disputing some of the facts upon which it was based. He denied that the working classes in our great manufacturing districts were distressed; consequently, the causes to which Mr. Disraeli had ascribed that distress must be imaginary; and whilst Mr. Slaney admitted that depression did exist in some of the agricultural districts, and that it had partly arisen from the large imports of foreign grain, he insisted that this was only one of the causes of the distress, and he dissented from the remedy really contemplated by the supporters of the motion, namely, the reimposition of the Corn Law and the raising of the prices of produce and of land. He denied that during the halcyon days of protection the labouring classes were in a better state than at present, and he contended that greater attention to the education, the morals, and the health of those classes, whilst it improved their social condition, would gradually reduce by one half the local and other burdens under which they suffered.

Mr. G. A. Hamilton, in supporting the motion, confined himself to the state of Ireland, and, maintaining that the calamities of that country had been aggravated by the policy of the Government, he entered at much length into the details of that policy, and of recent legislation for Ireland, which had been based upon principles alien from those applied to England. He observed that there was a feeling amongst large classes in Ireland, that the Government entertained a kind of dislike to Irish questions, and he accused them of a backwardness to meet the exigencies of that unfortunate country.

Mr. Hume denied that any blame was imputable to the Government for backwardness to al

leviate Irish distress; the Session had been almost one adjourned debate upon Irish questions, and all parties had been anxious to devise means of relief. Had the local authorities co-operated cordially with Parliament, things would have taken a different course. He explained why he had not moved the amendment of which he had given notice, with reference to the financial condition of the nation, observing that, as Mr. Disraeli had not announced who were to take the place of the present Ministers, or what policy was to be pursued, he thought it might do mischief; and when he had heard the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech, it seemed to him to be a complete answer to that of Mr. Disraeli. The true cause of the distress of the country, which he did not deny to exist, was excessive and unequal taxation; and Mr. Hume expatiated upon the manner in which this taxation affected various interests, and upon the expedients that might be adopted for its equalization and reduction.

The Earl of March took full advantage of the casual admissions of Mr. Hume, whose speech, he remarked, was replete with Protectionist sentiments. He acknowledged that Sir C. Wood had displayed great skill, but his speech would have been more satisfactory had it been founded upon papers before the House; and Lord March combated some of his facts and conclusions.

Sir Robert Peel said it was not his intention to enter into the political questions raised by the motion; the discussion of the state of Ireland, colonial policy, and foreign policy, in one speech, would leave little time to consider the main point at issue that night— namely, shall the Government be

displaced for the subversion of our present commercial policy? Since the accession of the present Government, he observed, he had felt it to be his duty to give to the majority of their measures his general support, making great allowance for the difficulties they had to contend with at home and abroad; at the same time, he wished it to be understood that all he implied by the vote he should give was, that he approved of the general principles of commercial policy by which the Government had been guided, and that he would not consent to a motion the direct or main object of which was to substitute some other economic principles. He then proceeded to examine the grounds upon which Mr. Disraeli had impeached our present commercial policy, and whether or no the new, or at least different, principles of economic policy proposed to be substituted had any foundation in reason, or would contribute to the welfare and prosperity of the country. Sir Robert Peel showed that no new principles had been introduced in 1846, which Mr. Disraeli had selected as his point of comparison, and when he had admitted that the country was prosperous; before the end of 1845 the amount of taxation reduced upon raw materials or articles of food was 6,582,000l.; and if any evils had resulted from the repeal of the Corn Law, they were not earlier than the 1st of February, 1849. He (Sir R. Peel) undertook to prove that the free-trade tariff not only had not caused any one of the evils complained of by Mr. Disraeli, but, on the contrary, had greatly mitigated them. He then showed that with the increase of imports there had been no dimi

nution, as predicted, but a large increase, of bullion; that the reduction of duty, increased importation, and greater cheapness of cotton, wool, dye-stuffs, and other raw materials, instead of interfering with, had stimulated domestic industry, whilst they augmented the material comforts of the labouring classes. The imports of manufactured goods, more than one-half of which were re-exported, proved that this country, by its warehousing system, had become an entrepôt for other countries. Having disproved the supposed inability of contending with hostile tariffs by principles of free trade, Sir Robert pointed out the fallacy of Mr. Disraeli's inference from the apparent deficiency of 6,500,0002. in the declared value of the exports in 1848, as compared with those of 1845 and 1846-that the working classes received so much less in one year than in the other. Official value, he remarked, had no reference to quality, whereas declared value was regulated by it. The cost of production was diminished by the reduced prices of raw material and by cheapened processes of manufacture; but it did not follow that the amount paid in wages was diminished. He next considered the condition of the labouring classes, a most important element in the question, reading communications from various parts of the country which represented their condition much improved; and he showed the inconclusiveness of Mr. Disraeli's argument drawn from the increase of the poor rate. The impeachment of our commercial policy for the last five years having entirely failed, Sir Robert nevertheless proceeded to consider what was the policy proposed to be sub

as

nor

stituted, and this had been thus declared by Lord Stanley-"We must return to the principle of protection." Sir Robert assumed this to mean legislative encouragement of domestic industry for the purpose of protection, not of revenue, which, he maintained, was a vicious principle; if the legislature required more to be paid for an article at home than it could be got for abroad, it was an interference with capital, and would diminish the annual income of the country. The doctrine that we should buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest was, he observed, neither new speculative, and in spite of hostile tariffs the true policy was to buy our raw materials in the cheapest markets, no mistake being so great as that of fighting such tariffs with countervailing duties. One of the consequences of the success of this motion would be the re-imposition of duties upon food; and he could truly say, as an agriculturist, no boon could be more fatal to agriculture. By the policy adopted in 1842, the legislature had gained the confidence and good will of powerful classes, and this country had been enabled to pass through a storm which convulsed other nations. Sir Robert Peel concluded a long and powerful speech by a very solemn appeal to the House to reject the motion, and not to barter the glorious heritage it had obtained by a most timely policy for a consideration smaller, more sordid, and more worthless than any since the days of him who had sold his birthright for a mess of pottage.

The Marquis of Granby, after controverting some of the positions of Sir Robert Peel, went at once to the most important part of the

question-the condition of the labourer, and he showed from a record of wages in Manchester, in 1845 and 1849, that they had been reduced in every species of manufacture without an equivalent in the fall of prices. He defended the argument which Mr. Disraeli had founded upon the falling off in the declared value of our exports; he cited evidence of the actual diminution of demand and employment in the manufacturing districts; and he vindicated the country gentlemen against the Chancellor of the Exchequer's charge, that they desired to maintain their rents at the expense of the labouring classes.

Lord John Russell, addressing himself in the first instance to the argument founded by the mover upon the poor rates, pointed out the inconsistency of that argument, and threw a more cheering light upon this part of the subject by a recent return, whence it appeared that the expenditure had greatly diminished, and the condition of the agricultural labourers had improved. With reference to a notice given by Mr. Herries, to move for a fixed duty on corn, he admitted that, however true were the principles of free trade, circumstances might justify a moderate fixed duty upon that article ; but when such a proposition was made at a time when it would have been a wise and generous concession, it was clamorously and pertinaciously opposed by those who now advocated such a duty. Lord John confirmed the statements of Sir C. Wood, respecting the revival of demand, increased activity in the manufacturing districts, and the augmented consumption of various articles, which proved that the people had greater

command of the means of comfort and enjoyment; and he concluded with a general defence of the measures and policy of the Government, which had been successful at home, and had tended to preserve peace abroad.

Mr. Muntz entered into some details explanatory of a former speech, referred to by Sir Robert Peel; and, after a reply from Mr. Disraeli, full of vivacity, point, and sarcasm,

The House divided, when the motion was negatived by 296 against 156-a majority of 140.

The period fixed upon for the termination of the Session had now arrived, and on the 1st of August Parliament was prorogued by commission. The following Speech was on that occasion read from the Throne.

My Lords and Gentlemen"We have it in command from Her Majesty to inform you, that the state of public business enables her to dispense with your attendance in Parliament, and to close the present Session.

66

Her Majesty has directed us to express her satisfaction with the zeal and assiduity with which you have discharged the laborious and anxious duties, in the performance of which you have been occupied.

"Her Majesty has given her assent to the important measure you have passed to amend the Navigation Laws, in full confidence that the enterprise, skill, and hardihood of her people will assure to them a full share of the commerce of the world, and maintain upon the seas the ancient renown of this nation.

"Her Majesty has commanded us to acquaint you, that the friendly character of her relations with VOL. XCI.

Foreign Powers affords her a just confidence in the continuance of peace.

"The preliminaries of peace between Prussia and Denmark have been signed, under the mediation of Her Majesty; and Her Majesty trusts that this convention may prove the forerunner of a definite and permanent treaty.

66

Her Majesty's efforts will continue to be directed to promote the restoration of peace in those parts of Europe in which it has been interrupted.

"Gentlemen of the House of Commons

"We are commanded by Her Majesty to return you her thanks for the provision which you have made for the public service.

"The public expenditure has undergone considerable reductions within the present year, and Her Majesty will continue to apply a watchful economy in every branch of the public service.

66

My Lords and Gentlemen— "We are commanded by Her Majesty to congratulate you on the happy termination of the war in the Punjaub. The exertions made by the Government of India, and the valour displayed by the army in the field, demand Her Majesty's warmest acknowledgments.

"Her Majesty has observed with gratification the spirit of obedience to the laws which has been manifested by her subjects during the period which has elapsed since Her Majesty last addressed her Parliament.

"It is the characteristic of our constitution that it renders the maintenance of order compatible with the fullest enjoyment of political and civil liberty.

[0]

"The satisfaction with which Her Majesty has viewed the peaceful progress of her people in arts and industry has been greatly alloyed by the continuance of severe distress in one part of the United Kingdom.

"Her Majesty has observed with pleasure your liberal exertions to mitigate the pressure of this calamity; and Her Majesty commands us to thank you for your unremitting attention to measures calculated to improve the general condition of Ireland. It is Her Majesty's fervent hope that it may please the Almighty Disposer of events to favour the operation of those laws which have been sanctioned by Parliament, and to grant to her Irish people, as the reward of that patience and resignation with which they have borne their protracted sufferings, the blessings of an abundant harvest, and of internal peace."

Thus ended the Session of 1849, a period unmarked, if we except the repeal of the Navigation Laws, by any important legislative changes. Nor were the debates which took place accompanied by much of that interest which arises from the contentions of wellbalanced parties. The rupture in the Conservative party, which was

as yet too recent to be healed over, effectually prevented any combined action on the part of the Opposition which could have proved formidable to the Government. Intrinsically, indeed, the Ministers possessed little strength, and, at one period of the Session, a dissolution of the Cabinet appeared very probable. But the circumstance that in the ranks of opposition there was no set of men capable, by reason of the dissensions that existed, of furnishing the materials for an Administration, proved an ample security for the retention of power by Lord John Russell and his colleagues. Upon the whole, the period included in this Session was not an unprosperous one to the community. The commercial and monetary depression, it is true, had not wholly passed away, but the material interests of the country appeared to be steadily recovering their wonted firmness; the revenue was on the increase, and there were many encouraging signs which showed that, notwithstanding the difficulties the nation had lately passed through, the sources of its wealth had not been dried up, nor the foundations of its greatness substantially impaired.