The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-12 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION.

from the present system, whetted the appetites of their op-
. Pouents, and made' there as :nue.) ever:etc the 4dvantAges
. the agriculturists derived from it, as they did those which
they themselves would derive were the system changed.
Hence it was they heard constantly put forth, not indeed by
judicious persons, but by those to whom the Noble Earl
had allucled,that every improvement in foreign manufactures
was attributable to the Corn-laws, and that if the Corn-laws
were abolished the price of food and labour would be
diminished. This was a state of things which could only
go on from bad to worse, End he was convinced it was de-
sirable that the present Corn-laws should be recon-
sidered. He agreed with the Noble Earl that this was
Lot a question between the manufacturer and the agricul-
turist, and that he who endeavoured to set them against
each other was an enemy to his country.—( Hear, hear.)
Ho thought it an indispensable preliminary to bring the
adverse parties to a just sense of the real interests of the
Comm inity at large, making them sensible that the inte-
rests of the community depended on the interests of its com-
ponent parts, and that there was no principle of good policy
Which required that one portion of the community should be
benefited, and another injured. For these reasons he
wished these laws should be reconsidered. If it could be
made manifest through all the fallacies and misapprehen-
'dons which prevailed on this subject, he believed it would
appear that cot only were the Corn-laws prejudicial to all
classes, but more particularly to the landed interest. He
said this because he believed that nothing was more pre-
judicial to the production of any article than fluctuation
of price, and he conceived if any one feature of the Corn-
laws was more proved than another, it was that this fluc-
tuation resulted from them. This was acknowledged to be
the result of the law of 1815, and it was in
order to put an end to this law that the law of 1828 was
enacted. Now he asked whether this law had fulfilled
the intention of its framers. Twelve years had since
*lapsed, during which the prices had ranged from 35a. to
80s. He said then that the experiment had failed. But
it was quantity that created price, and bow could they
regulate quantity. —( The Noble Earl here made several
remarks on this subject, but from the tone and position in
Which he spoke, we were unable to catch the import.)
The losses which resulted from this system were borne by
the lauded interest before they were felt by the commu-
nity at large, fur the farmer put his lands into cultiva•
tion, and employed his skill and capital upon them,
but the more he produced the more prices fell,
And thus all his hopes were terminated in disappointment.
and this was not all, for he not only produced sufficient for
the market, but anticipated the future, and was conse-
quently obliged to sell at 4 seduced rate ; all of which
were so many deductions ream the skill, industry, and
Capital which he had employed on the land. The opera-
tion of the law was to secure to the English farmer a
Supply for the markets when the price was low, and to
rid them of their corn at a time of scarcity, or, in other
words, when prices were high. The English farmer was
benefited as little as possible by them when they were
high, and when they were low, all the loss fell upon him.
The Noble Marquis seemed to deny that; but how often,
within the last forty years, had not the landlords been
obliged to remit large per centages upon the rents, not
Merely from benevolent motives, but from necessity, and,
the absolute incapacity of the farmer to pay them. He
thought it would interest, as well as instruct,
them if any accurate estimate could be formed of the
losses to which this fluctuation of price had sujected the
farmer; and in an able and instructive work by Mr. Wil-
30n, who assumed 525. 2d. to be the proper price of
Wheat, as being the average price in Mark-lane for the last
Seven years, he proved that any rate above that price must
be so much clear profit, and that anything below it was
10 much loss to the farmer, and he thus showed that the
;Mount of loss in three years was upwards of 501,000/. and
the amount of profit only 3551., leaving a balance of loss
of 500,6451. This calculation applied only to wheat, arid
and at this rate on wheat only there was a loss of between
4,000,000/. and 6,000,0001. in seven years. This was their
effect upon the landed interest in the first place, and he
doubted if any other class suffered to an equal extent.
The year 1838 was a remarkable omen in the history of
this country. A bad harvest came upon a short stock, and
between October 1538 and 1839, twelve millions' worth of
Corn was imported, and the amounts of bullion and deposits
.varied just in proportion to this influx of corn. It was
impossible but that such changes should affect the currency
seriously..—( Hear, hear.) Suppose, now, this had oc-
urred at a money-crisis too, and that we had been obliged
I° import two millions of quarters at a charge of six mil-
-I%s, to be sent out in gold, what would have been the re-
sult ?—(Hear.) Now, as to the being independent of
foreign states for the supply of necessaries of life,—
etir reliance on them had been much exaggerated,
(51 the one hand, by the agriculturists, to show their
ttiru to protection, and by the manufacturers, to
Cove the importance of their admission into a partici-
ftttion in the advantages of free trade. The main
was to be had from Prussia, Silesia, Saxony,
,_4ilignish Provinces, &e., where the average cost might be
`ken at 28s. 4d. a quarter, the expense of transit to
"autzie 6s. or is., making the cost,there 345. 4d. On the
ra Pens° of transit to England greatly different calculations
d been made, some as high as 20s. per quarter. With-
;tilt going into this question he believed the danger from
Qt.eictia competition was not at all what had been repre-
'elltebd. But as to our being independent of foreign states
We were not so at present. We constantly were obliged
t'4 have recourse to them for corn. Besides, a million and-
ttlaalf of our population were dependent on the regular
im-
port• of fifteen or twenty millions worth of raw cotton, and
" export of manufactures to the same amount.--( Hear,
bete,) The decision of their Lordships would be watched by
~.,,▪ titlreds of thousands of their country men with the deepest
hlSty___( Hear, hear, from both sides)—anxiety that
et! bldeed no parallel, for the question every yea' was
tge n g fresh importance—it was almost the only great
iitesticni not identified with party. Men of all classes
n,.`tled in the cry for repeal—merchants, traders, Chambers
Commerce—all were unanimous in their call for that
'erssure. Could the Corn-laws stand against another
tittersetary crisis, or a corn crisis, or both together ?_-( Hear,
hear.) The population was increasing at the rate of a
tt'lliion in three years. The House would not pledge itself
,
1„-154tly specific course by adopting this proposition—( A
,fluid it
was only for reconsidering the subject. He
"t)wid not say that he expected their Lordships to assent
tO, this motion--(A laugh)—but if they rejected it he
iu°llld feel the deepest regret, for it would signify their
tesolve that the Corn-laws would bear no consideration,
at Yet should receive no change.—( Hear, hear, hear.
The Earl of FALMOUTH disclaimed any intention of
'Pug what would have offended the Noble Earl.—( Hear.)
f Lord ASHBURTON said this question had assumed a
her
importance with the speech of the Noble Earl, one of
Majesty's Ministers. It was in itself, however, per-
l.,llPsthe most momentous question that could arise in this
With the complicated relations that prevailed in
131 country—more complicated than anywhere else—it
Wast_ absurd to speak of any one interest as being able to
04 without the outher—(Hear)—as well might a man try
6nd out which limb he could do without.—( Hear.)
Therefore,th if' any one " interest" could satisfactorily show
That the Corn-laws injured them, that was sufficient reason
li:repealing them. He, however, did not believe that to be
ease. He considered also that in the present state of
airs, nothing would be more injurious than the alteration
1, the Corn.laws. Whether the present scale was the best
e Would not now decide. On a bona fide representation
T rere those who were for the general principle of the Corn-
i4:4 that would be perhaps debated ; but the present pro-
13sition eras with a view to repeal. Fluctuations had been
• eged against the Corn-laws. He believed they were
4,1,1 than •efould otherwise arise from the natural
,e;4l,4tions of the seasons,—( Hear, hear, hear.)
t4,,,tne principal articles of commerce were liable to flue-
-11 ',ions in price as great as corn. Cotton, wool, iron,
tweet time
flax. Every article of commerce had within a
twert time been subject to fluctuations in price of oee or
e° hundred per cent. What reason could there be for
ieetring the fluctuations in the price of corn to the opera-
ITh,f'n of the Care-laws ? It was necessary to give the
te carry
such a protection as would encourage him
the cultivation of the land to the highest pitch
perfection—( Hear, hear)—in order to enable him to
vide for the contingency of a deficient importation,
~h et also to compensate him for the disadvantages under
tell he laboured in consequence of the burdens which
aere imposed upon him ; and he certainly had in addition
right to an equivalent protection with other producers.
j„is was admitted by most political economists. Mr. NP Cul-
ea admitted that the corn-grower was entitled to a pro-
it-
kaec,tion equivalent to the peculiar charges imposed on him,
Zu this protection Mr. /SPCulloch estimated at is. One
burden
as to the charges. The corn-grower had to bear the
qtl:deil of supporting all the surplus labour of the country.
Manfuacturer could take up a thousand men one day,
etid if he found be could not profitably employ them, he
could the,. next day throw there upon the parish. He
t)ew a -case in Wiltshire, in which a manufactory had
boen erected in an agricultural village, and labourers had
• collected from all parts of the country by advertise-
kern. The speculation had turned out an unprofitable
ilte• The manufacturer had removed to the north, the
1111%urers had been thrown upon the parish, and the rates
beers consequently increased to seventeen shillings in
stde Pound. There were also other charges which
been thrown upon the agriculturists. The Secretary
fState bad recently been encouraging the introduction
doubtederiel system of police, which in some instances had
the county rates. What had rendered this police
f cetsary ? They did not want a police to keep people
It was the towns which Cobbett
hed steallng turnips.
a, designated the large wens which had rendered the
I,44:roduction of the police necessary. 'Then, again, there
ti,j• the burden of tithes. How could the corn-grower in
i!eouner be expected to enter into competition with the
'Z1313-fgroaveYr of France and Italy, where this burden of
eideil was unknown. Then there was the charge of the
1,4 and-tax, the greater part of which had been redeemed.
e '
home corn-grower was entitled to soma protection on
tit
I 1, ttecount Stock-in-trade, it appeared by law, was
hw'le to be °rated. What was the consequence ? The
110'14 had eaised an outcry upon the subject, and a Billwas
before Parliament to exempt stock-in-trade from rates.
eidid not object to this; be thonght it was very expedient
ta44biecting stock-in-trade to rates would be investing
..u2 With als inquisitorial power of inquiry which wou
letolerable in this country. But then the corn-growerd
es
entitled to some protection as an equivalent. Again.
ket ee'rn-grower could not go to the cheapest rtT-
-41,n to purchase his commodities. Sugar, for
in-
saki ere, might bo considered as almost a necessary of lit
tha,tbe English corn• grower had to pay 300 per cent. more
tr,a, the resident ie Hatnburgh for that commodity. F roe
was a subject on which everybody talked, but which in
lea;' ,`v existed nowhere ; and they were not called upon to
te for what this country ought to be, according to the
1840'n. etries of the philosophers, but for what it actually was in
hien,: and they found, that so far from other countr es being
thorned to agee to this liberalism, all those countries in whicb
fre,`, were popolar bodies of representative actually repudiated
"rlde- 'they could carry on negotiations on the subject,
Xle!"heey all ended in nothing. If an Ambassador of Louis
ee,ko• tied agreed to a commercial treaty, they might have
sot do On his carrying his country with him ; but they could
. 0,50 with an Ambassador of Louis Philippe, as the Cham-
4-ot his countr would be very likely to refuse to accede to
such treat Y Then, again, in North Germany, there
Ithih.'t'ehCommercial
League
which, according to Dr. Ilowring,
put an end to had it been attempted at
liopecrnmencement by the Government, but which it was now
tt,ll. :is! to think of breaking up. They had adopted the sys-
Prgttctien in its fullest extent, and it was useless to

think of knocking at their doors in the hopes of obtaining terms.
Under these cireturist:l;ti-,e,, what equivaloiit could they ofrel- t
the corn-grower by way of protection? The Noble Earl had
attributed the recent derangement in the currency to the opera-
tion of the Corn-laws.—( Hear, hear.) He did, not deny but,
the circumstances of the Corn-trade might have contributed
to that derangement, but he thought it was much more attri-
butable to the conduct of the Bank, and besides it was in-
cumbent upon the Noble Earl to have shown that this derange-
ment could not have taken place under any other system of
Corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) The Bank had suddenly raised
the interest of discounts from 3 to 6 per cent., and this it was
which had destroyed all the small people, and produced the
panic.—(Hear, hear.) They had now replenished their
coffers, and the same thing had taker. place now which had
happened in 18:25 and 1826, when the Bank had all but stopped
payment. But under a free importation of corn there would
be a greater export of money from the country. He did not
think that this country could safely rely upon any foreign
country for a supply of corn to any considerable extent. In
fact, it could not be procured. The manufacturers stated,
that if they could get a free importation of corn, manufactures
would more than double in extent—that the whole country
would be covered with Birminghams and Manchesters en-
veloped in steam and smoke. Now, setting aside the argument
that that would make England such a steamy smoky place that
no one who could live out of it would willingly live in it. Let
thei, Lordships contemplate what must be the effect of such a
country being dependent on America, on the one hand for the
raw material by the manufacture of which these people were to
be employed, and on the Continent of Europe on the other for the
food from whence were they to be supplied with food? The only
material supply they could expect must be from the Baltic.
They could not get corn from France, as it had no corn to
furnish ; and Belgium was in the same state. Then with re-
spect to the alleged distress. It had been stated that it was
impossible fur their Lordships to conceive the extremity and
distress in which the mauufacturers were placed. lie ( Lord
Ashburton) did not believe in that distress ; but if it (lid exist,
it arose from the monetary state of the country. In 1835 and
1836 it had been stated that manufacturers were in great
prosperity, and it was absurd, therefore, to suppose that a small
additional price in corn could put a stop to that prosperity. The
whole manufactures of the country had grown up under the
Corn-laws. In the cotton trade the consumption had increased
from 90,000ffis. in 1915, to 600,0001b5. in 1828. If it was
thought the present system was bad, the sooner it was altered
the better ; but he thought, with the proofs he had adverted
to, the House would be slow to arrive at that conclusion. But
then it was said that the inhabitants of the country where there
was cheap bread were in a flourishing condition. Now that
was not the case, according to the statements of Dr. Bow-
riass for that gentleman stated, with respect to Prussia,
that each individual there had alsout thirty-four pounds of
neat in the course of the year. Now, he would venture
to say, that in the worst dietary in any workhouse in
this country each individual consumed twice that quantity,
and the same observations might be made with respect to
clothing and other things. Upon the whole, therefore, he
thought that the House would be ill-advised, and would act
unwisely, if it adopted the resolution of the Noble Earl.
The Earl of RADNOR supported the motion of the
Noble Earl.' The Noble Lord who had just sat down
had stated that the House would act most unwisely if it
adopted the resolution, without first having evidence on the
subject, and, he believed, had the consistency to state that he
should vote against a measure, the very object of which
was to obtain evidence.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") From
a fair examination of the averages given in Mr. Took's
book, it was evident that the fluctuations were greater on
wheat than on any other articles, except hops and apples. The
Corn-laws were protection, no doubt, to their Lordships ; it was
protection to the land, but it was no protection to agriculture.—
(Loud cheers.) It was a protection which took money out of
the pockets of the people, to enable landowners to pay those
rates which pressed upon them. Such was a former admission
made by his Noble Friend on the cross-benches (the Duke of
Richmond). Now, they did not ask for a change of the law—
they wanted nothing but inquiry ; and why should inquiry be
refused, if, as they said, their case was so very clear ?—( Hear,
hear.) The Noble Earl read several extracts from a
speech made by the Noble Lord (Ashburton) in former
times amidst much laughter, as they were very strongly
argumentative in favour of free-trade, not only in corn,
but all else. Then with respect to the opening of the trade, his
Noble Friend said there might be danger of not getting corn,
and we must not become dependent upon foreign nations.
Now were they not really dependent upon foreign countries ?
Was that not proved by the fact that in four years they had im-
ported no less than four millions of quarters ; and were not
their Lordships aware that for a century we had been an im-
porting nation? We had invariably insported more than we
had exported since 1770, and of late years much more ; and in
time of peace or time of war the import of corn went on in-
creasing
until 1820. There was no difficulty at all in obtaining
corn in abundance.—(Cheers.) Even under the present Bill,
during the last eleven years, the importation of wheat amounted
to 900 quarters yearly; yet this was called protection. They
did not prevent corn from coming, but by their regulations t'sey
brought it in in the most inconvenient mode that was possible.
Who supported the population of this country ? Was it not the
manufacturers? The agriculturists did not absorb all the po-
pulation, and therefore he supposed those not absorbed by the
agriculturists were absorbed by .the manufacturers. The
Noble Lord proceeded to contend that an increased importation
of corn would not diminish rents. During the first ha fof the
present century exportations exceeded importations, and the
price of wheat fell ; whereas. after 1750, the balance found
importations exceeded exportations, and the price of wheat
fell. The remainder of the Noble Lord's observations were
inaudible in the gallery.
The Duke of RICHMOND said he ',vas anxious to say a few
words on this subject, and more particularly as, it was said
those who supported the present Corn-laws did so to keep up
their rents. This he denied. He was one of those who were
perfectly indifferent to any accusation the Anti-Corn-law
League might throw out against him.—( Hear, hear, hear. )
The Chamber of Commerce at Manchester had never ventured
to say which they wanted, cheap bread or cheap labour. What
good would it be to the poor man to have the loaf at 3d.
if he had not work ?—( Hear, hear.) This was not a land-
lord's question. It was a farmer and labourer's question Go
into inquiry forsooth ! We had all the Information required,
and it, was deluding the people to go into Committee unless
prepared for repeal. He disliked such discussions out of doors
as led to excitement of the passions. The farmers were as good
and sensible men as any other class, though they made not such
loud speeches as the manufacturers.—( Hear, hear.) The
object of the Corn laws was not to exclude foreign corn, but to
render ourselves as independent as possible of foreign coun-
tries. The advantages of repeal were grossly exaggerated by
the manufacturers, who made their large fortunes under the
Corn law protection. Did they wish to kick away the ladders
by which they had risen ? That there was some distress in the
manufacturing districts lie admitted, but the repeal of the Corn-
laws would increase that distress by injuring the home market,
their main stay and support.
Lord 3ROUGHAM said he must even at that late hour—
(a quarter to 2 o'clock)—say a few words. It was said
by the Noble Duke (Richmond) that no inquiry was
needed ; yet had the subtle speech of the Noble
Baron ( Ashburton) not touched the facts of the Noble Earl,
the mover of the question. Said the Noble Duke, " You assert,
and 1 deny—and what's the conclusion ?" " Therefore lam
right." Ought not the conclusion to be " Therefore we
should inquire?"—(Hear, hear.) Had not last years' evi-
dence been tendered at the bar ? Had it not been refused?—

(Hear.) After that, whose fault was it that the motion was
vague ? Would their Lordships allow him, shortly to ask what
they intended to do ?—( Hear, hear.) Were they about to say
that they would not consider the question ?—( Hear. hear,
hear.) If they acceded to this motion, they would give the
country some reason to hope that there was a chance of their
reconsidering the question of the fixed duty and the sliding
scale.---( Hear.) He should be heartily rejoiced if he found
that he had misunderstood the ground on which the motion of
his Noble Friend was rejected.—( Hear.) The question was
one upon which, at this moment, the people of this country felt
an unprecedented interest. He regarded it as a good omen,
that, on this occasion, the proposition of his Noble Friend
had the support of a portion of her Majesty's Govern-
ment. His own opinion was opposed to " open questions" j
in the Government—( Hear, hear)—but he rejoiced that on
this question, if there was division in the Cabinet, the division
was in their favour—(Hear, hear)—and the next time the
question came before their Lordships, there was the greater
prospect of success.—( Hear, hear.) Ile must give a negative
to the proposition of the Noble Duke opposite, which was sup-
ported by a Noble Lord connected with Essex, namely, that
the present laws were supported, not because they had a ten-
dency to raise the price of bread. He could understand them
no o:herwise—( Hear, hear)— and the arguments which he had
heard only convinced him that such was the intention of those
who supported them. Reference had been made to the Corn-
law League, and it had been asked what did the members of that
league want? It was asked, Did they want to make bread cheap?
His answer was, that they did.—(Hear, hear.) A Noble
Friend of his, behind him, had said that he doubted whether
it would be of any advantage to the labouring classes to lower
the price of bread. But he (Lord IL) was quite sure that
lowering the price of any commodity was an advantage to those
who consumed it.—( Hear, hear.) It had also been asserted
that to lower the price of bread would be to lower the rate of
wages. He denied that. The rate of wages did not depend
upon the price of bread alone. It might be affected also by
the price of other commodities which the labourer consumed.
But it depended mainly not so much on the price of the
commodities which the labourer required, as upon the :de-
mand for labour, and the proportion of the supply to the demand.
He begged their Lordships' pardon for having gone into any
part of the arguments that had been adduced, but he could
not allow the question to go to a division without stating
shortly what his views were upon the subject.
Lord MELBOURNE was well aware that even at an early
period of the night, the present was not a subject that could
be discussed in a satisfactory manner to their Lordships ; but
considering the observations that had been made upon
the question, lie could not allow it to go to a division without
making a few observations. His Noble Friend who had just
sat down hail asked what was the object of those who would vote
against the motion. His Noble Friend who had made the
motion had stated that it was expedient to reconsider the laws
with respect to the importation of foreign corn. Now he
( Lord Melbourne) thought that it would be inexpedient to do
so. At the same time he must] beg to be: understood that
he never meant to pledge himself to the present system, as
there might be circumstances which would render it ne-
cessary to reconsider the subject. But under the present
circumstances of the country, and the present situation of
affairs, he did not think it right that Parliament should stir the
question, by entering into the consideration of it. If the
House adopted the motion of his Noble Friend, they would be
lowering the protection of agriculture, that was the object of
the present motion. He would not now go out of the
question, but he thought that there had been very
great injustice in the representations of the state
of the law when it was said that it was intended to keep up the
price to 80s. a quarter. One great apprehension which he had
with respect to the measure was, that it would be impossible
to carry it into execution. He could not help thinking that
Parliament would be acting in an extremely imprudent man-
ner if it made the experiment proposed. He could not
dismiss from his mind the ppprehension that it was not
wise or prudent to rely entirely for the maintenance
and support of the great part of the population of the country
on foreign supply. He agreed with Mr. Van Buren upon that
subject. It was true that America was in less danger of want-
ing foreign supply than perhaps any other nation in the world:
but being in that situation, if Mr. Van Buren
thought it right to adhere to that opinion, that gave his opinion
in his (Lord Melbourne's) mind more weight. Mr. Van
Buren was a man of great ability, and they must recollect
that the opinion he had given was not his opinion alone, but
that of the greater portion of the people of the United States.
He had very great doubt whether in considering this subject in
an economical, financial, or commercial point of view, whether
it would be prudent or wise to adopt it, even if he were con-
vinced that it would be most advantageous to the country, con-
sidering the situation in which they were placed ; he would
consider it inexpedient to enter into the consideration of it
under the present eircumstances.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
His Noble Friend had carefully abstained from stating what his
plan was—whether it was a diminution of the present scale
o ir a
but, Ohatever the object was, feeling that that
ohjecfitxcoe'ild( duty ;
could not be carried without stirring up society from its
very foundation, lie did not think the advantages that would
be gained would compensate for the evils that would be created.
currency,which
(Hcehteheerrse.f)ore felt it to be his duty to oppose the motion.
believed
to tbhea t
tracedall
to
the
theevils
of
theTmheanEuafralctouf r
eVr s
R complainedWl C K
were
and not to the operation of the Corn-laws.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM replied.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.