large a proportion of the discussions of both Houses related to one or other of these subjects. And, indeed, when the importance of each of these measures is considered, the extent of their bearings, and the vast mass of details which they all, but more especially the last-mentioned, presented for consideration, we shall be disposed to consider that this Session, as compared with those preceding, by no means deserves to be considered unproductive or deficient in practical results. The remaining works which were effected, with one or two exceptions which we are now about to particularise, were of secondary interest; and, as is commonly the case where no vital party principles are at issue, excited little discussion worth commemorating. The Session may, in fact, be described as having been almost exclusively devoted to the discussion of economical questions, and in various forms and shapes, whether directly in the course of debates upon the Government measures, or indirectly on other occasions, the subjects of commercial policy, national distress, taxation, the manufacturing system, the results of machinery, the influence of Corn-laws, were ever and anon recurring, and formed the standing topics of controversy from the commencement of the Session to its close. The condition of the country, now suffering under a remarkable depression and stagnation of trade, whereby large numbers were reduced to severe privations, afforded continual pretext for the introduction of these subjects, and as the causes which had produced these evils, and the remedies proper for their removal, formed the most prominent ground of difference between the two great

parties in the state; the spirit of political controversy within the House concurred with external circumstances, and the pressure from without, to make the condition and wants of the labouring classes, and the laws which affect the operations of industry, almost perpetually the battle-field between the Ministry and their opponents. It is needless to say, that in the repeated debates which occurred on these subjects, the same views and arguments were continually enforced and met by the same answers, but the positions maintained by either party in these controversies may be easily understood, by reverting to two or three only out of the many occasions on which the opposing principles of commercial and economical policy came in issue.

One of the most important and extended discussions of this nature arose upon a series of resolutions proposed by Mr. Wallace, as an amendment on going into Committee of Supply. The purport of them was to affirm the existence of distress, to declare that the alteration of the Corn-law and Tariff, coupled with the Income-tax, could not afford relief, and to propose an address to the Queen not to prorogue Parliament until inquiry should have been instituted into the causes of the distress, and until the Queen and the House should have been assured by the Ministers, "that effectual means were secured to provide sustenance for the unemployed and their destitute families, until their sufferings should be terminated by a demand for their industry, and wages for their labour. Mr. Wallace read extracts of letters of recent date from Glasgow, Paisley, Greenock, and Kilmar

nock, which described the misery of the unemployed in those places as continuing and increasing. The motion was seconded by Mr. Walker. It was supported by Dr. Bowring, who condemned expenditure in foreign wars while millions were starving at home; and by Mr. Aglionby, who admitted, however, that he did not think that prolonging the sitting of Parliament would alleviate the distress; he adduced reports of intense suffering from Carlisle and Cockermouth.

Sir James Graham deprecated desponding language, as tending to aggravate the miseries of which it professed to complain; and he derived confidence from the recollection that three bad harvests in succession have never been known. He had seen the distress arising for some time, and he feared that for six or seven years it could not be wholly obviated. Did he believe that the repeal of the Cornlaws would alleviate the distress, he would advocate that measure; but he solemnly declared his belief that it would not, but that it would displace and discourage agricultural industry, and condemn the agriculturists to a common ruin with the manufacturers.

Mr. D'Israeli argued that the commercial difficulty was owing to general causes; and he attributed it mainly to the neglect of closing a commercial treaty with France, and to the war with China, which had disturbed our commerce with that country.

Mr. Hume imputed it to the restrictive policy adopted by the United States and Germany in retaliation for our Corn-laws; and on that theme he enlarged; adding reports of increasing distress from Forfar and Dundee.

Mr. Matthias Attwood ascribed it to Mr. Huskisson's policy and the reciprocity treaties, which, while they produced apparent advantages to particular interests in a country, disturbed and injured all others. He asked, how it was that Sir James Graham did not view the state of affairs with despondency, if Government had taken no measures for the relief of the country? If Parliament separated, and left the country in its present condition, he must be a bold politician who could meet it again without apprehension; and he should not feel satisfied with anything but a statement of the views of Government on the condition of the people, and full enquiry into the causes of the distress.

Lord John Russell could not approve of the hostile course towards the Government taken by Mr. Attwood, who had himself proposed no remedy; but he so far agreed with him in principle, as to think that the commercial difficulty of the country was the primary evil with which Ministers ought to have dealt; whereas they had dealt with the financial deficiency as the primary subject, and had treated the depression of trade as secondary in their mea sures. He reiterated the argument, that if Sir Robert Peel's principles were good with respect to cattle, seeds, and other articles, à fortiori they must be so with respect to the far more important articles of corn and flour. He illustrated the probable working of a change of the Corn-law, by what had taken place with respect to cattle: there had been a panic; that brought down prices, which seemed to justify the panic; Sir Robert Peel still persevered with his measure;

the panic subsided, men recovered their senses, and once more the price of cattle is such as to be too high for the general prosperity. Lord John Russell did not ascribe all the evils to the Corn-law, any more, as Canning said, than you would ascribe a man's disease to the want of rhubarb, though that might be an appropriate remedy: but he thought that if corn had been introduced, even at 8s. duty, last year, it would have prevented much of the difficulty; and if any one would propose an alteration of the law, he would now support it. He could not, however, throw upon Government exclusively the whole responsibility of providing a remedy for the distress; nor could he support Mr. Wallace's motion for interrupting an ordinary Committee of Supply.

Sir Robert Peel recalled the discussion to the practical question before the House-the delay of the prorogation until after enquiry. He asked, how was the enquiry to be conducted?-at the Bar of the House, or before a Select Committee? And the prorogation was to be suspended until the Ministers could assure the House that means were secured for providing sustenance and employment! This was nothing else than the very proposal of Mr. Ferrand, for maintaining the sufferers out of the public funds, against which Mr. Wallace himself had voted. Sir Robert Peel next complained of the course taken by Mr. Attwood, who had at last suggested nothing. Mr. Attwood seemed to have no practical remedy in view, except, perhaps, either to degrade the coin, or to abolish the convertibility of paper into gold. Lord John Russell had blamed the Government for not treating the

financial difficulties of the nation more lightly now, the people's acquiescence in the Income-tax was a strong proof that they did not think lightly of those difficulties; nay, it had been reported, and on no slight authority, that the original intention of the late Ministers themselves had been to support that tax. He did not assume that the people's acquiescence was owing to any exorbitant confidence in this Government; he ascribed it to the prevalent conviction that the state of affairs imperatively required the equalization of the revenue with the expenditure. In some general remarks in vindication of the Government measures, (to which Sir Robert Peel charged Lord John Russell with giving but a lefthanded support,) he retorted the allusion to the reduction of the duty on cattle: the panic produced by that might be produced to a wider extent and with more grievous effect by alteration of the Corn-laws; and if that had done so little good as Lord John Russell described, perhaps the same result would follow with Corn-law repeal. Sir Robert Peel admitted the distress; but he mentioned the remarkable fact, that at this very time there was an increased quantity of cotton taken out for consumption-in the first six months of 1841 the quantity was 464,500 bales; up to the 24th June, 1842, 538,000 bales; and although mills had been closed, new mills were actually in course of erection. He feared that, in any case, the application of capital to manufactures and the improvements of machinery would throw out small capitalists with imperfect machinery, and from time to time deprive large numbers of people of

employment. The measures of Government were the best that under the circumstances could be resorted to. He praised the forbearance of the people, even under the efforts of wicked men to excite them to excesses; which left to Government no alternative but the firm maintenance of law and peace.

After Sir Robert Peel's speech, Mr. W. Williams moved the adjournment of the debate, and recommenced it on the ensuing evening, by adducing documents to show the starvation and want of employment existing in Coventry; and insisting that Sir Robert Peel, having admitted the distress, was bound to provide a remedy, whereas he pleaded the advanced period of the Session, and said, that it was too late to do anything. Mr. Williams proposed a plan of his own-to admit corn, cotton, and raw silk, free of duty; to repeal the Malt-tax; to reduce the duty on coffee and sugar to 3d. perlb., on tea to 30 per cent.; and to meet the reduction of the revenue by reducing all payments out of the Exchequer by one-third, excepting the pay of common soldiers and sailors; a measure which he justified on the calculation that the Currency Bill of 1819 had added one-third to the burthens of the country.

Mr. Aldam adduced statistics of the distress of Leeds. Mr. Brotherton described the depression and pauperism at Salford, and Sir B. Hall brought forward similar statements respecting the parish of Marylebone.

Viscount Howick could foresee no practical advantage from the inquiry proposed by Mr. Wallace; but the House ought not to separate without having had brought

under its notice the appalling state of things described by Mr. Aldam, Mr. Brotherton, and Sir Benjamin Hall. He thought, however, that the prorogation of Parliament would tend to hasten the adoption of measures against which large majorities had voted this Session; for if Government were disappointed as to the improvement resulting from their measuresif they found the gloomy anticipations of the Opposition realized

they could call Parliament together before the close of the year, and, as a last resource, try those measures which had been so earnestly pressed upon their consideration. And Mr. Wallace's motion was at least attended with this advantage, that it enabled the Opposition distinctly to throw on Ministers the undivided responsibility, in the present awful state of the country, of rejecting those measures while they had themselves no substitute to propose. He said the Government had made some important admissions. They had admitted that private charity was inadequate to the exigency; that employment alone could effectually relieve the people: and that an increased importation of the articles on which the duties were just reduced would lead to an increased exportation of our own goods. This doctrine was a true one, though the operation on which it was founded might be sometimes circuitous: but if it was true of other articles, why, in such a state of things as the present, was it not applied to the admission of sugar, of coffee, of spirits, and above all, of corn? For, under the new Corn-law, dealers still kept corn in the expectation of a rise in price, and the uncertainty was still such that they

were afraid to order corn from any of the nearest markets, and there fore they did not order it from America. He then entered into an enquiry as to the reasons why a flourishing trade with America had been carried on in 1836, in spite of the Corn-laws; ascribing it in great part to the enormous investment at that period of British capital in the stocks, shares, and various enterprising companies of America; a process which could not permanently continue. He then considered the practical effect of admitting corn from America, which being paid for in British manufactures, a stimulus would be given to employment-the expenditure of persons so engaged would return to its former scale-poorrates would be reduced-the wholesale dealers, as well as the shopkeepers, would participate in the general improvement, and be relieved from the necessity of observing a rigid economy-and thus the revival of trade would be felt through the whole frame-work of society. In the present juncture, he could not conceal from himself that things wore a most serious aspect, and that a feeling, once confined to the Chartists, was now dangerously extending itself to the middle classes. He did not expect the Government to retrace their steps at present; but the country had a right to expect that, if the Ministers were not able to discover other means of affording relief to the people, at all events they would not suffer the present year to close without summoning Parliament again; and then, if they had no measure of their own to suggest, to try what would be the effect of that course of policy which had been recommended to them by their opponents.

Mr. Ellice said, that unjust legislation had brought the price of the best wheat-he did not speak of the average-to 70s. a quarter and upwards. He imputed the present, as well as former visitations of distress, to tampering with the currency. In 1822 money was so abundant that an immense quantity of the capital of the country had been swallowed up in South American loans. The Bank of England had even offered to advance two millions of money to the United States Bank, which was now accused of dealing unfairly with its creditors. In fact, this country had stimulated overspeculation in America, and now the bubble had burst. Mr. Ellice gave a qualified approval to the measures of Government; but condemned the way in which his constituents, the silk-weavers of Coventry, had been exposed to attack, without equivalent advantages being secured to them.

Mr. Sharman Crawford said, as the distress was not so great in Bolton as in some districts, the cotton and woollen trades there not being entirely at a stand-still, though the privations of the people were very great-and as Belfast was for the time deprived of a representative-he should plead the cause of the Irish town. The working classes there were undergoing the greatest suffering: in Newtownards, the workhouse could not receive all the applicants for relief. He maintained that there was no over-population; for four acres of land could support five individuals, while the population of England and Wales was about 14,000,000, and the number of arable acres 32,000,000. He urged, therefore, resort to the small allotment system; admitting that total repeal of the Corn-laws