ld take the sense of the house on the policy of imposing any duty
whatever on foreign corn or food imported into this country. A third
notice was given by Mr. Christopher that he should move in committee a
scale of wheat duties, instead of Sir Robert Peel's, imposing a maximum
duty of 25s. when the price is 50s., and a minimum duty of Is. when
the price is 73s., the duty falling by Is., as the price rises by Is.;
except that at the rise of price from 59s. to 60s., the duty falls by
2s. The debate commenced on the 14th, when Sir Robert Peel moved that
the speaker do leave the chair, in order to a committee of the whole
house on the corn-laws. Lord John Russell then brought forward
his amendment, and stated his objections to the sliding-seale. He
remarked:--"The first objection I have to a sliding-scale, is, that a
high, I would say a prohibitory duty, always forms part of it. I could
understand a scale not exceeding 10s. or 12s., and going down to 4s.,
to 3s., or to Is.; but I find that whenever gentlemen speak of a
sliding-scale, it is of such a nature as to contain a prohibitory duty.
The first duty, when the price is at 50s., and under 51s., is 20s.;
and I shall now proceed to show that that is a prohibitory duty. I
have looked over the papers containing the latest information. From the
information obtained by Mr. Meek, who was sent to the north of Europe
expressly to collect information on the subject, it appears that the
original price of Dantzie wheat, when brought from the interior of
the country, is 35s.; that the charges, which seem to satisfy that
gentleman's mind amount in all to 10s. 6d.; thus making the price at
which it could be sold in England in ordinary years 45s. 6d. If you add
to that the proposed duty of 20s., you make the entire price of Dantzie
wheat, 65s. 6d., when the price at home, is 50s.; showing of course that
20s. amounts to a prohibitory duty. In the same way at Odessa, as stated
in the consul's returns, the price would be 26s.; adding to which 10s.
for freight, and some further charges, which cannot be taken or less
than 5s., as on the former occasions, and adding then the proposed
duty of 20s., you would have the price up to 61s-, without counting the
profit of the merchant who had to deal with this corn; and therefore,
though you may say that you have reduced the duty to 20s., to 19s., and
to 18s., yet in all three instances it can be shown that the duty is
prohibitory; and that when the pr