Page:History of the Anti corn law league.pdf/173

Rh the promotion of general rather than of class interests was the legitimate business of legislation.

On Wednesday, Mr. Villiers brought forward his motion, "That the house resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration the act of George IV. regulating the importation of foreign corn." The motion was seconded by Sir George Strickland. The Earl of Darlington, abused the League, and said the press was in its pay. Mr. Labouchere said, if it were in his power, he would have a duty of from 7s. to 8s. to fall to 1s. when wheat rose to 70s.! but he did not mean to say that, for the sake of compromise, he would not have a higher duty! The debate was adjourned to Thursday, when Lord Morpeth declared in favour of a fixed duty, in preference to the sliding scale. He acknowledged that the people were in deep distress, and, looking at the increasing prevalence and power of their demands, he thought the time was not far distant "when a freer and more unrestricted access of foreign corn would more amply repay the efforts of our domestic industry, and secure and extend the harmony of nations." The debate was adjourned to Friday, April 3rd, when, after Mr. Brotherton, Mr. E. H. Greg, and a few other members had been heard, Sir Robert Peel objected to the motion on three points:—First, That the Corn Laws had nothing to do with the drain of bullion. Second, That there was no inequality of prices under the existing law which would not take place under any other; and, Third, That the depression in trade was not proved, because the exportation of manufactured goods had increased within the last year. An end was put to the debate, by Mr. Bradshaw cunningly moving to adjourn it to Monday week, when it was known that the house would be otherwise occupied. Mr. Warburton, to avoid a division when many of the supporters of the motion had gone away in the belief that the house would not be divided, moved that it should then