would imperil the safety of the country. He made a strong appeal to the House not to pass the Bill. He was followed by Sir James Graham, who supported the third reading by a very powerful address. He began by observing that Mr. Herries had endeavoured to show that the commerce of the country was opposed to the Bill. But all that he had to justify such an assertion was a few petitions which had been signed by a few parties, respectable, it was true, but insignificant in point of numbers, as compared with the mass, not of the whole population, but of the population of the outports themselves. If anything were wanting to show that the commerce of the country was in favour of the measure, it would be found in the course pursued with reference to it by the representatives of the great emporia of commerce. The measure was introduced on the responsibility of a Cabinet presided over by the noble Member for London, whilst it had been supported throughout by the representatives of the chief seats of commerce, amongst which he instanced Liverpool, Glasgow, Newcastle, and the West Riding. It had also the support of the head of the house of Baring, who now presided over the Royal Navy of the country, and who was not likely to take any step to the manifest injury of that mercantile marine to which he and his family owed so much. With these facts before him, how could Mr. Herries assert that commerce had spoken out against the measure? The right honourable Gentleman then, with a view of refuting the objections to the Bill, closely followed Mr. Walpole in his historical, economical, and national review of the subject. During

the course of his remarks he intimated that he attached but little value to proceeding in this matter by reciprocity; and, as to the retaliation clause contained in the Bill, he hoped that it would not be made a rule which would be frequently carried out. Το retaliation, as a rule, he was opposed, but he was prepared to give his sanction to the Bill, because, without having recourse to reciprocity or retaliation, it would tend to increase the general commerce of the world; an increase from which this country would derive the greatest advantage, as the lion's share would fall to England. Admitting that the superiority of our mercantile marine was the keystone of our naval power, he supported the measure without any apprehensions as to its impairing or compromising our superiority on the seas. He then quoted Adam Smith and Mr. Huskisson in refutation of some of the objections which had been offered to the Bill; after which he proceeded to show the reasons on which he grounded his conclusion that the repeal of the Navigation Laws would not injure the mercantile marine, which was the mainstay of the Royal Navy. He was not disposed to follow Mr. Herries, and set at nought the menaces of Foreign Powers, in reference to the subject. On the contrary, he regarded the attitude assumed by those Powers as furnishing a cogent reason why some step should be at once taken in the matter. Another reason for putting our navigation system upon a more simple and intelligible basis than that now occupied by it was to be found in the complication of our reciprocity treaties-a complication which rendered it difficult for us

often to know where or how we stood. The right honourable Gentleman then proceeded to glance at the injurious mode in which the Navigation Laws indirectly affected the different interests of the community. After this he came to the consideration of the colonial branch of the subject, and expressed his astonishment at the levity with which Mr. Herries had treated it. The colonies had very generally remonstrated against our present navigation system, but the remonstrances of the others were of secondary import, as compared with the urgency of the question raised by the attitude of Canada respecting it. He had the fullest conviction that unless they returned to the system of protective duties in favour of Canadian corn, the loss of Canada would be inevitable if we persisted in retaining the Navigation Laws. [This declaration created a profound sensation in the House.] He would repeat, that if they attached any importance to the retention of Canada amongst our colonial possessions, no time was to be lost in passing this Bill. Nor was it by any means certain that the laws in question were favourable to the shipping interest of the country. Indeed, it was not difficult to show that they were not. Nor were sailors benefited by them. In his opinion, the old reliance on impressment was greatly to be attributed to the laws in question. And if a change was to be made, this was the time at which to make it. The measure before the House was necessary to consummate the policy on which the country had already embarked. Mr. Herries and others attributed all the present evils of the country to that policy; if they were sincere, why did they not press the

whole subject, without delay, upon the attention of the House? Lord Stanley's views had been frankly stated by him. He had declared himself to be the friend of reaction, and the uncompromising enemy of free trade and progress. If such were the views of his party, he could not but expect that they would make a great struggle on this Bill. The measure was the capital necessary to crown the work which had been already begun. Without it, all that had been done would prove itself infirm; with it, that which had been achieved could not easily be undone. Here, therefore, a direct issue was joined, and fairly joined. He regarded this measure, then, as the battle-field on which the last struggle must take place between reaction and progress. (Great cheering.) He was far from regretting the part which he had taken in our recent commercial legislation. The peace and tranquillity of the country during the year just past were, in his opinion, mainly to be attributed to that legislation. To go back now to protective duties would be a dangerous experiment, and might lead to convulsions and fatal consequences. At all events, his part was taken. He was opposed to reaction, and favourable to progress, tempered with prudence and discretion; and it was on these grounds that he gave his cordial support to the third reading of the Bill, which he was anxious, without delay, to see the law of the land.

Mr. T. Baring, in opposing the measure, admitted the injurious influence upon commerce of restrictions generally. But whatever grievances might be traced to the Navigation Laws, they were far outweighed by the immense advan

country? Let not the House, then, by the rejection of this Bill, give the signal for a renewed agitation on this subject.

Mr. Disraeli rose at a late hour, but promised to detain the House for a very short time. Sir James Graham had characterized the measure as the capital which was to crown the pillar of past legislation. But if the column had disappointed all the expectations formed of it, why go to the expense, or incur the risk, of crowning it with a costly capital? The measure was introduced last year to consummate a theory. He then believed that that theory had failed, and said so, and he was convinced of it now. Last year Sir James Graham had said that reaction was impossible, whereas now he admitted that progress and reaction were in actual antagonism, and Lord John Russell was now deprecating an agitation which had been regarded as impossible, but which was now recognised as springing from the distresses of the farmers. If the theory, which the Bill was introduced to support, had failed, the case on which it rested was a factitious one. The theory had blown up, and the case had broken down. It had certainly broken down so far as the colonies were concerned. The case of Canada was a serious one, and one which had, that night, been treated in a manner which would not speedily be forgotten. But there was nothing in the case of Canada that afforded an argument in favour of the repeal of the Navigation Laws, which was not equally an argument in favour of a return to protection. And this was what they had come to at last. They were told that they might look for rebellion in Canada, unless they protected the chief interest of

Canada. But what would the people of England say to this? They would say, woe to the statesman who had plucked that jewel from the British Crown. The case had not only failed as regarded the colonies, but it had also broken down, so far as foreign States were concerned. Lord John Russell had that evening called upon them to come to a settlement of the question. A settlement of what question? A settlement of one of the many questions which he had assisted to unsettle. The whole policy of the Whigs was to produce agitation, that they might have the honour and glory of appeasing it. They had that evening gained a great ally in Sir James Graham, and they seemed to be highly satisfied with him. The right honourable Gentleman had declared himself inimical to reaction, and friendly to progress. But progress to what?"progress to paradise, or progress to the devil?" (Cheers and laughter.) The people of England would no longer be satisfied with windy phrases about progress. They wanted to know what they were progressing to. As to what Sir James Graham had said with respect to the Corn Laws, and the challenge which he had thrown out, he could assure the right honourable Gentleman that ample opportunity would be given him to vindicate the policy for which he was responsible, and of which he was so proud. During the three years' experience which they had had of free trade, the poor rates had increased 17 per cent., the capital of England had diminished by 100 millions, and the deposits in the savings-banks had decreased to one-half of what they had formerly been. He implored the House, by all the wrongs

of a betrayed agriculture, by all the sufferings of the operatives of Manchester and Birmingham, and by all the hopes of Ireland, not to pass this Bill.

at the close of the war, Lord Lansdowne gladly welcomed the fact; he was glad that the prosperity of England had not been based on the ruin and misery of other na

foreigners was irrationally dreaded, he showed by statistics, displaying the large share of the American direct and carrying trade, which we already secured in open competition with American ships hence, and with foreign ships from their own ports to the American

In the Lords the second reading of the Bill was moved by the Marquis of Lansdowne, on the 7th of May. The noble Marquis began his speech with a sketch of the history of our restrictive legislation on the subject. That legislation commenced in a feeling that still pervaded the national mind of this country-the desire to grasp at everything that can be obtained in commerce; a desire which had never been indulged without superinducing again and again its own punishment. At its full strength it proved quite the contrary of successful in its object of increasing our naval power; and in modern times it had suffered such repeated relaxations, had been modified by so many and conflicting stipulations with Foreign Powers, that instead of being to commerce a suit of impenetrable armour; it was a mere clothing of shreds and patches; forming the most imperfect and useless protection that could be manufactured out of the parchments of our statute books. Conceding in one portion of his argument that foreign shipping had grown with proportionate rapidity to our own since the great relaxation of the Navigation Laws made

share of the Russian trade which we were able to bear off from the Baltic ships in the heart of their own country. He referred briefly to the colonial bearing of the question. The West Indies were subjected to the greatest difficulties; and Canada, engaged in a difficult competition with the United States, felt that the whole trade of the St. Lawrence depended upon the repeal of the remnant of the Navigation Laws now in force; nothing but the perfect opening of that river would enable her to retain her trade. If their Lordships did not pass the Bill, the condition of the country would become incomparably worse than at present; if they passed it, they might anticipate such an extension of commerce throughout the world, as must immediately, or at all events ultimately, be beneficial to the commerce of this country.

In conclusion, he observed that as Lord Stanley had stated plainly and manfully that he was prepared for the consequences of the rejection of the Bill, he hoped that he might be permitted to rejoin for himself and his colleagues, that they also were prepared for such a result. (Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.)