The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-26 00:00:00

he
thought that the entire proposition was unsound ; did
not believe it was true, that the vendor of grain was We-
rested in the cheapness of the commodity ; at the setae
time he admitted, that farmers were more interested ttl.
obtaining an advance on the price of corn than lant.
lords. He should- only trouble their Lordships with
one other doctrine on the same side of the questiooi
which he considered equally erroneous ; it was the
proposition, that to place a large portion of the popula-
tion in a state entirely dependent on the foreigner for s
supply of corn, would be, to produce that -commodity et 5
cheaper rate, than if the entire population were obliged to
depend upon the supply afforded by this country. Thigd
would be placing a large body of the people at the mercy
of
the foreign grower, and would, no doubt, be disadvantee-
geous to the supply which could be brought into tn
markets. He had troubled their Lordships with some
'doctrines adopted by one side, which he considered OW
gerated, and. of which he disapproved ; he should not de-
tain them long with remarks, upon some opposite opinion
equally erroneous in their nature. It could easily be pray
that the existing law was only to be maintained by 601'"
stant relaxations and changes. The law of 1815, and 0'
had been justly stated to be one and the same. Witt°
the space of not quite five years, which had elapsed sty
bses
quoit to the passing of the law of 1822, 3,318,000 guar'
tern of foreign wheat had been admitted into this costar?"
This fact proved, that the exclusive system could not ote
maintained. Having taken some of the extreme poi°
upon both sides, and endeavoured to refute them, he al
at liberty to say, that he thought 'the bill, now hecre
their Lordships, had this advantage, that it stood be;
tween both extremes, and was calculated to benefit e',
classes of the community—one branch of which cor
is
e.not suffer, without another being sure to suffer in
turn. One advantage had been derived ahead},
from the very introduction 'of the bill, which had' c 00"
ciliated the animosities previously existing between P;sii
interests, that ought never to be separated—the agrienittl to
and commercial classes. He was sorry to be obliged
cit
say, that these classes had been set in array against ef'itt
other, but he confidently hoped, the present measure sveli,
have the effect of reconciling them. He should now 110;
tarn that principle, which he considered as forming the sac
basis for sound legislation on the subject of the Corn Tral
—this principle tallied so entirely with that of the 13!
now before their Lordships, that he felt it impossible) 'ft;
stating it, not to give his entire assent to the measure, a%
to convert the statement into an argument conclusive,
far as his own mind was concerned), in favour of the 13n
The principle he was disposed to advocate was, to fix salt
a duty on the importation of foreign grain, as wouldiA
once protect the farmer and the landowner from ruin rs
injury, and preserve the consumer from the mischief tsi;
must ensue, if he were entirely dependent for support tiPSO
foreign countries. At the same time, by regulating a
importation of foreign corn, according to the price of h,,ow.
produce, any thing like security would be prevented.
hid
was a better system than the existing one,
made it necessary frequently to resort to the in":„,"
position of Parliament, and Government—an ."/
terposition always delicate, and sometimes rnischie/i'c
ous. Now, this was the principle of the Bill, °lt
on this ground he felt bound, not only to vote for it, hitt
support it with the utmost cordiality. He had looked_l
the scale of duties proposed, with great attention ; perh_,lr
in the original schedule the price of Oats and Barley 17:4
not in proportion to that of Wheat, but these two ta
been subsequently altered. If it required any argument'
chew the fallacy of feats which existed in the minds'
many in that House, and out of doors, it might be f
in what they had all witnessed since the month of 5e..11;
tember last, when foreign Oats- were admitted into °J,
ports. They had already been admitted to an enornel
amount, and, as the Noble Lord (Malmesbury) stated, t:
importation was going on at this moment, to a great eof'
tent. Yet it bad not considerably lessened the rice
the commodity in the home market. The fact that or.
wards of a million quarters -had been introduced, Vii,
duty of 25., and that the duty levied at the present st().t,
was not more than Bd.—a duty which. was merely n°T,e s
nal, while the price of the grain in question was big
act
than most persons could desire it to be, was the, stroogs t
argument in favour of the proposed law ; indeed, be did Ori
see how persons could object to that measure, on the gl:_itcu:cl
that it did not afford sufficient protection, when it app at
that the average of Oats for the last six months was 28 o,
an importation duty lower than that proposed by the
The duty on foreign Oats, when the price was taresti,e
eight shillings, would be four shillings, according tn.cresS'
schedule attached to the Bill now before the House. 'tee
a duty, one-half the amount of that, nntwithstanding ffi,
great introduction of foreign Oats, was found to be 511.4
cient to sustain the prices of the commodity. 113;01,
stated that he would give his cordial support to the be
and mentioned the reasons which induced him to
do s,t be
was perfectly ready to admit that there were parts °1 ss,
measure which he thought susceptible of . improvelne
modification, and even of change, if that could be offset's,
However, lie distinctly and openly avowed his opit'i°,
that if the Bill was of that peculiar nature, that the altedlisi
tion of any of its clauses 'night endanger its success tea,
session, he„would not be a party to overthrowing a 113,#
sure, the general principle of which he approved. It but
unnecessary for him to be more explicit on the subjects be
Noble Lords would perceive to what lie alluded, an„ei
repeated, that if any proposed change, in any of the de',iis
of the Bill, would go to endanger the present success ofvtr
measure, he, for one, was ready to take it as it was. tber
they than risk the chance of its postponement to ;
session, he should vote for it, in its present shape and for of
because lie thought anything better than that a inessurese
such paramount importance should be permitted to
up for another session.
Lord MANSFIELD said, the objections of the sgt-•ast
turists were not directed against the principle, buteg!oo,
the operation, of the law ; and for its defects, the!..d— to
ceived an adequate remedy might be found. He objet rod
the present Bill, because it did not afford proper protee for
to the agriculturist. He thought the best protection jos
the British agriculturist was to be found in the es city
of foreign grain, except in times of ecarcity—that sea'
to be denoted by the price of corn in the home mariset'o,
There were two defects in the Bill of 1815, which se
unlined unaltered in that of 1822. The first was attaist
effectual protection afforded to oats, the price of which °:`
to be kept up to 30s. or 325. The second defect al*ofs
respect to the averages. Viewing importation as onlYios
tifiable in case of scarcity, he objected to taking the
rages in some particular districts, without reference t 0 .f
whole country. It was inconsistent to deprecate 6ji
as an evil, and assume its existence on inadequate hole?
tion. What objection could there be to the Bill of 1°...00
Had the importing price, which is fixed, raised their,ses
of corn? The returns on the table negatived
of
supposition. An objection brought against the P'"
1822 was, that it had not prevented fluctuationvde
prices. Certainly it had not : but when he looked
to the averages of the last two hundred Years6"og'
found variances of 40 or 50 per cent. frequently oees* lie'
Since 1822, the fluctuations had not been so great as :Iceo
viously ; yet, if they had, there were other circunlstanst
which might have occasioned these, independent of the V5eOG
Had the measure of 1822 been the cause of the Pr!jer
manufacturing distress ? He thought not. In cons' she
ing the circumstances which gave rise to the distress, jo,
change in the currency ought not to be omitted. He 03350. e
tamed that a high governing importation price did not !refs
the price of corn in the home market. The manufee°.,de
had learned, by sad experience, that the necessity of if?,
testi= had crippled theme of those who were dope,
and ought to ireetheeprefisrable, consumers of that pee 0,0
The Bill of 1822 bad -been stated to be inadequotesoso
protective measure ; but he contended, that no prowl,
afforded that- the principle of-eceinsion ought to beDe
doped. It was said, that the- Bill. now proposed sc.). it
was, he tonaitiered it equally erroneous in
innovation, but return to theancient *system e whicheveie
principle's pre
wished to guard against being supposed to object to thtsee°
sent measure, on the ground of its novelty; that circuity f°
t
he begged to assure their Lordships, should, with hito,b,
no objection. It was upon quite different considerations eifeb
it his duty to resist the progress of the Bill. lie conc,ao;
that the best course had not been taken to arrive at a sool'bjee.
cision on the question then before the House. The Ootsfr
which the framers of the Bill bad in view was, it al.50011:1
ed, to afford protection to the agriculturist. Obvlssools'
the judicious mode of proceeding in such a case, %olio'
have been to institute an inquiry into the cost cars ;1
in this country, attended the production .f.
and a similar inquiry into the cost attendan"„asses,
its production abroad. It was only when, in taw,
sion of such data as these inquiries, if successful, sc°,u es°,
furnished that Parliament could, on safe grounasd'optiee
proceeded to fix a rate of duty. Now, instead of a or3liCe
this course. Parliament proceeded to legislate inig"A Abe 4
of both. They commenced their legislation, i
hrosra
called evidence as to the cost and means of produetiescsoe'
But, though an inquiry to the extent he inentionee_ro jos
have done much towards supplying sound and n_logaiei,
formation, yet, alone, it would prove insufficient. An it, s
of
into the state of the currency ought to accomPalgtion
nothing could be more manifest than that the co: „t. de"l
the currency had the effect of materially elevati g ael"
pressing the prices of corn. The sudden expenscolcriditie7
contractions of the currency, which a certain a,
of it necessarily involved, must affect every. Pro
_sthelae,,
the country, and, moreespecially the production
,01_..rsolee
He felt much difficulty in understanding. hyo_re'cs"ast
Lord could give hie support to a measure s hs a