Page:History of the Anti corn law league - Volume 2.pdf/368

 lord; and they were ready to avail themselves of every opportunity as it arose, to propose practical measures for the improvement of the condition of the labouring classes. He had not by his measures hitherto gained the confidence of the opposition benches, while, if he was to believe the honourable baronet who represented Essex, he had lost the confidence of the great agricultural body. How that might be he knew not; but, if that confidence could be repurchased by a single expression of regret for the course pursued by his government, he would not consent to make it, feeling as he did that the course was productive of essential benefit to every class of the community, and without inflicting the slightest injury upon the agricultural interest.

Lord John Russell replied principally with reference to the Corn Law question, which he earnestly impressed on the House should be settled in a time of tranquillity and prosperity, and directed himself, in conclusion, to the subject of confidence in ministers:—

"That the measures of the right honourable baronet should have lost for him the confidence of honourable gentlemen on his own side of the House was not surprising, while they bad not been of that character to secure for him that of bis opponents. But though he agreed with the honourable member for Essex, that he had, considering the understanding upon which he had supported the right honourable baronet in obtaining his present position, grounds for withdrawing his confidence, he disagreed with him, and those who thought with him, that the importation of foreign cattle and Canadian corn bad injured the farmers of this country. He did not believe that those importations had been at all injurious; those importations he believed had had but little effect on the markets of this country, but if those imports were greater, he was of opinion it would be for the benefit rather than the injury of this country. The agricultural interest must look for their prosperity to the prosperity of the country generally. So far he differed from the hon. gentleman opposite. (Hear, hear.) But when they went on to say that they had been led to expect that the present government would be in favour of protection, and against free trade, he thought they were fully justified in that observation. (Cheers.) In fact, the truth of it was undeniable. The speeches of the right honourable baronet (Sir Robert Peel) and his friends in 1839 and 1840 tended to produce, and no doubt