petition praying for the total repeal of all protective duties whatever.
Mr. Edmund Ashworth, of Bolton, seconded the amendment that the meeting stand adjourned, and that a committee be appointed to prepare a petition for adoption. The petition now proposed, he said, had been approved of by Mr. Fletcher, because it was it was moderate; his own objection to it was that it wanted energy, and he asked, if that chamber really was in earnest, why it should not speak out? Mr. Fletcher thought the adjournment would be disrespectful to the directors. Mr. Gibb said he would only ask for half the loaf, when they knew they would be refused the whole one. Mr. W. Rawson remarked that a 15 per cent duty, would be as fatal as one of 50. The President said the petition went the whole length of those who asked for an adjournment, only it advocated a gradual transition to entire freedom of trade. Mr. Cobden thought the quotation from Mr. Canning had been peculiarly unhappy, for nothing could be more absurd than the concluding sentence about an "overwhelming" supply of corn. Mr. Tootal agreed with Mr. Cobden as to entire repeal; he only differed as to the time and mode. It was no new thing for the chamber to move in the matter of the Corn Laws.
Mr. Dyer: "How often has it petitioned since 1825?"
Mr. J. B. Smith: "Not during ten years up till 1837."
A long discussion ensued, in which the President, Mr. Sandars, and a very few members opposed the adjournment, mainly on the ground that it would be a loss of time further to discuss the question, and ultimately it was agreed that the original motion and the amendment should be withdrawn, and the meeting be adjourned to that day week.
The proceedings of this meeting, reported at great length in the Manchester Saturday's papers (now employing excellent short-hand writers), and copied into the
