure. A fixed duty appeared to him the only remedy for the exist- ing evils; and upon that topic he dilated.

The Marquis of Solloway advocated the Government plan. It was attacked by Lord PORTMAN; who wondered at Lord Ripon's inconsist-

ency in supporting it, since in 1821 and 1822 he sat as one of nineteen County Members upon a Select Committee which reported in favour of a fixed duty. The measure would unsettle every bargain between landlord and tenant, without relieving the country from dependence on the speculator; and if it failed, it would be impossible to fall back on the fixed duty.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA. was prepared to contend that the bill would give to the agriculturists greater protection than they had ever had before—[ Opposition cheers] —not because it would enhance prices, but because it would relieve the grower from the frauds practised upon the averages and the sudden alterations in the duties. He thought it a great improvement.

Lord MONTEAGLE, who also considered the bill an improvement, des- canted at considerable length on the necessity of a foreign supply, and the comparative merits of free trade in corn, a sliding scale, and a fixed duty ; giving the preference to the last. He wished that he could dis- cuss the measure in a Select Committee : he defied the Government to produce a single witness to defend the sliding scale—a single mercan- tile man—or to produce one from among the eminent men all over the world who would not reprobate the sliding scale as the greatest monster in legislation which had ever been produced. In all the revisions of the Tariff, by some of the wisest and most experienced men, had the principle of a contra valorem scale ever been applied to any article but corn ? He insisted that a fixed duty would be more easily maintained in time of dearth than a sliding duty— Suppose a great exigency had arrived—a time when prices were high, and food was dear, and when there would be a great clamour for the repeal of the fixed 8s. duty. The Government would deliberate whether they should or should not adhere to the duty. Were he answering for them, he should cer- tainly say under such circumstances, adhere to the duty ; for this reason, that if even the Government were to give way, and the fixed duty be removed, the -consumer would get little or no benefit from it—it would all go to the owner of the grain. An instance occurred the other day illustrative of the operation of this. There was a great quantity of foreign grain lying in bond at Glas- gow, or on the Clyde : there was great distress in the neighbourhood at time, -and the Government were called upon to allow the grain to go out of bond duty free; suppose they had, what would have followed? was it thought for a moment that the grain so let out would have sold for 20s. a quarter less than the other grain of the same quality then in the market ? would the taking off the duty have lessened the price in that case? No; the only effect would have been to put so much money into the pocket of the proprietor of the grain. He alluded to the effect of irregular importation on the currency— In 1827, Government were very much pressed by agricultural distress under the very law framed for agricultural protection ; and they resisted a motion for further protection. Sir Robert Peel said—" The Bank having returned to cash payments' being obliged now to pay in gold, nothing is more likely to in- terfere with that measure, or to cause a run upon the banks than the prohibi- tory system of 1815. In case of scarcity, if the ports were open for three months, speculation would be indulged in, and the corn must be paid for in gold. So that there would be a run upon the Bank and a disturbance of the present currency of the country." Lord Monteagle next referred to a return of the fluctuation in the amount of bullion at the Bank since the enactment of the last charter. The importation of corn had commenced at the rate of about 52,000 quarters in a month, and it had ended (in September 1838) at 562,000 quarters; and at the corresponding period there was in the first case 10,000,000/. bullion in the Bank, and in the last only 2,800,0001.; only 2,800,000/. in the vaults of the Bank to meet all their liabilities, public and private, to pay the Dividends, to pay the Army and Navy, and to supply the deficiency Ms that that were required in order to maintain the commercial ..credit of the country ! Now, every British statesman, every merchant who loved hie country, ought to congratulate himself that this demand for foreign .corn did not occur simultaneously with the American disasters: had that occurred then, which did occur at a very short distance of time, when the Bank of England was only saved as if by miracle, by the Bank of France— and what an illustration did that case afford of the boasted independence of foreign nations which these Corn-laws were to bring about—if such an event as those American disasters had occurred at the same time that those demands were made for gold in order to pay for the foreign corn imported, and if the Bank had been compelled to stop payment, let the House imagine what would have been the amount of commercial distress that would have ensued, not to speak of our national disgrace in the eyes of Europe.

They could not much longer support with any safety a system which separates classes, and places the highest personages in the state in the position of making laws apparently for their own benefit and against the interests and welfare of their fellow countrymen.

Lord BROUGHAM approved of Lord Melbourne's resolution, compara- tively; for the preference for a fixed duty must depend greatly on the amount, nor could he in any ease regard it as sound legislation. Taking it, however, at 8s., he thought it somewhat the better proposi- tion of the two ; but there was no difference between them in extending the Markets for our products abroad or increasing the growth of corn for this market. The latter trade must depend upon its profit ; and the dealer could not tell whether he could afford to bring in his corn with the addition of 8s. duty, until he should know what the price is here. But was corn a fit subject for taxation at all?— He declared it was not a fit subject for taxation, because the tax was a poll. tax, paid by the poor and the rich, but much more by the poor than the wealthy ; and it fell heavily on those whose resources were the more slender. It formed a considerable portion of the expenditure of the poor man, but was as compared with the luxurious expenditure of their Lordships a mere paltry trifle. It was also a poll-tax eminently uncertain in its operation, whether going under the name of a graduated scale or a fixed duty. It depended on the winds, the weather, and the seasons, whether the Government should levy one farthing of this duty. The expenditure of the country, however, did not wait on the seasons; there was a pretty steady current of expense always setting in, and the Treasury could not depend for supply on the weather and the winds. One of the best characteristics of a tax was, that it took the least out of the pockets of the people in proportion to what it put into the coffers of the Trea- sury : how did the tax on corn operate in this way ? In order to raise, say as much as 8s. per quarter on foreign corn, they taxed all corn, not only foreign but also the corn grown in this country. To raise 1,000,000/. they must im- port 2,500,000 quarters at a duty of 8s. per quarter. The Treasury got the 1,000,000/. ; but was that all that was paid ? True, it was all that was paid at the ports, but not all that was paid by the consumer. Besides this, the people on every one quarter of home-grown wheat had to pay, he would not say the whole Si., but a proportion amounting probably to 3s. or 4s. per quarter. And thus the operation of this tax of 8s. per quarter on foreign corn raised the price of wheat grown at home by 3s. or 4s. Thus in order that the Treasurymight obtain 1,000,000/. from foreign corn, 4,000,000/. or 5,000,000/. were taken out of the pockets of the people. Another objection to this tax was, that it had a tendency to raise the price of food all through the year; and if it did not, it would not operate as a protection. This effect, too, was produced, even where no revenue was raised from the tax. Now, when the price of food was raised, the revenue was injured in another particular ; for the rise of the price of food had a tendency to lower the produce of the Excise, and even the Cus- toms. Thus, a tax on food, whether imposed through the medium of a sliding- scale or a fixed duty, had a direct tendency to lower the income of the country.

The Duke of WELLINGTON repeated some of the recommendations of the Ministerial plan ; and insisted, in contradiction to Lord Mon- teagle, that the price of corn had always been steady under the Corn- law of 1829. Lord Monteagle had said that the sliding scale was an absurdity only known to the Corn-trade-

It might be an absurdity ; the noble Baron might have good reason to think so ; but, begging the noble Baron's pardon the principle of a sliding-scale had always been known in the corn-trade of this country. The Corn-law of 1794 contained a graduated scale of duties depending on the state of prices in this country. It had invariably been the principle acted on, and was always appli- cable to any article that was produced, the quantity, quality, and value of which depended on the state of the seasons in which it was produced. Lord Melbourne need not go back to the Greeks and Romans in search of experience as to dependence on foreign nations : in our own time, we have seen the Emperor of Russia impose a duty on the export of corn, avowedly to raise the price in this country ; and only last year it had been forbidden. The supply of Britain depends on the tranquil- lity of the countries lying on the banks of two or three streams that run into the Baltic. It remained to be proved that the Corn-laws produced drains of gold from the Bank in payment for sudden exports of grain— Those inconveniences were produced by other circumstances. Certainly, if large sums were required to be sent abroad at once for the payment of corn, the deficiency of bullion must be aggravated; but he believed it was found that corn, under ordinary circumstances, was constantly in the course of being im- ported, and that a demand for the introduction of a supply into the home market, arising from any failure in the harvest, did not require the transmission abroad of large sums of specie. Corn was brought into the market only by opening the doors of the public storehouses, and it was paid for by the money circulating in the interior of the country. It was true that the replacement of the corn so consumed would require the transmission of large sums; but that was done by degrees. Lord LisionowNE followed up Lord Melbourne's arguments ; and ridiculed the successive attempts to tinker the Corn-laws--six times within a few years, and each time with confidence as to its being a final settlement ; yet foreign corn was not excluded, and no "remunerating price" was secured.

Lord Frrzcanoun bestowed some pains in combating the doctrine of the mutual dependence of foreign countries; pointing to Russia, who sends us large exports and refuses to import our products in return ; and then he enlarged on the advantages of the sliding scale.

On a division, Lord Melbourne's motion was negatived, by 117 to 49; majority, 68. Lord BROUGHAM then moved these resolutions-

" 1. That no duty ought to be imposed upon the importation of foreign corn for the purpose of protecting the agriculturist by taxing the introduction of food.

"2. That no duty ought to be imposed upon the importation of foreign corn for the purpose of regulating trade by taxing the introduction of food. "3. That no duty ought to be imposed upon the importation of foreign corn for the purpose of raising the revenue by taxing the introduction of food." The motion was rejected, by 87 to 6.

The House then went into Committee ; and adjourned at two o'cck.

The House proceeded with the Committee on Thursday ; Earl STAN- HOPE moved the omission of clauses 12 and 13, which relate to the appointment of Inspectors in the City of London ; objecting to ex- clude London from the list of towns returning averages. The clauses, however, were affirmed without a division. Lord BEAUMONT moved to omit clause 17, under which dealers in corn are to make returns to the Inspectors; proposing that the return should be made by the growers and not by the dealers. The original clause was affirmed. Other amendments, moved by Earl STANHOPE, Lord BEAUMONT, and Lord Mous:remittal, were rejected in a manner equally unequivocal.

THE INCODIE-TAX.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Sir ROBERT PEEL brought up the Income-tax Bill. On the motion that the bill be read a first time,

Lord JOHN Rtrssall, moved an amendment ; observing that there had been no division upon the question of an Income-tax in the Com- mittee of Ways and Means, the resolution having passed without a divi- sion. Lord John quoted and commented at a considerable length upon some remarks which Sir Robert Peel made in 1833 against such a tax ; his speech consisting of little else but these personal allusions— He said that to resort to so inquisitorial a process in order to raise a tax of two or three per cent would be most unwise; that the odium attaching to it would render it almost impracticable excepting in time of great necessity ; that he doubted whether it would promote the interests of the labouring-classes, as it would diminish the funds from which they are paid; that to impose such a tax upon England and Scotland, and to exempt Ireland, would be exceedingly unjust. [Sir Robert Peel called out," Read on I "3 Lord John Russell had not provided himself with any further extract. He had read from Hansard's Debates : he understood that in the Mirror of Parliament still stronger ex- pressions were ascribed to Sir Robert, such as the term " digusting inquisition." He recalled Lord Stanley's remark (two or three sessions back, on a railway bill) that Sir Robert has great ability in "dressing up a state- ment for that House." He repeated the charge that Ministers painted in too dark colours the prospects of the country—

It is tranquil. In Canada the great majority is well affected to the British rule: in Europe there lasso immediate danger: it had been shown that the reverses in India do not justify the Income-tax ; and although members cf the Cabinet had spoken of the Emperor of China as if he were the Emperor Napoleon, and of the fleet of junks at Canton as if it were the fleet at Boulogne, he had no such apprehensions with regard to the result of that war. It had this peculiarity, that the expense is limited to the expedition itself, without the necessity of strengthening our Colonial possessions : nobody ex- pects the Emperor of China to capture the island of Jamaica or attack Gibral- tar. And if we cannot wring from China the terms which England would dictate, still we might retain possession of a depot, such as Hong Kong or Chosen, for the safe and convenient conduct of our trade. But even if this country were to pay 500,000/. annually for some years to come on account of the expedition to China, it would not justify the Income-tax. He would not now object to the principles of changes in the Tariff; but those changes might have been more easily carried through Parlia- ment, and with much less panic in the country, if Sir Robert Peel had stated last year that these were the principles upon which he under- took the Government. Speaking to the country generally, he said that the Tariff would diminish the cost of living ; to those interested in agriculture he said prices will not be materially diminished: the accom- plishment of both results would be impossible ; and it would be much fairer if Sir Robert Peel, instead of shuffling between the two great interests of the country, were to tell them boldly and candidly what he really contemplated as the result of his propositions. If Sir Robert abandoned the restriction on the importation of foreign copper, he must abandon his argument against the importation of foreign sugar, that it would encourage foreign slavery ; since the copper-mines of Cuba are worked by slave-labour. Lord John had no new proposition to make ; therefore he simply moved as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

Sir ROBERT PEEL observed, that though Lord John Russell had taken the somewhat unusual course of opposing the first reading of a bill brought in in pursuance of a resolution of the House which had been debated eight nights, the whole of his argument consisted of personal appeals to Sir Robert— Having had some difficulty in devising valid arguments against the bill, he had taken the trouble of referring to a speech delivered by him in 1833, and had done him the honour of saying that the arguments he found in that speech were much stronger than any he could advance. Up to the present time, Sir Robert confessed, he considered the arguments used against the bill had been very weak ; and he was much gratified that those be had used upon a former occasion had been of such service to the noble Lord. (A laugh.) When he stated the strong objections he had to the imposition of an income-tax in 1833—objections of which he. felt the full force at the present moment—what was the financial state of the country ? Why, there was a net surplus of 1,500,000/. over the expenditure. Lord Althorp then proposed a considerable reduction of taxation—a reduction to the amount of 1,000,0001. The imme- diate loss to the revenue was to be greater, but Lord Althorp calculated upon such an increased consumption as would leave him still a net surplus of 516,000/. Proposals were made to reduce the Malt-tax, to reduce the House and the Window taxes, and it was proposed to impose a property-tax by way of commutation for those taxes. He most decidedly objected to the imposition of such a tax by way of commutation for such taxes. If the proposition now were to reduce the House and Window tax and the Malt-tax' and if there was still a surplus of upwards of 500,000/. in the exchequer, then he would offer his most decided opposition to the proposition to impose an Income-tax by way of commutation for the others—he would take precisely the course he pursued in 1833. Lord Althorp lost the Malt-tax ; and he then asked Sir Robert what was he to do ? He at once told the noble Lord, that he might rely upon the utmost assistance he could give him for the maintenance of the public credit ; and that in order to do so, unmindful of party politics, he would willingly gilts him all the support in his power towards the rescinding of the vote to which the House had just come. He gave the noble Lord that support ; he assisted him in rescinding the vote, at a great risk of offending many of those with whom he had then the pleasure of acting. Be would tell Lord John Russell that it was in consequence of that advice, and the promise of his support, that Lord Althorp took the bold step of proposing to rescind the resolution on the Malt-tax. It was proposed to reduce the House and Window duties; and Lord Althorp met the proposition by another, in which he affirmed that if those propositions were carried the loss to the revenue could only be supplied by the substitution of a tax upon property and income, and that such an ex- tensive change in the financial affairs of the country was then inexpedient. Only four days after that, he (Sir R. Peel) in his anxiety to support the public credit, voted for that resolution of Lord Althorp's, although the country was then at peace, and in no exigency. The noble Lord had taken care to quote only so much of his speech as served his purpose. What were the facts? The Income-tax was to be applied in a commutation of other taxes which only applied to England, and he said it would be most unjust to impose a property- tax upon Ireland in order to make up for a remission of taxation given to England only. Although he now proposed to exempt Ireland from the In- come-tax, he at the same time proposed to raise from her by an increase on stamps and spirits as nearly an equivalent as possible. Altogether, were not the circumstances now very different, and sufficient to justify a man in enter- taining a different view? It was said that the tax would soon be very unpopular : granted : what, then, but a strong sense of public duty could induce any Minister to propose such a tax ? Leaving India entirely out of the account, there is now a gross deficiency of 10,000,000/, to be increased in April 1843 by 3,000,0001.: the Tariff would entail a farther yearly loss of 1,200,0001.; a total deficiency on the year of 4,200,000/. He could dis- cover no mode of making good that deficiency so proper as that of call- ing upon the comparatively affluent to contribute a considerable portion of the additional taxation. He was confident, if the measure received the sanction of Parliament, that there would be, among the great con- suming classes of the country, a feeling of satisfaction at the example thus set, which would in the end have a tendency to compensate the holders of property for some of the inconveniences to which they might be subjected. He would not now discuss the Tariff; but he explained two modifications which he had made in the bill before the House— An English tenant who occupied land tithe-free was entitled to a deduction of one-eighth on the amount of his assessment, and he thought the Scotch tenant was entitled to an equal advantage. Be had endeavoured to place the occupying tenants in Scotland as nearly as possible upon the same footing as the English tenants ; and he thought substantial justice would be done by as- sessing the Scotch tenant at about one-third instead of one-half, or at 20. in- stead of aid. in the pound. In order to meet the objection that it is unfair to subject the trader and the professional man to the inquisition to which they were exposed in 1806, he would permit those persons liable under schedule D, who preferred submitting their cases to Commissioners appointed from their own neighbourhood, and perfectly independent of the Crown, to go before such local Commissioners : but if any person objected to go before those local Com- missioners, on the ground that they were parties engaged in a simihsr trade with himself—his competitors and rivals in trading or manufacturing pursuits— and that the disclosure of his income to such men might be prejudicial to his interests, or vexatious to his feelings, he proposed to give to an individual in such circumstances the option of sending in his return of income to a sworn officer of the Crown. Be proposed also, in case a surcharge should be made by that officer, to give the person the option of having his appeal heard by a Special Commissioner appointed by the Government.

[The debate which ensued went over much beaten ground : we take only the more novel points.]

Mr. Vit.t.trats declared that the peculiar system of indirect tax- ation which prevails in this country is breaking down under the pressure of monopolies on trade and the means of living. Mr. Mawr concluded a general defence of the measure by referring to a petition bearing the signature of all the respectable inhabitants of Rochdale in support of the Government plan. Mr. E. R RICE would vote for the first reading of the bill, but should vote against the third reading unless it underwent some modification. Mr. Fox MAULE said that the story about his visit to Perth, which Sir James Graham had quoted in a previous debate from an anonymous letter in a newspaper, was entirely a fabrication : not one of his constituents, with whom he had a conversation on the subject, but disapproved of the Income-tax. The Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, or rather the Directors of that body, who had adopted a resolution approving of a resolution of Sir Robert Peel's financial measures, last year recorded a vote in favour of Lord John Russell's fixed duty upon corn : the great majority of them were deeply involved in our East and West Indian Colonies. Mr. MILNES, alluding especially to Afghanistan and the Anti-English feel- ing in France, said, quoting Cicero, that the objectionable law had at least this excuse that it was not the measure of the man but of the time.

Mr. RAIKES CURRIE asked from the House a few moments of that indulgence which he believed it never refused to one who addressed it with reluctance and sincerity. He might be supposed to address it with reluctance, because during the five years in which he had sat there, he had scarcely troubled it with as many sentences ; with sincerity, because he feared that his sentiments would find little acceptation in that focus of party-spirit-

" I feel it my duty, after the best consideration I can give the subject, to support the propositions of the right honourable Baronet. (Ministerial cheers.) I am by no means insensible to the serious objections to an Income-tax ; I am by no means blind to the defects and short comings of the Tariff; but, taking the Government propositions as a whole, (and as a whole I think we are called on to consider them,) they appear to me bold, honest, comprehensive, required by the circumstances which they are brought forward to meet, and at all events not more objectionable than any substitute equally effective which could be carried in the existing constitution of Parliament. I think this mea- sure a bold measure, because in the discharge of public duty the right honour- able Baronet braves the odium of imposing a tax which, whatever it may seem to be at present, will become doubtless peculiarly unpopular with that middle class who form the bulk of your constituencies ; its inquisitorial attributes will secure for it their extreme aversion. I think it an honest measure, because, while we impose no direct burden on the working-classes—on the great body of the people, we severely tax ourselves. No other impost would hit so hard the class to which I belong : you take three per cent from funded capital and three per cent from profits—no small inroad, let me tell you, in a large com- mercial or banking business. I think this is a comprehensive measure, because, while you take money from the public, you do something at least—something in the right direction—to unfetter commerce and to invigorate and expand trade, the source of all revenue. I believe that those who most strenuously oppose the measure, acknowledge that it will be effective for the purpose it professes ; but say that it is not required by the exigencies of the public service. This, indeed, is a most weighty argument ; for if this be true, your tax is down- right spoliation and injustice. I cannot come to this conclusion. When I see our expenditure annually exceeding income, till a deficit of ten millions stares us in the face—when I see the miserable expedients to which we have resorted—when I remember the paramount duty, I will not say of upholding public credit, for that no one will deny, but of placing all your financial provi- sion above the shadow of suspicion, I cannot think that you have made too great an effort. When I look across the Atlantic, and see the shameless course which men who spring from our race, speak our language, and sup- pose that they have improved upon our institutions, have pursued, I feel more than ever that this country is called on to exercise her high vocation as a teacher of nations, and that the best teacher is example. Then I turn from financial ta political considerations; and I confess I do not think that you have overstated the emergency. Your Indian ware would not alarm me if we had a righteous cause ; but, based as they seem to me to be on the most horrible injustice, I own I tremble at the wonderful arrangement of retri- butive justice, which all history shows us does overtake the proudest and the mightiest who become unprincipled oppressors. But there is enough in Eu- rope to call on us to set our house in order. War appears to most of us such folly and such monstrous wickedness, that we can hardly conceive that a ci- vilized nation would wantonly engage in it ; but those who are acquainted with the irritation which exists in France, who know what a fearful part the effect of wounded vanity have played in the drama of the world, may well wish this country to be prepared for all contingencies. Thus, Sir, for the maintenance of credit, for the maintenance of European peace, for the vigorous termination of those struggles in which you are unfortunately engaged, I believe that an in- crease of revenue is necessary ; and granting this,- I own I have listened with. much attention to the substitutes rather hinted at than propounded by the noble Lord, without any conviction of their adequacy. But, say some of my honourable friends to me, will you vote for an Income-tax in order to main- tain abuses ? Will you lay fresh burdens on the people, when you see that by freeing trade and maintaining duties, not for purposes of protection, but for purposes of revenue only, you might replenish the exchequer and absolutely relieve the people ? I reply to them, God forbid, if this were the real alterna- tive before us ; but, while I cordially acknowledge that all this is theoretically possible—that it in undoubtedly the coarse of abstract justice—is it possible at the present moment, with the present distribution of political leaders, that it can be accomplished by any man with the instrumentalities with which he has to work ? There seems to me a strange hiatus in all Whig argumentation on this subject : you conveniently forget that the instrument of legislation is a monopolist Parliament, the legitimate product of that distribution of political power on which you have stamped your approbation." Mr. Currie continued to say that he had looked forward to protecting and enlarging the suffrage, as the means of righteous legislation, when he first came into Parliament, in 1837. How bad his hopes been met ? By a manly and candid declaration from the

noble Member for London, that the Reform Act, advisedly and with premedi- tation, gave the preponderance of power to the landowners of the kingdom ; and that if any changes were to be made in it he could be no party to them, as he considered the measure a final settlement of the question. Meanwhile, all his- tory taught him that no dominant class ever voluntarily gave up that which

they deemed to be profitable to their own class-interests. Thus the friends of Liberal principles and of Free Trade were placed in a complete dilemma. After four years, not very well spent, the noble Lord came forward with his attack upon Monopoly in a Parliament of monopolists ; and however chivalrous his NW-devotion, the crusade waa hopeless. (Cheers and laughter.) He first re- pudiated the only agencies which could win the battle, and then couched his lance' pulled down his beaver, and rushed into the fray.. It is said that the noble Lord, in his lighter moments, was wont to indulge in a pleasant chuckle on the impracticabilities of abetract politicians, philosophical Radicals, men who would be great statesmen if the world were a chess board and human beings pawns: and all this might be very just, but did those men ever under- take any thing more visionary and chimerical ? One of his political friends said of him, that he was a man equally ready at five minutes' notice to take the command of the fleet at Chatham or to build St. Peter's. (" Hear, hear!" and laughter.) But the noble Lord undertook a task far more arduous; he un- dertook to build the temple of Free Trade with the hewn stones of Monopoly ; and the result was that the building tumbled down, and the noble Lord and his friends remained struggling and mutilated under the scaffolding and the fragments. (Cheers.) We are here a soi-disant Liberal Opposition, with the ground cut away from under us, in a most helpless, hopeless state—a popular Opposition without a 'solitary puff of popular sympathy. (Much cheering and laughter.) " What then remains for me, who most sincerely think that free trade, the gradual abandon- ment, not of prohibition only, but protection, is absolutely essential to the welfare of your population, and therefore to the security of property and to the safety of the state ?" It would be presumptuous in him to say what should be the course of opposition ; but he felt quite sure what it ought not to be. He was quite sure that it ought not to give a factious resistance to measures which they had advocated when sitting on the Ministerial side of the House. How could Liberal Members advance their views? By Whig instrumentality ? Be thought not. Were they to organize an agitation for Universal Suffrage? He was not prepared to do so. How then was the chasm to be bridged which the noble Lord had created when he slammed the door of the constitution in the face of the unrepresented ? What should they do ? They ought to make the best use of all the measures which showed that the right honourable gentleman opposite designed to do justice to the people. And upon all those measures he would take the liberty of judging for himself. He had not been an inattentive observer of what had taken place during the last five years. He had seen the right honourable Baronet conduct an oppo- sition with great ability, and he believed, on the whole, with fairness. He found him now charged by honourable gentlemen on the Opposition side of the House with errors the most opposite, and labouring under accusations the most contradictory. At one time it was said that he had betrayed the aristocracy ; and at another that he had pledged himself to uphold all mo- nopolies. "We look at the right honourable gentleman through the smoked glass of party, and so fancy him as black as we wish." (Laughter.) But the right honourable gentleman had made a pregnant admission two years ago : be said, "I consider the manufacturing interests of the country of more importance to you, the agricultural interest, than any protecting law.' (" Hear, hear I " from Sir Robert Peel.) The right honourable Baronet had said also, "I will never a Minister to carry out other men's opinions." (Ministerial cheers.) Coupling, therefore, these two opinions together, Mr. Currie was sanguine enough to see the germs of a better system. Be was sanguine enough to believe that, through his instrumentality, if, instead of hounding him on to take up those who were Ultra-Protectionists, the Opposition pursued an impartial course— viewing, if they pleased, his proceedings with suspicion, but still doing him justice—they would still gain some good. He knew of no other agency by which they could do justice to the people. He told the right honourable Baronet, that he must do this justice, and that he must unfetter trade—that the days of legislation for class-interests were numbered. It remained for the right honourable gentleman to choose whether justice and mercy should issue forth in peace from the portals of our ancient monarchy, or whether they should be enthroned hereafter after a fearful struggle, at some doubtful, distant day, on the wreck of all our institutions. Under those institutions he confessed that be would wish to live and die. In conclusion, he might, perhaps, be per- mitted to address the right honourable Baronet in his own emphatic words- " Elevate your vision ! look beyond the sordid and party interests by which you are surrounded—look forth on the suffering, starving, but patient millions. (Loud cheers.) In an old and densely-peopled country, where your chiefest care should be to make food cheap and plentiful, your party desire to maintain arrangements to render it scarce and dear. You cannot be the dupe of the shallow sophistry to which you sometimes condescend ; follow your own free will. You know, you must know, that expanding trade offers the only hope for the existence of your increasing population, and for the safety of the state. You cannot be scared by the childish bugbear of dependence on other nations ; you know that this country never can be wholly independent ; you know that, while casual and occasional dependence is a perilous thing, full of danger to our monetary system, constant dependence is the handmaid of commerce, and the only sure cement of peace. (Cheers.) If you say that protection is a political and social question, you cannot forget that the despair of starving millions may merge all politics and all society in one overwhelming ruin. You have the power to do justice to all classes. What a fearful responsibility that fact an- nounces! Will you not, by timely concessions to the claims of justice and hu- manity, avert that fearful union of the starving workmen and their ruined masters, when they shall merge their mutual animosities in one fell cry for ven- geance, and bury you and your monopolies under the ruins of the con- stitution ? " He would say to the right honourable gentleman—and he spoke with all sincerity and respect—he would say to him once more' in his own emphatic language—" Elevate your vision! look forth beyond a few feverish evanescent years, beyond the tiny segment of time with which we are per- sonally conversant—when all the familiar faces which haunt these precincts have departed—when every pulse which beats within these walls shall have ceased for ever—when my name and the names of nine-tenths of those who hear me shall be utterly forgotten, or remembered only as household words, cherished by children and descendants—you will then be spoken of: for you there is no oblivion ; you belong to history. You will be spoken of as an astute and able Minister, as a statesman fertile in expedients, as a debater perhaps un- rivalled, as one who achieved preeminence in a field of the intensest competi- tion. All this your enemies and detractors must admit. Will you not claim a higher and more enduring eulogy ? Will you not enter among a far scan- tier and more glorious band—among those master-spirits who have achieved supreme power and used it, like gods, to do justice to mankind—(Loud cheers)—who have stamped their impress on the age in which they lived, and given an impulse, large, continuous, and abiding, to human happiness and human virtue ? You stand on the loftiest summit of ambition : as you look forth from that dizzy height upon the millions of this mighty empire, to speak the sober truth, on that multitude, of all people, nations, and languages,_ will not your heart be stirred withinyou ? will you not acknowledge a constraining and diviner influence, enlightening and controlling you, like the Chaldean seer, to bless and not to curse them ?" (Cheers.) Mr. Tames DuNcorann, in a smart joking speech, quizzed Mr. Currie for his glimpse of a political millennium ; and he passed on to reproach the Ministerial Members with being ready to eat any pro- fundity of political dirt in order to keep Sir Robert Peel in office ; and then to general objections against the measure. Mr. Rozzarcir. made an elaborate comparison of the rival propositions before the country, noting their points of agreement and difference— Lord John Russell agreed with Sir Robert Peel that there was a great defi- ciency, and that the expenditure ought to be supplied by the income of the current year. Both agreed that the deficiency was to be supplied by payment of taxes, not by a saving in the expenditure. There he differed from them both. Me believed that the true and only course of meeting the present defi- ciency—the proper mode of relieving the distress of the labouring classes—was not by throwing fresh hardens upon the people, but by retrenchment. Therein, however, the House of Commons did not agree with him; if he were to make each a proposition, the House of Commons would scout it, and he was per- suaded that not more than half a dozen honourable Members would go out with him in favour of it ; and therefore the Rouse would allow that he made no improper assertion, when he said that the House of Commons, by an enor- mous majority—he might say almost unanimously—would determine that this deficiency must be met by fresh burdens imposed on the people, and not by any saving in the expenditure of the country. The constituencies, however, had no right to complain on that head—

They had elected the majority of this House, well knowing the opinions of those honourable Members who formed that majority, and who would be against any saving being effected. But, speaking of the unrepresented portion of the community of this country, be said that they were the parties who had a right to complain ; and he hoped that they would complain—not of the right ho- nourable Baronet, or of the noble Lord, but of that constitution, of that finality which had brought us to this position, and had made that House what it is. There was the root of all the evil. The blame must be shared by both parties, but by no one should it be more completely appropriated than by the noble Lord.

He ridiculed the species of recrimination which was adopted on either side in place of argument: one speaker pitching Hansard at another, al;i1 the other flinging back the volume, like two scolding women showing how much noise they could make on matters not affect- ing the point at issue. But to return to the two propositions— The right honourable Baronet proposed to raise a sum of from 2,000,000/. to 3,000,0001. to meet and cover the expenditure of the year. This he could not effect by any alteration of the Tariff. And here it should be remarked, that the noble Lord in all his propositions never once said that he could raise the required sum by any of his plans. This was a curious fact : the noble Lord never pointed out, as a man of business, any plan which would clearly go to provide for the deficiency. There was still another point. The noble Lord had not stated that he could provide for the deficiency, but contented himself by saying that his plan would produce a certain sum of money. One of the modes was by an Ss. duty on corn; • which, it should be remarked, was not simply for the purpose of revenue, but for protection also; and on the point of protection the noble Lord again agreed with the right honourable Baronet. The country should understand, that when there was so much talk of relieving the working-classes, and so much indignation expressed at the imposition of an Income-tax—which it was said would press upon capital and thus prevent the employment of labour—the country should remember, that notwithstanding this indignation, the leader of the Opposition united with the leader of the Government in keeping up the tax upon corn. With respect to the Tariff of the tight honourable Baronet, the noble Lord concurred in that also, as far as it went, though he condemned it as not going far enough with respect to certain articles. Mr. Roebuck also agreed in thinking that it did not go far enough, for he was desirous of doing away with the whole of the protecting duties. Rebuking the Opposition for evoking the cry of "protection to landed interests" in a disgraceful scramble for political power, Mr. Roebuck raised a cheer from the Ministerial side ; to whom, in turn, he flung a reproach for electioneering uses of the Poor-law and pro- fessions of friendship to the farmers; and a cheer was thus drawn from the Opposition. Both Lord John and Sir Robert, then, agreed that there was a deficiency : the difference between them was, that Sir Robert proposed to make it up by direct taxation ; Lord John, it ap- peared, never meant to provide for it—it had never been attempted to show that by his lowering of the taxes a sum would be raised suffici- ent to meet the deficiency. Lord John professed great sympathy for the working-classes ; but what was his proposal ?- Not to raise a revenue by removing a tax now imposed upon those articles which the working-classes used. If two millions of money were wanted, it must be raised ; and those two millions, by whatever process, must be drawn, by the course proposed by the noble Lord, from the pockets of the working- classes. He challenged the most astute political economist in the House to show how the deficit was to be taken from the people without taking money out of their pockets, and in some proportion diminishing the means of their enjoyment. Mr. Roebuck's conclusion— Taking, therefore, the House as it was, and judging between the leaders of both parties—seeing that the total abolition of these duties could not be effected, and that the House was not prepared to make such fiscal alterations as would give the people their rights, opposed as such a proposition would be by the noble Lord and the right honourable Baronet—what was to be done ? Was the country to be left in the financial state in which it would remain if the noble Lord's resolution were carried—a state in which no DIM of forethought, honour, or courage would allow it to remain ? Under such circumstances, every man was called on to make a sacrifice ; and he was not to be daunted by the cuckoo- note of "inquisitorial.." For his own part, he should vote in the way which he thought right; and if his constituents thought he was wrong, they could give an intimation to that effect in the proper way. We have acted like careless spendthrifts for more than ten years, and it is high time that we should make up our accounts and pay over the counter. The money mast be had some- where : and if it press upon the industry of the people, they have the remedy in their own hands. It is in the power of the constituency to turn out any man who voted against the reduction of the expenditure. As regarded the present proposition, he concurred in the opinion that a direct tax was the least expensive, at the same time that it gave to the people the advantage of knowing what they had to pay. He should therefore vote for the proposition of the right honourable Baronet; and he hoped he should be able, hereafter, to per- suede him to alter what was crying and unjust in the measure when it went into Committee.

Mr. WALLACE attacked Mr. Roebuck as wanting in experience, and his speech as having no argument. He counselled postponing the In- come-tax until the Tariff should be secured. Mr. &carmen Cnzw- FORD as representative of Rochdale, denied that the petition mentioned by Air. Hardy represented the sentiments of his constituents : they were, to a man, opposed to the tax.

Mr. COBDEN was opposed to the imposition of any tax under the cir- cumstances of the country : a strict economy ought to be established in every department, from the most illustrious downwards. He admitted some improvement in the Tariff: a great deal had been done in trifles, but the, most essential things to the trade in this country had been passed over.

Mr. Mut= was so anxious for a tax upon property—to reach the lawmaker—that he should prefer a property-tax with an income-tax to none at all ; and he should vote with Sir Robert Peel. Mr. BUNDLE would vote on the other side ; and he would tax property, but not income.

The House divided ; and Lord John Russell's amendment was re- jected, by 285 to 158; majority 97. The bill was then read a first time. COMPLETE SUFFRAGE.

Presenting some petitions for extension of the suffrage, on Thursday, Nfr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD particularly drew attention to one signed by Mr. Joseph Sturge as Chairman of the Complete Suffrage Conference at Birmingham ; to which 87 delegates were sent by the middle-classes and. working-classes of 51 towns of Great Britain. Mr. Crawford said that the Reform Bill has failed to remedy the abuses of the representa- tive system; for new modes have since been found of perpetuating the abuses in other forms— It was intended to abolish nomination of Members by individuals. He had reviewed the list of the House of Commons, and he calculated that there were 107 Members elected by the influence of patrons in boroughs; 194 County Members of Great Britain elected by the influence of the aristocracy ; 32 (one half) of the Irish Members returned by like influence; and to that list might be added at least 50 Members elected by means of bribery and other un- due influences. If further evidence were required that Members were returned by other means than the free votes of the electors, it would be found in the fact, that there are in this Parliament 144 brothers and sons of Peers, and 97 Baronets and Knights and their sons. Had the expenses been reduced? Bribery has increased to an enormous extent : witness Sudbury, Bridport, Cambridge, and St. Alban's. Peace, retrenchment, and further reforms were promised : the country is engaged in unjustifiable wars, and Canada, once excited to rebellion, now requires a large force to keep her in subjection; a lavish expenditure is kept up; the Ballot, the repeal of the rate-paying clauses, the extension of the ten-p mad franchise to counties, have been refused, and the finality of the measure has been declared. Has class-legislation czased ? The taxes retained on the peoples' necessaries of life prove that it has not ceased. He believed that Sir Robert Peel would have given the people a better Corn-bill but for the power of the landed aristocracy in the House of Commons. Mr. Crawford quoted from a speech by Lord John Russell in 1831, in which Lord John argued for making the House of Commons a real re- presentation of the people ; and cited the statute 25th Edward I. c. 6, which declares that no talliage or aid shall be levied without "the good- will and consent of the archbishops, bishops, earls, barons, knights, burgesses, and all freemen of the land": the validity of the statute is asserted in the Petition of Rights, and it was allowed by the Judges in the case of Hampden; and it is in fact the foundation of the constitu- tion as it has existed since the days of the Stuarts. Mr. Crawford then stated the points demanded in the petition, to which he drew attention— The first was, the extension of the suffrage to every male adult, under re- strictions arising from the right itself; of which the most vital would be, to limit the exercise of the vote to the district in which the elector is settled. One objection to the proposal was, want of education on the part of the persons to receive the suffrage : are the majority of those who now hold it educated? Then, to answer another objection, are they less open to corrupt influences ? Or was it shown that the working-people had manifested any disposition to violate the laws of property ? The second point was, the more equal distribu- tion of electoral districts, without which a share in the representation cannot be equally distributed. The third was, the Ballot ; the fourth, the abolition of property-qualification for Members, of which there is practical experience in the good working of the Scotch law on that head ; the fifth, payment of Mem- bers; the sixth, shorter duration of Parliaments. It was the old practice of the constitution, that the Parliament should last for three years; some wish it to last for one only.

Mr. Crawford, in moving for inquiry into the subject of the petition, asked the support, not merely of those who agreed with him on each point, but of all who think the people not fairly represented. He dis- claimed the idea that he was the organ of those who had advocated similar principles with violence ; but he asked if a feeling that distress is produced by unjust laws, which extensively pervades the people, could be safely allowed to continue? He concluded by moving, that whereas the points which he had ascribed had been stated in various pe- titions, the House, on an early day, would resolve itself into a Com- mittee of the whole to consider the same.

Mr. WALLACE, Dr. BOWRING, and Mr. WILLIAM WTI LTAtis sup- ported the motion.

Mr. WARD took the silence of Ministers for an acknowledgment of the importance of the subject. He supported the motion generally ; preferring, however, triennial to annual Parliaments, and not wishing to disconnect the suffrage with the possession of some property. But the basis of representation must be widened; for bow absurd was it to talk of taxation and representation being coextensive, while they taxed twenty where only one was represented. It was said that the franchise would be misused : are those who now possess it so immaculate—those who appear before the Election Committees ? But there is as much corruption in the House of Commons itself as in any constituency in the kingdom : there is as much bribery in a blue riband as in a couple of sovereigns ; as much corrupt influence in according corn-laws, sugar- duties, or timber-duties to particular interests. As a Member repre- senting a population of 100,000, of whom only 4,000 are voters, he bore testimony to the intelligence, sound intellect, and honesty of the work- ing-classes.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM contrasted the intense joy with which the con- cessions of the Reform Bill were received and the derision and con- tempt with which they are now treated. He admitted that some large constituencies returned no more Members than certain small ones : it was not professed at the time of the Reform Bill that the principle of representation was population, not property. They were, however, dis- cussing an abstract question with a practical question involved in it— whether the Monarchy should continue or not ? for with the proposed system of representation, based on numbers to the exclusion of pro- perty, the Crown and the Aristocracy must be pat down.

Mr. O'CoNNELL rested his support of the motion on the statute de tallagio non concedendo ; averring that the limitation of the franchise separates the people into a master-class and a slave-class.

Mr. WABLEY noticed that Sir James Graham bad left the House, and commented on the absence of Members on both sides— The state of the House on both sides was strange. Motions of this nature, however—such innocent agitation — (Laughter)—ought to be repeated

monthly instead of sessionally, and he would do his best to secure their con- stant repetition. Millions were awaiting anxiously the result of this motion, and yet the House was half empty ! The just demands of the people are refused, in whatever temper they are made : if they make intemperate speeches, you say that English gentlemen are not to be intimidated : now that they are headed by a Quaker, you still give the same answer—" No." As a recent instance that the House does not represent the people, he alluded to the pass- ing of a private bill on the previous evening, the Kingsclere Enclosure Bill, which it was alleged would dispossess five hundred small holders for the benefit of a few rich proprietors in the neighbourhood. Avow- ing his general adhesion to the demands of the petition presented by Mr. Crawford, he again warned the House of the feeling which they aroused by exclusion of the people-

" Let not honourable Members lay the flattering unction to their souls that the people will long consent to be taxed without being represented ; and upon this point let me quote the words of Lord Camden, on the 22d January 1776, on a motion respecting the Stamp Repeal Act. ' My position is this, (said his Lordship,) and I will repeat and maintain it to my last hour, that taxation and representation are inseparable. This position is founded upon the law of nature ; it is more, it is in ifself an eternal law of nature; for whatever is a man's own is absolutely his own, and no one has a right to take it from him without his consent. Whoever attempts to do it commits an injury, whoever does do it commits a robbery."

Mr. REDHEAD YORKE supported the motion ; pointing to the "thieves, rogues, and vagabonds," who had appeared before the Ipswich Election Committee, as proofs that the present system is not perfect. Mr. Pao- TERROR also supported the motion ; though he concurred only par- tially in the several demands of the petition. Mr. BERNAL Said, that he for one did not understand at the time that the Reform Bill was to be a final measure. He declared that the people were never so steeped in corruption, they never wallowed in such degrading mire, as since the passing of that measure ; and he attributed it to the equal balance of parties, which offers more temptation ; though he feared also that the people were not sufficiently educated to be fully alive to their political rights. He believed, however, that a reform might be safely effected ; and he thought that some day they would be obliged to adopt a mixed test for the franchise, of property and numbers combined. Sir Joust EASTHOPE opposed the motion in the terms employed by Mr. Craw- ford, which were almost the terms of the Charter. Sir CHARLES NAPIER bad had a mandate from his constituents to support it. Mr. CHARLES VILLIERS reminded the House that the motion was simply one for an inquiry into grievances. Sir James Graham's argument of danger to the Monarchy came too late : he had consented to the Reform Bill on the same grounds that Mr. Crawford rested his motion ; and there was not a single thing which Sir James Graham and Lord Stanley then pointed out as a proof of the necessity for change which Mr. Craw- ford had not pointed out now.

Sir ROBERT PEEL would do nothing that would argue disrespect to the petitioners ; but if he should be brief in his objections, the House would remember that Mr. Wakley had given notice that the question should be brought under discussion every month. Ten years ago he had prophesied, that the day would come when he should be found de- fending the Reform Bill against farther changes. He had now, not only to defend the bill, but its absent author, Lord John Russell ; who had said that this nation could not afford a revolution once a year. In another ten years, Mr. Crawford's proposal, if it were carried, would have to be changed. And the majority of those who were about to vote with Mr. Crawford had dissented from his particular propositions. Sir Robert then playfully passed in review some of the arguments in support of the motion— The only argument which he had heard for an extension of the suffrage was, that every individual taxed should be represented : why that would include women, minors, and even beggars, who are subject to indirect taxation. If the position of Lord Camden were true, the present system of representation is indefensible. He had never heard a more 9habby argument than that in favour of annual Parliaments : Dr. Bowring had said that triennial Parliaments con- tradicted the course of nature, for the earth makes its revolution round the sun in a year ; and then with great pathos, he added, that the merchants of this country annually settle their accounts ! The payment of Members Sir Robert thought impracticable.

If he were asked what was required to give satisfaction to the people, he should say, pass the Income-tax and the Tariff : show that you desire to ameliorate the condition of the people, and, while maintaining the national faith, to lay the burden on the comparatively affluent And he advised the Radical Members who complained of the absence of Lord John Russell and his friends,:to retaliate by staying away next night, and thus abstain from voting against his Income-tax.

Mr. MUSTS admitted that the people had called for "the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill" ; but they did not get it, for it was crippled by the fifty-pound tenant-at-will clause and other altera- tions. He supported the motion ; and so did Mr. TURNER and Captain PLUNIUDGE, though the two latter dissented from some particulars.

Mr. COBDEN reproached Sir Robert Peel with mystifying the ques- tion; which was, not of universal suffrage or payment of Members, but whether the House would grant a Committee to consider the demand of the unrepresented multitude for the Charter. He asked whether the Reform Bill had improved the people in any one respect, physical, moral, or intellectual ? The people were in a state of severe suffering, which no income-tax would cure. He heard much of class interests— such as sugar interests and land interests; but nobody talked of the labour interests, the interests of the people. Government had been playing off the working against the middle classes, with a view to trample on the one and plunder the other. The people—those, at least, whom he represented—had no hatred of the Monarchy : what they hated was the Aristocracy and that House as at present constituted. Mr. ROEBUCK asked, whether the rough method of estimating a man's intelligence by the possession of a freehold or the occupation of a ten- pound house would be resorted to in private life. He went on to re- proach Sir Robert with speaking of the working-classes in "a tone of ridicule and mockery," showing himself "heartless, disregardful, and contemptuous."

Lord STANLEY thought Mr. Roebuck's violence furnished a complete answer to his speech. He explained the ground on which Lord Grey's Cabinet seceded to the Reform Bill: they thought it wise to extend the sphere of the suffrage—unsafe not to do so ; but they regarded.it as a privilege to be granted, not as an inherent right. It was now said that the Reform Bill had done nothing : had nothing been done for the po- pular influence by a bill which admitted Members for so many of the large towns, and destroyed so many of the smaller boroughs, where cor- ruption and nomination prevailed ? It was made a large measure, pre- elsely in order that those who introduced might take their stand upon it ; and, without insisting on finality, he would say, that there were now fourteen gentlemen in England who were bound by that measure: those fourteen were the Cabinet of Lord Grey, of whom he himself was one ; and they were certainly bound to resist these perpetual attempts at dis- turbing it. Why did not the Members who talked of voting for this motion, without adopting the suggestions on which it was founded, bring in some bill embodying their own views ? Sir Twomas WILDE opposed the motion, as tantamount to a proposal for the Charter ; and he bore testimony to Mr. Roebuck's having com- pletely misconceived the spirit of Sir Robert Peel's remarks. Sir Ro- nERT PEEL, thanking Sir Thomas for his correction of Mr. Roebuck's error, observed that the latter did not enter the House until the middle of his speech.

Mr. BLEwirr made a few remarks amid much interruption ; and then the House divided; Mr. Crawford's motion being rejected, by 226 to 67. FRAUDS IN MANUFACTURES AND THE TRUCK SYSTEM. Mr. BUSFIELD FERRAND moved on Tuesday for a Select Committee to inquire into the existence of frauds in the manufactures of the United Kingdom, and into the truck system in manufactories, mines, collieries,

and railways : his motion also contained a clause to protect witnesses from tampering, or from injury in consequence of the evidence they

might give. To justify the latter, he mentioned the loss of employment by two witnesses whom Mr. Sadler had summoned to give evidence be- fore a Committee on the condition of the working classes. Mr. Ferrand asserted the importance of a high character in the merchants and ma- nufacturers of the country, in order to the extension of its commerce ; and he cited laws, beginning in the reign of Richard the Second, to pre- vent deception in the manufacture of woollen cloth. About fifty years ago, however, such new and enlightened principles burst upon this country, that those laws which restrained the dishonest were abrogated. The consequences were, frauds of the grossest description, practised by manufacturers reckless of the character of British manufactures at home and abroad, in the race to undersell each other. In this way the South American markets had been lost. Mr. Ferrand supported his assertion with a great mass of evidence- -He began with Mr. Bakes, who, in his Plistory of the Cotton Manufacture, says that cloth was originally passed through starch made of wheaten flour, for the purpose of fraud ; a contrivance which, "though now too generally under- stood to be regarded as fraudulent, it would be creditable to the trade to lay aside." Messrs. Robertson's account of Francia's Reign of Terror describes the Dictator as rating a pedlar for attempting to pass off bad English cotton cloth, and exclaiming, " The English are downright swindlers." Chambers's Edin- burgh Journal mentions the bad repute of British prints in Switzerland. Bab- bage's Economy of Manufactures explains frauds in the lace-trade. Some anonymous correspondents of Mr. Ferrand described the manufacture of cloths for the South American market, stamped with Spanish names, in order to make them saleable ; and the use of " shoddy " cloth, or resurrection wool- stuff, made of old woollen rags, in the manufacture of coarser cloths and carpets. Government had even been obliged to issue a circular to declare, that if cloths furnished to them were found to contain woollen waste or shoddy, the whole supply would be rejected, and the offending parties would not be dealt with simn'

He then proceeded to the truck-system ; and read the letters of seve-

ral correspondents giving the particulars of the practice in various parts of the United Kingdom. Some of the more striking allegations were these— In Carlisle, a weaver had applied for parish relief, because the material fur- nished by his employers was so bad that it took six weeks to weave it instead of three. Rules of the most complicated kind are hung up in factories, and Loss are exacted for the inevitable breach of them. Workmen are compelled to inhabit cottages let by their employers, to take milk, and to take shares in a cow when killed. A clergyman of Wolverhampton mentions the prevalence of the system in his neighbourhood ; especially alluding to a colliery where there is a "Tommy-shop," at which much higher prices are charged than in the town. At Coatbridge, near Glasgow, there are nine extensive mines, each with its store where wages are paid in kind, at profits of fifteen to twenty per cent. At one place, many industrious miners have not handled a shilling of their own earnings for four years. Mr. II. S. Chapman, an assistant Hand- loom Commissioner, says that he was requested not to put any questions as to the existence of the system at Windhill, a small hamlet in Yorkshire, for fear of consequences to the weavers. Mr. George Lovell, the Government Inspec- tor of Small-arms, issued a circular in Birmingham against the system as ap- plied to persona employed in the work of Government contracts. Mr. FIELDER, MR. WALLACE, Mr. BROTHERTON, and Mr. WAHLEY, all admitted the necesssity of inquiry; and the last moved an amend- ment to extend it to the occupiers of land. Sir JAMES GRAHAM could not sanction a motion which went upon the presumption that frauds were common among British manufac- turers: he thought it an exception and not the rule. Any inquiry with a view to further legislation would be fruitless: the real remedy was the competition of honest tradesman. In unprosperons times, when there is little demand for labour, the employer is both able and impelled to reduce his workmen's wages, and no statute can prevent him. Sir James, however, had no objection to an inquiry into the truck system ; but, desiring to give the inquiry a less partial direction, he sug- gested, that "a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the opera- tion of the law which prohibits the payment of wages in goods or otherwise than in the current coin of the realm, and into the alleged evasions and defects of the present enactments." Mr. MUNTZ thought that the inquiry would be abortive: the system could be practised without the offender appearing in it. Mr. MARK PHILIPS explained, that manufacjurers made goods to order, and the bad manufactures sent to South America are ordered expressly for the slave-market. Mr. COBDEN, in the midst of some angry remarks, asked, how it was, that English manufacturers, who who export more than all the rest of Europe put together, could procure a sale for their goods, if they were all spurious ? and he said that those who resort to the truck system are only indigent manufacturers, who thus get on by means of a virtual reduction of wages. After some farther debate, Mr. WAHLET and Mr. FERRAND having both withcliawn their motions, and Sir ROBERT PEEL having interposed to moderate the strife and to back Sir James Graham's proposition, the amended motion was put and agreed to.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.

The Cardigan Election Committee, which opened the inquiry on Sa- turday, closed it on the same day ; and reported on Monday, that Mr. Pryse Pryse had been duly elected. The question turned on the num- ber of votes polled. A poll-book was lost at the election ; and it was at first assumed that it would have shown a majority in favour of Mr. John Scandrett Harford ; but it was now admitted on his part, that, had it been found, Mr. Pryse would have had a majority of 20.

The Longford Election Committee reported, on Monday, that Mr. Luke White had not been duly elected, and that Mr. Anthony Lefroy ought to have been returned. They added a resolution on the general question of Irish elections-

" That, considering the matter of the 29th section of the Act for amending the mode of deciding on Election Petitions, they feel it to be their duty to draw the earnest and serious attention of the House to the state of the law as it affects the elective franchise in Ireland, with reference to the conflicting decisions so frequently given by Committees as to the meaning of certain technical terms, the right of reopening the registries, the true interpretation under the statute of the words 'beneficial interest 'and 'clear annual value,' and also with re- ference to the oath to be taken before the Assessor. Your Committee are unanimously of opinion, that without some declaratory act is passed on these points of appeal, it will be altogether impossible for future Committees to ar- rive at a right or satisfactory conclusion.'

The witnesses before the Ipswich Election Committee have been of an unusually discreditable caste. One Lucas was committed to New- gate last week, for giving false evidence. He has admitted that he pre- varicated, and requested permission of the House to be examined again, promising to tell the whole truth. One Thurston was committed on Wednesday : he denied that he applied to the Yellows (Liberals) for money ; and immediately afterwards a letter was banded to him, in his own handwriting, demandinc, 30/. On the same day, an independent elector confessed to having been paid by both parties ; voting for the Blues, who paid him least, (U. to 6/.0 on account of his political prin- ciples: he thought them at least a pound better. This man, as well as another who followed him, was also a confessed thief.

The Wakefield Committee reported, on Thursday, that Mr. Joseph Holdsworth had not been duly elected, and that Mr. William Sebright Lascelles ought to have been returned. Mr. Holdsworth had withdrawn from further contest.