THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES AN EXPOSITION, A 2 AN EXPOSITION CORN-LAW REPEALING FALLACIES AND INCONSISTENCIES. BY G. CALVERT HOLLAND, M.D. LONDON: PUBLISHED BY LONGMAN, ORMK, BROWN, GRKKN. AND LONGMANS. 1840. LONDON: Printed by William Clowes and Sons, Stamford Street. CONTENTS. H 7 I & Introduction ....... The Arguments of the Right Honorable the Earl Fitz- william .... of C. P. Villiers, Esq., M.P. of R. Torrens, Esq., F.R.S. of William W. Whitmore, Esq. . of Hewitt Davis, Esq. ofH. B. T of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce PAGK xi 17 24 27 32 3 35 39 The Arguments of James Wilson, Esq. Argument I. Causes of the inequality and fluctuation of the price of Wheat .... ,. II. The fluctuations greater than have been ex- perienced in any of the chief products of our distant colonies .... ,, III. The fluctuations have arisen from the in- equality in the supply ,, IV. The tendency of grain is to maintain an (■quality of value .... ., V. The prices of Wool have not fallen, hence the cheering evidence of a rapid increase of our consumption of it . is 50 51 53 55 fl CONTENTS. PAGE Arqument VI. The Corn Laws the cause of the ex- tremely low price of grain on the Continent . . . .56 „ VII. Protective Duties always lead to the employment of a great excess of capi- tal and labour . . . .59 „ VIII. Extremely low prices and excess of production and stock the consequence of protective duties . . .60 „ IX. Low prices and excess of production and stock occasion a lavish and in- considerate use of the great neces- sary of life . . . .62 „ X. Excess of production induces the far- mer to lessen his cultivation, and causes the subsequent high prices, in which the foreigner participates . 63 „ XI. The injurious working of the present ) system on the interests of the Land- lord 65 „ XII. The Landowner, in the years of the greatest productiveness, is obliged to accept a low price . . .68 „ XIII. The profit and loss of the farmer . 69 „ XIV. The manufacturing industry of the country depends intirely on the ability of our home population to con- sume, and of our merchants to export 78 „ XV. The occasional and accidental demand for grain causes the exportation of bullion . . . . .82 CONTENTS. Vll PAGE Argument XVI. The vicissitudes of the farmer affect the labourer . . . .85 „ XVU. England possesses the finest climate — the finest and best cultivated soils — the greatest amount of skill, industry, and capital, of any country in the world . . 86 ,, XVIII. The peculiar advantages of this country for the growth of corn . 92 „ XIX. The average of the price of wheat for a series of years . . .95 „ XX. Expenses of importing wheat from the Continent . . .99 „ XXI. The English farmer, during the ex- istence of the Bounty Act, was able to compete with the foreign cultivator on his own soil, and hence he has nothing to fear from the latter, were our ports perma- nently open . . . .106 „ XXII. The landed interest of this country has to fear only its own overex- cited and stimulated power . 109 „ XXIII. Those countries, on which we should calculate for a regular importation of grain, have all the lands best suited, both in quality and local position, for the raising of wheat, already in cultivation, and hence an additional quantity could only be grown, at 8 greater cost of production . . .129 CONTKNTS. PAGE Argument XXIV. Wheat in this country can only be driven out of cultivation, by the land becoming too valuable for the purpose . . . .135 „ XXV. Provisions would not be cheaper, if we had a free trade, than the internal competition of our own resources and means has furnish- ed them . . . .137 „ XXVI. The great benefit accruing from the repeal, would not be cheaper provisions, but a uniformity of their prices, and their present fluc- tuation would be intirely removed by an equality of price . .146 ., XXVII. An immediate repeal might throw land in this country out of culti- vation, but this would be only for a short time, the foreign grower being incapable of per- manently competing with our own agriculturist . . .150 Arguments of the Right Honorable The Earl Fitzwilliam. Argument I. The object of the corn laws is to raise the price of corn above its natural level, and to enhance the value of land. . . . 1 53 ,, II. The high price of com is felt inju- riously by all classes . .157 CONTENTS. IX PAGE Argument III. The advantage of cheap bread to the labourer ..... 161 ,, IV. The corn laws afford no protection to the farmer . . . .163 ,, V. Cheap bread will enable the manufac- turer to lower the wages of labour . 166 „ VI. The device of the corn laws has been to produce an artificial scarcity , 170 „ VII. The burthens imposed upon the far- mer and labourer by the corn laws. 174 ,, VIII. The corn laws allow bread to become cheap, and do not prevent fluctua- tions 191 ., IX. A reduction in the price of flour will lead to an increased consumption of meat 203 INTRODUCTION. It is scarcely necessary to offer any apology for the following remarks, on a subject which daily in- creases in interest, and which indeed has great claims on public attention. The question of the policy or impolicy of the corn laws is not to be set at rest by the coarse invectives, hollow decla- mation, and illogical reasoning of the one party, nor by the more temperate, but feeble opposition of the other, reposing on the imagined excellence of their cause. It demands and must receive a patient examina- tion ; nor have the supporters of the corn laws anything to fear from the most searching inquiry. The best evidence of the want of truth, in the doc- trines of the repealers, are the extraordinary dis- crepancies by which they are characterised. No two writers are at all agreed on the effects of these Xll INTRODUCTION. laws either on agriculture or manufactures — nor do they calculate on the same results from their abolition. They are as various in their opinions as if they had purposely avoided the interchange of thought. If the justice or policy of the repeal be so obvious and unequivocal, or if the wrongs or evils inflicted on society by a restrictive system, be too apparent to suggest a doubt, how is it that each individual has his own peculiar notions — his own peculiar causes and effects — — and his own peculiar remedies springing out of the repeal ? Strange that men, some moving in the higher circles of society, and hence possessing all the advantages of a liberal education and of ample sources of information — that men, practi- cally acquainted with manufactures, and feeling the effects of their depression, — shrewd, — intelligent, and enterprising, should exhibit in their labours no common bond of agreement — should be linked together by no comprehensive principle of political economy, and yet should urge with the same zeal the necessity of repeal ! The author, in the fol- lowing pages, has endeavoured to expose many of these discrepancies and inconsistencies, not selected INTRODUCTION. Xlll from the heated harangues of popular declaiuiers — who have an interest in agitation beyond the ad- vocacy of imagined truth, but from the writings of individuals whose names dignify even what they fail to elucidate — whose intelligence, sincerity, and high moral tone cannot possibly be matters of doubt. The greater part are selected from the re- cent work of a writer who has been greatly extolled by repealers for his just and enlarged views — for his judicious treatment of the subject, and for the highly philosophical spirit which per- vades his production. His authority has con- stantly been appealed to by the leading advocates of repeal in the discussions in parliament, and hence the propriety of selecting his work for analysis. Where the author of these pages cannot convince by argument, he will not descend to abuse, nor will he notice that with which he may be honoured. The low; of truth is the principle by which ho has been guided in his examination of the corn laws, and the results at which he has arrived have been forced upon him against his previous convictions. And, perhaps, he may be permitted to say, that Ins exertions in the town, in \1V INTRODUCTION. which lie resides, have tended largely to dispel much of the prejudice and ignorance existing on this subject. The intelligent artisans begin clearly to perceive, that the repeal is not intended to give them the power of commanding a greater share of the necessaries and comforts of life, but to reduce the wages of labour — to cheapen manufactured productions, and to aggravate the already intense struggle in the held of competition. Sheffield, Sept. 26th, 1840. AN EXPOSITION OF CORN-LAW-REPEALING FALLACIES AND INCONSISTENCIES. When the leaders of popular agitation unite, for the purpose of effecting the removal of a law which is re- garded as injurious, it is natural to expect that they would entertain uniform sentiments, or at least the same general principles, with respect to the desirableness of the measure, and the results which would follow its accom- plishment. Important differences of opinion would certainly not be anticipated. It will, however, be shown in this in- quiry, limited and imperfect as it is, that no two repealers are actuated by the same motives, or agree upon the same conclusions. A noble lord, whose character justly stands high for liberality and independence, has attempted to expose, what he conceives the injurious effects of the Corn Laws.* "The first object," he remarks, "of these laws is to raise the price of corn above its natural level; their * Earl Fitzwiiliam. 18 next, and ultimate object, is to raise the value of land." If the noble writer means, by natural level, what would be the price of corn were a free importation from abroad at all times permitted, lie is perfectly* right. Such a level would be ruinous to the whole agricultural interest and detrimental to the manufacturing. The present laws have afforded bread at a reasonable price to the poor for the period of nine years. The plausibility of the noble writer rests principally on the assumption, that the wages of labour will be unaffected. He states, " in the view which is here taken of the advantages to be derived from a low price of provisions, it is assumed, that wages do not fall" With this assumption his arguments could not be otherwise than plausible. The great advocates for repeal contend, that a serious reduc- tion in wages is imperatively required, to enable the home manufacturers to compete with the foreign. The repeal with them is a step towards such reduction ; and, according to their own arguments and calculations, a re- duction in the ratio, in which bread would be cheapened by this measure, would be quite inadequate to place the home manufacturer in a commanding position with re- spect to his opponents. The first step in the inquiry should have been to prove, that wages woidd not be affected by the proposed alteration. If this had been satisfactorily established, his reasoning would have been irresistible. His repealing associates state, that they calculate on reduction, and they look to it as an inevita- ble effect of repeal. The next objection to the Corn Laws is, that they raise the value of land. This will, of course, be admitted. The protection favours both the produce and the soil producing. The best evidence 19 that the value of the latter is not unduly raised, is in the competition which exists for land, and the generally healthy state of the agricultural interest. Nor can it be asserted, that the protection which is afforded to the produce is unreasonable, because for a series of years this has been cheap and abundant. The Corn Laws were never dreamed of as an evil by the working classes until the failure of trade made them the dupes of a manufacturing section. If these, as they assert, had for years entertained the conviction that the laws were ruinous in then- influence, why did they not agitate when commerce was in a prosperous condition ? Why reserve their bitterness and persecution for a future day? The great principles of justice ought not to be silenced by temporary prosperity. The repealers, how- ever, had no time to think of principles, or to complain of imagined evils, when princely fortunes were accumu- lating at the expense of the muscular exertion of the multitude. The illustrious writer further states, that " to the occupier, it is, in the long run, of no con- sequence whatever, what be the market price of grain, as he knows perfectly well that his rent will be adjusted to it, and rise or fall icith it." The farmer, with a reduced price for his produce, woidd have to maintain the same establishment as at present, and, according to the arguments of the writer, woidd have to pay the same Mages ; taxes and all other expenses would be un- affected. Let us test the accuracy of this doctrine by reducing it to calculations. It is computed that land generally lets for a pound per acre, and the average produce of wheat per acre is estimated at eight loads. Whether the truth iii either case be a little bighei o\ B 2 20 lower than the estimate will not materially affect the argument. It is impossible to state what reduction in the price of wheat would take place on its free impor- tation. The repealers generally calculate on a serious reduction, but we will not suppose extreme cases. "Wheat at 53s. 4fZ. per quarter, or 20*. per load, is always regarded as reasonable by the consumer, and one repealer asserts, that it cannot be afforded for less than 52s. per quarter* We will suppose, then, that at the present rent of land, the farmer cannot afford to sell for less than 53*. 4d. We may calculate on a reduction of 5s. per load in con- sequence of importation ; in all probability it would be considerably greater. What reduction in rent would the landlord think reasonable ? One-fourth, or 5s. per acre, would certainly be a handsome allowance. According to these calculations, the farmer has an interest in the price of grain. By the reduction in price he receives less by 40s. per acre than at the average which has been stated ; and, by the reduction in rent, he gains 5s. If the landlord allows one-third, he gains 6s. Sd. by the reduction in rent, shewing a loss to the cultivator of 33s. 4d. per acre. If the farmer has 200 acres of wheat, he loses by the reduction 400/., and gains by the lowering of his rent one- eighth, 50/. In all probability the reduction in the price of produce would, in years of abundance, be much greater than is here calculated upon. Rent is only one of the * James Wilson, Esq. 21 several important elements in the cost of production, and therefore it scarcely seems philosophical to assert, that a modification in one element only, is all that is required to make the market price of grain a matter of indifference to the occupier. The argument is just only on the sup- position, that all the elements are modified proportion- ately to the price of produce, which is indeed an impos- sibility, because that will be regulated by the continental scale, an approximation to which would be ruinous to the home grower. The noble writer alludes to no dimi- nution in the ordinary expenses attendant on the culti- vation of the soil, and consequently the tiller has a most important interest in the price of what he produces. The apparent fallacy in the position of the writer may be exposed by a case drawn from the manufacturer. We will suppose that he carries on an extensive concern, in which 400 hands are employed, and a large quantity of raw material is daily worked up. The factory and the greater part of the machinery he rents, and for the use of which he pays 1000/. per annum. This sum is a trifle compared with the annual expenses attendant on keeping the whole establishment in operation. Suppose the same language was addressed to the manufacturer as is to the agricidturist, he would at once reply : " No reduction in my rent would be a compensation for the loss sustained in being compelled to sell manufactures at the continental price, which is from 25 to 40 per cent, under my own : a clear proof of this, is the fact that the foreigner can afford to pay a duty of 25 per cent, on many of his goods, and undersell me at my own door." It would be an extremely difficult matter to convince &2 the farmer that it is of no consequence to him what he receives for his produce. The noble writer says, " Com- paxe the methods by which our ancestors encouraged tillage with those adopted by the present generation ; they indeed gave a bounty on the export of corn, and thereby attracted to agriculture capital which, without that attraction, would have been otherwise employed; but they did not enhance the price of corn, or retard the progress of manufacturing industry ; on the contrary, they made com cheaper — they made it abundant — they produced an artificial abundance ; your device has been to produce an artificial scarcity" These remarkable words were penned in 1831. The bounty, and the pre- sent protective system must necessarily produce and have produced the same effects. The former gave encourage- ment to agriculture by the foreign market which it opened; the latter gives encouragement to agriculture, by securing the greatly increased demands of the country to the home grower. Both measures attracted capital to agricultural pursuits, and both measures, as an inevitable consequence, caused an extraordinary cheapening of this important necessary of life. In proof of the correctness of this statement, the fol- lowing were the prices of wheat per quarter, from 1831 to 1837 :— s. d. 1S31 . . . . 66 4 1832 . . . . 58 8 1833 . . . 52 11 1834 . . . . 46 2 1835 . . . . 39 4 1836 . . . . 46 6 1837 .... 56 10 s. d. 39 '6 34 25 23 9 23 21 22 6 23 Low as these prices are, compare them with those "6f the same periods at Dantzig and Konigsburg, and also keep in mind that wheat can be imported from these places in spring and summer at 5s. per quarter, and in autumn from 5s. 6d. to 7s. 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 In the face of such facts it can scarcely be said, that it is of no consequence what the farmer receives for his produce. What reduction in rent would enable the English farmer to treat with contempt the com- petition of the foreigner were he permitted to import duty free ? There was no scarcity of grain in this country from 1831 to 1837, but indeed so great an abundance, that the price at which it was sold did not at one period afford sufficient remuneration to the agriculturist, and hence he had, as he must always have, his partial and temporary sufferings. These arc incidental to all pur- suits. The summary of the noble writer's objection to the Corn Laws may be thus stated : — First. — They raise the price of corn above its natural level. Second. — They raise the price of land above its natural value. •J I Hie good effects which he anticipates from their re- peal are : — First.— There would be great abundance of corn in this country from its free and unrestricted importation. Second. — The labouring classes would be enabled, on account of the cheapness of food, to command a greater quantity, than at present, of the comforts of life, the wages of labour not being affected by the reduction in the price of grain. We shall afterwards analyse more at length the views of the noble writer. The views and reasoning of another distinguished ad- vocate of repeal are very different from the preceding.* He shows the necessity of great reduction in the wages of labour, and the repeal is urged as a means of such reduction. His words are, " Now, it is clear that as we do not export the produce of the soil, that this trade must depend upon the export of our manufactures, which must be regulated by their cost of production here as compared with their price in other countries." In another part of the same speech from which this extract is taken he asks, " and where is it that we have suffered most ? precisely wliere the cost of Iking has entered most into the cost of production" In proof of the correctness of this statement he remarks, " Indeed it is a fact that ought to startle those who really understand in what the interest of this country consists, that the Germans not only at this time have ceased to demand the hosiery of * C. P. Villiers, Esq., M.P. 25 this country, that they do not only undersell us in every part of the world in this article, but that they note under- sell us in Nottingham itself, after paying 20 per cent, duty" These startling facts, which are true, are ad- duced to show how necessary it is to have cheap bread in order to have low wages, to enable the manufacturers here to compete successfully with the foreign. The as- sumption of Earl Fitzwilliam was, that wages would re- main unaffected ; the facts and arguments of Mr. Villiers go to prove, beyond all question, the necessity of a serious reduction in the wages of labour — a reduction regulated by the continental scale. These certainly are important differences between two of the most talented and distinguished advocates of repeal. Tl^e benevolence and good intentions of both are indisputable ; but it is clear, that the results on which the one calculates in re- lation to the poor, viz., the power of commanding a greater amount of the comforts and necessaries of life, woidd not folloiv from the greatly diminished ivages of the other. The charge of Earl Fitzwilliam, in 1831, against the present Corn Laws was, that " they create an artificial scarcity." The evidence of Mr. Ellis, given before a committee appointed by parliament in 1836, and adduced by Mr. Villiers in his speech in the session of 1840, shows that agricultural distress was occasioned in the three years preceding, by the cheapness of produce, the consequence of great abundance. It therefore ap- pears, that one honourable repealer complains of these laws creating an artificial scarcity, and another, of their creating a superabundance of the staple commodities of life. In allusion to the exports of this country, it is remarked by Mr. Villiers, that "it had been inferred 2G that the increase of the exports of the manufactures of the country authorised some persons to infer, that a state of prosperity must be the consequence of this circum- stance. Let those who argued thus ask the manufac- turers themselves, and it would be found, that it was always at a period when trade was lax at home, and when the consumption there was circumscribed, that these large cxportations or consignments took place." If the honourable speaker had examined the exports to the United States of America, to which his remarks especi- ally referred, previous to the crisis of 1 836, and after- wards, he would have discovered that the exports or consignments were immeasurably greater in the one period than the other ; and this was indeed one of the principal causes of the crisis and the subsequent distress. In proof of this we give the exports from 1834 to 1837: The value of the exports in 1834 . . £6,844,989 1835 . . 10,568,455 1836 . . 12,425,605 1837 . . 4,695,225 The overtrading was in 1835-6, and the exports in these years indicate the melancholy extent to which it was carried. The serious depression was in 1837; and, as evidence of it, the exports or consignments were only about one-third the amount of the preceding year. The conclusions to be drawn from the remarks of Mr. Vil- liers are : First. — That the Repeal is indispensably necessary, in order to reduce the wages of labour. 27 Secondly. — That foreign manufactures are imported into this country, and after paying a duty of 20 per cent., are sold for less than similar articles of home production. Thirdly.— That the mode of living abroad is exceed- ingly cheap, which is one of the principal causes of the artisans being able to work for low wages. Fourthly. — That the Corn Laws lead to the produc- tion of a superabundance of the necessaries of life, and consequently are injurious to the agriculturists. We proceed now to examine the opinions of another repealer.* His doctrine will be found very different from those we have brought under review. He states, that the artisans of this country execute in a given time, a much greater amount of work than the operatives of the continent ; and, that we are nearly, but not quite undersold by the foreigner. In illustration of the first assertion, he adduces the evidence of an English artisan, who had been two years in one of the best manufac- tories of Alsace, given before a parliamentary committee on artisans and machinery. This witness is asked, " Had you any Frenchmen employed under you?" " Yes, eight." " Supposing you had eight English carders under you, how much more work could you have done ? " " With one Englishman I could have done more work than I did with those eight Frenchmen. It cannot be called work they do ; it is only lookiny at, and wishing it done." Supposing it to be established, that an Englishman can execute a much greater quantity of work in a given time ' R. Toncns, Esi|., P.R.S. 28 than a foreigner, his prospects are indeed miserable in the extreme. Almost all repealing authorities admit, that continental manufactures are from 20 to 40 per cent, cheaper than our own ; and, whether we rest on these authorities or not, the fact is indisputable. Hence it follows, that the foreigner with all his disadvantages, and want of skill and industry, is nevertheless able to undersell us from 20 to 40 per cent. How melancholy is this admission ! Ability and industry come with habit, and as the foreigner will improve in these respects, his competition will clearly become more formidable every day. In his ignorance he can actually afford to import goods into our own country, to the disadvantage of the home manufacturer, pray what will be the extent of his powers of competition, in his fulness of wisdom and ex- perience? The writer endeavours to show, that the repeal of the Corn Laws would give to the artisans of this country higher wages. His words are : " "What then is the counteracting circumstance which takes from the operative classes of England the power of obtaining an increase of wages, within the limits of their great su- periority in the efficacy of their labour, arising from the extraordinary advantages, natural and acquired, which they possess ? This counteracting circumstance is the high price of food; and the cause of the high price of food is the existing Corn Laws." In another part of his pamphlet, he says, " So long as the existing Corn Laws remain, so long will it be found impracticable, either to diminish the hours of labour, or to increase wages." The doctrine of Mr. Villiers is the necessity of a serious reduction in the wages of labour ; in fact, an approximation to the continental scale. The writer here 29 states, that it " amounts to a self-evident proposition, that other things remaining the same, the profits of the manufacturer must fall, as .the value of agricultural produce rises, in relation to manufactured goods." If the accuracy of this proposition be tested by reference to the past, it "wall be found, that the profits of the manu- facturing interest have not fluctuated with the rise and fall in the prices of agricultural produce. At one time, they have been the greatest for a series of years, when the farmer was insufficiently remunerated for his capital and labour ; at another, they have been ruinously low, when the agriculturist has been in an exceedingly pros- perous condition. The profits of the manufacturer are regulated almost entirely by the demand for his goods, and this demand depends on two markets, the foreign and the home. The writer reasons as if it depended on the latter only : the ability of a foreign country to pur- chase manufactures is not influenced by the price of agricultural produce, or the value of land in our own. Its necessities and ability spring out of its own peculiar circumstances. When the farmer receives a fair remu- neration for the capital and labour expended, his improved ability to purchase is felt by the manufacturer ; and if this coexist with the urgent demand from abroad for goods, the profits of the latter must of necessity be high. He also advances another proposition, which will be found on examination equally as unfounded as the fore- going. He says, " where a rise takes place in the value of agricultural produce, the subsequent fall which takes place in the farmer's profit is occasioned by the compe- tition, which compels him to offer a higher rent." If we appeal to the past in this, as in the former instance, 30 for the truth of the proposition, it will be found, that the profit has fluctuated according to the more or less abun- dant seasons, and circumstances which have not the b! 'lightest connexion with rent The writer argues, as if rent was the only clement which regulated the profit of the farmer : as that rises and falls, this is imagined to ebb and flow. Rent, as already stated, is only one element among several, regulating the amount of profit. His next proposition is, that the free importation of corn would increase the value of land. After having, as he supposes, by various calculations proved this, he remarks, " The profits of the farmer, and the rents of the proprietor, both raised by a fall in the price of corn ! " The doctrine of Earl Fitzwilliam is, that the land- oAvners must reduce their rents ; that, in fact, rents are already much too high. The distinguished political economist thinks otherwise, and he still further remarks, " when the price of provisions is low, human labour may be cheaper than mechanical power ; but as food becomes dear, the machine which does not eat will become less costly than the operative, which must be fed while at work. In many branches of trade, it is the price of corn which determines whether machinery can be advantage- ously employed or not. Other things remaining the same, as the value of food is raised, mechanical power will be brought more and more into competition with human labour ; and the operative will be employed at wages reduced to the starving point, and for the longest period of time which nature can endure." A superficial glance at the history of the rise and progress of machinery 31 is sufficient to expose the fallacy of such reasoning. Machinery, according to his argument, would make rapid advances only during the high price of food. The price of food has had little influence on its progress. The demand for goods has been the great regulating prin- ciple. The enterprise of man stimulated by avarice, and the fine field presented for the exercise of his talents, have been ten times more instrumental in multiplying inventions and in effecting improvements in mechanical contrivances, than dear bread and a depressed state of com- merce. The principle that much will have more, is the great stimulus that rouses the speculative and inventive powers of the human mind — that creates a grasping and comprehensive faculty in virtue of which it looks abroad for appropriate means of gratification. The arguments advanced by this distinguished political economist in favour of the repeal of the Corn Laws may be thus sum- marily stated : — First. — British manufactures nearly undersold by the foreigner. Secondly. — The repeal would diminish the hours of labour and increase wages. Thirdly. — The profits of manufacturers increase or diminish with the variations in the price of agricultural produce. Fourthly. — The repeal would raise the value of land. Fifthly. — The high price of food is the occasion of 32 the employment of machinery in the place of human labour. "We come now to the consideration of the arguments of another great authority in favour of repeal.* " The system of exclusion," he remarks, " is a monstrous prin- ciple. It tends in some degree to raise the price of food here, though I think I can show that even here its effects are much overrated; but it tends in a very material degree to lower its prices in other countries, thereby offering an inducement to the English capitalist to in- vest his property and transfer his skill to any other country rather than Britain." The bounty act in favour of the exportation of grain did not, as was anticipated, raise the price at home, but actually cheapened it, and there is certainly no reason why it should be rendered dear abroad, by the privilege of importing it duty free into this country. Both circumstances give encourage- ment to agriculture, and encouragement leads to improve- ments which always permanently cheapen the article produced, whether appertaining to manufactures or to agriculture. He still further argues, that the rents of the landlord would be increased by the repeal, " because, there being more wealth in the country, there is a larger portion of capital ready to be expended upon the land." The prevailing complaint among repealers is, that there is already too much capital expended upon the soil. It also appears from his reasoning, that he calculates on the production of a greater amount of grain after the repeal than under the existing system of occasional exclusion. * William Wolryche Whitmore, Esq. 33 His words are, " Land, in a popular sense, may be called the farmer's raw material ; and the implements of hus- bandry, manures, seed, &c., his machinery. An amelio- ration in the condition of the first, and an improvement in the construction or application of the second, may en- able him to raise more 'produce, or 'produce of greater value, than he now does, without a corresponding increase of expense." Repealers contend, that we ought to produce less, a great part of our land not being fit to be kept in a state of cultivation, and it is anticipated, that the foreigner, were he permitted to import largely his produce, would take in return our manufactures. Accord- ing to the arguments of this writer, there is no just ground for such an expectation. He admits that we may pro- duce more, "without a corresponding increase of ex- pense." It is somewhat amusing to find this admission, he having previously asserted, that the demand for foreign grain would enhance its price abroad. From such reasoning it appears, that improvements in agriculture will cheapen grain at home, but will enhance it on the Continent. Hence like causes do not produce like effects. He also remarks, that the attention of the legislature " should be directed, as much as possible, to remedy the evil of a constantly increasing rate of food, leading of necessity to a rise in the price of labour, and a conse- quent diminution in the rate of profit." The wages in manufacturing districts have never been regulated by the price of food. They have often been the highest when agricultural produce of :ill kinds have been sold at a miserably low rate. The summary of his opinions may be thus stated: — < First. — One objection to the Corn LaAVs is, that they render food cheap abroad. Second. — Were they repealed, the rents of the land- lord would rise. Third. — The amount of agricultural produce grown at home would be increased. Fourth. — The price of labour is increased by the price of food. Fifth. — In all probability wages would not fall in consequence of the repeal. A writer, who is himself a farmer, in addressing his own class, says, " My inquiries have led me to believe, that they, as well as every other branch of the commu- nity, are interested in obtaining cheaper labour, which is only to be obtained by a supply of cheaper food, and I therefore particularly address myself to them, with the hope that after the perusal of the calculations which I have now to submit to them, they will be convinced, that although they may, on the one side, suffer a loss in the sale of part of their produce by a free importation of wheat, still they would, on the other side, be gainers by the diminished cost at which all their produce would be raised, from the reduction in wages which always follows a permanent decline in the price of loheat"* Hewett Davis: London, Ridgway, Piccadilly, 1»39. 35 This writer uses no equivocation, nor does he mystify his meaning by any refinement of reasoning. He tells the farmer plainly, that the cheapening of food would enable him to diminish the wages of labour, and conse- quently the cost of production would be greatly lessened. It is a little remarkable, that the pamphlet is dedicated to Earl Fitzwilliam, who, in his examination of the Corn Laws, is at considerable pains to show how beneficial the repeal would be to the labourer, his wages being un- affected, while the staple commodities of life are greatly reduced in price. There is certainly nothing in common in the opinions of the two writers. In pursuing the inquiry, we find at every step the same extraordinary discrepancies in the views of the repealers. Another authority,* whose opinions have often been quoted with approbation, asks, " What is the great desideratum ? It is abundance upon easy terms. What are the sources of abundance? — They are rich soils, favourable climates, skill in cultivation, and facility of conveyance, in respect of the products of land, whether they be for the food of man, or of animals for the service of man, or be the materials of manufac- tures." He immediately after remarks, " My first posi- tion is, that the agriculturists have, under any circum- stances, the enviable advantage of always selling their goods at home, in a market insufficiently supplied. My second position is, that the manufacturer, when ho sells any of his goods at home, always sells them in a glutted market." These positions are founded on * Letters on the Corn Laws by II. B.T. 1835. 36 pure assumptions, and arc at variance with fact. The unequivocal evidence of the abundance of agricultural produce is its price. This always tests correctly the amount of the prevailing plenty or scarcity. In 1834- 35-36, com was remarkably cheap, and, indeed, so abun- dant, that, for a time, the agricultural interest was in consequence depressed. Surely, at this period the market was sufficiently supplied! The average price of wheat from 1828 to 1837 is the best answer to his argument. It is, also, false to assume that the home market is always glutted : the customers of the home market have as great a difficulty in being supplied in prosperous times of trade as the foreign. Were the former in the condition which he represents, the profits of the manufacturers and the wages of the artisan would only fluctuate from bad to tvorse. The scale would never slide decidedly upwards. There would be no ample room for improvement in respect of either. The contrary, however, is the fact : when the manufacturers, from the extent and urgency of the demand, are unable to supply it, their profits rise ; the competition for their goods gives them a commanding advantage ; the artisan feels the increased demand for his labour, and at once sets a higher value upon it. Were the market glutted such effects would be impossible. The same writer remarks, " This country, compared with any other in the world, is a rich high-priced country ; the parties, therefore, who raise or make the commodities, which are wholly consumed at home, may measure their respective exactions by the scale of English price ; but they who make the surplus which must be exported are forced to conform to the scale of foreign prices." All parties are 37 ready to admit there is an extraordinary difference be- tween our own and foreign prices ; were it not so, there would be no occasion for any protective system. This, in fact, is to prevent the lowering of our own prices, comforts and habits to the continental scale. Cheap bread would not give us the advantage in the competi- tion ; there must be a cheapening in every thing, and also a retrograde step in our ideas and feelings with respect to the necessaries — the elegancies, and the luxu- ries of life. It is the progress of the arts, the results of a high state of civilization, which has made the immense difference between our condition and that of corn-grow- ing countries. The repealers reason as if it were possi- ble to retrace our steps and return to a more simple and primitive state of society. It is, further, the opinion of the writer, " That if the ports had been thrown open at the end of the war, for the admission of corn duty free, or at a moderate duty, for the sake only of revenue, the prosperity of our trade would have been such as to have secured to the farmers a much better price for their pro- duce than they are now obtaining." This is only an assertion, and is evidently founded on the supposition that, with open ports, commerce would have flowed on in an uninterrupted stream. It is in the highest degree visionary to calculate on the steady progress of trade ; the elements of change are inseparable from it. Open ports would have presented a fine market for the intro- duction of foreign produce, and it is natural to suppose that the amount of importation would annually increase ; and howthis would be an advantage to the home-grower docs not appear. Imagine the cost of production of our manufactured goods to be 30 per cent, cheaper than that 38 of the Continent, and that we are kept out of their market by a protective duty ; were this repealed we should of course export largely, and our exertions would be stimulated with the certainty of being able to dispose of our goods ; bat in what way would this benefit the foreign manufacturers and the artisans generally ! De- preciated profits and low wages would be a blessing to neither. In what way, then, would large importations of grain benefit the farmer or the labourer ? The writer states, that " We have long passed that point up to which the prosperity of a country is based upon its land. Our trade has outgrown our agriculture, because it has led to an increase of population, which the land can neither profitably employ nor plentifully feed." The assertion, that the land is incapable of feeding the im- mense population, is disposed of by the fact of it having been equal to this for years in succession, and at an ex- ceedingly cheap rate. It is the opinion of men who have deeply studied the subject, that the ability of this country to produce the necessaries of life may be doubled, by improved methods of cultivation, while they deprecate the folly of expending capital unprofitably on poor and worthless soils. If the present protection be continued to the agriculturist, his ability to create will increase with the demand, and, in all probability, his produce will be afforded to the consumer at a gradually decreasing price, — a price regulated by his improve- ments and the more skilful application of labour, and not by foreign competition. The opinions of this writer may be thus briefly stated : — First. — That what we want, and what we shall ac- 39 quire by the repeal of the Corn Laws, is abundance, which rich soils, favourable climates, skill in cultivation, and facility in conveyance, would give us. Second. — The home market is insufficiently supplied with the necessaries of life. Third. — There is now an urgent necessity that our prices, and consequently wages, should conform to the continental scale. Fourth. — If the ports had been open from the end of the war, the farmer would have been receiving higher prices than at present. Fifth. — The land is incapable of feeding the existing population of the country. We now come to the examination of the opinions of a body of men, who, from their wealth, intelligence, and position in society, demand a courteous and re- spectful consideration.* They in fact may be regarded as the focus of repealing agitation. They have concen- trated all the heat of zeal which money, sumptuous banquets, nervous and glowing harangues can excite ; and they have adduced in favour of the cause a series of statistical facts, well calculated to influence the unre- flecting mind, but which really have about as close q * " An Authentic Report of the late Important Discussion in the Manchester Chamher of Commerce, on the destructive effects of the Corn Laws." 40. connexion with the operation of the Corn Laws as they have with the profound investigations of the astronomer. It is worth while to consider whether these individuals, associated and acting together in a body, and animated by one spirit, be harmonious in their views and reason- ing. In a petition drawn up by them we have these winds : — " Our former pre-eminence in the universal cheapness of our manufactures is already passing away, and though old recollections and national pride may make men loth to give ear to accounts of such changes, they have been long forcing themselves on the notice of those who directly experience their effects." We have nothing to do with the bad construction of the sentence, or its want of grammatical accuracy ; the ideas of the directors might however have been much more clearly expressed, The meaning intended to be conveyed is, that we are now undersold. This is ad- mitted ; but is it because our goods have gradually advanced in price, or because the foreign manufacturers, from the universal cheapness of all things, can afford to undersell us ? This is an important question. If we have lost our character for cheapness, because we have been grasping at high profits, the remedy is clearly in our own hands. Or if occasioned by extravagant wages, or by an advance in the price of raw materials used in manufactures, the want of trade will quickly correct these evils. It turns out, however, that our character for cheapness is lost because manufacturers in other countries, whose habits and manner of living are simple and grovelling compared with our own, can afford to sell much cheaper than ourselves. Why was not this obvious truth embodied in plain terms in the petition ? .41 It appears from the following extraordinary facts that the manufactures of this country have within a few- years been greatly reduced in price. The facts are taken from the Report : * " Within seventeen or eighteen years, printed calicos have reduced 15 per cent, in price, or from 100 per cent, to 25 per cent., from various causes, the most powerful of which was competition." " The wares of Germany and France were supplant- ing those of England ; and what was more extraor- dinary, that the wares of those countries were imported to supply our own markets." " He held in his hand, also,- another specimen of gloves of foreign manufacture, and one of similar quality, of the manufacture of tins country ; but while the price of the English goods was 6s. per dozen, those of the Saxon manufacture were purchased at Hamburgh for 3s. 2d. per dozen." " While the still more important fact remains to be adduced, that Saxon hose, manufactured from English yarn, after paying a duty of 20 per cent., are beginning to be introduced into this country, and sold for home consumption, at lower prices than they can be produced by our own manufacturers." These are startling facts, but it appears that our own * See the Speech of J. \i. Snath, Esq., President of the Man- chester Chamher of Commerce. 12 prices in many cases have been reduced 75 per cent, and even beyond this., during the growth of this formidable competition, and yet the foreigner can afford to undersell us in our own country from 25 to 50 per cent., and many articles of hardware 70 per cent. The cry of cheap bread here means, unquestionably, cheap labour. To give to the artisan cheap food, without reducing his Mages to the scale abroad, is securing no advantages to the manufacturer. His object by the agitation is to lower the cost of production ; the importation of cheap grain will not effect it, unless the wages of labour be reduced. It would be doing the repealing manufac- turers an injustice to suppose them not to be aware of it. Then why is this important truth kept in the back- ground ? It ought from its importance to be brought prominently into notice, because it has a vital relation to the industrious classes. Why does not the agitating junto adopt a motto expressive of their meaning, viz. : — " Cheap bread and cheap labour ?" Why express the one, and reason upon the results of the other, without breathing the implied fact ? They remark, u We ex- ported more cotton yarn than would be sufficient to manufacture all the cotton goods we exported to all parts of the world ; and if, instead of exporting yarn, we exported it made up into goods, which we should do but for the Corn Laws, there would be employment for double the number of hand-loom, and double the number of power-loom weavers, employed in this way at present." The countries are enumerated which now take largely cotton yarn in place of manufactured goods, and which we are told have been induced to act in this way, because we have refused to admit their corn. They are : — 43 First. — Russia. Second. — France. Third. — The German States. Fourth. — The United Netherlands. Fifth. — Prussia. Sixth. — Gibraltar. Seventh. — Malta. Eighth. — Ionian Islands. Ninth. — Italy. Tenth. — Turkey. According to such reasoning, these countries would not have turned their attention to manufactures, if we had been willing to receive all the surplus grain they could have spared. The quantity must clearly be im- mense, if it is to induce them to cultivate the soil, in place of investing their capital in the formation and extension of manufactures. Such reasoning implies that peace, the progress of civilization, and the accumu- lation of capital, are to call into play none of the higher powers of the mind, which find fitting employment in mechanical contrivances and commercial pursuits. The world, indeed, is to stand still, and we alone arc to think and to cater for them, in all things beyond the common necessaries of life. Again, it is stated by them in reference to the repeal, " There were strong interests opposed to this, for the landowners knew the present system to be necessary for the support of their high rents." It is contended by repealing authorities, that the nuts would be advanced by the abolition of the II Corn Laws. We are also told, that " the landlords had been living upon the capital of the farmers ever since the peace." The capital must either have been very large at the first, or the landlords must have been mere nibblers, to account for any capital remaining at the present time, and yet, what is more extraordinary, to have in favour of the continuance of such a system the very men whose capital has been food, drink, and luxu- rious- enjoyment to the landowners ! We are likewise informed, it was these " who, like vampires, lived upon the blood of the nation." Another interesting point to which our attention is directed, are the exports imme- diately after the peace, and in 1835-6-7. " Now the declared or real value of the exports of the years 1815-16-17, was £45,000,000, while the offi- cial value was £38,500,000, and the official value of the exports of 1835-6-7, comprising double the amount of stuff, though amounting to £78,000,000, in real value amounted only to £49,000,000: instead, therefore, of the manufactures exported in the latter period being double the value, they only exceeded the exports of the former period in money value by £4,000,000, which proved that we were now exporting double the quantity of goods for the same amount of money.'''' "What an immense cheapening in the price of manu- factured goods, and yet we are undersold by the foreigner from 25 to 50 per cent. ! The most melan- choly fact is, however, this : — the amount of exports goes on increasing, — exports of manufactured goods, — and yet the working classes employed in these branches of trade 45 are in a starving condition. What has this multiplica- tion of productive power done for them? Has it in- creased their comforts — raised their wages, or placed them in a more independent position than formerly ? Their circumstances and their prospects are indeed miserably poor. What hope have they when they see a power created, which supplies the necessities of the world without the co-operation of manual labour ? Some of the repealing authorities have stated that our artisans execute in a given time a much greater quantity of work than foreigners. This is not the language held by the directors. One states, in allusion to the high wages at present received by the machine-makers on the Continent, " but competition would soon reduce prices to their proper level ; and their mechanics getting 12s. a-week would do as much as ours at 30s. a-week." " The rate of production in their mills, including the extra time worked, exceeded the rate of production here, in any mills of which he had any cognisance."* Another director remarks, " the absolute and immediate repeal of the Corn Laws would cut down the landed interest to the extent of 50 or 60 per cent. We arc in- formed by another in speaking of the working classes, " the long hours of labour, of Avhich they justly com- plained, were not fixed upon them by their employers, but by the landowners, for whom they were obliged to work four hours of every day." How disgraceful are such assertions ! The individual who makes them must know perfectly well that cheap bread, to which he alludes, is not intended to be given to them without a * R. H. Greg, Esq. 46 further reduction in the wages of labour ; and in this case, would it be the landowners or the manufacturers that would prolong their hours of exertion ? In proof that cheap labour is the object, a director remarks, " they were a kind of goods on which about 80 per cent, of the whole value was expended in labour ; and it was cheap labour, arising from the cheapness of food, that caused this, to us, alarming difference in price." * Here it is distinctly stated that we can only maintain our position by cheap labour and cheap food. From this brief analysis of the opinions of writers on the subject of the Corn Laws, they are clearly characterised by the greatest possible discrepancy — scarcely any two re- pealers entertain the same views with respect to their influence or the residts that woidd follow their abolition. The directors, who are practically acquainted with trade, exhibit in their reasoning no enlarged or just conception of the operation of the Corn Laws. They find them- selves in difficulties, and they struggle to get out, which is very natural ; but in explaining how they got in, they jumble together causes and effects, and succeed at length in confusing themselves and their hearers. The opinions of the directors may be thus summarily stated : — First. — The manufacturers have lost their pre- eminence for cheapness, though they have within the last twenty years reduced the price of goods about 70 per cent. Win. Rawson, Esq. 47 Second. — The present restrictive system is necessary for the support of the high rents of the landowners, who are vampires living upon the blood of the nation. Third. — The quantity of goods exported is nearly double what it was twenty-three years ago, but the value has only slightly advanced, so that their price has greatly decreased within this period, and yet the manu- facturers are undersold by the foreigner in many articles of large consumption, from 25 to 50 per cent. Fourth. — The artisans abroad do as much work in a given time as the artisans of this country, and receive little more than a third of the wages. Fifth. — The long hours of labour were not fixed by their employers, but by the landowners, for whom they were obliged to work four hours of every day. Sixth. — The competition abroad is occasioned by cheap labour, arising from the cheapness of food. Seventh. — The landowners have been riving upon the capital of the farmers almost ever since the peace. ■is Wc now come to the consideration of the views and reasoning of a writer, whose opinion is held in great esteem by the repealers. Argument I. — " In taking a general survey of the " history of wheat during the period proposed, from 1815 "to this time, the most striking feature is the great " inequality and fluctuation of price, the average of some " years being double that of others. This feature is not, " however, more striking in the great extent to which it " exists than it is remarkable at first that it should exist " at all. Natural fluctuations in the prices of commodi- " ties of any kind can only be the result of great and " frequent changes in the relation of the supply of, and " demand for, the article ; and this may be effected in " two ways, either by a variation in the former or " the latter." * It will not be difficult to expose the speciousness and false reasoning contained in the foregoing extract ; the whole argument rests on assumptions, and may be adduced as an admirable example of a loose and inac- curate mode of philosophising. The writer begins with the determination to see nothing but the opera- tion of one cause, and it is not surprising, therefore, that he sees nothing beyond it. To establish his posi- tions, he considers the fluctuations from 1815 to the present period, and after showing that they have been great, he arrives of course at the conclusion, that they * Influences of the Com Laws. By James Wilson, Esq. Second Edition. 49 arise solely from the injurious influence of the Corn Laws. How natural, and indeed how inevitable appears such a deduction ! What other cause or series of causes could possibly exist, anterior to 1815, at all calculated to affect, not only the price of wheat, but of other articles for many subsequent years ? He perhaps acts wisely in confining the mind to the contemplation of one object. By such procedure, he secures attention, and avoids perplexity, and what is of much greater import- ance — he produces effect. To present large and accurate views, and to preserve at every step of the investigation severe and logical reasoning, would have been a course fraught with difficulties, and of questionable utility to his party. To understand the cause of the fluctuations in the price of wheat from 1815, and for several following years, the mind must take into consideration the influence of causes long anterior to this period. A war unexampled in its magnitude, and of protracted duration, by rousing attention to the immense resources of the country, agricultural and commercial, necessarily advanced the prices of all productions. If we had de- pended at this time on foreign countries for our daily bread, what, in all probability, would have been our present situation ? The past, however, is not allowed to yield to such reasoners any instruction for the future. Their wisdom is concentrated in the present point, and contemns experience. Peace establishments, — peace prices, and peace relations, between the agricultural and manufacturing interests, are very different from those of war. A sudden transition from one to the other would be awfully ruinous in its effects ; the adjustment, lmw gradual soever in its character, is fraught with serious j) .50 consequences. The process was in operation from 181.5 to 1827, and between these periods, ivhat convulsions and vicissitudes affected both interests ! an alternate and undue expansion and contraction of the currency caused corresponding fits of prosperity and adversity. The prices of all productions necessarily rose and fell on these occasions, and to imagine any close approximation to a steadiness of prices possible, during the process of transition, is to calculate on stability amidst the elements of change ; to ascribe the fluctuations to the influence of the Corn Laws, is about as reasonable as it would be to trace them to the tail of the comet that last touched our horizon. Argument II. — " The fluctuations, he contends, are " much greater than have been experienced in any of " the chief products of our distant colonies, notwithstand- " ing they are subject to the influence of climates, and " circumstances much less certain, to hurricanes and dis- " asters, to droughts and inundations, and to a train of " vicissitudes natural and political, wholly unknown in " the production of wheat." This country and our distant colonies were very dif- ferently circumstanced during the war. We were thrown more upon the resources of the latter, during the protracted struggle for political existence, than at any former period; and hence they were gainers by our peculiar position. Nor was an artificial state of things the consequence of it ; no transition after the war was required to adapt them to peace prices and peace relations. Their resources had been developed, but not 51 by unnatural exertions. Heavy taxation during the war was not felt by them, nor have the prices of their pro- ductions subsequently been regulated by it; peace to them was a continuation of the same favourable circum- stances. They experienced the advantage of an influx of capital — increase of population from immigration, and its consequent blessings — improvements in the arts and the progress of civilization. The absence of a ponderous national debt and a necessarily complicated and exten- sive system of taxation, make their situation the antipodes of our own. Is it not strange, that with these striking differences in view, any writer should regard the mother country audits colonies similarly circumstanced, and should so far sink the logician, as to draw illustrations from the condition of the one, and regard them as strictly appli- cable to that of the other ? We need not express sur- prise at such specimens of reasoning ; they will be found to pervade the whole tissue of the inquiry. Narrow and partial views are the rule, and not the exception. Argument III. — " It is quite plain, that inequality of " demand cannot have been the cause of fluctuations of " price ; the inequality must have arisen in the supply." The writer argues throughout the investigation, as if steadiness of prices was an admitted fact, in coun- tries in which Corn Laws have no existence; and, moreover, that the prices of all articles liable to be influenced by the seasons are unchangeable, providing their production at home, or their importation from abroad, be unfettered by restrictions. Such assumptions are notoriously false. To calculate on steadiness of .) 2 52 prices in any class of productions, and especially such as are materially affected in quality and quantity by the seasons, exhibits rather the skill of the sophist than the exercise of sound judgment. There is no doubt that the fluctuations originate principally in inequalities in the amount of supply. But there cannot possibly be any permanent remedy for such evils. No conceivable plan of legislation, nor its entire absence of control, can guard against them. Steadiness of prices supposes the demand and supply always equal, which is an impossi- bility, whether confined to our own agricultural exer- tions, or permitted the unrestricted benefit of the foreign market. Let us imagine we have the advantage of both, independently of all legislative enactments, how will the price be maintained, under the most favour- able circumstances, for a series of years ? Suppose for two seasons in succession, both the home and the foreign agriculturist blest with abundant harvests. If the sup- ply were just equal to the demand in seasons of average plenty, is it not evident that it will now greatly exceed it ? What is the effect of a surplus ? Unquestionably to cheapen the price of the productions on hand ; and nothing can prevent the operation of this circumstance. The only mode by which it can be obviated is to change the constitution of the human mind, so that neither the buyer nor the seller will be influenced by motives of interest. Imagine two bad seasons — seasons in which the quantity is greatly beneath the average, and the quality seriously deteriorated. "Will the prices charac- terising abundant harvests prevail at this time ? Cer- tainly not. The demand now exceeds the supply. To deny this, is to imply in the argument, that there is 53 somewhere such a stock of wheat on hand, that it comes in at this opportune moment, to make the supply just equal to the demand. The supposition would be in the highest degree absurd. This stock, if known to have existence during plentiful harvests, would tend of course to swell the abundance, and by lowering the prices still more, would aggravate the fluctuations which it is sup- posed to be capable of correcting. In reference to a fluctuating scale of duties on the importation of grain, he remarks : — Argument IV. — " Provided there were in the nature " of the article its elf the necessary elements of fluctuation, " which has been shown do not exist, then such a regula- " tion might possibly have been useful ; but if, instead of " such a tendency, it is found that if left to itself, it has " the direct contrary tendency — that of maintaining an " equality of value : — that this ingenious device was only " an attempt to cure an evil which would not have " existed but for the interference of the legislature." The elements of fluctuation exist in the article. To argue otherwise is to contend against notorious facts. Such elements are common to all productions. The fluctuations in the price of wheat in this country, from the enactment of the present Corn Laws to 1837, were as follow : — Per Quarter. 1828 . . . 60*. Od. 1829 . . . . 06 1830 . . . 64 1831 . . . 66 54 Per Quarter. 58 52 46 8 40 47 55 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 The average price during these ten years was only 55s. 5d. per quarter. The fluctuations in the price of flour in the United States, during a series of years, will be found to exceed those indicated by the foregoing table. Dollars. Cents. Per Barrel. 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1829 1830 1831 1834 1835 1836 1837 The average price during those thirteen years was 7 dollars, 60 cents per bushel. The fluctuations in the price of cotton were in two years only as follow : — 9 do. 13 50 do. 10 do. 9 do. 6 do. 4 do. 8 50 do. 4 50 do. 6 62 do. 5 12 do. 4 25 do. 6 87 do. 11 50 do. Per lb 1838, June, Sea Island . \bd. „ — Upland . 5k „ New Orleans . . 5} 1839 — Sea Island 21 „ — Upland • 7h „ New Orleans 7 55 The fluctuations in the price of bristles at Petersburg are great, and, like those of grain, they arise almost altogether from the character of the seasons. Petersburg. Per Cwt. £. s. d. 1830, July 13, do. do. 11 11 1831, Sept. 9, do. do. 13 1 1832, Sept. 26, do. do. 12 3 1834, April 11, do. do. 18 18 1835, Oct. 24, do. do. 21 2 1836, May 2, do. do. 20 7 6 1837, Sept. 4, do. do. 16 1 1838, Sept. 26, do. do. 21 6 1839, April 7, do. do. 22 These facts are alone a sufficient refutation of the doc- trine inculcated by this author ; but how visionary, to imagine steadiness of prices attainable under any cir- cumstances ! Argument V. — " It is worthy of observation that, not- " withstanding the crisis of 1836-37, and notwithstand- " ing the immensely increased supplies of foreign and " colonial wool, the prices have not fallen, which is a " cheering evidence of the rapid increase of our con- " sumption of wool." This admission is a little unexpected. The repealers talk of the ruin of trade from foreign competition and restrictions on the importation of foreign produc- tions; but it is here distinctly stated, that, notwith- standing the crisis of 1836-37, the consumption of wool was not diminished. This can be explained only on one of two suppositions, — either on increased con- 56 Stun j ii ir wheat, which is Hi*- average of the past ten years. 71 mated aa equivalent in value to 1,500,000 quarters of wheat. In order to simplify the question, the decrease will be estimated in wheat alone. Assuming this quan- tity, and adding it to the importation of grain in 1838 and 1839, a sufficiently accurate estimate of the deficiency of these years ; or, in other words, the loss in quantity to the grower, may be formed. For one part of the esti- mate there are statistical facts of unquestionable accuracy, viz. the amount of grain imported. Quantities of grain imported in 1838 and 1839. 1838. 1839. Wheat . qrs. 1,736,207 2,521,111 Barley . ,■> 8,193 594,485 Oats >. 11,070 864,240 Rye . » 2,517 152,421 Peas • s> 11,618 169,997 Beans • 54,240 123,264 2,023,845 4,425,518 From these calculations it is evident, that the home grower suffers a serious loss in the greatly diminished quantity of grain produced, and the amount must clearly be taken into consideration before attempting to show his actual gain by the enhancement of prices. It is rather a novel mode of reasoning to establish the gain, without any reference to the quantity of production. And it is equally strange to attempt to prove the im- mense loss incurred by the agriculturist in exceedingly bountiful harvests, by a reduction of prices, without at all taking into account the contemporaneous increase in the quantity of produce. The calculations which esta- blish the amount of deficiency in the years 1838 and 1839 will be admitted as being, at least, the difference 75 between a bountiful and a deficient harvest ; they leave out of consideration, however, the quantity which remains on hand, and ivhich is disposed of the year following. When an article is extremely cheap, there is necessarily a large stock reserved for subsequent consumption, and this must be regarded as so much gain to the grower, compared with the actual quantity produced in an un- favourable season. Let us estimate the difference in the quantity of pro- duce between the years 1835 and 1836, and the years 1838 and 1839. It will then be easy to expose the ex- traordinary fallacies respecting the loss and gain of those respective periods. The quantity of produce, in the two former years, is to be ascertained by three different inquiries : — First. — The difference between the importations of grain in these years, compared with those of deficient harvests. Second. — The consumption of grain is always greatly increased when it is cheap, and its application to various purposes is likewise more general and profuse. Third. — The greater quantity kept on hand and re- served for subsequent consumption, in years of inordi- nate abundance, than in seasons characterised by deficient production. It must be admitted that there are no Certain facts, on which to found precise calculation, with reaped to 76 1835. 1836. 16,350 19,554 136,853 110,021 176,141 97,184 3 18 25,184 80,338 69,823 87,736 the two latter heads. There is no difficulty connected with the first inquiry. Quantities of Grain imported in 1835 and 1830 : — Wheat . . . qrs. Barley . . „ Oats . Rye Peas „ Beans . . „ 424,354 394,851 From this, and the foregoing tables, it appears that The total imports of 1838 and 1839 were 6,449,363 qrs. Ditto 1835 and 1836 were 819,205 qrs. Difference 5,630,158 We have, also, supposed that the greater consump- tion of grain in seasons of abundance than in years of scarcity will be at least 1,500,000 quarters. It unfortunately happens, there are no data on which to calculate the surplus quantity on hand after its profuse and wasteful consumption in years of plenty. That the quantity is considerable does not admit of doubt, as is evident, if the subsequent harvest happen to be beneath the average production. In this case the effects of the actual diminution are materially modified by the surplus quantity on hand. And again, how severely are the effects of a second bad harvest felt, in 77 consequence of the veiy limited stock in the granaries from the preceding year. Even the writer whose opinions we are controverting, states, as an objection to an abundant harvest, that the surplus quantity produced is carried to the next year, and keeps down prices. In the absence of all data, the difference in the quan- tity reserved, in the periods compared, will be alloAved to be at least 1,000,000 in favour of 1835 and 1836. The difference between the two periods will stand thus in figures : — The difference between the imports of 1838 and 1839, and the years 1835 and 1836, and which must clearly be regarded as a quan- tity in favour of the productiveness of the latter periods, is .... 5,630,158 qrs. The greater consumption of grain from its cheapness 1,500,000 The greater surplus quantity reserved for subsequent consumption . . . 1,000,000 Total 8,130,158 qrs. Such is about the difference in the quantities pro- duced in the two periods compared, one marked by great abundance, and the other by great scarcity and deterioration of quality. The average price of wheat in l83."> was 39*. \(' a restrictive policy energy of purpose and a force of reasoning that no sophistry can grapple with. The well-being of the country unquestionably depends <>n the amount of its exports, and its ability to consume its own manufactures. On this view the opponent of repeal contend, that were this measure to lie carried into effect, momentary prosperity to the m; facturing interesl might result, but permanent injury would be m- 80 Jlicted upon the agricultural, and 09 an inevitable con- sequence, ultimately, on the manufacturing and com- mercial in '(rests. The reasoning adduced by the opponents, in favour of the necessity of repeal, is the same line of argument followed by the supporters of a restrictive policy, and ■when used by them it has this advantage, it rests not simply on assumptions or gratuitous statements, but on calculations the data of which are furnished by experi- ence. There is nothing hypothetical about the effects of competition, and they are the same whether they be studied in connexion with agriculture or manufactures. To assert that those engaged in agriculture would be benefited by competition is equivalent to saying, that whatever diminishes profits, and increases the necessity for exertion, is advantageous to the productive classes. The manufacturers complain of the injurious effects of foreign competition, they urge it on the consideration of the legislature, as the cause of the greater part of their present distress. It thus appears that a condition which is detrimental to their interests is advocated as capable of conferring upon the agricultural incalculable benefits. How much more forcible then arguments would be, if they could adduce the good effects of competition as experienced by them. It is contended by all repealers, with the exception of the writer in question, that grain would be imported in large quantities on the abolition of the Corn Laws. Of this there is no doubt. The consumption of wheat annually in this country is variously estimated. By some it is calculated at 81 12,000,000, by others as high as 16,000,000 quarters. What will be the amount of annual importation, on the repeal of these laws, is extremely difficult to state. In seasons of deficient crops, about 3,000,000 quarters are sometimes imported ; and it is natural to suppose that this quantity would be greatly exceeded, when the foreign grower would be stimulated to augment his pro- duce, by the certainty of always finding a market for it. Admit that 16,000,000 quarters are consumed annually, it will not be extravagant to calculate on the importa- tion of 4,000,000 quarters. It is impossible to consume both quantities, and therefore it folio avs, that we shall permanently purchase of the home grower less by the latter amount. So far as this reduction goes, simply as quantity, the ability of the agriculturist to encourage the manufactures of this country will clearly be dimin- ished in this proportion. The circumstance which thus seriously affects the extent of his production, will also depreciate the prices of whatever he produces. Some of the repealers state, that wheat would be lowered in price, by unrestricted importation, only about 10 or 12 shillings per quarter. On this low estimate, an estimate much beneath the truth, it is not difficult to show, what would be the amount of loss incurred by the home grower : — The 4,000,000 produced less, calculated at the average price of 45*. per quarter, would be a loss to the farmer J scheffel, at 5* 3|rf. is 28s. 3d. per Imp. Qi . " Rye, 5J ,, 3 Bj 19 11^ "Barley, 5j ,, 2 'J; 15 I | "Oats, A| ,, 2 0\ 11 1* "The average prices in Dantzig, in the following " years, were — 96 1817 1818 1819 1820 18-21 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 : 1827 75*. 8rf. per quarter. G4 7 9 3 7 1 43 33 3 1 29 26 22 23 23 22 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1335 1836 1837 1838 Average of the whole period 24*. 4 re- ceive; less being inadequate to remunerate liiin for Labour 98 and capital employed. The average for the nine years preceding 1833 is only 29s. Id. From this inquiry it is obvious that the foreign grower would be able to bring wheat to different ports for export- ation, for years in succession, not at the average price of 28s. per quarter, according to our calculation, but frequently, as appears from the foregoing table, as low as 25s. 5d. and 23s., the prices of 1834 and 1835. These would be the prices against which the home agriculturist would have to contend in times of great abundance, when indeed without competition he is forced to dispose of his produce at less than a fair remunerating reward. What would be his condition with competition under such circumstances ? Ruin, without the prospect of re- covery. There would then be no advancing prices, as under the present restrictive system, of which he would have the sole benefit up to a certain point. The compe- tition would be severely felt by him, and with the same intensity, throughout the whole range of changes. And yet this is the condition which the repealers assert will be beneficial to the agricultural interest. In the name of justice, let them be preserved from such benefits ! The most deceptive part of the fallacy is the following passage : — " We will consider that we have now arrived " at such prime cost of wheat, ready for shipment in a " port in Prussia, as will enable that country to sustain " its cultivation exactly in the condition in which it is, " both in respect to quantity, quality, and the advan- tages derived by all those connected with its pro- " duction." 99 In a previous part of his work, the writer breaks out into rapturous exclamations about the fineness of our cli- mate, the richness of our soils, and the immense capital at command for agricultural purposes. He calculates on great improvements in the various processes of agriculture, by which the home-grower will be better able to afford his produce at a cheaper rate than at present. But how strange, the spirit of improvement, according to his rea- soning, is to be confined to us. We only are to advance. The continental grower is to stand still. The fine mar- ket we shall open to his produce is to make no change in the breadth of land under cultivation abroad, nor is there to be any difference in the quantity or quality of grain grown. This is taking an enlarged and comprehensive view of the subject indeed. What a pity such a view, so flatter- ing to our national pride, notices only one half of the facts ! What the foreigner wants is capital, and yet this when acquired is to suggest, or to lead to no improve- ments ; nor in any degree to modify the habits of the people or improve the quality of the soil. Argument XX. " We have calculated the precise "actual charges, which many real shipments have " shown : — " Unhousing, shipping, and export-dues, at Dantzisr, paid by the shipper there . Iff. 9rf. per qr. " Freight and primage . . .00,, " Sound dues . . . .06,, 100 " Insurance, in winti 1 £5 5s. i)d. per cent. " Dilto, sprinor 15 6 10 " Average ..350 " At 50s. per quarter to cover all charges, £100 would be 40 quarters, or . . Is. 1\>I. per qr. " Entry and lighterage . . .06 '' Met age inwards . . ..06 " Landing . . . . .04 " Warehouse-rent, and insurance against fire for six months, at 5s. per 100 quarters per week, or . ..13 " Turning for six months, at 1*. 6rf. per 100 quarters per week, or . .04 " Loss in quantity, and damage from the time of shipment at Dantzig, until so;d after lying six months in granary, 3 per cent, a' 50*. per quarter, is . J G " Metage, portion paid by seller . .04 " Delivering . . ..03 " Interest of money for nine months, includ- ing the voyage and the customary credit given on wheat, at 50s. per quarter, at 5 per cent, per annum . . . 1 IO3 18 3 " Of which is paid by the shipper Is. 9d- " And by the purchaser . 16 6 18 3 " In this calculation we have assumed that the wheat " shall be six months in warehouse on an average, which 101 " must be considered a very moderate time, in case a " regular trade should be carried on between the Con- " tinent and this country, free at all times. These " charges are the nett cost, without any profit to the " merchant shipping from Dantzig, or without any com- " mission to the merchant in London, to whom it miarht " be consigned, without which, it is quite clear, no trade " would continue to be carried forward. — So that if we " add to the prime cost these charges, we shall bring the " Prussian wheat into the posture of competition with " British-grown at a seaport, thus : — " Prime cost . . 34*. 3d. per qr. " Shipping, landing, warehous- ing for six months, and selling IS 3 " 5 per cent, profit, or commis- sion on 50s'. per quarter, be- tween the merchant in Dant- zig and in England . .26 55 0" Were these calculations at all to be depended upon, it is evident that the home-grower has sufficient protec- tion, without any restrictions whatever imposed by law. If wheat could not be imported and sold in this country under 55*. per quarter, there could only be one feeling prevailing with respect to the propriety of removing such restrictions. The calculations of the writer axe far from being cor rect. Wheat is imported from the places mentioned by him in spring and summer, for about one-third of the expense stated. 102 The following tabic is furnished to us by persons in the corn trade, resident in Hull, and gives the actual charges paid l>i/ them within the past year. What has been done, and what is occurring daily in ordinary business transactions, is practical, and to be depended upon. Indeed, all calculations are valueless, unless founded on facts. Average freights on Wheat. Spring and Summer. Autumn. FromDantzig&Konigsberg 5s. Od. . 5s. 6d to 7s. per qr. „ Lower Baltic Ports . 4 6 to 4s. . 5 , , 6 „ Hamburg . .26 .30 „ Mediterranean Ports 6 0,, 8 „ The Black Sea ditto 10 0,, 12 On Oats. From Archangel .... 4*. 6d. per qr- ,, Petersburg . . . .43,, ,, the Ports above named 22^-per cent, less than for Wheat. The Insurance on 100 quarters of Wheat, from — In Spring. In Summer. In Autumn. Dantzig, &c 40s- to 30*. 1 5s. to 20*. 3 to 5 per cent. Hamburg 20 „ 15 10 20*. to 30*. Mediterranean 15 ,. 25 2 to 3 per cent. Black Sea 30 „ 25 50*. to 60*. Petersburg . . 15*. to 20*. in aut iimn, 3 to 5 per cent Archangel . . 15 „ 20 , , 3 ,, 5 , , Charges into the warehouse on 100 qrs. Wheat. Primage . . . . £o 5*. orf. Corporation dues . . 8 4 Sound dues . . . 15 Metage . . . 10 10 10:3 Lighterage . . . £0 13*. Ad. Landing . . . 1 10 Banker's Corami, Stamps, & Postage 1 8 £6 6 Or about 1*. 2d. per quarter. According to this table, the expenses of importation are much less than the amount stated by the writer. And, let the reader remember, that these are not mere theoretical calculations, but are expenses which have actually been paid in the ordinary transactions of busi- ness. We may now proceed to compare the facts in this table with the statements of the writer. Average freight on wheat in spring and autumn from Dantzig and Konigsberg . . 5*. Vd. Insurance on 100 qrs. in spring, from 30*. to 40*. — at 35s. it is something less than 4£rf. per quarter, but allow . . .06 Charges into the warehouse, per quarter, about 1 2 Total expenses per quarter ..68 In summer the insurance is less than is here stated, and in autumn and wintei both the freight and insurance are higher, as shown by the tabic. The average price of wheal in Dantzig from L8 1837 is proved in the foregoing pages to have been only 28*. Id. per quarter ; so that, dining these years, vi heal in I would have been imported and sold in this country at the following rate : — Average pi ice for five years in succession 28s-. Id- per qr. Freight, insurance, and various charges fi 8 34 9 In endeavouring to trace the effects that would arise from the repeal of the Corn Laws, it is not our business to consider the average price of wheat abroad for a long scries of years. The average might possibly not be low ; and yet wheat, for two or three successive years, might be little more than half the average. In 1834, Wheat was selling: at Dantzi? for 25*. 5d. per qr. In 1835, ,, ,, 23 So that if 6s. 8d., the expense of importation in spring and autumn, be added to either sum, wheat would have been sold In 1834, in this country, at 32s. Id. per qr. In 1835, ,, at 29 8 The price of wheat was affording at these periods no fair remuneration for labour and capital employed ; but how lamentable and appalling would the consequences have been, if at that moment the competition of the foreign grower had been permitted to reduce the already too low prices to one-third less, which would have been the case ! What consolation would the home agricul- turist find in the reflection, that the average price of 105 wheat abroad for twenty years preceding, had been higher by one-third than at these periods ? The retro- spect would have offered no balm to soothe the evils of the present time. He would have been ruined by such competition. The consequent depression and misery, and the breadth of land necessarily thrown out of culti- vation, would prevent his reaping the benefit of the higher prices of subsequent years. The advantages would be largely enjoyed by the foreigner. An interesting fact in illustration of this may be mentioned. — Some years ago, the duty on rape-seed was £10 per last, which preventing to a great extent continental competition, the market was almost entirely supplied by home production. This duty was taken off, and one of 10s. only was substituted, which cannot be regarded in the light of protection ; the market then was altogether supplied by the foreigner, and he has retained sole possession of it ever since. The fineness of our climate, and the richness of our soils, and the immense capital which the home farmer can command, conjoined with all his improvements, have not enabled him to contend against or arrest this competition. He has been forced to turn his attention to other objects, and perhaps it may be remarked, that in this there is no evil. His attention, it may be urged, is turned to objects that afford a fair remuneration ; but if protection be removed from all kinds of grain, he will clearly have no choice. The foreigner will cheapen grain generally, as he has cheapened rape-seed ; and under sncli circumstances, where will the home farmer look for remuneration for capital, labour, and ingenious improve- ments . When the price of rape-seed has been for a lOti few years such as to pay for cultivation in this country, its growth has again been partially promoted; but it has always been immediately arrested by the large importations of the foreigner. The attempt at competi- tion is at once, stifled by him. It is asserted that prices will be steady on a free importation of grain. Rape- seed may be regarded as admitted duty free, and yet it exhibits fluctuations as great as those of wheat, for the same number of years. The fluctuations of prices have ranged between £20 and £30 per last. Argument XXI. — " During the first seventy-three " years of the last century a bounty of 5s. per quarter " was given by law on all wheat exported, whenever " the average price was at or below 48s. per quarter, " and importation almost prohibited. It must be ad- " mitted that this bounty could not be sufficient to pay " the charges of taking wheat from this country to the " Continent, but still we find, that during this period " England was the largest wheat-exporting country in " Europe. There is no doubt that the bounty on ex- " port gave a great, and perhaps unprofitable stimulant " to production ; but still, during the whole period of its " existence, our farmers continued to be large exporters : " now if this bounty was not sufficient to pay the " charges of export, it is clear, that when the British " wheat arrived on the Continent, it had even to en- " counter the disadvantage of bearing a considerable " charge above the bounty given ; and if it was able to " bear this charge, and compete with the growth of the "Continent, how mucli more could the former compete " with the latter, if retained at home ivithout any addi- 107 " tional charge, while the foreigner would have to come " here at a considerable cost.'''' This extract is another example, in addition to the many already given, of the very limited and inaccurate view which the writer takes of this important subject. He neither troubles himself nor his readers with any inquiry into the operation and effects of causes, which have come into existence between the periods which he compares. He regards the social, physical, and in- tellectual condition of countries the same now as they were a century ago. The spirit of change has brought under observation no element nor agent worthy of con- sideration. This is certainly a very easy and self- satisfying mode of conducting an inquiry, especially when a minute investigation might possibly bring to light facts which would clash with principles incul- cated. When the Bounty Act was passed, this country was in its character more agricultural than manu- facturing and commercial, and the Continent at this time, compared with this country, had more of the latter character than the former. But how great have been the changes since the passing of the Bounty Act 1 Since this period, the manufactures of our country have sprung into existence, exercising an extraonlin;ir\ influence on the whole civilised world. The power, riches, and importance which they have conferred upon this nation have created new interests, and changed the relation of old ones. Perhaps the best evidences oi this revolution are t li< • high pines ofeverj thing in tin- 108 country^ compared with the continental scale. Many articles of Large and necessary consumption are higher by 30 or 10 per cent, here than abroad. Grain of all descriptions, the great necessary of life, is one of these articles, and it proves the immense progress of the nation in arts and manufactures, and it exhibits the effects of their successful cultivation, in the accumulation of wealth, and in the creation of the luxuries and elegancies of life. It is an undoubted fact, that the average price of wheat on the Continent is from 30 to 50 per cent lower than in this country ; and therefore it is manifest, that the foreign grower, were restrictions on the importation of grain removed, would be able — after deducting all expenses of conveyance — to greatly undersell the home-grower, even in his most abundant seasons. The Bounty Act was an excellent regulation. It gave an impulse to agricultural improvements, and by its encouragement to the production of the first necessaries of life, fostered and invigorated the growing tendencies of the nation towards manufacturing pur- suits. When the act was passed, it was imagined that grain would be enhanced in price, at least by the amount of the bounty ; but so far from this being the case, the price of grain fell. The repeal of the Corn Laws would have the same effect on the price of produce abroad, because it would furnish capital, excite a spirit of enter- prise, and bring into play greater skill and industry. A permanently increasing demand for an article always cheapens it, provided its culture or manufacture 109 admit of improvements by which the usual cost of pro- duction is diminished. This is strikingly the case with agriculture. The demand necessarily forces into culti- vation a greater breadth of land, but more especially leads to improved methods of culture, by which the productiveness of the soil is immensely augmented. The contrary doctrine is taught by the repealers, and indeed, one of the anticipated benefits on which they calculate from the abolition of the Corn Laws, and not the least important, is in enhancing the price of bread abroad. The doctrine is however decidedly false. The gradually increasing demand for the necessaries of life in this country has cheapened them in relation to most other articles. Higher rents, heavier taxes, and addi- tional expenses of every kind, are borne with compara- tive ease by the agricultural interest, from no other cause than the improved productiveness of the soil. Look at the appearance of the country now, and compare it with times past. The roads are the best evidence of what the eye cannot see beyond them. They afford indications of wealth, industry, and comfort. At no period was the agricultural interest generally in a sounder state. And this condition is not induced at the expense of the manufacturing and commercial interests, but is the result of industrial habits, the diffusion of knowledge, and a higher tone of civilization. Argument XXII. — "It is extremely worthy of re- " mark, that the average price during the thirty-two "years that this law continued in operation,* is shown " * By a slight alteration in the law, in 1791, the price of ad "mission at dd. per quarter was raised from 48*. tn 54*. per " quarter." 110 •• to be 2a. '-V. per quarter higher than the average of " the last seven years, and 11*. lie/, per quarter higher •■ than the average of the thirty-two preceding, with the " assistance of the bounty on exports and prohibited " imports. The following table shows a comparative " view of the range of prices during these two periods : Average, No. 1. Average, No. 2. Years. s. d. Years. s. d. 1772 50 8 1773 51 1771 47 2 1774 52 8 1770 41 4 1775 48 4 1769 45 8 1776 38 2 1768 60 6 1777 45 6 1767 64 6 1778 42 1766 43 1 1779 33 8 17G5 52 1780 35 8 1764 46 9 1781 44 8 1763 40 9 1782 47 10 1762 39 1783 52 8 1761 30 3 1784 48 10 1760 36 6 1785 51 10 1759 39 10 1786 38 10 1758 70 1787 41 2 1757 60 1788 45 1756 45 3 1789 51 2 1755 33 10 1790 53 2 1754 34 8 1791 47 2 1753 44 8 1792 41 9 1752 41 10 1793 47 10 1751 38 6 1794 50 8 1750 32 6 1795 72 11 1749 1796 76 3 1748 27 1797 52 2 1747 34 10 1798 50 4 1746 39 1799 66 11 1745 27 6 1800 110 5 1744 1801 115 11 1743 24 10 1802 67 9 1742 34 1803 57 1 1741 46 8 1804 60 5 Average of the whole Average of the whole period, 42*. 5d. period, 54*. 4d. Ill " 1. — Average price of wheat in Great Britain in " each year of the thirty-two years preceding " 1773, when a bounty was given on exports, " and strict prohibition against imports. " 2. — Average price of wheat in Great Britain in " each year, from 1773 to 1804, when the bounty " was repealed, and importation allowed at 6d. " per quarter duty, when the average price "should not be below 48s., and, from 1791, " 54s. per quarter. " The experience of these two periods proves not only " the total inefficacy of any government interference to " control or influence production or prices, but it also " proves again, that the landed interest of this country " has no competition to fear, except that of its own " over-excited and stimulated power, put forth to an " extravagant extent to catch the phantom advantages " held out by protective laws. There never was a time " of surplus stock and low prices which proceeded from " any other cause. During the thirty-two years that " our trade was free, there was surely abundance of " time for the continental countries to take all the ad- " vantage of the privilege, if it had proved really a " profitable one." The foregoing table is presented as satisfactorily showing that the home-grower has nothing to appre- hend from foreign competition, on the free importation of grain. The attention of the reader is directed to am column of thirty-two years, when a bounty was given 11-2 «m exports and a strict prohibition against imports, during which period the average price was 42s. 5d. He is next requested to examine the other column of thirty-two years, when the bounty was repealed and importation allowed at 6d. per quarter duty, on the average price not being below 48s., and from 1791, 54s. per quarter. It is intended to be shown by this statement, that the home-grower was better remunerated when foreign competition was brought into the field, than when he had the field to himself; hence the advantage of competition. Carrying out this princi- ple, it is manifest, that the multitude who agitate for repeal in order to procure cheap bread, will be greatly disappointed. The repeal, according to the reasoning of the writer, will very much enhance the price of bread ; hence the great objection to repeal. If this effect inevitably follow the introduction of competition, let the multitude be made acquainted with it. It is too impor- tant a truth to be kept in the back-ground. Let it be universally understood that the repeal will enhance, and not cheapen, the necessaries of life. The Bounty Act was repealed in 1773, having served the end for which it was designed. It had led to many improvements in agriculture ; and manufactures, from the impulse derived from its healthy and invigorating condition, were beginning to change the habits, the feel- ings, and the wants of the nation. The agricultural preponderance in the state was in the gradual process of transference to the manufacturing interest, and hence the increasing demand for the productions of the soil, and clearly a diminished necessity for a bounty on exportation. 113 The writer remarks, — " During the thirty-two- years " that our trade was tree, there was surely abundance " of time for the continental countries to take all the " advantage of the privilege, if it had proved really a " profitable one." The condition of agriculture abroad, previous to 1773, must have been in an exceedingly depressed state, either from the want of capital or industry ; or otherwise it would have been impossible for wheat to have been largely exported to the Continent from the advantage of merely 5s. bounty. Added to this, there would be the expense of freight, insurance, dues, and various charges, and yet there was a ready market for it. This can be explained only on the de- pressed condition of agriculture abroad. There can, indeed, be no better evidence of it, than the fact of ex- portation from this country. A close analysis of the table presented by the writer will however show, that for a period of ten years, when wheat was exported and importation not allowed, its price was higher than the average in the same length of time, when the ports were open to foreign grain. — (See next page.) 114 i'or the ton yean previous to the repeal of the bounty. Average prtceof Wheal in thisenuutrj for ten yean after the repeal of the Bounty. s. d. i s. d. 17G3 40 9 1773 51 1/64 46 9 1774 52 8 1765 52 1775 48 4 17G6 43 1 1776 38 2 1767 64 6 1777 45 6 1768 60 6 1778 42 1769 45 8 1779 33 8 1770 41 4 1780 35 8 1771 47 2 1781 44 8 1772 50 8 1782 47 10 Average of the teu years, 495. 2d. Average of the ten years, 43s. lid. According to this table, the average price of wheat was higher by 5s. 3d. per quarter, when the bounty for exportation existed, than when foreign grain might be regarded as admitted duty free. The conclusion to be drawn from this fact is, that as our produce found a market at the one period, when it was higher by 5s. 3d. per quarter, than in the subsequent ten years, there was clearly no ground for calculation in the latter, on any large importations from abroad. A nation which paid for ten years such a price for wheat, exclusively of the expenses of freight, insurance, dues, and various unavoidable charges, was certainly not likely to be in a situation in the ten subsequent years to import, when the prices were lower in this country than during the ten years we exported. It is absurd to calculate on any extensive importations under such circumstances. We proceed now to examine the price of wheat from 1783 to 1792, the ten years immediately following the ten already analysed. 115 *. d. 1783 52 8 1784 48 Id 1785 51 10 1786 38 10 1787 41 2 1788 45 1789 51 2 1790 53 2 1791 47 2 1792 41 9 Average price for the ten years, 47s. Id. During these years, the price of wheat was 2s. Id. lower than during the last ten years of exportation, and consequently there could be no great inducement for the foreign grower to compete against the home agricul- turist. As already stated, the inability of the former to export is satisfactorily established by his immediately previous necessity of importing. In examining the twelve years from 1793 to 1804, the average price of wheat will be found to have advanced considerably ; but circumstances, which the writer has left altogether out of consideration, prevented the foreign grower enjoying the advantage. 116 Average price of Wheat from 1793 to 1804. s. be an exceedingly difficult investigation. The difficult} i In discover 'lata for the groundwork of the calculation. //' presumestht 1-M data to he the average amount of exports for a series of years. Suppose a person were to attempt to estimate the capabilities of a manufacturing nation, in the com- parative infancy of the arts, by taking into consideration the amount of manufactures exported for any given number of years, could his conclusions be otherwise than false ? They would be founded on two assumptions ; the first, that no improvements in the process of manu- factures would take place ; the second, that the demand would never exceed the average annual consumption of preceding years. Such data would clearly be of no value, and the same may be said with almost equal truth of the capabilities of agricultural countries to export grain, estimated by previous exports. The argument may, indeed, be applied with even greater force to the exist- ing condition of agriculture abroad. It is certainly somewhat amusing that the writer should regard the exports in any degree a measure of the surplus, or spare produce of these countries, when it is considered that it is admitted only occasionally, and sometimes at very dis- tant intervals, into this kingdom. These occasional de- mands are demands so uncertain, irregular, and limit- ed, that they cannot possibly bring into operation the great natural resources of any country. Were it even allowed that the foreign agriculturist has abundance of capital, to employ it in creating produce beyond the necessities of his own district, would be injudicious and ruinous in its consequences. Previously to taking any steps towards obtaining an Act of Parliament for the construction of a Railway, it is usual to ascertain accu- rately the amount of traffic on the principal road or roads with which the proposed line would interfere, and 125 then to multiply this in the ratio of three or four, thus arriving at an estimate which affords the best grounds for an application, and inspires confidence as an invest- ment for capital. This procedure seldom leads to any serious errors. The estimate is more frequently under than over the amount of actual traffic. It would be supposed, that the writer would have adopted a similar procedure, in calculating the capabilities of agricultural countries to export. The first step was to ascertain the quantity of grain which had for a series of years been imported into this country, and then to endeavour to establish data on which to calculate the probable amount of the future. The past alone affords no guide. It docs not indeed present even the data of a common high road to the projectors of a Railway. The road is constantly open, and hence so far the facts which it furnishes are sound. The occasional imports of grain, whatever may be the quantity, cannot be regarded as the amount of surplus which corn-growing countries can spare, but rather the amount of what we want. Our necessities and their capabilities are two different things. His reasoning would have been just, if instituted for the purpose of determining our average annual depend- ence on others for this staple commodity. But this is no part of his investigation ; but certainly his premises admit of no other application. Much of his reasoning is based on the fact, that in nineteen years, from 1817 to 1835 inclusive, the ave- rage annual quanity of foreign wheat and Hour, taken into consumption, was only 532,237 quarters. In this ] 26 calculation he ua departing from his own principle. He has previously confined his attention to the exports of other countries, without at all considering whether the produce im ported be entirely for our own consumption, or partly for re-exportation . The amount taken for consumption is the measure of our necessities, and not the ability of foreign countries to produce grain. The two questions must not be con- founded. The average of the imports for the last six years, from 1834 to 1839, will be found to exceed greatly the average which he has given. This period is sufficiently long, and the seasons have been sufficiently varied in their character to furnish fair average results. Before presenting the table, it is right to remark that the imports of all kinds of grain, and not of wheat only, ought to be given. The interest of the home-grower is not confined to wheat. He depends on the general productions of the soil. Quar tities of Grain in the following years. i 1834 1835 | 1836 1837 1838 1839 Wheat Barley Oats . Rye . Peas . Beans. qrs. 131,132 87,181 175,641 10 67,924 47,469 qrs. 42,627 67,796 113,067 24.187 34,379 qrs. 168,747 83,482 131,056 6,626 77,703 92,911 qrs. 455,828 87.802 415,721 30,710 111,289 106,448 qrs. 1,241,461 2,203 63,544 1,781 29,848 64,358 qrs. 2,634,356 580,070 669,769 153,625 139,995 109,846 509,357 282.056 1 560,525 1,207,798 1,393,195 4,287661 It is often asserted by the advocates of repeal, that this country is quite incapable of producing food eijual 127 to existing demands, the population, partly from the influence of the manufacturing interests, having outgrown the productive powers of agriculture. The foregoing table shows, however, that for three years in succession, 1834-5-6, the amount of grain of all kinds imported from abroad, was only 1,351,938 quarters. Its exceed- ing cheapness during this period is evidence of the great abundance grown. In the deficient harvests of 1837-8-9, the quantity was 6,888,654 quarters. This fact cannot, with propriety, be adduced as establishing the doctrine of the repealers. It does not prove a want of ability on our part to produce, but the injurious effects of inauspicious seasons, which are felt whatever the extent of land in any country. They disturb the calculations of the foreign agriculturist with respect to demand and supply, to the same extent as those of the farmer at home ; and if in one instance it be contended that these effects prove a permanent inability on our part to satisfy existing wants, the same argument applies with equal force to the foreigner. In deficient harvests, his produce would be greatly increased in price, were he altogether debarred from exportation. The surplus average of Russia is calculated at 100,000 quarters annually. This is certainly an exceedingly moderate calculation, when it is considered that many years ago about five times this amount of grain was im- ported by hei into this country. In 1817 we received from her -105, 'J33 quarters. 1818 „ ditto „ (i7C,,79.'i 1810 „ ditto „ 5 V.i .Or, i 1820 ,, ditto ,, 372,189 1 28 The average importation for these years in succession Wub 1:99,602 quarters. The agricultural capabilities of Russia have increased immensely since this time. And yet, according to this writer, her surplus produce is only about one-fifth of what it was a quarter of a century ago ! In 1831, this high average was nearly doubled. In that year was imported from her 937,363 quarters, and the amount received from foreign countries, in that sea- son of scarcity, was 3,541,809 quarters. Yet in the face of such facts, which unequivocally show the capa- bilities of agricultural countries, not excited or unduly stimulated by markets always open to their produce, — but capabilities manifested by the fitful demands of our necessities, we are gravely told that the surplus average productive powers of the whole agricidtural world is not equal to 700,000 quarters annually .' In the same year was also imported from Ireland 2,419,643 quarters, making the sum total of importation for 1831,-5,961,452. Supposing the writer, in 1817, had estimated the surplus quantity of grain which this country might cal- culate on receiving from Ireland. In that year he would have found 699,809 quarters, and this is about the aver- age of the preceding ten years. He would, in all pro- bability have fixed her capabilities at this point, consi- dering that he had for his data the previous known traffic between the two countries, co-existing with every faciliti/ for importation. But how greatly he would have erred in his estimate ! The average importation is now about four times this amount. It is scarcelv necessary to advance 129 another argument, in order to expose the gross fallacy involved in the reasoning of the writer. The view he takes is exceedingly contracted, — the premises he lays down, partial, and the conclusions which he draws must be, as they are, unjust and false. Argument XXIII. — "It cannot, for one moment, be supposed that all the lands best suited, both in quality and local position, for raising wheat for ship- ment, are not at this moment in cultivation ; there are, therefore, only two modes by which the cultivation can be increased ; first, by the application of more capital and labour to force the production of the lands at pre- sent in cultivation, or by taking into cultivation inferior lands, either in point of quality of soil, or more distant points from the shipping ports or markets : but in tohichever case this might be accomplished it could only be done at an increased cost of production. If, therefore, an increased price was not obtained, it is quite evident the attempt coidd only be momentary. If, we again repeat, the average price in England is too low to admit the continental grower, even though free of duty, to pay him at his present cost of production, it requires no argument to show that, if he attempted to increase his production in the only way he could by increasing his cost, he would be still farther disabled for competition with the grower in this country. " llie only case, therefore, in which we can Suppose " it possible that an increased production would take " place on the Continent, is, by supposing, that their " prices would improve, which might be effected either I l:*o " by a material general advance on the prices in this " country, or by the more likely cause, an increased " prosperity and consumption amongst themselves. " The former cause coidd not exist without first and " most particularly benefitting the English grower : nor " could the latter cause exist without benefitting him in " an indirect manner, in common with the whole com- " munity. " It must also be borne in mind, that even though an attempt should be made to increase the production of the Continent, it could only be the surplus of that pro- duction which could, at any irrice, be available for exportation. For example, in order to double the quantity of grain available for exportation, it would require that the whole cultivation should be doubled, or even more : for, in the first place, the labour of pro- duction must be sustained, which would consume as large a portion of the increased produce as it does of the present quantity, and in all probability a larger proportion, for such an increased demand for labour which would necessarily be called into existence by such an attempt, could not fail to advance wages so much, that not only would the labourers be multiplied in proportion to the increase, but their condition so much improved, that their individual consumption would be greater, in proportion, than it now is ; and this circumstance, in its turn, could not fail again to add to the general cost of production, and render it still more difficult for the grower to send even the surplus to this market " 131 This extract is a most striking illustration of his bold and unwarranted assumptions. He at once takes it. for granted, that all those countries, capable of ex- porting grain, have at present all the best land in cultivation. If foreign countries were densely popu- lated, or if their agricultural resources had been fully developed by peculiar or trying circumstances, such assertion would have carried with it the semblance of truth. But the agriculturist has not been strongly stimulated, either to bring under the plough any great breadth of land, or to force the land already in culture into a high state of productiveness. The demand, hitherto, has been very limited compared with the capabilities or extent of the soil susceptible of cultiva- tion. There is one fact, which alone is sufficient to confute his doctrine, and that is the extraordinary cheap- ness of land in the richest corn-growing covntries. Why is it cheap ? Because there has been no great demand for it. If the whole of the best land were in cultivation, or any large capital had been expended in its improve- ment, the natural and inevitable consequence would be, enhancement in its value. To reason accurately on this subject, there is no necessity for a thousand par- ticulars respecting the habits, — the wealth, and the con- dition of a people. It is only necessary to ask, Is land to be bought exceedingly (heap, or rented for little more than a mere nominal acknowledgment? The answer will be "Yes;'' and this applies to every country that has, in times of scarcity, liberally and promptly supplied our necessities. He argues that there " are only two modes by which . 2 132 " cultivation can be increased; first, by the application " of more capital and labour to force the production of " the lands at present in cultivation, or by taking into " cultivation inferior lands ; but in whichever case " this might be accomplished, it could only be done at " an increased cost of production. If, therefore, an " increased price Has not obtained, it is quite evident " the attempt would only be temporary." The inference deduced from this reasoning, which is certainly anything but correct or sound, is, that the agriculturists of this country have nothing whatever to apprehend from the competition of the foreign grower : He has now cultivated his best lands, and has expended upon them all the capita/ which can, with profit, either immediate or prospective, be enyrfoyed. This discovery is so important, that it ought to be recorded in letters of gold. The writer may undoubtedly claim it as his own. It is indeed perfectly original. He argues that the foreign grower will not continue to apply any additional capital to land already in cultivation, to increase its pro- ductiveness, unless he obtain an increased price for his produce, and in this case he would cease to be a formidable competitor. Capital applied to land susceptible of great improve- ment is not expended in vain, nor does it indeed require that the produce resulting should be sold at a higher rate, than previously to such additional expenditure to afford a commensurate remuneration. The more capital judiciously laid out, the greater the profits to the grower, and the cheaper the produce may be sold to 133 the consumer. There is land in this neighbourhood which sixteen years ago yielded on the average from six to eight loads of wheat per acre, which now, with better management, and the application of more abundant capital, produces from twelve to fourteen loads. And no person who has given close attention to the subject can have failed to observe, how much more productive moderately large farms are, — farms ranging from 250 to 600 acres, than small ones. The former are usually cultivated upon a liberal scale of expenditure, encouraged by confidence of permanent tenure. The latter are managed in a parsimonious manner. The want of faith is the ruin of small farmers. They cannot be made to believe that the soil must be treated liberally, to insure a profitable return. Important improvements in the cultivation of soil, — the production of seed, or the breed of cattle, always originate with farmers upon a large scale. They have not only the advantage of capital, but they have what capital usually confers, — large and accurate views on the subject of agriculture ; — minds schooled to think, and capable of thought from their education, their posi- tion in society, and their frequent intercourse with per- sons moving in the higher walks of life. These arc advantages which capital insures, and the results may be traced in the produce of the soil. The doctrine that the foreign grower cannot increase the amount of his productive powers, without having recourse to the cul- tivation of inferior lands, or the expenditure of capital on others, which will not repay the application of it, without considerable advance in the price of the produce 131 is bo perfectly gratuitous and so obviously false, that it would be a waste of time to attempt, at any length, to refute it. The progress of agriculture in our own country, within the last quarter of a century, affords the best answer to such reasoning. Different high authorities have laboured to prove that the amount of wheat and other grain consumed in the United Kingdom, in 1814, was 35,000,000 quarters, exclusive of seed. The estimated consumption, at this time, is 44,000,000 ; seed included, 52,000,000. This immense increase arises, principally, from the improved methods of cultivation, and the more liberal application of capital. "Will the writer assert that such improve- ments and outlay of capital require necessarily an in- creased price for the produce in order to insure remune- ration ? Were his doctrine correct, the home grower would demand even greater protection than the law afforded in 1815. The law of 1828 would certainly be insufficient protection, if his -produce, to yield •profit, must be sold at higher prices than those of 1815. The condition of the agricultural interest is healthy, and the farmer would be satisfied with a protective duty of 15 per cent, less than he had twenty-five years ago. Yet, in the face of such fami- liar facts, it is gravely contended, that in corn-grow- ing countries where the demand has never been great, — where the soil has not been forced to anything like the extent of its productiveness, the foreign grower has- not the power to increase profitably the '/mount of grain. And it is asserted that "in order to " double the quantity of grain available for exportation 135 " it would require that the whole cultivation should be " doubled, or even more?'' The reason which the writer gives, in corroboration of this strange doctrine, is, " that " the labour of production must be sustained, winch " would consume as large a portion of the increased " produce as it does of the present quantity." He cal- culates the utmost ability of foreign countries to export grain at 700,000 quarters, so that, according to his ar- gument, to double this amount would require the whole cultivation to be multiplied in the same ratio. Suppose that this country exported 700,000 quarters, its annual consumption being 52,000,000, is it necessary that in order to export 1,400,000 quarters we must double the whole of our cultivation ? or that such an increase in our exports would so advance the wages of labour, that we should no longer be able to dispose of grain in foreign markets ? The amount of our production is a trifle com- pared with that of corn-growing countries, and conse- quently the imagined surplus of 700,000 quarters, belonging to the latter, is too insignificant to merit serious consideration. Improved methods of cultivation without any great outlay of capital, and certainly with- out increasing the wages of labour, would enable those countries to export ten times the surplus of 700,000 quarters. Argument XXIV. — " The only circumstance which " can ever drive wheat out of cultivation in this country, " will be when land shall become too valuable for this " purpose." The apprehension of chiving wheat out of culti- i:$c ration is less serious than that of impoverishing those who will be compelled to grow it. The evil will not be annihilated by the repeal of the Corn Laws, nor will those who cultivate it be swept from the face of the land. The inferior soils will unquestionably be neglected, but not that amount which the repealers designate inferior ; winch, according to their meaning, is almost every acre in an arable state of cultivation. There are branches of manufactures which yield little profit, and only a starving remuneration to the artisan, in consequence of foreign competition arising from cheap food and low-priced labour. It is poor consolation to the masses, engaged in these branches, to be told that competition has not entirely thrown them out of em- ployment, though it has reduced them to such a state of misery and degradation, that they are incapable of pro- curing for themselves and families even the common ne- cessaries of life. The home farmer will still have to live, how distressing soever the effects of foreign com- petition. He must still grow wheat, and the labourer must still work ; but agriculture, like manufactures, may either be a profitable or exceedingly unprofitable pursuit, and if the latter, without the prospect of improvement, ruin, — beggary and disappointment will be the portion of those who depend upon it. The struggle against the repeal of the Corn Laws, is not to prevent wheat going out of cultivation, it is to prevent those who cultivate it being beggared. Were the undiminished production of an article any evidence of the comforts of those who create it, the working classes of this country would have no reason to complain. The exports of manufactured goods have not diminished with the increase of their 137 hardships, and hence labour continues to be expended but most unprofitably. It is this state of things, the inevitable effect of competition, that awakens the sym- pathy of the philanthropist, and causes him to rouse all his energies to prevent the repeal of a measure, the cer- tain precursor of distress. Let not the writer imagine that opposition originates in any apprehension that wheat will be driven out of cultivation, but in the well-grounded conviction, that the condition of those who cultivate it will be brought to the continental scale of beggary and degradation. Argument XXV. — " By the whole tenor of the ar- " guments urged by the manufacturing interest against " these impolitic laws, it appears that they consider, " first, that the high price of labour in this country, " as compared with the Continent, is only the result " of a higher price of provisions, and that the lower '' price of labour on the Continent, consequent on a " lower price of provisions, is the chief cause of what- " ever progress these countries have made in the arts " and manufactures. These opinions we believe to be " wrong, both as regards the facts and the principles " dediiced. " If we have proved anything in the second proposi- " tion, it is that, on the average, provisions would not be " cheaper if we had a free trade than the internal compe- tl tition of our own resources and means has furnished " them, and therefore, though their price did regulate "the price of labour, that commodity could not be " cheaper. 138 " But while we must admit that, in all cases, the price " of provisions enters as one of the measures of the price " of labour, and in some cases as the chief measure — yet " it is by no means the only measure ; and in respect to " the particular description of labour of which we now " treat, we believe it to constitute a most unimportant " and trivial portion. " If the price of provisions were the sole or chief " measure of the value of labour in all cases, then it " would necessarily follow that its price would vary in " different places, just in proportion as the price of pro- " visions varied. That in the same place, at the same " time, the price of all kinds of labour would be exactly " the same ; and that everywhere the real condition of " the labourer, in respect to the amount of the necessa- ries, or comforts of life, which he could command, "would be exactly equal; that he would everywhere "receive exactly the sum of money which would pur- " chase a given uniform quantity of provisions for the " same number of hours' labour. Now not one of these '" consequences accord with the facts. The reverse will " be found to exist in most cases, especially in this " country. Wherever provisions are dearest the con- " dition of the bulk of labourers is decidedly best, and " their ability to command the necessaries, comforts, and " even elegancies of life, form a striking contrast with "the extreme difficulty with which even the barest " necessaries are obtained where they are cheapest. " Compare the general condition of the whole labour - " ers of this country with that of any of the countries on 139 " the Continent where provisions are at the lowest "prices: compare their diet, clothing, and habitations, " with what are allotted to the labouring classes in " Prussia, Poland, or France, and see how superior the " worst classes are in these respects in this country coni- " pared with the very best in these lands of supposed "abundance and cheapness. " It becomes, therefore, quite clear that some other " more important causes must exist to determine the clif- " ferent value of different kinds of labour, and of the " labour of different countries ; which, we believe, will " be found to consist in the amount of skill, intelligence, " and ability ; in the assistance which physical exertions " have received from mechanical discoveries, and in " the proportion of supply and demand, as existing in " different places or in different countries. " The price of this labour is one of the distinct modes " in which a nation becomes benefited by ingenious me- chanic al discoveries, which tend so much to abridge " the total quantity of labour necessary to produce a " given article, and renders the portion still employed " of much greater value, by the increased demand and " consumption which the entire lower price secures to " the article. " The price of this labour is one of the distinct modes " by which a nation becomes benefited by the possession " of a large capital, industry, and mercantile enterprise, " which seek for profitable employment, by tin • exchange I 10 " of the skill and ingenuity of this country for the simpler " products of distant and different climates. " From all these considerations we are induced to con- " sider, that there is no better evidence of a prosperous " community or country than the existence of a high " average price of provisions, when the condition of the "labourer, as is the case in this country, is relatively "better than in other countries; and that, on the con- " trary, there is no stronger evidence of a miserable and " impoverished country than the existence of low prices " of provisions, where the condition of the labourer is " comparatively and infinitely worse than in other coun- " tries where prices are higher. " We are therefore of opinion, that in the event of a " free trade in corn, the price of labour in this country " would rather be increased than diminished, by the " operation of the distinct benefits which to the whole " community would result from such principles." The agitation for repeal has hitherto had for its object, cheap food, not only for the purpose of secur- ing cheap labour, but from the supposed justice of the cause. There was no difference of sentiment on this subject among influential repealers engaged in manufactures. Every kind of argument has been ad- vanced by them to shoAV the necessity for the immediate abolition of the law. The gradual decline of trade has been alluded to, and attributed to foreign competition made successful by cheap food and low-priced labour. 141 The masses in their distress and misery have been roused to contemplate the injustice of the measure through the medium of their own sufferings, and their indignation has been sharpened by hobgoblin tales, about the smallness of the loaf, compared with that which their rights would give them. Indeed, every advantage that could be taken by an appeal to the pas- sions, and by vulgar illustrations of the rapacity of the landowners has been most liberally employed. It would be imagined, that repealers, entertaining such sentiments, would have had no sympathy with a writer who has clearly nothing in common with them, except his advocacy of repeal. They are for cheap bread : He shows the advantages of a high price of provisions. They are for cheap labour : He shows that wherever labour is cheap, the condition of the people is, in the extreme, miserable and degraded. They advo- cate large importations of grain, and contend that the foreigner has great abundance to export : according to his calculations, the foreign agriculturist cannot pos- sibly compete with the home grower ; and still further, he maintains that the average surplus produce, which the foreigner could annually export, would never exceed 700,000 quarters. These are differences, not in minia- ture, but in the great principles on which the argument rests. This writer, however, has been hailed by repeal- ers, as one of the most talented advocates of their cause. They have quoted his calculations, — they have adduced his reasoning, — they have rested upon his conclusions as truths which no ingenuity could subvert. His depth, his acuteness, and the comprehensiveness of his views have been the theme of their unbounded admiration. 142 This disagreement and inconsistency would alone be sufficient to convict them of superficial reasoning, and almosl as a necessary consequence, of gross errors. Men who think deeply, — who have adopted views — the result of close and accurate inquiry, — hold on a steady course, and arc not like straws cast upon the water, which every fresh breeze and accidental ripple of its surface turns. Their principles are firm and unchanged, having been carefully adopted as the basis of all their conclusions. The repealers have no settled principles in common; vulgar and popular influences guide all their declamations : and their doctrines, like the cha- melion, have every changing hue, with which the glare of varying prejudices may happen to deck them. The writer endeavours to show that the high price of provisions is rather the effect than the cause of high and well-paid labour. In this opinion he is to a great extent correct. Where wages are permanently low, provisions are always permanently cheap. The latter have no chance of advancing except with the former, and they can advance only with a permanently increased demand for labour. It is this which augments the ability to pur- chase, and he justly remarks, in reference to the labour- ers of this country, — " compare their diet, clothing, and " habitations, with what are allotted to the labouring " classes in Prussia, Poland, or France, and see how " superior the worst classes are in these respects, com- " pared with the very best in these lands of supposed " abundance and cheapness." The ability to purchase the comforts, and even the luxuries of life, is immensely in favour of the labourers of this country. But though 143 the price of provisions may be regarded as the effect of the prevailing rate of "wages, nevertheless, where the price is permanently low, the producers of an article, be it corn or hardware, have in the field of unfettered com- petition — in the open and unrestricted market, a com- manding advantage over those who produce on the scale of high -wages and dear provisions. The consideration of the question is the same whether the price of provi- sions be regarded as the effect or the cause of the pre- vailing standard of wages. There is no use in mystify- ing the subject by refined distinctions on this matter. The admitted fact, that prices are always low where labour is permanently cheap, is quite sufficient for a common sense view of the case. It is cheap labour that gives an immense advantage to the competitor, and especially in the production of articles, where labour constitutes a large item of cost. In many kinds of manufactures, the cost of the raw material is a trifling consideration, labour constituting the chief expense. This is the case with many of the highly finished articles of this town, and likewise of the manufactures of silk, satin, and even cotton goods. Thus we find that hard- ware is imported from abroad into this country, and after paying a heavy duty, in addition to the expenses of freight and various charges, it is sold for considerably less than similar articles of home manufacture. There is also another fact which strongly illustrates this point. A short time ago, the Member for Coventry was ad- dressed by his constituents, asking whether it was the intention of government, in the then pending ncgocia- tions with France, for the purpose of diminishing the 1-14 heavy protective duties on some of the staple commodi- ties of that country, to lower the protection on the home manufacture of silk goods. It was stated that the present duty of 30 per cent, was an insufficient protection. Can there be any fact showing more clearly the advantage of cheap labour than this? Suppose the protection re- moved ; what would be the condition of the artisans in this particular branch ? If the expenses of freight, and other charges, be calculated at 10 per cent., it is evident that the wages of labour would be reduced about 40 per cent. The artisans themselves are fully sensible of the disastrous effects that would follow the repeal of such protection, for even under the present arrangement, it is inadequate to prevent the injurious influence of competi- tion. What is true of one branch of manufactures, is also true of another. They differ only in the degree in wbich protection is required. The writer considers the cause of the well-paid labour of this country to be in the amount of skill, — intelligence, and ability possessed. Admitting this, it is easy to show that these are the effects of time, — protection, and the peculiar circum- stances in which the country has been placed; — circum- stances, which have called forth the energies and the ingenuity of the nation to a remarkable extent. Such effects may, however, be transferred to other countries, and there act as causes, in conjunction with cheap labour, even to become injurious to the consumption of our own manufactured goods at home. The skill, intel- ligence, and ability of our country, have led to extra- ordinary improvements in machinery and the arts ; but these improvements, though indigenous to the soil, may 145 be and are readily transplanted to other parts of the world. That high state of civilization which has pro- duced them, by very gradual, — tedious, and expensive processes, is not indispensably necessary to employ them. An inferior state of mind is sufficient for this purpose, and certainly a much less amount of capital. Supposing the cost of the raw material to be the same in our own and in other countries, the same mechanical improvements, with exceedingly cheap labour, will give a commanding advantage, with which skill, intelligence, and ability, in conjunction with them, cannot possibly in the open market compete. The countries to which these improvements are transferred will have their skill, intelligence, and ability, greatly advanced, thus render- ing the competition at every step more difficult. Labour, where the necessaries of life are permanently cheap, is always slow in securing a better remuneration. From these remarks, it is manifest that the advan- tages which we have hitherto almost exclusively pos- sessed, as manufacturers, have become now common property to be enjoyed, if not equally, yet largely, by the world generally. No sophistry, nor metaphysical refinement can conceal the fact, or its consequences. The higher price of agricultural produce in this coun- try .than on the Continent arises from the following causes : — First. — The rent of land, which has a price in harmony with that of all other things in this country L46 Second. — The high rate of the wages of labour, com- pared with that of other countries. Third. — Heavy taxation paid on everything con- sumed. Fourth. — The highly respectable position of the agriculturists, as a class, compared with the serfs and the tillers of the soil in other countries. All these are elements which enter into the cost of production. In corn-growing countries the soil is let at almost a nominal rent ; labour is extremely cheap ; taxes are light; and the condition of the cultivators often miserable and degraded. In the event of a free trade in corn, the price of labour in this country would be seriously reduced ; and the agriculturist would be compelled to abridge his moderate indulgence in the elegancies, the luxuries and even the common comforts of life. Argument XXVI. — " "We will now glance at the two " proposed ways in which the manufacturing and mer- " cantile interest would be benefited by such a policy. " First. — That which would result from a uniformity " of the prices of provisions, as particularly affecting the " labouring classes. In the first proposition we alluded " to the evils which afflict this class in consequence of " the present fluctuation of prices, which would be in- 147 "tirely removed by an equality of price. We cannot "hold out any prospect that, on the average, he would " have his provisions cheaper, but that, instead of being " lavishly supplied at one period, which leads to habits " of luxury and indulgence, and the more unfit him for " the period of comparative scarcity and want, his con- " dition would he nearly uniform. "We have already shown that his wages are de- " termined by principles which do not necessarily fluc- " tuate with provisions, and it is therefore most desirable " to hini, that as his wages are comparatively uniform, " the amount of the comforts and necessaries of life " which they can procure should also be uniform. It is " a cruel policy which introduces a working population " into the temporary possession of comforts and luxuries "far beyond what their average condition will enable " them to support, and which, by a re-action, reduces " their means before long as much below what thai " average should be as it had before been above it. " The manufacturing and mercantile interests ari . "however, more directly interested by the second mode " in which we propose to consider their distinct benefits ; "viz: — In the general advantages which would result "from an improvement so greal in the condition and "interests of so larger and important a portion of then " consumers as the landed interests constitute "If we have shown thai the Landed interests suffer, "by the present state of the law, greal and fearful I" " in our first proposition, and if in our second proposi- ti 2 Us " tion wo have shown sufficient to prove that a free ' f trade in corn would avoid these losses, and not subject "them to any other; — then have we shown that the " whole wealth of the country, both in income and capi- " tal, would be much increased ; that immense sums " which are at present expended in unprofitable labour " would become applicable to general and useful con- " sumption ; that large amounts of capital, which. He " dormant until wasted and decayed, would be available " for the employment of useful and beneficial produc- " tion. "The connexion between the manufacturer and the " landed interest is much closer than is generally ad- " mitted or believed ; not only is the manufacturer " dependent on the landed interest for the large portion " of his goods which they immediately consume, but also " for a very large portion of what he exports to the most a distant countries. " On the other hand, the dependence of the land- " owner is no less two-fold on the manufacturer and " merchant. He is not only dependent upon them for " their own immediate consumption, but also for the "consumption of whatever food enters into the cost " price of their goods." The results at which the writer arrives, after all his calculations and investigations, could scarcely have been anticipated by his repealing friends. He does not awaken their imagination by the opening of new and extensive markets abroad. We are told nothing about 149 the glorious advantages of reciprocal interchange. We hear nothing of the anxiety of foreign nations con- cerning changes in our restrictive system. At the con- clusion of his labours he remains perfectly calm,, and seems to have been studiously careful neither to heat the imagination nor to fire the passions. The benefits, according to his views, that will accrue to society from the repeal, are twofold : — First. — That there will be a uniformity in the price of provisions. Second. — The condition of the landed interests will be improved. He states, and truly, that fluctuation in prices would be entirely removed by equality of price. It will not be doubted that the one would remove the other. It is also remarked, that then the condition of the artisans would be nearly uniform. One would suppose, thai ;ui individual who could pen this sentiment had passed his life in the even tenor of rural scenes, widely apart from the great world, and only hearing occasionally of the vi- cissitudes of trade, lie would certainly not be sus- pected of being familiar with the causes influencing manufactures and commerce. To imagine thai enter- prise, the life and soul of trade, — that urges man from region to region in search of markets for his rjrodui tions, — that leads him to Bpe< iilate on the future from a knowledge of the past,— will be so sobered bj th< r< peal that fluctuations will entirely cease, is indeed, an antici 150 pation which none but an enthusiast could form. A knowledge of the constitution of the human mind, and of the motives by which it is constantly acted upon, is sufficient to refute the absurdity of such a doctrine. The other benefit to which he alludes is still more visionary in its character ; the improvement that will ac- crue to the landed interest. It has already been remarked that competition never enriches the producer of an article. It invariably diminishes profits and lowers wages. The repealers complain that the corn laws are an undue protection to the agriculturists : what they mean is, that it enables them to get a better price for their article than they would otherwise receive. And in this opinion they are perfectly correct. Unrestricted importation from abroad always reduces prices in times of scarcity, and the effect would be the same in times of plenty. To argue that competition would benefit the agricultural interest, is not less absurd than it would be to contend that the condition of the home manufacturers would be equally improved by the free importation of continental goods. The doctrine here inculcated is so opposed to reason and the plain dictates of common sense, that it is un- worthy of serious consideration. Argument XXYII. — " It may, however, be said, " that though an immediate repeal of the present restric- • tions tended to curtail the home-growth, it would tend ,£ to give additional stimulus to foreign supplies, and that •• thu^ the desirable point would only be in another way 151 " arrived at. Such an effect would not only fail to ac- " complish the object, because no increase which could " take place on the Continent, with its extremely limited " means, could for many years be equivalent even to an " inconsiderable curtailment of the huge production of " this extraordinary country ; but even if it should prove " equivalent, it would be injurious to our growers in the " first instance, by inducing them to throw the lands out " of cultivation when they could have been profitably "retained, and to the continental grower by giving a " momentary and unnatural impulse to his productive " powers, which could not be maintained when our own " level of cultivation was again restored." He here points out the probable evils of an im- mediate repeal. The home cultivator, from his deeply- rooted prejudices, would not fail to discourage and limit the efforts of production, and the foreign agricul- turist, with the hopes of a ready market, would greatly increase his. These effects would unquestionably follow the repeal. He imagines they would be quickly cor- rected by the home-grower cultivating, with his ac- customed ability, his rich and highly productive soils, 11//1I r the most genial climate of the world, and by the foreigner discovering that he had over-calculated the wants of this country, and underrated the competitive powers of the home-grower. All this is very plausible, but will not bear examination. W r e have already shown that the home-grower could not possibly compete with the foreigner, and therefore he must cease either to cultivate the usual breadth of land, or lie musl lower the price of his produce to that of the continental < all 1.52 and in doing so, his position in society would necessarily be degraded. He would lose his present command of the luxuries and elegancies of life, and those dependent upon him would be compelled to adapt themselves to an inferior state of things. THE ARGUMENTS RIGHT HON. THE EARL FITZWILLIAM. The very decided opinions of this nobleman on the sub- ject of the Corn Laws are well known. He stands forward as the friend of the agricultural interest, especially of the farmer and labourer. In addressing his own order, he speaks to them as men having violent prejudices and narrow views, as unwilling to inquire into matters connected with trade, with which he is familiar. At one moment he appeals to the benevolent feelings, and the landowner is asked whether he can be so cruel as to enhance, by any measure, the price of the first necessary of life; — whether he can be so interested as to think only of himself? At another, the noble writer proceeds to show, that the removal of all protec- tion from agriculture will be a benefit to all classes, and not least to the landed aristocracy of the country. Argument I. — He remarks, that " the first object of " these laws is to raise the price of corn above its natu red "level; their next, and ultimate object, is to raise the " value of land."* * First, second, and third addresses to the landowners ol England on the Corn Laws, pajje 4, new edition. London Ridgway, Piccadilly, mucccxxxix. 154 The first duty, after laying down these propositions, was to have defined clearly what is meant by natural level, and then in all probability it would have been shown, that such level would not be calculated to elevate* but to depress the condition of the working classes. By the term level it is presumed is understood, what would be the price of bread on the free importation of foreign grain. It is scarcely necessary to point out the striking difference in the ability of the home and foreign grower to afford the staple commodity of life, at a cheap rate, not in consequence of a difference in rent only, but from the greatest possible dissimilarity in the social — the in- tellectual and the physical conditions of the two. In the appeal to the landowners, it seems to be taken for granted, that the higher rents of this country are the only causes preventing the home-grower from competing successfully with the foreign ; and yet how is it possible to reconcile such a statement with the doctrine, that the value of land will be affected only in a trifling degree by the repeal of these laws. We will briefly attempt to state what this level would be, w T ere our ports always open to foreign importation. On this subject there are abundant facts of unquestion- able authority. The following are worthy of attention. " In 1837 there were 98,380 quarters of wheat exported " by the Danube from Galatz, the price of which was " 1 5s. taking the mean average of the year's quotations. " In 1838 there were 171,813 quarters exported at 16*. ; " and in 1839, 117,148 quarters, at 23*. Hcl. With re- Ci spectto Bulgaria, I found it impossible to obtain more 155 " than an approximate estimate of the amount of wheat u exported. Upon the authority of the British Vice- '* Consul at Galatz, it appears that Bulgaria could, even " under the former state of things, export after an " ordinary crop, to the amount of 500,000 quarters of " wheat, averaging in price, at the ports of embarkation, " 1 5s. per quarter."* Another authority gives the prices of wheat at Dantzic and Konigsburg in the following years : — f s. d. 1833 25 per quarter 1834 23 " " 1835 23 " 1836 21 << « 1837 22 « Wheat is imported from these places into this country in spring and summer, including all expenses, for 6s. Sd. per quarter. Suppose the expense of its conveyance from the shores of the Black Sea to be 10s. or 12*., it is manifest that for years in succession wheat could be im- ported and sold in this country at the low prices of 25s. and 29*. Sd. per quarter. These prices would then be the level to which the homo-grower would bo compelled to descend. This is the hrc/ which the noble writer washes to establish, being according to his notions ;i matter of indifference wlmt the farmer receives for his * The Farmers 9 Journal, and Corn Law Circular. | Prussian Official Gazette. 150 produce. Were he permitted, however, to live rent-free, it would be impossible to maintain his present position in society, — a position, the beneficial effects of which are felt by the whole of the manufacturing interest. Competition is always injurious to the producers of an article, whatever be its nature, and yet the aim and tendency of these repealing exertions are to give the farmer at home the benefit of unrestricted continental capital and labour. The illustrious writer contends, that the Corn Laws are for the purpose of enhancing the value of land,* and that were rents reduced, the farmer would have nothing to fear from the removal of all pro- tection ; and yet, in another part of the inquiry, it is stated : " the persuasion of my own mind, not lightly taken " up, but resulting from the best consideration which I " can give to the various resources of the country, and in " particular to those of agriculture, is, that the alteration " in the valve of land consequent vpon a repeal of the " Corn Lavs, will, if any, be exceedingly trifling, and " that the fall of rents will not be great."f At one moment, selfishness, prejudice^ and ignorance, are imputed to the landowners generally — they are charged, in consequence of upholding these laws, with a desire to raise the value of land ; at another, it is how- ever admitted, that this will not be much, if at all, affected by the repeal of them. If rents are only to be nominally or fractionally reduced, in what situation is the farmer placed ? He will clearly have to contend against the competition of the foreigner, and yet, ac- * Page 4. t Page 47. 157 cording to such reasoning, without any substantial re- duction of rent. These inconsistencies may perhaps be ascribed to an amiable desire to reconcile the jarring interests of all parties. The landowner, the tenant, and the labourer, are taken under the special protection of the noble writer, and when they present themselves separately to his imagination, he addresses them in language grateful to each, but strangely at variance in its views. The land- owner is lulled into the belief that the value of land will not be affected by repeal ; — the tenant is told that the price of grain is to him a matter of indifference, as rents will be adjusted accordingly,— the labourer is gratified with the prospect of cheap bread and no alteration in his wages. We find, however, that these doctrines are variously modified. The landowner, when he appears again to the imagi- nation of the writer is distinctly told, that he will be called upon to lower his rents, but the sting is taken from this information by the unexpected announcement, that this will not affect his interest, being a large consumer of agricultural produce, which trill be greatly cheapened by the repeal. The tenant, in his next audience, is told, that the wages of labour will be lowered, so that his inter- est is also permanently secured. The labourer is informed that his wages will be reduced, but as the staple com- modity of life will be cheapened, he will have no cause to regret the change. Argument II. — " The high price of corn," the noble 158 writer remarks, " docs not fall exclusively upon any " peculiarly favoured classes ; it falls upon the intire " community, and not less upon the landowners and " agriculturists than upon the other industrious classes." " First of all, let us examine the case of the labourer " in husbandly. " Look at his habits and circumstances ; — consider " how large a portion of his slender income is expended " in the purchase of bread and flour ; — and can any of " you arrive at the conclusion that he is benefited by " enhancing the price of corn ? So far from this being " the case, that, probably, there is hardly a class of " labourers more interested in having corn cheap than " those who are engaged in husbandry, because there is " none that spends so much, comparatively, upon the " necessaries, and so little upon the comforts, or the " luxuries of life."* From these remarks it would be inferred, that it is not proposed to lower the wages of labour. Were this con- templated it would be imagined, that not only would the fact be unequivocally stated, but the degree of reduction would be shown. The writer must be fully aware, that cheap bread and greatly diminished wages may be a serious curse to the labourer. If wages were to remain unaltered, which is implied in the argument in the fore- going extract, and if rents are not to be affected by the repeal, how will this measure be a benefit or a matter of * Pane 6. 159 indifference to the farmer ? The only point on which the noble lord is consistent, throughout his examination of the subject, is the great cheapening that will take place in the staple commodity of life. How is this cheapening to be afforded ? If rents are not to be lowered — if wages are not to be reduced, it is manifest that the profits and the capital of the farmer will be sacrificed in accomplishing this cheapening process. It is here assumed that wages will not be diminished. In other parts of the inquiry it is taken for granted that this will be the case, and in addressing his own order, this truth is constantly enforced. — " .Examine " your respective expenditures in the gross — analyse " them in detail, and you will find that the price of corn " affects their amount most materially. TJie wages of " your day-labourers, whether employed upon the farm, " or in the garden — the wages of your menial servants — " the feeding of your dogs — of your horses — your travel- " ling expenses — the repairs of your buildings, — whether " for use or recreation — the amount of all these, and " other sources of expense, which form the great bulk " of your annual outlay, whether upon a large or upon " a small scale, is materially affected by the price of " provisions."* In this extract, it is distinctly admitted, that the land* owner, after the repeal, will not be called upon to pay the same wages as at present. Indeed, their prevailing rate is alluded to as one cause of his gnat expenditure. Is it not, therefore, strange that the noble lord should * Page l.o. 1G0 dwell on the advantage of cheap bread to the labourer, when at the same time it is contemplated to lower his wages f We now pass to the examination of one of his illustrations in favour of cheap bread. " The weaver, or the miner, may be temporarily bene- " fited by a sudden rise in the price of cloth or of iron, and " a consequent rise in the wages of weavers or of miners;* " it would, however, be extremely illogical to affirm that " it was permanently advantageous to either of these " classes of labourers to raise the price of cloth or of " iron, by measures calculated to restrict the supply of " those indispensable articles ; and it is equally illogical " to affirm, that the ploughman is benefited by a law " which raises the price of bread, by causing a scanty " supply of corn. In the case of a restricted supply of " iron, the ultimate advantage, if any, would accrue to " the owners of iron mines, and in that of cloth, to those " of wool, or of sheep ; and so, in the case of corn, the " owner of the land alone can be ultimately benefited, " and even he is far less benefited than is commonly " supposed." The noble writer remarks, it cannot be permanently advantageous to the weaver or the miner that the price of cloth or of iron should be raised by measures which restrict the supply of these articles. Such restriction may, however, be shown to be highly advantageous to them. The advantage or disadvantage Page 7 and note. 161 turns altogether on the amount of wages which these la- bourers receive, or the amount of the necessaries of life which these wages command. If wages were reduced 25 per cent, and the necessaries of life only 10 per cent., they would clearly be losers to the extent of 15 per cent. As the changes in either case are not given, by what species of philosophy is the conclusion arrived at, that to restrict the supply of cloth or iron, or in other words to set bounds to competition, would be injurious to those engaged in their produc- tion? What end does the illustration serve, resting on no data or carefully established premises ? Suppose that cloth and iron could be manufactured abroad at half their cost price in this country, and suppose their free im- portation, which is carrying out the argument of the writer ; — would this be beneficial to these labourers ? Would their employers be able to give the same wages, or anything near the present amount '. This is an illustration, and to the point. The noble lord would find the same difficulty in satisfying the agricultural labourer. Argument III. — We pass now to the examination of the following extract: — "Let us now make some " comparison between these wages and prices. The " weekly consumption of wheat in a Labourer's family, " consisting of himself, his wife, and three children, may " be stated at two-thirds of a bushel, the amount of " their enjoyments will depend cateris paribus upon the 162 " excess of the weekly wages above the price of two- " thirds of a bushel of wheat. Now that excess was " greatest in 1814, viz. 7*. lid. ; and the least in 1810, " Is. 2d. It will, however, be safer to draw our con- " elusions from periods of a moderate length than from " single years. Five years are probably as fair a period " as can be chosen, and the year 1810 (as the point of " the highest alleged agricultural prosperity) will not " improperly be taken as the centre year of one of these " periods. Comparing then the wages in the annexed " Tables (in which the wages are those given in North- " amptonshire, and the prices those for all England) " with the price of two-thirds of a bushel of wheat, it " appears, that in the first period of five years, ending " with 1807, the average excess of the weekly wages, " above the price of two-thirds of a bushel of wheat, " amounted to 4s. Id. ; in the second period ending with " 1812, it was 2s. lOd. ; in the third, ending with 1817, " it was 5s. Sd. ; in the fourth, ending with 1822, it was " 5s. 10c?.; and in the last, ending with 1827, it was " 5s. 4d. It necessarily follows from this statement, that " the period which is uniformly cited as that of the " greatest agricultural prosperity, was precisely that in " which the surplus income of the labourer was the " smallest, and, consequently, that in which the com- " forts of the agricultural population were most abridged. " Nor is this conclusion derived from any peculiar " mode of presenting the data from which it is drawn ; " for the result, whether we contemplate single years, " or cycles of five years ; and whether those cycles are " distinct, each from the preceding one, or only vary- " ing by the addition to, and exclusion from, each cycle, 163 " of a single year ; in whatever way we view the case, " it follows, that with the exception of the famine in " 1801, the sera of 1810 must have been the most unfa- " vourable to the labourer in husbandry that has oc- " curred since the close of the last century." * Nothing is easier than to show the advantage of cheap bread to the labourer, provided wages be unaffected, nor will it for a moment be doubted, that the cheaper it can be afforded, the greater will be his comforts. These are truths which no one questions. During the periods which the noble writer compares, the price of grain and the value of land experienced extraor- dinary fluctuations, and -were occasionally inordinately high. A long protracted war greatly enhanced the prices of agricultural produce generally. To attempt to illustrate a principle by reference to times and cir- cumstances which are casual and exceptions to any general rule, is manifestly unfair, and in this case docs not at all bear upon the subject of inquiry, viz. the policy or impolicy of the corn laws. The high price of grain in the periods compared was the result of other causes, and if these are neglected, the greatest and most serious mistakes will arise in our conclusions. Argument IV. — In the following passage the noble lord endeavours to show the inefficiency of the 0OOT laws as a protection to the farmer. " During the interval from 1815 to 1822, the fennel * Page 10. 1 64 " experienced the most extraordinary fluctuations in the " price of his merchandise, fluctuations arising from the " variations of the seasons, but aggravated by the state of " the law, which either rigorously prohibited, or indis- " criminately admitted foreign corn. What, however, I " am particularly anxious to direct your attention to is, " the utter inefficiency of the law to accomplish either of " its two purposes, of protecting the farmer from too low, " or the consumer from too high a price. In the spring of " 1817 wheat sold at 120s. a quarter; in the winter of " 1821-2, it sold at less than 40s. a quarter ; the average " of the year 1817 being 94s., and that of 1822 being " 43s. The highest price in Oxford, at Lady-day, 1817, " was 148s.; at Michaelmas, 1820,66s.; at Michaelmas, " 1822,52s. a quarter. The consequence of this state " of things cannot have escaped your recollection. Great " difficulties had been felt by the agricultural interest in " 1814,-15, and -16; but the difficulties of all former " years were surpassed by the distress of the winter of " 1821-2. The insolvency of tenants, at this period, was " unparalleled in the history of the agricultural classes, " and the inefficiency of the Act of 1815 was so univer- " sally acknowledged, that an alteration in the law was " made in the Session of 1 822 ; but the alteration being " contingent upon circumstances which never occurred, " no permanent or practical change took place till the " year 1828, when the present system was adopted. " During the period, therefore, from 1815 to 1828, " the prohibitory system of 1815 was in virtual opera- " tion. How far it secured you from a diminution of " rental, your tenants from insolvency, and your estates " from injury, every land-owner in England can testify. 165 " I am here, however, principally entreating your con- " sideration of the effects produced upon the agricul- " tural capital of the country. Year after year the " value of the farmer's produce had been diminishing, " till it fell to little more than half the price at which " Parliament considered that he could be remunerated " for his industry."* These facts which he adduces in illustration of his argument, cannot be safely and legitimately employed on this occasion. The extraordinary fluctuations in the price of wheat from 1815 to 1821 did not arise from the ope- ration of the corn laws, but from the variations of the seasons — the transition from war to peace, and its conse- quent embarrassments, aggravated, also, by changes in the currency. The fluctuations would not ha"^e been less had there been no restrictions on the importa- tion of grain. The prices would not have ranged so high, but they would have descended to a much lower point. The fallacy of all remarks respecting the inefficiency of the corn laws to protect the farmer from too low, or the consumer from too high a price, has been fully ex- posed by the results of their operation from 1829 to 1838. At no period of English history, and in no part of the civilised globe, with one exception, lias the price of wheat been steadier than in this country. Examine the following Table, furnishing the average price at tlirce different places, during these years : — • Pagea 12, 13. 166 A Return of the highest and lowest prices of Wheat, and the difference, per cent., in each of the years from 1829 to 1838 inclusive, in each of the following places : England, Dantzig, and Rotterdam. Years. ENGLAND. DANTZIG. ROTTERDAM. Lowest. 5 (Terence er cent. Lowest. Highest. c a iffi Z. Lowest. Highest. o c £ r & a^ Q & 1 s. d. s. d. 1 S. d. S. d. s. d\ s. d. 1829 55 4 75 11 1 37 30 8 60 1 96 40 6 52 4 29 1830 ! 55 5 74 11 35 2!) 9 48 2 62 39 11 49 6 24 1831 59 2 7.') 1 27 40 2 49 6 23 48 11 68 9 24 1832 51 3 63 7 24 28 10 42 6 47 34 5 46 11 36 1833 49 2, 56 5 14 26 4 32 21 26 5 38 1 44 1834 40 6 49 6 22 23 2 28 6 23 30 1 34 4 14 1835 36 44 22 20 1 24 11 23 26 9 31 6 17 1836 36 61 9 68 21 10 34 10 59 29 7 33 4 12 1837 51 60 1 17 23 2 33 11 36 Imper feet retu rn. 1838 52 4 78 4 50 24 1 61 2 154 38 9 54 6 40 The noble Lord asserts that these laws afford no protection to the farmer. Suppose that in 1 835, when the average price of wheat in this country was 39s. 4d. per quarter, its importation, duty free, had been permitted from Dantzig, where it was only 20s. 1 d. The home- grower would in this case have been compelled to have sold his produce for much less than 30s. per quarter, which would have entailed ruin and misery on the whole of the agricultural interest. No laws, how well devised soever they may be, can prevent fluctuations in the price of grain; they may nevertheless be so formed as to pro- tect the farmer from too low, and the consumer from too high a price ; and the present laws have unques- tionably had this effect. Argument V. — In the following passage it is argued, that cheap bread will enable the manufacturer to lower 167 wages, and thus place him in circumstances to compete more successfully against foreign capital and labour. " In order to place this view of the necessary effects " of the corn laws more distinctly before you, may I be " allowed to exhibit some details of the expenses of " labour in a few of our leading manufactures ? " It is a subject to which your habits rarely attract " your thoughts ; few of you have local opportunities of " considering it ; and I am afraid that I have remarked " in some a reluctance to inquire into the state of your " manufacturing and commercial countrymen. " In the manufacture of fine woollen cioth, the wages " paid by the manufacturer amount to about GO per cent. " upon the total expenditure incurred between the pur- " chase of the wool in the foreign port, and the period " Avhen the cloth is in a state fit for sale ; in the manu- " facture of linen yarn, the corresponding expenditure " in wages is about 48 per cent. " In the manufacture of earthenware, the wages paid " by the manufacturer amount to about 40 per cent. ; " that is to say, in the conversion of the requisite quaii- " tity of clay into goods worth £100, £40 arc paid to " the workmen in the shape of wages. " It is obvious, however, that in these three instances, " especially in the latter, a very large proportion of the " remaining charges is resolvable into the wages of " labour, though, perhaps, not to so meat an extent as in I (is " the next instances I am about to cite. In the manu- " facture of pig iron, the expenses of labour upon the " various ingredients employed amounts to no less " than 81 per cent. ; and its subsequent conversion into " bar iron, to 84 per cent. " In the working of collieries, the expenses are almost " intirely resolvable into labour; and, in cases within " my own knowledge, the wages actually paid exceed v ' 90 per cent, upon the current expenditure. In the " different branches of the steel manufacture, the folio w- " ing may be stated as the proportions per cent, which " materials and wages bear to each other. Material. Wages. " In Files (coarse) . 50 50 per cent. " Ditto (finer) 25 75 ,, " Table Knives & Forks 35 65 ,, "Razors . 10 90 ,, " Scissors (coarse) 1 5 85 ,, " Ditto (fine) . 4 96 ,, " Great as is the proportion which wages bear to the " direct cost of manufacturing these articles, it must never " be forgotten that by far the greater part of the price of " the material itself consists of wages ; and consequently " that almost the intire value of our steel goods may be " said to consist of the wages of labour. * * * * « j) ear provisions must, indeed, produce " one of the following effects — they must either lower " the condition of the labourer, or raise the rate of wages. ' Nobody can wish the former result ; you must there- 169 " fore wish high wages to be the result of dear corn — " but if wages are high the price of goods must be high " — but if the price of goods be high, our manufactures " cannot compete with foreigners — but if they cannot " compete with foreigners, our export trade is dimi- " nished."* It is manifest from this analysis that the cheapening of bread is regarded not simply as a blessing to the poor, but as a means by which the wages of labour may be reduced. The noble writer shows to what an extent labour enters into the cost of manufactured articles, and the argument is to prove that when the staple com- modity of life is cheap, the wages of labour should at least correspond. The complaint of the manufacturer i <. that he is greatly undersold by the foreigner, in many cases to the extent of 50 per cent., and yet, within the last 18 years, his productions have been cheapened from 85 to 50 per cent. The wages of labour have also in many branches been seriously reduced. The competition of the foreigner can be met onlv bj lowering the condition of the working classes. The noble lord is willing to give them cheap bread, but he says, in return for this boon, " we must diminish your ability to purr base it." This is certainly a doubtful ad- vantage. It is established by his reasoning thai not only must the agricultural labourer, but the artisans generally, calculate <>n a lowering of wages. This being * Pages 17, 18. 170 the case, why attempt to show by figures the great ad- vantage of cheap bread? Argument VI. — The writer proceeds to state, " Com- " pare the methods by which our ancestors encouraged " tillage, with those adopted by the present generation ; " they, indeed, gave a bounty on the export of corn, and " thereby attracted to agriculture capital, which, without " that attraction, would have been otherwise employed ; " but they did not enhance the price of corn ; they did " not by enhancing the price of corn retard the pro- " gress of manufacturing industry ; on the contrary, they " made corn cheaper — they made it abundant — they " produced an artificial abundance ; your device has been " to create an artificial scarcity."* It is here admitted that the bounty did not enhance, but actually lowered the price of grain in this country, which was the fact. An enlarged demand for an article, supposing its creation admits of the application of means by which it may be increased, with a diminution in its relative cost, always cheapens it. The principle allows of no exception. The demand excites vigorous competition, the inevitable result of which is a lowering in the price of the article. The limits by which improvements in agriculture are bounded are certainly narrower than those circumscrib- ing manufactures, but they give nevertheless ample room * Page 21. 171 for the display of ingenuity and the application of capital. The increased demand for the staple commo- dity of life in this country has led to improvements by which the farmer can afford to sell his produce for at least 15 per cent, less than he could twenty years ago ; and from 1828 to 1837 it was furnished to the consumer at a less price than in the preceding ten years, as the fol- lowing Table shows : — Average Price of Wheat in the following Years : — Years. Years. s. d. s. d. 1818 83 8 1828 60 5 1819 72 3 1829 66 3 1820 65 10 1830 64 3 1821 54 5 1831 66 4 1822 1823 43 3 1832 1833 58 8 52 11 51 9 1824 62 1834 46 2 1825 66 6 1835 39 4 1826 56 11 1836 48 6 1827 Average . 56 9 1837 Average . 56 10 61 4 55 1 1 Plain and obvious as the principle is, which leads ulti- mately to the cheapening of productions, the manufac- turing class of writers dispute its correctness, and even the noble writer, after having once admitted it, by stating the effects of the bounty, overlooks it in his Bubsequerrl reasoning. In the following extract he states: — " 11, in " any given year, the whale fishery was unsuccessful, — " if, instead of any given quantity of oil, or an\ given " number of fish, only half thai quantity or nninbn WBi "imported, there would obviously be a great rise m 172 " the price of oil; now, supposing a duty to be " payable upon all fish or oil imported in foreign " bottoms, the effect of that duty would not have been " felt, as long as there was an ample supply from our " own adventurers ; but the moment an unsuccessful " fishery occurred, the effect of the duty woidd neces- " sarily be, to raise the price even beyond the point " which it would have reached in consequence of the " mere failure in the fishery. On the contrary — if the " import of foreign fish, or oil, were free, it would arrest " the rise of the price in England, whilst an abstraction " of part of the supply from the other markets of Europe " would raise the price in those markets, and a general " equalization of the price of oil would be effected."* It is afterwards remarked, — " Now, if this reasoning " be accurate in regard to oil, is it not equally correct in " regard to corn ?" It is therefore argued that a perma- nent demand for foreign grain would enhance its price abroad, and this is one of the advantages contemplated in the repeal. The bounty cheapened the first necessary of life in this country, simply because it led to agricul- tural improvements and the application of additional capital, and yet the illustrious writer contends, that an increased demand abroad will not produce the same effects. The consumption of grain on the Continent is considerably greater than it was twenty years ago, and yet there has been no advance in its price, but in fact a reduction. * Page 49. 173 The average price of wheat in Prussia Proper was, in a series of years, at two different periods, as follows :— Years. Years. s. d. s. a. j 1816 36 9 1832 34 o 1817 52 7 1833 25 1818 49 6 1834 23 9 1819 34 3 1835 23 1820 27 3 1836 21 1821 Average . 25 6 1837 Average . 22 1 6 37 7 24 10 j If increased demand advances the price of an article, the production of which may be greatly facilitated by im- provements, how does it happen that the price of wheat abroad has actually been cheapened by it ? or, indeed, on what principle can it be shown, that a still further demand will not be followed by results of the same kind .' The bounty, adopted by our ancestors, is stated to have produced an artificial abundance, and the device of the landowners of the present day is said to create as artificial scarcity. This sentiment was expressed in 1831, from which period to 1837 the average price of wheat was little more than 50s. per quarter, clearly showing that the device with which the landowners are charged, so far from having caused an artificial scarcity, had indeed created an unprecedented abundance. It is remarked, and truly, thai the bounty, bj en- 174 couraging agriculture, reduced the price of grain, and yet it is argued, that the privilege of importing it duty- free will actually increase its price abroad. These are inconsistencies which it is difficult to reconcile. The home market, always open to the competition of the foreigner, will excite his enterprise — will furnish him with capital, and lead to agricultural improvements, pre- cisely as the bounty did in former times in this country. The cases are similar, and how can it be maintained that the results will be different ? Argument VII. — The next extract, which it is our business to analyse, abounds in partial and consequently fallacious views. " Burthen imposed on the Country by the " Corn Laws. " If an agricultural labourer, with a moderate family, " consume two-thirds of a bushel of wheat per week, his " annual consumption is 34$ bushels. " If the Corn Laws raise the price of wheat in Eng- " land 10s. per quarter, the rise per bushel is Is. 3d. " If the rise per bushel is 1*. 3d. or \5cL, the weekly " excess paid by a labourer, above what he would pay " if the Corn Trade were free, is lOd. ; his annual excess " 43s. 4d. Thus the tax imposed by the Corn Law on " the labourer is 43.y. 4d. per annum. " If the consumption of wheat in a farmer's family be 175 " double that of a labourer's, his annual excess will be " 86s. 8d. The same excess will be paid by every head " of a family, whose consumption is the same as the " farmer's, but the farmer will pay greater excess. I will " state why. " Suppose he occupies 1 80 acres of land ; suppose one- " third of this is grass, viz., 60 acres ; suppose one-fourth " of the remaining 120 acres is sown with wheat; viz., " 30 acres. " Suppose 90 bushels of wheat are sown on the 30 " acres ; the excess which this farmer will pay for his " seed will be 1*. 3c?., multiplied by 90, which amounts " to 1 12*. 6d. Thus the burthen of the Corn Laws will " be 86s. Sd. to every other equal consumer, but to the " farmer it will be 199s. 2d. or as nearly as possible to " 10/. per annum. But 10/. per annum is rather a seri- " ous tax upon an occupier of 1 80 acres. There is no " other single tax at all to be compared to it. Malt and "tea are very heavily taxed, but neither the tax upon " the tea, nor upon the malt, that he consumes, is an\- " thing like 10/. The tax on corn, or bread is, therefore, " the highest tax paid by a farmer.* " Skkj) Corn. " Probably we shall not be very far from the trutk, " if we assume, that about 12,000,000 quarters of wheal " arc annually produced in England ; and if we take the " produce at eight times the seed (which is too much) it * Pages 26, 27. 170 " follows that 1 ,500,000 quarters of wheat are sown annu- " ally. If the effect of the Corn Laws be to cause an excess " in the price of wheat in England, of 10.y. a quarter, it " follows, that the excess of price of the 1,500,000 quar- " ters of seed wheat amounts to 750,000/. per annum. " A considerable sum must be added for seed oats, " and barley; but if we take this addition at only « 250,000/., the total will be 1,000,000/. per annum, " constituting a charge which falls exclusively upon the " farmers. Surely, neither farmers nor landlords have " any interest in thus increasing the cost of cultivating " the soil ; and yet this effect is manifestly produced by " increasing the cost of seed."* Before proceeding to examine these calculations we will pause to ask what results are anticipated by the noble lord from repeal, or how he imagines it will affect the three great classes — the landowners, the farmers, and the labourers. At one moment he contends that the landowners must lower their rents, the value of land being unduly raised by existing protection ; at another, he says that rents will not be much affected. Again, in allusion to the labour- ers, he shows what an advantage cheap bread will be to them, wages remaining as at present ; but immediately on quitting this class, and directing the attention to his own order, he remarks, how much of their annual expen- diture is made tip of wages, which must necessarily and * Page 28. 177 naturally be lowered, so that the landowners will gain by diminished wages what they lose by diminished rents. To the farmer, he observes, the price of agricul- tural produce is a matter of indifference, as rents will be modified accordingly. The noble writer seems to ima- gine that rents constitute the only important element of expense in the cultivation of the soil. Though the farmer is to sell his grain at greatly reduced prices, rent, it appears, is not to be much, if at all, affected, nor are the labourers to receive less wages. Tins places the for- mer in a very peculiar situation. It is he that must make the sacrifice, which is to be a blessing to the com- munity : such, indeed, is the inevitable inference from one part of the foregoing reasoning. The noble lord endeavours to show the extent of the burthen, which the corn laws impose upon the agricul- tural labourer, and discovers, supposing they raise th< price of wheat in this country 10s. per quarter, thai it is lOrf. per week, or 43s. 4f the most prominent of his own arguments leads him to expect an increased share. It is difficult to say what may be the reduction in the wages of labour consequent on repeal ; if it be propor- tionate to the supposed reduction in the price of wheat, which is about one-fifth, on the average price for six years ending in 1837, the loss to the labourer by such«a scale, which is exceedingly moderate, would be at least 2s. 5d. weekly, or 6/. 10s. per annum. Subtracting the gain by the cheapening in the price of bread, his actual loss Avould be 1*. 8c/. per week, 4/. 6s. Sd. per annum. This is carrying out the views of the noble writer, and we have no wish to misrepresent them So far from these laws being a tax upon the labourer, the repeal of them, according to the argument here analyzed, would reduce his present income, and at a moderate calculation, about one-fifth. After dwelling on the benefit which the repeal would confer upon the labourer, the noble lord attempts to show what an advantage it will be to the farmer, and his reasoning in this case overlooks many important considerations. The serious injury that it would inflict upon him may be demonstrated on the data furnished by the writer. He shows that the cheapening of wheat 10s. per quarter would be, on his annual con- sumption, and on the seed required for 30 acres of wheat, a saving of about 10/. We will admit this, and then we must take into account what the farmer will lose when he goes to market with his produce. The noble writer seems to forget that he has to sell as well as to grow and consume. The two latter circumstances are weighed 179 in the argument, but not the other, which is the most important. Supposing 30 acres of good land to yield, on an average, 12 loads per acre, an estimate which is exceeded on the estate of his lordship in this neigh- bourhood, by some of his intelligent and wealthy tenants, the loss on 360 loads, or 135 quarters, will be 67/. 10*. at a reduction of 10s. per quarter ; deducting from this what the farmer gains on his own consumption and on seed, which together is 9/. 19*. 2d., his net loss is 57/. 10s. lOd. Supposing that he has 90 acres of wheat, his loss according to these calculations, will be 172/. 12?. Cut. We are, however, prepared to show that a free importation of foreign grain would cause a reduc- tion of 15s. per quarter under the average price of wheat in this country for the last ten years, reasonable as the price has been. In this case the loss would be 258/. 18s. 9d. Suppose the landowners are compelled to lower their rents one-fourth, or 5s. per acre, the farmer gains by such reduction 22/. 10s., which being subtracted from 258/. 18#. 9d., still leaves his loss 236Z. 8*. 9d. on 90 acres of wheat. The quantity of wheat produced in England is esti- mated by the writer at 12,000,000 quarters, the seed necessary to yield this amount at 1 ,500, 000 quarters. According to his reasoning, by the excess of price of 10*. per quarter, the agricultural interest Loses annually 750,000/. The seed, oalfe, and barley, he takee at the moderate calculation of 250,000/., thus making the total loss 1,000,000/. W'cwill endeavour to show what Mould 180 be the loss, on these data, were the free importation of grain to reduce the price of wheat 10s. per quarter, and oats and barley to the extent of only 6s. per quarter. For wheat the grower would receive less by . . £5,250,000 Supposing the produce of oats to be 16,000,000 quarters 4,800,000 Estimating barley at 6,000,000 quarters . . . 1,800,000 £11,850,000 It thus appears that the total loss to the agricultural interest, on these exceedingly moderate calculations, would be 11,850,000/. per annum, from the benefit of free importation ; it would, however, be much greater, be- cause less grain would be grown by as much as is imported by the foreigner, so that there would be another serious item of loss to be added to the above sum. Supposing the diminution to be only 2,000,000 quarters of wheat, at the price of 52.?. per quarter, the loss from reduced growth would be 5,200,000/. Thus the total loss expe- rienced by the agricultural interest would be 17,050,000/. It can scarcely be imagined that anything like the present average amount would be grown in this country. The great cheapening which is anticipated, rests on the supposition of a large importation and a consequent diminution in our own production. The loss arising from this circumstance is entirely left out of consideration. The foregoing calculations are not founded on extra- vagant data, but are indeed under the truth. In un- favourable seasons the amount of grain imported from abroad is sometimes about 3,000,000 quarters, and there- 181 fore it is not unreasonable to expect, with open ports, an annual importation of 2,000,000 quarters. In all pro- bability this estimate is greatly under the mark. It must, also, be taken into account, that the market, which would be furnished to the foreigner, by giving him capital — by stimulating his enterprise — and by invigor- ating his exertions, would increase his ability to compete with the home grower, while that of the latter was gra- dually lessened. If the noble writer would refer to the prices of wheat, oats and barley for years in succession on the continent, keeping, also, hi mind, the expenses of their importation to our shores, he would perceive that the prices of them in this country would be much less than has been presumed in the preceding calculations. The doctrine taught by the repealers is, that the corn laws were enacted to benefit the landowners exclusively • — to give them, in fact, higher rents than they would otherwise have commanded. It is also argued that the repeal will be an advantage to the farmer, rent being reduced with the price of his produce, or at least that his interest will not be materially affected. On this snh- ject the repealers express themselves with the greatest possible confidence. According to their reasoning, rent is the principal element in the expenditure of the farmer, and consequently if this be adjusted to the market price of grain, his situation will not be at all deteriorated by the change, as previously remarked. The noble writer distinctly states that, " to the occupier it is, in the long " run, of no consequence whatever y what be the market " price of grain, as />'■ knows perfectly well that his " "l " will be adjusted to it, and rise or lull with >/■ Kent is'2 " is, as it were, a barometer of the state of the market, " not indeed varying from week to week, or from year " to year, but from period to period."* This reason- ing would be just, and no one would for a moment pre- sume to question it, were rent the only or principal element concerned in the creation of agricultural pro- duce. The elements indeed are various, and unless all were proportionally reduced, the doctrine which is here advocated, would be fraught with ruinous effects to the cultivator. In evidence of this, as well as of the neces- sity of protection, the following elaborate calculations are furnished. They have been made with great care, and on the results of farming in the immediate neighbour- hood of the noble lord : — * Page 50. I*:* o .5 o Cu 3 ;ctM © «e r 3 o 0) £ 0) * o * § « « J ■2 to* 5 o "M O 00 O ■g « "S S .2, o C to i m — W O0 0) "5 (M * s — ed — •^j - cd f— ' ci 00 »-l 00 >rt ■M 41 ■— -r ^ OOOOOOOc. - •-' DO t- c 1) — Q Q Z X> § ~ ^ o ^. •— H en OS to 9 B u ai £ "08 gd a 2 5 ." en s ed v "E «*- _o g GU q _r ■— ; '3 £ cd be 3 b a; a >■> '3 M oi - 3 c e > — 3j £ oi « < 5 -= 5 . K T3 O. B X r 3 •*>;;«> is Bfe „ 2 £ .= *S g 3 05 _! 35 H 5 U 3 M E v S -a 5 184 V3 O ~, 1^ tfi \ o — T CI 03. Woo w TO c£ iN^cnoow-'ai'-'iocoioc'; «H ©©©©©©©e©©© ©©50©©©"*©© — iOO Ot^-H— >0ln C5i— I OM00O oooooooooooo «H pq CO tn •s o o "a! ffi-S C t3 a be be £ W! n • s h&2 c c •£ .= •= 2 5 « «: « S"2 a ? Ph O OD W pfl _) OS H pq c o 00 be bf> £ "5 -2 - Ji ' E-§OB5 pip few ,2 o£ be _ W3.& s-o -a :c»0 c 6 S 2J & 2> «* c OnO^^OSOi £=h t-» be bp -a: ° *=« a) o w •a -m bc^, ;.g c hSohpsos fc 185 s^ - - © © © o * O — 1 «0 00 o m o © CO •-* "* — ' ■ so ©1 00 — i O £<* t>» iO >o o *:© =•*!> CO © CO CO rf (M >, £ *e => ° "* ~* 5 5 "9^ O .— rj t^ "5 "» "* _, °**o °* S 1 ^ Pn := on 0. A *J p he u c — U p. o a o ad ad o OB jC B -C |«* O a, ^» « O CIS -3 >-i "^ pM ^_ O (JhCCH^ CI •* chJ r; — -3 S a; $> JPh ©oootoo©©©© oo © © © i-i © © — CN N >n t^o CO"*— «©©©© — ©© I '-'CO •«3 — 9 H la :- s -3 -3 B 3 9 B ■8 eg en B i — ' En O p. CJ c o a "A o T3 a -. r_, C< 5! c"S » .— a» a> — C 9 ^ O K .- 186 pq — < to «H a 3 O" — pq feoc 25 I— I —I — — r— Cfj OOOOOOSOO — o — <*i oooo OOOOOOOOOO— > o o «H ;/: " r-3 c; >, o ho* CO a. c o _. 0> w o ' i II s pq jg.2 O 3 U- 1 C 3"— Js'-s st fat v, ° c c Sf 1 w « •? - — c — J- a> 'S.--5 '3 3^ 3 a. 3T_3 * J ~ .5 bI-3 E.2 -a .3 a: 3 fc£~ £ C*3 • B 3 — a o — z r be br hi be c c Oi 187 °9 _. _ «t* _ 71 2 o t^ l^ o -3- « 1 O 5 H O on «o ce — ■ M a X. ad — — .. ■yj V) u aj u fc! ? In sd W a> h-l 0! X > U, DQ >±H "S3 S(£00=.OOSt^ X — — O N Q (I N S 00 OOOt>.©0>— oc I — CZ2 s a -oB v he ■ > e » •" eS o "S 5 | "1 2 S g | _ Cn -a «*» "' S «> e 's is S la S ._ * ° * - "3 ' = 5 o ~ . o 71 o — OQ K U* ?; a/ - -i *S j2 1/ ec £ & X X 188 ■« u © © © © — no jo a 2 £ Zn © © © — . © — =H © © © © *>' © C-J t^ © © « © o ^z W "7, C -3 . ° £ O «5 oj & *2 O o, « £ & ja bt be M | .5 ee s- i; c Pi P! J H o 35 S! h IV) "t* © o o » o 00 ■o o i Hj' W C5 O) .-: o o t~» o -" H< ^ Ci c^ - t» sn r^ -1 — K co (N © 00 00 °> 00 CO w o -. „ CO 2 o g(B W CO O i:^ o5 O ST e< T3 *^ *^> •*-> d Qj fm ^ ."^ ^ +g r« s ■r * O s- o £ ^J-° I 5 "*3 C *> «o H .-f i» ■M "O -C ~ fe S3 g ! T3 i T3 6 • — '-O '- ce CfJ — — o» «o o Cl t^ 00 -r — ' — »C —J« ~H t; T C T3 fe2 coi "5 3/ OS ~ x: •>-> o ^ c o d •ddit Ditt Ditt SI H o c Cv u J- « 0) - O, -• i_ ad a . ~ "« 00 Xh « Etf ,CXi CC CG o o r — — o 3 z ■= >> - s M « = " ,-. ~ c ._ <_ 3 "- ~ _ D ■»• s * Si M 5 s s - d ■ — z Ed B S r^r= t: M " = ° & 111 5 * | < \ 1 *r ~ 3 fc -a 3 s 3 S ^ -c *■ ^ - I J - a'-a u-s &5H0 8 q.! ^-3 = a v * 0) = *- t => J * J s5 = Mil ' : o ,a o ^-- ^S I 8 a "J. „ * ™ a 5"o •»• 01 « «c ' a,t.o°x^-ag t> d « •-. - - i 3 i|| -A . S £ ' J e"8« B .a 3 a S 8«3 _rt ft-^ V rt O Cm ^ s s « " i "- i — •H* 190 A.ccording to these calculations, the price of grain is not a matter of indifference to the farmer, even if rent were reduced. His gain from the diminution of rent will be almost imperceptible compared with his loss from the cheapening of wheat only 10s. per quarter. The soil on which these calculations have been made scarcely comes under the designation of clvmfty and inconvenient pieces of machinery unworthy of being worked. It is quite of the average quality, and has long been under cultivation. It would be an interesting and instructive investigation, to ascertain how far the data on which these calculations are founded, can be modified, so that it may be clearly proved to the farmer he has no interest in the price of agricultural produce. From the preceding calculations of expenses the ele- ment of rent in the cost of production, is found to bear the following several proportions to the whole expense of the year's crop — under the different circumstances stated : — First, on Clay Land. « Wheat at 1 7*. Wheat at 25*. per cent. per cent, 1st year 1 Fallow I llf 11| 2nd, Wheat . 17f 16i 3rd, Beans . 17| 19 4th, Wheat 19£ 15 Mean Average. , 16| 161 Asgres^ate Average . i6i 15| Or not one-sixth of the whole cost of production. 191 Second, on Turnip Land. Wheat at 1 7s. Wheat at 25*. per cent. per cent 1st year 1 Fallow } . 13i • . 13* 2nd, Barley . 25$ 25* 3rd, Beans . 27 \ Red Clover 36f I Mean . 26 26 White Clover 14 ) 4th, Wheat . 26* 24$ Mean Average. 22f 22$ Aggregate Average . 20f 20$ Or little more than one-fifth of the cost of production. Rent here bears a greater proportion to the actual cost than is usually given by writers, — it is frequently estimated by them as low as one-eighth of the expense of production. At a later period,* the illustrious writer addresses the landowners on the impolicy of the corn laws, but not for the purpose of showing, as in his previous examina- tion of them, that they i-aisc the price of bread to an ex- orbitant rate, but thai they allow it to become cheap, and do not prevent fluctuations. Argument VIII. — The following extract presents his \ i( u s on this matter : — * 1835. 192 " The season, indeed, appears peculiarly favourable for " contemplating the system with the most perfect calm- " ness. The general prosperity of the industrious classes, " but more especially the moderate price of provisions, " will relieve the discussion from every irritating charac- " tor, and excuses me from the necessity of making " even an apology for reviving it. Whether the low " price of the principal article of subsistence be one of "the causes which have contributed to this general " prosperity, I will not here inquire, but I beg to re- rt mind you that it is co-existent with it ; and I feel " more forcibly the necessity of reminding you of it, be- " cause it has been recently asserted that low prices are " inconsistent with the national welfare. It is not, how- " ever, with this view that I allude to the present low " price of wheat, but rather for the purpose of drawing " your attention to the Corn Law, and of inviting you to " a comparison of its objects with its results. Of those " who have ascribed a particular object to the law, or " rather to its authors, (for laws themselves have no ob- " jects, and nothing but the imperfection of language as " an instrument for communicating our thoughts could " have led us to use this form of phraseology,) there are "two classes, one of which affirms that the object was to " raise the price ; while the other alleges that it was to " regulate it. In the following argument, however, it is " quite unnecessary to distinguish them, and I only ad- " vert to the distinction, lest those who attach importance " to it should imagine that I had intentionally neglected "it. Whether, then, the object was to raise or to regu- "*late prices, 63s. or thereabouts, appears to have been 193 " the rate at which the Act of 1828 contemplated that' " wheat should be sold. During a considerable portion " of the period which elapsed since the adoption of that " measure, the price ranged within limits so little re- " moved from the pivot, (as it was termed) that in the " estimation of some high political authorities, its efficacy " was satisfactorily established. The price, however, " has now debated so far and so long from the pivot , " that even those who took the most nattering view of '•' their success in regulating it, will probably begin to " doubt whether its previous steadiness ought not to '' have been ascribed to other co-operating causes rather " than to the sole operation of the Corn Bill. "VVhat- " ever may have been the causes of the price adhering " so closely to the pivot till the year 1 833, it is perfectly " clear that those causes cannot now be in effective " operation. The average is now 40.y., and the occupiers " of the soil have for many months ceased to reap the " benefit which they have been taught to expect from " the protecting statute. Nevertheless, they are in a " situation quite as prosperous as when wheat was at " 64s. ; and every other branch of industry, indeed " every other section of the community is enjoying tfre " advantages to be derived from a moderate price of " provisions. "You will observe that I have affirmed that the " causes which kept the price al 64*. cannot now be in "effective operation. This is, indeed, a self-evident " proposition, for if theywere, the price would still be "64*. But the Corn Law is still in force The Corn N 194 *•" Law, unassisted, could not therefore have been the " cause of the price continuing at 64s. "* The objection to the corn laws embodied in this passage is founded on the fact, that they fail to maintain the prices of grain at a uniform rate, and hence the noble writer arrives at once at the conclusion, that they afford no protection to the farmer. The inference does not necessarily flow from the premises. We are ready to admit that these laws do not prevent fluctuations ; and he who ever dreamed that they could exercise such a power, knew little of the modifying causes of the prices of all productions, whether they be agricultural or con- nected with manufactures. No laws, nor the intire ab- sence of their control, will, or ever did, prevent fluctu- ations. They occur as manifestly in purely agricultural countries as in our own. No calculations of the agricul- turist, how elaborate soever or matured his experience, can guard against them. A succession of abundant harvests always cheapens the produce, and a succession of unfavourable seasons as constantly advances its price. Whether there be laws or no laws, these effects will ever follow the vary- ing character of the seasons. The table already given f shows that the fluctuations, for a series of years, have been less than those of other countries, and in the one which follows, presenting the results of a more extended period, it is remarkable, that with one exception, the per * Pas;e 31. f Page 166. 195 centage of fluctuation has been less in this country than in any of the sixteen places named, and for a period of twenty-three years. With such facts as these before the mind, with what reason or justice can it be asserted, that the Corn Laws are the occasion of the fluctuations in the price of the staple commodity of life ? If these laws be chargeable with such an influence, what are the causes existing in other countries? The noble lord will scarcely adopt the opinion of a recent writer,* who con- tends, that the aggregate capabilities of corn-growing countries to export, does not exceed 700,000 quarters, and yet argues, that our refusing to take this small quantity annually, is the cause of the serious fluctuations in the price of grain in all other countries, Such is the opinion of a great authority ! * James Wilson, Esq. N in this country in the same < 9 8 1836 . 27 8 J years. . . . . 1 20 10 The corn laws manifestly secured the farmer in these years from foreign competition, at a time when it 199 would have been ruinous. What reduction in rent would have been any compensation for the loss of 20s. \0d. or 16s. 9d. per quarter, or indeed half the amount of either sum? There is, however, another ad- vantage which he derives from them. As the prices ad- vance from the lowest point, which is an insufficient remuneration for his industry and capital, he exclusively enjoys the improvement, which would not be the case if the foreigner were his competitor in every step of the ascending scale. In the following extract the noble Lord employs an illustration to show that we ought not to encourage our own agricultural produce, unless it can be purchased at the same rate as that of the foreigner. " To resolve this question, then, we must examine " and define both the measure and the lands. First " let us see what is the measure. The measure is an " artificial enhancement of the price of the first ncccs- " sary of life. Now let us see what are the lands. " The lands are such as are either unusually steril, or " unusually expensive to cultivate. As land is only a " machine upon which corn is manufactured, they may " be described as clumsy and inconvenient pieces " of machinery. Now if a manufacturer of cloth were " to recommend to any of us landowners the purchase " of a particular assortment of his commodity, in pre- " ference to what was made by other manufacturers, " but adding at the same time that wo must give i " higher price for it (30*. instead of 20*. a jrard), we " should naturally inquire whal were the peculiar ad •200 vantages to be derived from the transaction. We should probably ask whether it were either more beautiful, or more durable, or more agreeable ; and, if in answer to these inquiries, we were told that it was neither more beautiful nor more durable, nor in any respect of better quality, I suspect we should be disposed to tell him that, in that case, he must not expect a higher price for his cloth than his neigh- bours. If to this reply he were to rejoin, that really, he could not afford to sell it cheaper because his machinery was expensive, and his looms of a particu- lar construction, which required a greater supply, either of labour, or of fuel, or of materials ; should not each and every of us tell him that that was no affair of ours, that he ought either to get better machinery, or to give over weaving ; and, in short, that he should have none of our custom, because his neighbour over the way had offered to furnish us at 20s. instead of the 30s. that he asked. In thus withdrawing our custom from the manufacturer in question, we should feel that we were perfectly justified, and the by-standers would sanction our conduct with their approbation." * In order to test the justness of this reasoning, we will modify the illustration, so as to make it represent, more accurately, the agricultural interest. Suppose the manufacturers of cloth to be as important a class as the cultivators of the soil, and finishing an article as in- dispensable to existence. Imagine still further, that their prosperity, as consumers of manufactures, to have * Pages 34, 35. 201 the same relation to the well-being of the state as that of agriculture : they must also be regarded as subject to heavy taxation — to high prices, in whatever they consume — to exorbitant wages and extravagant rents, compared with the continental scale. The illustration thus modified will enable us to ascertain what claim they have upon our consideration. The noble writer may be supposed to say to this great interest, " We will " not purchase your cloth, you are demanding 30 per " cent, more than the foreigner." The interest, in vin- dication of itself, answers, " My lord, it is true that " there is a cheaper market than ours, but this is not " occasioned by better machinery ; ours is admitted to " be the best in the world, and is in every respect well " managed. It is certainly expensive to work, and from " circumstances which we beg leave to explain : — " In the first place our machinery is subject to heavy " taxation, from which that of the foreigner is exempt. "Second. — It pays a high rent, while that of the " foreigner pays little more than a nominal acknowledg- " ment. " Third. — The wages of the labourer are fifty per cent. " higher than those abroad. " Fourth. — Whatever we consume, or use, is high- " priced. The saddler, — the shoemaker, — the blacksmith, " — the tailor, — the wheelwright, indeed all whom we " employ have a scale of charges very different from the " game trades in Prussia, Poland, or Russia ; but from " your exalted situation you are, probably, unacquainted " with these things. •202 •• Perhaps we may be permitted to bring them under •' your notice. We have no desire to ask more for our " goods than the continental manufacturer ; necessity has •' placed us in our peculiar position, and it seems to us " extremely difficult to get out of it. You will oblige " us by showing how we can be enabled to sell as cheap '* as the foreigner. We should like to have your cus- " torn." His lordship may be supposed to reply : " The land- " lords must reduce their rents." " Ah ! this will not " relieve us greatly ; it is only one of the several import- " ant elements of expense connected with the working " of our machinery. You will, perhaps, reduce the " wages of labour ?" " Unquestionably. It is clearly stated in my pam- " phlet, addressed to the landowners, that the wages of " labour will be lotoered. They are shown to be a serious " item in the annual expenditure of my order, and un- " less such meaning was intended to be conveyed, they " would not have been alluded to." " There still remain heavy taxation and high-priced " productions of every kind which we consume, and we " should be very glad to get quit of the burthens which " they impose." We are puzzled to ascertain what answer would occur to the noble writer upon such an appeal ; for this view of the subject, most important, in rightly settling the ques- tion of protecting duties, seems to have largely escaped his attention. Argument IX. — In the next extract there is another 203 striking instance of a want of clear and accurate view a of the subject. " If a reduction in the price of flour leads to an in- " creased consumption of meat, an immediate compensa- " tion is made for the fall in the value of corn, by a rise in " that of cattle ; or by what is, perhaps, quite as advan- " tageous, a readier sale for it. It may not be a full " compensation, but it will be a very considerable one ; " and, as far as it does go, it will be without drawback or " alloy." * It is here supposed that a diminution in the price of bread will enable the labouring classes to consume more meat. The noble writer throughout his inquiry argues the advantage of cheap bread to the labourer ; but he here supposes that the farmer will have an immediate compensation for the fall in the value of corn, by tin rise of that of cattle. His reasoning, with respect to the foreign grower, is, that an increased demand ad- vances the price of an article — meat, therefore, will be enhanced by the augmented demand, so that what is gained by the cheapening of one necessary of life, is clearly counterbalanced by the higher price of another, scarcely less important. The want of consistency in this instance arisee from blending together the interests of two individuals — the farmer and the labourer. The compensation which is given to the one is certain!) a disadvantage to the other. Why should not the Labourer have cheap meat as well as cheap bread ? According bo the occasional admissions of the writer and the tenor of • Paes 40. 204 reasoning throughout his inquiry, wages will be lowered, and therefore, if the ability to purchase is rather dimi- nished than increased, in what way will the labourer be enabled to consume more meat ? When the landowners present themselves to the imagination of the noble lord, he invariably addresses them about the charges of their annual expenditure, and the wages of labour are always prominently in- troduced, and their diminution is dwelt upon as a com- pensation in part for the supposed diminution of income. These contradictory representations would have been avoided, if the labourer and the landowner had been so linked together in the mind, as to preclude the possibility of a separate audience, and it would have been well if the farmer had been associated with them. In a question involving complicated and important in- terests, the most acute reasoners are liable to fall into fatal mistakes. It is not peculiar to the illustrious writer, that in analyzing the influence of the corn laws on the several classes of society, different and contradictory conclusions are established. The repealers are not only inconsistent with each other, but they are strikingly at variance with themselves. Distinguished rank — high-toned independence, and the most comprehensive liberality, do not exempt the individual adorned by them from the errors and defects of the class. They are inherent in the principles advocated ; nor is it in the power of the most gifted to evolve harmony, beauty, and truth from the study and contemplation of them. London :— Printed by William Clowes and Sons, Stamford Street. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. MY 1 4 1952 RfcCU U/trtrt "NOV 151972 WCD nMJiff . 10- J-flwuJ * IVM*» u* NO- DISCHARGE or 982 i L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 THE LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF CAMPANIA LOS ANGEU UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY AA 001 013 753 7 6 3 1158 00153 4048