The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-21 00:00:00

which were compensated for by the corn-laws. If the mere
question had been one of political economy, the Hen. Member
and those who coincided with him would be required to prove I
that manufacturers formed a majority of the country. But there
was ample evidence before the Home that they were not a majority
in it. What objection, he might ask, could there be to a law
which protected the interests of the majority. He would now,
with the leave of the House, refer to the other considerations
involved in the question. He did not wish to go through the
various subjects in the course of this argument ; he would not
even charge the Government with its present change of opinion,
After the Right Hon. Baronet had rendered this country sub-
ject to foreigners in respect to its monetary system, he could
hardly have expected that the Right Hon. Baronet would
render this country dependent upon foreigners for its supply
of food. Although some of the leading Members of the Go-
vernment had repudiated arguments, facts, writings, and
speeches of times lung gone by, and had committed a sort of
political suicide, he was not aware that any of them had repu-
diated the speeches which they made in the last session of Par-
liament. He (Mr. Newdigate) listened to those speeches with
deep attention, and he wished now to show from them how
sudden this change had come upon the country. What was the
substance of the speech which the Right Hon. Baronet at the
head of her Majesty's Government, delivered last year
upon the subject of the corn-laws. It was an
able argument in favour of the maintenance of the corn-laws—
it proved their tendency to produce steady prices without
diminishing the activity of manufactures—it proved the great
increase which had taken place in manufactures under the
corn slaws—and it proved that in September, 1844, the price
of wheat was 455. 2d. per quarter ; and he appealed to the repre-
sentatives of the manufacturing interest to say whether this
was an unreasonable price. He used the argument that the
landed proprietors of this country did not look upon their laud
in the light of mere commercial speculations, and expressed
his
could
wit beliefh
htheis h
present
reiatt it w
ehnt t
Hon.
courseo ul d bet
3oG a great
nf
eat crtei eviloc
no(ief
Hear,
thathe
ae
ry d. ,
feelinghi
ar. Now,
)Ihw
t sentimentho
at
speech the Right Hon. Baronet said that if they were to ex-
tend the principles of free-trade at home, they should extend
them also to the colonies ?—( Cheers.) He (Mr. Newdegate)
heard the Hon. and Gallant Member for Liverpool say in his
speech, that such should be the result with respect
to their colonies. He (Mr. Newdegate) could not
conceive what were the motives which actuated the present
policy of the Right Hon. Baronet for not adhering to the prin
ciples which, during the greater part of his life, won for him
honour, and for his country great commercial prosperity.—
( Cheers.) Was it possible that he sought to establish a direct
bartering of the products of that country with those of any
other? Suppose that even they could establish large exports,
that was a principle that could not be advocated by any sensi-
ble political economist. That system would find its level in
the way that bullion relieved your monetary distress, by an
importation of it from abroad. They would now remove
by such a measure as the present the only barrier
between them and the distress which would be felt by their
being unprotected. He trusted the House would excuse him
while he explained the basis on which he formed his opinion
of the measure now before the House. It was ad extremely
disagreeable duty to differ from the opinion of the Right Hon.
Baronet, but no personal considerations should induce him to
act against the opinions of his constituency ; almost the whole
of whom would be seriously injured by that measure, as some
were extensively engaged in the hafting trade, and others in
the manufacture of hardware.—( Cheers.) If they adopted
those free-trade principles—if they carried them out—they
would unshield almost every class of his constituency, and ex-
pose them to privations that their struggling trade could very
badly endure. The great mass of trade, in the majority of
instances, in this country will be found to be hindered in their
progress by the application of the principle of abandonment of
protection; and further, it will be necessary for this principle
to be followed up until almost universal distress is produced.
He would now enter upon the question of whether or not re-
laxation or prohibition had characterised the policy pursued
with respect to commerce—whether or not protection had been
abandoned and relaxtion adopted. The Right lion. Baronet
the Secretary for the Home Department thought the policy
for the last twenty-five years had been to impose prohibitory
duties, and as they became burdensome to abandon them
gradually until they had become relaxed. Mr. Huskisson wa'
an advocate for protection, but not for prohibition. The
Right Hun. Baronet had said that nothing but extreme emer-
gency should justify the retention of protection, and that
protection should only be extended to some part of the
country that was in a suffering condition. Was this paternal
treatment from the Government of a great country ? It would
not, in his opinion, bear the name of a paternal Government.
The labour of this country had been obtained at an
exorbitant sacrifice. The currency had also been depreciated
up to 1820, and he would inquire, how much it had been appre-
, ciated since? The late Mr. Ricardo, before he died, said that
the curreney had depreciated 15i per cent. The Right Hon.
Baronet had also stated that the advantage which capital bad
obtained over labour amounted to about 85 per cent. Previ-
ously to the year 1820 the depreciation in the currency
amounted to about 10 per cent. According to returns
from official sources, the rental of land amounted in
1814 to 39,555,7051., and in 1843 it was 45,753,6151.,
shewing an increase during a period of thirty years
of about 6,347,910/. ; in this amount were included 1,500,6701.
for tithes, which being deducted, would leave a result of
4,813,5451., being the real increase. The rental of houses in
Great Britain and Ireland during the same period in 1814 was
16,259,3491. annually ; and in 1843 the rental was 38,475,73'11.,
being an increase of income during thirty years of 22,215,339/.
From these returns then it would appear that the value of
land had increased 12 per cent. during thirty years, while
during the same period the value of house property had
increased more than 40 per cent. The Honourable
Gentleman then showed that during the period between 1814
and 1843, the increase in the productions of the land had been
fifty per cent., while the increase in the population had been
rather more, about tifty-seven per cent. He would consider
now whether no strain had been put on the labour of the
country—whether capital had gained nothing during the perice,
to which he had referred. If, according to the Right Hon.
Gentleman, the depreciation be ten per cent. on house pro-
perty and land, the same principle would apply to money in its
intrinsic value, as applied to the purchase of corn. Tin
average price for five years, from 1815 to 1819, when
the currency was returning to its proper level
was 80s. 4d. per quarter. During the two years from 1819
to 1821, the corn-law being then fixed, the price of wheat fell
from the average of 80s. per quarter to 445. 7d. per quarter
In 18'22 the tern-law was again altered, and the price of
wheat had recovered to 01e. per quarter, fell again to 565. 2d.
The average price from the year 1822 to 1827 was 575. per
quarter. During the years between 1828 and 1641 the average
was .58s. 11d., and the average for the last four years to the
present time had been 525. per quarter. It thus ap-
peared that since the peace, with abundance in the
country, while the rent of land had not comparatively
increased, the price of corn had fallen 5 per cent. If we tak,
the official value of corn; which is the fixed, we can appreciate
the difference of the increase. It is a singular fact, that it
1819, the declared value, which was also the official value, am
which during that year had been less than the free-traders'
value, fell below, and has never since recovered the amount.
The amount of difference was very great. In 1819, the official
value, which was the tiled value, had exceeded the declared
and actual value by about 9(1 per cent, or, in other words,
money had gained a value over produce and labou,
of more than 96 per cent.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
Had not therefore the value of labour in this country been ii,
some degree depreciated ? The character of this period hae
been marked by an unequal distribution of property. Labour
had fallen in value in the hands of the great capitalists. He
would now address himself to another part of his subject. L
was his firm belief that the burdens upon the land amounted to
12,100,000/. annually, in which sum was included the paymere
of tithes. It was sometimes argued that tithes did not con-
stitute a burden on land. The Hon. Gentleman then quote
Ricardo, M'Culloch, Dr. Pavey, and Dr. Smith, to shoe
that tithes were a burden on the land, inasmuch as they im-
peded the improvement of the soil, and were obnoxious to the
interests of both landlord and tenant. The total amount of
taxes paid by the land) including the property-tax, amounted
to 12,339,064/. Tte Hon. Gentleman having specified the
items of this amount, proceeded to say that it was impossible.
by any argument, to gainsay his statement as to the exis-
tence of burdens on the land. It might, perhaps, b,
supposed that he was willing to have these burdens
commuted ; he would accept free-trade for a eominu•
Cation. To these he would reply, that compensation
would not only be improbable, but it would be impossible
Before he sat down he wished to express what he understood
by the meaning of the word protection. He did not under-
stand that it meant prohibition, but it meant the regulation of
trade. Taking protection in this sense, he believed it was the
duty and function of the Government to afford protection to
the trade of a majority of the community, but in such a manner
as not entirely to sacrifice the interest of the minority. Now
in relaxing this system of protection, it ought to be done rather
with a view to its relaxation than a view to its abandonment.
He could not conceive that it was profitable; in a constitutiona:
point of view, for the majority of that House to give to,
opinions which they had advocated and entertained for years
at the dictation of a Minister who had proved himself to be the
master and dictator of his own Cabinet. When he heard the
expressions which fell from that Right Honourable Baronet in
respect of the aristocracy and the monarchy of the land, he
could not help looking at the ensign of the authority of I
the House, and reflecting that the Right Hon. Baronet
would have acted with more wisdom had he paused
a little longer ere he gave utterance to such sentiments.—
( Hear, hear.) He, for one, did not admire the manner in
which he had trampled upon his supporters, and by using
threats had overpowered their better judgment—it was not the
conduct of a constitutional Minister, but was subversive of the
freedom, liberties, and best rights of the subject. Unless,
therefore, the Right Hon, Baronet subjected his conduct in
changing opinions to the proper and constitutional tribunal,
namely, an appeal to the people, he should say that the Right
Hon. Baronet was the Minister of her Majesty by necessity,
who hid already indicated her choice by calling another to her
councils; and likewise that he was the Minister by necessity of
the country, but net of its choice.—(Cheers.) The Right
Hon. Baronet had told them that if they did not yield now,
they would have to yield hereafter by force. He confessed he
should not have been surprised to heir such an argument from
a leader of a band of agitators ; but when a Minister of the
Crown turned round upon his faithful supporters, and,
seisting them by the throat, demanded that they should
yield up their principles or he would force them
from them, he was in truth alarmed. But let them see
what this force was, and he for one told the Hon. Baronet
that he was not afraid to look it in the face. Such terms must
certainly be unbecoming a Minister of the Crown, and he was
sure if the broken-up party with which he was connected per-
sisted stedfastly and firmly in their constitutional apposition to
this Measure, they would only be preserving the rights and
liberties of the people from the grasp of ruthless agitators.
The Hon. Gentleman concluded by saying that whilst the
agriculturists had such men as the Mileses and the Barings
they need not entertain any doubt as to their ultimate success.
(Laughter on the Opposition benches, and cheers from the
protectionists. )
Mr. BARKLY (who was very imperfectly heard in the
do rt
branchesanee.
gallery) said that he was so circumstanced as to be able to enter
upon the 'consideration of this great question as calmly and
deliberately as he should do upon any other question of equal
truemagnitude
that
was
aesqual
connected
with t
commercial orh social
e in-
dustry, and he must also own that those who had done him the
honour to send him to that House as their representative be-
lievedthat he would give his support to agricultural protec-
tion. But those were only reasons why he should
be more likely to be free from the bias of prejudice
or self-interest.—(llear, hear.) The question which pri sented
itself to his mind, in Le consideration of this subject, was,
whether it would be more conducive to the interests of the
British empire to carry out those doctrines with regard to
freedom of trade which had been alluded to by the Right
Honourable Baronet, or to continue the present protection to
agriculture, which had existed for centuries past. The ques-
tion should be approached with the greatest caution and de-
liberation. It had been said that the Hon. Members on his
side of the House had changed their opinions upon this ques:
tion merely because the Right Honourable Baronet had thought
proper to change those which he had so long advocated, but he
(Mr. Barkly) would beg to tell those who had ventured to
say so, that he himself was influenced by no such; motives.
He would not be influenced by the opinion of any number of
men, however high their character fur wisdom and experience.
It did strike him that the simultaneous advance which had
been lately made by the two great leaders in that House in
the direction et free-trade was a very remarkable
fact. —(Hear, hear.) For he maintained that it was not a real
change, but merely an advance of opinion in favour of free-
trade. The Hon. Member for Wiltshire had, the previous
evening, said that he had listened to hear •from the Right