The Sun.
London, England, 1820-08-01 00:00:00

TUESDAY, AUGUST 1, 1820

LEWES WOOL FAIR.

REPORT of the EARL of SEIEFFIELD to the MEETING

at LEWES WOOL FAIR, on the ‘2 GUI Ju!y.

(Continued front our Paper of yesterday.)

The preceding statement might pave been thought unneces-
sary if it bad.not evidently appeared, that the attempt to pro-
cure the repeal of the duty on Wool would be repeated—
therefore, we must be prepared to resist these unreasonable
attacks, and by no means repose under the idea that the ques-
tion is at rest. This is not the case; nor is this the only
point on which we should be on our guard. It seems meant-

bent on me to take advantage of the present occasion to notice
a still mote important and alarmiug attack that has been
lately made on the Landed Interest, that is, the Owners and
Occupiers of Land, by the Petitions, Speeches, and Publica-
tions of the Merchbots and-others, respecting the restrictions
on Foreign Commerce. Their applications to Parliament are
a sting of mere abstract propositions, contained in plausible,
sophistical, and artfully coustructed sentences, calculated to
delude and mislead those who throngh ignorance of such shh-
4iccts are incapable of competent discrimination. These Peti-
tions and some accompanying Speeches of extraordinary flip-
pancy. denounce our Curt, and our Navigation Laws, the re-
vered and sacred principles of which have justly been consi-
dered, the one as our great preservative against (amine, the
other as tilt guardian of our Naval prosperity. It must not
be supposed, thal these observations are intended to apply to
the British Merchants generally, than whom a more respecta-
ble body does not. exist, or men of more liberality and good
sense—but to the Reforming Theorists, who would risk the
best interests of the State to gratify their speculations.
• The object seems to be to change every Institution, Regu-
lation and System, that has been sanctioned bythe experience
of ages. Freedom from Restriction might indeed benefit and
increase the profits of the individual Met chant, but it will be
at the expence of the Conntry at large. Whenever the impor-
tation from other Cou tithes depresses the value,and therefore,
checks the produce of our own Country, it is most injurious
to our resources and to the nation. Foreign Commerce is
beneficial when it respects those articles which cannot be
raised at home, and promotes the Exportation of such pro-
duce and manufacture as this Country can furnish to advan-
tage. Neither diplomatic negociation nor treaty can secure
the admission of our Exports into other countries, when

those countries can obtain them cheaper or better elsewhere.
The presumption of sending delegates to oppose the decla-
rations of hostility against the revisal of the Corn Laws, and
the opinions offered to the Legislature were most extraordis
nary. Is it not evident that some measure is necessary in
support of the Agriculture of the Country ? Is it not known
front the accounts laid before Parliament, ithat in 1817 and
1813, grain and flour to the amount in value of 21,035,5241.
was imported into Great Pritain ; and, that in 1800 and 1801,
anequal sum went to the encouragement of Foreign Agricul-
ture, and consequently to the depression of our own ? Thus
upwards of forty millions sterling were thrown into the ba-
lance of Trade against this Country in the coarse of four
years for au article, every grain of which might have been
grown in the United Kingdom, if better pulley had existed,
and due encouracement bad been elven to the cnttivation of
our Waste Lands, whereby the whole of our peopo:! NOil Its
have been profitably occupied, and those who are now consi-
dered as the greatest. burl hen to the State, and sent to dis-
tant regions, would hare been beneficially employed at home.
In a former Report I stated, that if tillage should fail, or
our harvest he ,deficient, so far that we should want some-
thing more than two months consumption, all our wealth,
and all the measures that it is possible to adopt, would not
secure to us a sufficient supply. The public is perhaps not
fully aware of the calamity that may arise from a decrease of
tillage, and increase of population. To explain the above
assertion, it is necessary to observe, that the quantity of Wheat
that came from abroad in the year 1706 amounted to
820,381 quarters of Wheat, and 205,86 G cwt. of fluor,—one-
third more than hail ever heen imported before, yet there
was only a sufficiency for the consumption of twtethirds* of
the people forthitty-nine days; and of that quantity, 753.356
quarters came tr,,m the North of Europe. The importation
of wheat and flour into Great Britain, forthe year 1.800, (the
Hoer being reduced into quarters) was 1478,108 quarters,
which was 389,015 quarters snore than had hcen imported in
1796, much the largest importation that had ever taken place,
and was only a sufficiency fur 58 days subsistence for eight
!pillions of people, although every practicable means had
been used by bounties and otherwise to procure the largest
supply possible.
IL has been artfully and unfairly proclaimed that any in-
. •
quiry, examination, or discusiion onthe Corn Laws, would
disturb and distract the country; but why that distraction
shOuld ensue is by no means explained. Nor can it be ex-
plained
except by the prevalence of a disposition to evade
and put off the evil day of embarrassment, by which the dif-
ficulty is greatly increased, and the public interest deeply in-
jured. It was said that the Agriculturists were suffering less
than any other class of the people ; but this is the assertion
of persons utterly unacquainted with the subject, who perhaps
are more conversant wills business on the Exchange. The
Agriculturists are snore leaded.with !axes, tythes, poor-rates,
and assessments, than Any desciiption of the people, at the
same time that they pay all other taxes and assessments in
commoe with the test of the community. To these, however,
they unavoidably and patiently submit: but as to the inter-
ference of Foreign Grain and Foreign Wool, they pray that
the remedy which is in our power May be granted. That.
remedy would not raise the price of bread as is
'suggested,,
but undoubtedly its the end, would lower it. The qut stion,
however, is not. merely whether they are more oppressed, but
whether the Agriculture of the Country,—the subsistence of
the people, is likely to be diminished, which will be the cer-
tain consequence if till-age is not encouraged and protected.
To return, however, to Our own situation and circumstances;
whilst some have denied the existence of the distress among
the Agriculturists, others have admitted it, but attributed its
origin and cause to high and extravagant rents. It is to be
wished, thought certainly not to be expected, that those who
have so great a facility in making such observations, and re-
commending that we should abandon our equipages and a few
luxuries, would also recommend the reduction of ,the interest
of money, especially of the Funds, and thus place land anti
money more nearly on a level. They perhaps are not aware
of the very considerable reduction of rent and retrenchment
of expence which have taken place in thegreater part of Great
Britain and Ireland. On the rents of lands depend a thou-
sand engagements, and established distribution of labour and
Comfort, which must give way with the rents themselves;
and as far as the price of Grain is-concerned, the difference
between what is deested a highs and moderate rent, goes but
little way-in the expence of tillage. The object of the Agri-.
cultural Petitions was merely to' obtain protection front an
overflow of Foreign Grain. They did not propose any thing.
that would raise the price of Corn, but they prayed for
an examination whether the law- answers . the intended
purpose, or. whether the limitation on the admis-
sion of Grain is sufficiently high Or tiot and whether on
inquiry and examination any alteration would be found ne-
cessary. A more respectable Body of Petitioners never ap-
plied to Parliament on any occasion. The Petitions came
from every County and district in England—from almost the
a bole of the Agricultural Population of the Kingdom. Yet
these Petitioners, thus numerous and thus respectable, have
been subjected to a severe degree of Mortification ; they have
just cause to be disgusted by the treatment of their Petitions':
by the frivolous and trifling manner in which they hare been
dismissed. The disgraceful•mode of over-thling a decision of
the House by the weight of influence, which if it did not en-
courage attention, to the Player of the Petitions should at
least have beets neutral, still not be forgotton. We cannot
copceive a more injudicious policy than that of thus disgust-
ing the land-owner and occupier, who have at no time.devia-
ted front the paths of true Loyalty and Patriotism. The
House decided generally that the Committee shOuld inquire
into the allegations; but the next day that Committee was in-
structed not to attend to the Prayer of the Petitions, nor even
permitted to make an inquiry into the general question of
the averages as applied to the kingdom at large, but were re-
stricted to an examination ('f abuses in the mode of taking
the averages in the :Maritime districts only A restriction'

Allowing one-tbirtl to be fed can barley and oatenbrtacl,
yotatoes,!Acc.