Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 14th February 1846, Edition 1 of 4, Page 7, Untitled Article

Page 7
Page 7
7 of 8

On this page

  • Text (2)

      Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Untitled Article

      The SPEAKER .-The hon . ge Amil is entltled to put a question , but he 13 net { M b the ^ of the house to make a speed' nift - _ h 4 r ) Mr Fehkasd .-1-jail ^ fizgig then , to the noblelord , whether ^ mo ^ has presented » e the free and unbir ^^ ^ ^ vasoxa whoge napes are appende ^ to them ? ( Laguhtcr . ) Lord Mobpetf _ x late - ^ ^ that f tothe v * !! $ ^ * ' > * e signatures are the free anduabiassed acts <• - ^ pera 0 n 8 whoso names are appended * °£ os ? v Jtions . ^( Cheers . ) jut . Jjr jSC 0 MBE moTed for a return of the number Of fern 1 - jjgs anj persons who had been removed from " ¦^ places of settlement in Lancashire , Yorkshire , *?' . ! Cheshire , in the years 1842-3-4 , with the P . iaoes to which they had been removed , and their residences in the towns . The return was ordered . T ^ . ? iJ ™ ° d i ' ! f ; ' ™ 'J * - "fl ™™ " entitled t »

      FACTORY SCHOOLS . Mr . Bright objected to the manner in which the money accumulated from tines under the Factories Act had been distributed . Messrs . Iiorner and Sannders had paid to the church and schools £ 420 . "Whereas the sum awarded to the Dissenters' schools was only £ 75 . Sir J . Geahaji could assure the hon . member that it was the wish of the government that the fines to which he referred should be distributed without partiality or favour . ( Hear , hear . ) Instruction ! Bad been given that the spirit of the act should be carried out in the recommendations of the

      inspectors , and that the distributions should take place with reference only to the wants of the schools . He eonld assure the hon . member he would find that any application , come from whatever quarter it might would receive the fullest attention . ( Hear . ) * Sir R . Ixgus wished the right hon . baronet to state more fully than he had done , whether the house was to understand that an equal amount was to be given to the schools of the establishment and other schools , or only a proportional amount to the latter . He understood trom the right hon . baronet that a proportional sum was to be given , according to the number of scholars .

      Sir J . Gruiam , in repl y , had to state that by the act there was no distinction as to the schools , and that the inspectors were directed to report , without reference to the number of scholars , what sum they thought should be siren .

      TIIE REFORMATION OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS . Mr . Liddeu . asked the right hou . the Secretary of State for the Home Department if government were and refonution of juvenile offenders ! j Sir J . Graham said , this subject had not been neglected either by the present or by the former government . Before 1838 there was no institution in this country for the punishment of juvenile convicts except in the hulks in the Medway , and so far from this being a place favourable to reformation , it was highly injurious to their morals . In 1 S 38 governp ent , with the sanction of the house , founded an institution at Parkhurst , for the reformation of offenders . In September , 1 S 41 , there were 2 S 0 juvo mle offenders confined there , and thev had since

      increased to 66 S , being subjected to discipline and to as good moral training as was possible under the circumstances . He obserrcd , in addition , tfcat there were « t Millbank 200 juvenile offenders , of whom 100 were very young ; so tkat at the preseat moment there were S 66 juvenile offenders subjected to dis-« ij > Iine on the most perfect principles . ^ Uear . ) If it should be the pleasure of the house to sanction the proposal of her Majesty ' s government , that an annual sum should % e granted to promote the improvement of juvemte offenders convicted by a jury , certainly it would be his endeavour to induce the magistrates in the various counties in England to give directions for setting apart a portion of the prisons for the special use , and to establish schools for the discipline of these children —( hear , hear );—and when the schools had been established he would

      recommend that me public in each county should also erect an asylum of refuge , in which , on their escape ; from prison , those offenders migat'be received before they were restored to society . Mr . Dckcokbe presented a petition from the paperhangers of the city of London . iteelaring thcmselws favourable ^ the principles of free trade , but wishing them to be-equally applied , and complaining that the duty on the importation of foreign paperhangings wes to be reduced five-sixths , in place of one-hall .

      THE CORN-LaWS . Sir R .-Eeel rose for the purpose of correcting a false _ impression , that the present duties leried > en the importation of foreign com would eease as soon as iiis resolutions imposing the new duties had're ceived the assent of the committee and had been approved by the house . lie had thought that Parliament had been accustomed . to deal with the corn as with other duties ; but as it vras not so , he would cuke the reduction of the duties take place upon the passingoftheAct . Government , however , had-determiBed to give to the CorniBill precedence over all other public business . It -would be taken without wahingtfor the bills necessarv to give effect to the other alteration in the tariff ,, and would , if it passed the -House of Commons , be sent forthwith to the House of Lords .

      THE CONDITION OF AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS . Mr . Waklet , after presenting several petitions in favour of the repeal of the Corn Laws , said that he had another petition of -an important nature io pre-* ent « n the same subject . .-It was from 14 labourers ia -Wiltshire , and was as follows : —

      "'; Xi > the Hon . the Comactis of Great Britain and Ireland , in Parliament Autmlled . "The petition of the 1 undersigned , inhabttatts of Feweey , in the county of Wilts , showeth , —That < your petitioners are agricultural labourers , members of that-class for whose especial protection and . benefit the Corn Laws are said to hsve passed , and are now sought to be maintained . : l < hat , so far from Imvins received protection and ^ benefit , the condition ol jour , fetitioners is one « f destitution and of degradation ,-being obliged to snbnut to the work usually assigned to beasts of burden , aamely , to be harneEsed to carts and to draw tliera , laden with stones , from place-to place , in order to earn , not the fair wages for labour , but a miserable pittance , a sum nicely calculated as being just sufficient to keep them fram starvation , and to prevent their availing themselves of that refuge which tbe la-w ^ of the land has prweiiied for them , and which toe poor-rate U levied , lo

      ensureto them , that , although some of your petitioners-have as many as eight in their family , ia -no one instance does the payment for their labour amount to more than 6 a . a-wesk , out of which sura rent , fnei , andothernecessaries . as wellas food , ha * e to be provided ; that , being this reduced under the ComXaws , which do not enable the occupiers of the soil to ^ jrive them employment ifor fair wages , and which clearly do not afford than protection , or candace to their benefit * your DetituHers are strongly of opinion that those laws are injurious , rather than ad- ' vantageoas to them ; they therefore humbly implore your hon . heuse immediately andentirely to abolish , thoselaws , . and all others the tendency of which is to make food scarce and dear , —* state of things that is always hurtful to the . labouring classes . ( Signed by M labourers , having 34 wives and 48 children , altogether amounting ia . 76 persons , subsisting , on £ i . 2 s . a-week , or 13 d . each person , being Ies 3 than ^ d . a-day each . )"

      THE GOVERNMENT COMMERCIAL MEASURE . On the motion that the Speaker do saw leave the chair , Mr . P . Mass rose , and moved as anamendment , that the house do resolve itself into committee that day ax months . He trusted that he approached the consideration of the question with ajust sense of its magnitude , and that no expressions might fall from him which should teed to excite any angry feelings . It was , indeed , of too important a character to be treated oh mere party i ^ rounds . It was a question which touched the interests of every man in this © nuntry , the highest and lowest , the merchant and the agriculturist , the landlord and the tenant , the operative ana the artisan ; and it was a question of

      jar greater magnitude than the Reform Bill , because it implied a change in the policy which had been pursued in this country from the earliest period of Us history , and under which it had risen to great eminence—a policy which all nations had long followed , and which all still continued to follow . ( Cheers . ) "Whether the country was prepared for this great change— -wLether theconstitueueks were prepared to give their sanction to the measure of the right hon . gentleman—he could not venture tosay ; but he ( Mr . Miles ) could not hesitate to declare that on a question of such vital importance to their interests they ought at least to be consulted . Undoubtedly the Majority of this Parliament was elected on protectionist principles . ( Hear , hear . ) Notwithstanding the

      explanations given by the right hon . bart . ( Sir R . Peel ) he ( Mr . Miles ) could not but agree with the late Secretary for the Colonies , in thinking that there was no peculiar necessity for this measure—that thou « h there was a failure of the potatoe crop in Ireland , jet there was no failure in the harvest of this country , for every report showed that the crop was very large . From tLe reports which had been published it appeared that between the 5 th of July , 1 S 45 , and the 5 th of January . 1846 , nearly 1 , 000 , 000 quarters of grain had been imported , and more than lOOcwt . of meaL That there was no apprehension of famine was shown by the fact that wheat was at

      56 s . a quarter—a price which in 1 S 42 the right h"n , baronet had thought a fair price . ( Hear , hear . ) He ( Mr . Miles ) did not underrate the responsibility of the Minister . He could understand that the right hon . haronet ' sanxiety would beincreased by the mere idea of a famine . Then the right hon . baronet had not only the earliest reports from different quarters , 5 {)™ e was receiving such rePorts continually . At ^ n ^ W ^ - " V fcon . barunet ' gcolleagues had ELI huMdf tl \ mcans of judging whether henro ^ S ^ T * ^ *« demand the measure wL ^ Sf ^ Jt * ** ? hen thosecoUeagu eS were seen refusing to open the port * , and dednriiur 01 iannne

      we repuns exaggerated , he ( Mr Miles ) Without wishing to impute improper motives S BPt tit m thBthefdttlat iV ^ S > roteS

      Untitled Article

      hnd long been doomed m the mind of the right hon bart ., and thatthe propositions now made by The Si hon . bart . nad at last sealed its fate UBonthat . nrin cple he ( Mr . Miles ) w ^ nreparedto SffuSSSf and give his most decided opposition totherielitW baronet . But he did not , Lan fo derSStfe were parts of the measure from which the country would denve benefit . He thought a moderate tl tection however , due to native industry fli ££ brought forward his motion , not on account of the aaacs ^ s ^ -w ^ s ^^ jwjsta tad long been - ||

      olSfT ? - , pini ° "lmaccordancewithWswn . H « chKf objection to the measures of the right hon . baronet was , that he saw no termination to them , tvery session would bring an additional change . It was proposed to effect great changes ; and greater still must follow . The more he considered the ques < tion the more was he convinced that those measures ought not to be allowed to pass through Parliament oeiore the deliberate opinion of the country had been taken on the subject by an appeal to the constituencies . He did not think the recent prosperity of this country was attributable to measures of the right hon . bart ., but to the fact of improved harvests , and the immense impetus given to trade by the more general application of capital to railroads . The termination of the wars in China and India had also

      materially . tided ia producing this result ; he could not therefore admit that the prosperity of the country was attributable to the right hon . baronet ' s policy , for many of those circumstances would have taken place had the noble lord been in power . ( Hear . ) Neither was the state of exports a test of prosperity . The foreign markets had been glutted—China and India had been inundated—with British goods . More reliance was to be placed en the home trade . He would not quote the former speeches of the right hon . bart . on the Corn question , nor taunt him with inconsistency . If the right hon . bart . considered his measures essential to the best interests of the country , he ( Mr . Miles ) for one would not blame him ; but he could not consent to follow the right

      hon . baronet . The Corn Law , it would be admitted , had worked well , so far as a law could work well . ( Laughter and cheers . ) So far as calculation could go it had , he thought , answered the right hon . baronet ' s expectations . The object of that law was to give a fair price to the farmer . What did he consider a fair price now ? If the right hon . bart . was right in his views of the effect which would attend the repeal of the Corn Laws , what became of the "cheap loaf" argument of the hon . gentleman opposite ? There was a vast difference between the cheapness produced by a good harvest , aud the cheapness produced hy the introduction of foreign corn . Mr . Husktsson had described the importation ol foreign grain as the sure forerunner of scarcity ;

      while the same great authority held that a steady home supply was the only sure guarantee for a steady home market . The right hon . baronet ' s measures would lead to the utter ruia of the agricultural interest ; they would cause great agricultural distress , andtead to lower wages ; the working classes would feel their effects before the higher orders . When these treasures passed , free trade would fee the principle of her Majesty ' s government , and protection could not be taken from one interest- without its being taken from all . What would be said of the navigation laws , of reciprocity treaties ? Where the sweeping current was to pass when once the barrier was broken down , he could not say ; but , if justice

      were done to all parties , protection ought to be contiaucd . Then the free trade proposed was a one- ] sided free trade . Tiis country would be inundated ] with foreign goods , but have no corresponding advantage ; and already -the Swiss and French competed in hosiery , cotton goods , cutlery , < &c ., with British manufacturers . Wages on railroads or public works might for a time'be higher , but ultimately all wonld be reduced . Thore were other circumstances which gave the manufacturer great natural advantages over the agriculturist . His establishment was much better conducted . ( Ironical cheers from the Opposition . ) What he meant was , that the manufacturer could survey « H his workmen •« & one glance , and therefore had them more under controul than tlie

      farmer . ( Hear , hear . ) Whether the sun shone , or the rain poured , the factory went on the same ; hut the farmers were subject to the vicissitudee ^ of the weather . It 'vas a matter of . great doubt whether manufactures-and agriculture could l > e governed by the same lawa-F . nJ principles v ( hear ) , as regards the restriction ofilabour . The manufacturer valso had an advantage -over the agriculturis-t in the > burdens they respectively bore . One of the largest cotton manufactories in the country , 1 the annual produce of which was £ 170 , 000 worth of-goods , and which paid £ 30 , 000 a-year in wages , paid only £ 530 > in direct burdens . ( Hear . ) There wae nothing to « counterbalance tlus-jn favour of the farmer . Theoompensa tion offered tc the landed interest—soine ££ 400 , 000

      spread over the whole country—was not ~ 6 umcient _ There was aaether article of product , which , how ] ever , did not strictly come within the subject—he meant sugar . In 1844 and 1845 certain . advantages were given ;*© free-grown sugar over slave-grown sug . tr . But ' -uotr the growers of free-labour sugar were told that they cuuld stand a little mere competition . Why , what was to protect them from being told in ISiS that the West , Indian colcuists had already derived great benefitfiem competition , and , therefore , that they must be subjected to still more . Oh the other hand , if the fanner wa « obliged t- > sell his corn . at-the cheapest masket , why-should he be

      compelled to < luy his sugar at xlic dearest' ? ( Hear . ) Extend the principle of the Cuaada Com Bill generally , arid he ( Mr . Miles ) wouid then not oljject to vote for die-plan . If free trade , principles were to prevail thejtCjught to be extended to tlie colonies ; and the manufacturer of this country ought not to be allowed to have a monopoly of the colonial market . Upon the whole , he believed that they would be acting for the . beat interests of ike country , for the benefit of commerce , of the colonies , and of the working classes , by advocating proteetioafor every branch of British industry . The hon . gentleman , who was very imperfectly heard tewardc the cieee of his speech , concluded by moving his Amendment .

      Sir W . Heaxbcote rose to second the amendment . He said , that in-opposing the measure of the right hon . baronet , he « vras desirous of altogether avoiding the practice that had in some quartets become general of charging the right hoc . gentleman with personal dishonesty in having introduced it . It was true that he looked upon the measure itself as delusive , as based on . grounds separately inconclusive , and inconsistent wiiQn combined ; and thatlie . ihought the right hon . baronet , in his eagerness to accomplish a great result ,. overlooked the evil of shaking a . settlement wliieh appeared to the pullie mind to be based on thegoodiaithof the present Par&unent . ;{ llear . ) He believed also that the right hon . bart . Jiad not sufficiently perceived the violent shock that

      • was being given to public confidence in public men . But , to suppose that . the right hon . baronet was pretending d conviction he-tlid not feel , or that he had an ; other object in view than to promote what he thought tO : be the best interest * , of . the country , appeared to him ( Sir W . HeathcoteJ . tOrbe agratuitousassumptkm . Tiie plan proposed to be . a . large and comprehensive scheme of free trade . If it were so , and if it was at the same time impartial , he would still look on it ag a step in a downward course , and one which was calculated to lead to evil . He was not afraid to avow , that , « £ his conscience , he believed the legislation d the lasi twenty years in the same direction , had produced evils greater than had been supposed , and the amount-cf which had been conceal , d only through

      the enormous growth of our colonial trade—a trade which , lie it remembered , had been carried on on principles antagonist to those of this measure . ( Hear , hear . ) The measure , however , was not impartial—it did nut take protection from all alike . The different classes of domestic industry demanded protection in pr -portion to the amount of manual labour required to carry them on . Yet , by this plan , that brancli which required more manuallabour than any—agriculture—was to have the least protection ; while manufactures , on which machinery would be so much brought to bear , was to have the most .

      ( Uear . ) The right lion , baronet rested its abolition on considerations , he said , partly of justice and partly of policy . Surely , as regarded the justice of it , the condition of the British Agriculturist , as compared with the forciguer , should be considered . He lived in a country where , money being plentiful , and its circulation rapid , prices were high . He was exposed to taxation unequal and heavy , and also to thosso local assessments which in foreign countries were borne by the state . The agriculturist was embarrassed too , more , perhaps , than any other person in the state , with the burden of the Btamp laws , the indirect taxation of the Excise and Customs . But

      it was impossible to do away with the effect on the right hon . baronet's supporters of his former arguments in favour of protection . ( Hear . ) He ( Sir W . Heathcote ) could not forget that the farmers , who were not fifty years ago so highly taxed as they were now by three times , were able to feed double the population . Nor could lie forgot that when last a scarcity occurred , such as was made one of the pretexts for this measure , England was the only country in Lurupe really able to meet it , and that at a time when every other country was prepared to close its ports agaiust us . To avert the possibility of such a crisis being renewed , he had voted for the Canada Corn Bill , and he was prepared to have voted for an Australian C » rn Bili also . But now no such principle was retained , he conceived himself bound to oppose the measure .

      Mr . W . Laecelles said tho hon baronet who last spoke seemed to attribute the prospcritv of England to the system of protection . He thou » ht differently ; for from the time of the commencement of the adoption of the principle might be traced a system of fluctuation , of alternations of prosperity and adversity Aor did he see why this measure should bema'iea test of Conservative policy . There was nothing in the reconstruction of the Conservative party , after the Reform Bill , to authorise the eupposition that a « 8 » wuve commercial policy was to be considered as

      Untitled Article

      its fundamental principle . The right hon . baronet had been taunted with the sudden change in his policy and with his inconsistency , Ht it ° was impossible to look at the principles of his former relaxations in the protective systom and not see that they . had embraced the whole principle of free trade . ^ o ^ f - J ^ . T so understood . ( Hear . ) In 1842 the right hon . baronet proposed the existing Corn Law ; and what was the consequence ? ( Hear . ) In every succeeding sessions of Parliament questions had been put to him in every tone ef alarm—•• After the principles you have L p ^/ d , do ? ou mean to alter the Corn Laws , or do vou not *" The right hon baronet ' s ans ^^ K ^ sideraF unsatisfactory at the time ( hear , hear ) were to this effect- I have no intention 0 alter the

      Corn Laws , but no man who is the Minister of this country ought to pledge himself for ever as to what he may do upon such a subject . " They mieht attempt to bolster the trade of the country by protective duties but , depend upon it , that at the root of the question we should find our best policy in free intercourse jnthfineign countri es From the first opening of the East India Company ' s charter , and whether they looked at the articles of silk sugar , or wool , every instance that they could possibly bring to mind of a relaxation of protective dutiesestablahed the wisdom of that policy , nlS ? T « f " - df i . * l at ha « . ving been « constant supporter . of the right hon . baronet ( Sir R . Peel ) s * KW 183 ° down totI » e present timeh

      ^ , e regretted that he must now not only oppose the measure but also withdraw all confidence from the right hon . baronet s administration . He had not deserted ! fcf Unt he had heard the explanation and themeasures . He was ready to admit the difficulties of tlie right hon . baronet ' s position , that whatever change he had proposed would have met with equal opposition from most of his present opponents ; theretore lie might have been driven to such an extensive T "\ ? ut h ?( Lord tforreys ) thought he might have obviated much of the difficulty if he had refused to return to power until thegovernment had been offered to the noble duke who presided at the Agricultural Society . Any man who knew anything of public affairs knew what would have been the result . This

      would have opened the eyes of the agriculturists to their real position , and some settlement more favourable to the agricultural body might have been effected . He ( Lord Norreys ) never could have expected that he who , in 1841 , so damaged the fixed duty that its advocates dare not again propose such a mode of protection—who , in 1843 , professed to mako an adjustment of the question—that he would have been the man to propose a 4 s . duty to end in total repeal . He did not believe that the right hon . baronet had been wanting in political integrity , or that he had been actuated by any dishonest motives ; but , contrasting his conduct in former yeara with the present , it was clear he had been wanting in that foresight which it was necessary a leader should possess to

      command the confidence of his party . He ( Lord Norreys ) would resist the measure , and the right hon . baronet , and not those who opposed the measure , must be responsible for any confusion which arose . ( Hear , hear . ) Mr . 8 . Cochbane doolared his intentioa to vote for the measure of the government , and did not see that Sir Robert Peel had 'been more inconsistent than others . The Reform Bill had passed , and the necessity for passing this measure was one of the inevitable consequences ef that bill . Mr . W . Deedes defended the Corn Law of 1842 , and commeKted ujaoa the inconsistency of Sir Robert : Feel , who instanced the prosperous ( condition of the

      country during the last three ye * rs , and then called epon Parliament % > alter the law under which that ! prosperity had been attained . Sir J . WusH-denied that the maintenance of tlie ' Corn Laws resolved itself intonpuestion of rent , as was frequently ^ stated by the free traders ; though even if it were so the magnitude of the interests dependent on'the land should imlscethe legislature to be cairiBous ' -in unsettling it . The country had made rapid ; progress under theeld system , and ( there ' never was ; a , period when its agriculture was more ' ready for a stride in advance , aad if proper security was offered they would be quite-able to meet the den mands of ounincreasing population . Mr . A . B . > I 1 ope supported the amendment . i

      Lord -S&xsox startled the house by declaring'that though he . disapproved ol' 'the scheme proposed < by her Majesty' c government , hehad made up his mind ! to vots = iR . ia 7 our of it , After-ctating his objections to tUejueasure at some length , he said that he felt ' that the ooantry must be governed . lie foundtthat when opinions hostile to . protection had been . pronouflcedbytthe great leaders'on both sides of the houue , and'that it was now opposed by all the . gentlemen who'had ever sat in the government except two , itwaenolongeramatterforldiscussion ; but the only question ' WPjj the way of doing it . He looked . upon it , afl . the ^ French said , " . wi / fait accompli '—it wa 9 settled . . It might be railed . against , but the country must be _ governed ; and when the only persons who could gevsrn the countey -were of one opinion ,. the sooner . it * -. vas settled tlie . better it would be-for all parties .

      LordJiRussixi , believed that he was the firstraember who . Lad risen on his side of the home on the important' . question now before them ; and while he should give his vote on the .-same side with the noble lord -who . Jiad just addresseditiiem , he could say-that he should do it with better heart and hope than < that noble lord . He was not at all terrified by an argumeut which appeared quite conclusive on the other side—namely , that protection was a system of legislation-winch had been adopted in England t ' or-conturiee , and that we were about to destroy it . We

      bad destroyed many other systems which had -been injurious to the country , though they had been defended ifcy the prescriptive usage of centuries 4-and he hoped that hereafter we should be proud of having destroyed this system , andof having participated in f-umUng instead of it a newer and better stale ot things . The protection which it was now sought to maintaic . for agriculture was defended on the ground that It-was a protection for the benefit of agriculture , and of agriculture alone . Now , such protection was an interference with trade and labour for the benefit

      of a class—it was a tax on ihe community for the benefit , of a class , whilst the > class for whose benefit it was professedly intended , absolutely lost by it . These were truths which eveny writer on political economy now admitted ; but he was sorry to say that every oue < ot them was at fault when they came to the consideration on the question— " What is the course ron < ought to take , when . you wish to get rid of that protection , which you admit to be au evil ?" Admitting that the transition from protection to free trade could not be made without some suffering , he proceeded to discuss the mode in which Sir K . Peel had treated the question . He thought that Sir Robert had not laid the grounds fur his measure boldly and broadly enough in point of time . Sir Robert might have quoted s . veral measures of Mr .

      liuskisson witb respect to raw silk , French gloves , and several other articles , to show the benefit of removing prohibitory , and of relaxing protective duties , lie ( Lord J . Russell ) would not enter into any criticism at present on the reductions in the commercial and manufacturing articles contained in the new tariff proposed by Sir Robert Peel , but would confine his observations to his plan for getting rid altogether of the corn duties at the expiration of three years . He was of opinion that if Sir Robert had undertaken his present course in the year 1842 , it would have been better both for agriculture and the community at large . As matters now stood , seeing the struggle which was going on throughout the country , ami which w ; n likely to continue , he was prepared to say that the immediate abolition of the corn duties was the most

      expediant course for a government to pursue . Considering , however , the plan of Sir R . Peel as a great measure , which was to lay the foundation of a new principle of commercial legislation , and was to leave all the interests of the country to flourish or to fade according to the skill of the parties concerned in them , he was determined and prepared to give every support in his power to it , although it did not go to the length he wished . The relief offered by the plan to tlie agricultutal interest was more apparent than real . lie heard iroin all parts of the kingdom that the farmers everywhere said that if they were to have a system of free trade , they would prefer an abolition of the duties at once to a gradual reduct . on of them , and that they were anxious to be relieved from

      that new "Corn Law which was proposed to break their fall . After explaining the reasons why he thought that the farmers were correct in that opinion , he put it to Sir Robert Peel whether he would not re-consider that part of his plan . He wished , however , that plan , whether amended as he suggested or not , to succeed both in that house and the House of Lords ; and no vote of his should be so given as to endanger its success . He then made some comments on the minor details of Sir Robert ' s scheme , and concluded by drawing a contrast between the disinterested support which the Whigs were now giving to the free trade measures of a Tory government , and the factious opposition which the Tories gave to the same measure when proposed by a Whig government . His opinion was

      that if the free trade measures of the Whig government had been allowed to pass when they were ori . inally proposed , much of the suffering of the year 1842 would have been avoided . Sir Robert l'eel would have escaped much of the invective which was now heaped upon him , if he had then been true to himself , and would not have been reproached with betraying somebody if he had then been true to lug country . Sir Robert might wear the laurel for enabling the poor man to get a better reward for his labour , and so to improve his moral ami social condition ; he might also wear the laurel for increasing the prosperity and improving the revenue of tho country ; but with the Whigs would rest the solid satisfaction that out of oflice they had joined together to consolidate the triumph of the Minister oi the day .

      Sir R . Ing lis congratulated Lord John Russell on the gallantry with which he had come to the rescue of the Ministry after nine gentlemen had risen one after another on the Ministerial benches to direct their fire , not a « ainst a common enemv , but against each other . He lamented that the vote of Lord San-

      Untitled Article

      speeen wLv , " n Such . di !> ecfc contradiction to his ments ' Jk \ i $ "T 0 / 16 of the most convincing arguency of £ h he ha ( J ^ er hea rd against the expeditRilabr 86111 , ^ 1186 * T ¥ priflci Ple on ^< = h thfswasSh ? ! , t 0 Proceedon a question like on tlW * ° bt £ » n the largest and best supply of corn vhefenerT dera teand ^ ble price . He ask d com B hpPn ^ "y cou « fry *» « " > world in which in KWi 1 ° , btained on a more equable price than Sean ?^ 1 ?^ P resent ^ ££ 3 rf of thfS 2- ° f thi r P roP < Kition he quoted ' returns Rotterdam l cornfor , many yeanat Hamburgh , 22 ? l ? , 1 several other foreign ports , lie SfcSfW r ? berfs plan better , if he had 5 ^ 5 nut ? , parfc ? f the p ° ° ' vate which ™« Fund Hn f and lively to the Consolidated runa . tie then complained that envflmmont hail

      in tl e ( Wn " 1 C ° nsid fration the effe ^ onhis change S lieuoftfnV « Vh * ™ M <»« B » recently created in neu ol tithes . It would be easy to prove the eross incou 8 , stency of all those who * && * $££££ TnvH 1 T S nncc , f ? al 7 . as we had cmifitcntc , reo ,. vnntl , fft » RUS 8 ° - had i ellan ^ the O P' ™™ of hi * fZ J- , iv ? ° * matU , V 1 r a S e " He did not accuse pi ™ ' ^ y / ow , ? r sordid motive in making that mS " if dl ( 1 1 ? accuse Sir R - Peelofanyiother 2 ™ th ° se wh . ck were most pure and honournow wl * T : R > P ? el ™ s a great statesman SSiiSff ^ must have bee » * of n > a « si- ^ r *? " ^ SS ^ fe&rE £# I : 1 I « S Major tuzMAumcE onnosed the minis * » v . i ~ i ™

      ^^^^ Ti TTt the iran i 5 nrafc da "s Slflfth . \ > Ireland » m in cons ' iqa «> ce of the n h » it , S ° T P- T ^ r ' Scrftlemanthen r e ' 11 d 0 not 8 tan ( J on a Point of consistency when clrtm ^ MrS T , lfc taied ' and si inally fo'led ; " and SKWtJ e : , tlla 1 fc the P reseat ministry had 252 . H ?" £ ° - pposi '» * ^ y an / spon-SI A pport m effi ?* , ! p clHW 1 « * » y » t « n . S ^^ ! ccee , , t ! forming a cabinet . He denied that wheat could be i . mp 0 l 4 el from the conti nantal ports at the low pric es which had been stated j and asserted that it would te impossib | e to bring any great quantity of toreign g ^ ^ conlpete BU ^ tolly with our home pr oduce . As to the apprehensions . irom the United , states , the nnmilation in .

      creased m them much more rapidly thon the production . The right 1 . eorttleman then proceeded to say that a meetn Jg took iplace at a village called ^ oatacre , 111 my coi mty-a meeting which has been alluded to m a diftei .-eat sense by different parties in th 13 house . ( Heir . ) Now , I am not prepared to deny—indeed , I th ink on the face of the resolutions agreed to at that 1 nocUng " dt is obvious that t ^« se resolutions were notv drawn < up by working men , that the proceedings < vev « preorganised and contrived by others . ( Hear . ) , But this 1 am bound to state that

      tbt statevtctm oj iho » titiomng men as to the difficulties they labour ttJic / . ' er were -correct . ( Hear , hear . ) J live inthe mklstof a population at to whom I scarcely know how thee exist * ( Hearj ) The only remedy he could see for this s « jate ^ f -things was high , farming , which would at one * give a remunerative return for capital and ; greatcr employment for labour . The hon . member concluded an elaborate and eloq uent speech by strongly supporting the new measure . 'On the motion -df Mr . S . O'Brien , the debate wag then adjourntd till'Tuesday .

      BEESENTMENT . SESSIONS ( IRELAND ) BILL . Sir James GnAHAMimoved fur leave to bring in "a bill to authorise . grand juries in Ireland , at the spring assizes of the present . year , to appoint-extraordinary presentment suasions ; to empower such sessions to make presentment . for county works , and to provide funds for the . execution of such works by loans of public money ! " . He said the powers which were 'meant to be conferred on grand juries by the bill were pel-missive , and not compulsory . One object of the foill was to render the money already in the hands of tgrand juries immediately available , so that the contracts for which-it i was intended might becommenced in the spring and-. in the early part of summer . This sum amounted to £ 120 , 000 , and was now lodged in exchequer bills , and bearing interest , so that

      sudposing all the gram ! juries in Ireland-concurred in the objects of the bill , it could be sent into the labour market immediately . The second object of the bill was to give grand juries power to make presentments at the spriiig . asBizes for further works , which , under the existinglaw , they could not do until the summer assizes . It was -intended that these further works should be made . to the amount of £ 80 , 060 , making in all £ 200 , 006 , to be expended in employment under the « ontrol of the grand juries . It was , he should repeat , merely a permissive , and not a compulsory power , and under existing circumstances he hoped the house would be induced to pass the measure with as little delay . m possible . ( Hear , hear . ) Sir James Graham and Mr . Young were then empowered to introduce the bill . The house adjourned at one o ' clock .

      HOUSE OF LORDS-Tuksdat , Feb . 10

      TIIE POLISH NUNS . Lord Aberdeen , in answer to a question from Lord Kinnaird respecting the cruelties alleged to have been perpetrated on the Polish nuns at Minsk , stated that he had no-doubt the persecutions in question were grossly exaggerated ; and that whatever might be the state of the case , the government of this country had no . power to interfere . Several petitions were presented , the Scotch Turnpike-roads Bill was forwarded a Btage , and the house adjourned . HOUSE OF 'COMMONS-Tuesdat , Feb . 10 . Mr . James S . Wortley took the oaths and his seat for the county ef Bute .

      KEW WRIT . On the motion of Mr . J . Young a new writ was ordered for the election of a citizen to serve for Westminster in the room of Captain Rous , who , since his election , had accepted the office of one of the Lord * Commissioners for executing the office of Lord High Admiral . A large number of petitions , for and against the Corn Laws , were presented by various members . Petitions in favour of the Ten Hours' Factory Labour Bill were presented from places in the county of York , by Sir G . Strickland ; from places in the county of Dorset , by Mr . Bankes ; from twelve places in Glasgow and its vicinity , and two places in Choriey , by Mr . T . Duncombe ; from places in Wales , bj an hon . member , whose name we did not learn ; and from several places in Lancashire , by Mr . Perrand .

      _ Mr . T . Duncombe presented petitions from inhabitants of Marylebone , Pancras , and other places , against the enrolment of the militia , which they considered to be altogether unnecessary . After a sharp conversation respecting the value of the tariffs of different countries , prepared for Parliament by Mr . M'Gregor , which were styled by Lord Seymour "dull romances , " and defended by Dr . Bowring , Mr . Hume , and others , the house resumed the debate on

      THE CUSTOMS AND CORN IMPORTATION ACTS . Mr . S , O'Biuen denied that there existed , as Lord J . Russell represented , an impression among the farmers that the repeal of the Corn Laws , if it took place at all , should take place immediately . He regretted that the agricultural interest had not an opportunity of publicly and constitutionally declaring their opinion . After the late declarations lie wanted to know upon what principles parties in this country were iH future to be kept together ? Not only had the present government changed its principles since it came into office , but it had also taught us this valuable truth—that parties in this country were no longer to be kept together by distinctive princioles .

      Mr . { Sidney Herbert had told them that the law of 1812 had signally failed . What he wanted to know was this— "Did that law fail to the Sidney Herbert of 1845 , or to the Sidney Herbert of 1846 ? " The Sidney Herbert of 1845 found that it failed because ft let in corn too freely ; the Sidney Herbert of 1840 found that it failed because it restricted the free importation of corn . Mr . S . Herbert asked too much , if he supposed that the Corn Law of 1812 could , by any human ingenuity , be made to answer the view 3 of a Minister of bo changeable a temperament . The failure of a law which had succeeded two years and failed only one year , was not a sufficient reason why he should give .. up the principles of a whole life .

      He could not agree with the proposition of Lord J . Russell , that protection to agriculture was no longer defensible ; and , in reference to his assertion that labour was the property of the poor man , observed , that it was well for those who had used up that pro ? pcrty most cruelly in the manufacturing districts to como forward and say now that we ought to let it alone . We were propounding tho most selfish dootrines when we brought forward measures of which the avowed object was to leave the poor man without protection , and so to " consign him to unmitigated ruin . The axiom of buying in tho cheapest market and selling in the dearest , and that the property of the poor man needed no protection , was a very plausible one ; but see how it operated . Supindividual tb his han

      pose an o uy paper-gings in Paris , his carriages in Brussels , and his hardware in Germany ; and suppose , Vfhile he was lookinp out of the window of his smart house , or his elegant carriage , he saw the labourers all idle , because of the now law which had pasBed in favour of the introduction of these articles ; and suppose he said to them , " My good fellows , I have done my best to make you poor anil wretched , but I have not done so from any selfish motive . On the 27 th of January , 1 S 40 , it was propounded by the head of the government that the property of the poor needed no protection , and that in future we should all buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest , and I have only a \ vi 9 l 1 to promote my own interest by acting upon those principles . " What poor consolation this

      Untitled Article

      would be to the poor workman ! He begged the house also to think not only of the amount of poverty which these proposals , if carried out , would occasion , but of the amount of alienation and disaffection which they would occasion . In that house they were all rich men . Comparatively they were all rich . They all had had a breakfast that morning and they all would have a dinner before night . But there were millions in the country who could no ^ say so . ( Hear , hear . ) The doctrine they had announced wag the most selfish doctrine . It was not a question of cotton against corn . But when they spoke of always buying in the cheapest and selling m the dearest market , ho would ask how they reconciled thoir principle with that of a poor law ? Cbuld

      they explain why one man ' s industry vras taxed to relieve another man ' s property ? In showing that their principle struck against that of a poor law he was only arguing againstaclumsy , hard , and impracticable S on * hlc ] i they never could act ; which , if reduced to practice , would alienate the affections of he people and only increaae their own dangers . He hat , 7 \ car ^ at d ° Sra » Promulgate ! in that house , the member , of whkh could not call themsehis M * onto sense the representatives of the poor man ~{\ ie 8 X , ^¦ -because , xvhile they talked of respectiiig th nght i of the po&r , they had hitherto been acting so as practically to diminish and destroy those rights . ¦ they should be very careful how they announced that they were no longer able to protect the property which the millions of their

      fellow-£ countrymeu said was all they had in the world , lie had been accustomed to consider the present as a landlords' question .- He was convinced that he had been wrong . It . was not a landlords' question , but a tenant-farmers' question ; and being such , lie refused to alter the existing law relative to the importation of foreign corn . He thon drew a highlycoloured picture of the ruin which would fall upon the tenant-farmers and the labourers whom they employed—whose honest hearts were worth more than all the heaviest volumes of political economyit tire new-fangled doctrines of Mr . Cobden should be carried into execution under the auspices of Sir 1 £ j i 1 ¥ ir grea , iault Wfts that thev . like their landlords , had trusted m the faith of the legislature ; and the misfortune

      which they would most deplore in their common ruin would bo the loss of all confidence in public men . Mr . S . Crawford considered that the eloquence of the last speaker was much greater than the power of his arguments ; for though he professedly took great interest in the welfare of the working man , he showed the value of his professions by refusing to give to that working man cheap food . Nothing would promote the prosperity of the country so much as cheap corn , and therefore it was that he wished to repeal every tax which was imposed on its importation from foreign countries . He concluded by declaring his intention of giving his cordial support to the proposition of her Majesty ' s government on this occasion .

      Mr . II . Daihjh rogrotifid that this question should have been taken up on party groundo . The members on the ministerial side of the house had only tne choice of two alternatives—they must either accept the compromise now offered to them , or throw out the present administration to make room for another equally pledged to the abolition of all duties on the importation of foreign corn . Under such circumstances , he should support ^ the proposition of the government from a conviction that in so doing he was supporting the boat interests of the British empire . Mr . Lefroy commented on the speech of Mr . S . Crawford on the wretched condition of the population of Ireland , and asked how this measure was calculated to improve it , or to raise the capital of the landlords and farmers of Ireland , who were the employers of labour ? He declared himself compelled , as an Irish member , to oppose the proposition of the goverment , which he denounced as a most raBh and hazardous experiment .

      Lord Clements had no hesitation in meeting the challenge of the last speaker , and in contending that this proposition would not be injurious either to the population or the landlords of Ireland . He wished hon . members would inquire how far-the Corn Laws had benefited the agricultural population of Ireland . Nothing could be more destitute or deplorable than the condition of the peasantry of that country . What , then , was , or what would be , the benefit of protection to a population in such deplorable misery ? Had it been , or would it be , of the slightest use either to the tenant-farmer , or had it prevented , or would it prevent , the labourer from standing idle in the market-place ? No such thing . He should , therefore , give his support to the government proposition for the alteration in the Corn Laws .

      The Marquis of Granby believed that Sir R . Peel was actuated by the most pure and honourable motives ; but if he had promulgated in 1841 the same opinions which he now entertained , he would not have proposed them now as a Minister of the Crown . It was not a fair way of putting the question to say that the labourer , if the Com Laws were repealed , would be enabled to buy cheaper bread . The question was , would he be able to buy and to eat more bread ? He was afraid that he would not be able ; for where subsistence was cheap , labour was olveap

      also , and the condition of the population most miserable . Sir Robert had told the house that he oould not hold out hopes that foreign nations would follow our example or relax the regulations of their tariffs . But even if they did , you might increase your exports , but in the same proportion your home consumption of manufactures would fall off , as your agriculturists would be deprived of funds whereVith to purchase them . He should support the principle of protection , which had mainly conduced to the greatness , the happiness , and welfare of Great Britain .

      Mr . Gbkoory contended that agriculture had flourished hitherto in this coimtry , not through , but in spite of protection . Ho derided the fears of the agriculturists , that land would be thrown out of cultivation , and that we should become dependent on foreign nations for supply , if we acceded to the proposition of government . He hoped that the hou 3 e possessed too much true courage to be afraid ef tho imputation that this measure was granted as a concession to agitation . Lord Bkookb expressed his regret that , on his first entrance into Parliament , he should find himself compelled to oppose the administration of Sir Robert Peel . He gave the First Lord of the Treasury credit for a sincerity and straightforwardness

      which nad not been manifested by _ many of those who followed him . He was surprised at hearing Lord Sandon express his disapprobation of the measure , and his determination to vote for it , because he considered that the government of the country could not be carried on without the aid of the unquestioned talent of Sir Robert Peel . For his part , he thought an objectionable measure should be rejected , without regard to possible consequences . Another reason assigned forsupportiugthe government measure was , the fact that the present Parliament was near its end . But old age frequently benumbed the faculties , and impaired the judgment ; and in its senility , Sir Robert Peel called upon it to make its will , and give away its property .

      Lord Worsley observed that this measure was not brought forward by her Majesty ' s government as a measure which they deemed right , but as a measure which peculiar circumstances had rendered expedient . At the last general election no cry was so general as that of " Peel , the farmer ' s Mend ; " but now " Peel , the farmer ' s friend , " was introducing a measure which almost every farmer in the country considered as pregnant with ruiu to himself and his property . Noticing the observation of Mr . Sidney Herbert , that the country gentlemen of England were entertaining apprehensions of tho proposed change not very creditable to their good sense , he asked who wero the parties who had first poured those apprehensions into the agricultural mind

      They were no less personages than Sir Robert Peel and Sir James Graham . Having read amid the cheers and laughter of the house extracts from their speeches in direct contradiction to the many advantages which they now proclaimed as likely to result from free trade , ho observed , that with the recollection of these speeches fresh in their memories it was impossible that the farmers would not at the next general election choose such representntires as would enable them to demand a revision of the Corn Laws , even if they were defeated in their present opposition to the new-fangled scheme of government . The question , therefore , would not be settled , even if the present measure were passed : but he hoped thac it would not ba passed even by the present

      Parliament , which was elected as a Protection Parliament ; for it was not either wise or equitable to enact a permanent law to meet a mere temporary evil . He urged upon the government the propriety of appealing to the country upon this subject , and of taking the opinion of the constituencies whether they would or would not abandon protective duties . If they did not , they must remain in their present painful position , in which they were dependent on their opponents for support . Sir James Graham considered that this question was one of vast importance , which demanded from all who were engaged in bringing it forward the most frank explanations , lie then avowed most explicitly that he had changed his opinions on the subject of the Corn Laws ; and with tkat ayewal he disposed of all the speeches which he had formerly made , and

      which Lord Worsley had just quoted against him . He then proceeded to explain the reasons of the change which had taken place in his opinions , and to apply certain tosts to try the honesty of that change . The first test would have reference to his private interests in this question . He must , therefore , inform the house that his private position as a landlord , who had inherited a large portion of inferior land , exposed him , if this change should prove injurious , to aa great risk as any landowner in the country . Lord Worsley had insinuated that the government had brought forward the present measure , not because it was right , but because it was expedient . Now , he distinctly asserted that tho government had brought it forward , not only becauso it was expedient , but also because it was right . He denied that this alteration would bo injurious to the poor , and contended that it would give cheaper bread to

      Untitled Article

      the working population . The question , therefore , narrowed itself within this compass— " Is tlie main * tenance of the Corn LawB conducive to the interests of the majority of the community , and is it calculated to procure for the population a cheap and abundant supply of food ? " and that question , he proceeded to argue , at considerabto length . He admitted that tlie unforeseen circumstances which occurred after the close of the last session had exerted great influence in producing the change of opinion which he was now about to derend . Those unforeseen circumstances were the condition of the harvest , which though not deficient in quality was variable in quality , and tho great miure ot the potatoe cron throush all the domestic

      dominions of Great Britain . In Ireland the failure was so universal that it would become necessary before many days elapsed to make a grant of public money to purchase food for its inhabitants . But could any Minister take upon himself the responsibility of asking the people of Great Britain to submit to a tax for such a purpose whilst their own food was enhanced in price by artificial regulations ? He certainly could not ; and , therefore , he had proposed that the law should be suspended ; but he foresaw the necessity of abolishing ; if you once suspended it . Since the year 1842 those whose duty it was to watch public events had had experience leading to the most decisive conclusions » We had , continued the right lion , barfc ., first of all ,

      the lamentable experience of 1812 itself , a year of the greatest distress , and , since it has passed , I may say of the utmost danger . ( Hear , hear . ) What were the circumstances of 1842 ? Allow me just to glance at them . We had in this metropolis , at midnight , Chartist meetings . Almost for nearly three weeks there were assembled in all the environsof the metropolis immense masses of poople , greatly discontented , and acting in a spirit dangerous to tho public peace . What was the condition of Lancashire , the seat of our great staple manufacture , depending for its prosperity on uninterrupted tranquillity " and labour ? Such was the madness of the people on that occasion , that a great combination existed to stop machinery , and to put an end to the source of the

      labour on which they depended for subsistence . ( Hear , hear . ) What was the duty of the government under these circumstances ? It was my painful duty to consnlt with tho Horse Guards as to the precautions that were necessary for the maintenance of the public peace ; a large force was marched to Manchester , and the troops were actually called on to enforce public tranquillity . I can safely say that for three months the anxiety which I and my colleagues experienced with reference to the public peace was greater than we ever felt before with reference to public concerns . ( Hear , hear . ) Those were the days of high prices and scarcity . ( Hear , hear . ) I am certain from what I have since observed , that that turbulent dispositionthat dangerous

      , disposition , mainly arose from the want of adequate sustenance , combined with low wages . ( Loud cheers . ) He would now refer to the different experience of tho last two years . They had boon blessed with an abun-Ottut YmT-rco * in t ) iia pnuntry ; and as a cuuac ^ uv ..... . with plenty of work . What were tho results ? Within the last few weeks he had not had a singlo interview with the commissioners of police —( cheers ) —and within the last twelve months not one with the authorities at the Horse Guards . ( Loud Opposition cheers . ) There had been perfect peace , tranquillity characterised the whole of the great seats of industry , happiness and contentment wero diffused among their population . ( Great cheering . ) He did not wish to trouble the house with statistics , but he had

      prepared an analysis of the state of crime in the counties which were the great seats of industry , which was pregnant with instruction . The returns comprised the six counties of York , Lancaster , Warwick , Gloucester , Chester , and Stafford . The amount of crime in the three high-priced years of 1840 , 1841 . and 1842 , when average prices of wheat were 60 s ., 64 s ., and 67 s ., a quarter , had been compared with the amount in the three years of 1843 , 1814 , and 1846 , when the average was 50 s . per quarter , the general result was that the average decrease on the whole six counties , from 1842 to 1845 , amounted to 18 per cent . To these instructive figures he could only add , that he was convinced from experience , and by reflection on past

      • vent ? , that it was a fallacy that wages fell with low prices and rose with high prices . ( Hear . ) Unless the rise in wages was equal to , and concurrent with , the rise in prices , there could be no benefit to the working classes . In support of this he might adduce the testimony and the experience of Sir John Walsham , Assistant Poor-law Commissioner , and himself a landed proprietor in the co « nty of Hereford . That gentleman had informed him that he had never known wages rise in the agricultural districts from more than 10 s . to 12 s ., and in other districts from 12 s . to 15 s . or 25 per cent . ; while the rise in the price of food had been from 40 to 50 and even 90 per cent . With such facts before them , could it be contended that wages rose in proportion to the

      increase m the price of food ? But whatever might be the effect in agricultural districts , the fact was always the reverse in the manufacturing districts . In them low wages were always accompanied by high prices , and high prices by low wages . ( Hear . ) So speedily did this cause act upon the manufacturing districts , a short time ago they had information irom the West Riding , that on account of an actual rise in the price of food , and the apprehension of a still greater rise , they had begun to work short time , and itwas expected that such reduction would extend still farther . ( Hear , hear . ) For these reasons , therefore , he said , that looking at the state of the country in the months of November and December , and contrasting the conditien of themanufacturingdistrictsia

      1842 and 184 o , there was no option left to the government , but to tako the course they had done . ( Cheers ) It was _ formerly the opinion of the operatives that low prices were synonymous with low wages ; they had now departed from that opinion . ( Murmurs . They had changed that opinion . ( Hear , and No . ) The experience of the last four years had convinced them of this fact . It was true , they might still be subject to many evils—they might be taxed in their industry and subject to long hours of labour ; but if they wore made to understand that by this measure their comforts would not be diminished , and the trade of the country placed upon a more secure basis , he did hope that by subsequent mutual agree ' ment between the masters and the men , the question of

      the hours of labour could be satisfactorily settled ; and he did not hesitate to say that it would be the happiest day in his life , when he saw that important question so settled by mutual consent . He was happy to see that the noble lord the member for Yorkshire , whose absence from that house he had never ceased to regret , as one of its brightest ornaments , had upon the hus * . ings expressed similar sentiments . In conclusion * he would say that he did not think the landlords would , have any great sacrifice to make , but if it were ten times greater than he thought it could bs , fie would say for himself that seoner than have an increase of rent at the expense of the comforts of the poorer classes , he would descend to a lower

      estatesubmit to a curtailment of his means—rather than have such a . charge laid to his door . ( Cheers . ) It had been , said a great party had been broken up , old ties severed , and two powerful ministries dissolved by this question ; but he hoped and belioved that the adoption of the proposal now under their consideration would save a great and powerful nation from misery , from anarchy , and ruin . The right hon . Baronet resumed his seat amidst general cheers . Lord Clive briefly opposed the ministerial measure , and called for a dissolution , in order that the question might be fairly tried by the country ; and after disposing of the orders of the day the debate was adjourned at one o ' clock till Thursday .

      HOUSE OF LORDS-Wedxesday , Feb . 11 . The House of Lords did not sit . HOUSE OF COMMONS-Wedsesdat , Feb . 11 . The Spbakbk took the chair at the usual hour on Wednesdays , twelve o ' clock noon . Several petitions were presented in favour of the repeal of the Corn Laws , and praying for the continuance of protection to agriculture .

      NEW WRIT . A new writ was ordered for the election of a knight of tho shire for the county of Mayo , in the room of Mr . M . Blake , who has accepted the Chiltern Hundreds . Mr . Blackburn presented a petition from Warrington in favour of a Ten Hours' Factorv Bill .

      IRISH POOR LAW . Mr . S . Crawford called the attention of government to the necessity of immediately extending the powers of the Poor Law ( Ireland ) Act , so as to enable boards of guardians to dispense out-door relief to destitute persons in case of the poor-houses being filled . This subject was one of great importance in the peculiar circumstances of Ireland at present . In Ireland , under no circumstances could the guardians administer out-door relief—all they could do was to offer relief in the workhouse to those who were properly recommended . The rule , too , was , that unless the head of the family became an inmate of the workhouse , none of his family could obtain relief there In case of famine , then , the Poor Law guardians would not be able to meet tho applications made to them for relief . Under such circumstances , he hoped that government would introduce a bill

      giving to the board of guardians a discretionary power to administer out-door relief . Sir J . Grauam regarded with much auxiety th « condition of a large portion of the Irish poor for the next four or five months . During that time the difficulty would bo great , and must he met by provident arrangements on the part of the government . After stating tho various measures which had been introduced by her Majesty ' s ministers in the hope of increasing the means ol employment in Ireland—such as the Public Works Bill , the Grand Juries Presentment Bill , and the Drainage Act—he observed , that it . was possible that in Committee of Supply he should feel it necessary to ask a grant in aid of that object . If , unfortunately , lever should follow the scarcity now impending over Ireland , tho government would rot be taken by surprise , an the Poor Law Commissioners had made the most ample arrungcuienis to meet it . In reply to Mr . Sharniiin

      Untitled Article

      SiMla ^ a H £ ^ &m& > ag

      Untitled Article

      Febotary 14 . 184 * THE y 0 RTHERN gTAR ¦ ¦ «

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), Feb. 14, 1846, page 7, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1354/page/7/