[16] Do. p. 8.

Again—­

“If you disturb agriculture, and divert the employment of capital from the land, you may not increase your foreign trade—­for that is a thing to dwell under existing circumstances—­but will assuredly reduce the home trade, by reducing the means to meet the demand, and thus permanently injure yourselves also."[17]

    [17] Do. p. 13.

Again—­

“I have come to the conclusion, that the existing system of an ascending and descending scale of duties, should not be altered:  and that, moreover, we should as much as possible make ourselves independent of a foreign supply—­and not disturb the principle of the existing corn-laws—­of these corn-laws, which, when you have an abundance of your own, exclude altogether the foreign supply—­and when the price rises in this country, freely admits it."[18]

    [18] Speech, p. 15.

Again—­he quoted the following remarkable language of Lord Melbourne on the 11th June 1840—­

“Whether the object be to have a fixed duty, or an alteration as to the ascending and descending scale, I see clearly and distinctly, that that object will not be carried without a most violent struggle—­without causing much ill-blood, and a deep sense of grievance—­without stirring society to its foundations, and leaving behind every sort of bitterness and animosity.  I do not think the advantages to be gained by the change are worth the evils of the struggle."[19]

    [19] Do. p. 18.

And Sir Robert Peel concluded the foregoing summary of his views, on the great questions then proposed to the country for its decision, in the following words:—­

“I ask your free suffrages, with this frank and explicit declaration of my opinions."[20]

    [20] Do. p. 18.

On this, there occur to us three questions—­

(1st.) Was this, or was it not, a frank and explicit declaration of his opinions?  And, (2d.) Did it, or did it not, as tested by the result of the general election, completely satisfy the country? (3d.) In what respect has the subsequent conduct of Sir Robert Peel been inconsistent with these declarations?  And we echo the stern enquiry of the Duke of Wellington, for “the when, the where, and the how,” “of Sir Robert Peel’s deceiving his supporters or the country”—­and “pause for a reply.”  Failing to receive any—­for none can be given, except in the negative—­we shall proceed to condense the substance of this memorable manifesto into a few words; offer some general observations designed to assist in forming a correct judgment upon the topics discussed in the ensuing pages; and then give as fair an outline as we know how to present, of the “DOINGS” of Sir Robert Peel and his Government, by way of comment upon, and illustration of his previous and preparatory “SAYINGS.”