The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-27 00:00:00

To the manufacturers of the latter he still affords protection
on a number of articles, but from the grower of corn he takes
away all protection by removing the duty on the importation of
foreign corn. They were prevented from cultivating tobacco, in
order to afford a benefit to the colonies, buthe ( Mr. Christopher)
was convinced that in the county he had the honour to repre-
sent there was soil which might he profitably employed in the
growth of tobacco. Differential duties are also allowed in
favour of the colonies in sugar and other articles,—(Hear.)
In France also the cultivation of beetroot for the manufacture
of sugar was carried on to a large extent, whereas soil of an
infinitely more fertile character in the county for which he
was member (Lincoln), and equally adapted for the growth of
beetroot, was thrown out of the cultivation of that article to
afford advantage to the colonies.—( Hear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet had proposed to grant us certain benefits which
he pleased to call compensations for thus depriving us of the
protection to which they were entitled. He regretted the
Right Hon. Member made use of such propositions. They
were offered compensation, but let them consider what the
compensation was. In the first place it was proposed that
gentlemen with settled estates should have an opportunity of
going to commissioners and borrowing money at a low rate
of interest. Now he (Mr. Christopher) was sure that
any gentleman of credit in the country would, if they
were in a position to do so, prefer going to a
neighbouring friend, than to Mr. Darby, where they should al-
low their title-deeds to be examined before a public board, to
be then invested ; and they may not, perhaps, he good in law,
and then people, wile, like himself, had the experience of a
chancery suit, would rather submit to anything than place
their title-deeds under the restriction of clerks in a public
office. His Right Hon. Friend next proposed to alter the laws
of settlement, and to prevent, after a certain time, persons from
being remoued to their parishes. That he (Mr. C.) considered
a very proper measure, although he would not pledge himself to
support it, because, like his Noble Friends the Members for Lei-
cestershire, Worcestershire, and Lincolnshire, he doubted very
much whether they would confer a benefit on the agricultural
classes who had found work in the manufacturing counties. At
the same time, he freely admitted that he was willing to view
the measure, so far as the law of settlement was concerned, in
a favourable light. No one could say these changes would be a
benefit to the agricultural classes, for the effect of the mea-
sure would be to inflict suffering on them for many years, and
that he thought, after taking the most favour-
able view of the proposition of her Majesty's Government.
He was himself a magistrate, and felt the defective state of in-
ternal communication, but he considered that the proposed mea-
sures with respect to the highways of this country would in-
jure instead of benefit the poor. It was notorious that those
highways maintained a great number of poor sickly persons
who were unable, from their infirmity, to earn a subsistence in
the fields, and who were set to this labour by parochial autho-
rities, in order that they might support themselves ; bdt the mo-
ment they appointed district surveyors they would be guided
by that political economy on which these measures were
founded ; and whilst the differences which could not fail to
come between them and the local authorities were being ad-
justed, those who were earning their living in the way he had
mentioned would be driven into the workhouse, thus increas-
ing the poor-rates and inflicting great injury on those who
were compelled to pay it. It was said that the shipping in-
terest would be greatly benefited by the importation of cern
into this country, but he was at a less to understand
the argument which hail been advanced, that the agricul-
turists would be benefited to a similar extent.—(Hear, hear. )
He would not refer to documents, or occupy the House with a
long quotation of figures, but this he would assert, that the real
merits of the case were concerned ; that it was bringing the
labour and large produce of the continental markets in a direct
competition with the labour and produce of this country, on
the produce of which so much larger and so much greater
capital and labour were every year expended. Some fifteen or
sixteen years ago thereemight have been a greater equality—
a reason for a change in the corn-laws, but now the case was
evidently different, and lie believed that it was simply owing
to the proceedings in Parliament, andithe protection given to
agriculture, that the people of this country were in the enjoy-
ment of a better supply of food and other necessaries than the
people of any other country on Europe. It was well known
that good wheat could be purchased in the agricultural
districts—he did not say London or any of the
large towns—but even there it was easily obtainable
at 545. 3d.—(Cheers.) It was a fact that his own tenants in
the east of Lincolnshire paid as much money in transporting
that produce to Lancashire, or any other portion of the ma-
nufacturing districts, as the grower in the neighbourhood did
on delivering his corn at any port in London. It was well
known that the people of this country only consumed a certain
quantity of wheat, and it was not proved that the country did
not grow sufficient for the wants of the people. He did not
wish to take an extreme view of the qaestion ; he would refer to
a very great authority on political economy, he meant Mr.
Deacon Hume. He was asked this question, Have you formed
an estimate of the quantity of corn that would be imported un-
der the proposed tariff, taking one year with another ? His an-
swer was, taking all the quantities of corn and meal
received into tke country, I think that from eight to
ten millions will be imported evey year. Now
Mr. DlHume would likely be able to form this opinion from his
official returns. He was also asked what would be the effect of
this increased importation on the home produce of the country,
and his answer was, that a considerable portion of the country
would be devoted to grazing purposes: Now, any tyro in agri-
cultural matters w ould be perfectly well able to inform them, if
they once broke up pasture land, it would require 50 years to
bring it to its former condition. At present such was the im-
proved system of agriculture pursued in this country, that many
poor lands, which formerly produced nothing, were now under
cultivation for corn. He had endeavoured, as far as was
possible, to enter this question without having recourse to any
unnecessary arguments, and to treat it exclasively on its own
merits. lie believed that if the measure were carried into
effect in the sudden manner in which it was intended to be
carried oat, every interest in this country, whether it con-
cerned agriculture or sundae ure, would be greatly itijured
and disturbed. He believed that the first persons who would
suffer would be the agricultural labourers ; the second persons
who would suffer—according to his Hon. Friend, the Member
for Northamptonshire—whose opinion bad been rather sneered
at by the gentlemen on the other side of the House—would be
the small farmers and occupiers. He believed that those who
would suffer after the small farmers, would be the small landed
proprietors whrs were not, generally speaking, men possessed of
much capital, but were persons of small property and ancient
family, and had succeeded in maintaining a respectable position
in society. It was not those who were possessed of large pro-
perty and estates, and who enjoyed all the superfluities of life,
that would be affected. No, they would still continue to enjoy
those superfluities. He would oppose the measure, because it
would inflict an evil on the lower and middling classes of
society, and would prove injurious to the interests of the
country at large.
Mr. CA RDWEL L said, that though it might be his mis-
fortune to differ from his Hon. Friend the Member for North-
amptonshire, and also from the Hon. Gentleman who had just
sat down, it would be his duty, in the course of the few observa-
tions which he had to offer, to avail himself of many of the
opinions on which they seemed to lay so great weight, and to
press into his service many of the features and illustrations
which they had thought it expedient to employ. He would
have no difficulty in admitting that agriculture had gone on
improving in every part of the country, and that although they
had had a constant relaxation in the protective system, all the
prices of agricultural produce were very much higher at pre-
sent than they were during the commencement of the present
century. Notwithstanding all the drawbacks, agriculture was
in a prosperous and improving condition, and the general con-
dition of the people was satisfactory. On the other hand,
however, he should not contend that' in proportion to the
supply of the harvest, the general prosperity of the country
had been affected. Neither would it be necessary for
him to dispute with the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last, that
the population had been greatly improved. As he (Mr.
Cardwell) had not enjoyed the opportunity on any previous
occasion during the debate of expressing his opinion to the
House on the subject of the corn-laws, perhaps he might be
allowed to state the grounds on which this measure, for the
final adjustment of the various conflicting interests in the
country, should meet with his cordial support. The opponents
of the measure had held very strongly that protection was not
intended for the exclusive benefit of any particular class, but
was intended for the advantage of all classes in the country.
The Government was dealing with the general welfare of the
community, which important object those gentlemen so cor-
dially supported. The arguments that had been used in favour
of protection were great arguments against it. It had been
said that the existing measure of protection had secured do-
mestic agriculture against foreign produce, and that the land-
lord, the farmer, and the labourer, had each in turn reaped its
advantages ; that it had provided for the rent-charge, and had
protected the rate of wages. He would ask them, when they
talked of protection from foreign nations, what was the
meaning of the language they employed ? Do they know that
foreign nations are the consumers of 50,000,0001. worth of native
manufacturers? Were they aware, that for two•fifths of the
imperial revenue, we were indebted to the taxes upon foreign
imports? Do they remember the history of our country in
former times? Do they not know that it was the manufac-
turers that brought them through the cruel contest of the late
war ? Do they remember, that at the close of that war, we
were in collision with America and with France, and by re-
ceiving cotton from the former country, and not from the latter, i
the detciencies between the contending nations were mainly
adjusted? Why, then, do they exclaim against foreign na-
tions? We all know what the distress of 1642 was, but what
was that distress owing to ? Not to the deficient supply of
food from foreign nations. The Honourable Gentleman then
proceeded to review the condition of the foreign trade, to show
that it had benefited the interests of this country. Where was
that boasted unanimity in the agricultural interest ? Had not
many followed in the steps of the late Lord Spencer and the
present Lord Grey ? What the British farmer wanted was
security against further change.—( Hear.) He would ask the
Honourable Gentlemen, if they succeeded in their present oppo-
sition, if they frustrated for a short time the proposition of
relaxing the operation of the present law, would they go down
to their estates and offer the farmers long leases on the security
of the present law ? The Honourable Member for Lincoln-
shire says, Ne. Could there bee greater test of the ineutllciency
of that law ? It had been urged as an argument against free
trade that the country was in a prosperous condition. It was
the fret symptom of reviving trade, under the new tariff, in
Manchester, that there was an increased demand for the su-
perior joints of meat sold in that town. It was said that, during
the last year, there had been a falling off of 15,000 sheep in
the London market. He would ask how many foreign sheep
had been imported into this country during the last year?
Why, not more than sufficient to supply one week's demand for
the people's consumption.—(Hear, hear.) This statement
he could prove from authenticated tables,which any Hon. Mem-
ber might peruse, if he felt so inclined. The demonstration
was mathematically correct, and the proof was not irrefraga-
ble. Another argument against the measure had been drawn
from the peculiar burdens which had been supposed to bear
upon agriculture. Whatever burdens had been laid upon land
when agriculture was protected, ought, when that protection
ceased, to be equally adjusted. He would not deny that the
land did bear peculiar burdens, but it was intended to compen-
sate amply for any loss which might accrue to the agricultural
interests. But he did not think that the agriculturists had
any right to say that they were a burdened interest. If they
were, it was a virtual argument for protection. Would the
agriculturists say to the Government—" In spite of you
we will remain a burdened interest, in order that we may
have an argument for the protective system ?" That must lee
the conclusion, and he must certainly say that it was one which
could not be supported. He believed that he had now gone
over every one of the main arguments that had been
adduced by Honourable Members in favour of the corn-
laws. --(Hear, hear.) Ilis memory failed him if there were
any besides those, with the exception of that which was called
the " colonial " argument. He had gone over the argument
with reference to dependence upon foreigners and security of
the home trade, as well as that of securing a proper re/miners-
tien to the farmer for his industry, and also that of giving an
increased rate of wages to the labourer. He had shown, or at
least he had endeavoured to show, the increased amount of
wages paid in the great manufacturing districts over the wages
paid in agricultural districts. He had shown that the working
people, instead of receiving from Bs., 125., and 15s. per week,
were now the recipients of 30v. or even 40e. in the
manufacturing districts. He had shown them that the wealth
of the people had increased by the process which he had
described. He had asked them to draw this necessary infer
eves, that a. man who was in the receipt of 30s. weekly wages
would require a great deal more butcher's meat, and a great
deal more bread than the man whose weekly earnings amounted
to no more than Ss., 125., or lbs. weekly.--(Cheers.) He had
also asked the house to believe, that when a great pertiou of
the agricultural population was drafted off into the menufac-
turing districts, the districts which they had left would br
thereby in ; ranch better condition. Having thus byiedy tlC4i.'