unobjectionable. For all these reasons, | he trusted the House would give his hon. colleague leave to bring in the bill. should abandon an unrestricted trade, and have recourse to a system of restriction, but in what manner they could diminish the distress, arising out of a trade diverted from its natural channels by themselves? The question was, whether they were to mitigate those evils which their own previous interference had occasioned? There could be no doubt of the distress of Co Mr. Wallace said, that if there was one species of interposition more injudicious than another, it was that which had for its object to dictate to the master the rate of wages he was to pay his servant. No case of particular exception had been made out; and as to the case of Spital-ventry at the present moment. But it had fields, he thought that it would have been much better, if, instead of an enactment, recourse had been had to the vigour of the law, and the authority of the magisHe approved of that part of the bill which related to half-pay apprentices; but he could not on that account consent to adopt the rest, which was so highly objectionable. trates. Mr. Dugdale said, that having acted as a magistrate in the neighbourhood in question, he must declare that the distress was now arrived at such a pitch that he really believed the most alarming consequences would ensue, if some steps were not immediately taken. Though he was reluctant to interfere between the master and workmen, he considered the present a peculiar case. All the petitioners sought for was, to be placed on the same footing as workmen in the metropolis. been said that it was the nature of trade to fluctuate, and that if they were to interfere whenever there was a temporary distress in any branch of trade, they might devote their whole attention to this subject alone. It appeared, however, from the evidence, that this was not an ordinary distress. This was given in evidence by all parties, masters and servants. One circumstance, indeed, showed this in the highest degree. In this time of comparative prosperity, the poor rates of Coventry were nineteen shillings in the pound, and one-third of the population were receiving money from the parish. This was alone sufficient to justify the application of a remedy to the evil, if any could be discovered. Many causes had concurred to produce this state of things, but the great cause was that system which had been so fatal and injurious to the landed interest Mr. Fowell Buxton said, he felt some of this country, the system of paying difficulty in delivering his sentiments on wages partly out of the pocket of the this subject; for to all the maxims of master, and partly out of the poor-ratestrade laid down by the two right hon. that system, which, beginning in agricul gentlemen opposite, no answer could be tural districts, had extended itself at last given. All legislative attempts to compel to large manufacturing districts, and had men to be prosperous under pains and long been in operation in Coventry. A penalties, ended in folly and oppression. merchant in London, who had no connecBut the maxims of the right hon. gentle- tion whatever with Coventry, sent down a men did not apply to Coventry; for Co- large order for the manufacture of goods ventry was now employed in a most un- at the rate of 5s. 6d. a week to the worknatural and artificial trade. By whom men; and as long as the remainder of the were the wages of the workmen of Coventry wages of the workmen continued to be paid? By the parishes. A skilful work- paid by the parish, this would continue. man, after working sixteen hours a day, Another source of the evil was half-pay and aided by machinery which was his apprenticeships; this system was indefenown property, could only earn 10s. asible in every point of view. All persons week; and another workman, without any capital, but with equal skill, after working the same number of hours, could only earn 5s. 6d. a week. There was nothing but the poor rates which caused this. The evil would long ago have remedied itself had it not been for the poor rates; for either the workmen would have abandoned the trade, and applied themselves to some other occupation, or the masters must have raised their wages. The question here therefore was, not whether they trained to the weaving trade in Coventry, became necessarily and certainly paupers. This system also by congregating young persons by day and dispersing them by night, gave rise to a system of debauchery and profligacy, which loudly called for the interference of the House. The evidence showed that the distress and the licentiousness were equally without example. This state of things called for the extension of an act already in existence, which in Spitalfields, the district under its ope need of poor rates. It had been said, that one-fourth of a farthing in the yard would not be felt; but there were limits to every thing, and the question was not whether this was a great increase, but whether it was one which the article could bear. In his opinion it was not. Gentlemen seemed to forget the consumer, and that he would not buy the goods at all, if they could not he had at a certain price. With regard to the corn-bill, it was quite unfair to argue, that the object was to raise the price of grain: it was merely to protect the grower from importation and unfair competition. ration, had produced the greatest benefit. It appeared from the testimony of many masters living on the spot, that this act had produced the greatest benefit both to masters and to workmen. The principle of the act was, that if any dispute arose between masters and workmen, respecting the rate of wages, it should be settled by magistrates. This act made any agree ment between the two bodies binding. The consequence was, that whereas in 1816, an agreement was entered into between the masters and workmen of Spitalfields and Coventry, that of Spitalfields was adhered to, and that of Coventry was not. An hon. friend of his had said, that bad consequences had resulted from the Spitalfields act. He could only say, that the people of Spitalfields were ignorant of such evil consequences. No part of the country had exhibited more loyalty and tranquillity than Spitalfields, which had before this act, been the scene of perpetual tumult and disorder. He said that an argument had been urged which he, in point of fact, must admit-and he would leave it to the wisdom of the House whether that argument was strong enough to decide the fate of the bill: it was, that the effect of the bill would be to enhance the price of manufactured goods. It certainly would; but to what extent? to the amount of one-fourth of a farthing per yard. That was the extent, and he would ask, whether it was not more reasonable that those who thought fit to wear silks should pay the fair wages of the labourer who manufactured them, than that the parish should pay him? The system of poor-rates was one which, in the better days of England, was little known it was a system which every friend to the country would wish to remove: it was degrading and demoralizing, calculated to deprive the people of the national feelings of pride and independence, and to fix in their stead base and degrading sentiments, subversive of the freedom, and the virtue of man. He concluded by expressing his intention of supporting the motion of his hon. friend. Mr. Stuart-Wortley resisted the introduction of the bill, because he thought it would set an example to the cloth-weaver, the linen-weaver, and indeed all classes of manufacturers, to come forward with unwarrantable demands. If the principle now contended for could be introduced if magistrates on all occasions could settle the amount of wages-there would be no Mr. Philips said, that so far from all the master-weavers agreeing that the Spitalfields act had been beneficial in its operation, the very first witness examined, Mr. Stephen Wilson, who stated himself largely concerned in the manufacture of Spitalfields goods, was of opinion it had been highly injurious to Spitalfields. This witness had stated several instances of the mischievous consequences of the interference between masters and workmen in Spitalfields. The necessary consequence of interference was, the rendering the magistrate the judge of the reward of the workman, who could know nothing at all of the work. It had been said, that the Spitalfields act had produced quiet. Why, it had produced the quiet of death-the manufacture had been driven from Spitalfields to Cheshire, and if the Spitalfields act were introduced into Cheshire, it would be driven out of Cheshire. Nothing could more decidedly injure these manufactures than to interfere between the masters and their labourers. Nor indeed could he see any reason why labour should not be just as fair a commodity of sale and purchase, as any thing else sold or bought in this country. Why should they introduce a different principle in regard to the wages or price of labour than they adopted in regard to any other matter of sale? His hon. friend proposed to raise that price. And if he did, what would be the consequence? Why, that they would destroy the manufactory altogether. The arguments of his hon. friend seemed to be directed rather against the corn laws generally, than against any thing else. The house well knew that he (Mr. P.) was no friend to the corn bill. All attempts to alter the poor laws had only tended to aggravate the evils complained of. Any real relief to be now extended could only be attained by breaking up a system which had done so much to undermine that native spirit of independence, which was formerly the most distinguishing characteristic of the British nation. Mr. E. Littleton stated, that a very large number of his constituents were deeply interested in this question. He had himself carefully read over the evidence given before the committee appointed to examine the Coventry petitions last year; but the evil appeared to him, not to arise from the causes to which it was traced by his hon. friend, but from the half-pay apprentice system. He hoped the house would not be induced to apply to evils professedly temporary, a remedy which must be permanent. Mr. Curwen suggested to his hon. friend the propriety of withdrawing his motion. In its present state, the House was unable to extend relief to sufferings which he was sure it compassionated. If, therefore, his hon. friend would amend his bill, on his again bringing it in, parliament would feel disposed to further and assist his views. By doing so, he would convince his constituents, that there was a decided feeling in the house in their favour, although, from the present state of the bill, it could not grant that relief which it was called upon to do. Mr. Peter Moore, in reply, observed, that Mr. Stephen Wilson, the witness alluded to by an hon. gentleman, was an exporter and a capitalist, who, of consequence, was only interested in obtaining goods at a cheap rate for exportation, and had no concern with the manner in which the workman was paid. But when goods were exported at a cheap rate by means of paying workmen out of the poor-rates, we were only making the people of the continent a present of all that was taken from the poor-rates. He had done what he considered his duty, in endeavouring, as far as possible, to remedy the evils of the system which prevailed in Coventry. Leaving it to the responsible ministers of the crown, to take some measures to save that city from starvation, he should, as such was the sense of the House, withdraw his motion for the present. The motion was then withdrawn. SINKING FUND.] Mr. Grenfell, in rising to call the attention of the House to the motion he was about to submit, said, he did not regret that from various causes it had been postponed from day to day; because the delay which had taken place had permitted him to acquire far ther information on the subject, and to make such alteration in the form of his motion as he originally intended it should stand, as had removed the objections of some of his hon. friends, who were at first not entirely satisfied with it. The subject of that motion was one upon which he had addressed the House at some length in 1814-five years back. The object he had now in view was to convince that House of the expediency, and to urge to the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer, and to those at the head of the financial department of this country, not merely the expediency, but, looking to the state she was now in, the absolute necessity of applying that state fund which was generally termed the sinking fund, in diminution of the loan about to be raised for the service of the current year; which application, he would observe, was provided for in the act which was read from their table on the preceding day, by a particular clause, called Mr. Fox's clause; it having been suggested to Mr. Pitt in the year 1786, by that great and ever-to-be-lamented statesman. Before, however, he proceeded to state the general grounds of his motion, and feeling anxious to guard against the possibility of misunderstanding, as to any opinions he might be supposed to entertain in relation to that measure of finance called the Sinking fund, of which, unfortunately, little more than the name now remained, he would beg leave to state what were the principles of its formation. The principles upon which it was founded by Mr. Pitt, in 1786, were soon afterwards affected by a material change in the state of the country-a transition from peace to war. They were, indeed, principles of which no gentleman who now heard him, was a more warm admirer than himself; he having always considered the sinking fund, as established by Mr. Pitt between 1786 and 1792, the most splendid feature in that statesman's financial character. By the act of 1786, the existing excess of our income beyond our expenditure, to the amount of 1,000,000l., was applied and secured (so far as a transaction of this nature could be said or considered to be secured) to the gradual extinction, on the principle of compound interest, of a debt of 238,000,000l. But in 1792, it became necessary to alter, in some degree, the provisions of the act of 1786; inasmuch as the expenses incurred by one or two years of war were sufficient to swallow up all the savings accumulated in clear; that, united to former embarrassthe six years before. Accordingly, then, ments, there had been of late years great the act of 1792 provided, that every new profusion in our public expenditure. The or future loan should be accompanied by effects of those two causes combined, had such an increase of the revenue arising been almost to sap the principles upon: from taxation (which in a country like which Mr. Pitt had legislated, and to leave this was the only legitimate source of that no sinking fund at all. In the last year, increase) as should be equivalent, not the excess of our expenditure beyond our. only to pay the interest of such loan, income was somewhere about 13,500,000l., but to provide also a fund of one per cent, taking and considering a sum of about or in short a sinking fund, which should 15,000,000l. as part of our expenditure. in time extinguish the original debt itself. under the head of the sinking fund. So It was then calculated that the period of that with a nominal fund, for that was the effecting such extinction could in no in- fact, of 15,000,000l. we had last year, in stance exceed the term of 45 years. The reality, a sinking fund of not more than act of 1786 implied an existing excess of 1,600,000l. Certainly, he was not at any income; that of 1792, provided for the time one of those who were inclined to extinction of every new debt incurred on take a gloomy view of the state of the every new loan, by making the loan carry country; but nothing was more dangerwith it the means of its own annihilation. ous, in contemplating a subject of this. In all these instances, the excess of in- nature, than self-deception. It would uncome beyond expenditure was made the doubtedly give him great satisfaction if he vital principle of the extinction of debt. could flatter himself that the revenue of And it would be found, that such excess of the present year would equal that of the income was the only principle, after all last. It was also to be remembered, that the reasoning and research which had provision was to be made this year for the been exhausted upon the subject-upon loan which the chancellor of the exchewhich the reduction of debt, either of a quer was contemplating. In taking that public or private nature, ever was, ever into view, was it not probable that the could, or ever would be effected. These whole of the sinking fund would be reprinciples, then, adopted by Mr. Pitt on quired for the charges likely to accrue the two acts of 1786 and 1792, in creating from it? And if so, there would not be the sinking fund, were pursued and acted one single shilling reserved for the reduc upon from 1786 to 1817, a period of 27 tion of the national debt. True it was, years. Such was the sinking fund. What that 100,000,000%. stock stood in the is it now? In the year 1814 came the names of the commissioners for the replan of the right hon. gentleman oppo- demption of that debt, which the right site-a plan immediately adopted by par- hon. gentleman, who never failed to adliament, and one to which he (Mr. Gren-vert to the circumstance, called a treasure; fell) gave his most zealous and unqualified support; and the opinion he then expressed of its merits was one which nothing since had, in the slightest degree, shaken or altered. In the state of exhaustion in which the country then found herself, after twenty years of war and difficulties, the distressing nature of which was only to be rivalled by the firmness, endurance, and unshrinking fortitude with which they were borne, he did not then think, nor was he now of opinion, that in such a state of things, it would have been wise or expedient to add to the weight which the nation was already sinking under, by additional taxation. He thought it better to give the country a little breathing time, before her burthens were increased. Whether this view of the subject was a right or wrong one, he would not now inquire. One thing was very and well he might, for it was such a treasure as no nation ever possessed before! [A laugh]. Though those commissioners were sent four times a week into the city to purchase stock, let it be remembered, they bought with borrowed money-the money borrowed from the loan-contractors. For their money they got stock; with their new stock they bought old stock. This was creating a new debt for no other purpose than to destroy an old one: selling new stock cheap, in order to buy old stock dear; buying at a very high rate of interest to pay off a debt contracted at a very low one. Yet this was what his majesty's ministers were doing. It was mere delusion; an attempt to impose their system on the country for a new sinking fund, when it was the very reverse of one. This was the course of operations prosecuted by means of a fund which was re presented to the country as applicable to the extinction of 800,000,000l. of debt. The whole machinery, so wisely constructed in the year 1786, was now erect and in full play without any useful effect. He might indeed say, that it was worse than useless, and productive of no profit except to a class of individuals who contributed nothing to the service of the state. It was true, that loan-contractors, and speculators in the public funds, might be, and were in numerous instances, very respectable and conscientious men; but they were not persons to whose care the interests of the country should be intrusted. The question therefore now was, whether the House would sanction the continuance of a system of intricacy and delusion that could produce no beneficial consequences; or whether it would, by the vote of this night, put an end to it? He was prepared to contend, that it would have been highly advantageous if the sinking fund had been applied to, in aid of all the loans contracted since the year 1793, under the power given by Mr. Fox's clause in the act of 1786. According to a calculation which he had made, the saving which would have been thus effected, from the period he had mentioned up to the year 1813, did not amount to less than 20,000,000l. He held in his hand a paper showing the amount of saving to the public that might have been derived upon the loan of 1815, if the commissioners for the redemption of the national debt had been allowed to invest the sinking fund in the new stock created by that loan. The capital sum which might have been so saved was upwards of 2,000,000l., and the annual interest 77,000l. An hon. friend of his had moved for some other returns, which were not yet presented, respecting the loans of 1813 and 1814; but from his recollection of the premium which they bore, he was satisfied that a similar profit to the extent of several millions would have accrued to the public, had the sinking fund been resorted to in those cases. The only ground on which his principle was opposed was, that the effect of the system acted upon since 1797 was to keep up the price of the funds. He did not deny that in time of war, and so long as we were a borrowing country, the high price of the funds was a great advantage, as we obtained loans on easier terms; but that advantage became very doubtful when we entered, as he hoped we one day should, on the work of redemption. The facility of redemption must be increased in proportion to the lowness of their price. But whatever might be said on this subject, he denied altogether the foundation of the argument, and contended, that the system had no such effect as that of raising the price. At the end of this year we should probably have a sinking fund of 15,000,000!.; which, invested in stock at 70l., would amount to about 21,000,000l. It was his opinion, strengthened and confirmed by all he had heard or seen, that whether the sinking fund was thus invested or applied to the service of the year, the price of stock would remain the same. Its price did not depend on any of those mysterious causes to which it was often attributed, but permanently, like the prices in all markets, on the proportion on which the demand bore to the supply. He was aware, that many respectable persons differed from him in this opinion, and that some of them were not under any bias from self-interest. Others, however, who were considered as great authority on this question, were under that bias; or, if they were not, they were not composed of the same materials as other men. Now, loan-contractors were not in his judgment exactly that description of persons by whose advice in these matters a chancellor of the exchequer ought to be governed. In 1814, the right hon. gentleman had stated in his place, that, having conferred with a number of gentlemen contracting for the loan with regard to the propriety of acting on his (Mr. Grenfell's) suggestion, they all, with one exception only, signified their disapprobation of it, and recommended a loan of 24,000,000l. instead of 12,000,000l. The exception to which he alluded was that of his honourable friend (Mr. Ricardo), who, greatly to his credit, observed to the chancellor of the exchequer, that if he considered his own interest merely, he must agree with his brother contractors; but if he were to consult the advantage of the country, he should advise the application of the sinking fund, and a loan of 12,000,000l. only. Perhaps, at a time when large loans were regularly raised, such a proceeding might have been inexpedient; but now that they were comparatively small, and of less frequent occurrence, he could not believe that the right hon. gentleman was so infatuated as to adhere to the present useless and unprofitable system. Reserving, however, |