The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-12 00:00:00

SUN,

TIIE

to make such a manifestation of opinion as will compel him
to act upon that which I believe to be his own conviction.—
(Hear, hear.) I ask the House to declare, in the face of
the country, that it is not to be tolerated that, in a condi-
tion of general prosperty, there should be one suffering class
whose grievances create no sympathy, and to whose earnest
entreaties for redress no friendly atteetion is to be pent
I ask this House, in the name of common justice, and of
common humanity, to place on solemn record the expres-
sion of their opinion, that it is the duty of the administra-
tion to terminate at once a state of things so anomalous
and so deplorable. 1 could wish the Noble Lord at the head
of the Government to undertake the management of this great
question himself. - I am actuated by no factious motives. -
( Hear, hear.) I do not bring to the consideration of this
question any thing of that fervid passion which distinguishes
the proceedings of less deliberate societies or of meetings,.
where my own nameis sometimes mentioned as that of
one who is not sufficiently ardent in his efforts to obtain
redress for the suffering classes. I do not think that for
this reproach there is any warrant in truth, but I can make
much allowance for the feelings of worthy men, who without
any fault of their own find thernselvee in a position of the
greatest perplexity and the deepest suffering. Whether
my policy liar been right or wrong, of this lam irr my
heart convinced, that under circumstances ref difficulty
and of danger, I have taken that course with respect to
the agricultural interests which is the result of lorrg thetiglit,
observation, and pain, and I ask you to adopt in their
regard a policy which justice does not disapprove, and
which policy mot emphatically reconunerels. If I make
no further appeal to the Noble Lord at the heal of the
Government, I entreat you and him to believe that it is
from no hostile feeling, but because I have twice alreeciy
appealed to him in vain. But I now appeal to the House of
Commons. True, it has been called a Free. trade House
of Commons;" but I appeal to it with confidence, neverthe-
less, because I have the utmost confidence in the cause I ad-
vocate, and the most unbounded reliance on the spirit of in-
tegrity which, notwithstanding that I differ from marry of
its Members, I believe to animate the bosoms of all.—(Loud
cheers.) This House has now at its disposal an opportunity
not lightly to be discarded—a golden occasion for which we
will not easily find a parallel in the records of any Par-
liament in this country. It may perform a great of-
fice, and fulfil an august duty. It may step in at
this auspicious moment, and do that which the Minister
shrinks from doing—terminate the bitter controversy of
years, and bring back what the great Lord Clarendon
calls " the good old temper of the people of England."
( Hear, hear.) It may terminate that unhappy controversy
between town and country which has been the fruitful source
of jealousies and animosities, and which good men of all
parties cannot but deplore; it may build up again upon their
ancient basis the defences of the land of England—that hr.
terest to which we owe so much of our power and freedom
—that interest which has fulfilled the union of those two
qualities, for combining which a Roman Emperor was deified,
iniperium et libertas, and all this it may do, not by favour,
not by privilege, not by sectarian arrangements, not by class
legislation—(Hear, hear)—but by asserting the principles
of political justice and obeying the dictates of social equity.—
(Enthusiastic cheering.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
Hon. Member who had just resumed his seat had offered
at least one piece of advice of which he (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) would most cheerfully avail himself. The
Honourable Gentleman had advised that the important
question of agricultural distress should be approached in a
calm, rational, and temperate spirit, and there was so
much of propriety and of good sense in the advice that he
for one would not hesitate to accept it. In justice to himself,
however, he would take leave to say that he did not think
that there had ever been anything in his conduct, se far
at all events as it referred to this question, which renderel
it necessary that such an admonition should be given. He
could say, in all sincerity, that he bad on all occasions
endeavoured to consider this question with becoming
composure, and with an unaffected anxiety to take that
course with reference to it which he believed to be re-
commended by considerations of justice and of honour.—
(Hear, hear.) He would endeavour to act in the same
spirit now, for he had not the least doubt that that calm,
temperate, and impartial discussion for which the Hon.
Gentleman appeared to be so solicitous. would inevitably
lead to the rejection of his proposal.—(Cheers, and laughter.)
Indeed, he was at a loss to imagine on what plea of com-
mon sense or of common justice that proposal could be sup-
ported. On former occasions the Hon. Member had so far
obliged the House as to submit to their consideration pro-
positions which, whatever might be their faults in other re-
spects, were, at all events, clear, definite, and intelligible;
but he had sedulously avoided pursuing any such course on
the present occasion. His speech was a jumble of all
imaginable topics, but he did not call upon the House
to adopt any particular measure with respect to any one
of them, or even to express an opinion on any one of them.
There was scarcely a question which had been the subject
of political discussion during the lest five years, whether
national taxation, local taxation, acts of settlement, or
acts of currency, that he had not huddled together into
the hodge-podge of his speech, and he did not con-
descend to describe the course of policy which he would
wish the Legislature to adopt with reference to any one
of them. He could not tell with what sentiments the Hon.
Member's speech had been received by those who sat in
Ida immediate vicinity; but to him (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) it appeared to be vague and inconclusive. It
embodied no distinct proposition that he could comprehend,
and it led to no practical conclusion. Having already inti•
mated to the House his intention of making, on Friday night,
the official statement of the financial measures of tire session,
it was not to be expected that he should, in replying to the
arguments of the Hon. Gentleman, anticipate the discussion
which was to take place on that evening.—(Hear, hear.)
Therefore, he wished it to be understood that in the remarks
he was about to make, he did not mean to deal with the
question otherwise than upon general grounds, nor did he in-
tend to speak of any of the measures which he would feel it
his duty to propose to the House on Friday evening—(Hear,
hear.) He had to complain that the Hon. Member had mis-
conceived certain observations which had fallen from him on
a former occasion on the subject of national finance. The
first occasion on which he had had to meet the lion. Mem-
ber ou this subject was in 1849, and what was the proposition
which the Hon. Gentleman then brought before the House?
It was no other than this, that not only the agricultural in-
terest, but the whole community, was in a state of' the deepest
distress, and, indeed of absolute ruin. He said that, whether he
went into the marts of commerce or the fields of agriculture,
the same overwhelming cry of distress greeted his ear from all
sides. His (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) answer was,
that so far as commerce and manufactures were concerned,
the Hon. Gentleman was decidedly labouring under a singu-
lar infatuation, and that the facts were not as he (no doubt
with the best intention) had represented th,m ; and that,
with regard to agricultural distress, it was, in some respects,
exaggerated, and, iii another respect, premature. What he
had stated on the subject was this, that in 1847 the average
price of corn was 695. 9d. a quarter—that, during the year
1848, it bad fallen down only to 50s. 6d., which was the
average price during 1846, 1845, and 1844,—and that these
facts and figures proved that it was impossible that the de-
clination in the price could have been occasioned by recent
legislation on the subject of the corn-lawe. For this reason,
he said that the statement of ruin to the agricultural interest
was, to say the least of it, premature, because no circum-
stances connected with the repeal of the corn-laws had yet
taken place which could possibly have produced a state of
things such as the Member had described. Moreover,
by a reference to a volume which he now held in his
hand, he had proved to the Hon. Member that the
price of meat was actually higher in 1848 than it had
been in 1844, and that the agriculturists must have been
in a better position in consequence. These explanations he
had made for the satisfaction of the Hon. Member, and in
order to show that his alarm was in some respect exagge-
rated, and in some respect premature, but he had never de-
nied the existence of a certain amount of agricultural dis-
tress. He had never concealed from the House his convic-
tion that it was impossible for such a change to be intro-
duced, as that involved in the repeal of the corn-laws,
without occasioning a certain amount of distress and suffer-
ing to the agricultural classes.—(Hear, hear.) Experience
had convinced him that it would be most unreasonable to
expect that any branch of industry which had been accus-
tomed to lean on the crutches of protection, could have those
crutches knocked from under it without experiencing some
difficulty and distress; but at the same time he believed
that before long it would revive and stand in a stronger po-
sition than before. To these opinions he still adhered. Ile
might be mistaken in his views, but he had never attempted
to conceal from the House his honest convictions.—(Cheers.)
No man could foresee with accuracy at what time or to what
extent the temporary difficulty and distress consequent on
the repeal of the corn-laws would fall upon the agricul-
tural classes, for they all knew that it must
very much depend upon the seasons and the pro-
ductiveness or unproductiveness of the harvest. It
must depend also to some extent on the demand for agri-
cultural produce by the manufactunng classes. The demand
from the great seats of'industry had always a sensible effect
on the agricultural market; and he was happy to think that
that demand had been during the last few years, unprece-
dently great. He still was of opinion that the Hon. Mem-
ber had suffered himself to be alarmed to an extent greater
than the facts of the case warranted. There was nothing
in the importation returns to create dismay ; for, on re-
referring to them, he found that the importation of wheat
and flour during the six months ending the sth of April last,
was less by one half than the importation of the same arti-
cles during the six months ending
the sth of April, 1849.
(Hear, hear.) Tnis was a most significant fact. I tcertainly
indicated a great falling off in the supply of foreign corn.
And while on this subject, he would take occasion to ob-
serve, that the event bad proved that those who bad antici-
pated vast supplies of foreign corn from certain countries
were wholly mistaken as to the precise quarters from which
those supplies were to come. It was expected that there
would be an immense influx from the United States, and that
the American corn would be sold here for 35s- or 365. a quar-
ter, but no such result had been realised, nor anything like it.
The supply had, in fact, tonne from countries trans which no
supply whatever had been anticipated. There had been
considerable importations from France, but the present state
of agricultural affairs in that country was anomalous, and
strictly exceptional. The price of corn in France in the
month of March last was lower than it had been for the pre-
ceding thirty years. The importations ,from that country
into England in the year 1849 was 740,000 quarters; iu 1850
it was 1,100,000 quarters; but the misery which prevailed
amongst the agricultural interests in France at the present
moment proved how inefficient were protective laws and a
large foreign importation to sepure prosperity to a people.
The French newspapers teemed with the most deplorable
statements of distress amongst the agricultural classesin
France. He held in his hand an influential French journal
in which it was stated that the depreciation in the price of
corn still continued, and that there was every prospect of the
agricultural classes being more severely depressed than ever.
So much for prohibitory
.laws and large exportations The
solution of the difficulty in which the English agriculturists
were involved appeared to be that there was a large produce
of corn in 1849, and that the depreciation in price was occa-
sioned by the badness of the quality—not more than one-
half of what came to the flail being fit for the market. This
was certainly so in many counties. As far as he was him-
. self concerned, he bad never expressed a wiell that the price
of food should be high in this country. He had always said
that he believed it to be for the interest of the great body of
the people, and especially for that of all classes who were
engaged in industry, that the price of food and meat should
be as low as the world could afford. The recent change in
the price of meat was not to be attributed to the small in-
crease in the importation of foreign cattle, an increase which
in the year 1850 only amounted to 6,000 oxen and 11,000
sheep. It was rather to be attributed to increased home
production—(Hear, hear)—and it should be remembered
that there was more than a corresponding falling. off
in the quantity of imported provisions. The fact was,
that the diminished price of meat
was owing to the in-
creased production of the article in this country.—(llear,)
The returns during the last few years of the number of
cattle brought to the Newcastle and Glasgow markets
established this fact beyond controversy.—( Hear, hear.)
He believed no foreign beef whatever bad been brought into
Newcastle or Glasgow. The quantity of beasts slaughtered
in Glasgow in 1848 was 19,78 e ' • in 1849, 22,882; in 1850,
26,200. The number of sheep slaughtered iu those years
was—in 1848, 69,/90 ;in 1849, 82,480 ; and in 1850, 96,104.
That showed a very increased demand, which must have
proved highly beneficial to the agriculturist. He (the Chan-

LONDON,

cellor of the Exchequer) was happy to state that that de-
mand was apparently increasing in all the manufacturing
towns. He old not see how it was possible, with the hn-
pro vernents that had taken place in agriculture, and the
rearing of cattle, that a fall in prices could be avoided. The
Hou. Gentleman did not, in referring to the agriculturists,
seem inclined to dwell much on that topic, as it was noticed
in the Speech from the Throne. The Hon. Gentleman said
Ire would deal only with the owners and occupiers of land,
and ignored altogether the fact of the improved state of
the agricultural labourere, as shown by the diminished
burden thrown on the ratepayers for the relief of the poor.
Though the Honourable Gentleman was disposed to pass that
by, as a circumstance too insignificant to notice, he (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought it of such im-
portance that he refreshed his memory on the subject by
the perusal of a speech made by the Noble Lord (March)
one of the Members for West Sussex, who stated that the
whole question of protection turned on the condition of the
agricultural labourer, and disclaimed it altogether as one in
which the landlord was inteested. lion. Gentlemen opposite
might now be willing enough to omit that view of the subject
altogether.—(" Hear, hear," from the Free-traders, and loud
cries of " No" from the Opposition.) It was now admitted
on all hands that throughout the length and breadth of the
land, with the exception, perhaps, of some small district,i,
the agricultural labourers were in a prosperous state, and
that even where the reduction of wages had taken place, that
reduction had not been commensurate with the advantages
derived from the reduction in the price of food, comfort, and
luxuries. He had seen a few days ago, an admission madebv
a gentleman once a Member of that house, now chairman of
the Protection Society, and who was in the habit of delivering
Protectionist speeches in different parts of the country—Mr.
G. Frederick Young. At a great aericultural meeting, trekd
in the autumn of last year, that gentlern in said he was ready
to admit the truth of the remark, that the etas of the peo-
ple were now enjoying au extraordinarY degree of material
prosperity. He also observed, that since the repeal of the
corn-laws wages had been reduced, but not to an amount
equivalent to the reduction that had taken place in the price
of articles of food. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
set great store by that admission, for he had always con-
tended that that would be the result of free trade. Now,
this chairman and champion of the Protectionist Society ad-
mitted it to be the fact. He (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) would now show, from the poor-law returns, the
reduction that had been made in the expenditure incurred
for the relief of the poor. This he considered an important
point, for those expenses were charged as one of the extra-
ordinary burdens pressing upon agriculture.— (Hear.) It was
no slight matter for consideration that, by recent legislation,
not only was the amount paid for the relief of
the poor diminished, but also the number of the persons in
the workhouses. In the year ending Lady-day last, as com-
pared with Lady-day, 1849, there had been a diminution in
the expenditure incurred for the relief the poor of no less
a sum than 397,000/. in the year ending Michaelmas last,
which embraced a portion of the same time, there was a re-
duction in the expenditure, as compared with Michaelmas,
1849, of no less than 405,0001. Again, the number relieved
on the Ist of January last year, was 6 per cent. lower than
that of the preceding year. The Ist of January, 1850, as
compared with the Ist of January, 1849, showed a diminu-
tion of 15 per cent. On the Ist of July, 1850, as compared
with the Ist of July, 1849, there was a diminution of more
than 15% per cent.; and comparing the number receiving
relief on the Ist January, 1851, with that of the Ist of Ja-
nuary, 1850, there was a further diminution of 14} per cent.
For the last two years there had been a reduction of at least
15 per sent. of the number of able-bodied persons re-
ceiving relief throughout England, If Honourable Gentle-
men would refer to the return from which he quoted they
would find that there were only two counties in England,
neither of them exclusively agricultural, in which there had
not been a reduction in the number of able-bodied poor. It
was impossible, then, not to admit that a great boon had
been conferred on agricultural labourers by a reduction in
the price of food, while the reduction in the charges on the
poors'-rate must have proved a direct benefit to the owners
and occupiers of land.—(Hear, hear.) He was bound to say
that a similar reduction bad taken place in Ireland; and,
considering the extremity of suffering to which that country
had been reduced some time ago, the improvement was the
more remarkable. In the year ending September, 1848, the
number of persons receiving out-door relief was 1,419,000;
in the year ending September, 1849, only 1,210,000, and
last year only a little more than one-fourth of that num-
ber, namely, 370,000.—(Hear, hear.) A more gratifying
proof of the improvement of the condition of the people could
not be conceived than that.—(Hear.) But the Hon. Gentle-
man said, that even with the benefit which the labourers de-
rived from cheap food, still they were not so well off as for-
merly He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would soon
show how much the Hon. Gentleman was mistaken, and to
what extent the labourer was benefited. Taking the wares
of an ordinary labourer during the war at 155., and the pre-
sent wages at 10s., and supposing that a labourer with a
wife and three children would require about ten loaves for
their weekly sustenance, the result would be, taking into ac-
count the difference of price since the
,war, that at the
end of the week the man with 15s. a week would
have a surplus of 2s. 6d., while the matt with 10s.
a week would have a surplus of ss. 10d Again,
taking the average price of a quarter of corn, during
the war, at 80s.—the price which the corn-law of 1815 pre-
fessed to secure—and taking the average price of last
year at 405., then it is obvious that the labourer
obtaining 15s. a-week, under the system of high
prices, would be in a-much less favourable position than
the person now receiving only 10s. a-week. In fact, there
could be no doubt but the fall in the price of provisions was
far inure than enough to compensate the labourer, even
though his wages were reduced so low as ss. a-week. He
hoped the House would permit him to state the fall that had
taken place in the price of some other articles of general
consumption among the poor. In doing so, he would not
go back to such a remote time as that of the
war, but only so
.far back as the year 1840.
In that year the price of best flour was 35., now it was
selling at Is. 10d. • second flour was then 25., now only
is. Bd.; best sugar ,9id. per lb. in 1840, now only .sd. ;
treacle sd. in 1810, aid. tat present ; coffee 2s. 4d., now
Is. Bd. ; candles 6id., now 44d. ; tea from ss. to Os., now
from 35. to ss. There was hardly an item which the poor
man used that had not been reduced one-third or one-half
in price. But he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did
not believe that the-distress of the agricultural interest was
so great or so universal as the Honourable Gentleman had
depicted it. In many parts of the country there were no
such complaints as those which the Honourable Gentleman
had noticed. In Scotland there was great competition for
farms, and where corn rents were given rents were rising
rather than falling. In Northumberland there was con-
siderable difficulty in letting farms, but in Cumberland there
was great competition for them. In fact, there was no
ground whatever for the allegation so frequently made, that
tenants could not pay rents at present prices, and that
nothing bit ruin awaited 'the farmer under the existing
system. He (the Chancellor of 'the Exchequer) thought
the language generally held forth at agricultural meetings
was much to be deprecated; it was calculated to do material
injury to the farmers, but more especially to the land-
lords; and if any bad feelings were excited by such
language against the Legislature, it would recoil upon the
agriculturists themselves, and the landlords would be the
first to suffer. He had waited to hear the proposal
which the Honourable Gentleman had to make, but
he carefully abstained from making any intelligible pro-
position. The Hon. Gentleman referred to the tithe, but he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought that, since the
'Tithe Commutation Act, it was clearly understood that the
tithe formed simply a part of the rent, and he was somewhat
astonished at the pains the Hon. Gentleman took to mystify
a subject so clearly understood by everybody. With respect
to the cultivation of tobacco, it was true, as the Hon. Gentle-
man stated, that it was cultivated here twenty years ago,
but only to a small extent, and not with great success,
though raised under cover of high protection for it had to
pay no duty at all, while foreign tobacco paid 4s. It was
calculated en a most hazardous and gambling system, and
with loss to all the parties engaged in the occupation. The
Hon. Gentleman said the subject had never been inquired
into. A Committee sat upon the subject in 1828, and their
opinion was that it was perfectly impossible that it could be
cultivated with advantage in this country, unless the
growers received an enormous protection. If that protec-
tion were given, it would afford an unlimited opportunity
of fraud. Mr. Huskisson, who drew up the report, was of
opinion that the most advantageous course would
be to prohibit the growth of tobacco in Ireland
as well as in England, in order to protect a revenue
amounting to about 4,500,000/. The whole of the tobacco
consumed would only cost about half a million, and it
would be very unwise, for the sake of that small benefit, to

sacrifice a revenue of 4,500,0001., which in some way or an-
other
must be exacted from the community at large, and
probably in no small proportion from the agriculturists
themselves. The Hon. Gentleman also referred to the sub-
ject of making sugar from beet root. The farmers were at
liberty to make sugarfrom beetroot if they pleased, by paying
a certainduty—they might manufacture on conditions similar
to those imposed on France. The Honourable Gentleman
next referred to the excise duties, namely, the hop duty, the
malt duty, and the duty on spirits, and remarked that he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was inconsistent as a
free-trader in not removing all the excise duties laid on the
agricu tural produce of this country, more particularly the
malt duty. His notions of free trade, however, were not
such as to lead him to believe it possible to go on with-
out taxes. His idea, however, was, that the taxes
should lie raised in as easy a manner as possible—that duties
should be levied for revenue purposes only, and that they
should be of such a character as to press with as little seve-
rity as possible on those who had to pay them. But the
Hon. Gentleman seemed to forget the most important prin-
ciple of taxation, in stating that those excise duties fell upon
the agricultural interest. It was the man who drank tea
and beer who paid the duties on them; and, as the consumers
were not confined to the agricultural interest, it would not
be either wise or prudent to sacrifice a revenue of 5,500,0001,
tor the sake of the small advantage that would accrue to
that interest by the remission of the tax. But the argument
applicable to the malt was also applicable to spirits, and it
the duty should be remitted on the one, there could: be
no reason for retaining it upon the other. The
Honourable Gentleman was desirous to have duties
amounting to 15,000,0001. or 16,000,0001. removed,
but he left that material topic without suggesting any
mode in which the same amount of revenue could be
more conveniently raised. He (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) had listened with some anxiety to the Hon. Gen-
tleman when he promised to tell the House what he was
going to propose, but the Hon. Gentleman had left the
House in complete ignorance on the subject. The Hon.
Gentleman then referred to the local rates, and stated that
7,000,00/. out of 12,000,0001. were paid by the landed pro-
prietors. The Honourable Gentleman's fallacy on this point
arose front his confounding all the owners of real property
with those who were merely owners of laud. The
parties entitled to relief (if any relief was due) were the
producers of agricultural produce; but when they talked of
taking off a large portion of the burdens on the owners of
land, they meant in effect to relieve those who had no pre-
tence to relief. The Hon. Gentleman had said that agricul-
-1 tural land paid 7-12ths of the whole amount charged upon
real property. The Hon. Gentleman was entirely mistaken.
The
nttrialllyiad ceasedchanging.
to be agricul.
Agreat
amount
in
aiade
trhen
isccooutniy
become land connected with houses.
(Hear, hear.) There was a time, no
doubt, when by tar the greatest amount of real property in
p
this country was land. It was not so now. The proportion
railroads,
tural
r o
land,
opfri
canals,atal7 t s w &
c .
of burthens which land bears to the property of the country
is diminishing year by year, and therefore the relict' year
after year extended to real property goes less and less to land.
In the year 1815 (which was the last assessment of the real
property-tax), the whole value of real property in England
amounted to 53,000,0301. The land was assessed at
31,000,000/. In the year 1849 the whole amount of pro-
perty assessed to the property-tax was 94,000,0001., the land
being assessed at only 42,000,0001. That was to say, in
1815 land was 64 per cent. of the whole of the real property
of the country, whilst in 1849 it was only 44 per cent.
Therefore, of 1001. devoted to the relief of real property, 561.
went to the relief of real property, not consisting of agricul-
tural land, and 44/. to agricultural land. The facts of the
case proved that the owners of land were only a part and
parcel of the general community of this country, whose lot
was cast with the community at large. But that portion of
the community could not be benefited by any special legis-
lation of the nature suggested by the Hon. Gentleman.
They must consider how they could best benefit the cem-