The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-13 00:00:00

---
I parative prosperity and ahurlance.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
Ily leaving the question in doubt they were preventing the
application to the land of that skill and capital which were ne-
cessary for the security of rent, and by thus repressing enter-
prise they (the landlords) were in reality inuring themselves.
—( Hear.) When it vas said by Hon. Gentlemen opposite
, that free trade produced insecurity, and when they described it
! as something horrible and frightful to contemplate, he would
I ask them to look back for the last 15 or 20 years of the cern-
mereial history of the country, and to point out any instance
1 in which measures of relief, or approximation to the free trade
principle, had not materially tended to produce wealth and con-
-1 fidence.—( Hear, hear. He would put the question at issue
on that point alone, and he would abandon the argument if
they could show him a single instanee in which an alteration
in favour of the free trade principle diminished wealth or les-
sened the confidence of the classes more immediately affected
by it.—( Hear) No doubt all alterations produced at the time
some extent of mischief, but the evil was to be laid at the door
of those who built up a house on a false foundation, on which
it was impossible that it could have stood, and not to those who
witnessed the fall. The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract
from Cobbetes Weekly Register, stating that the corn-laws
i were prejudicial to the farmers and agricultural labourers, and
pointing out the cot:sequences of admitting foreign corn into
the country. He then continued to say that it was impossible
that a sufficient supply of corn could be produced in this
country for all the manufacturing classes, and that when they
were thus unable to give them a sufficient supply of bread, they
ought not to prevent them from manufacturing goods for those
who would give them food in return. He considered that
corn ought to be regarded as being as much a portionln various
ovfarßrui-s
Bri-
tish trade as any branch of their manufactures.
years when foreign corn was admitted they found no conse-
quent distress attend the agricultural labourers, but directly
the reverse.—( Hear.) He then read a passage from a pa-
per written by the Bight Hon. Gentleman, the President of the
Board of Trade, de scribing the necessity of having the mantle
facturers placed in a position to compete with the markets of
the world, and then continued to say that he did not think they
should have a Minister of the Crown putting forward such
statements for his private interests out of that Mouse, and pur-
suing the course which they had witnessed that evening as a
Member of the Government.—( Hear.) They had no right to
increase trade at the expense of the manufacturers, as they
had witnesses in many instances in the tariff of last year, while
they, at the same time, refused to allow them the proper oppose
tunities of procuring ford in return for their goods. He wee
certain the speech of his Hoe. Friend, the Member for Stock-
port, would produce a very great effect upon the country, and
he could tell Gentlemen in the lower part of the I-louse that
if they had to go before their constituents in some great town
in Nottinghamshire, they would find the question of the repeal
i of the corn-laws one of much greater importance than they
might at present be inclined to suppose.—( Hear and laugh-
i ter. He would give his most earnest, though humble, support
to the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Stockport ;
land he was certain that the question which that Hon. Gentle-
man so ably advocated would, before long, produce practical
results of the greatest possible advantage to the country at
t large,—(Bear, hear, and cheers.)
Lord POLLINGTON opposed the motion. He said it was
impossible to deny that the question before the House was one
of very great importance. It was his belief that a people could
enjoy no greater blessing than free trade ; but, in order to
make it a blessing, it was necessary that it should be entirely
free, and not consist of that kind of free trade which the late
President of the Board of Trade so much admired—namely, the
free admission into the country of the produce of ether coun-
tries that continued to impose heavy duties on English goods.
—( Hear.) Ile trusted they would hereafter see the day when
i all the great commercial nations of the world would awaken totheir true interests, and open their respective harbours free to
\all the world. lie did not consider the Right Hon. Baronet
at the head of her Majesty's Government altogether opposed:
to the principle of direct taxation, for, by resorting to it, he
had already restored the equilibrium between the revenue anus'
the expenditure of the empire. The Noble Lord concluded by
1 referring to a mistake made by the Morning Chronicle, in a
leading article, in confounding the Chairman of the Tory Com-
mittee at Braiford with a Mr. Rain, who presided at a recent
meeting of the Anti-Corn-law League.
Mr. SCOTT slid it was not his intention to trespass Sett t?
time of the House ; but as the Scotch Members Vsed been.
alluded 'o, he did not think it right to remain altogether silent.
He would feel obliged to oppose the motion of the Hon. Member
for Stockport, because, though he believed him to be a sincere,
advocate for the interests of the League, still he did not *regard
hint as filling the like character towards the class "71,191/3 he at
present professed to support. The Hon, AiZmber said if the
Committee were granted he would only examine before it landlords and tenant-farmers ; but !;b would ask, why should the
agricultural labourers be le`.l out?—( Hear.) The next matter.
referred to by the I.llln. Gentleman was the corn-law of 181.5 s
but if he understood the question at all he believed the corn-
laws to be in existence since the time of King Charles IL
Why, then, did he not refer to the corn-laws which had been
passed since that time ? All the corn-laws, in the meanwhile,
bore as much upon his subject as the present, and they bad as.
much relation to the corn-laws of 1815. He believed that that
interests of the manufacturers and the agriculturists were really
the same, and it was unjust and pernicious to attempt to raise a
difference between them. The landlords wished for plenty in
order to improve the condition of the labourers, and not for•! scarcity, in order to afflict them. The condition of the people,
i was better now than it was sixy years ago, when we had only
i one-half the population, and only one-third of the taxation.
1 The Hon. Gentleman ( Mr. Cobden) brought forward the ease
of wool to show that when the duty was small the
consumption was great. But he overlooked the fact that
the wool imported was chiefly from the colonies,
and therefore there was no parallel between the cases of wool
and corn. The Hon. Gentleman had also done an injustice in
comparing the amount of wages paid by landlords and mane-
' facturers, fur he did not tell the House that the landlords de-
rived very small profits from large capital, and the manuface-
turers derived large profits from comparatively small capital.
As to the statements made respecting Dorsetahire, he (Mr.
Scott) had no doubt that Dorsetshire would defend itself. The
statements (if true) were such as to make the heart bleed.—
(Hear, hear,) But the Hon. Gentleman had the assurance to
speak of Scotland.—( Laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman
seemed to him to depart front accuracy just in proportion as he
departed from the " tall chimneys" which he so much admired.
\ —(Laughter and cheers.) The statements which the Hon.
Gentleman had made respecting respecting Scotland were un-
founded in fact, notwithstanding the assurance of the Hon. Mem-
ber. The Hon. Gentleman stated that he was totally ignorant of
the subject. The official returns, as to the duration of life in
agriculture and manufactures, showed that the average dura-
tion of life in the agricultural districts was 32 years, whilst in
the manufacturing it was no more than 16 or 17 years, or
about one-half.—(llear, hear, and laughter.) 'I hen, as
respected the advantages to be gained by free-trade, in conse-
quence of the supposed increase of tra'ie to ensue upon it, was
it all clear that the corn-growing countries would take our
manufactures in return for their produce? The utmost amount
that capital invested in land produced was about 3 per cent.,
whereas 50 per cent. was frequently made by those who invested
their capital in manufactures. The Hon. Mover had also
accused the landlords of being the cause of pauperism, but he
was satisfied that more pauperism was created by the manufac-
turers.—( Hear, hear.) Ihe Hon. Gentleman had also called
upon the gentlemen connected with Scotland, to state what
was the feeling of the farmers in that part of the empire ; and
he (Mr. Scott), as the representative of a Scotch county, would
answer, that the farmers in that country were entirely opposed
to the Honourable Mover, and regarded the question as etas
mhich concerned them, and not the landlords—(Bear. )
Lord WORSLEY had not intended to trespass on the
House upon this question, because he thought that if the mo-
tion was carried it would lead to a renewal of the import du-
ties. But having heard the speech of the Hon. Member for
Stockport he saw that it was part of the object that the Com-
mittee should inquire into the management of land. The Ho-.
nourable i‘lember for Stockport had stated that the re-
munerating price of the present rates of the market was
sufficient for the farmer if he paid only an adequate rent. But.
he (Lord Worsley) had received a letter from a farmer is
Lincolnshire, which stated in detail the whole of the receipts
for his produce in four years, which showed that the market
price did not repay the expense of the labour alone. The
Hon. Member for Stockport had excepted the county of Lin-
coln from the charge which he made against agriculturists for
giving too low wages. He (Lord W.) must admit that the
wages said to be given in the south were not such as could
sustain life ; and he must also say that he knew it wasthe
fact, that although the wages in "Yorkshire and Lincoln were
higher than those paid in the south, they were not
sufficient ; but they had the effect of procuring the
work to be better done, and the farmers found that
their money was well laid out, and the labourers were more
contented than he was afraid they were in those countries where
wages were lower. He would also admit that the law was
working better than the farmers had expected, but yet what
they received was not enough to pay them. It had also been
said that in the southern districts wages would not be raised •
without the system of leases. But in answer to that he must
say that in Lincolnshire leases were the exception. But then it
was the practice in that country to allow land to be held in suc-
cession from father to son—( Bear).—and the result was to create
confidence on the part of the farmers, and also on the part of
the labourers.--( Cheers.) Last winter, wages were lower thaw
usual, but they had not been lower than 9s.—(Hear, hear, from.
Co). Sibtliorp. ) Yet the usual rate of wages was 12s. a-week,
the whole year round.— ( Hear, hear.) The general custom:
in that country was to pay by task-work, and he believed he
was correct in saying, that the average earning in those cases
was from 13s. 6d. to 16s. a-week.---( Hear, hear, from Cels
sibthorp, and a laugh.) Although he did not agree in all
subjects with the Hen. Member for Stockport, he thought that
gentleman had done much good by drawing the attention of
the landlords to a subject which he feared was too much ne-
glected, namely, the condition of the labourers.—(Cheers.'-
He thought they should be impressed with the conviction, that:
tee payment of adequate wages would be most advantageous,
as well as most creditable to themselves—(Cheers)—and that
they would find themselves repaid by the productivenet of
their land and the increased content of the people.--(Cheers.)
lie thought, if they went into Committee, there would be
such a diversity of opinion as to the remedy to be applied to the
state of affairs complained of by the Hon. Metnber who brought
forward the present motion, that no good would be effected,
and he must, therefore, refuse to give his support to the motion.
Mr. B. COCHRANE begged to state that he had received,
a letter from the Hon. Member who had- notice of an amend-
ment on this subject (Mr. Ferrand), stating that he was unable
to bring it forward in consequence of his having been detained
at the Yorkshire Assizes.
Mr. CURTEIS said that, in the part of the country
(Sussex) with which he was connected wages were equally
high. He gave his own labourers, generally, 126. per week,
and he gave them not more than his neighbours. The Hots.
Member for Stockport had not convinced his (Mr. Curties's)
mind, and tbough he was in favour of a fixed duty in prefer-
ence to a sliding scale, yet, if he were much pressed, he would go
from a fixed duty to a sliding scale.—( A laugh.) lie emigre
dered the agricultural interest the paramount interest of thee
country, and that interest he was determined most cordially to
support. He must give his opposition to the motion of the
Hon. Member for Stockport.
Mr. BROTHERTON said that the speech of the Hoc,
Gentleman who spoke last showed him the truth of the adage,
" Convince a man against his will,
He's of the same opinion still."
—(Laughter.) The question was, who was in the right, who
in the erong?—whether protection to agriculture was for the
benefit of the farmer and agricultural labourer, or not? As the
question was controverted lie concurred with the Hon. Mem-
ber for Stockport, that the best way to ascertain which was,
right was to investigate the subject thoroughly, whirl,;
could be best done in the Committee for which the Hon. Mem-
ber had moved. The Hon. Gentleman who spoke last said he
considered the agricultural interest the paramount interest.
He (Mr. Brotherton) was at issue with the Hon. Member on
that subject. He believed the agriculturul labourers, farmers,
and graziers of the country formed not one-tenth part of the
population of the country. In the agricultural counties they
were not one-third of the people employed. He had examined
the condition of twenty-three counties, the principal part of
which were agricultural; and he found that out of their popu-
lation, amounting to 6,038,833, there were employed in trade,
and various other occupations, 1,559,612 persons; and in ages.
culture, including farmers, graziers, yeomen, and agri-
cultural labourers in the whole of those twent-three
counties, 585,104, making a total of 2,144,71b5 and
showing that all the classes of agriculturists together bore only
the proportion of 27 per cent. to the whole number employed,
while those engaged in trade and otherwise were 33 per cent.
of the whole. In the agi icultural districts of Lancashire there
were not more than 32 per cent. employed in proportion to the
whole population. He contended, therefore, that the agri-
cultural interest was nut the paramount interest of the country, •
and that they ought not to have a law for their own benefit at