Page images
PDF
EPUB

the supply? Certainly not; for it would vantages were obvious; but how long those cut off one source of present supply with- disadvantages were expected to last, they out adding any other adequate to our in-had not been told. He thought the assercreasing wants.

tion quite too vague to satisfy their lord-
ships, that the country was capable of
growing corn sufficient for its consump-
tion, because the assertion of that capacity
did not state whether it referred to the
present amount of our population or to
our probable increase. In what ratio to
our population, therefore, he would ask,
was this capacity of production conceived
to exist, or what amount of capital should
be employed to render that capacity ef-
fective? When this capacity was asserted,
he thought it should be also shewn what
sacrifice of national wealth would be ne-
cessary to render our produce of corn
adequate to the wants of our population..
For it was a very material question to
consider, whether, in order so to extend
our agriculture, capital might not be with-
drawn from other objects in which it was
likely to be more providently employed
for the benefit of the nation. For instance,
it would be most preposterous to hold out
an inducement to capitalists to abandon
pursuits yielding a profit to the country,
in order to embark in the culture of lands、
incapable of producing corn without con-
siderable expense, because the amount of
such expense could never be fairly drawn
from the consumer by a price which corn
could reasonably bear. The idea, indeed,
of providing adequate remuneration for
such agriculturists at the expense of the
public, would be quite as unreasonable as
an attempt to render this a wine country
by excluding the import of that article,
and by thus rendering us independent of
foreign supply.

He was aware of the general argument which might here be urged, that as the ultimate effect of the Bill would be to encourage and give a stimulus to our own agriculture, we should, hereafter, grow an independent and ample supply, which would secure a steady and moderate price; but, in order to give that encouragement, they were beginning by raising it above its natural level. Nothing else was intended by the measure. What might be its future operation he could not undertake to say; but it was now brought forward for the avowed object of preventing corn from falling back to that price which it would bear if no restrictions upon foreign importation were imposed. Another purpose, contemplated by the supporters of the Bill, was to afford encouragement to the agriculture of Ireland; but that encouragement could be extended to Ireland only, by securing her from the foreigner who could sell his corn cheaper. In that way, also, the price would be raised; for how it could be possible to shut the market against him who would sell cheaper, and open it to him who would sell dearer, without raising the price of the commodity, might be comprehensible to the ingenuity of some, but for himself he confessed he was too dull to understand it. How was the cultivator to be protected by this measure? The land at present in cultivation was not sufficient to grow an adequate supply of grain; and how could it be made sufficient, but by bringing that soil into cultivation which was not now under the plough, because the actual price But to enable the House to decide upon of corn would not repay the capital and the subject of an adequate growth of corn skill that must be employed upon it? The for our supply, a further investigation was whole price of corn would thus be raised, indispensably necessary; for the report of by throwing into the market that which the committee, and the evidence taken had been grown upon those inferior lands before it, had by no means furnished sufat an increased expense. Nor could that ficient materials. Yet with this insuffieffect be considered as at all surprising, ciency of materials and information it as it was nothing more than the ordinary was proposed to legislate for a considerconsequence of a restraint upon importa-able period. It was, indeed, proposed to tion, which always caused the price of the commodity so restrained to rise above its natural level.

With respect to the object of the Bill in its future operations, he regretted that no intimation had been held out, by any of the supporters of it, as to the period at which it would begin to produce its advantageous results its immediate disad

fix the price of corn at such a rate as to provide a permanent encouragement for the farmer; but how was this encouragement to be secured? By preventing importation, it was calculated that the farmers would be induced to grow enough of corn for the consumption of the country; but in order to do so in an average of seasons, they must grow too much in a plen

tiful season; and how were they to dispose of the surplus? Where was that country in which corn was to be made dear by law, to dispose of its surplus produce? That surplus could not, in fact, find a market in any other country, and therefore must remain on the hands of our farmers. Thus the object of this Bill was likely to be defeated, and the farmers become more distressed than they probably were at present. Thus the farmers would be rendered unable to sell cheaper, while they would be also rendered unable to export, through the operation of this measure, for forcing an increased price of corn.

But the fallacy of the arguments, or rather the assertions, adduced in support of this measure, was in no case more glaring than in that which referred to the danger of our dependence upon foreign supply. That such apprehension was utterly groundless was quite evident, from the experience of the last twenty years, when the general state of the country, and especially the improvement of our agriculture, afforded the most conclusive answer to those who professed to entertain the apprehension of such a dependence. He not only deprecated this apprehension as quite visionary, but some observations connected with it, which he deemed illiberal; for he protested against the language used to excite a prejudice with regard to what was improperly called our "natural enemy," because he saw no rea son why we should not be as ready to open a just and liberal intercourse with France as with any other nation. But further, as to the idea of dependence upon France: it has been stated by the noble earl, that the price of corn in France was 47s, a quarter, and that its export was prohibited when it arrived at 49s. Now, if this country were so dependent upon France, how came it that our demand had not been such as to raise the price from 47s. to 49s.? But the fact was, that our import from France was insignificant, not exceeding 145,000 quarters, while our national consumption was from 13 to 15 million quarters. How, then, could it be rational to entertain any fear of our dependence for supply upon what was called our natural enemy? The idea of such dependence was, in fact, quite nugatory. We had, indeed, usually a much larger supply from Poland and Holland; but was it therefore to be inferred that we were dependent upon either of these countries? They were

entirely ignorant of the principles of commerce who could entertain such a notion, for it might be as well said that those countries were dependent upon us. Bot every commercial transaction was an exchange of equivalents, in which both parties were equally interested. It could not be pretended that we were dependent upon Russia because this country afforded the principal market for her produce. On the contrary, Russia was by that circumstance so dependent upon us that this dependence notoriously occasioned that effort on the part of Russia which had led (God grant that it might lead!) to the deliverance of Europe. The fact was, that the interest which the Russian landholders felt in their commercial intercourse with this country, was the great cause of the restoration of the pacific relations of Russia; and why should not the landed interest of France feel equally well disposed towards this country, if our market were opened to their produce through a free trade in corn. Such a cir cumstance must indeed serve to excite a strong interest in France in the maintenance of peace with this country. But could it be supposed, that because France would thus feel an interest in selling her produce to us, we should therefore become dependent upon her? The idea was absurd, quite as absurd, indeed, as the wild maxim prevailing among some politicians on the continent, that we were dependent upon those nations to whom we sold our manufactures; the buyers in such cases being just as dependent as the sellers. Yet from this absurd measure it was often assumed that this, the most independent nation in the world, was dependent upon its customers, who were, its customers only to supply their own wants. maintained that we were dependent because we brought from other countries, then we must contrive to supply all our wants at home, in order to guard against the imaginary danger of dependence. This supply was, however, impossible.. Some of our most essential articles must be had from other countries-naval stores, for instance. But this apprehension of dependence upon other nations, because we purchased from them, was quite a new notion. We must, in fact, buy, or we could not sell; we must export, or we could not import. And here he took occasion to observe, that the old maxim, that the balance of exports over imports constituted the wealth of a country, was

But if it were

quite fallacious; that wealth being, in fact, created by the profit arising out of the exchange of those articles which one country could produce cheaper than another, and which, exchange must of course, be mutually beneficial. But if this country endeavoured to supply herself with corn and manufactures, she must possess a double capital, enough to supply the loom and the plough, or one or the other must be neglected. Now, the question was, whether it would be wise on our part to abandon or to hazard the loom, which was found so productive of national wealth, in the speculation of becoming a great agricultural country. The country had been hitherto found incompetent to grow sufficient corn for its consumption; and the question was, whether by pursuing our prosperous system of manufacture, we should not be able, through the disposal of that manufacture abroad, to procure corn considerably cheaper than we could possibly grow it at home.

Adverting to the petition from the city of London, the noble lord forcibly pressed the necessity of inquiry upon the important point referred to in that petition, namely, as to the influence which this Bill was likely to have upon the price of bread. He asked their lordships, whether they could reconcile to their sense of justice, to decide upon the merits of this measure without hearing both sides? And it was to be recollected, that as yet only one side had been heard, no evidence whatever having been adduced on the part of the manufacturers and the other petitioners against the Bill. In his opinion, the tendency of this Bill would be to raise the price of bread above its natural level; and considering the influence of the price of provisions upon the price of labour, he conjured their lordships maturely to inquire and deliberate, before they determined upon such a question. The consequences to our national wealth from any considerable check to our manfactures he thought it unnecessary to dwell upon, for those consequences must be obvious to their lordships judgment; but he begged to impress upon their minds the serious injury likely to result from that provocative to emigration, which must arise out of any enhancement of the price of provisions, especially combined with the known pressure of our taxes. Indeed, it was a lamentable fact, that numbers even of the higher order of our gentry had already felt it advisable to seek in other countries

those conveniencies, which, from our peculiar circumstances, their means could not reach at home. If the Bill passed, there was no labourer who had a family or three children, who would not be obliged to apply for parochial relief: the manufacturers would be reduced to this resource, which was at present but too gene. rally resorted to by the agriculturist; and even the artificer, if the reward of his toil did not increase in the same proportion as the price of bread, would be reduced to the same painful resource. The noble baron concluded by observing, that he had studiously avoided every thing which might be construed into an imputation of improper motives to the supporters of the measure; and by thanking the House for the attention with which he had been heard.

The Earl of Lauderdale said, there was not one thing which the noble lord who had just sat down had offered to the House, which he had not anticipated. The noble lord had throughout argued upon a false view of the present situation of the country, as well as upon a false view of the measure on which they were that day proceeding. This measure had for its object not only a system by which the price of grain would be diminished, and by which the country would hereafter be secured that article at a fair and moderate rate, but it had in view the relief of the agriculturist from the distress under which he at present laboured. He said he had given his mind as much to this subject as any man-he had considered it in all its bearings; and the result of his deliberations was, that so far from being injurious to the community, it would prove in the highest degree beneficial. With respect to the argument urged, of a high price of provisions being injúrious to the manufacturers, he could only say, that the evidence of those individuals went directly to refute it. When those individuals were examined three years ago upon the question of the orders in council, he had distinctly asked them whether their distresses were not attributable to the high price of provisions? And their answer was, that they never experienced any inconvenience from the high price of provisions, provided trade was brisk. And the fact was, that the extra employment which was given to the labourers by this briskness, amply compensated for any increased price of provisions. The Bill, he observed, was

ing of rents would be attended with a comparatively trifling reduction in the price of grain. It had been argued, that from the reduction of taxes, a corresponding reduction ought to take place in the price of agricultural produce; but in the present state of the revenue of this country, and the way in which it was managed, no man could say what our taxation would be, and that it would not press heavier than it had done on the agriculture of the country. He had argued throughout, that the measure ought to be adopted as one which was beneficial to the consumer. There was not one of the general principles contended for by the noble lord (Grenville), that he was not deeper pledged to than most men; but it was necessary to look at the real situation of the country at this time, in measuring the application of these general principles. He was careless of present popularity-he looked alone to the welfare of the country; and he knew that when they came to feel the beneficial effects of this measure, the people of this country would not be deficient in gratitude to their real benefactors.

no new measure; it was only rendering | be obliged to hold back their supply. effectual the old laws, which had been The small quantity which we now imenacted for the protection of our farmers, ported, might be very well supplied by and which had formed the system of this our own farmers. Capital was not wantcountry ever since the reign of Edwarding, nor was the capital required to pro3, who had prohibited importation when duce 1,200,000 quarters, in addition to wheat was below 6s. the quarter. Far the present quantity, great. All that was from burthening the manufacturer, it required was security; for the farmers would relieve him by relieving the farmer; would not employ their capital without for from the prosperity of the farmer, the that security being afforded to their occulabourer would be employed, the shop- pation, which was given to all other lines keeper would thrive, and would create a in which capital was employed.-The demand-the most material and safest de-noble earl then contended, that the lowermand on the manufacturer for his commodities. The supply of grain from foreign countries was very small in proportion to that from our own soil. The whole quantity of grain consumed in Great Britain was estimated at 40 million of quarters, of which only 1,200,000 on an average were imported. To produce a cheap supply, would it not be wiser to encourage the producers of the greater quantity than those who supplied the lesser quantity? The price of 80s. would be a maximum; for if the price rose above that sum for six weeks, there would be a most abundant importation from the opposite side of the Channel. It was a great mistake to proceed on the supposition that the trade in grain was free, while there were so many taxes which pressed on our agriculturists. If the importation were open, there would be a bounty on foreign growers to import into our markets, Five million of quarters might in that case be imported. Such a state of things laid our subsistence at the mercy of foreign powers, and they might raise a navy against us by limiting the trade to their own ships. If our manufactures were to be destroyed by high prices, foreign states might, in such a state of things, put an end to them at once by stopping importation. On the other hand, they had experience that encouragement would produce low prices-as, for instance, in the cotton trade, the iron trade, and even in the trade of grain itself, the price of which, under a system of efficient protection, and with a bounty on exportation, had continued to fall for a whole century. It was chimerical to suppose that the farmers could combine to raise the price of corn, when they could not combine in any one thing. The consequence of a free importation would be, that in abundant years the market would be overstocked with foreign corn-in scarce years foreign nations, for their own preservation, would

The Earl of Selkirk contended, that however desirable it might be that a free trade should universally exist, it was well known that no state acted upon this principle; and while we were most in want of a supply of food from other countries, we might open our ports in vain for it. He entered at some length into the connexion between the price of food and the wages of labour, and contended that the present measure would have the most beneficial effect, in so far as concerned the labour. ing classes. He argued also, that a regular supply of food, at an equal price, was greatly preferable to the sudden rises and depressions of price which would follow from such an extensive country as Great Britain being in any way depen dent on foreign countries for any conside rable part of her food.

The House then divided on the question for the second reading: Contents, 92; Proxies, 52, 144; Not-Contents, 15; Proxies, 2, 17: Majority, 127.

Earl Grey again urged the impossibility of properly considering the Treaty without having information of the previous negociation, particularly if it should turn out,

The Bill was then read a second time as he believed was the case, that we had and committed for Friday.

[blocks in formation]

rejected moderate overtures in the hour of elation and success, to which we had afterwards acceded when the time came of reverse and defeat. He did not know at the moment, whether any precedent of such a communication existed; but he thought the information he sought for of so much importance to the proper discussion of the question, that he should take an opportunity of moving for its production.

TAXA

CORN LAWS AGRICULTURAL TION.] Earl Stanhope rose to bring forward his promised motion on this subject, which he prefaced with a variety of observations. The line of the noble earl's argumentation and detailed reference, were similar to those which he used on moving his resolutions last session pro forma, which he now proposed for the adoption of the House. He approved of the principle advanced last night by a noble earl high in office-that it was essentially necessary to encourage the agriculture of the country; in this he cordially agreed with him, and it was one of the principal objects of what he was about to propose to encourage agriculture, by relieving the farmers in the only way they should be relieved, and to enable them to sell bread at a cheap and reasonable rate to the consumer, by relieving

Earl Grey observed, that it had been the practice to communicate information respecting negociations which had terminated to the House; and that it would be impossible to come to the proper con-him from those parts of taxation that bore sideration of the Treaty without knowing what had been the previous demands, and in what manner those demands had been persisted in or retracted.

the heaviest on his agricultural pursuits. This principle was recognised by many of the petitions with which their lordships table was loaded; but more especially by The Earl of Liverpool denied that it had that of the corn growers of Peterborough been the practice to communicate infor- and its vicinity, in which his proposed mation respecting negociations that had resolutions were adverted to in a way terminated happily. On the contrary, he worthy the most serious attention of the believed there was no precedent whatever House. In illustration of his positions, of that nature. With respect to those the noble earl referred to certain parts of negociations that had broken off, it un-the evidence given before their lordships doubtedly had been the practice to com- committee; but more particularly to that municate information to Parliament. In given by Mr. James Buxton, who, among the present instance, however, there was other very material points, stated, that in no necessity for any such communication, 1792, the whole expenses of his farm for and therefore none was intended to be labour was 2741. 14s. 4d.; that, in 1812, made; nor was it intended at all to recur those expenses came to 816. 18s. 6d.; to the negociation, but to ground an Ad- and that upon the same quantity of land, dress to the Prince Regent, on the terms and for the same degree or scale of imof the Treaty being satisfactory and ad-provement. That the poor's-rates of the vantageous to the country.

same farm were in 1792, 174. 19s; that in

« PreviousContinue »