oftener than he had supported Lord John Russell) not to treat the subject with quibbles respecting the operation of machinery, nor as a mere "Manchester question," but to look at it in connexion with the whole condition of the country; and it must be done this session.

Mr. Ferrand argued against the resolutions. He was followed by Mr. Villiers and Mr. Roebuck, the lattor urging the Legislature to put aside party, to consider the great interest of the greatest of nations as brethren assembled together; and, viewing the state of the country, to ask themselves whether a remedy for at least a part of the evil might not lie within their power.

Mr. Fielden then moved the adjournment of the debate.

Sir Robert Peel strongly opposed it. It was thrice put in a varied form, and thrice rejected by large majorities.

Ultimately a division took place on Mr. Wallace's resolutions, when there appeared, for the resolutions 49; against, 174: majority 125.

The debate just recorded took place on the 8th of July. On the 11th, it having been moved to go into Committee of Supply, the Opposition party again succeeded in introducing the subject of the state of the nation; and a long debate took place.

Mr. Villiers-having moved as an Amendment for the appointment of a Select Committee on the laws regulating the importation of corn, with a view to their total repeal prefaced his motion with a speech, in which he said that he brought it forward in compliance with the wish of the Anti-Corn-law delegates; and because, in discussing Mr. Wallace's motion, a taunt had been thrown out by the Ministe

rial side, that if the Opposition thought that a repeal of the Cornlaws would remedy the evil, they ought to submit that proposition to the House. Moreover, the new law, he said, had proved a failure; and, since it had passed, the principle had been avowed by Members of the Government, that the people ought to be allowed to purchase food wherever they could, and on the best terms.

Mr. Fielden seconded the motion, with statements to illustrate the impoverished condition of the hand-loom weavers.

Mr. Philip Howard deprecated the delay of the supplies, as tending to aggravate the distress of the country; and he foresaw in the repeal of the Corn-laws, merely the addition of agricultural to manufacturing distress.

Mr. Aglionby declared the new sliding-scale was a delusion. He prophesied that Parliament would be obliged to repeal the law before the winter.

Mr. Gally Knight objected to the discussion of a question already exhausted; and Sir Charles Napier, though condemning the Cornlaw, thought that these debates ought not to be protracted; that it was a very unfair way of conducting an opposition to any Government.

Sir Robert Peel began by complaining of the continual interruption to public business, and of the impediments opposed to a fair trial of the new Corn-law. "Gentlemen on the other side have, though I will not say intentionally, adopted a course which in effect prevents my measure from having a fair trial; whilst any hope exists that Parliament will be induced to alter the law, and that corn might be admitted into this country on more

have no fair trial, for the grain will be held back." He had already shown that in the week ending 23d June, there came in of foreign corn 27,500 quarters, and of colonial corn 6,000; in all 33,500 quarters. He would now quote returns a week later, to show that the result was not less satisfactory:

Notwithstanding the expectation which had been held out respecting an alteration in the state of the law, it appears by the return of the 30th June, that for home consumption there had been brought in from the colonies 5,002 quarters at 1s. duty, and of foreign corn 48,112 quarters. The whole of the corn for home consumption amounted then to upwards of 53,000 quarters.'

This then showed the satisfactory working of the law; and in addition to this, the harvest had already commenced in some parts of the country. The consequence was a fall of 28. in price in Mark Lane; and in other parts of the country there was a similar tendency to a decline in price. It would be most unwise to proceed to condemn the law after an experience of seven weeks; but if they chose to form a judgment from so short an interval of the working of a new Act of Parlia ment, he thought there were al ready symptoms perceptible of a marked improvement.

Referring to the arguments employed by Mr. Cobden on the former debate, respecting the ef. fects of machinery ou the employ ment of the people, Sir Robert Peel said, he had done all he could to guard himself against being supposed to hold the opinion that the progress of mechanical inven

Sir Robert Peel cited practical authorities in support of that opinion from Stockport itself, which Mr. Cobden represented, showing by the evidence of one of the relieving officers of the Stockport union, that the want of employment and distress prevailing at Stockport, and the increased ap plications for parish relief, were to be dated from the introduction of improved machinery into the mills, whereby a large number of hands was rendered unnecessary. He said he was countenancing no vulgar prejudice, but when in 1841, he saw that the same quantity of work could be done in one mill by 100 hands less than in 1836, he could not refrain from con eluding, that improvements in machinery must have an immediate and local effect.

He referred to the evidence of Mr. Cruttenden, the partner in a well-known firm at Stockport, who had stated, that owing to the improvements in machinery, his manufactory could produce nearly twenty miles of calico in a day, Mr. Cruttenden had been asked"Do you think that the laws affecting trade have contributed in any degree to cause the distress at present existing in Stockport, or in other manufacturing districts?" He said-"I do not think that they have had much to do with it.

I am aware, some persons suppose that the Corn-laws have been the cause of our present distress. I believe that the distress has arisen in a far greater degree from the the immense increase in the amount of capital which has been employed in the cotton trade, and the consequent unnatural increase in the production of manufactured goods." The wages of the hand-loom weaver had fallen from 27s. in 1815 to 3s. in 1842; but when the price of corn, and the vast importation of cotton are considered, it must be obvious, that there must be some other cause for the existence of distress than the Corn-laws. There must be some other cause also for the rapid decrease of wages in the cotton trade:

:

"Here is an account of cotton manufactured since 1831. I have no means of comparing the increase with 1815; but since 1831, there has been a most extraordinary increase in the quantity of cotton imported for manufacture and retained for home consumption, and the quantity of cotton goods exported. In 1831, the total quantity of cotton spun was 208,000,000 pounds; and in 1841, it amounted to 337,000,000 pounds. The total quantity of yarn-manufactured goods in 1831, was 70,000,000 pounds; and in 1841, it had risen to 138,000,000 pounds. Now, though it might be that we do not take corn in exchange for our cotton goods, yet the quantity of goods exported, for which we receive some sort of return, has been enormously increased, comparing 1841 with 1831, and with 1815 also, when the wages of the artisan were so high, as described by the honourable Gentleman, and when corn was about 64s. aquarter. The increase of the trade, as mea

sured by the imports and exports, has been most extraordinary."

Allusion had been made in the House to a placard issued at Manchester, headed "Murder," of which Mr. Cobden had declared that the Members of the AntiCorn-law League knew nothing:

"I was glad to hear that declaration from the honourable gentleman: at the same time, I think there ought to be a more effectual measure taken for the purpose of manifesting a severance between disseminators of bills of this character, and those who profess to have the true interests of the working-classes at heart. I was determined to make no reference to this hand-bill without information, but these facts have been stated to me:- The inflammatory placard headed Murder,' continues to be issued in a shop in Market Street, Manchester. The placard was still exhibiting on the 23d of June, at 22, Market Street. Above the door of this house there are printed the words, 'The Dépôt for the National Anti-Corn-law League.' The printer of the placard, who is the tenant of that shop, is the printer and publisher for the Anti-Corn-law League. About four doors distant from this dépôt is a building, in which the Anti-Corn-law League held their meetings.'-I am glad to hear from the honourable Member that the members of the Anti-Corn-law League express their disapprobation of the exhibition of this placard; and I trust what I have stated may induce them to take steps which may make it impossible for any person to attribute to them any participation in appeals of this nature to a suffering population."

He trusted that nothing would be done to check the progress of

subscriptions in aid of the distressed manufacturers; though that could be no permanent remedy for the distress. His hopes of that lay in a general extension of the commerce of the country; and he re-stated the principles on which he thought it ought to be extended :

"I stated, and I am now ready to repeat the statement, that if we had to deal with a new society, in which those infinite and complicated interests which grow up under institutions like those in the midst of which we live had found no existence, the true abstract principle would be to buy in the cheapest market and to sell in the dearest.' And yet it is quite clear, that it would be utterly impossible to apply that principle in a state of society such as that in which we live, without a due consideration of the interests which have grown up under the protection of former laws. While contending for the justice of the abstract principle, we may at the same time admit the necessity of applying it partially; and I think the proper object is first of all to lay the foundation of good laws, to provide the way for gradual improvements, which may thus be introduced without giving a shock to existing interests. If you do give a shock to those interests, you create prejudices against the principles themselves, and only aggravate the distress. This is the principle on which we attempted to proceed in the preparation of the Tariff."

He frankly admitted that he had not applied those principles to corn and sugar; but on corn the duties were reduced one-half; and he again called on them to look at the measure as a whole :

"At the commencement of this VOL. LXXXIV.

year declarations were constantly made about the comparative prices of meat in this country and abroad. There were constant prophecies that no attempt would be made to deal with the monopoly of provisions in respect to cattle and meat. In respect to rice, potatoes, fish, and various other articles of subsistence, there have been made most extensive reductions of duty; and with respect to raw materials, there was likewise a reduction such as the advocates of free-trade could scarcely complain of. The effect of all this change could not yet be fairly estimated. But then it was asked, Do you intend to do nothing else? We do intend, after submitting it to the consideration of a Committee, to propose a further measure, permitting the taking of foreign corn out of bond duty free, upon the substitution into the warehouse, or delivery for exportation, of equivalent quantities of flour and biscuit. With respect to other countries, it will be our endeavour to extend on the true principles of reciprocal advantage the commerce of the country."

He had been asked why he had introduced no measure on the banking laws; but every day at the disposal of Government had been consumed in the measures to which he had referred; and they had as yet scarcely been able to pass more than the first clause of the Poor-law. They had passed the Income-tax, which no Government could have done against the general feeling of the country. They had entered into negotiations with other countries :

"I hope, now that we have been able to bring these measures to a conclusion, with some difference of opinion on my side of the House, and with strong divisions against [L]

me on account of the alarm given to the agricultural interest-that they will be allowed to have a fair trial; and if they do not prove calculated to increase the prosperity of the country-if they should prove inadequate to meet the distress of the country—in that case I shall be the first to admit, that no adherence to former opinions ought to prevent their full and careful revision. But I hope that no precipitate conclusions will be come to, but that a fair experiment will be made, in order that we may see whether they have a tendency to revive the prosperity of the country, and to terminate that stagnation which no person in this great community views with deeper concern than those who are immediately responsible for the Government of the country."

Lord John Russell remarked, that Sir R. Peel did not speak as if he were very confident of the success of his measures. For at least eight weeks after the new Corn-law had received the Royal Assent, it had not been interfered with; but Sir Robert Peel was not correct in saying, that the change had led to the importation of foreign corn; for in two weeks this year, corn had entered to the amount of 25,000 quarters and 48,000 quarters respectively. In two weeks of last year, ending 16th April and 21st May, it had entered to the amount of 58,825, and 71,040 quarters respectively, at the much higher duty of 22s. 8d. and 23s. 8d.; and therefore, the diminution of duty by the new Act, had only led to a diminution of revenue-there had been no gain to the people. If the duty had been fixed at 8s., there would not have been this delay of two months and a half, during which

corn was not admitted. Would it not be better to resort to a measure which Sir Robert Peel himself acknowledged would afford a temporary alleviation of the distress? If it was desirable to obtain relief for the people from charity, would it not be much more so to afford it by the law? In 1826, Sir Robert Peel had acted with Mr. Canning and Lord Liverpool, in supporting a measure temporarily to suspend the Corn-law; and why, therefore, should he not agree to the motion about to be made by Lord Howick, for the admission of foreign corn for a time at a fixed duty? Last year, the Whigs were told when in power, that they were incompetent :

"That Government is now replaced by Gentlemen possessed of perfect intelligence and unfailing wisdom; and when asked where is the remedy-where the hope of an alleviation, they say, 'they expect a good harvest.' Now, I do think, Sir, that though our abilities be not so shining as those of honourable Gentlemen opposite, we were at least equal to the task of looking at the barometer and saying we expect a fine harvest.”

Towards the close of his speech, Lord John Russell launched into a general attack on the Government measures:

" I remember a right honourable Gentleman, not now a Member of this House, Mr. Herries, parodying a French writer in reviewing a work, said, that our measures contained some things that were good, and some things that were new

that those that were new were not good, and those that were good, were not new, I appply this expression to the measures of this session proposed by the present Go