The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-20 00:00:00

accommodated to' circumstances. The duty upon
corn, according to the present Wan, varied, he -.be-
lieved, from 13s. to 15s. per quarter.—(The Ho
Member was here informed that this day's duty wee
about 13s.)—That was about what he thought.
Now he would propose that, instead of being, as at
present, fixed upon a graduated scale, rambling
through uncertain variations, a fixed duty should be
put—say of lbs. per quarter Upon wheat, 10s. upon
barley, and Ss. upon oats. This would be about the
relative amount of their value. If they would allow
him to go into a Committee, lie would then propose
that from these rates there should be an annual re-
duction of ls., (for himself he should prefer it to be
2s. or 35.), and he relied not So much on the advan-
tage of this gradual reduction as upon the acknow-
ledgment of the principle that the ports were to be
open, at a fixed rate for corn to the free trader, as well
as in all other articles. Were this once enacted, the
advantage, lie contended, would be much in favour
of the agriculturist. To examine this point, he
would call their attention to the manner in which
the fixed duty would operate. It would at once
open the ports of Great Britain for the reception of
her proportion of the surplus corn of all the other
countries in the universe. God knows, they had
manufacturers enough to pay for every thing, pro-
vided they could obtain proper employment. The
effect of the measure would undoubtedly be to raise
the price of corn all over the world, and England
would have the means of exchanging her manufac-
tures for her share of the commodity. In this plan
there would, he believed, be no fluctuation or alter-
nation of price, vibrating in the markets, and alarm-
ing the people. The more the markets (like indi-
viduals) were scattered in this wide world, the less
chance there would be of a reduction of demand for
their manufactures, and the less probability of that
deficient supply of food which occasionally led to
famine and misery, and in fact was the alleged cause
of these corn laws. A steady price would, by open-
ing the market, generally keep the commodity at its
fair value, and prevent those dangerous vacillations
of which every body complained. It would also
prevent gluts, for the demand for their manufactures
would be regulated by the exchanges, and the prices
would be equally determined. Another advantage
from the change would be, their getting rid of
the monstrous and unwieldy machinery of what were
called the averages. The country gentlemen who
depended upon the, equity of these were not
aware of the tricks and frauds which were daily
practised in the regulation of these averages.—
He had then another proposition, which he hoped
they would concur with him in thinking beneficial,
and which lie thought was only fair as long as the
duty should be continued. For instance, instead of
leaving the farmer ruined, as he sometimes was, by
a plentiful harvest, lie should be ready to give him
a bounty on exportation, to enable him to meet his
home calls. This would have the effect of levelling
the prices pretty fairly throughout Europe. An in-
telligent farmer had once told him, that he was
obliged to sell his corn to meet pressing exigencies
at 355. a quarter, and before seed time came to buy
it again at 55e. The Hon. Gentleman then pro-
ceeded, at considerable length, to refer to the re-
turns of the duty levied upon corn during the last
nine years, and to contend that under a proper sys-
tem of regulation a revenue of 1,200,0001., instead
of 256,0001., might have been raised upon them, to
the relief of the manufacturer, whose taxes would
then, in a great degree, be paid by the foreign con-
sumers. In his annual reduction of the duty upon
corn, he said, he meant to proceed until the agricul-
turist was liable to no other tax than society at
large. He complained that every article of food—
ham, eggs, hay, &c.,—was subject to heavy taxa-
tion, and denied that it was the agriculturist alone
who produced corn,—every artisan arid mechanic
equally Produced it, by fabricating an article
which was exchanged for the corn of foreign
states. If the principle which he recommended
was to be adopted, this land, so pregnant with
the materials of productive industry, would flow
with milk and honey.—(A laugh.)—A gentle-
man who had a farm a short distance from Man-
chester observed, that whenever trade was brisk
at that place, every article belonging to his farm
brought high prices, and added, that he could tell
without any particular information on the subject,
by the price which his bailiff obtained for the pro-
duce in the market, what was the state of trade in
Manchester. He thought he was borne out by every
proof and argument in the principle he had endea-
voured to establish, and that big principle, if adopted
and followed up, wonld lend to perfect freedom in
commerce with respect to every article. He desired
no other trammels to be imposed upon trade and.
commerce than such as might benecessary for raising
the revenue. Much as m e ought to attend to the
home market,—and he admitted that was an impor-
tant consideration,—he would not neglect the fo-
reign market. The consumers at home paid the
taxes ; but if we ever admitted the principle sought
to be established by Sir John Sinclair, with regard
to the support of the home market, independently of
the multitude of persons whom we should thus throw
out of employment, we should cast the whole
weight of 52,Q00,000/. of taxes (the amount now
levied) on the home market. He mentioned this as
a reason why the home market should not be held up
as the object of exclusive support and preference.
By carrying on commercial intercourse with foreign
states, we made foreigners pay a portion of our
taxes. There was, however, one objection which
he wished to anticipate. It would be said—
" This country is very heavily taxed, and there-
fore we cannot enter into competition with other
states not similarly burdened." Now heavy taxation
was a reason why we should endeavour to extend
our commerce, for in that way ouly could we get
free from the load which oppressed us. It was also
said, " countries where there is cheap corn are very
miserable." This was, because they had no manu-
factures, as in the cases of Ireland and Poland,where
corn was cheap for this reason. There the growers
of the article could not get corn to feed on. A
country without trade, as Ireland and Poland, was
in the situation of a country of slaves, where there
was plenty of rum, plenty of sugar, plenty of coffee,
plenty of cocoa, but the slaves got' none of them.
The slaves in the West Indies were unable to con-
sume the produce of the soil for the same reasons
exactly as rendered Irishmen unable to consume
wheat and oats. The latter got potatoes to feed
them, and nothing else; the wheat and oats went
in payment of rent to their landlords. Rear up a
portion of Irishmen as manufacturers, and then they
will be able to give their labour and ingenuity in
exchange for a portion of the wheat arid oats. It
was necessary to mention one other objection. Some
persons say, " it is not fit that we should trade with
other countries, if they will not trade with us on
equal terms." They add—" unless a principle of
reciprocity be acted on by them, it is proper to pro-
hibit the importation of foreign corn, so long as they
refuse to take British articles." He denied this—
admitted reciprocity was a good thing, and that if we
could persuade France to give her wine and oil in
exchange for our hardware and cloth, it would be
all very well : but still if she refuse to act thus, we
should not on that account decline to accept such
of her commodities as we could advantageously ac-
cept. We ought to take from France whatever
we could get cheaper than elsewhere. Russia
had put us under a ban as regarded recipro-
city, yet we good-naturedly took her hemp,
tallow, Lc. Why did we do this? We did not send
her any manufactured goods directly, and according
to the argument referred to, the amount of her deal-
ings with Russia must be a dead loss. But Russia
was supplied by France with brandy, wine, &c., and
Portugal sent her wine, olives, and other articles to
Russia. Our hardware and cloth found their way
into France (smuggled or not, it did not matter) ;
our jackets went to Portugal : and thus we paid for
Russian hemp and tallow as if our clothing and hard-
ware went direct to Russia in exchange for them.
The means by which the operation was effected
might be circuitous, but they involved a principle of
perfect reciprocity in the end. It was our duty to
buy at the cheapest and sell at the dearest market
we could, and thereby, and by multiplying our mar-