A A 1 o: 1 \ 3 I 7 { 5 i 6i ■^ ifj'jjiiit-Ci^, The Objections against the Corn Bill Refuted.., By William Spence :-t^-i7ry^T^-^^zim'^'w:''i d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES THE OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE Corn iSill IRefutet»; NECESSITY OF THIS 3IEASURE, VITAL INTERESTS EVERY CLASS OP THE COMMUNITY, DEMONSTRATED. BY WILLIAM SPENCE, Esq. F.L.S. rSESIOENT OF THE H0LDERNE8S AGRICULTUHAL SOCIETY. FOURTH EDITION. PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN, PATERSOSTEU-ROlV. AND SOLD BY J. CUM MI NO, DUBLIN. 1815. every ?es it amomit to ? Stn)j>ly that liie freest importation nuist be most j)r(»(lueti\e of national riches. And are riches then the one thinii" me(iiol to a nation ? and is there not somethint;- of stdl <;:t\iler value, to wit tndepend- ANCK and si.ci K.TV ? and may not this first prin- ciple be as destructive to the latter as favourable to the former? Let us a^ai!! consult Adam Smith and see \>hat he says. Why, that though "the Navi- gation Act is not favourable to foreign conmierce nor to the growth of that opulence \vhich can arise from it, yet inasnuich as dkfence is OF MORE IMPOIITANCE THAN (>PUi.EiseF>, t/iis ifct is per- haps the irisest of all the cowwercial regulations of Eiuihnidy* And is it only of importance, then, that \\ t' should di ttnd ourselves irt)n» t he attacks w hich our enemies might make upon us with the sword, and a matttr of indiftirence whether they may be able to wield against us the infinitely more dread- ful and efficacious weapon of famine ? This question twenty years ago, would have seemed absurd, but is it so after the experience which wehave g-ained — after we have seen the whole continent shut against us, and America suffering her corn to rot, rather than sell us a grain of it ; and after we have witnessed a sea- son of such dependence upon our own resources (lhl*2) that in many districts just before harvest, a bushel of wheat could scarcely be met with at any * Ibid. p. 255. 9 price, and famine must have been our lot if the pre- ceding- crop had been materially deficient ? But it will be said, a similar state of things can never occur ag-ain. Alas! he must be a shallow politician who uninsrructed by the past, does not see that if we are ever again rendered dependent upon foreigners, (which, that we are not now, it has been most incontrovertibly proved, is solely owing to the high price of grain and consequent improvement of our agriculture,) nothing is more probable than that in any future quarrels with them, the new weapon •which Bonaparte has taught them the use of, will be the very first of which they will avail themselves; and one of mightier efficacy far than British rockets, or American torpedoes. Are the powers of Europe all so well satisfied with themselves and with each other that no future differences can arise ? Have we so fully convinced them of our disinter- estedness and of the necessity of our naval supe- riority for their advantage, that no northern coali- tion can ever again spring up? And have the Ame- ricans been so humbled into love for us that we can rest secure of their never again entrusting their go- vernment to a Madison ? It is only requisite to state these questions. If an answer by the remotest pos- sibility can be given in the negative, the deplorable folly of not providing against such contingencies — of not preferring security to riches — must be mani- fest. OBJECTION SECOND. When pressed by the argument that it is surely equitable that the Farmer should be protected Irom unfair foreign rivalry, as well as the manufacturer, 10 J lip opponents of the Corn Bill usually rejoin, that food is ou a different footing- from manufactures, and that human it y calls out so loudly for bread, the stalf of lile of the middling and poorer classes, being- cheap, that to this consideration every thing* should yield. No one, I may venture to say, is more the friend of these classes than I am ; no one could repel, with greater indionation, any project for increasing the national wealth, or that of the higher classes of the community, at their expense; and if any o:;c will convince me that the present cheapness of Corn can coexist with the high wages which ac- companied its former dearness, I will at once admit that the interest of the comparatively small class of Farmers and Land Owners, should be sacrificed to that of the numerous body of labourers. Never, where the interest of the rich and poor are at va- riance, shall I be found contending that the latter, as being the greater body, ought not to have the preference. It is perfectly natural, that the poor should be alarmed at any measure which they are told will enhance the price of that bread they have so seldom known cheap, and I blame not them for petitioning against a Corn Bill. But what shall be said of the information of the public orators and writers, who would persuade them of the compa- tibility of high wages and low-priced bread, when the slightest examination of our present circum- stances is sufficient to prove that they are utterly incompatible? I am not here going to contend, that the price of Corn has any direct and immediate effect on the price of labour, for though in fully cultivated coun- tries like this, the one must influence the other I 11 eventually, the case of America, and the fact that during" the last twenty years the rate of wag-es in our chief raannfacturing 'owns, has been often highest when Corn was low, and vice versa, prove that the demand and supply have a much more speedy and striking effect, and may often, for a time, counteract that arising from the price of Corn. But in the present instance, the indirect influence of the low price of Corn, which puts it out of the Farmer's power to employ the best of his labourers, except at greatly reduced wages, and obliges him wholly to discharge all inferior hands, must im- mediately, as rar as respects the agricultural class, and very speedily as regards the manufacturing classes, depress their condition much more than the cheapness of the price of Corn can improve it. If this be doubted — if any one hesitate to believe that the effect has even already taken place, let him ask the ploughmen, who can now but obtain £16 per annum where they formerly got £20,* whether the reduction in the price of bread has compensated them for this reduction of wages ? — Let him ask the thousands of farming labourers, who received their 1^")S. and 18s. a week, and could get employment when they asked for it, of whom some now think themselves fortunate if they can procure work at one fourth less, while the rest arc * "At the late Sittings or Statutes for liiring servants through- out tlie clifFeront parts of tlie country, the rate of wages was lowered nearly one fourth, in roiiscquence of the present prices of Corn, and from the necessity tor smaller Farmers to l)econie their own foremen, and for those of greater extent to perform their work with fewer servants. The wages of hibourers were lowered in the same projiortion." Leeds Paper, December^ 1814. 12 thrown n|)on the parish from absohite inability to find ( n)pl( \ lupnt at any rate ; wlietlier the former liave ciuise to rei( ice at f^ainin^- a shillings on their weekly consumption of bread, while they me losing' four by ciiminishf^d wages ; or the letter in the ex (ban o./ of a scanty poor-house allowance for the full me:r» which, notwithsjaiiding *he deatness of Corn, iheir inuusir; co'ild l:>tely secure to them ? — and their answer will at once tUciJe, that short as is the ; t ;m!h1 which has elapsed since the change to cht apne.-,.s, misery, and not prosperity, has been the consequence, as far as they are concerned. Nor does the effect stop here. In all the inland market towns, of which the shops sop[>ly the sur- rounding ccuj'try with groceries :md ouujufactures, the comj)laint of a deplorably diminisheu consump- tion is universal. Professional men of my acquain- tance, both ill law and physic, have informed me that they find it impossible to get any money of those even who used to |)aY most readily. The sums formerly destined for new articles of dress or furniture, are appropriated to the tax-gatherer, whose demands it is well if they are sufficient for, without having recourse to borrowing, or selling produce for half its cost ; and tradesmen, who eight months since wne foremost in petitioning against a Corn Bill, at length too well convinced that a savinn" of a few pounds a year in flour, is a wretched cons(»lntion foi a daily declining consumption and bankruj)t x:ust(»mers, would now be as m'gent as their agricultural brethren for its adoption. The evil has not yet reached the class of manu- facturci - enlivened by the opening of new sources of trade, and able just now to obtain as high wages as e\ er : but in the end it will infallibly extend to 13 tliem also. Not to mention that they mnst soon be injured by the competition of dismissed agricuhural labourers, driven to apply themselves to manufac- tures ; if the present distress of this class be suft'ered to continue, their power of consuming- manufactures must be diminished at least one half; and what would be the effect of withdrawing one half of the custom of a population of six millions, consuming*, on the lowest computation, one hundred and twenty mil- lions, may be easily conceived America, though she were to purchase of us as largely as ever, would be a poor substitute for such a defalcation of home demand, the effects of which eventually, and in no long period, must ramify through every class of society. OBJECTION THIRD. When driven from the ground just traversed, the opponents of the Corn Bill shelter themselves under the pretence that all the evil is owing to hujh rents ; and tell us, that if the Land-owners chuse to reduce them, the Farmer will have no reason to complain of present prices — a position so tar from being true, that it may be demonstrated, that if the Farmer paid not one sixpence of rent, the pre- sent prices- would be ruinous to him. The Farmer contends, that the very lowest price at which he can afford to sell his produce, is 80s. per quarter for wheat, and other grain in propor- tion. He has given the data upon which this as- sertion is fojiiided— stated the items of rent, labour, &c. on which he builds his calculation, nnd chal- lenged his opponents to prove their inaccuracy. No such attempt, even, has been made; and it may be therefore assumed, that his position is admitted to 14 be unassailable. Now at present he can obtain, in most nuuki^ts, no more than oOs. per quarter for his best wheat; \n those of this part of Yorkshire not so much ; but to prevent the possibility of cavil, let us say, that he can g-et eren sixty for that of average quality. * Taking", then, the * It may be said, perliaps, that the average which governs importatioii is yet sixty-five ; but a moraent's consideration will shew, that this is no criierion what«'ver of tiie prices obtainable for wheat of middlin0s. and 80s. or fifty shillinrjs ; and who that knows any thing of the real average rent •whence the great supply is drawn. " I have before me," ob- serves Sir Joseph, in a letter which I have had the honour of receiving from him since writing the preceding paragraph of this note, " at this moment two averages ; the one taken from six corn-growing counties, contrasted with one taken from Lan- cashire, Cheshire, and four Welch counties, in which the ave- rage price of the corn-growing counties is 57?. 8^/. a quarter, while that of the consuming counties is 73s. 4d. — Tlius is the very corn grown and sold for les: Ihan it cost in Lincolnshire, brought forward in Lancashire, with all the charges of car- riage, profit, &c. for the purpose of determining tlie price at which importation shall cease !" It is only necessary for any candid inquirer to look over the lust Gazette list of averages (for the week ending 7th January), and at the same time to calculate the proportion of whert shipped by the different dis- tricts, as I have just done, from the account published by the Corn Committee of the House of Commons (Appendix, No. II.) to be convinced of the importance of this observation, and the truth of its inference. He will find that while the average price of wheat in the seven last maritime districts, (including Cumberland, Westmoreland, Lancashire, Cheshire, (he ANelch maritime counties, Gloucestershire, Somersctsliirc, Devonshire, Cornwall, Dorsetshire, and Hampshire), liom all which, in 1813, only 94,077 quarters were shipped, is 69s. 2d. that of the five first (comprising Essex, Kent, Sussex, Suffolk, Cambridge- shire, Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, Durhuni, and Norh- umberland), from which, in the same year, were shipped 4G4,.'j'Ju quarters, or Jive times as much, is but 57s. 2i ob- taining this revisal, all their effort $ are in vain. 16 of wheat land tlirong^hout the king^dom, and that lias not taken up his crude notions from the rate at which land has been let, in a few instances, near g-reat towns, or to unthinking' tenants, does not know that this is at the vert/ least ^0s. per acre viore than the amount of the rent. It is therefore clear, beyond the possibility of contradiction, that niakin<»* every supposition of priced— produce — rent — in favour of the op[)onents of the Corn Bill, the farmer rvouldy at the existing prices, lose IO5. per acre by every acre he cultivates^ even if his landlord were to let him have his land for nothing. That a material reduction in the advanced rents which have of late been given, must and ought to take place, I have no disposition to deny ; thoug-h I am far from thinking that the average rise of rents has been more than equivalent to the advance in all the articles of the landowner's consumption, or that his income is actually (as to its power of command- ing the services of others) greater than it was for- merly. But it need not be apprehended, that at 80s. or 8 is. per quarter for wheat, the highest price at which it is proposed to restrict the importation, the landholder could continue to receive his present rents. If greatly advanced, he must be prepared for a serious deduction, and for some diminution probably even from what he received twenty years ag-o ; for it may be doubted, if, when all circum- stances are taken into account, 80s. per quarter now, will admit the farmer to pay as nmch as he did in 179o, when wheat was at 60s. And these de- ductions the British landholders, who, whatever some may say of them, have not lost the character which they, as well as our farmers, deserved in Dr. Smith's time, of " being-, to their great honour, of 17 all people the least subject to the wretched spirit of monopoly,"* will not repine at making-. They do not object to bear their fair share of the losses arising- from the convulsed state of Europe, which all ranks have in turn borne ; all that thev ask, is to be protected from utter and irretrievable ruin. OBJECTION FOURTH, If any reduction of rent is inadequate to secure to the farmer his fair profits, still less can be ex- pected from the diminution of taxes, and the fall in the price of labour, which some have held out as all that his case requires. The property tax will, it is to be hoped, cease at the period to which it was originally limited ; and to a man absolutely without money, it will be some consolation not to be called upon for a tax which most unjustly levies on him a contribution for profits however heavy may have been his losses: but it is very obvious that the cessation of a tax which on the avera^ does not exceed 2s. 6d. per acre, can be no efl'ectual relief to men who are losing- />0s. And as to other taxes, direct and indirect, wliich affect the farmer, how can there be the sliphtest prospect of their being- taken off, when it is unde- niable that the revenue of the country, even if all the present war taxes -are continued, will be scarce- ly adequate to the expenses of a peace establish- ment? Indeed were they every one removed, so long as the farmer is called upon to bear his share of • Wealth of Nations, vol. ii. p. 251 18 the thirty-eight millions of taxes now levied to pay the interest of our enormous national debt, and of which two thirds must continue to be levied, even if the sinkinii' fund he abolished — it is in vain to ex- pect that any probable diminution of taxation can place him on a par with the Polish nobleman, who could afford to grow corn for us if he got 2s. a quar- ter far it beyond the 3()s. expense of conveying it to Dantzig, or with the French farmer, who has no na- tional debt, or next to none, upon his shoulders. With regard to the fall in the price of labour, it might be of some service, if the fact were not that what the farmer saves on the one hand, he loses on the other, by increased poor rates, already a heavy item in his expenses. If he pay less wages to those men whom he continues to employ, be is obliged to contribute to the support of others, that he or his neighbour has discharged and have come upon the parish. Nor is there the slightest prospect, consi- dering the great body of disbanded soldiers who will be shortly turned upon the country, and that our manufactures are fully supplied with hands, that he will be relieved from this obligation which may soon equal half his present rent, by any de- mand for labour from other quarters, until his ruin has been Ions: consummated. OBJECTION FIFTH. The last argument against the Corn Bill which I shall notice, is that regarded by those who advance it as their sheet anchor — namely, That we are more a manufacturing than an agricultural nation ; that our commerce, which is the source of our riches, must fatally decline, if our manufacturers, owing to 19 the liigher price of corn in this country than abroad, cannot obtain workmen at as low a rate as their fo-^ reig-n rivals; and that consequently the minor inte- » yr rests of agriculture should give way to the more 'V important interests of commerce. My opinions on the subject of foreig'n commerce are well known ; and so far from having seen reason to alter them, I consider the experiment to have been made and fairly decided, that Britain is inde- pendent of commerce. If she were not, how was it that during the period when almost every avenue to it was closed, when our manufacturers depending upon it were in a state of universal distress ; and when the gains of some classes of commercial men • were admitted by themselves to be more than ba- lanced by the ruinous losses of others — how was it that no material defalcation took place in any of our taxes, and the great index of national prosperity, the property tax, increased in productiveness;* But I am not now about to take up the argument on my own peculiar ground, as I feel myself perfectly competent to engage with my opponents on their own ; and therefore, in discussir.^^ this objection, I shall errant that foreig'n commerce is a souice of wealth, and a very considerable one; and tor a moment admit, that it is probable that the price of grain which the farmer contends for, would, in the way stated, shut us out from many foreign mar- kets. Admitting, then, for the sake of argument, that the interests of the commercial and of the agricul- tural classes are irreconcileably at variance, what is the course which wisdom dictates* 01)viously, that inquiry should be made which class is tiic most numerous and essential, and that the interests of <:2 20 that which is proved to be least so, should yield to those of that proved to be most so. Let us then, iu the first place, inquire, which is the most numerous class, the agricultural or that part of the manufacturing which depends on foreign commeice} bearing in mind throughout, that the rest of our manufacturers, those who prepare ar- ticles for liome consumption, are to be wholly left out of question, as it has never been contended that it is of any moment at what rate their wage* are. Now it appears, from the census of 1811, that tliere were 895,998 families chiefly employed in agriculture, and 1,129,049 chiefly employed in trade, manufactures, and handicraft. The pro- portion of t'nese dependent upon manufacturing ar- ticles for foreign commerce is estimated by Mr. Colquhoun, who is disposed to give as high import- ance to this branch of industry as its warmest ad- mirers can desire, at 406,350 individuals'^, or (reckoning only four individuals to a family) 101,587 families — that is, at less than one eighth of the agricultural population. But taking another calculation given in the Quarterly Review^ which %, '•! be found farther on, let us admit the manufac- turers employed on articles of foreign export to be one-fifth of the whole, which is certainly above the truth ; yet still the agricultural class is four times as numerous, and it will hardly, one would think, be contended that the interest of 225,809 families should be preferred to that of 895,998. " But the wealth that the sale of these manufac- tures brings in, is what we maintain they are so im- * On the Resources, &c. of the British Empire, p. 72. 21 portant for," cry our opponents. Weil then, let us dig" into this richest of mines, and see how far the intrinsic value of the ore corresponds with its glit- tering- exterior. The amount of our exported manufactures, esti- mated at their real value, does not on the average exceed forty-five millions, but we v/ill say fifty. A man need not be an adept in political economy to perceive that this whole sum is not profit ; nor will any one, at all acquainted with the actual profits of manufacturing concerns, contend that those of all engaged in preparing this amount of exported articles, are likely to exceed fifteen per cent ; but to do away the possibility of objection, let us call them twenty-five per cent. — surely a sufficient al- lowance. Great Britain, then, gains by her ex- ported manufactures, £12,500,0(JO annually. — In the next place what does she gain by her agri- culture ? When the Income Tax was laid on in 1798, Mr. Pitt estimated the rental of land at twenty-five millions, and the income derived from tythes (which is as much the produce of land as rent) at five mil- lions, together thirty millions. This it is well known was as greatly below, as his estimate of the profits from trade was above the truth ; but to shut every door to cavil, let us adopt this as the ground of our calculation. — It will not be denied that since 1798 rents have doubled ; but that we may be within the mark we will take them at only fifty millions — ;m amount much less than the fact. Now it is notorious that the farmer's profits ought to equal (and did so before his present distress) three fourths of his rental, upon which ratio he is assessed to the Property Tax. It is clear therefore — with- 22 mit taking^ into account that the rent and farmer's ])rofits are only hvo fifths of the gross produce of the land, the whole of which is a new creation of Mcalth ; and without adverting- to the profits of the wheelwright, blacksmith, saddler, &c. employed by the farnier, who draw their subsistence from the remaining tliree fifths — that we derive a net re- venue of upwards of Eighty-Seamen Millions from our land, or seven times as much as we gain by our exported manufactures. Away, then, with that senseless folly which shutting its eyes on the plainest rules of Arithmetic, contends that a branch of trade which at the highest estimate does not produce thirteen miUions, is of more uuportance than one, which, at the lowest, produces eighty-seven ! Richly would that man deser\ e to be laughed at, who, possessing an estate of eighty-seven thousand a year, should consider it as of less value than an, in comparison paltry, mercantile concern, that brought him in thirteen ; and who, if there arose a question as to sacrificing one, should hesitate which hut must be. And well do we deserve, for eser bawling out in the ears of the world, both in pailiament and out of it, our trade! our dear trade.'! our invahinhle trade! ! ! and never considering our agriculture as w orthy of men- tion ; — richly do we deserve that our Contmental neighbou's should take us at our word, and believe us incapable of any gti-erous or disinterested exer- tion, and that even our mighty achievements in behalf of their independence, nay, even our pleadmgs ibr Africa herself, have been dictated by that cold calculating attention to self, which alone can l-e looked for from a people who seem to glory ia avowing themselves, what their arch- foe nick- named them, a nation of shop-keepers ! Lamenta- 23 bie, indeed, is it to contrast the suspicions and in- sinuations which are thrown out against our motives in every part of Europe, with the commanding aspect with which, having- finished our work, we might now have looked around us, had we, instead of ridiculously pluming ourselves upon our com- merce, and attributing all our wealth and power to it, regarded it and proclaimed it, as what it is, a simple auxiliary to our greatness, and taken our station as what we really are, the first agricultural, and therefore the richest and most powerful nation in Europe. Nor is this reproach deserved by our mercantile class only. The agriculiural class come in for their full share of it. For seldom or never I am sorry to say, have they manfully come forward to resist the pretensions and encroachments of their mercantile and manufacturing brethren, or asserted their just claim to be regarded as the first, the most essential, the most honourable class in society. Dear-bought experience, has at length taught them wisdom, and they will not in future believe the professions of their benefit being always in the view of the regulations called for by manufacturers, who, while the importation of one hundfed and Jift;/ of their articles is absolutely prohil)ited by Special Statutes*; have the modesty to exclaim against the equitable protection from foreign rivalry (not mono- poly like theirs) which the farmer requests. Let me not be misunderstood — but for the twen- tieth time in speaking of the relative importance of agriculture and commerce, protest against being deemed as I am perversely by many, an enemy to * See the list of these articles in Appendix to the Report of the Lords' Committee. 24 the latter. I was educated to it ; I know and jidinit its \'alue and utility: and so far from wish- in;;* its decrease, no man is more desirous of seeing- its leg-itimatc extension, or has a higher respect for the general character of a British merchant, lii t our flag cover every sea, and our manufactures insinuate themselves into every creek of the four quarters of the globe, carrying along with them civilization and improvement, and I shall look on and rejoice. But because a thing is good in its pro- per place, and as an auxiliary, am 1 therefore to shut my eyes to fact and common sense, and declare that it is the chief good — that the minority is moie numerous than the majority, and a part greater than the whole? This I certainly will not do ; but ,>>o often as any public topic as at present calls off my attention from pursuits more attractive to me than political economy, never will I relax in my endeavours to awaken my countrymen to a proper sense of their dignity and indr-pendence, and the real source of their greatness. I have the gratification of knowmg that my former eftbrts with this \ ievv have uot oeen in vain ; and having seen the county of Wigton in their address to the Prince Regent*, admitting that " foregn trade is not essential to the posiln e prosperity of a state already skilled in the arts of ;igriculture and manufactures ;" and even the manufacturers of Sheffield, giving credit ^o commerce and manufactures as having" contributed to the pros(/er:ly of the kingdom only ** as giving great oicouraf/ement to its agriculture and stimulaliny in various other modes the produc- tive energy and inventive ingenuity of its popula- * Courier Ne\\spaper, July lltb, 1811. 25 tion*" — sentiments which eig-ht years since might have been looked for in vain in any public addresses; — I shall most assuredly not despair of witnessins^ just ideas on these subjects, in the end, more pre- valent than at present. But though a reference to the Rule of Three thus speedily decides the relative value of agricul- ture and foreign commerce. I am prepared to hear it objected that the question is not thus to be de- termined by the calculations of a prejudiced advo- cate, insensible to the vast importance of a source of wealth, which political economists of so much greater eminence have estimated so highly : and as I am well aware of the slenderness of mv authority, I shall endeavour to satisfy this very reasonable scrupulosity, by referring to some of these authors of greater weight, and who, as they cannot be suspected of the prejudice which clouds my incul- ties, will, I trust, be allowed to pronounce a hnal judgment. And first then let us refer to a respectable ad- versary of mine, who took up his pen expressly to defend commerce from my misrepresentations. What, then, says Mr. Mill, in his " Commerce de- fended ?" " Couunerce," he observes (p. 11;*).) ** is a very good thing when it comes spontaneously, hut a thing which may very easily be IxMjght too dear The two main springs of national wealth and prosperity are the cultivation of the land, and manufactures for home employment and consump- tion. Foreign commerce is a mere auxiliary to * Resolutions of the ShofTicld niccting Otii April, 1812, for pttitioning parliameot to lay open the East India trade. 2(5 tin >c two.'* And he farther proceeds to admit, •' Tliut to this hour tlie soun<] inquirer has most fre- quently occasion ibr his efforts in exposing the errors into Avliich both governments and individuals fn\[ ])\ tlu' reniainiiio; inHnence of the mercantile theory ;" that " the firm hold which this doctrine yet maintains on the minds of men, forms the prin- cipal obstacle to tlie diffusion among mankind of juste!" jxinciples of political economy and of g-overn- ment :" (p. 14.) that " the importance of commerce is in ifeneral greatly over-rated;" (p. 106.) that ** when we hear people talk, as we too often hear lliem, and in places too high, of commerce as the cause of our national grandeur ; when we find it appealed to as the measure of our prosperity ; and our exports and our imports quoted as undeniable ])roofs that the country has flourished under the draining- of the most expensive war that ever nation waged on the face of the earth, we have reason to smile at the ignorance or the deceitfulness of the speaker ;" (p. 107.) that " it is but too true that the greater number of persons with whom we con- verse, seem to imagine that commerce creates wealth by a sort of witchcraft ;" (p. 108.) and lastly, that *' the fee-simple of our whole export commerce is not worth the expense of the last fifteen years war, and that if it had been all sacrificed to the last six- pence, to save us from that expense, we should have been gainers by the bargain." (p. 108.) This is pretty well, methinks, for a commercial advocate. Next let us consult Mr. Colquhoun, who, whatever may be thought of the accuracy of his calculations, cannot be accused of any tendency to undervalue commerce, or to rate agriculture too high. Yet this gentleman, in his late publication, tells us, not only that the value of our agricultural 27 wealth of every kind, is fifteen hundred millions, while that of oar manufacluring- and commercial wealth (even including- mines and canals) is but four hundred mil lions* ; but that in 1812- 13 the new property created by ag^ricnlUire was £210,81'7»^24, while that created by foreign commerce and ship- pin ;r, was £ 16 :373,784, that is a little more than one fifth as much! t If a foreig-ner were to inquire where he was to look for the opinions of the most eminent of our living" political economists, he would doubtless be referred to the three quarterly publications called Reviews, but in reality collections of essays or treatises on the interesting questions of the day, in which, under mask, our ablest writers on different sides, more effectually and extensively lead the taste and opinions of the public, than they could do by detached publications in their own persons. What sentence then do these arbiters pronounce on the point at issue ? and let us begin with the oldest. ** The commerce and manufactures of this island," say the Edinburgh Reviewers, " conceal in some measure its agricultnral grandeur ; of which we may not perhaps obtain a lull \iew, unless this splendid superstructure of our present prosperity, mouldering away from the fragility of the materials, or shattered by external violence, shall expose the strength and extent of the base on which it rested." J " But who would pin his faith on the authority * J). 55. t p. 65. I Vol. v., p. 204. 08 of s\icl) jacobins?" I bear a reader exclaim. Well llun, my fViontl, turn to their opponents the Quar- tcrh/ BcviewerSy wiiose loyalty you will scarcely iuipeach, and >ee what tliey think as to the import- ance of commerce. ** In seeking-," say they, " a criterion of our internal trade, an estimate of the sum annually expended in Great Britain will not be useless. Estimating* the expense of each indi- vidual at only twenty pounds annually, and rating^ the population at twelve millions, the expenditure of all the inhabitants will be 240 millions sterling". Our domestic customers, therefore, purchasing to the amount of 240 millions, and our foreign cus- tomers 4-3 millions, is proof that external commerce however important, adds no more than ^jifth or a sixth part to our commercial prosperity, and the greater portion of this is carried to our own foreign possessions and to Ireland, leaving ONE eleventh part of our commercial prosperity to be derived from customers over whom we have no controul.*" And if some one still more dijffiicult to please, de- mands the testimony of writers even more decidedly devoted to the measures of Government, I need only refer him to the British Iievie7v, where he will find the following conclusive passage : — " The ability to advance ^such great sums for the use of the public, and on the credit of the funding system, depends most materially on an actual concurrent increase of the real wealth of the country, and without such an increase, would be difficult if not impossible. But the rapid progress of Britain in that respect, though without doubt assisted by foreign trade, has arisen much more from the great Vol. v., p. 411. 29 increase of population, and of domestic im- provements, than from any causes over which foreig"n power can exercise a controul."* Amongst the political economists of the present day, none have procured for themselves a greater name than 3Ir. Blalthus ; and though many, like myself, may doubt the expediency of some of his deductions, few will dispute his authority on the point we are considering. What then are his opi- nions respecting it ? That, " in the Kistory of the world, the nations whose wealth has been derived principally from manufactures and commerce, have been perfectly ephem.erai beings compared with those, the basis of whose wealth is agriculture ;" — that ** it is in the nature of things that a State "wJiich subsists upon a revenue furnished by other countries, must be infinitely more exposed to all the accidents of time and chance than one which produces its own." — And he goes on to say : — *' No error is more frequent than that of mistaking effects for causes. We are so blinded by the shcw- iness of commerce and manufacturevS, as to believe that they are almost the sale cause of the wealth, power, and prosperity of England. But perhaps they may be more justly considered as the conse- quences than the cause of this wer.lth.f" And, lastly, not to weary the reader with cita- tions, let us finish with referring to that great lu- minary in political economy, wlio has shed radiant light upon its darkest recesses, and to whose jiulgc- * Vol. V. p. IG. t Essay on Population, 4to. edit. p. 435. 30 meiil implicit deference is due from those who are so reiuly to (jiiote him \v!ien ii suits their purpose — Adam Smith. " The Capital," says he, " em- ployed in aoricultnre, not only puts into motion a greater ([unntity of productive labour than any equal capital employed in manufactures; but in proportion, too, to the quantity of productive la- bour >vhith it employs, it adds a much greater va- lue to the annual produce of the land and labour of the country, to the real wealth and revenue of its inhabitants. Of all the ways in which a capital can he emjAoyedy it is hy far the most advantageous to the society.''* Again: "After agriculture, the capital employed in manufactures, puts into mo- tion the greatest quantity of productive labour, and adds the greatest value to the annual produce. That which is employed in the trade of exportation, has the least eii'ect of any of the three. "f And once more; — speaking of the security of our farmers in their leases, he adds, " Those laws and customs, so favourable to their yeomanry, have, perhaps, con- tributed more to the present grandeur of Eng-land, than all their boasted reyulations of commerce taken together. ""X It will now be admitted, I flatter myself, that I am uot single in my opinions as to the preference due to agriculture over commerce; and I put on record these quotations, that any reader, who ho- nours me with his attention, henceforward, when he hears it asserted in or out of Parliament, that we are more a commercial than an agricultural nation • Wealth of Nations, vcl.ii. p. 129. t lb. 182. X lb. 164. 31 — that our commerce is the main source of our wealth — and that the interest of our manufacturers is of more importance than that of our farmers — may estimate such wretched nonsense as it deserves, and may know and be able to prove to those who deny it, that they who make such assertions, arc setting' themselves in opposition both to the arith- metical fact, that seven are greater than one, and to the authority of the most eminent political econo- mists of every party. That I might meet the adversaries of the Corn Bill on their own ground, I have admitted that it may have the effect of injurinij our export of manu- factures ; and I have myself in former publications contended, that the high prices which our Corn once bore, and which it seemed likely the* war, then apparently interminable, would go on to in- crease, must ultimately drive us out of the forciou market. But the case becomes very different, now that we are at peace with all the world, and when the price which the farmer demands, is so material !v below that exorbitancy with which we were at one time threatened : and it may be safely denied, that a steady price of 80s. or S4s. per quarter for wh^^at, can raise the rate of manufacturing- labour, so as to force us to yield to our Continental rivalsi For many years to come, we nuist maintain a vast superiority over them in point of capital ; and it does not admit of dispute, that a country which abounds in capital can afford to trade on much lower profits than one where it is almost all to be creatt;d. On this head, what says Adam Smith P *• Our mer- chants and master-manulacturers complain nuich of the bad effects of high wages, \)\ raising the |)ricc, and thereby lessening the sab; of their gxxxis both at home and abroad ; they say notliin^^- cunccrning 32 the b;ul efl'erts of hii>li profits : thev are silent with regard to thi- pernicious effects of their own ^ains : they complain only of those of other people."* If onr master-manufacturers will be conten with some- what smaller profits, they need not fear hjsing- cus- tom from allowing- their workmen to pay a fair price for corn. In iart, supposinjr our foreign ri- vals to keep pace with us in improved machinery, our advantage, in | oint of cheap fuel for our steam- eng-ines, is more than suffinent to counterbalance any probable difference in the rate of wages ; and therefore, though the interest of manufacture* ought to jield to that of agriculture if they were in op- position, the truth is, thai ihey are not, and that the former have nothing to apprehend. Who, indeed, that contemplates the insatiable desire of the people of Britain to obtain foreign commodities, and knows that commerce is but barter, and that those of whom we purchase must buy m return of us, or we can never pay them for their articles, can believe that an advance of 20s. per quarter in wheat, is to have any effect in lessening our trade ? the supposition i^ preposterous. Having now, I think, satisfactorily answered the objections which have been urged against the Corn Bill, I shall conclude my observations by pointing out the consequences of suffering things to remain as they are, and adverting particularly to one or two Wealth of Nations, vol. i. p. 133. 33 considerations which have not received the attention which in my opinion they demand. These consequences may be considered as they respect the tenants — the land-owners — the manufac- turing class — and the nation collectively. As to the tenants, it is clear that all those who have taken leases within these five or six yeai-s, some of the most intelligent and most spirited of their class, must, except when released from their engag-e- ments by the generosity of their landlords, be utter- ly and irretrievably ruined. All those who have leases on more moderate terms, after great sacrifices of capital, will endeavour to lessen their losses by laying down their land to pasture, as far as practi- cable; and all occupiers from year to year, seeing that their hopes of a change for the better, which have hitherto sustained them under their misfortunes, defeated, will necessarily give up their farms, and either betake themselves to other occupations, or live upon the interest of the remnant of their capital, un- til the folly of the measures which have driven them from agriculture has been felt and repaired, and it once more affords a living profit. A few, on farms of which a considerable portion is in grass, may be induced by a large reduction of rent, sufficient to compensate by the profit from stock for the loss by corn, to try the effect of laying down the whole to pasture^ but in many cases this will be impossible; and thousands and tens of thousand^ of acres of cold clay, wold, sandy, and heathy land, reclaimed and improved at great expense, must be suffered, unoc- cupied, and affording not a sixpence of rent, to re- vert to their native gorse, heath and weeds. D 34 Nor Mill those viliose land being of a superior qiKilitv, '.uliuits of beini;' converted into pasture with a greater prospect of advantage, ii> the end fare better. Tlie new demand for stock to occupy this land, will atfirstenhai.ee its price to the pui chasers, ill able to atford any advance, while in a few years the glut which will nifallibly follow, will make it fall proportionably as low as corn, and the whole farming class will be involved in one scene of wretchedness. In the mean time, such of the landlords as have lived upon the rent of small estates, must diminish in every shape their already moderate expenditure, and, in instances without end, endure the most bit- ter suffering-; while all men of larger landed in- come must lay down their equipages, give up their townl)ouses, turn off their retinue, and, by a gene- ral curtailment of luxuries, reduce their expenses within their now contracted means. If this diminution of expenditure on the part of the land proprietors were all that followed, some of those who have looked at their gross receipts only, and forgot that their expenses have been in proportion, and that not one in twenty has laid by any thing-, would say that no great harm was done. But will it be all ? Will the evil stop here? Will it be the same thing to the coachmaker, and all that he em- ployed—to the tradesman in town, who depended on a winter's demand from the land proprietors for his sale ; to the master-manufacturers who supplied Jiim, and the workmen to whom they gave employ- ment—in short to the hundreds of thousands to whom the effects would descend in endless ramifications, — whether or not the land owners continue to be able to consume ? But it is not only a great propor- 35 tion of the demand from this class, that the manu- facturing- class would lose, but from the still more numerous class of farmers and farming- labourers, who must content themselves with wooden clogs where they wore shoes — a new coat and hat once in every two years, instead of annually— and cloth of five shillings a yard, where they used to give ten. In fine, if we are to be told that losing a portion of their foreign demand may be injurious to our manufacturers, can it be necessary to point out the result of losing- a greater portion of their home demand, which from the agricultural class alone is, at the very least, four tiaies as great as the foreign? Thus misery will rapidly spread itself through every branch of society, and even those who think themselves most secure, will soon be called upon to bear their share of suffering. But after all, do we obtain the great object of all these sacrifices — the permanent and steady cheapness of corn ? So far from it, that it is sus- ceptible of almost mathematical demonstration, that if the present system continue, before three years are expired, we shall have wheat again at £(i. the quarter. It has been proved, that no possible di- minution of rent or taxes could enable the laimer to glow his produce with profit at the present rate, and it is undeniable that no man will continue longer than he can help to bring articles to market at a loss. It is obvious, then, that instead of grow- ing, as we now do, sufficient for our own con- sumption, we shall soon, as formerly, be dependent on foreigners for a considerable ])roportion of our supply; and with this dependence will come its old concomitants, high and unsteady prices. How can it, in the nature of things, be otlierwisu? Sup- D 2 86 posing^ onr consumption twelve millions of qtiar- ters of wheat, and that we g^et annually only one million from abroad, is it not self-evident, that the price must get up enormously, whenever the harvest, either abroad or at home, is below an ave- rag'e crop ; it being known to every man, that a small deficiency in the supply of food, unlike the case of articles that can be dispensed with, en- hances the price in a highly disproportionate ratio ? And who is ignorant that once in every three or four years, a crop below the average may be ex- pected? Let us even grant, that by dividing our custom between America and Europe, our risk of high price from a deficient foreign supply, may be somewhat obviated ; it must be borne in mind that mitil our foreign supply is greater than our home produce, this would be no security from a deficiency in the latter. Foreigners will only provide for our ordinary demand, and any extraordinary one must exorbitantly increase the price which we pay them. Nay, going still further, and supposing us con- verted, as some have contended would be for our interest, into a manufacturing nation, procuring the greater part of our supply of corn from abroad, it is evident, without adverting to the possibility of this dependence being hostilely turned against us (which having before referred to, I now leave out of question) that we should have no security against high prices. We should necessarily be confined to one or two great markets, and it would require no stretch of sagacity m those from whom we purchased to see, that being dependent on them for an indispensable article, they might as well make us contribute to their finances b} imposing a tax on the exportation; which tax would plainly have no limit but the apprehension of drivings us to 37 other sources of supply, and as these could not at once be obtained, the imposition of a heavy duty one year, and taking- it off again the next, would be a very happy expedient, by which the Grimalkins with whom we dealt, might alternately favour their unhappy victim with a gripe or a pat, as suited their interest or amusement. Nor is this mere supposi- tion. The duty on wheat has been considerably in- creased in Prussia, when our necessities have been most pressing- ; and the immense revenue which Bona- parte drew fron» the wheat with which he licensed his merchants to furnish us, is notorious. This supply from him has been referred to, as a proof that we need never fear being* cut off from our foreign con- sumption by any hostile power. But why did Bo- naparte let us have wheat ? Simply because money was just then of more value to him than our starva- tion. It will scarcely be objected, that if this supposed advance in price takes place, the farmer's losses will be only temporju'y, and need not therefore be provided agaii.st; as it is palpable that before the advance he will be ruined ; that when it comes he will be in no situation to avail himself of any imme- diate benefit from it; and that before his endea- vours to do so are matured, the price may be at its old rate again. Such will be the effects of being- dependent for our supply of grain. On the other hand, if by hold- ing out to our farmers the protection which they are so justly entitled to, we enable them t(» maintain that extensive and spirited system of cultivation, to which high price alone has given birth ; and thus produce, as they do at present, grain enough for our consumption, allowing at the same time the freest as exportation of any surplus, we shall be effectually exempted, not mtrely from the possibility of famine, but from any exoibitant price in the event of defi- cient harvests. Grain will remain at a steady rate; and the prosperity of the ag-ricnltural class will dif- fuse itself through the rest, giving them what is much better than low-priced bread, and wages ina- dequate to buy it, a brisk, permanent, and increas- ing* demand, independent of casualty and foreign caprice ; and securing to them an income amply en- abling them both to afford the moderate advance on the price of bread, which the interest of the whole demands, and to enjoy that portion of comforts and luxuries^ to which they have so well-founded a claim, and which no one is more sincerely desirous of seeing augmented than I am. There yet remain two considerations of great im- portance connected with the present question. Within the last twenty years the government of this country has expended, including the sums rais- ed on loan, and the total amount of the annual taxes, twelve hundred miUiojis,* or on the average sixty millions per annum. f Whence has this incre- * The amount, previously to being fundtd, of the loans from 1794 to 1814, is £406,300,000. I average the revenue for the first ten years at eighteen millions, and for the last ten, at sixty millions. t They who regard tlie sums borrowed by government, only as so much capital converted into income, will demur as to the propriety of putting these in the same class with the sums an- nually raised by taxes. It is impossible here to enter into the discussion which a full explanation of ray opinions on this sub- ject would require. I must content myself with asking, whether by far the greater part of the amount of the loans is not laid out by goverurueat ia the annual consumable produce of the country. 39 dible sum been drawn ? — from what inexhaustible source has this Utile nook of Europe derived a reve- nue more than half as great, ])robahly, as that of the whole Continent; — and how is it that after such a tremendous expenditure, we are still in theenjo}- ment of greater wealth and prosperity than any of our neighbours P Nine persons out of ten will tell you that we owe it all to our commerce and manu- factures. But let us aj)ply to this assertion a fami- liar process, which we have before found very useful in putting such g"ra:.uitous allegations to the test. The whole amount of our commerce strictly fo- reign, including imports as well as exports, has ne- ver exceeded one hi:p(ijed millions annually, and I appeal to any merchant if the average profits upon this amount can be taken even so high as ten per cent. ; but as I can afford to make almost any ad- missions, let us say ti.'teen. Our importing and ex- porting merchants and manufaci^urers, then, gain an animal revenue of fifteen mdlions from our com- merce. The question next is what portion of this is paid by them to the state : — I do not mean in cus- tom-house and excise duties, which no one is now required for the support of our fleets anvious that the government of sncli a nation might appropriate to itself nearly tlie whole of the surplus produce of the soil, and thus com- mand the services of the remainder of the popula- tion, which it could set to buihl its fleets, to clothe and equip its armies, and to perform all the functions which the service of the state requires :' And this is precisely the difference between the anrictdttiral system of the continent and ours; and thougb the disproportion is not so great as in th(! instancts sup- posed, it is quite sufficient to account for our im- mensely superior revenue, and the facility with which we raise .it. The intervention of money in our case makes the operation obscure to orilinary 4-2 obsor\er.s ; but it will surely not be contended that a govtMnnient which had tlie dispensing of the food of four millions of people, (which is what ours vir- tually has), could not do every thing that ours is competent to. So long- as food is the first necessary of existeuce, they who can command food, can com- mand every other kind of wealth.* Indeed the truth of this theory is amply con- firmed by facts : for in proportion as our agricul- tural surplus ])roduce has increased, so has our power of expending larger sums of money, though at the very time m hen our commercial profits, esti- mated not by fallacious calculations of the value of our exports when ship'ped, but by the sums leceivecl for them, are w eil known to have been worse than nothing. Thus from 1794 to 1804, we raised with difficulty a revenue of eighteen millions ; from 1804 to 1814, we have raised with at least as little difficulty, sixty millions. Is it possible for facts to speak more strongly ? If then our enormous revenue have arisen from our improved agriculture ; and if there be a pos- sibility that in no long time we may be called upon again to make exertions as mighty as those from which we are just breathing, would it be any thing short of madness to suffer the continuance of a state of things which must withdraw from our agricul- * If any of my readers are desirous of seeiug a fuller illus- tration of this important doctrine, and that which necessarily flows from it — the truth of which Dr. Smith has himself indirect- ly admitted — that all taxes, however levied, are in the end drawn from the soil, I must refer them to " Agriculture the Source of the Wealth of Britain," p. 42—48, whert it is treated of at large. 43 ture that capital, enterpvize, and intellect, to which the vast increase of its surplus produce, and our consequent efforts within the last ten years, are owing ; and is it not something- worse than folly that at the very same time we are doing ail in our power to transfer this superiority to the agricul- ture, and consequently power of our rivals ? In- credible will it seem to posterity, that at the moment when even the Dutch were congratulating them- selves on seeing their ** hnuiiliating dependence upon other nations for food, utterly abolished,"* we were with one voice almost, after having' with unexam- pled efforts achieved our liberation from such de- pendence, crying out to be again plunged into it! The remaining consideration to which I alluded, and which as more immediately coming home to our business and bosoms, is, if possible, of greater moment, is the effect which the general lowness of the price of grain, and ultimately of all other ar- ticles, will have upon our taxation. It must be needless after the experience which we have gone through, to waste many words in proving, that a man is rich, not according to his nominal income, but to the power w hich it confers upon him of purchasing a greater or less quantity of those things which he is desirous of possessing. Twelve months ago it was in every one's mouth that two pounds would go * "The inhabitants of llie Netherlanils inav now \\o\w to sec what their forefiitlicrs could never liave imii^iined — niimelv, The supply of all their iieccssarv wants from their