The Sun.
London, England, 1834-03-07 00:00:00

CORN LAWS.

Mr. HUME pr*.sented a petition from the grinders of
Sheffield ; also another petition from another part of the
country; and likewise one signed by 31,000 of the inha-
bitants of the metropolis, against the corn laws.
The petitions were ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. numE stated he had now to crave the indulgence
of the house whilst he endeavoured to state the views he
entertained on the question of which be had given notice.
He felt satisfie l it was unnecessary for him to state the
great importance of the question, and which he trusted
would now be set at rest. He meant by setting it at rest that
those who held undue privileges should no louver continue
in that situation, and that the public mind should no
longer be agitated in amending that which they considered
to be their rights. He was anxious that the question should
be discussed without ill-temper or any manifestation of
heated feelings. On former occasions, a good deal of
personal and very often unjust feelings had been mani-
fested, which could only tend to prevent the discharge of
honourable members' duties aright. As this was the
first time in which this question had been fairly
brought forward, lie was exceedingly desirous, whatever the
result might be, that the public should be satisfied of the
attention paid to their application. In the fist
the house ought to know the:situation of the parties ;
those who came forward now on the one hand to ask
were the large mass of the population seeking to be
relieved from a burden they had lung lived under,
and those who opposed were the few who had had the
advantage of refusing the claim, and who by law had been
enabled to retain their refusal to the present mo t.ent.
He was not surprised that such was the case, when he
looked back to the composition of an unreformed Parlia-
ment. Formed, as it -was, by those who had an interest
in high prices of corn and large incomes, it might
be naturally expected that they and their nominees
would take etre that the laws respecting coin
should be such as should favour themselves in a special
manner. Such had been the result of latter years, and lie
complained on the part of the people against the continu-
ance of this unjust favour, and that monopoly which at
present existed. Few subjects had occupied more of the
time of the house than this ; there were few which
there were more laws passed respecting, than the
corn question; lie, therefore, was not one who
wished in any way to pretend to say that this
subject might have been fairly and properly treated
under the ignorance of the principles of political
economy. But now that they had obtained reform,
and that the people had in that house a considerable
portion of individuals to maintain their interests, they
might with fairness appeal to this reformed parlia-
ment to adapt the principle of a free trade in corn.
--(Hear, hear.) He wished not to encroach upon the'
rights of any one property in the state. lie would not,
if it were in his power, do injury either to the agricultu-
ral or any other interests; he merely meant to show, it
possible, the manner in which the agricultural in-
terests had been befriended at the expense of many
other interests._(Hear, hear.) It was, undoubtedly, the
duty of that house and the goverinnent, to deal out
equal justice to all persons. He put it to any min im-
partially to consider whether, for the last thirty years,
there had teen equal protection to the labouring man and
the landed proprietor. No man could be so blinded
by his own interests, or prepossessed by his own
views as to deny this. He wished to show to the house,
before he sat down, what interests under the existing
laws the agriculturai possessed over the rest of tin: com-
munity. He would first remind the noble lord (Al-
thoi p) of what fell front him a few nights ago in an
incidental discussion on the subject of the corn
lace in which he (Mr. Hume) entirely concurred, viz.,
that the best mode fdf permanently improving the coali-
tion of the agricultural interest was by promoting the
welfare of all classes of the community, and Rot by at-

tending to any particular interest in preference to another,
That was the practice which he hoped to see acted upon.
If gentlemen would turn their attention to what was the
state of the corn laws in this country, they would find that
the complaint he was now making was comparatively of
ahemavoydedty,
modern date, for from an abstract of a report which he
held in his hand of the committee appointed in 1821, it
alp7pe7oarteodtthhe presentat legislation had occasioned the high prices to
proprietors ; that they were caused by various laws, first of
next of
periodrelaxation,.A altnhdoutghhenceorftabionulnint!eitsaftrioonnsi
existed prior to 1815, the house had a right to consider
the existing injurious laws to have commenced in that
year. During the period from the commencement of the
French war until 1815, after the termination of the war,
the corn laws might be almost said to be inoperative.
' The prices at which the import took place, were
above those at which the duty was exacted, and the
consequence was that all the markets of the world were
open to us. All the statements showed that the power
of production was limited, and that with all they could
grant, they could not obtain more than was necessary
' for food ; besides which they would give an abun-
dance of employment to our manufacturing population.
It would be impossible to continue the same system, when
so great a change had taken place in the population. Up
to that period this was decidedly an agricultural nation,
but from 1770 upwards, any gentleman who looked at the
manufacturing districts, which were now the staple com-
modity of the country, would see that the population had
Increased in these districts ; and if they meant to maintain
that population in ease and comfort, they must provide for
the means of obtaining work for them, and not leave
them a burden upon the state. It was said that this po-
verty arose from the mal-administration of the poor laws ;
but whatever it might be attributed to, it was necessary
for that house to provide the means of food for them. If
they looked to the real cause of distress in the country, he
was sure that there would be little difference of opinion
among them ; it clearly arose from a want of employment.
The employment of labourers upon land was limited, and
never could employ the surplus class. The only other
mode then by which it was possible to employ the idle, was
to encourage the manufactures. They could not en-
courage the manufactures, unless they allowed them to be
exported, in order to pay for the corn which they would
receive in return. In a pamphlet on the currency, pub-
lished a few years since by the First Lord of the Admi-
ralty, a table was introduced, by which it appeared that,
from the year 1710 to 1800, the price of corn, in a
dezen different places in Europe (Hear, hear)—
bore nearly the same relative increase as it did in
England. But the moment the law prohibiting that free
trade haul passed, the price of corn rose in England,
remained stationary in other places, and had gone on in-
creasing. If they looked to the population of the country
it would be seen that they had nearly doubled the popula-
tion since they had ceased to be an exporting country,
and that increase appeared to have taken place in the
manufacturing towns, and had arisen from manufacturers.
The increase in the agricultural districts had been very
trifling. In the capitals, the increase bad been remarkable.
—in Glasgow in 1770 the papulation was 41,000--in
1821 it was 92,000—and it was now 202,000, being
an increase of 114 per cent. In Manchester a popu-
lation of 90,000 had increased to 207,000. In Bir-
mingham it had increased from 73,000 to 240,000. In
Leeds from 53,000 to 220,000. In Paisley from 31,000
to 57,000. In Aberdeen, Newcastle, and some others,
the increase bad been from 46,000 to '75,000. That
great increase had arisen from the manufactures, and
there was no way of providing for this increased popu-
lation but by enabling them to carry on those ma-
nufactures which the rest of the world were ready
to take from them if they took produce in return.
He had before shown the enormous increase of imports of
cotton wool and sheep wool, by which it would appear
that in 1814 there was an import of 80,000,000 lbs. of
cotton wool. It had increased so, that in 1830 it
amounted to 242,000,000 lbs. ; and he believed that in
the last year it amounted to no less than 296,000,000 lbs.
If the people bad been reared to carry on by the changes
that had taken place that manufacture, how was it pos-
sible they could be provided:for, unless there were conti-
nued to them those manufactures in which they had been
reared, and the means of paying for their food and sup•
port ?—(Hear, bear, hear.) If he looked at indigo—
if he looked at all the staples which were of the
greatest importance to the country, it would appear that
the surplus population had been raised by them, and that
nothing now could relieve that population from the
difficulties that now pressed upon them but a free trade
in corn. Much discussion had taken place as to the
amount of agricultural population and manufacturing
population. After all the attention he had been able to
give to the returns laid before the house with reference
to those, and after having availed himself of the beat
assistance on the subject he could obtain, be
into
the that the one class merged so much
the other as to render it impossible to draw
that line which individuals had attempted to draw. They
all afforded only that information which enabled a person
to come to a very unsatisfactory result. A gentleman
then sitting at the table of the house, and who had
had more experience on this point, probably, than on
any other, had made out a statement, by which he
thought the owners, occupiers, and labourers of land,
might be taken at 58 per cent. of the whole population
of the country, being mote than one half of the whole.
In hie opinion that gentleman had overstated the amount.
With an increasing population such as that of England at
present, he would ask, how was it to be maintained ? It
was by corn imported into those kingdoms, which the la-
bouring classes ought to consume, being enabled to do so
from increased employment rather than by wastefully
spending their time in idleness and poverty. A great
increase took place in the annual exports of those king-
doms. Since the year 1817 they increased from nine or
ten millions to sixty one millions and a half. A great
increase also occurred in the population, say from ten to
seventeen per cent. He was sure that three fourths were
of the manufacturing class. How then was the surplus po-
pulation to be supported unless by cheapening food ? Other
states had not to labour under the disadvantages of dear
food as these kingdoms had. Food was one-third less in
the former. He would not take the exaggerated state.
ments that had been made concerning the difference be-
tween the prices of food in France, Belgium, and Ger-
many and England. He was aware that from forty-five
to eighty-five per cent, of a difference was asserted
to exist in the price of food. He (Mr. flume) had ma he
inquiries on such Farts of the continent in which he had
travelled and did not find a great difference ; but he
would say that front 30 to 40 per cent. was a fair
average at which to rate that difference.—(Hear.)
General labour was a great deal cheaper there than in
.England, and how was it possible that we could enter
into any competition with countries that enjoyed the
advantages of cheap food and cheap labour? It was
only to be done by equalizing the price of food with the
former countries. It was rather satisfactory, however,
that wages were rising on the continent, so as nearly
Ito come to an equality with England. But England was
to prepare for (~reign markets, and the disadvantages under
which she laboured were raising the price of such com-
modities as she prepared, and those alone prevented her
tram exceeding all other markets in the production of every
article at a cheaper rate than any other country. Silk
wool and flax were us cheap in England ax in any part of
the world. We had no disadvantage there ; the raw pro-
duce was as easy to be had here as anywhere.—( Hear.)
He knew no limit to manufacture, or to the employment
of hands. Every surplus hand might be employed, if they
,could only deal with the manufacturers, and thus theywould
give an opportunity to those who now lived by charity
to provide means for feeding them elves. They should allow
the manufacturers of this country to be reduced to the same
scale as those of the continent. He would state what took
place in 1815, when the Corn Law Act was passed. He
wasthouigialistsietdh attv
etrhe feelings
esuc
hasn
otri
eirritation under
would
wishu which
) witnesst haagtaai
again.
The act was said to have passed under the protection:of fixad
bayonets in that house. He thought that in the present
feeling of the country they ought not again to risk such
an occurrence. Ac the present moment fostunately the
manufacturers were generally employed. Terre were ex-
ceptions undoubtedly, and those exceptions were likely
to continue. He regretted that be was not present
yesterday, as otherwise he would have protested against an
opinion of an hon. friend of his, that a repeal of the
corn laws would raise the wages of :hand.lootn weavers.
That was impossible—it might improve their condi-
tion, but it was impossible that their labour in competi-
tion with machinery should be raised to the level it forme' ly
enjoyed, or the situation they had a right to expect. It
was therefore a delusion to stale that the wages of this
class would be raised by clue repeal of the corn laws.
They would be benefited, no doubt, and by the in-
crease of the other 'wenches of the silk, cotton, and wool
manufactures, they would be gradually absorbed; and in this
ineansr only c euld they be relieved. Whet was the obj ct
of the act of 1815 ? It was to keep corn at the ire-
niunerating price of 80s. That was found impossible,
Another object was to keep the market steady—to form a
regular and stea :y market, such as the farmer might cal-
euil .te upon. In that tuna it haul faile.l.—(No, no•) lie had
in Lis band
taakseti4itepqlialecae,t of
aridtheif"azliltiw
iymess and
uibcrwaelutelill'atlinwhich haul 000 k
at that statement, which only went as fir hack as 1828,
he must be satisfied that in this object also the act had

ftTahiheleertsleef.olvrteal:aiiadtti wboenaessn found impossible to maintain corn at 803.,'
r ar
ne d
uu cpe da
tutio
(01 0s
own
aatn
tdh
euiltaitme a toefl y
4I
0o wpeerr.
cent., and they were such as no provisions could guard
against ; so that instead of being advantageous, they were
injurious to the agricultural interest. The landlord suf-
fered—the farmer became bankrupt, or was obliged to
pay the amount of his rent by deducting from his capital
—( Hear, hear, hear)—so that it was obvious that the
law failed of the object at which it aimed—the support of
the agricultural interest, whilst the rest of the community
were starved by the project, and the artificial want conse-
quent upon it.—(A laugh.) He wondered why hon.
gentlemen laughed. The object of the law which kept up
the price of grain was to support the agricultural interest,
and if it failed of the:, why continue it ? Its only effect
was to drive to the poor-rates and the poor-house those
who would otherwise have been able to make provision
for themselves. It would be easy to prove that the manu-
factures of the country would be treble their present
amount but for the baleful operation of the corn laws.—
(Hear, hear.) The effect of doing away with these laws
would be to reduce the rate of wages—(Cheers from the
ministerial benches)—and enable the manufacturer to
compete America.—(Hear.)
The
money te,ith
ex h
for
th last twelve
years in manufactures did not pay the mere profit of the
tpeonsieled of
by Europe
capitalists
al aisnt t
capital.—(Hear, hear.) Persons employed in manufac-
turing labour formerly only worked twelve hours in the
day ; they were now compelled to work fifteen or sixteen
hours, in order to compete with'the foreign producer, who
had the staple food at forty per cent. lower than they.
Thus was the country pauperised. Want of manufactures
produced
want of work ; the tradesman was thrown out
of employment; he was flung upon
the parish; he became
degraded in his own eyes ; and lost that independent
spirit which used to be the pride and boast of Englishmen.
—(Hear.) It may be asked if wages were lowered by
the measure, how would the people benefit ? would
answer, that food would be proportionably cheaper, and
England being the principal corn market, she would strike
the average price of Europe, and, at the same time, by her
cheaper production, secure a market against the com-
petition of foreign manufactures. What he sought
was, some moderate fixed duty, which would keep
the ports regularly open to all nations and all flags,
until the trade became ultimately free; and not have
it as it was at present, varying and uncertain. This
he admitted could only be done by degrees. So un-
certain and mischievous was this law found in its
operation, that since 1815 twelve other acts were passed
violating its provisions to meet emergencies.—(Cheers.)
Was not this a matter of great evil ? If the ports were
regularly open, the trade would become more regular—
regular habits of interchange would be induced ; and in
lieu of the corn imported, articles of British manufacture
would be taken in return. In illustration of this, Ire
would instance South America, where British articles
had been introduced, notwithstanding it had first been
deemed impossible. Another advantage which would
follow was that the carrying trade would become more
particularly our own, and instead of employing foreign
vessels, those ships now rotting in our docks would be
called into profitable employment, because the ship-
owners, many of whom are also merchants, could calcu-
late upon a fixed, and not a varying and uncertain trade.
It had been objected that the repeal of those laws would
be the ruin of the agriculturiste. By looking at the prices
of corn in various parts of Europe in 1825, it would be
found in England 675. Bd. ; in Cadiz 751.; in Lisbon 731. ;
at Marseilles 525. ; in other years, 338. in Bordeaux ;
395. in Antwerp ; 66a in Lisbon ; and again, in other
years, in Amsterdam 293. 9d. ; Bordeaux 475. 9d. ; Mar-
seilles 60s. ; and Lisbon 475. If England became a regu-
lar importing country, these variations would diminish, the
consumption of England would increase, and that increase
would regulate the price, which, as he said before, would
be repaid in articles of English manufacture, and insure to
this country a fixed carrying trade. By this plan, which
would increase consumption by interchange, the wants of
all would be supplied, and the benefits of production dis.
pensed. The every-day variation in this article left the
whole trade and its dependencies in uncertainty, and by
the exclusion of millions of quarters from the country, left
millions of people to starve, without any advantage to any
class. Why then continue so absurd a system, which in its
consequences was injurious even to the farmers them-
selves ? He was ready to afford to the agriculturists what-
ever protection they could fairly lay claim to; but he
thought he had satisfactorily shown that they could not lay
claim to such as this, and more, that it was no protection.
But if by protection they claimed to raise the price of corn
above what it was on the Continent, he thought it was
incumbent on them to show the reason of such claim. If
from 1791 up to 1815, when the ports were open, corn
came in duty free, in 1815 the agriculturist could only
claim protection for the average price in Europe. Since
then it had become lower upon the Continent, and why
should the agriculturist claim to be supported in a monopoly
granted to them by a parliament of landholders ? The conse-
quence was ruin. The protection they received induced them
to look to better times ; they continued on their ;arms, lived
beyond their means, and, in the hope of future prosperity,
ruin overtook them. Numbers of landholders were now in
that condition, and it was not to be wondered at with the
claims upon them. There were tithes, poor rates, county
eras, local and parochial taxation, and church rates.
What title had they to relief from tithes ? They had
purchased their land subject to this impost, which existed
from tune immemorial. To be sure there had been in
some places an enormous increase. They had been
doubled, trebled, quadrupled—but, great or small (and
it was impossible to say how they could be got down),
from 1700 to 1815 no claim of exemption had been set
up on which parliament could make any allowance. The
poor rate only exempts Iceland, and any exemption on that
head would be but partial, as neither England nor Scot-
land would he included. The hon. gentleman then re-
ferred to various particulars, in order to prove that the
amount of burdens borne by the towns was greater than
that imposed upon the land. Let the house look at the
amount of assessment—let them look to the expenses of
paving, lighting, watching, and other expenses incidental
to towns. Let them look again to church rates—from these
the landed interest was peculiarly exempt. Then, it had
been said that there had been a heavy charge for the
militia force; but on this head lie also thought the balance
was against the landed interest, though this charge was
by no means so great as formerly. Then there were the
county rates ; but he was prepared to show, that in respect
to county rates the agricultural coun:ies were much less
pressed upon than the manufacturing counties. In Sassex
the rates were 6s. 9d. in the pound, but in that county they
acted upon a principle which), as between landowner and
titheowner, he could not but consider unjust and oppres-
sive. This was to make tithes pay towards the mainte-
nance of the poor, they being assessed by the parishes for
that purpose. A comparison of the agricultural with the
manufacturing counties, showed a great pressure on the
latter compared with the former. By a statement in the
population returns, there appeared, on a comparison of
the increase it) the money advanced with the increase in
the population, between 1776 and 1815, that whilst the
latter heel increased only one-third, the former had in-
creased five fold.--(Hear, hear.) He was not aware of
any other charge that fell on time landed interest which
did nut fall squally on the towns. An hon. member e-
-1 minded him of the malt tax, but though the malt tax tell
heavily on the land, it also fell heavily on the inhabitants
of towns, the consumers of b er. The rise in the price of
food had already added materially to the poor rate, but if
the high prices were kept up, large numbers of the
operatieve
manufacturing clisses would be thrown out of ernpley
men', and this burden would be greatly increased.—
(Hear, hear.) Another, and important consideration,
amongst
si
was the effect which these laws had on our conamer-
scuialmueh relationssuffermg with
other
the industrious countries.
It had been
clearly proved that the virtual exclusion of our manu-
factures from the American ports, which had created
of this country, was owing to our refusing to admit
American corn, to revenge which they had • s.see d tle
Tariff Bill. Poor rates to the amount
of riillius
r''
might be attributed to this exclusion.—(Hear, hear.)
Prussia, finding we would not take timber *
her and corn,
had shut us out from the greatest portion of Europe for
the last ten years, and had now enlisted Germany in her
views.—(lleir, Lear.) None of our manufactures can
now peneti ate there except such as are einuegted and
contraband. All these evils arose from the narrow views
of restrictive policy which had been adopted towards that
country. He contended that the value of land d- pended
on the manufactures of the couLtry, for, in proportion
with the increase of manufactures, land advanced in
value. An artificial value could not be given to land, nor
indeed could a high natural price be maintained; unless
you kept up a wealthy class of manufacturers, you must
keep augatenting that clots ; you must keep it etniliyed ;
you must let it be wealthy, in order that it in :y be bates
able to consume the produce of the land. Cot n was only
one portion of the produce; it produced cattle, butte.
milk, and other articles of necessity and luxury, which
went to form rent as wall as corn ; and there were many
places in which the rent of land was made up without an:
corn whatever being grown upon it. If, on the othea
hand, restrictive laws prevented the growth and continue,:
prosperity of the manufacturing classes, the land would
soon become worth nothing, for it would be eat up by e
pauper population. Apiculture could only support e
limited number of Nbourers, but the labourers would;

tnevertheless,urers w ere „
aincrease
d;
tann dg, i unlessve
them
tutibaueepi
and eo
rent.
would be thrown back upon the land,
'l-e whole of its produce, leaving the landlord
thesel %e was nots
facts.
Theyenough
shouldfor
act Englandup
nano and b
eEnta,g lei eohdt
set tiet IF
ample to other nations. The feeling
whichd;tiroulat:
spread through France on this subject shoul n de, A
them to increised exertion. Within the last ten i
Duties,
petition had been presented to the Chamber ( inn the
which proved the growing intelligence of EuropeofuPFrance
subject of free trade. A part of the peoPle h Was
t of
appeared to be inclined to follow the example which
the
lately set them in America. The southern par
aUnitedgreat
deal l atecshdeeacplearrerda
tteo
fromtl nEonr
land.gh npa rt that i t wi(_l..
not buy its produce at a dear rate, whilst it cculd be got 4';
steeprmaritohnatfrUonmiestshettnieorptiojerrtns
pofartthoefktithnliegedorn
return Bordeaux,
its at
wine,a igtsr e:itl, publican,i
its mfie.ueitti,n g, deScolatrbeed Pie:PP' l_a 1?°:
to the manufactures of England, which would receive
1:
(Hear, hear.).
wanted to act in a spirit of monopoly.--
England, however, ought to take the lead, and rFneo,e
of social in.
ail these barbarous impediments in the way
tercourse. Hon. members did not know with what re.-
this important object, freedom of industry, who
spect the decision of England on all matters of commerce
was received on the continent, hut they
He
omight form some,
judgmentstr of the matter from the fact, that foreign elation
strenuous) defended their bad ra • b our previous
• ctices y
bad exam
knew that debt was urged asy aorpeaasyonYkfionnr;dmali'ledmirne'dte:asPi'nrehen:-gh
ple. If any sacrifice wasp to be made to obtain
onlyt he c
Now,
bo re
the
erl
ea
reductionnwds rendered
properly make it as the wealthy landlords ? The sacrifice,
however, would be merely nominal, for the result would
be to enable them the more easil t the national debt,.
from the general taxation of the country, which woo
laws;
edb utrich
fe
tbhye national
stpep li
yndcoerfbe tafsoceoo,oui
of
taloi
tosnel
thisyo commerce.
country
uenpr
tee:et dA;
necessarily give foreign commerce and foreign manufau*
tures, which had food 50 per cent. cheaper, great advan•
tapes over us, for it must be remembered, they could have
machinery as well as we. All that was asked was, that
the country should be freed from a restriction of the quail'
tity of bread the people might consume; for it must be
remembered that the landed interest was protected in maul
things besides corn. No manufacture was protected above
30 per cent., with one exception, whilst there was a long,
list of articles of agricultural produce which the people 01
could se
this country were absolutely prohibited from importmg:
—(Hear, hear.) The people of England were not all eVefi
to exchange their labour for imported beef, pork, blae:
cattle of any kind, fish, with one exception-4 foreigor
salt fish.—(A I itigh.) He admitted that salt fish Wa°,°_A,
an agricultural production, but it was an article of 1;
and he therefore classed it among the absurd restrictieto
be protected? They were protected, howedtvuoer,
we had of that kind. What right had the agriculturistset
Jae!
al l theseoiis
werea d vtahnetyag eosf? a n
yWt
hhiantg right r
ibadng theyia te tonwspeepYtriot
ihoi.:,
their timber. hay, cider, cheese, straw, and tallow sbrio
with them, that even the importation of asses Wo
bited.—(A laugh.) Everything that tended to raise the
price of food acted as a blight upon the industry of the
country, and our corn law was a gratuitous blasting c''' be
blessings which nature had put within our reach.
,ed
could easily conceive how it came to pass when the lauiie_e
proprietors were the only law makers, when an unrefortoe"
Parliament did not think itself bound to at,end to tber
welfare of the whole community; but now that Parliaorto
was reformed—now that they were compelled to at" „,
the interests of weavers, of shoemakers, of cu at
nera, of seamen, in short, of every class as well as t° these
oinf.juthrienuoswrneesrtsrieotif,inlasnudp,unhetbceosuulipl
pnlyorucfoinoceedive that
ninni,
munity, could be long kept up. It was the
formed Parliament to do justice to all closes of its coordes
tuents, whatever their callings might be. There 0 de:
various duties levied, but there should be orliY.,tw one
scriptions of duties in a well regulated state.
..enntaiy,
of protective duty ought not to exist ; it was an u,,
aan other
—(Hear.) It was enough to tax the country in,on frees
things without shutting out the working PuPulati hear.)
the means of procuring cheap f00d...--(llear,.es
svo
He knew that this evil system of prohibitory due"nded t°
not confined to the agricultural produce, but exl In his
many articles connected with manufactures. _
ar,ides
opinion no duty should be laid on manufactured b_.,„,
crimported
tthsuiehns
pot oaruielidtnehibi
present
timee oiatiutslneetpdrwayor,hnt
particularly
clbeauelyl
laoranlrydt i
eft!!
evi the
so
uexcise
e. tdo 1
iustbeye pay,
able here.—(Hear.) if the amount of custorns were
tlemof
ent this question. There was scarcely any man,
_le, however, maintained draatnditvi:
except some. few ultra landed gentlemen—for there s
nt
ultras even in this—who did not admit that at:tree:el
corn laws could not be kept up much longer.
it. F
delayed. He should say, let tl,em adopt a stem
slotted
would give steady prices. No man in that house aefor his
that he advocated the continuance of the corn 109, e egrie
own benefit, but always put forth the interest of too
..ne,
cultural population, as concerned in their inainteeuernce
When, however, they looked at what bad taken pla4d this
the great rise in the prices of corn, they would
,ofiron the
somewhat difficult to reconcile with the fact. F',lo'-_,,,,,feern
day when those enormous prices were first ob'al..e.tubecoese
gradually the state of theagricultut al population o,3.."ntiee of
gry worse ; and, taking into consideratio:ttoruerbigher
bleed, and the rate of wages, it would seem the " q'
latter. -u
the former was, the worse invariably were 0
fli _ he the
retain the corn laws would, therefore, eerratioyn
quiet,
worst mole of keeping the agricultural popu
_nntforteble
—(Hear.) They could not be in a more wee
t.--their
time Pas in
situation than they had been in for some Levee--
id!! tnhoe ni
eng thinkehri
el
condition would not be deteriorated by any eue" for the
short, any change which took place must be on ilre,t,
better ; and he was sure that the agricultural
fer !uevi'; see
generally, would find that cheap corn was
~
_rth hog
vantage. Perhaps those who were entangle! w'
re were 13°1
leases might be excepted ; but he believed thee ere
coo,
Europe, and the average price probably wyu 8° f4t
the same as it was now. The farmer, therefore,.ossr)„,,,
itm aeneyrtaininsuch
eau
lsdi trunaitsieo nt .h
eI
pf a
ricetrade
o f thiant caorrtni
eiweiedtrbbrneutnoe,:rui created`
front suffering by this, would prosper by ie---(.„.adoe,c
whilst we should never be subject to the Odra for
.114'
type
by the opposition of one or two countries; foe L.,:night be
awsokrel,di
wv‘h'aotulrdatheeliceonptreonpdoisnfd to 0 LtlP. plYffuesiina foreeerlY art!,
vocated -a
duty of 153. per quarter,
ee to the ow
duced one shilling every year, 'ill it --alj'n coast
tie
where the agricultural interest had a clainbi
beyond that to
any exclusive taxation paid by them
came to tbet
what other classes were liable. when trey
heymust eithe
point they must do one of two things. l'-e- eiee bur'
relieve the agricultural interest from their diemexclusive
ban
dens, which he should much prefer, or C.
wergi
equivalent protecting duty. He believed thatt ti 00'
gentlemen in that house, who formerly ellterita',ll: taiu,ll
trary opinions, now agreed with him ; and I,ie,,,rfirtea'
considered it preferable that the duty shoula '...(nr die
A noble lord, now one ofthe e state .- die .
Secretaries or . ~,,
Home Department, vie- ' 1,6
in 1827 ex ressel similar ' A that '
hoped that his opinion had pnot 'Chaneed. Ot' tail
1 'rlY
couldooysunl i
doe ,
idew:snhmaaonno:vd:ietinriglooefar
would not shrink from statinau' 1 .jui‘
g candidly eiji 0.
opinion in •
t favour of a fixed duty. In the pro topriety
than a sudden and extreme alteration. measure ton of the country, he thought they might, weirtablPdaiii, the
commence at a duty of 10 wheat, an, 5-: „Ito -e i
duce from th • e. on that Ons vi-better
which should be r
at point. He admitted be t
tirogtehtil
iaietel ft,doruelt:iyuutetatiiktoennvv protection,otialedsa,i
lir Paetuats. 110,:afurr(Piceletv'h: er.....„oairprtec.:loinp:::lo4:llhtr,:g:
ii ,
tyb;
oefna.dttesi:
probably lead to great distress. If the landed P , _Ol
they called called 4 4ri
on corn, then corn should be admitted due free.(
mhear.)omen t ProTtie,cisti nv,godutirdti duties esvuhreic hp existed
ought also by degrees to be removed, so the
ell tutbe eat
.7 I,
teeting duties should cease and determine
r'he CetioorYti :,
very reverse of what they
generally ; and the farmers and landed in '_01;01, :o', ~
that so far from their gloomy views being.; take plbad l
Those who entertained these appreliensions„eueenbjeet.
ton ~..
anticipated wyule rteiolf it I'
not taken a very comprehensive view of the
his rofres ~
the house felt any objection to that part le of 6 ,set I•
which would pledge it at first to the
Princitlio rheastbeo
trade in corn, lie would not put it, th"ugh. r, ba,_ in'
they must inevitably come. Some OOP and
Play in
1
of the latter w Deo q epee
tinhaisdeq
uto, thestio n
;fusTlfeade aansd
iithe w
al asn,d.oe dn
cienrtneerdes::er °liclicean;l:
0. :: :
tercet which these (Efferent parties had e he prof') e. i.
ps teerdi t
yo
If, therefore, he took an erreneous yieW 0f,,, these gt„lreet ~
would be to him of the ;yet questiu°lolo
took at least an hones, one.—(Cheers.) "-- d the es deg '
he moved the resolution, to which he entieeteeo
, costa~
Colonelt i
aTil
diO, lidtoßhweEnNt :inn seconded eb:osottinho I,
st,:liddletithi
ee 1 ru,
10°,
iitirii°;t,tio,°*,eiae°,s•
leit).ish.iwii-toeo(hll:::°auevi:tialjeftPry',l,:"-r'pl:Oeteijo-e, ; '
attention of the house. The lion. member
id
eieesa•
tie,
by reading his motion, which we have elre' Y bp il q list
atigoinicusoltuvriat
teilo
reirtl2,, sound argument. Tirat areumen
__°sely peePety
all lyinitoeirne:rt iatihrtereitwWasasoinried,isapne
this, that in a country like England, so en ye)
be e%l-. _IP
with a manufacturing population, it would , ,ion to
„,, ,
il"b ihroadlY' 'the
,augefous to expose the food of that pont,'"
~weraub*
other eirG4
danger in time of war, or under any
distinctlyse nl d

of
befog .
O , Insufficiently provided. That was the only appa-
rently loud argument "urged by the agriculturists. He,
did not believe it valid, nor could be think that the
wiie they
agriculturist's themselves believed it valid, other-
certainly would not take the course which they
ursued. For if they really wished the manufacturing
Population of this country to be independent of foreign
foreign
of food, why did they resist the importation of
eitveign Ildev, and thereby prevent the barley lands of this
ifilitt,,try fron.i being emplove-d in the cultivation of corn ?
i they ready wished that the manufacturing population
Ide
IN be independent of foreign supplies of food, why
did they Object to the free introduction into this country
of Near and molasses, to be used instead of malt, and
lerehy to increase the quantity of land at liberty to be
cultivated for food ') In one breath they declared that
an independent supply of food was necessary tor our ma-
, ufacturing
~ Population, and in the next breath they
ranitnued for those restrictions which occupied the
•.' n the cultivation of those superfluities, and prevented
"afficiant fitiant't f food from being raised in the
"ntrY itself. The for the agricultural interests
artiserted that the hum market was the best market for the
th,'nuf'eturer• He °would turn that argument against
hostagriculturists themselves, and contend, that if the
market was the best market for the manufacturer,
pilei,llo,w_ea,surthe Iltst market for the agriculturist. The
the arit'ie,e er of muslin was enabled by the lightness of
Profi. but ' , to go to a foreign market, and sell it at a
te,.• ' the great bulk of the produce of the
_ague' ulh.
•'st Prevented him from going to a foreign market with
a, 'hnilar object and expectation. If, therefore, it was
ti'arart.lie interest of the manufacturer to have a domesticieei.
t,,i,kteti it was still more for the interest. of the
agrf
the
wotici to have a domestic market. This history of
r..
ni i indeed, proved that there never was a rich g i
:Ic-.taral country which did not owe its wealth to the
111:teesa,..7.ecti.n it of great manufacturing towns. Now, if
511 tam lans on importation of food were abolished,. and
vvlliehleson the raw material repelied, the great increase
triet that would occision in the manufacturing die-
d and h in the whole
clearly b y consequence markets,. would
interest e of the utmost benefit to the agricultural
t 4 ay , bY augmentieg the j.otnestic
other and, if
tilluediestrietions on the importation of food were con.
levipd and the taxes on the raw material were still
delve• -''' the effectwouldbe to lower profit and wages, to
the
and thereby to
dep,i, manufacturer into other countries, .
• tie f e tbe agriculturist of the benefit of his presence in
the 'c'ern„e market. Let the house consider what. would be.
ntrefa'fi,,—; uPen the rent of land in this country if the ma
Milet-:;ng Po ul t' n were doubled. Let them consider
recttUf•"4ll beP`he increase of the rent of houses, of the
th -' building ground, of the rent of garden ground,ho
deeer,p4tti °_f pleasure ground, and of ground of ever.y other
nflhe 2", lle sincerely believed that if such an increase
Ivsto'mufacturin population were to take place it
the," dcuble the rentalg of the kingdom. If, therefore,
.
erernsPerity of the manufacturer would produce this. in.
theisl'e,, el the domestic market for the agriculturist, let
Peri,,:eet that it was in vain to expect that that pros-
tio,' would be chet jibed by the continuance of restric.-
coasird monopoly. Again, let him entreat the house to
of I 01 what would be the effect on the value and ren
, and f. .
',Q,j,, 1 some dyastrous event shou'd cause a great
sippoetnpn of the manufacturing population. Let if d
ttict,,
.ted that the country should require a tenth less oo h.fdi
01tf r‘rire,,l, at present; let
.it be supposed. that a
toy
..," manufacturing population were to fall into de-
er,,,e Lne agriculture of the country would then supply ea
sa, !quantity of food than was necessary for the con-
helti°,ll of the country ; and England would then become
Wh,t
thenad formerly been, a corn exporting country.
gage,' , Would be the value of rents, the value of mort-
lree,n; anf the value of estate's ? England would then
ing h:,,hat Poland now was, and instead of even becom-
'lvy 1,,,'"' in the market, it would, of necessity, become
li lelueii lowere 1. Yet this was the danger to which the
io: t: Proprietors LOW exposed themselves by endeavour-
b°
matt )„bn!'ter Up the present system. The commercial
s
Fitt, 1":4' the manufacturer, might fly to other countries
44Vey 1,1 capital, but the landlord iinti.t remain at home
Maned,.. ''''' desulaion which his own conduct had.occa- ,
tlie in ite maintained, therefore, that it was evidently ,
q il,'erest c
o I the. landlords themselves to abandon
.the
witl;ing sYstein. 11, had hitherto argued the question
effect 4fe.rence to the landlords ; with reference to the
rtlin,,,whinthert,hset,doefeision upon it must have on the Per-
the I
.i.nt' agriculture. But he would now ask
ininienV geinlemen if they conceived it possible that the
tulet,te t;'ne'ses of our manufacturing population would
bee, de 'e continuance of the existing system ? It had
of
f,
jeMonstrated over and over agiin, that as the price
ii1ini,,,,1.. nerleased, the amount of profit and wages di-
tion
()Ili. dan Vas. it to be suppost d, that t he large populti.,-
feet diitinetlint'tlllgeat manutacturing town, having
.this
taral interest t'eb,f°re tbeir eyes, would allow the agricul-
-110 would tell t° go on lowering profit and wages.?
there to d' • them that th,-., towns would not permit
14111:airtutgeneratitli7.n lie
would advise them to he wise in
, , and agree to some safe and wholesome
it possible wnich might evert such an extremity. How was
thir me that the landed proprietors could stand upon
pre,,_Pr.esent grounds ? Vas there one among
nttetn:
turfs to to ni:-01 the argument, that the great m t
by
an g Interts:s of the country ought to tae unshackled 1.
iNYeir,e4trictiun upon the supply of their food ? However.
• t„,:g"l' however versed in science, however highly
geo'f,,Weri_rt 'genius, he defied any one of them to deny the
na,lt, 'e of the proposition. which he had jest stated,
of 'Y, that as the price of food diminished, the amount
of 14°4 and wages increased. While the demonstration
int,.th't fact remained unshaken, be challenged any one
1 ,N9t,(l
s„ , in apiculture, either in that house, in the other
I'4
' (), Parliament, or in the country, to show that the
ttl'i'trieti°r,s on the importation of food ought not to be
at',...tintied. If they could not do this, how could they
t,,i'Mpt to persevere in the present system ? Did they
alie'lk that the intelligent people of England would long
t 'N them to do so ? Vainly would they endeavour to
tuti'l.titiue it against the irresistible progress of. knowledge,
h 0"... against the omnipotence of truth. He hoped the
toil', Inoettibers for Ireland would be ready to support the,
li4tL ~..,olition of the corn laws.—(No, no.) No, no .
ple:,11,
1,,e• member acted consistently with his own prin7
1 , h. II e •
would do so.—(No, no.) Yes, yes !—(A
hhish ~/ He would show the hon. member why. The
105(11 "'Me ,t present complained loudly, and not more
Y tle", •
tiodqubt Justly, of the great evil of absenteeism, and
If
~,,,edlY One great cause of the poverty of Ireland was
If 110,164ei Proportion of rent drawn from it by absentees.
n,°antt ' e°lo were let into Ireland, the rents of that
iusda Z Would fall, and a greater number of Irish land-
theorniclulti remain at home to help the people. Food
blftig ileaper, labour would become cheaper. Ma-
lieing 0 es WoUld be established, and their produce, there
•IY • oZP"r rates, and labour abundant, would eventu.-
4'41: an, ?oii,: the rent of land. But putting all this
tuait:ti,,(•'),Mog to the real question, was it possible to
was I,'n t", Present corn laws ? He contended that it
144 thu'bie• If his lion, friend opposite could nit
ef tie 't wages and food would not fall in coasequence
i4tellig 4obteliti°4 of the corn laws, his enlightened and
t't ;e--- nand must admit that their continuance was
t1i,,,, 'lrable• Never, iii the history of the world, was
'net,t: THIrY so blessed as England with all the ele-
,\v,4% the 0,,• • Pr'Verity. One of its principal advantages
‘"
1, r't "al, more valuable than gold, spread all over
ttilusteent'iln,:uf,teWtulehr:lTanin,edstirnable gift of Nature, ail that
was cheap corn. Let them
with th t'
00d " foteigner would be able to compete
no lunc,eln• Let them have that, and goods would be
Aianehber manufactured more cheaply in Saxony than at
'01,1,d 'r. It was the high price of food which alone
thq , • "•°41i,1, manufacturers of the advantages which
toe :I°'l,l thjoy if food were cheap. It was said by
h
eveut o'f't
then Would not fall much in this country in
nott e
;e1,,t,,... . repeal of the corn laws. He cared
it
171)01,1
r., it (lid or not-. If it did not fall in England, .
t"ler v,,:e, iCo ti,! Continent and the English mi.inufii.c-
khiqita )4''
11)
Linger be in' the state of comparative dis-
to fund," 'o which he was at present placed with respect
rebulti, wi'de he would te
chconnue to enjoy all the bene ts
therefotge fioni plentiful and eap fuel. He repeated,
prov,iit,, that there could he no possible limit to the
tor„) of Enamd, if they would only open the ports
Int o'?" eon:, 1-;• • corn imported
f ° '''' co . ''',l y quarter of foreign
°- English'untry, would be paid for with some article
our trail manufacture. Our trade with Russia—
of ti,,,
1.," with Ainerica—our trade with all other parts
ii, ~,d,,7rbli would b.come snore and more extensive. Lei
pprptulatia,tit;tinawtioutlei
50`1 lin.' 1, eye
ch"P food and the untaxed raw material,
ould s,t no bound to the glorious pros-
°Pen before us. Our manufacturine
atit"tion ''o7°,l4'd go on a rapidly increasing as the con
in twenty:ev"l7'44 U4tt"les
U+ 1t d state' Years. •il, Woplel permit, and be doubled
,oause
ig or h was it that the people of the
as the America were in so happy a condition ?
of the count P°Pulation increased it spread over the face
W4S it that tri3lc: having abundant food for its supply.. Why
4ti ewalition 0 having
of this country were not in as baPP)
)eY Were II the People of the United States? Because
whio, eset hy restrictions on the supply of food,
ti , " Prevented lahour from receiving its due reward. Let,
",*e re' tritttetia, . ions be removed; let the taxes on the ran
c 5,,,,, :,. be removed, and the results would be, high
ge'et'atnilignh Pofi's, a rapid increase of population, and a
Le sp._ Provernent throughout the country ; greater,
was persuaded than his imagination could conceive,

and greater, therefore, than he could attempt to describet
What the house might determine to do be knew not. Ar
all events the landed proprietors of England were on theie
trial. Unless they c .uld show to demonstration that tber
was some inherent f.ilacy in that which the philosophy
of the present day had declared to be incontrovertible, the
public judgment would declare against them. They
must show that dear fond was compatible with high
wages, and high prices, and that cheap food slid not
contribute to either. They must prove what in fact was
a physical impossibility. He repeated that the landed
interest was on .its trial. Argument alone could serve
their cause. Declamation would not do.—(Hear, hear.)
The hon. member for Essex, who cheered so loudly, must
show that, by continuing the d. ar price of corn, they
did not decrease the value of labour and manufactures; or
that, by diminishing the price of corn, they would not
increase the value of labour and manufactures. If the
hon. member for Essex, or any other hon. member, would
show him that, he would vote against the motion he had
just seconded.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM observed that the gallant
officer who bad just spoken had stated that the landed
interest were on their trial. He (Sir James Graham)
was so satisfied of the strength of their case, that he had
not the slightest apprehension of the issue of that trial.—
(Hear, bear, hear.) He was prepared to maintain that
the continuance of the corn laws was advantageous to all
the interests of the country. Before proceeding any fur-
ther, he would observe that there were two or three parts
of the speech of his bon. friend the member for Middlesex
in which he entirely agreed. In the first place, he con-
tended, as his hon. friend had contended, that in coining
to a determination upon this subject the house was bound
to consider what would be beneficial to the interests of the
whole community. For he should never have taken the
view of the question which he did take, if he were not
pet feed), satisfied that to concur in maintaining the conti-
nuance of the corn laws, was to do that most calculated
to promote the interests of the community at large.
His honourable friend had also said that he had
nu personal interest in the question. He (Sir James
Graham) could not go quite so far as his honourable
friend on that point; for candour compelled him to allow
that all his interests were connected with the land. But
at the same time, he must observe that he had the honour
to represent a county which contained not only valuable
agricultural, but valuable manufacturing interests; and
he was perfectly satisfied that the opinion which be was
about to express that night was the opinion of an over-
whelming majority of his constituents. His hon. friend
had also admitted that it was exceedingly difficult to draw
a line between the interests of the agricultural and the
interests of the manufacturing body. Nothing could be
more true. It was not a truth, however, which lay on
the surface of the subject. But although in the first blush
there might seem to be a variance between the interests of
the landed proprietor and the interests of the manufac-
turer, yet upon further investigation it would prove to be
so impossible to draw a line of separation between them,
it would appear that they were so inseparably blended
together, that it would be impracticable to give a death-
blow to the landed interest, consistently with any attention
to the prosperity of the manufacturing interest. He
cordially agreed with his hon. friend in wishing that the
question should be settled. But then, in the course of
his speech, his bon. friend asserted that it was impossible
to settle it in any way but one, namely, giving up the
corn laws. To give up the corn laws was inconsistent
with the preservation of the landed aristocracy.—( Hear,
bear.) But even if that were considered of no importance,
he was prepared to contend that the destruction of the
farmers, and the annihilation of the occupation of an im-
mense body of agricultural labourers, must inevitably fol-
low. His hon. friend had dwelt on the great inconve-
nience and evil of perpetual change on this subject. His
remedy for that inconvenience and evil was a singular
one. What was the course which hia hon. friend recom-
mended ? To obviate the evil and inconvenience of
change, his hon. friend proposed a succession of changes.
His hon. friend did not propose one change once for all.
He did not propose either to establish a fix, d duty, or to
permit a free trade in corn, but he proposed precisely that
which he had before condemned. He proposed a reduction
of duty by a scale of shillings, until at last the duty should
be altogether extinguished. The difference between the
plan proposed by his hon. friend and the immediate abo-
lition of the corn laws, was the difference between a
lingering dissolution and sudden death. If he must die,
he (Sir James Graham) should prefer to die at once, and
in the face of the day. His hon. friend had said that a
perfect freedom in the trade of corn would cause a great
increase in population ; and yet, almost in the same sen-
tence, had pointed to the surplus population as an evil.—
(Mr. Hume, we believe, expressed his dissent to this
statement.) If the increase of population was not an evil
—if the increase of population was good, it must be re-
collected that that increase had been co-existent with the
corn laws. It was a remarkable fact, that the charge
against the corn laws, of being injurious to the manufac-
turing interest, was brought forward at a time when the
manufacturing population of the country was, in full em-
ployment; and when the only part of the population
unemployed—willing to work, but unable to obtain work
to do—was the agricultural. But his hon. friend bad not
treated the subject merely as a British question ; be had
treated it as a European question. What was the object
which his hon. friend proposed? Tullis (Sir James Gra-
ham's) great astonishment, not to lower the price of
bread iu England. His hon. friend repudiated the vulgar
doctrine, that cheap bread in England alone would be he-
, neficial, but spoke of the advantage of equalizing the price of
bread throughout Europe. The landed interest of Eng-
I land, threfore,was to be sacrificed—not for an English ob-
ject, but to produce an effect on the price of corn in
Europe. His hon. friend was prepared to drag us
through the greatest dangers—not for an English object,
but to effect a large scheme of European policy ; everything
in England remaining the same. In the first place, he would
not admit that Lis hon. friend's views of European policy
were sound ; but even if they were so, he thought it would
be much better to keep England as it was, and, throwing
aside all considerations of European policy, treat this as
a British question only. His hon. friend had observed,
that during the last six years the protecting duty had
averaged only six shillings and eight pence a quarter, and
bad added, that if his proposition were acquiesced in, the
duty would be higher, and the levenue would gain. That
would be a very good argument if the subject under con.
sideration was fiscal regulations ; but they were deliberat-
ing what was the best mode of protecting corn ;
they were deliberating whether for that purpose his hon.
friend's proposition was beneficial.—(Hear, hear.) It was
very extraordinary that bath Lis hon. friend and the
gallant member who seconded his hon. friend's motion ap-
peared as the friends of the agricultural interest. They
talked of the proposed change not only as the best course
that could be pursued for the interests of agriculture, but
as indispensable for the preservation of those interests.
They declared that the adoption of their recommendation
was all that the case of the agriculturists required. Now,
with whatever stigma the philosophy of the present day
might think proper to mark the understandings of the
agticultural interest, he certainly thought they might be
allowed to judo for themselves on this subject; and un-
doubtedly they would not depute either his hon. friend or
the gallant member to speak for them. The value of al
products most undoubtedly depended on the state and con-
dition of the labouring classes. If they were not content—
if their condition was not a happy one—if employment
was not plentiful and regular, be admitted there was no
safety for the agricultural interest; and where this safety
did not exist, there could be no security for the other
branches of national industry. He could assure the
house that he, as a I aided proprietor, would not advocate
any restriction on the importation of corn—or any pro-
tection to the landed interest; he would not advocate
any measure whatever in behalf of a particular interest,
if be were not conscientiously satisfied that by so doing he
was protecting or advancing the interests of all.—(War,
hear.) One of the first points urged on time house by the
hon. member for Middlesex was, that if they ceased to
glow corn to the extent which they then did, the land
would be converted to other and equally profitable pur-
poses, and would produce the same amount of rent as
before; but it so happened that the experience of former
years proved to the contrary. Besides, the hon. gentle•
man made no provision for those who would be thrown
out of employment; that important point was not,taken
into his calculation. The lion. and gallant cfficer, the
member for Bolton, who seconded the motion, had stated
that the question had been always argued in that house
specially, and that hon. members always regarded a secret
interest under the garb of protecting the interest of the
entire community. Now, it was an established fact, that
no country in Europe, from the most wealthy to tha very
000resi, consumed anything like the same quantity of
Wheat as the inhabitants of the United Kingdom. There_
' fore, in his (Sir James Graham's) opinion, it was of the
very highest importance, nay, it was absolutely necessary
to our safety, that our supply of wheat should be constant
and _abundant, so abundant as to leave out time possibility
of scarcity, so constant as not to put it in the power of a
, foreign country to injure or annoy us.—( Hear, hear.)
Ott this subject lie should quote an authority, which the
gallant officer himself would admit to be a high one—an
authority, indeed, which was indisputable, one to whom
economists ever bowed—the Coryphreue of the science—
, whose opinions were the corner-stone of it, and whose
~ memory would ever be held in the highest possible respect

so long as talent was valued in that house. It did so
happen that be was about to quote the opinions of a man
who was generally looked upon as one not very friendly to
the lauded intrest—be meant the lamented Mr. Huskis,on.
—(Hear, hear.) That right hon. gentleman had stated
in a pamphlet—
" The history of the country for the last one hundred and
seventy years clearly proves, on the one hand, that cheapness
produced by foreign import is, the sure forerunner of scarcity;
and on the other, that a steady home supply is the only safe
foundation of steady and moderate prices. During upwards
of one hundred years, up to the year 1765, the import of foreign
corn was restrained by very high duties. What was the state
of the country during those one hundred years ? That in ordi.
nary seasons our own growth supplied a stock of corn fully
ample for our consumption ;—that in abundant seasons wehad
some to spare, which we exported ;—that in bad seasons we
felt no want, and were under no apprehension ;—that the price
cf corn seldom varied more than a few shillings per quarter,—
that we had no years of inordinate gain to the farmer, and of
starvation to the consumer ;—that prices, instead of rising
from year to year, were gradually diminishing, so that at the
end of this long period of a century, during which we never
imported foreign corn, they were actually one-fifth lower than
at the beginning of it. Would to God that we had continued
this salutary system But in 1765 it was most unfortunately
abandoned. What has been the result ? Precisely the reverse
of the former system. Instead of a steady supply, aftbrded at
steady and moderate prices, we have witnessed frequent and
alarming scarcities. Every year our dependence on foreign
supply was increasing, till the war came, and, by interrupting
that supply, greatly aggravated all our evils, for a country which
depends on enemies of rivals for the food of its people is never
safe in war. In the first eighteen years of this war, we were
forced to pay sixty millions of.money (to nations, every one of
whom has, in the course of it, been an enemy) for a scanty and
inadequate supply of foreign corn ; and when for this purpose
we had parted with all our gold, and even our silver currency,
combined Europe shut its ports against us, and America co.
operating, first laid an embargo, and then went to war."
Now what did he say further on this subject?—

" In peace, the habitual dependence on foreign supply is
dangerous. We place the subsistence of our own population,
not only at the mercy of foreign powers, but also on their be-
ing able to spare as much corn as we may want to buy. Sup-
pose, as it frequently happens, the harvest in the same year to
be a short one, not only in this country, but in the foreign
countries from which we are fed—what follows? The ha..
bitually exporting country, France for instance, stops the ex-
port of its corn, and feeds its people without any great pressure.
The habitually importing country, England, which even in a
good season has hitherto depended on the aid of foreign corn,
deprived of that aid in a year of scarcity, is driven to distress
bordering upon famine. There is, therefore, no effectual se-
curity, either in peace or war, against the frequent return of
scarcity, approaching to starvation, such as of late years we
have frequently experienced, but in our maintaining ourselves
habitually, independent of foreign supply. Let the bread we
eat be the produce of corn grown among ourselves, and I for
one care not how cheap it is ; the cheaper the better. It is
cheap now, and I rejoice at it, because it is altogether owing to
a sufficiency of corn of our own growth. But in order to insure
a continuance of that cheapness, and that sufficiency, we must
insure to our own growers that protection against foreign
import which has produced these blessings, and by which alone
they can be permanently maintained." _ _

This was in 1815, the period when the heavy restric-
tive duties were imposed.
Mr. HUME—Did he not change his opinions 2—(Yes,
and No, no.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—When?
Mr. HUME—Why, in 1821.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—Change his opinion ?
Mr. HUME—To be sure he did.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM—Then I join issue with the
bon. member. He (Sir James Graham) held in his hand
the report on agriculture, drawn up in 1821, and from it
he could certainly draw no such conclusion as that Mr.
Huskisson had changed his opinions. Let the home re-
mark that he was now about to quote from a report which
was drawn up by the lamented gentleman himself. Now
what were the remarks : did they show any departure
from the general principles I mid down ? The report said,
" Your committee are not insensible to the importance of
securing the country from a state of dependence upon
other, and possibly hostile, countries, for the subsistence
of its population."—(Hear, hear.) The terms were almost
the same, and, if they were not, he could assure the house
he would not for the of obtaining an advantage in
debate, have quoted one word) if he thought that, by so
doing, he exposed the memory of that great statesman to
the slightest taunt. The measure which then regulated
the corn trade of the country, and which the hon. gentle-
man found such fault with, was the measure of Mr.
Huskisson.

Mr. HUAIE—No, no.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—WeII, be would appeal to the
right hon. gentleman's colleagues—to hon. members right
and left—whether it was not a measure which he particu-
larly favoured : whether the duty, as it now stood, was not
his own suggestion ; or, More correctly speaking, whether
the scale of varying duties was not suggested by him, in
direct contradistinction to a fixed scale, on the ground that
a fixed scale was highly dangerous and wholly inapplicable
when the landed interest most required protection—the
season when the crops might happen to fail. In his judg-
tnent, the great excellence of the present law was, that as
the price rose the duty declined, thus giving both relief to
the consumer and protection to the agriculturist. The next
was,
tploieinntotsotrwumhicphrele sicr(ibSei
dr Jamesby the
hon. Graham) should a r
Al
dddel
esex,
the ultimate effect of which would be an absolute free
trade in corn. It was a hardship that, in debating im.
portant matters, terms were thoughtlessly, and sometimes
flippantly, used, which ought never to have been used at
all ; and he should contend, that, as the hon. gentleman
applied the words " free trade," they could have no mean•
ing ; such a thing as " free" trade did not exist. 3.1 r.
Huskisson himself never contemplated such a state of
things ; be never made any attempt at 4‘ free" trade ;
he never applied the term " free" trade to his measures,
but spoke of them as they really were—a substitution of
protecting for prohibitory duties. What course did Mr.
Huskisson take with respect to the silk trade ? Did he
make, or attempt to make, what was called a "free" trade
in silk ? He laid a duty of 25 per cent., or rather the
minimum was 25 per cent, on silk, which as far as certain
goods—gauzes, he believed, were concerned—was after-
wards raised, and was at the present time little below 40
or 50 per cent. Now, this was what was called free
trade. And what were the grounds on which Mr. Hue •
kisson defended the imposition of these duties ? Expressly
that as our manufactures were burdened by taxation, a
protection as against France was not merely advisable, but
absolutely necessary. Now be (Sir James Graham) would
show, that in addition to the general, there were also
special burdens pressing on agriculture, which required
that land should have a similar protection. Then as to
the argument of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hume) that the
existing corn law, compared with that of 1815, was in-
comp itible with the commercial prosperity of the country,
he would show that a greater fallacy could not be enter-
taimd. He desired the particular attention of the house
to this, as he did not wish to be misunderstood, and his
argument was very capable of misrepresentation. He
would show, that under the present law there had been
a considerable increase of exports to those countries which
were the chief corn-growing countries, such as Russia,
Denmark, Prussia, Germany, the Netherlands, the British
North American colonies, and the United States of Ame-
rica. The whole exports to those countries (and be in-
cluded all articles of whatever kind) in the year 1823,
amounted to 27,472,0001. official value, and in 1832,
35,216,0001., being an increase of one-sixth during the
period that the present corn law had been in existence.
But perhaps it would be fair to state the British and Irish
exports only, and the hon. gentleman might have the de-
cla-ed or official value, or bath, just as he liked.
Mr. HUME—The official.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM—Very well; the official. In
1828, the official value of exports of British and Irish
produce was 21,275,0001.; in 1832, the value rose to
28,031,0001.: showing an increase of three millions,
during the time that these decried laws had been in opera-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he really thought that the
bon. member for Middlesex had understated the case
which might be made out on behalf of the landed interest;
for the hon. gentleman actually asserted, that he knew
of no tax which bore directly on the land. The hon.
gentleman had wholly—he had entirely overlooked one
little tax, called the " land" tax—(Cheers)--which at
the present time amounted to not less than two
—(Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman 'had expressed a
doubt, too, on the subject of tithe—whether or not it bore
exclusively on the land. Wishing t resolve the doubts
the hon. gentleman, he would b'g leave to quote an
authority of some considerable standing on the subject.
Mr. Ricardo said thus :
"The growers of corn are subject to some of these peculiar
taxes, such as tithes, a portion of the poors' rate, and perhaps,
one or two other taxes, all of which tend to raise the price of
corn, and other raw produce equal to these peculiar burdens.
in the degree then in which these taxes raise the price of corn,
a duty should be imposed on its importation. If from this
cause it be raised ten shillings per quarter, a duty of ten shil-
lings should be imposed on the importation of foreign corn, and
a drawback of the same amount should be allowed on the ex.
portation of corn. By means of this duty and this drawback,
the trade would be placed on the same footing as if it had
never been taxed, and we should be quite sure that capital
would neither be injuriously for the interests of the country
attracted towards, nor repelled from it. The greatest benefit
results to a country when its government forbears to give en-
couragement, or oppose obstacles in the way of any disposition
of capital which the proprietor may think most advantageous to
him. By imposing tithes, &c., on the farmer exclusively, no
obstacle would be opposed to him, if there were no foreign

ompetition, because he would be able to raise the price of his
produce, and if he could not do so, he would quit a trade which
no longer afforded him the usual and 'Ordinary profits of all
other trades. But if importation was allowed, an undue en-
couragement would be given to the importation of foreign corn,
unless the foreign commodity were subject to the same duty,
equal to tithes or any other exclusive tax, as that imposed on
the home-grower."

The lion, gentleman Rarely could not be doubtful now
on the subject of tithes, or assert that land was not
subject to direct burdens. There was tithe to pay—
there was the land tax, simply two millions—the malt
i!uty, no very trifling impost—(Cheers)—county rates,
which, in fact, put the landed,proprietors in the place
f public prosecutor—(Loud cheers)—these were the
burdens resting solely on the land.—(Hear, hear.) But
he would only refer to tithe an 1 poor ri,e, of the amount
of which he happened to have an estimate, which had
ben given him in some degree as an award by the Icgis,
latnre, and which set these burdens down at three and
thirty per cent. on the amount of rental—
Mr. HUME—Three and thirty on the rental ?
. Sir JAMES GRAHAM repeated, the amount was
three and thirty, and as the hon. gentleman seemed to be
taken by surprise, he would call his attention to the time
and circumstance when the award, as he termed it, had
been male. At the time that the property tax was im-
posed, Is. 6d. in the pound was charged as the farmer's
share. Scotland remonstrated against this, on the ground
that tithe and poor rate were both computed in their rent,
which was not the case in England, and the consequence
was, that after a fair consideration of the question, the
tat was reduced to Is. in the pound far her farmers, and
maintained at Is. 6,1. for ours. Therefore. as lie before
stated, the legislature had decided the amount of tithe and
poor rate at 33 per cent. on rental. Now the hon. gen-
tleman seemed to entertain considerable hopes of relief
from a commutation of tithe and an amendment of the
poor law system—but he should recollect that the commu-
tation would still leave a charge on the land, and so would
the poor law, however shaped.—(Hear,. hear.) The
hon. member for Midllesex had stated that his motion for
a " fixed" duty was only a step towards an entirely free
trade in call. Now, in a journal of considerable talent,
and still greater influence—which, by the way, was fre-
quently supposed to speak the sentiments of the party to
which the him. gentleman belonged—a " fixed" duty on
corn was thus spoken of. The language, he must pre-
mise, was much stronger than he would have dared to
use, and was as follows :—" As to a fixed' duty, it is
neither more nor less than a fixed evil—a fixed discou-
ragement of manufactures—a fixed robbery of the consumer
by the producer—a fixed imunty upon foreign industry, to
the detriment of British—a fixed aggravation of the burden
of the 'poor laws.'4 " Now the hon. member far Middle-
sex had overlooked the remaikible fact, that the substi-
tution of a free trade in corn did not produce the effect of
levering prices. It was only a few nights ago the hon.
gentleman had stated that the effect of a free importation
would be a rise in the price of corn.
Mr. HUME—No, no.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM—It did so happen, however,
and it was a remarkable coincidence, that the effect for a
series of years of a free trade in corn was to raise the price
of that coinmodity.—(Cheers.)
Mr. HUME—Aye ; but not in this country.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—In this country.—[The
right honourable baronet here read a statement in proof
of his assertion, but in too indistinct a tone, and too much
across the table, for us to catch two consecutive figures.]
Now there was another point, that while it was yet fresh
in his memory, he would just touch upon. While hon.
gentlemen argued on the vast importance of the foreign,
they seemed wholly to undervalue the great conse-
quence of the home demand. Yes, indeed, they should
take into account the home demand ; and one of the first
effects of the hon. member for Middlesex's motion, if
carried, would be to throw a large number of the agricul-
tural labourers out of employment; they would then
cease to be consumers.; cease to be dealers with the petty
shopkeepers : the call, in consequence, for manufactured
goods would be lessened, the manufacturers themselves
could not so extensively purchase the raw material. Fo-
reign trade, it was true, would he increased at the ex-
pense of the manufacturers of Britain. He (Sir James
Graham) did not desire to be considered es anxious to
undervalue foreign trade, but one limit ought to be put to
it, the limit of their own industry.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
That was the only statesmanlike way in which to view it.
The foreigner should only be encouraged when native
exertion was dormant—importations ought not to super-
sede the produce of home labour.—(Hear, hear.) He
opposed the motion of the hon. member for Middlesex on
that ground—on that ground he would nut fear to take
up his, position of defence.—(Hear, hear.) An hon.
member had strongly appealed to the Irish representatives.
He (Sir J. Graham) would also make a like appeal.—
(Hear.) He rejoiced that the market for Irish corn was
open in England. Ile would be glad to find the returns
from that country even greater than they were at present.
The prosperity of Ireland was of the utmost importance to
the empire in general ; and it was only by encouragement,
and giving it the benefit of our great consumption, that
that union, which be wished to see perpetual, could be
preserved.—.(Hear, bear.) Look at the price of wheat
in Ireland for the last two years, and then would the house
desire, in the present state of that country, that it should
be further reduced ? The priCe of wheat in Ireland at
present was from 365. to 38s. per quarter. He held in
his hands returns prepared by the right hon. the Secretary
for Ireland. Their accuracy was undoubted—their details
of the first moment. They gave the prices of wheat for
the last twenty-two years, in the provinces of Leinster,
Munster, and Connaught, and they ought to be duly
weighed and consideree. The average price of wheat in
1833 was 41s. 6d. ; Barley, 20s. '7(l. ; and oats 12s. 6d.
the English quarter. In the present year wheat was only
375. 41.--(Hear, hear.) Without taking the European
view of the question which the lion. member for Middle-
sex had done, he would maintain, that the interest of our
colonies ought to be considered. They were vents for our
superabundant population. In them English, Scotch, and
Irish enterprise found a wide field for its display. It was
employed and fostered, and we were bound in return to
take from them the produce of their industry.—(Hear,
hear.) The question had been well and briefly stated.
It so far was in a nutshell.---(Hear, hear.) Would they
prefer Europe to Ireland and their North American colo-
nies The present average prices the hon. member for
Middlesex had declared, were most injurious to the manu-
facturing interests. How would lie be borne out when
his statements should be tested by facts ? If estimated by
the then standard value of money, the average prices
would be found not to have much varied within the last
century. Fifty shillings was the average in 1792, when
the standard of William the Third was renewed, and the
then average was 48s. 11d., a shilling less than at that
period.—(Cheers.) The averages had not increased, and
the hon. member's complaints would not find support by
their minute and particular investigation. Under the
existing law, care was taken to provide for a supply in
times of scarcity ; then foreign corn was admitted under
a graduated scale of duty. The system was found to
work well, and to answer the exigency of such times.
The opening of the ports was permitted when the state of
the country required it. These facts were better than
theory ; they could be direc•eil by the voice of experience;
they ought rant to be led away by projects, that he was
convinced, if adopted, would be ruinous at once to a great
and influential interest. The committee, of which he had
the honour to be a member, were most desirous to come
to some fixed settlement ; they intimated there should be
something like a final arrangement, and, under existing
circumstances, he considered the house should pause be-
fore it pro9eded to disturb and dislocate the existing
system. They were a deliberative assembly ; they ought
to weigh well—to mark—te observe—before they passed
the threshold and embarked upon the great and turpid
sea of change—(Hear, hear)—a sea on which their
fairest and brightest hopes might be wrecked.—(Efear,
hear.) As the organ of the committee, he was celled
upon to state, that steadiness of purpose was in their
minds a point to be carefully considered. To descant
upon the existing law, it was necessary to refer to their
report; and, first, as to the ',edition in price. The
variation between 1792 to 1800 was 220 per cent. From
1817 to 1821, 9a. 3d. per quarter. In 1815 the price
was '74s. to 755. fid. per quarter ; and the variation 143
to 82 per cent. The current variation was 74 per cent.
for the last five years. From 1822 to 1826 it was 82
per cent. ; and for the last four years 61 per cent. ; 49
per cent. being the principal variation. This he could
prove to ain ithematical demonstration. The market of
Rotterdam—the best regulated market that he knew--
should not be forgotten on the present occa-ion. Its then
state should be considered. Its variations were 91 per
cent.—(Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Middlesex
would proceed to say, that the corn market was at the
moment disturbed ; bat what would be the extent of its
disturbance if dependent on the fluctuations of a foreign
supply? The present was said to be the landlord's ques-
tion ; he denounced so confined and narrow a v:ew of
it ; it was the labaurer's as well as the landlord's ques-
tion. Ile need scarcely refer to the report of the cern-
inittee—a ponderous volume then before him—to substan-
tiate his statement; but lie could not avoid referring to
the evidence of Mr. Oliver—(Hear)—a most intelligent

• Sir James Graham did not finish the sentence, which the
Reporter considers it his duty to give—" a fixed monopoly of
subsistence against the hungry multitude."

witness, who was examined at considerable. length. He
Ives asked whether the rent of land and the prices of
'eon, as they then stood, did not make the question a
landlord's one? He replied he tho►►ght they did. He was
closely pressed, and ratter abated in the direct tendency
of his answer. He respired to he re examined, and said
he had maturely considered, and was of the firm and de-
cided opinion that the labourers were as much interested
in the question as the landlords.—(Hear, hear.) He
stated, that if 3,000,000 quarters of corn were imported
into the country, the number of labourers who would be
thrown out of employment must of course depend upon
the number of acres of land necessary to produce so much
marketable corn, and the inutility of the land so thrown
out of culture. In a former part of his evidence he
stated, that 12 bushels for each acre producing corn was
required for seed and feeding of farm-horses, and, conse-
quently, the marketable corn was the excess of the gross
produce over 12 bushels per acre. If, then, it were sup-
posed that land producing 18 bushels per acre would he
thrown out of cultivation, it followed that the extent
would be one acre for each six bushels of the quantity
assumed to be imported, which would give in round num-
bers 4,000,000 of acres. If the average produce of the
whole land be taken at 36, and that of the portion likely
to be thrown out by the supposed importation, it would
have no room to doubt the correctness of his calculations.
Assuming, then, that the land to be thrown out of culti-
vation in the case put, be equal to the production of 24
bushels per acre, the extent thrown out would be
2,000,000 of acres ; and if the gross consumption of the
empire, or the gross produce, at the usual esitnate of
50,000,000, be divided by 36, the estimated average
number of bushels produced. per acre, it would give
18,000,000 acres as the land annually producing corn_
The quantity of land thus rendered unsusceptible of cul-
ture by the annual importation of 3,000,000 quarters,
would be 2,000,000, or about one-ninth part of the land
now under corn crops, and according to the proportion of
the population dependant on agriculture, as ascertained by
the last census, it followed that between 900,000 and
1,000,000 of individuals would be deprived of their pre-
sent means of subsistence, of whom about one-fourth part,
or say from 200,000 to 250,000, might be considered
labourers.—(Cheere.) After that statement, he (S:r
James-Graham) would confidently ask the house, was
that a landlord's question which he advocated ?—(Hear.)
He was strongly persuaded that the motion, if carried,
would ruin the agricultural interest ; and could one trade,
he would ask, be henefitted by the absorption of another?
The hon. member for Oldham was a great authority on
rural subjects. In fact, no individual knew more of the
,gricultural population of the country. He had mixed
with them; he had studied their wants; he had narrated
their wishes; he knew for what sort of labour they were
fi, ; and he should call upon him to be the judge between
him (Sir James Graham) and the political economists.—
( Hear, bear, and laughter.) Would it not be tl►e grossest
absurdity to send an agricultural:labourer to spin—(Hear,
hear)—to manipulate cotton—to steep his bands, his
hardy hands, in vessels filled with colouring compositions?
—(A laugh.) Did they want them to depart foom the in-
struction of their youth—the practice of their age? Second
nature was often stronger than nature itself. If these
new plans were carried into execution, nature would tebel,
and their enactments would be set at nought.—(Hear,
hear.) He felt he bad trespassed too long on the indul-
gence of the house.—(No, no.) He could not, however,
avoid glancing at another subject. He alluded to depriving
artisans of the chance of employment who were now out
of work, by the introduction of a new portion of appli-
cants. If artisans were employed they would justly enjoy
a command over the necessaries of life, that they could
not then do. Was that class to be neglected ?—(Hear,
hear.) Against the argument of the necessity of a resto-
ration to the former standard value of money, he was
bound in candour to dissent, and to say that such a re-
eurrence would depreciate and injure trade.—(Hear.)
The hon. mover had spoken of the cost of provisions at
the present time. He would carry the hon. gentleman's
attention to some statements which he then held in
his hands, and which would be found to furnish the
fullest refutation of the positions he had advanced.
—(Hear.) In the time of war there was necessarily a
great demand, and an interview was sought, and obtain-
ed, with the Lords of the Admiralty 'by the Masters, when
a new scale of prices in bread and pork was adjusted. In
1813 the adjustment took place. In 1813 the wages of
Ihe men were 1/. 17s. 10d. a week, with an allowance of
two quartern loaves and seven pints of beer a week. In
1816, U. 155., with 10s. 31. for bread and beer. In
1819, V. 16s. 2d., and 9s. lid. for bread and beer. In
1825, 11. 18s. In fact the charge of bread and beer, from
1813 to the present period, had fallen from 14s. 2d. to
7s. Bd.—(Hear, hear.) Statements so conclusive, he
thought, should weigh forcibly with the house. He should
then sit down, satisfied with the case already made; but
he could not avoid referring to the political considerations
of the question.. The relations between landlord and
tenant, master and servant, which were ties of the greatest
importance, existed at the present moment in a state cf
comparative laxity. He should deplore to see them fur-
ther dissevered ; one false step then made would be ruin-
ous to the landlord, and cause the whole frame of society
to receive a shock, which he felt the country was not pre-
pared to encounter.—(Hear, hear.) A restoration to the
standard of valise bad caused results which he anticipated,
and would to God he had been mistaken. The hon.
Member for Essex—(Here the right hon. baronet al-
lowed his voice to fall: so low that we could not catch
another wool of his sentence.) The landlord had made
reductions equal to the altered standard of value. No
admission was, however, made. In matters of currency,
time was everything ; thus, that which in 1826 might be
good, would be ruinous in 1833. He should, therefore,
give his fullest support to maintain the present standard
of value. He was bound as an honest man to re-as-
sert, and to declare that, in any decrease, rent would
fall 20 per cent. If the present motion wire wiled,
two-thirds of the land would be brought into the market.
It would be a confiscation equal to an agrarian law. It
would be bought in_ masses: a gradual sale might be
compatible with the safety of the country. If the house
proceeded as it was called upon to do—that which
would be gradual would become sudden—that which was
safe would become irregular—it wondi lead to an agrarian
law—ore common ruin would be the result : it would
not only destroy one class—not only impoverish a co►n-
munity—it would ruin the state itself.—(The right hon.
baronet concluded amid loud and long continued cheers )
Mr. F. O'CONNOR—Although he should oppose the
motion of the hon. member for Middlesex. agreed
with that hon. member that the question ought to he im-
mediately settled. If foreign corn were admitted free of
duty into Ireland, it would do the greatest injury to that
country, which was essentially an agricultural one, and
would throes nut of employment immense numbers of per-
sons engaged in aericultural pursuits. The people of Ire-
land were now but poor consumers, but if they were
thrown out (tithe corn market, they would be still proper
consumers both of English and Irish natural or manufac-
tured produce. Irish exports, such as butter, pork, &e.,
were, upon an average, one-third less in price than they
were during the war. They were told that this measure
would give cheap food ; but what was the use of having
bread at sd. the quartern loaf instead of I Id. if people
should be thrown out of employment, or their wages re-
duced in the same proportion as the cost of bread ? It
had been said that the Irish members would be unanimous
in support of this measure, but he would say that they
would, or they ought to be, unanimous in opposing it.
He considered that he was expressing the opinion of the
great body, of Irish members when he stated that the agi-
tation of this question in that house would cause great
mischief in Ireland, particularly if it was found in that
country that the present motion was not resisted by a great
majority of that house.
Mr. RICHARDS, owing to his having spoken from
under the gallery, was nearly inaudible during the short
time he addressed the house. He did not think that the
present measure would be the cause of procuring cheap
bread, and be was of opinion that circumstances might
arise with respect to foreign countries, by which this
country would be placed in a very dangerous position, if
it depended upon those countries for a supply of corn.
The hon. member concluded (as we understood) by say-
ing that he would certainly oppose the motion.
Mr. HEATHCOTE had hoped that the hon. member
for Middlesex would not have brought forward the present
question. But as the hon. member had thought proper
to bring it forward, they had no other alternative than
to meet it in the best way they could. It had been said
during the debate, that the corn laws were for the benefit
of the few, and not for the benefit of the rainy'
If that assertion was merely applied to the whole of
the great towns it might be true ; but they should
take into account the inhabitants of small towns—
the proprietors of land, yeomanry tenants and labourers,
the small mechanics in country towns, and then it Would
be found that these laws consulted the benefit of the many
rather then of the few. He might gn further, and make
a still stronger assertion—namely, that the country gene-
rally was satisfied with those• laws as they now
existed. The fact was, that a great change had taken
place among the agriculturists respecting a fixed
duty on corn, since they Ittpw thAt a fixed duty Iva,.
no duty at all when the price of corn was low—and tiles
also knew, as well as Mr. M'Cullocb, that when the
price was high—that is, when it was a remunerating one—
there was iikovise no duty ; 51 that in both these ex-

treme cases the result was the same. Last year the host
member for Middlesex contended for a fixed duty of 15,.
to be reduced to 10s., and now he seeks for a fixed duty
of 10s. to be reduced according to circumstances to 55.;
nd hon. gentlemen say that this alteration will not
lower the price of corn. If it don't lower it, if it have not
that effect, what is the use of trying the present experi-
ment? But if it lower the price of corn, the agricultu-
ri•ts are now so situated as to be totally unable to bear it.
It was argued generally in that house that this question
was one between landlord and tenant ; that it was a mere
affair of rent. Very well—that species of property should
Le attended to as well as every other species of
propeey. In his county, there were thousands of
small renters, and when he considered their situation,
how their property teas mortgaeed, and how they were
other wise embarrassed,lie thought it imperative on the house
to consider well the situation of these persons, and not to
:liter laws, by which alteration they would make paupers
ie the villages of those who were before respectable and
independent proprietors. He bad a fe.v words to say upon
one point, namely, about the everlasting cry of protection
being peculiarly afforded to the landed interests. Why
net ? He would ask the house whether every other spe-
cies of interest had not protection extended to it? Was not
protection extended to the woollen trade, to the cotton
trade? Was not the shipping interest protected ? Why,
at this present moment, the shipowners were petitioning
on this subject ; they wished to be let alone, and he could
scam the house that all the agriculturists wished for
was to be let alone likewise. He would not further tree-
pa. on the house. The quetion had been so well treated
by his right bon. friend opposite, that it was scarcely neces
sary for him to say more than that he opposed the motion.
Lord MORPETH considered he was not coining for-
ward inappropriately to express the grounds why he
should vote for the motion of the hon. member for Mid-
dlesex. Ever since he had commenced his political
career—when be was the representative of an agricultural
b wough—ewhen liberal opinions upon this matter and upon
others were less popular than they were now, because
they were less understood—when he went out of that
house one of the sixteen that had supported the lion.
member for Middlesex on a former occasion upon this
subject—he proved that his opinions were made upon this
point—and that he supported then a similar motion to
the present on the same grounds, and with the same con-
sistency, that he would support it now, when lie hoped to
q sit the house that night with a large body of supporters.
Though he might be accused of having vulgar notions,
e confessed be was one of those who were desirous of
making food as cheap as they could for the people.—.
(Hear.) He belonged to an agricultural connexion—he
resided in the midst of them—he knew that great misery
and great distress prevailed among them at the present
period ; but be was sent there not as the representas
ties of one interest, but he was sent there as a legislator
for the whole community, and in that capacity he was
unable to refuse his assent to the demonstrations and to
the arguments by which the hon. member for Middlesex
had supported his motion, and proved that a free trade
in corn was necessary. The noble lord contended that as
long as the nation was compelled to resort for articles of
subsistence to one shop when 'lt might get them cheaper'
at another, so long was that nation cheated. Whilst he
trusted that that House would take some steps to diminish
the burdens of the agriculturists, be saw no reason why
:t should oppose a revision of the corn laws. He was sure
that the hon, member who brought forward this motion had
dune so not to add to agricultural distressrs; and he felt con-
vinced that the hon. member would take them into full
account, and make adequate allowances accordingly. When
the distress of the agriculturists was acknowledged—when
it was re-echoed on all sides—it would seem harsh in them
to advocate measures tending to increase that distress.
But was this measure to be taken in that view ? For
his own part lie felt that it ought not, and he confidently
denied that the present measure would have the effect of
increasing in any way the burdens or the distress of the
agriculturists. This was, then, the argument which the
agriculturists might bring forward—do not tdce away
that protection under which we are suffering; do not
give us that absence of protection under a filch all ether
classes flourish. He (Lord Morpeth) was of opinion that
the greatest mischief of the present system was in its in-
stability, insecurity, and fluctuation.—( Hear, hear.) And
as the present system could not continue unassailed—as
the consumers of corn would not abide contented under a
system which pressed so heavily upon them, so the pros-
pect of a settlement of the question, and the prosperity
which might reasonably be expected to follow such a set-
tlement, could only be realized by that settlement being
founded upon a basis which the great body of the people
would admit to be just to all parties. He admitted
that depression would ensue to the agriculturists,—would
follow from any change in the corn laws. But since it
was said, and that with truth, that the agricultural inte-
rests were much depressed, was this not the time to make
the alteration, when the shock would be less than it could
have been at any former period, or might be hereafter?
The protective prices were at present so low, that unpro-
tective prices could not be much lower. Now that wheat
was at 48s. a quarter, it was surely the time for the agri-
culturist to take the opportunity of striking his bargain,
Since the unprotected corn could not be much lower.
His right h.nn. friend had stated that the agricultural
population was in so distressed a condition, that they muss
he protected, and that, therefore, the repeal of the corn
laws could not be effected. But was his right hon. friend
not aware that the trade, manufactures, and shipping of
the country absorbed a large portion or the agricultural
population, when the agricultural classes were in distress ?
Aud if it were admitted as it was, that the mental-tic:urine
classes would be relieved by this measure, ani more em-
ployment given to manufacturers, did it not follow that the
manufactures and
nsuenc,pdaittautiunr,no:aaludedtstefntiaecoleatoantityntr:,uceoanroilueiiirinnnsedgu
h eiabsorbacttiso.
nation.
stillN
Note
Twgh
ear
yel
la
Itneri
thesegph portion
sego.
uvne.
of the agriculturists than they did at present, at least in
ha
proportion to the extent to which they were extended?
Would not the change give employment to those miserable
and half-starving wretches who now could find no
employment under the chilling wing of protection?.—
( Hear, hear.) He would not eater into details of the
arguments brought forward by the right hon. baronet,
nor attempt to refute the calculations which he had
made. That duty he would leave to more experienced
and more able advocates than himself. He was himself
inclined to support the doctrine of free trade—(flear)—
but it seemed absurd that that doctrine should be ad-
vocated with success in all other articles; and that they
should stop at corn alone.—(Hear.) If our tnanufar,.
turers were to compete with the manufacturers of
other countries, it bocame the duty as well as She in-
terest of parliament to extend to them every sort of
protection. Tare were already too many drawbacks on
their industry. In their competition with foreigners,
they bad not only to support the expenses necessary for
their security and protection, but the burden of an enor-
mous debt. All these were disadvantages which could
not be availed, but let them not add to the burdens by
broughtd
f
present
state
ar t we
a or
the ntuat
be
tohbuti
esh,
very
set
juat
rynbrye.iewtul
ehetsTeseslii
giving protection by partiality to a certain class of the com-
munity. He knew that it was said that all classes of the cunt-
triunity were bound together so closely, that any measure
which was oppres,iye to one class must be injurious to all.
True it was that the interests of all classes were. bound
together, but it was not equally-true that one class would
benefit or suffer in exact proportion with all others in
consequence of a measure which, as a community, was
injurious to all. The fact was, that the links whiain
bound all classes were those which were for the general
good of the nation, and which would give general relief,
not those which went to the benefit of any partioniar class.
So it was with the corn laws. The repeal of them would
be of advantage to the whole of the industrious classes.
It would be of advantage not only to the capitalist, and
the person in receipt of large wages, but to the poorest
labourer. It would promote the industry and increase
the manufactures of the nation, not only by decreasing the
price of the necessaries of life at home, but by approx•
itnat ing the condition and expense of the labourer in this
country with that of the foreign labourer, with whom he
came into competition. There were other argutruaatts,
n
r
p, say
at to it
so, that
tat'tit ell:
laborious,
manufacturers--that
i‘ r discontent iv
tet:t u
yelsas tl
bof
awi
and egtlui disaffection—.that, the
e
laws
Icotilfuasfedepttsvbrho:Ouvicuf otno9vl maintained
sta.i anda
al° "
to
ot
hf the
arpresente tu
r ss system, s tem
should butbe they
p r outd trueoewcef
te
etrootden
bphnnieoe,o,
yta
agriculturists,
repepinpeectu
depended
applicable
it
thhthe
ntts
l
les Theys l say,able
som
eaiswnw,
Dien" ati
had
Now,
upobniwrndo,i
eourtanto,ah
lioa.tttr ldtse:iit:nope
agricultu-
rale
ken
s.
wVt
baiell
cytil:oaefr
apcotrt Tempe,,a,ft
which had neither foreign connexions nor a national debt ;
but a
great nation, and to support that character we hal to►
wale wars—make conquests_—and support wide-spreading
domthem we could no longer support the character to which NV
we should hoe commerce and manufiatetwu'r'essn;:efo7awlYitltiohuatt
aspired. As well might those who inhabited the ks of the
Scheldt, or had villas on the bordersof tsel3rente, cell their
couratres agricultural countrie,, and claim protection
against the iuhabitants of Venice and Amsterdam), as we
ep
oreotieconodot;
oboeha n wthheilen7,,e.huail
delft
e debtly::fi
,:dritt:in abort,
they
are
In his opiuioar