Reform, with such other measures as the House might think best calculated to afford them relief. Mr. G. Robinson supported the prayer of the Petition. He believed as the petitioners expressed themselves, that the distress was not as stated in the King's Speech, partial, but general He was not disposed however, to agree with the petitioners in their prayer for an alteration of the Standard, though he was of opinion that the return to the use of metallic money had caused much of our distress. The petitioners desired that the standard might be restored to what it was in 1797, but on this subject he thought the arguments of the right hon. Gentleman unanswerable. Various changes were indeed talked of, but he would give no opinion on any one of them till he saw some substantive measure brought under the consideration of the House. That would be the best method for those Gentlemen who had plans to propose to adopt, and then every one might be able to form a judgment of the probable results of their schemes. As to Parliamentary Reform, he would say that he desired to see the franchise extended to those large towns which have of late grown up, and he would recommend those opposed to reform rather to yield to gradual measures than be at length compelled to adopt a more extensive reform. He would recommend those who wished for reform to adopt the same plan, as the surest and safest way of accomplishing their object. Colonel Davies dissented from the statements of the petitioners, and expressed his regret that they had overlooked the true cause of the distress,-namely, the pressure of inordinate taxation. They had conThey had contented themselves, however, with expatiating on the worn-out topic of the currency, without ever adverting to an additional repeal of taxes, which all parties acknowledged to be an unexceptionable mode of administering relief. He would venture to assert, that not one person in a hundred of those who had signed the petition understood the questions on which he gave an opinion. There was no county less subject to political excitement than Worcester, and he was sure that nothing but intolerable distress could have induced the people to petition. It was impossible, under such circumstances to say to what lengths people might go, and therefore he regretted that they engaged in matters which they did not understand. Sir F. Burdett differed widely from his hon. friend who had just addressed the House; and if his hon. friend would read the petition, he would find that the petitioners knew a great deal of the subject on which they petitioned. He must, in contradiction to his hon. friend bear his testimony to the importance of the petition, the subject matter of which he considered well worthy of being made the ground of a regular motion to be submitted to the House. The distress which prevailed amongst so large a portion of our hardworking population, in his opinion, was not to be adequately accounted for by any cause but that which had been assigned in the petition. Every practical person in trade or commerce with whom he had had an opportunity of conversing on the subject, took the same view of it; and he was ready to make it apparent, that any reasoning to the contrary was untenable, and might be casily refuted. As to what he had advanced in reference to Mr. Hume's Essay, he still maintained the truth of all that was asserted, but it must not be supposed that he adopted indiscriminately all the opinions put forth in that excellent piece of writing. He merely contended that the hon. Gentleman might there collect a principle, which would lead him through the mazes of confusion in which he was entangled. He, however, was not one of those who were swayed by the greatness of a name, nor had he ever given his adhesion to any doctrine without examining and judging for himself, however speciously or authoritatively it might be urged upon his attention. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. He thought Hume wrong for example, in saying that an increase of currency was a proof of increasing prosperity. The industrious classes must be affected by every change of currency, and all who lived by prices must necessarily suffer when prices declined. They might therefore benefit by a rise of prices, but when that was caused by an increase of taxation it was an injury, not a benefit to the industrious classes. Would any man pretend to tell him that there was no loss where 9l. an acre was reduced to 4l., while the owner had precisely the same burthens as when he enjoyed the former profits? To reduce the taxes was wise on the part of Ministers, but the people could not look to any relaxation of taxes as an efficient remedy for their distress. That could only be found in restoring the currency to its former value. Mr. Warburton was of a different opinion from the hon. Baronet, on the ground Sir Charles Burrell said, the hon. Member was very feeling towards those who might be ruined by another change, but he had no compassion for those who had suffered by the changes already made. He, for one, had no doubt that the greater part of our present distress, and in particular the sufferings of the agriculturists, and all the industrious classes, had been caused by the former change in the currency. He would not then however enter into the subject, he would only observe that from, information which he had received, the proposed alteration in the Beer duty would completely disappoint those who expected that it would be attended with any benefit to the agricultural classes. that every creditor in the kingdom would | the best means of remedying it having suffer by the adoption of the policy which failed, and having been even reproved for the hon. Baronet and the petitioners recom- their well-meant endeavours, could do mended. It should always be recollected, nothing further than press on the Governthat by altering the currency, not only the ment the necessity of diminishing taxation obligations of the State were changed, but as much as possible. Profits were so realso the private contracts of all the debtors duced by competition, that the capitalist and creditors in the kingdom. To adopt could not give high wages. The whole the measures recommended by the hon. mass of the labourers were in a sad state of Baronet would only plunder one class of poverty, and till means were found to people for the benefit of another. improve their condition the country would know no returning prosperity. In former times the discovery of the mines of Louth caused a universal rise of prices; those mines were now deficient, and a universal fall of prices had followed. He thought then that our distress had two causes, one permanent and the other temporary; the permanent cause was the law altering the currency, the temporary cause was the diminished quantity of the precious metals. The latter cause affected all countries; the former made the distress of England peculiarly great, and affected, through her complicated mercantile relations, all the countries of the trading world. He attributed the distress felt in America, in France, and in Sweden, to the lessened supply of the precious metals. To meet the peculiar circumstances of England a large reduction of taxation was necessary, and some temporary means of supplying the expenses of the State. He did not mean a Property-tax, for to that he should always be opposed, but there were means well known to those conversant with the money market, which considering the great quantity of superfluous capital then in the country, might be advantageously had recourse to. Some temporary expedients to meet temporary causes, might ultimately restore the country to a sound and prosperous state. Mr. Bright expressed his surprise, that Members of that side of the House should consider it a great thing, forsooth, that the petitions of the people were favourably received, and to him it seemed most arrogant in Members to run down the petitions of any class of people. What reason had those who asserted, that to ascribe our distress to a change in the currency was a proof of ignorance, to give for their assertion. He was of the same opinion as the petitioners whom the hon. Member for Worcester had branded with ignorance. Nothing indeed could be clearer than the fact that prices fell when the quantity of money was lessened, and rose when that was increased. A depreciation of price and general distress among the working classes had invariably followed a contraction of the currency, from whatever cause it might have arisen. He did not mean to say, however, that a reduction of taxation would not alleviate the distress, for it was plain that a portion of the charges which weighed on the people would by that means be removed. He would not assert that it was possible wholly to get rid of distress by reducing taxation, but he would assert that to give much relief a much larger portion of the taxes must be taken off. Those who had endeavoured to obtain an inquiry into the cause of the distress, and Colonel Davies complained of the hon. Member having misrepresented what he had said of the petitioners. Sir F. Burdett said, his hon. friend had also misunderstood what fell from him. Sir M. W. Ridley protested against the doctrine of the hon. Member for Bridport (Mr. Warburton) that it would be an act of injustice to revert to the former standard, though he admitted that it might be inconvenient. We had already committed injustice, and he thought that it would not be more than an act of justice, to place those who had been affected by the change already made in the currency, in the situation they would have stood in, but for that change. Mr. Davenport maintained, that the ex traordinary change of price that had taken place within the last seven years was the consequence of the change in the Currency system. With respect to our prosperity, he could state on unquestionable authority that within three years the diminution of butcher's meat had amounted to one-third, as he had calculated from the sales of eighteen butchers. Since the House came to a decision not to inquire into the state of the country, he had received letters from Cheshire, Staffordshire, and Westmorland, which were worthy the attention of the House, on account of the view they gave of the state of the country. The principal produce of the latter is sheep, and the fatter ones did not now fetch the sum the lean ones were bought for last Autumn. The price of cattle was depreciated to the amount of 8s. a head, and what fetched 288. last year, only brought 20s. this. The grazing land of Cheshire, which let in 1828 for 20s., might now be hired for 16s. The increase of tolls had been mentioned as a proof of returning prosperity, but in many cases the rate of tolls had been raised, and on the Stourbridge road, near Birmingham, the tolls had fallen off. Another fact worthy of notice was, that a quantity of blocks and other cotton-printing machinery, which sold last year for 10,000l. was resold this year for the very trifling sum of 21. He would only add, that land near Birmingham, which seven years ago was let for 24s. now lets for only 118. Lord John Russel said, the hon. Member for Westminster seemed to think that the House had not treated the question of the Currency fairly. [Sir F. Burdett said, that was not what he said] At least, the noble Lord continued, he so understood the hon. Baronet. If that were the case the fault must be attributed to the hon. Member for Shaftesbury, who made a speech which turned altogether on that topic; but concluding with a general motion on the state of the currency, he lost the votes of those who were averse from altering it. He was surprised that hon. Members who ascribed all the evils of the country to the change in the currency did not bring forward a substantive proposition respecting it, which might afford the House an opportunity of again expressing a decided opinion on it. That was the manner in which the hon. Member for Essex acted in 1822, when the House, at the recommendation of the President of the Board of Trade, came to a resolution that settled the matter for some years. If that course were now taken, no doubt the argu ments respecting the currency would be fairly met. Even admitting that many persons had been ruined by the change in the currency, which he, however, did not believe, that by no means proved the necessity of another change. That depreciation to which Members desired to return was itself an act of injustice, and according to their own shewing, gave several persons 100l. who ought only to have 50%. Mr. Ward rose to ask the hon. Member for Bridport (Mr. Warburton) who had been represented to have stated that the corporation of the Bank of England and of the East-India Company exercised an improper influence over the city elections, if that were so, because he wished to inform the hon. Member, if it were, that he was labouring under a mistake. He could assure him that the Bank had never exercised the least influence over the City elections, and had it done so, those who are supposed to be subject to its power would have freely expressed their opinions on the matter. While he was on his legs he wished to add, that his statement on a former evening relative to the gold currency, included the quantity issued by the Bank of England subsequent to the last returns. Mr. Warburton admitted having expressed the opinions alluded to, but he meant it to apply to all such great corporations, and in that sense he had no doubt the remark was correct. He believed, however, that at the last City election the Bank had exercised no influence. Other public bodies however, interfered, and it was a notorious fact, that if the Lord Mayor be a candidate, his office ensures him 500 votes. The hon. Member's question he understood to apply particularly to the Bank, and that body he was bound to say did not excrcise any influence at the late election. Petition read. On the Question that it be printed, Mr. Davenport, in answer to the noble Lord's challenge, begged to say that he would, before the close of the Session, submit a distinct motion respecting the Currency, which would afford the opportunity of discussion for which the noble Lord seemed anxious.-Petition to be printed. MANUFACTURE OF ARMS.] Mr. Lawley presented a Petition from the Gun-makers of Birmingham, against the intended abolition of the Arms' Proof-house of that town. This Petition, he said, from its importance well deserved the attention of the House. This persons who signed it carried on a trade 853 Manufacture of Arms. {MARCH 25} 854 Mr. William Smith had no doubt whatever of the good intention of Government, but he must, on principle, protest against it setting up to be a manufacturer of any article whatever. Manufacture of Flour. that was at one time thought to be worthy The petitioners of much consideration. expressed great alarm at the prospect of the proof-house at Birmingham being no longer used for his Majesty's Ordnance; and they Mr. Hume said, that he also was convinced stated that the Government would not find it advantageous to take the manufacture of that it was very bad policy for the GovernThe House, he ment to manufacture any thing. During the Arms into its own hands. war there was some reason for its making thought, would feel surprise at hearing that it was intended to remove the manufacture Arms, but the gun-makers of Birmingham, of Arms from the vicinity of coal and iron and other places, were now so experienced, mines, to a distance of 100 miles. The peti-and their establishments were so large, that tioners state, that their capability to supply they might be safely relied on to furnish Arms to any extent, was fully proved any quantity, and of the best quality, which He had frequently during the war, and as they thought might be desired. they could supply cheaper than the Ord-pressed on the attention of the Government nance establishment at Enfield, the neces- the propriety of putting down the estasary Arms for all the purposes of war, blishment referred to, and he should be very they prayed that the House would order happy to give his support to the hon. Memthat establishment to be discontinued. At ber for Warwickshire. a period when the Government was resolved to add to the supply of Arms, it sent some confidential persons to Birmingham to urge the manufacturers to undertake the business. They did so, and some of them lost by the job about 20,000l. A further injury would be inflicted on them by continuing the establishment at Enfield, and whenever the grant for that was proposed, he should resist it. Alderman Thompson, in support of the prayer of the petition, contended that it was necessary that Government should give some employment to the manufacturers of Arms, otherwise, in the event of a war, the means of supply might be found wanting. He was convinced that the Ordnance in undertaking the manufacture itself, acted from the best motives, but at the same time he must assert, that Government ought to trust for a supply to the private manufacturers. That they were capable of meeting its demands was proved by the fact that between 1803 and 1815 not less than 3,277,000 stand were manufactured in this country. Mr. Littleton conceived that the supply of Arms should be left, like that of any other manufacture, to the competition of capitalists, and should not be a Government manufacture. For a considerable period during the late war, a musket a minute, including night and day, was manufactured in the districts from which the Petition Had the establishment at Enfield been broken up several years ago, the country would have saved a great deal, and he hoped, therefore, that the hon. Member would persevere, when the time came for voting the Ordnance estimates, in his intention of resisting the vote for that establishment. came. Mr. Perceval would only remark, that when the Ordnance estimates were discussed, he should be able to shew that the Government had good reason for keeping up this He would defer stating his establishment. views till it was brought substantively before the House by the hon. Member for Warwickshire.-Petition to be printed. Alderman Thompson presented a similar Petition from the gun-makers of London. Alderman Wood supported the prayer of the Petition. He wished to take that opportunity of asking, why a manufacture of knives and forks was carried on at the Ordnance Works at Deptford or Lewisham, he did not know which, to the injury of the Sheffield and Birmingham cutlers, and the cutlers of the metropolis. Mr. Dugdale said, he did not think that putting down the Ordnance establishment at Enfield would be of any benefit to the manufacturers of Arms, for the Ordnance had already a million stand of Arms in its possession. As to the knives and forks alluded to by the worthy Alderman, he could assure him that no such manufacture at Deptford, or any where else, was carried on under the control of the Ordnance.— Petition to be printed. MANUFACTURE OF FLOUR.] Mr. Western be perpresented a Petition from certain Millers in Essex, praying that they might mitted to take foreign corn out of bond, for the purpose of exporting the flour to be He saw no obmanufactured out of that corn, on the payment of a duty of 4s. jection against acceding to the prayer of the petitioners, provided they gave a good security that the flour should be altogether exported, and only the bran and chaff retained for domestic consumption. A proposition of this kind had already been submitted to the Board of Trade, and as it would be an advantage to the English Agriculturist, as well as the Miller, he hoped it would be acceded to. The law, as it stood, encouraged the foreign Miller to the injury of the English Miller; the consequence was, as he stated last year, that in Essex several valuable mills were untenanted. Mr. Bramston supported the prayer of the Petition. Mr. Herries begged leave to remind the hon. Member, that the subject involving the prayer of the petition had been discussed at length in that House, and that the opposition to it did not arise from the Ministers, but from hon. Members connected with the landed interest. Ministers were on that occasion anxious to promote the object the petitioners had in view, and would now do the same thing so far as was compatible with the existing Corn-laws. Government was aware that the measure would supply employment to many unemployed mills, and it was desirous to accede to the prayer of the petition. Mr. Hume thought the present a favourable time for attending to the prayer of the petitioners, and he hoped that the Government would bring forward some measure to carry it into effect.-Petition to be printed. CANADA.] Mr. Labouchere, in rising to postpone, at the request of his hon. friend, the Member for Dover, his motion respectingthe state of the Judicature and Legislative Councils of the Canadas, in order to allow an early hearing for the motion respecting Taxation, wished to know whether the public service would suffer if he brought forward his motion on the question of granting money. He was particularly anxious to bring it on before the sums were voted for fortifying Canada. He was unwilling to retard public business, and if that were to be the result of his bringing forward his Motion, on going into a Committee of Supply, as there was no open day until the 18th of May, he should be obliged to defer his Motion till that day. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, so many motions had been brought on at various times by hon. Gentlemen on going into Committees of Supply, that the House had now arrived almost at the Easter holidays without having got through one quarter of the Estimates of the year; but if there was any Gentleman who had any motion standing for some day which would suit the convenience of the hon. Gentleman, before the passing of the vote for Canada, and would postpone it in his favour, he would be most happy to meet the hon. Gentleman's wishes by going into the subject. With a view to meet the hon. Member's wishes, he would postpone the vote for the fortifications of Canada to as late a period as possible. TRIAL BY JURY-NEW SOUTH WALES.] Mr. Jephson said, Sir, I had given notice of an Address to the Crown to extend the right of Trial by Jury to New South Wales and Van Dieman's Land: I now rise with great pleasure to withdraw this Motion, as it has been rendered unnecessary by the fair and liberal way in which I have been met by the right hon. Gentleman opposite. He has agreed that an Order of Council should forthwith issue, directing that Juries, formed of the Colonists, and with all the incidents of English Juries, should be granted to all defendants in New South Wales and Van Dieman's Land, where the conduct or character of the Government or Governor, or of the Executive Council, or any of its members, should be concerned; also in cases where any conflicting interest or party feeling existed between the civil and military classes,-instead of the present Jury of seven officers, selected by the Governor." This ought, I think, to satisfy the Colonists, and those who interest themselves on their behalf in this House; and I do assure the right hon. Gentleman that I receive this concession made so freely out of this House with much greater pleasure than if a majority of the House had forced upon him the resolution I had this night intended to move. The effect will be very different in the Colony. The enlightened portion of the Colonists must see that the Government is not one of its tyrannical masters; but that there are those now who are intrusted with the management of Colonial affairs who are willing to concede their fair desires, and to impart the full blessings of a Constitution which is the heritage of the Colonist. Before I sit down, if I might hope that any advice of mine would reach the Colonies, it would be this-that the liberal portion of the Press in that colony should abstain from that coarseness of vituperation and harshness of expression towards all who are placed in authority which I have been sorry to remark in the researches I have been obliged to make in preparing for this Motion. Such feelings are, in all states of society, to be lamented; but in a free country more particularly so, |