Corn Law. If the last resolution had been thus worded, "That it is expedient that all restrictions on corn should be gradually abolished," the speech of Sir Robert Peel would have been an admirable one in support of it. After a brief reply from Mr. Villiers, the House divided, when there appeared:—
| For the motion | 122 |
| Against it | 254 |
| ——— | |
| Majority against it | 132 |
It was clear from this debate, that the repeal of the Corn Law, or the substitution of revenue for protective duties, waited only for such an emergency as would be created by a depression of commerce sufficient to lessen materially the productiveness of the Customs and Excise; or for such a deficiency of harvest, with accompanying high prices of food, as would add popular clamour to the existing agitation for free trade; or for the expulsion of monopolists from the representation of a few of the large counties and the most important towns. The argument was brought to this:—"The nation is in comparative prosperity now; be quiet till calamity comes." The state physicians would not prescribe until the disease came to its height. Wait for bad trade; wait for a greatly falling revenue; wait for a bad harvest; wait for starvation prices; such were the suggestions made by men who called themselves statesmen!
It was gratifying to observe the steady, although not rapid increase of Mr. Villiers' supporters. The following shows the comparative strength of the free-trade party in 1844 and 1845:—
| 1844— | for Mr. Villiers' motion | 126 |
| Paired | 11 | |
| Absent | 28 | |
| ———— | ||
