ABSTRACT
The debate was shared in by a number of members; amongst them was Sir Robert Peel, who said that to encourage the idea that a mere transference of a portion of the county-rate to the consolidated fund would be any benefit, would be to practise a delusion on the agricultural interest. But support for Mr. Miles's motion had been sought on other grounds than a mere transference of a sum of £250,000, which would involve the additional charge of £400,000 on the consolidated fund. Reading a circular from a local protection society, he drew the conclusion that the object of the motion, in general, was to censure the financial policy of the government, and to stop their measures. He did not repent of the course he had adopted since he assumed office. He remembered Sheffield, with its unlet houses; the tales of people living on the putrid bodies of animals ; of Paisley, with its thousands who rose daily without food; and when he assumed office, he had done so, not for the sake of favouring any one class, but of consulting the interests of the entire community. The house had given its assent to the income-tax, which it would not have done if the country did not approve of their measures. Compare the present state of commerce and trade with 1842, and, whatever may be said of the effects of good harvests, the influence of commercial reforms could not be denied, which, by promoting consumption, benefited agriculture. Thinking extreme protection and prohibition wrong, he defended moderate protection as necessary, not on principles of commercial policy, but as essential to a state of things where great interests had grown up, and whose injury would be that of the community at large.
