The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-19 00:00:00

SUN,

He would not, however, dwell on there things,
us he had nu desire to introduce anything which
might interrupt the good temper which ought to pre-
vail in discussing the present question. But what had
been the prophecy of the Free-traders? They thought
that free trade would greatly increase the general pros-
perity of tie country, and he (Eel Granville) theueht
that prophecy was true. The exports had greatly ia-
creazed. and during the present year had been six mil-
lions more than during the previous year. That in-
crease would show what they might still expect it to be,
if the principles of free trade were carried out. The
Noble Lord had referred to letters he had received from
farmers in his own immediate neighbourhood, but even
these letters only proved that the harvest had been very
bad last year, and led to the conclusion that, under
different circumstances, and a good harvest, a favour-
able result might be calculated on. He found by re-
turns under the poor-law, that in the county of Cam-
bridge—one of the six of the worst of the agricultural
counties--tine pauper list had exhibited an increase of
1,723 auove what it was last year. The six counties
he had alluded to were Cambridge, Hereford, Lin-
coln, Monmouth, Rutland, and Shropshire. In all these
there had been an increase to the pauper list; but in
the ether counties the decrease had been to the extent of
69,000—(Hear, hear)—far beyond the increase in the
others. Now, it would be a very difficult thing, as their
Lordships knew,to introduce particular measures to meet
the necessities of particular districts. But to come to
the question as to the effect on landowners and occupiers
of land by the change to free trade, he believed that au
expenditure in some cases had been made in effecting
improvements and increasing the productive power of
land equal almost to a new purchase of the land.
If the effect of the change that had been male would be
to bring this country from being one of the dearest to
one of the cheapest, and ono of the most compact in
Europe, it was almost impossible that that could occur
without great shocks being felt by some particular inte-
rest. With reference to France: he (Earl Granville)
had talked with many Frenchmen on the subject, and
ha had been informed that in many parts of France
landlords were unable to let their lands. All the mer-
chants and all the landowners admitted that the
fact of food being so cheap in France was the reason
why the manufacturers and the labourers were em-
ployed. He had been much struck with a leading article
which he had seen lately in the leading Conservative
journal of France. It was admitted in that article that
free trade had taken such deep ro a in this country that
it was impossible to change it. They had seen in con-
nexion with that change the improved tariff in the
United States—the effect in Sardinia—the lowering of
the customs in Russia—the improvement in Austria
from an obsolete system to one more in accordance
with the spirit of the age ; while Prussia
and other countries were engaged making similar
beneficial changes. The Noble Lord, after alluding
to the improred comfort of certain classes, and
especially to the old soldiers who were pensioners, went
on to state that he had been informed by the Chief
Commissioner of Police that never in the experience of
the inspectors had they seen the working classes so
happy and so well disposed.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble
Lord had referred to the malt-tax. Now those who
really paid that tax were the people who consumed it,
and if that tax were repealed some other tax would have
to be imposed which might not be more advantageous
to the agricultural interest. In conclusion, tho Noble
Lord said that Noble Lords ought to state the course
they meant to pursue on this much-vexed question.—
(Hear, hear.) Some it appeared had postponed their
views sine die, while others thought that they should re-
turn to protection. The great leader on this question
ought to state his views—whether it was their intention
to return to protection, or from what burdens they
would relieve the land, and in what way they proposed
that relief should be afforded.—(Hear, hear.)
The Duke of RICHMOND said he had risen not to
answer the question which the Noble Earl had put to his
Noble Friend the leader of the agricultural party. lie
(the Duke of Richmond) did not ask the Parliament,
which had not the confidence of the country—he did not
ask them that the burdens which had been imposed on
the land by the advisers of free trade should be got rid
of. It was on the hustings the battle must be fought.—
(Hear, hear.) It was not the duty of the Opposition to
state what should be done. It was their duty to state
their objections to the present state of things. It was
said that the distress was not so great as had been re-
presented, because some superintendent of police bad
stated the working classes wore so comfortable. No
doubt they had given the labourers of London good em-
ployment at the glass-house.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
It was something of that kind they wanted for the agri-
cultural labourers.—(Hear, hear.) Hie Noble Friend,
with the feelings of an old soldier, had spoken of the in-
creased comforts of the old pensioners. There might be
some fewer pensioners than formerly, but he did not
know whether there was any greater liberality extended
towards them in Chelsea Hospital; but this he knew,
that Government made them pay for engraving their
names upon the medals they had given them.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) He did say it was a hard case when
the landlords were employing double and treble the
number of labourers they did formerly, that the Minis-
ter should come down and say they were not in such
great distress!, because there were not so many labourers
unemployed, when employment was given by the land-
lords under such circumstances. If such conduct was
persevered in, the labourers would be discharged, and
let them take care of the consequences. Idleness was
the parent of crime, and it was tearful to reflect that of
late such daring burglaries had been committed as they
had been made acquainted with.—(Elear, hear) After
alluding to the operation of the malt-tax, and the in-
jury it inflicted on the farmers, the Noble
Lord referred to the condition of the tenant-farmers
in the Weald of Sussex and of Kent, and said he
would ask them whether they had ever heard of
any rent being ever paid out of the small holdings in the
Weald of Sussex, and whether it was not with great dif-
ficulty they obtained the rates.—(Hear, hear.) He
would maintain that the British farmer, taxed as be was,
could not compete wieh the foreign farmer. His Noble
Friend (Earl Granville) had said that they were laying
out more money than would buy the land. Ho was
much obliged to his Noble Friend for the admission, for
that was exactly what they complained of. If any ono
laid out 100,0001. he could not get back 50,0001. Oh,
but then, it was said, " Try it."—(Laughter:) Ho be-
lieved, before long, as some of the Manchester people
were beginning to find out, that America would be able
to send over cottons cheaper than they could produce
them in this country. The manufacturers would be
obliged to retrogade, for they would find that
the home market would decrease very much, and
that that was the real trade on which they
ought to rely, and not upon the speculating export
trade. The great body of the tenant-farmers had been
ruined, and if they pursued the present course ruin would
continue to follow them, and they must go into the work-
houses or to the United States. The labourers only
asked for work. They had a right to have it. In his
opinion they had no right to say to the man of good
character, willing and anxious to work, " You must
either go into the workhouse or starve." As long as he
was a guardian of the poor be should re-
commend his fellow-guardians to grant such characters
out-doer relief, and not compel them to associate with
people. whose own misconduct and idleness had driven
thou into the workhouse.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord WODEHOUSE said that at the present juncture,
when they saw an attempt being made to reverse the
commercial policy that had been recently adopted, it be-
came the duty of every landholder not to shrink from ex-
pressing his opinion. If he could agree with the Noble
Lord who had just sat down, that the agricultural
classes would be relieved, or oven that their
feelings would be consulted, he would say that
an inquiry preliminary to such measures should be
immediately instituted.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) But
while they could not hold out the slightest hope of a res-
toration of the former system of restriction, it was their
duty to warn the tenant-farmer against being led away
by such a snare.—(Hear, hear.) It was necessary, in
the first place, to understand what amount of distress
actually exists. The Noble Lord had referred to certain
letters from individuals in his own county of Kent; but
these letters were worth as much as was due to the
opinions of these individuals, and he (Lord Wodehouse)
could not take them for more. He could state that in
the district to which he belonged—a district by no means
unimportant—Norfolk—(Hear, hear)—he had taken
some interest in this matter, and instituted inquiries
which had resulted in proofs satisfactory to his own
mind, that the condition of the poorer classes was better
than it had been for many years past.—(Ministerial
cheers.) There was no doubt that there had been con-
siderable reduction in the wages—(flea,;)—bat then the
reduction in the price of provisions had been far more
than equal to that reduction. In his immediate district
wages had been reduced to Se. a week, yet he had
formed calculations from the prices which proved that
where labourers had large families, as many of them
had, they had not been better off for some years than
they were now.—(Hear, hear.) They had been told by
the Noble Duke who had just sat down, and be believed
by the Noble Earl dare that it was very fallacious to
refer to the condition of the agricultural labourer, and
he had heard with warprise the deductions disputed which
were drawn from the returns of the poor now receiving
relief as compared with former periods, as if these returns
were of no vr.,lue in such a question. The diminu-
tion was 'Aid to be only 10 per cent., whereel
these reyhrns showed it to be 15 per cent., and the
diminut',on was to be found not only in coun-
ties de-toted to manufacturing industry, but also in C 0412-
ties 'lurely agricultural. In Norfolk, Suffolk, and Es-
seee, all agricultural districts, there had been a diminu-
tion of persons receiving relief, and though they had
been told of a riot by a number of persons in one work-
house, it was only one, and might be accounted for by
special causes.—(Hear, hear.) They had been told that
the tenant farmers were making a desperate attempt to
hold their heads above water. Bat he asked if it was
likely that any body of men would continue to invest
their money in a pursuit which was certain to be at-
tended with loss?—(Hear, hear.) He knew there were in which men could not immediately withdraw
ther capital, except at a great loss.—(Protertiftiist
cheers.) But how did they account, then, for Wagons
taking new farms?—(Hear, hear.) lie knew 114, was
a great competition for farms, and that !arms could
be, and were now let at improved rents.—(Cries of
" Hear.") Another important POiD'i was the present
price of meat. Now he believed tliat the diminution in
prices was caused, not so much *by foreign importations
as the
inbyca aa
consequence
icractrteleasendowanbdrochugea.hpt t
—not so much by an increasn in the number of cattle
marketbre d,
numberence thefat
ac-
commodation prase t d
a e by railways.—(Hear, hear.)
This had nt.tur,.l y the effect, in turn, of diminishing
the expenses of the farmer, and er, and improving his balance..
sheet at the, end of the year. Ho certainly must say he
was surprised, on the other hand, to hear our commer-
cial prosprerity denied. It was proved by documents in-
controvertibly that our commerce and manufactures were
flourish/fig—our wor p keopl o well employed—that we
had a fxrplus revenue, notwithstandingrecent
and re-

pealed reductions of taxation. If this was not commer-
cial prosperity, he should like to know what Noble Lords
oppoqits called prosperity,—(Hear, hear.) Why, even
the fact that we had so much corn and flour imported
into Lh.l country was a proof of that prosperity; that
corn and flour had bona consumed and paid for,
and of courte n large number of persona had bene-
fited by that consumption.--(Bear, hear.) If this
was the fact—if the large body of the
labouring classes were enjoying the
series and the comforts of life, he asked if it would be
politic or possible to turn round upon the p,,ople of this
country and tell them, " All this is true, but there is
distress among the landlords and the tenant farmers, and
to relieve these classes you must reverse all this, and
submit to burdens for their exclusive benefit?"—

(Hear.) They might depend upon it that the labouring
classes would look at the question in that way. But,
then, it was said by Noble Lords, why do yen not act
consistently with your free-trade principles—take off the
burdens on land. Now, he should like to know what
burdens were exclusively laid upon laud, which were not
fairly shared by other classes. Take the malt-tax, for
instance, would any one say that the grower of barley
paid the malt tax. But then they were told that the
repeal of the malt-tax would be followed by an increased
consumption of beer, and there would consequently be
an increased demand for barley. But then it must he
remembered that much of that increase would be
supplied from abroad, and also, that if the malt-tax was
removed, we should have to put on a countervailing tax,
and the agricultural classes would have to bear their
share of that tax. It was said that the poor-rate formed
a peculiar burden on laud. Why, there was not more
than 45 per cent. of the land of England occupisd by the
agricultural interest, and many portions of that were
not rated to the relief of the poor. But he asked Noble
Lords if they were prepared with any substitute for the
present mode of rating, and in what way fuodholders
and traders would be affected by it ? The proposal of a
national rate would, he was afraid, take away all check
to extravagant expenditure. Even under the present
system these checks were frequently not sufficient. lie
thought that an alteration in the law of settlement—
and ho was happy to see her Majesty's Government
had promised a measure on the subject—would be
of great value to the agricultural interest, and to the la-
bourers especially. Apart, however, from all these con-
siderations he did not despair of British agriculture.—
(Hear, hear.) The same outcry had been made when
protection was taken away from other interests. Mr.
Huskisson was accused of having ruined the silk trade.
Was that trade ruined now? Even the cotton manu-
facture itself, at one time, was declared to be injured by
foreign competition. Was British agriculture the only
interest in this country that could not stand against the
competition of the world?—(Hear.) Were they to be told
that in this country, where they had such an abundance of
capital, of machinery, and science, with the richest mar-
ket of the world at their own doors, that they could not
compete with foreigners unless protected by taxes which
must fall ou other classes of the community ?—(Cheers.)
He would remind Noble Lords opposite, also, that even
when protection was in its most palmy days that they had
the cry of distress from the agricultural interest. In 1822,
and again in 1835, and eines, then, on other occasions,
complaints of distress had been made. He said, in con-
clusion then, that he did not believe they could return
to these restrictive laws.—(Hear, hear.) He believed
that the ipterests of every one class was bound up with
the general interest of the community; and that, however
the agricultural interest might temporarily suffer, it
must, in the end, be benefited, and above all, in the face
of the advantages we had derived from that commercial
policy, he could not believe that their Lordships, in the
face of the nation, would deliberately condemn and
abandon it.—(Cheers.)
Lord STRADBROKE (Who was nearly inaudible in
the gallery) was understood to express his surprise that
the distress which had been admitted in the Speech
from the Throne, had been denied by Noble Lords in
their speeches that night. Speaking for his own
county, Suffolk, ho could state that there never
had been greater distress than there now was
in that county. The riot at Barham workhouse, where
the guardians were compelled to admit 134 able-
bodied paupers into the house, was only one of the
melancholy proofs of this fact. There was a decided in-
crease of pauperism, and he had also received returns
from the masters of galls, which showed an increase of
crime. In the year 1847, before the free trade system,
the number of persons in the county gaol, on the 17th
of February, was 90. On the same day of the year 1850
it was 139, and in 1851, 180.—(Hear, hear.) In the
Ipswich House of Correction, taking the three years
before the free-trade measures, the returns were, in
1846, 90; in 1847, 101; and in 1848, 86; giving an
average of 92 1.3, whereas in 1849 the return was 126;
in 1850, 130; and in 1851, 180; giving an average of
148.—(Hear, hear.) In the Beccles House of Correction
the number of prisoners, on the 17th of February, 1846,
Ives '22, on the same day in 1851 it was 41, or nearly
double, They had heard much of the competition for
farms. The only competition he knew of was a compe-
tition to get them at lower rents.—(Hear.) He said that
before depriving them of protection, equitable arrange-
ments should have been made. The land was the
basis on which the institutions of the country rested. It
had to support an Established Church, which cost
8,000,0001. a-year. It had to support the poor. at an ex-
pense of six or seven millions a year more. When they
talked of the property of the country supporting the
poverty of the country, they ought to do justice to the
holders of that property, and he did hope that her Ma-
jesty's Government would reconsider the subject, with a
view of granting relief to an interest they admitted to be
suffering under distress.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of WINOLIILSEA. said that vhen Noble
Lords opposite advocated free trade, they, and the late
Sir R. Peel also, had stated that less than 545. a quarter
would not be a remunerating price to the British farmer;
but the price at • the present moment was only 87s.
a quarter. The difference between 545. and 375. a
quarter showed, he thought very clearly, that the whole
rental of the country was at this moment lost by the chansre.
He had no hesitation in saying that agriculture had
been going back gradually ever since those changes were
made, He had seen in many districts the wheat mown
instead of being tint as usual, and he believed that the
wheat crop was less, by two millions of quarters, than it
would have been under protection. They were told to
employ more capital. In his own county more capital
had been employed in drainage and improvements than
be had ever known before, and yet he never knew so
much destitution or such au excess of crime. That state
of things existed in every county in England, and if
they persevered in the system which produced it, they
would bring the agricultural interest not only into a
state of great embarrassment, but of great contempt;
but it was not to Ire Oxpeoted that the great body of
agriculturists would sit down and see their interests en-
tirely destroyed without making a strong remonstracce
and appeal to the country. They would, he was quite sure,
have the feeling of England with them, and with such sup-
port, and such a case as theirs, they should not be afraid
to meet the manufacturing body of the country on the
question.—(Hear, hear.) The principle of free trade
he did not deny, so far as its benefits extended and ap-
plied to foreign markets; but when it came to bo regarded
in relation to its bearing on the home markets of this
country, he denied its alleged advantage. The Govern-
ment had brought the landed interest of this country
into great distress by their policy, and much of the
blame of the sufferings of that class was attributable to
the course pursued by her Majesty's Ministers.—(Hear.)
The Earl of MALMEaBURY said the question was,
whether the agricultural interest was really in distress
or not ; and the next question was, whether the Go-
vernment was justified in neglecting that part of the
community, and not bringing forward those measures
which were calculated for their relief. But a fort-
night ago, it was confessed in her Majesty's Speech
that the agricultural interest was in a state of distress.
Since the Speech from the Throne, events had taken
place in the other House to which he thought he had a
right to refer, Opinious were expressed, and impressions
were endeavoured to be made in contradiction of the
opinions expressed in the Royal Speech. He might al-
lude to the division which lately took place in the other
House of Parliament, and he believed he was right in
saying•that it was the opinion of a large body of the
people of the country, and of this metropolis, that were
it not for the extraneous support which her Majesty's
Government received on that occasion they would have
been in a minority.—(Hear, hear.) He could not but al-
lude to the manner in which the Right Hon. Baronet, the
Member for Ripon, rushed in, when he saw them in
difficulty, to save them.—(Hear, and laughter, increased
by the attention of the House being directed to Sir
James Graham, who was seated in the commoners'

-----.-
,
gallery, and looking down at and listening to the Noble
Earl.) Yes, the Right Hon. Baronet, seeing her Ma-
jesty's Ministers in difficulty, rushed in to the rescue,
and in a speech of great ability and great talent, saved
them. The Right Hon. Baronet had, howevs7,
speech said that the alleged distress of_ 1- in that
agricultural
interest was very doubtful, notyv
Speech from the Throne that.
The Right Hon. Barone•
.- ittstanding that in the
stress had been admittdv
was reported to have ettid, that
e the county of Northumberland, he
in his is
withoutown y
rd of land unlet which he wished to let,
and thatt nottb years changed any of his
r five
But the B,ight Honourable
t ennaris.— he
:d h e
hear.)
Bar°7..et did not tell his audience how much he had laid
"...at in improving his land..,lle (the Earl of Malmesbury)
had, however, heard from other sources that the Right
Het. Baronet had laid out a considerable amount
in the improvement of his estates. The question was not
what was the state of this man's property or that, but
rather what was the state of England and Wales, and
Scotland and Ireland? He (the Earl of Italmesbnry)
knew an estate that let at 3,0004 a year before the repeal
of the corn-law. but that estate did not now tet.,,K,r
more than 2,2001. per annum.--t Tear, hear.) Tire
owner of the farm had then taken it intO bit own hands,
and spent a considerable amount its Improving it, Being
a man of spirit and great industry, h
et was not to be
alarmed at tbo discourse
,-hg aset' 'et of things. Time
went on and prices did rise; on the contrath ah-ti
(the Earl of MalmeLtir,
y) was told that lts 650, after
considerable out,'
y he had been obliged to let the farm
for 1,7001., ;arts of it at a variable rent, The Nolelt
Earl he.,ee read a letter from a correspondent, stating
thr.:
6 for a farm fur which ho was in the habit of receiviug
6001. a year rent, he now only received 4504, and that
for another which he received 7001. a year rent for, he
now only received 5301., although he had incurred much
expense in liming and draining it, the reduction being 20
per cent. He would not mention names, but the writer
remarked, that the reductions in the value of farms
seemed oddly enough to have:fallen more on the Free-
traders than the Protectionieti. He should not dwell
fuirther on the statements put forth in that letter; but
he should say a few words of his own case. His own
estate was, at that moment, worth something like 20 per
cent. less than it was before the repeal of the corn-laws.
It was not " a dream of theirs," they prophesied it; it
sv'ts not, he re.:retted, a dream, nhhough it might
be so to Noble Lords opposite. The Government wore
responsible for the evils, and they were bound to
do something to obviate the distress from which the