The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-19 00:00:00

Under such circumstances it is impossible to form
1 any decisive opinion as to the amount of the calamity."
1 On the 24th of October the Lord-Lieutenant wrote—

" We constantly receive satisfactory reports of the
state of potatoes when dug, and learn a few days after-
wards that they have all rutted in the pits. We do not
know, and cannot know, the extent of the evil."
The secretary of the Royal Agricultural Association
(an association formed of the chief landed proprietors in
Ireland), *Thing about the same time, observed—
" When I issued a circular about a month since to the
secretaries of 120 local societies in connexion with the
central one. I got several answers from persons stating
that the disease was not apparent in their immediate
neighbourhood ; but I have since received letters from
most of them stating that, upon digging the crop, they
found the disease in almost every quarter ; and I may
safely say that at present there is not a county in Ireland
that is not more or less affected by it. I shall barely
add that the greatest panic appears to exist in all ports
of the c. aintry."
At a public meeting, held in Dublin, on the 31st of
October, 1845, at which the Duke of Leinster presided,
it was re‘elved, " That it has been ascertained beyond a
'ubt that famine, and consequently pestilence, are im-
mediately imminent, unless the Government, without
hesitation or delay, take the most prompt measures to
provide for this people." It was resolved also, " That
we respectfully call upon the Lord. Lieutenant of Ire.
land to order the ports of Ireland to be opened for the
importation of Indian corn, rice, and other articles suited
for human food."

We thought it possible that reports even from such
authorities, sent from the spot at a period of great ex-
citement, might be unduly influenced by the prevailing
alarm. We dispatched, therefore, to Ireland, in the
month of Weiler, two men (of the highest eminence in
the departments of science to which they belong), hav-
ing no local connexion with Ireland—Protessor Lindley
and Dr. Lyon Playfair.
We sent them to Ireland for the double purpose of
suggesting, if possible, some remedy against the threaten•
ed evil, and of conveying to us their impressions as to its
real extent.

Their report was more unfavourable than any other.
They stated " that they had consulted persons acquainted
with the facts of the disease ; that they had visited the
district lying between Dublin and Drogheda, and in-
spected various potato fields and stores in the counties
of Dublin, Louth, Meath, Westmeath, and a part of
Kildare ; and that judging from the evidence thus col-
lected, and from what they had seen of the progress of
the disease in England, they could come to no other
conclusion than that one-half of the potato crop of Ire-
land was either destroyed or in a state unfit for the food
of man."
It was no doubt possible that all these parties might
be, in some degree, mistaken—that events might subse-
quently prove that they had magnified the extent of the
evil, but place yourselves in the position of those who
were responsible for the public safety, who received such
reports at the commencement of winter, without a hope
of additional supply from internal sources for the long
period of nine months, and you will not be disposed to
pronounce a harsh judgment on their motives for
advising that increased facilities should be given for the
importation of food from other countries.
You will bear in mind that the visitation was a very
peculiar one. " That," to use the words of the Lord-
Lieutenant, " we did not know, and could not know the
extent of the evil;" and that it was an evil not confined
to these islands ; that many other countries in Europe
were suffering from it ; and that in some of them the
restrictions on the import of food had been already
suspended.
I am bound to admit that if the advice given had been
limited to a suspension of similar restrictions in this
country, there probably would not have been a very
serious difference of opinion. Many who might have
doubted whether the precautions were not superfluous,
would probably have offered no decided resistance to its
being taken.
The point on which there wa., and still is, the greatest
conflict of opinion, was the proposal to reconsider the
wh question of the corn-laws, with a view to their
u,timate repeal.
When I proposed to the Cabinet on the Ist November,
1846, the temporary suspension of all duties on foreign
urn, it became necessary for me at that time to decide
whether i could undertake to support, after the period
of suspension should have expired, the restoration of the
ire-existing law. Such an undertaking implied, et
course, resistance with the %%hole weight and auth rrity
of th.- Government to any proposal that might be made
in Parliament, by others, for the modification of that
law in its principle or in its leading enactments.
I found it impossible, consistently with my sense of
public duty, to give an assurance to that effect.

„
In justifying my decision in this respect. I have no
desire to take any undue advantage of events which have
since o,curred. That terrible scourge which has since
afflicted Ireland, which has demanded an extraordinary
advance of ten millions of money, for the purpose of
averting from that country thq horrors of famine, must
not be pleaded as a vindication of the course taken in
January, 1846.
But, Gentlemen, no prudent Minister deciding on that
course at that time, could safely exclude from his cm
sideration the probability that the same disorder which
had affected the potato crop of 1845 might affect that of
1846. The experience of other countries in which the
blight had appeared, tended to show that it was not
limited to a single season, and as an early proof that
apprehensions on that head were not without founda-
tion, I will quote from a letter received from Protessor
Lindley on the 18th February, 1846, the following ex-
tract:—

" I feel it my duty to apprise you, at the earliest pos-
sible moment, of the following alarming facts, in regard
to the potato crop of next season. It has been ascer-
tained beyond all doubt that diseased sets will pro-
duce a diseased crop. Evidence in conformation► of this
was produced yesterday before the Horticultural So-
ciety, in the presence of Sir Charles Lemon, Sir Philip
Egerton, Lord Grey, and others ; and for your own in-
formation I enclose you some proofs of it in the shape of
the haulm of the new pbtato plants grown at Bicton,
in Devonshire. They were perfectly healthy in appear-
ance in January, and now they are advanced beyond the
first stage of decay.
" I would have communicated this information to you
yesterday, if I had not wished for leisure to re-examine
and re-consider the evidence in my possession, so that
all possibility of error or misconception might be
guarded against. I have now spent some hours in re-
examining the evidence, and not a doubt remains in my
mind that next year's crop is in jeopardy."
Such was the opinion of Professor Lindley, tending
to confirm the apprehension, that from the same cause,
a second suspension of the corn-laws mighp become
necessary.

It appeared to me that, considering the nature of that
law—considering that it was passed with a view of in
suring, through its own unassisted operation, an ade-
quate supply of foreign corn in case of necessity—a
single suspension of it on the first occasion of severe trial
would be a powerful argument against its permanent
continuance, and that the necessity for renewed suspen-
sion (should it recur), would add greatly to the weight
of that argument.
But, independently of this consideration, there were
other and more important reasons which influenced my
decision.

My confidence in the validity of the reasons on which
I had myself heretofore relied, for the maintenance of
restrictions on the import of corn, had been materially
weakened. It had been weakened by the conflict of ar
gument on the principle of a restrictive policy—by many
concurring proofs that the wages of labour do not vary
with the price of corn—by the contrast presented in two
sucees3ive periods of dearth and abundance, in the health,
morals, tranquillity, and general prot.perity of the whole
community—by serious doubts whether, in the prt Aent
condition of this country, cheapness and plenty are not
insured fair the tuture in a higher degree by the free
intercourse i❑ corn, than by restriction on its importa
lion for the purpose of giving protection to domestic
agriculture.
It had been weakened also by the following considera-
tions, which were in a great degree new elements in
forming a judgment upon this vital matter:—
The general repeal of prohibitory duties, and the re-
cent application of the principles of free trade to almost
ail articles of import from abroad, made the corn-laws
the object of more starching scrutiny and more invidious
comment, and narrowed the ground on which their de-
fence could be maintained.

Among the articles of foreign import prohibited up to
the year 1842, and then admitted at low rates of duty,
were some important articles of agricultural produce,
salted and fresh meat, oxen, sheep, cows, &c. You pro-
bably recollect the panic which this admission caused—
tbe forced sale of stock, the prophecies that it would be
impossible to compete with the foreign grazier, and that
meat would be reduced to 3d per pound. Five yetirs
have passed since this great change in the law took place,
and your own experience will enable you to judge whe-
ther the panic was well founded, and whether the pro-
phecies have been fulfilled.
The complete failure of those prophecies had naturally
had its effect on public opinion, with regard to the pro-
bable consequences of a freer intercourse in other articles
of agricultural produce.
There was another circumstance still more calculated
to diminish apprehensions as to the risk of opening the
corn market of this country to foreign competition.
There has appeared of late years a tendency to increase
in the consumption of articles of subsistence much
more rapid than the increase in the population. Lis
difficult, if not impossible, on account of the absence o f
statistical information, to measure accurately that in-
crease in the case of articles of the first necessity, such as
corn and meat. But it may be inferred from the rela-
tive consumption, at different periods, of articles in re-
spect to which the comparison can be instituted.
The following is an account of some of the principal
articles entered
respectivelyntehomeredfor—
Cocoa, lbs
and 4
1,930,764 ... 2,962,327
Coffee, lbs
Currants, cwts
Rice, cwts
Pepper, lbs
Sugar, cwts
Molasses, cwts
402.422 ... 582.665
••••
Tea, lbs 36 681,877 ... 46,723,208
Tobacco and snuff, lbs 22,308,38.) ... 27,001,908
Brandy, gallons 1,165.137 ... 1,515,954
Geneva, ditto
British spirits, ditto
Malt charged with duty,
table S Surely rwe yt
hi0tuit523,122,581
bushels
in the consumption of the articles which it embraces.
Can there be a doubt that if the consumption of articles
being impossible
forcibly to
struck refer
byto the this
r: a: :cp
oi4dmlil39na7crr9aet7vs increase
ot secondary necessity has been thus advancing, the
consumption of articles ot first necessity, of meat and
of bread for instance, has been making at least an equally
rapid progress ?
During the greater part of the period included in the ,
return, from the middle of 1842 to the eud of 1846, the