The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-20 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MARCH 20, 1858.

Dressed up in a variety of forms, we met with
them at every turn, and many good men, like
Mr. BAPTIST NOEL, were captivated and seduced
by them. "
More than' ten years have elapsed since
the Cpl Laws were swept away, and we tee
now at liberty to ask wkether the abolition of
Protection has made bread cheaper—has in-
creased our foreign trade—or diminished pall-
perm ?
1. Had it reduced the price of BREAD?
None of us can easily forget that this argu•
ment formed at once the banner and the ral-
lying-cry of the Free-traders. " The big loaf"
of Free Trade was paraded at every election
side by side with the little loaf of Protection ;
and the working-classes were taught by scores
of hired orators that the Protectionists were
depriving their children of half their food,
merely to swell the rents of " a bloated aris-
tocracy." The cry of " Down with Protection"
told, and the Corn Laws were abolished. Let
us now see what has been the practical result.
In the year 1845, at the close of which Sir
ROBERT PEEL succumbed, and resolved to
abandon Protection, the annual average of
wheat was 50s. 10d. per quarter For the year
1857, which has just closed, the average was
582. 4d. We fins, therefore, no" cheap bread"
here, but an absolute rise of prices.
But this, it will be said, was merely a single
year ; and it is not fair to judge by a single
instance, which may be influenced by the cha-
racter of one harvest. Let us take, then, a
whole period, say of six years, and test the
matter that way. The six years preceding the
repeal of the Corn Laws were these, and we
give the average price of wheat in each year:—
s. d.
In 1840
1841

1842
„ 1843
„ 1844
„1845
6 )340 1

Average

Now let us contrast with these the last six
years, and their average price of wheat, which
—WaB—

d.
s.
In 1852
„ 1803
„ 1804 - 72 to
„ 1855
„ 1858
„ 1857

6) 366 7

Avenge
So that for the six years before the repeal of
the protective laws, the average of wheat was
565. Bd. per quarter, and during the last six
years the average has been Ole. Id. ! Where
wheat was 7d. per loaf under Protection, it has
been raised to 7fd. under Free Trude! Yet re-
member how small was the Protectionist loaf
in the League processions, and how large was
the Free-trade loaf depicted in the representa-
tions of what was to come !

2. Has Free Trade augmented our continental
trade ?

We say " continental," for the gold-mines
of California and Australia must not be placed
to the credit of Free Trade. They would have
been discovered, and our exports to America
and Australia would have been vastly aug-
mented, as they have been, whether the
advocates of " Free Trade " had triumphed, or
had been defeated.
The allegation always was, on the part Of
the Free-traders, that the people of the Con-
tinent, on all sides, were holding out their
hands to us, eager to take our manufactures,
if we would only take their corn in exchange.
Thia representation was so constantly made,
and repeated in prose and verse, and even in
pictures, that many good men, and especially
Mr. BAPTIST NOEL, cordially believed it, and
felt quite sure that the opening of our ports
to Polish corn, duty free, would be followed
by immense augmentations of our exports to
Germany.
Again we ask, How stands the fact ? What
has the experience of the last dozen years
taught us ?
Our trade and commerce are always growing.
An increase of some kind, in every ten years,

we are sure to find. Between 1834 and 1814
per cent.
‘t the ad.
opened

In 1844
St 1854
Now, bearing in mind, as we have just said,
that a natural growth is always going on, and
that that growth, in the previous ten years,
was forty per cent, we may plainly and safely
say that in these ten years, from 1844 to 1854,
the opening of our ports had produced no
Ovect whatever in augmenting the continental
demand for our manufactures. Tho second
promise, or prediction, then, of the benefits to
accrue from Free Trade has been no more
realised than the first.

3. Has Free Trade diminished Pauperism!
If there had been the least realisation of
the two former predictions, this third promise
would have been fulfilled also. If bread had
been greatly reduced in price—if the demand
for our manufactures had been augmented—
both of these causes must have operated to
diminish pauperism. But as these promises
both remained unfulfilled, it could be no
matter of surprise that the reign of Free
Trade produced no beneficial fruit in the re
duction of Pauperism. The amount expended
in the relief of the poor, in the ten years pre-
ceding, and the ten years following, the abroga-
tion of the Corn Laws, is given in the Annual
Reports of the Poor-law Commissioners as
follows :
From 1838 to 1815, gross amount £48,788,097
From 1148 to 1856, gross amount 53,594,087
Average of the ten years of Protection 4,876,809
Average of the ten years of Free Trade 5,359,408
Thus, instead of a diminution in the Pau-
perism of England under the operation of
Free Trade, we find an immediate and per-
manent increase of some eleven or twelve per
cent. Nay, probably of more, for the expen-
diture on the poor was—

In 1836 £4,717,630
" 1866

Thus we find, under each of these three heads,
that all the promises of the Free-traders have
proved delusive ; and that no one of the
benefits which they predicted, was realised,
Bread was not cheaper; trade, so far
as the Continent was concerned, was not
augmented ; pauperism was not diminished.
The masses, indeed, the electors at large,
had not, probably, gone through these calcula-
tions, or ascertained fully the real facts of the
ease. But they knew the general bearings of
the question. TheY knew, without any books
to teach them, that the "large loaf" which
they were promised had never appeared. They
knew that the French and Hamburgh mer-
chants had not crowded our ports with their
ships, seeking for British goods; and they
knew, well enough, that the poor-rates were
not one farthing lower, but in many oases
several pence higher, since the repeal of the
Corn Laws. And hence we can easily under-
stand how it happened, that when a Peelite pre-
sented himself at the last election, or when
one of the Council of the League stood on
the hustings, and boasted of his zeal for Free
Trade, the cries often arose, " Down with
him !" " You're a humbug !" " No shams r—
and the poll, when cast up, showed the Free-
trader placed at the bottom.
Practically, however, what is the result at
which we aim? Do we advance these things
to suggest the expediency of a return to the
Protective system? Far from it. Nay, we
will not for a moment conceal our conscious-
ness that the facts which we have brought to
light " cut both ways." The Leaguers pro-
mised us great results from the abrogation of
the Corn Laws. Chiefly, they promised us
bread at a far lower price. The farmer heard
the cry for " cheap bread " raised on all sides,
and he was filled with terror. " Cheap bread
" for others," he said, " means no bread at all
" for me." Universally, and most naturally,
the agriculturists took the alarm. They
believed a good part of what the League

our exports were augmented forty per cent.
Bearing this in mind, let us look the ad.
vance ^ieh took plans niter we had opened
our ports to &rein Corn-
Tltsi eaports of Vfrritisk produce and manu-
factures. to the various 00untries of Europe
_sir., Sweden, . Norway. Denmark, Russia,
Prussia, Germany, Holland, Belgium, France,
Spain, Portugal, and Italy—were--
in 1844 X20,82.5.590

averred. They have now discovered that the
whole affair was a cheat and a delusion, and
they trouble themselves little about it.
As to the Protectionists in Parliament, their
position was merely this—they questioned the
desirableness of the change. They said, "If
" bread is to be greatly cheapened, the farmers
" will be ruined. That is undeniable. But if
"this does not happen, and bread is not
"cheaper, nor the farmers much injured, why
"meddle with the law at all?"

The political result, at last, is just what might
have been expected, and what ought to happen.
The main body of the Conservative party ob-
jected to the change. They have remained
united, and in every emergency the Crown
appeals to them for support. But the Liberals,
the Free-traders, are detected cheats. They
have imposed upon the people. They pro-
mised theta cheap bread, improved trade, di-
minished pauperism. Not one of these promises
has been performed. Yet by these promises
Lord JOHN RUSSELL acquired the Premiership,
Mr. BRIGHT gained a seat for Manchester, and
Mr. Con DEN got a good estate.
If political lying was not by far too common,
—if men would not be shocked at the thought
of requiring a Member of Parliament to stand
by his words, we should be amused to see the
man of " unadorned eloquence " placed for an
hour in the witness-box, and forced to main
tain, or to recant, some of his most noted anti-
Corn-Law speeches.

averred
whole a
they trl
As to
positioi
desirab
" bread
"will
" this
" chear
" medd
The I
have be
The rat
jetted
united,
appeals
the Fre
have it
wised t
minishe
has bee
Lord Jc
Mr. Ba
Mr. Col
If pol
—if me
of requ
by his
man of
hour in
tain, or
Corn-Li
TaE
Monday
it, a sort
Lord J(
promote
sundry
the nets
Pope's I
third pa
who disk
the Jew,
likely t
fourth r
awearin,
Lord Jc
a farce
have be
it has b
Four,
fifth pa
from at
sent to
who de
disdain
ROTtin
Believe
exalted b
any office
adruinist
the true i
tionality,
whom, to]
aloof, hi
aninded
the truth
Aa Je-.1
what else
are not o
• our gods
ayinpathi
wish to
fathers,
the rest(
it were,
a few, th
of the stt
an actual
revolves
question
the think
the grave
Mr. AN
The fu
the two I
the point
of the JE
affliction
all those
are nece
present v
it in the
but next
•