Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Friday, Feb. 20.

Mr. Cumming Bruce resumed the debate. He distrusted the promises that had been made of quiet upon the subsidence of the present anti-corn-law agitation; on the contrarr, he expected fresh confusion would hereafter be generated by the course which bad been pursued by Government upon the subject tefore the house. He, for one, should dissent against that doctrine, by voting against the proposal of Government. Mr. P. Scrope expressed himself in f ivour of the proposals of Government. Mr. Newdegate took exception to the maxim, that we ought to buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market in the worll. It might be applicable to the affairs of trade, but did not hold good when the government of a State was concerned. The conduct of Sir Robert Peel had been most dictatorial; and to the measure before the house he (Mr. Newdjegate) would give his hearty opposition. Mr. Babkly was in favour of the Government measure, deeming it to be an advance i

t owards a healthy fiscal system, warranted by j t he exigences of the country, and free from the c bjections which lay against precipitate change. Captain Bennett expressed his intention to \ ote for the amendment.

Mr. Muntz, though differing from every fection in the house, whether for or against free trade, yet concurred as heartily as any man i n the present measure. Mr. D'lsraeli congratulated Sir Robert 1 'eel upon the equivocal support he was about i o derive from the vote of Mr. Muntz. One point in the present confusion of events was ilear — her Majesty's Ministers had changed their opinions. He was prepared to prove that the system of protection was not the odious thing it had been designated. Sir Robert Peel liad condemned the spirit of party. What was party but the embodiment of public opinion ? fhe charge he had to prefer against the Minister was, not that be had paid too much deference to public opinion, but that he had outraged that opinion. It was monstrous to think of settling a great question by the influence of a heterogeneous mass of converts to policy but uot to principle. It would have been becoming Lord John Russell to propose a free-trade measure, founded upon his previous policy, but it came with ill grace from a minister like Sir Robert Peel to a policy of a totally opposite kind. The debate was then adjourned to Monday, the 23d of February.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NENZC18460725.2.8.3

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 229, 25 July 1846, Page 82

Word count
Tapeke kupu
412

Friday, Feb. 20. Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 229, 25 July 1846, Page 82

Friday, Feb. 20. Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 229, 25 July 1846, Page 82

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert