proposed by Lord John Russell was rejected by a vote of 302 to 202, and another amendment, proposing the reading of the Bill on that day six months, having been thrown out on the 18th of April by a vote of 285 to 188, the third reading was carried by a majority of 130 on the 30th of May. No debate took place in the Lords until the third reading, when the Bill passed by a majority of 71.

The weak and vacillating Whigs now saw how good a chance of popularity they had lost. They were indignant at finding that the Protectionist Minister had outwitted them by capping their timid advances towards free trade by a scheme which, while it inflicted no injury upon his party, constituted a really bold and sweeping reform of the tariff. Their pamphleteers delighted to recall the saying of Mr. Canning, that Peel was the sublime of mediocrity. They praised his many domestic The amended copy of the proposed tariff was laid on virtues, his adroit talents in debate, his steady appli- the table of the House of Commons on the 5th of May; cation to business, his freedom from jobbing, and his and its details explained by the Premier in a speech "plain habits," only to sneer at him as a second-rate which served to bring out still more strongly the man." They said he had originated nothing except the anomalous position in which he was placed. His speech London police; that no speech of his had ever lived was a long elaborate statement distinguished for its beyond the day; that no sayings' of his were quoted, or excellent temper, its clearness, and, above all, by its remembered for their wit or their wisdom; that all singularity as delivered by the Conservative leader. He about him, like his person, was common-place; second- went over all the sections of his subject, showing how hand, "well got up." They said that the agricultural the removal of prohibitions would benefit everybody; kings of Moab little thought, during the elections of how the reduction of duties on raw materials would 1841, when they called him to a high place to bless their stimulate trade; how the diminished duties on provisions wheat and their short-horns, that he would so soon take would make living cheaper for all; and how the lesser up his reduced scale and his tariff to confound their protection to manufactures would injure none. For the expectations, and to make them eat their own words, agricultural interest he had to offer cheap foreign clover and to vote against their own motions. With some show seeds. The duties on wood came next. In consequencə of reason it was said that all the great leading measures of the high duties on foreign wood entered for home conwhich have been advocated and carried since he came sumption, it had been frequently imported into the into public life, had been opposed and mistaken by him country, then re-exported to France and Germany, and for sources of mischief; while afterwards, ninety-nine finally re-imported as furniture on a payment of 20 per people out of a hundred (and himself amongst them) cent. It was not surprising that the cabinet trade of hailed them as great advances in the paths of liberty, this country had, under these circumstances, been transjustice, and humanity. They taunted him with the ferred to Germany and France. The reduction of the fact that he began by opposing Mr. Horner's cele- duties on dye-woods and ores was also calculated to be of brated resolutions on the currency, and ended by him- great benefit to manufacturers. The high duty on self carrying the return to cash payments; that he copper ores had been found to operate in such a manner opposed Sir Samuel Romilly's humane attempts to that copper smelted in bond in this country could not be simplify our criminal laws, and to mitigate their re-used here; while copper was actually imported which volting severity; and then, many years later, took had been smelted in England and France with our own some hesitating steps in the same direction, but, satisfied fuel. Similar advantages were anticipated from the or alarmed with a few digests, left its revolting severi- reduced duties on oils, which are extensively used in our ties untouched and unrebuked. They reminded him manufactures. While one of the chief—whale oil—had that he had twitted Mr. Canning, in 1827, with his risen from £60 or £70 a tun in a few years to £95, or inability to resist the abolition of the Test and Cor- even £111 a tun, in the United States it could be proporation Act, and was himself, under the compulsion of cured for similar purposes at 3s. or 4s. Coming to Lord John Russell, no later than the following year timber, the Minister reminded the House of the celewhen Secretary of State, an example of the very inability brated dictum of Mr. Deacon Hume, that we have he had denounced; that for the first twenty years of his abundance of untaxed coal, abundance of untaxed iron, political life he was the uncompromising opponent of and that we only wanted abundance of untaxed wood, Catholic Emancipation, and yet suddenly opened the in order to be provided cheaply with the three great sessions of 1829 with an unrestricted Emancipation Bill; primary raw materials of employment and necessary that in 1826 he approved of educating the Irish Pro- consumption. Entering into further details, he said testant and Catholic children together, and of giving that he found beef, fresh or slightly salted, was absothem Scripture extracts as school books-in 1832 he lutely prohibited; he proposed to admit it at 8s. per cwt. disapproved-in 1835 he re-approved-and in 1842 he Lard, an important article in the consumption of the united both opinions by approving in words, and dis-poor, and for manufacturing purposes, would be admitted couraging by deeds, this system; and finally, that in 1815 he defended, in 1833 he denounced, and in 1842 he imposed an income tax.

Their taunts, however, though true enough, had little practical effect. The Income Tax Bill passed, after considerable opposition in the Commons. An amendment

at 2s. per cwt., instead of 8s. ; salt beef at 8s., instead of 12s.; hams at 14s. per cwt., instead of 28s.; herrings— a fish in which the poor were most interested-would be admitted at 10s. the barrel, instead of 20s. In the true spirit of free trade, he answered those who anticipated injury to our own herring fisheries from this change by

A.D. 1842.]

SIR ROBERT PEEL'S TARIFF BILL.

577

"to my

asking why the inhabitants of the north of Scotland Sir Robert caused some merriment by producing a letter should not be able to compete with the Norwegians for from a smuggler-" not addressed," he said, the supply of Ireland; adding "I say, reduce the duty self, of course," but a bona-fide letter written by a man on timber, enable the fisherman to build a better boat, of large means and capital in regular intercourse with in order that he may go further to sea and navigate in London. It was dated December, 1841. After offering rougher weather, and then he will be able to compete his services on the goods for a certain port, the Premier with foreign fishermen. He has as much industry, as read the conclusion of the writer as follows: "I am great skill, and by exposing him to a certain amount of able to forward to you every week blondes and laces (I competition, you apply a stimulus to greater exertion mean articles manufactured at Lille, Arras, Caen, than is now called for from him." In the same Chantilly, &c.), at a very low premium, by the indirect way he showed the effect of the reduction on vege- channel. The goods would be delivered in London the tables. The Government had come to the conclusion same week of the reception. . . for which articles prices

that the duty on hops was extravagant, and it was to be reduced from £8 4s. to £4 10s. He also devoted a considerable portion of his statement to convincing those who feared the reduction of the duties on live cattle, that their anticipations were groundless. He told his agricultural friends that it was from Holstein alone that any great supplies of cattle could be brought; and that they might be certain that not a single ox, fat or lean, would cross the Bay of Biscay. Inquiries had taught him that the trade of feeding lean cattle had become quite profitless, except for the sake of the manure. Lean cattle from the Continent would mend that. In proof that high duties did not protect the home manufacturer, VOL. VII.-No. 361.

would have to be determined, but certainly a great deal under your Custom House duties." "Is it not clear," asked the Minister, triumphantly, "that it would be more beneficial to the domestic manufacturer that he should know the extent of the competition to which he is subjected; that he should be aware of it, and not be exposed to an illicit, unseen competition, against which he can take no precautions?"

He then told the House that the case of the straw-plait manufacturers had called for the serious attention of the Government, as one in which they had found it impossible to resist the appeal for protection at the expense of the consumer. "They were," he said, mostly women

and children living in country districts, and on representations made on their behalf, the duty had been increased in the amended tariff from 5s. to 7s. 6d. in the pound; but I wish," he continued, "to convince them of the delusiveness of that security they ask. At present the duty on the raw material in straw, to be used in plaiting, is not more than 1d. per pound; the duty on the manufactured article is the extravagant one of 17s. 6d. per pound. It is so light an article, that there are great facilities for introducing it. I give the House a practical proof of the manner of introducing it. There is the straw introduced for manufacture, and this is subjected only to 1d. per pound on its introduction." Sir Robert Peel here exhibited a small bundle of bleached and cut straw, about eight inches in length, and of the thickness of a man's wrist, neatly bound up, such as is seen in the straw bonnet shop-windows. "In this straw," he continued, "intended to be introduced at such a very low rate of duty, is enclosed the article which is charged on its admission with a duty of 17s. 6d. a pound. Now observe," and with these words he tore the binding from one end of the bundle of straw, and from the centre of it took out a neat small roll of strawplait, about the thickness of the thumb, which had been concealed inside the bundle, a proceeding which caused some surprise and mirth in the House. Such, he said, were the grounds of the change which it was his intention to carry through; adding, "I know that many gentlemen who are strong advocates for free trade may consider that I have not gone far enough. I believe that on the general principle of free trade there is now no great difference of opinion, and that all agree in the general rule that we should purchase in the cheapest market, and sell in the dearest." Loud cheers from the opposition benches here interrupted him. Turning in the direction of the cheerers, he said, "I know the meaning of that cheer. I do not now wish to raise a discussion on the corn laws or the sugar duties. I have stated the grounds, on more than one occasion, why I consider these exceptions to the general rule, and I will not go into the question now. I know that I may be met with the complaints of gentlemen opposite of the limited extent to which I have applied the general principle to which I have adverted to these important articles. thought after the best consideration I could give to the subject that if I proposed a greater change in the corn laws than that which I submitted to the consideration of the House, I should only aggravate the distresses of the country, and only increase the alarm which prevailed among important interests. I think that I have proposed, and the Legislature has sanctioned, as great a change in the corn laws as was prudent, considering the engagements existing between landlord and tenant, and also the large amount of capital which has been applied to the cultivation of the soil. Under these circumstances, I think that we have made as great a change as was consistent with the nature of the subject." In conclusion, The Corn-Law Leaguers were grateful for the great he cited the wise and just words of Mr. Huskisson in impetus given by the Minister to free trade principles, 1825, against the needless application of new principles. but were not to be turned aside from the task they He and his colleagues, he said, "had removed prohibi-had undertaken. Free trade in corn-the great reform

tions, reduced duties, balanced between conflicting interests, and endeavoured to make their measures as effective as possible, with as small an amount of individual suffering as was compatible with regard to the public good. He trusted that their measure would act as an example to the whole of Europe, showing that, in the midst of financial difficulties, they were not afraid to attempt a reduction of the import duties, looking to other means to meet those difficulties. Those countries would soon find how profitless was the expense of establishments to keep down the smuggler in the support of their high duties. Comparisons would be drawn between England and the countries where monopolies exist-as Spain, where the system existed in perfection; and there they would see eternal contests, and yet no revenue. It was his belief that Russia would shortly be compelled by the loss of revenue to abandon her attempts to force manufactures. The example of England would insure the general application of just principles, with benefit to herself and to those who were wise enough to follow."

I

The free trade journals did not fail to observe that what they called "this remarkable lecture on free trade, protection, and smuggling, delivered from the Tory Treasury bench," was wound up by the avowal that the principles of free trade were now beyond a question, and that the rule to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest was the only valid theory of commerce. In fact, that rule means only that the merchant should be at liberty to take commodities from where they are cheap, that is, abundant, to dispose of them where they are scarce and dear, and, of course, by so doing, to equalise prices to the ultimate benefit of consumers. In the House some opposition was offered to the reduction of duties on pigs, apples, butter, fish, and other articles; but the Government proposals were in every case affirmed by large majorities. The opposition, however, raised the old question of the sugar duties which had been omitted from the list of changes. The Tariff Bill passed the Commons amid some enthusiastic signs on the 28th of June. The best proof of the philanthropic intentions of the Minister was the dissatisfaction evinced by the more thoroughgoing of his own party. In the House of Lords, Earl Stanhope said the Government had, by this new tariff, thrown open the floodgates of a torrent, which they would find it utterly impossible to stem. He taunted the Minister with having used arguments which appeared to have been taken from one of the "Anti-Corn-Law Circulars," or some speech of the Anti-Corn-Law League, and pronounced his scheme "an ignis fatuus, which would destroy the political power of the man who introduced it." Great meetings were held in Kent, convened by the high sheriff of the county, to denounce the changes in the duty on hops; and similar great meetings were held in other counties, at which resolutions strongly condemnatory of the new tariff, the corn bill, and the income tax, were passed.

SIR ROBERT PEEL'S PRESENT OF VELVETEENS.