cent. He next proceeded
to combat the argument of his opponents, that he had begun at the wrong
end, that he should have reduced the duties on articles of provision,
and have dealt more largely with the corn-laws. Taking the whole tariff,
he contended that it would be seen that the cost of sustenance was
greatly reduced. At that moment, he said, under the old law the duty on
foreign wheat would have been 27s. a quarter; under the new law it
was 13s. Then again, beef, fresh or slightly salted, was absolutely
prohibited; but he proposed to admit it at 8s. a hundred-weight. He
further proposed to lower the duties on lard, hams, salmon, herrings,
hops, &c. Sir Robert then explained that in the amended tariff, on the
representation of straw-plait makers, the duty had been increased from
5s. to 7s 6d. in the pound; at the same time he showed that it would be
no protection to them, inasmuch as the article was of such a nature that
it could be easily smuggled into this country without detection. He then
endeavoured to convince those who feared the reduction of duties on live
cattle, that their alarm was groundless, arguing that the English grower
had substantial security in the quality of the article, and that England
from this circumstance might become an exporting country. Mr. Labouchere
said that he had heard the speech of the right honourable baronet with
great pleasure. At the same time he asserted that the late government
had announced a tariff reform; and that it was only the want of success
which attended its plans with respect to corn, timber, and sugar, which
had prevented it from submitting to the house measures of a similar
character to those now brought forward. After a protracted discussion,
the house divided on the question, that the speaker do now leave the
chair, which was carried by a majority of two hundred and nineteen
against one hundred and fifty-two. On the 13th of May, on the motion of
going into committee on the customs' duties bill, Lord Howick proposed
this resolution:--"That in making a new arrangement of the customs'
duties, it is not expedient to impose different rates of duty upon
the same articles when imported from foreign countries or from British
possessions, in any case where no such difference now exists; and that
in those cases in which such a difference already exists, it is not
expedient that it should be increased." He argued that such differences
would injure the revenue without benefiti