tled within three years; and since which, trade, manufacture, and agriculture had been, for the main part of the time, as flourishing as in any years before 1819. Neither was foreign competition the real cause. "It was a great mistake to suppose that the great branches of manufactures were confined to this country; for the truth was that we had the most competition elsewhere during the rise of all our manufactures. He would take the cotton-manufacture. He found that the cotton-trade in France had increased between the years 1787 and 1815 about seven and eight fold. The number of hands employed in the French cottontrade was a considerable proportion to the number of hands engaged in the same branch of trade in this Country. If there were, as he believed was the case, 1,500,000 persons more or less dependent on the cotton-trade of this country, it would be found that about 60,000 persons were dependent on this trade in France. There had been a great increase in the exports of cotton goods from France since the peace; but it was obvious that none could have taken place previcusly to the peace, as all the French ports were then blockaded by our cruisers. He had got the returns of the exports from France up to the last two years; and he found that from the period of the peace up to the latter period, there had been an increase of exports of cotton goods sevenfold, taking them at their valuation. During the same period, our cotton-trade, as regarded exports, had also greatly increased; indeed it had more than doubled, for it had risen from 22,000,000l. to 52,000,000l. This, then, was during the period when the French exports of cotton goods had been increasing in a much greater ratio." He recapitulated what the petitioners would be prepared to prove, if they were admitted to do so. They would show the injury to our foreign trade by the restriction on the importation of Corn-the consequent emigration of capital and labour from this country: he knew an instance of a person employing a thousand workmen who was prepared to transfer his capital to another country if this state of things were persisted in. The petitioners would prove that many persons in foreign countries would give orders, who now withheld them from the manufacturers of this country; and that without delay a most important and thriving trade might be created with other countries, which was now prevented by the operation of the Corn-laws. At present many of the manufacturers had been obliged to dismiss half their workmen; but in the majority of instances they kept them at work for a diminished number of days in the week. It had been stated, at a large public meeting, by a most respectable and excellent magistrate, that he knew instances of workmen having the choice given to them to have five or six days work a week as heretofore, but that if this were done the number employed must be reduced; or that the whole number should be employed for a shorter period of time: they preferred the latter, as it enabled the masters to keep all the hands, although with greatly reduced wages, instead of dismissing them. If the House did away with protective duties, it would be impossible for foreign countries to maintain them; in the United States, especially, where they have a popular government, the Western and the Southern States would unite against the Northern States to force an abrogation of the existing duties. The present state of the policy of this country reminded him of what took place in the time of Napoleon with respect to the Orders of Council, which were enforced to meet the Berlin and Milan Decrees; the Decrees would have been a dead letter but for the operation of the Orders in Council, but by those Orders they became effective. Lord Brougham offered to include in the proposed inquiry other subjects than the Corn-laws, the Currency, or the operation of Machinery, if Lord Stanhope (who had cheered him) wished. Earl Stanhope: "The question is, the protection of the wages of labour." Lord Brougham continued Yes; that demand for labour being limited, as the noble Earl probably would argue, in proportion as steam-power, and machinery, and horses were employed: although others would contend, perhaps, that the introduction of these aids to labour, on the contrary, enabled the employer, the capitalist, to call still more and more of man's labour in requisition -that by enabling the capitalist to work his mine, or whatever it might be, to profit, he could give employment to man as well as horse; whereas, otherwise, he might not be able to work at all, or, consequently, employ either man or horse. However, even should the noble Earl go beyond thisshould he, not content with suggesting doubts as to the propriety of steam-machinery and horselabour, of wheels, of axles, of ― as cranks, and pullies, go some steps with satisfaction-the public credit had been preserved. He could hardly conceive a greater mischief -he could not imagine any inerease of distress which would have been more overwhelming, than if there had been any thing like an obstruction to the public credit by a defalcation of the revenue, rendering it incapable of meeting the expenditure. He appealed to the conflict of opinions on the subject, and particularly on the Corn-laws, for proof of the necessity of inquiry; and concluded by moving that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Distress of the Country. The Earl of Ripon stated his objections to the motion in a short speech. The sum of Lord Brougham's complaint was the Corn-laws; and of his proposition, the repeal of those laws-the very question that had been most recently settled. Nothing had convinced him that those laws were the cause of the distress; and unless he saw his way to some clear, distinct, and safe mode of remedying the distress, he thought it kinder to the people themselves to abstain from going into Committee; the result of which could not answer the expectations entertained from it. It could not be said that the embarrassments of our foreign commerce arose from restrictions on corn; for, in fact, during the last ten years, we had taken all the surplus corn, which the countries of Europe grew. He pointed to the determined prohibition of our manufactures in Russia and other countries, as giving little hope than any change of our own policy, would induce a more liberal treatment on their part. When Lord Brougham ascribed the depression in our trade with the United States to the Cornlaws, he had forgotten that during the antecedent years, when our Corn-laws were in full force, this trade had been carried on to a great extent, and the United States had taken no less than 12,000,000l. of our manufactures. It appeared probable that President Tyler would veto the proposed new Tariff, and then the Compromise Act would continue in force; the duties on imports diminishing under that Act. If their monetary system should correct itself, and they should adhere to the existing law, there would be then no more impediment than there was before to the extensive consumption of the manufactures of this country, which six years ago afforded such a stimulus to the manufacturing industry of our population. As to the proposed inquiry, it would be impossible to conclude it within the Session. Earl Stanhope admitted that Lord Brougham, like Dr. Johnson, was Magister verborum gravissimus, and had treated the subject with his usual power; but he could not agree with him as to the effects of machinery. He had received a visit from a woollen manufacturer in the West Riding of Yorkshire, not a Radical or Whig, but one of the old Tories, now almost extinct; and he said that unless wages were protected and justice done to the labouring classes, this would perhaps be the last Session of Parliament. (Much laughter.) Lord Stanhope contended that the Corn-laws had nothing to do with the distress; but it was the very object of the Poor-law to grind down wages. Lord Kinnaird feared the effects of refusing inquiry would be most lamentable during the winter. The Marquis of Clanricarde ridiculed Lord Ripon's argument for refusing to inquire into the possibility of finding a remedy, merely because they might be unable to find one. The distress was spreading to the agricultural districts; the poor-rates were everywhere increasing; and now the Incometax had to be paid in addition to those rates; if they would not submit to the inconvenience of inquiry, he feared that they might be compelled to submit to something worse. Viscount Melbourne agreed, that Lord Brougham, always able and cloquent, had never addressed the House in a more temperate speech. He did not deny the melancholy and awful state of affairs to which that speech related; the long continuance of the distress, and the time which it took the country to recover from it alarmed him; but he did not think that any good purpose could be answered by the inquiry, or that it would be wise and proper for the House to grant it. The question of the Cornlaws had been fully inquired into; and he thought that the application of change and fluctuation at this time would do more harm than had been attributed to the Cornlaws in the course of the debate. The Earl of Radnor insisted that the new Corn-law had done no good, for the greater portion of the little corn which had come in under it, had been Colonial wheat and not foreign. With respect to the Tariff, too, but little good could be expected from it, and in some instances harm, he considered, would ensue from it. He recommended Mr. Canning's measure of 1826, for admitting 500,000 quarters of wheat at 12s. duty, as tending to restore confi dence even before it was carried into effect. Lord Wharncliffe said, the repeal of the Corn-laws would only cause such alarm among the agricultural population as would greatly aggravate the existing distress. In his reply Lord Brougham observed that inquiry was not refused into agricultural distress in 1822. On a division the motion was negatived by 61 to 14. The most striking shape, however, in which the grievances of the working classes presented themselves to the notice of the Legislature during this Session, was the presentation of a petition, which for bulk and number of signatures, was unparalleled in the annals of Parliament. The sum total of names attached was stated to amount to upwards of 3,000,000. -the proportion of bona fide signatures being considerably lessits prayer was for the enactment of the great constitutional changes which form the "six points" comprised in the Chartist creed-besides these demands, however, the petition declared the weight of the National Debt too great to be borne, and pointed in significant language at the abolition of all "Monopolies," including those of paper-money, machinery, land, religion, the public press, and railway travelling. The conveyance and presentation of this enormous document afforded a curious spectacle, and a task of no small difficulty-it required sixteen men to support it, and was escorted to Palace-yard by a long procession of working men, who marched in good discipline and with peaceful demeanour to the Houses of Parliament. Arrived at the door of the House of Commons, however, it proved too big for admission, and in order to effect its entrance it became necessary to divide it into sections. Hastily plucked asunder in many parts, each piece formed a load for a troop of the petitioners, who carried it into the body of the House. It there lay on the floor beside the Table, which it overtopped, piled up in massy folds, and was "presented," if that term can be strictly applied to so unwieldy a document, by Mr. T. Duncombe, one of the Members for Finsbury. In calling attention to its contents, he thanked the House for the kind and respectful manner in which it had been received. The petition, he observed, had nearly 3,500,000 of signatures; and, making allowance for the signatures of females and youths, he was prepared to prove that there were above 1,500,000 of families of the industrious classes subscribers to that petition. He had gathered in conversation with Members what were likely to be the objections to its prayer; and one was, the doubt as to there being any precedent. But in 1785, the promoters of the Lancashire petition against the duties on cotton stuffs were heard at the Bar; in 1789, persons who took a strong interest in the Slave-trade were heard at the Bar, and afterwards referred to a Select Committee; in 1812, on the motion of Lord Brougham, and with the concurrence of Lord Stanley, Mr. Rose, Mr. Baring, (Lord Ashburton,) and Lord Castlereagh, witnesses were heard against the Orders in Council. Unquestionably, the petition which he now presented, proceeding from every part of the empire, was equally deserving of attention. "They will not only prove to you that a state of great distress exists in this country, but they will also prove, if not to the satisfaction of every man in this House, at least to the conviction of every unprejudiced mind, that those grievances arise from the neglect and misrepresentation of their interests within these walls. They will also state to you what they believe to be the remedy for the evils of which they complain. It will not be for you to decide to-night upon the merits of the remedy they may suggest; that will be for your consideration after having heard their statements. After you shall have heard their arguments, then it will be my duty to propose what I conceive would remedy and correct the abuses and mismanagement under which this country is now labouring." He traced the history of Constitutional Reform in the country for the last fifty or sixty years. Many called the Chartists wild and visionary; but several eminent men of both Houses had advocated the same principles. When Major Cartwright advocated Reform in 1777, it was called "Radical Reform;" and at that time the people almost repudiated the name of "Radical" as stigma. In 1798, the Whigs took up the cause of Reform, and they were then called "Reformers :" but those who were originally called Radicals, and afterwards Reformers, were now called "Chartists;" the Chartists were the Radicals of former days. a He doubted if the House was aware of the state of the public mind and of the country. The petition had received its number of signatures in the course of the last three or four months; the persons interested in it were en |