new habits, will not have some difficuties to overcome; but, will any gentleman compare their condition with that of the wretched peasantry of Ireland, having only a scanty supply of bad food, and exposed to all the misery arising from that state of gradual suffering which is the only positive check to population in old countries.

Sir, I contend that it will be doing an essential service to the country, to adopt a measure which shall operate as a relief to such a condition of the poorer classes. And when the honourable member for Newark tells us, that the true wealth of a country consists in keeping at home those who consume its productions, does he forget, that by persons going abroad and employing their skill and their capital in undertakings, in which they cannot be so well employed at home, they create a commerce which, but for them, would never have existed, and which, in the end, affords employment to the industry and capital of the people at home? The honourable member seems to imagine it impossible to create a population, to the full extent of the means to be found of supporting it. He must therefore, think, that China is the country of the world in the best condition; and that Ireland would be in a better condition, if its population were ten-fold what it now is. I do not dispute the doctrine of the honourable member, that the wealth of a state consists in its population, and in that, leaving every other circumstance out of consideration, the extent of Ireland and its fertility are sufficient to support a population of ten-fold its present amount. But, Sir, the honourable gentleman who is the opponent of all theorists, goes beyond all the theorists, when he states such a proposition, and leaves out of his consideration the changes which must take place in every respect in the country, before such a population could be provided for.

I do not deny the truth of the abstract proposition, that Ireland might be made to support a population as dense as

that of Middlesex; but it could only be done by finding capital, and devising the means of giving that population employment. The honourable member has quoted Lord Bacon, who is, undoubtedly, a very high authority; but, in doing so, he ought to have recollected, that the same great authority has also stated, that there is no abstract proposition which is universally true. A recommendation of that great man, made in another of his works, will shew the propriety of this observation. Speaking of the idleness which exists in England and in most parts of Europe, he says, "if a man has nothing else to do, let him plant a tree." Now, nothing can appear more wise or more prudent than that, if a man be idle, he should plant a tree; because, in a country like this, where timber is in great request, it would in the course of time become of value. But let the same man migrate to the wilds of Canada, and there the recommendation would be, to cut down a tree; and this is an illustration of the error of attempting to apply theories at all times, and without reference to the actual state of the country.

I will not pursue the subject of colonization and of emigration further than to observe, that my right honourable friend, who has paid so much attention to the subject, and who has furnished us with such important statistic information, is justified in expecting that we shall receive the proposition which he is about to submit. In that proposition I cannot entirely concur; because I cannot go the full length of thinking, that the country can be entirely relieved from its present distress by any practicable measure of emigration. I do not say that it ought not to be one of the measures adopted, in reference to the general system, with regard to the improvement of the condition of the paupers of this country; but, for the State to undertake to convey large bodies of the pauper population from this country to other lands, is a step surrounded by difficulties greater

than any which my right honourable friend seems to contemplate.

Now, Sir, in my opinion, a system of emigration is only wise and prudent, when those who emigrate carry with them the means and the capital necessary for their employment. It is only the connection of property with population, that can render emigration useful to this country, or beneficial to the colonists. It is only such a principle of emigration that can strengthen the colonies, benefit the empire from which they proceeded, and open new markets to the mother country, by multiplying the consumption of her products. Any principle different from this would only increase the amount of misery.

ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT THE OPENING OF THE SESSION-DISTRESS OF THE PRODUCTIVE INTERESTS-CURRENCY-WAR BETWEEN RUSSIA

AND TURKEY-GREECE-PORTUGAL-MEXICO.

February 4, 1830.

An Address, in answer to the Speech from the Throne, having been moved by the Earl of Darlington, and seconded by Mr. Ward, the member for London, an Amendment was moved by Sir Edward Knatchbull, expressive of the Distress which generally prevailed amongst all the Productive Interests of the country. Another amendment was also announced by the Marquis of Blandford, a third by Mr. Protheroe, and a fourth by Mr. O'Connell.

Mr. HUSKISSON began by observing, that there had been already one amendment proposed, and notice given of no fewer than three others. He was far from censuring the practice of proposing amendments on such occasions as the present. He came, he said, down to the House altogether ignorant of the contents of the Speech from the Throne, and equally ignorant of the intention of the honourable baronet, or of any other gentleman, to pro

pose an amendment; but an amendment having been moved, and a debate having arisen upon it, he felt himself called upon, without reference to the possibility of prospective arrangements which might be for consideration hereafter, to express his opinion on the subject, as to the simple matter of fact, as regarded the state of the country,-which was the real question at issue. If the question were as to any particular mode of relief, it would be unequally unwise and unbecoming to go into it, when assembled to thank his Majesty for his gracious speech from the Throne; accordingly, from any thing of that sort he should cautiously abstain. But, after what he had heard from the noble mover and from the honourable seconder of the proposed address after all that had fallen from those who had since addressed the House-and, from his own knowledge, he felt bound to state his opinion, that the real facts of the case, as regarded the public distress, were more correctly stated in the amendment moved by the honourable baronet, the member for Kent, than in the address proposed by the noble lord.

Entertaining that opinion, whatever might be his wish to abstain from saying any thing upon this occasion, he was no longer at liberty to support an address which did not contain so accurate an estimate of the actual state of the country, as was to be found in the amendment. He thought it a material circumstance in the state of universal disquietude and dissatisfaction that prevailed at present, not to provoke a hostile discussion between the representatives of the people and the people themselves, and not to call down on the House of Commons reproach, by understating the distress and difficulty of the time. The best course to be adopted, in order to meet and overcome these difficulties, was to look at and avow them fairly. He did not despair of seeing the country restored to a situation of prosperity; but, from all the information which he possessed, he felt satisfied

that there now existed that degree of pressure on the productive classes generally, which, were it to be permanent or long continued, would be incompatible with their continuous existence. He was of opinion that the country-as far as the productive classes were concerned—was in an unsatisfactory and suffering, but he trusted and believed, not in a decaying and falling state. If Parliament looked at the subject properly, and acted as a part of the Speech recommended, he was firmly persuaded they would find themselves fully competent to cope with the existing difficulties, and overcome them. But it was by studying to benefit, to the utmost, the industrious classes, that we could alone lay any solid foundation of public happiness, or revive prosperity.

There were many things difficult to be accounted for in our present condition, but which Parliament would do well to attend to. Some gentlemen attributed the distress to the supposed deficiency in the currency, a proposition which he thought it would be difficult to maintain; for we now saw money more abundant in the metropolis than at any former period. We saw exchequer-bills, producing two and a quarter per cent. interest, selling at a premium of seventy-five shillings, and we saw the low rate at which money was every day borrowed. The fact was, there was a stagnation in several parts of our productive industry, and an overflow of capital in others. It was a cause of satisfaction to observe, that the produce of our exports last year exceeded the produce of the exports of any preceding year; but, at the same time, he knew that the capital and property so employed had, in many instances, been unproductive. It would be difficult to reconcile the two facts of a deficient currency and a low rate of profit. In almost all branches of productive industry the profits were so small as not to compensate for the amount of capital employed, or afford sufficient support to the individuals whose labour