between 51s. and 58s., and because they were now lower, the farmers were called on to withdraw confidence from him. To disprove this, he read an extract from his speech of last year, which showed that he had expressly disclaimed the possibilty of guaranteeing by legislation a remunerating price for corn. It was not the law which had caused the fall of prices—that he attributed to the depression of trade and commerce, the prosperity of which would better secure prices than any Corn Law whatever. It was hardly fair to try the present law by the circumstances of last year, during which great speculations in corn had been undertaken, on the faith that the harvest would be a defective one, a belief which had been much encouraged by motions and speeches in the house, Lord Palmerston, in July last, had ventured to predict that if parliament did not meet in the ensuing November, the government would bare to let out the bonded corn. Under such circumstances of encouragement to undue speculation, the law had not received a fair trial. And as to the objection that it operated unfavourably to the employment of British shipping, returns showed that it had a fair share and chance. The Canada Corn Bill was a part of the measures which had been planned last year; and though they were aware that the re-agitation of the question would be disagreeable, they had resolved to keep faith with the people of Canada. On the whole, he contended that they had been actuated by regard to the public interests in the proposition of their measures, and had thereby risked political friendship and support; and they were not acting in good faith, and were not seeking to provide for themselves a shelter from political storms."
It was twelve o'clock before Sir Robert concluded this speech. The scene that ensued is thus described in the papers of the time:—
"By this time the patience of the monopolists was completely exhausted, and although Mr. Cobden was expected to reply, it is not at all probable that he would have been listened to with even ordinary patience, notwithstanding the vehement protestations made to the contrary. Accordingly, Milner Gibson moved an adjournment of the debate, on the ground that members representing large manufacturing constituencies were not only anxious, but bound in duty to assign reasons for the vote they intended to give. This he considered no more than fair, considering the indulgence extended to the other side of the house; but however proper these remarks may appear to impartial observers, they proved the prelude to a measure of turmoil, noise, and confusion, such as has rarely, if ever, been witnessed in the House of Commons. In the Sun of Saturday we find the following sketch penned, no doubt, by an eye-witness:—
