The Sun.
London, England, 1827-10-05 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, OCTOBER .5,. 1827.

EMIGRATION.

THIRD REPORT.

The Select Committee appointed to consider the Subject of
Emigration from the United Kingdom, and to whom the.
Report of the last 'Session, and the several Petitions
which have been presented to the House, in. the present
Session of Parliament, on the same subject, were re-
ferred ; and who wee' empowered to report their Oh-
Nervations and •Opittioil thereupon, together with the
Minutes of Evidence_ taken before them, front •time to
time, to the House ; have further considered the Matters
to them referred, and have agreed upon 'the following
Report.

(CONTINWED FROM YRSTERD4Y.)

4.-REMARKS ON THE APPLICATION OF A SYSTEM OP

REGULATED ENIGRATION, TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF

THE THREE COUNTRIES.
Having thus adverted to those circumstances
which appear to them peculiar to the three kiniz-:
&ins, your Committee beg make a few general re-
marks on principles equally applicable to all, and
upon the sounders of which the value of the remedy
proposed mainly depends.
• The first and main principle is, that labour, which
is the commodity of the poor man, partakes strictly,
as far as its value is concerned, of the circumstances
incident to other commodities; and that its price is
diminished in proportion to the excess of supply as
compared with the demand. If the demand for
labour be great, the wages of labour are high ; the
poor man, therefore, sells his commodity for a high
price. A contrary State of things produces a con-
verse of results. If this proposition be admitted, it
follows that if the supply of labour be permanently in
excess, as compared with the demand, the condition
of the lower classes must be permanently depressed,
and a state of things induced which is incompatible
with the prosperity of a great proportion of the popu-

lation, and equally so with the general interests of the
country, which are involved in the equalization of
national prosperity.

Your Committee feel it expedient to bring this
simple principle prominently forward, for the pur-
pose of refuting the erroneous notions and opinions
which are attempted to be inculcated upon this sub-
ject. The capitalist in England is reproached that
he intentionally withholds from the artisan those
wages which are fairly due to him : the fact being
that the rate of wages depends upon the supply of

labour (whether manufacturing or agricultural) as
compared with the demand for it. It is not to be
expected that the capitalist will purchase the com-
modity, labour, which he requires, at a higher price
than the market rate. If machine labour be as ef-

fectual, and more cheap than manual labour, he will
purchase it, that is, he will employ it in preference.
If it were to be contended that he ought not to do
so, the converse proposition would be equally true,
that when the wages of labour were high, arising
from an increased demand, the capitalist would be
justified in .calling upon the artisan to take lower,
wages-ttian tii-e—itarßer-ratt. In other words if the
artisan can fairly call upon the capitalist to pay him
wages higher than the marketrate when that market
rate is low, the capitalist can, with equal fairness,
call upon the artisan to take wages lower than the
market rate, when that market rate is high. The
one proposition is as unjust and as impracticable
as' the other; and your Committee are persuaded
that the House will concur with them in the.opi-
nion, that there is no point which requires more to
be explained to the lower classes than the impossi-
bility of regulating by law either the maximum or the
minimum of wages. '
It is from an entire ignorance of the universal
operation of the principle of supply and demand re-
gulating the rate of wages, that all those extrava-
gant propositions are advanced, and recommenda-
tions spread over the country, which are so 'calcu-
lated to excite false hopes, and consequently discon-
tent, in the minds of the labouring classes. Among
the most extravagant, are those brought forward be-
fore your Committee by a Society 'professing to be
established for the purpose of bettering the con-
dition of the manufacturing and agricultural la-
'bourers of Great Britain. The extent of miscon-
ception which appears to pervade the opinions of
this society, can only be fully understood by an ex-
amination of its doctrines, as explained in the evi-
dence and appendix.
Another elementary principle, to which your
Committee beg the particular attention of the House,
and in
.confirmation of which, all the practical evi-
dence, without exception, may be quoted, is the ef-
fect of a comparatively small excess of labour, occa-
sioning a deterioration of the condition of the la-
bourer, in the particular district where such excess
exists (or supposing the excess to be general, the
consequences are equally general), and the conse-
quent improvement of the whole body of labourers
by the abstraction and removal of any superabun-
dant 'portion. Every practical man, whether agri-
cultural, commercial, or manufacturing, is well aware
that the excess of the supply of an article bona fide
brought to market over and abo re the demand of it,
whether of annual or even of weekly sale, will de-
teriorate that article, not merely in the ratio of the
excess, but in a much higher . ratio ; and that, con-
versely, the supply being'less, the demand enhances
the price in a similar ratio. It is only necessary to
prove that that which- is true of commodities, is
equally so of labour, to justify the opinion that the
abstraction of a comparatively • small number of la-
bourers will remedy the evils incident to the exist-
ence of excess in the supply of labour, as compared
with the demand.

The rule, however, applies much more forcibly
to labour than to commodities, for in the case of any
commodity, the owners might at once withdraw a
portion and keep it back, in hopes of the real de-
mand increasing; but the holders of labour, that is,
the labourers themselves, have no store-rooms in
which their commodity can be bonded, but have only
the alternative between the offering it at once at the
market price, and starvation.
With respect to this principle, of the influence of a
small excess in the supply of labour, as compared
with the demand, and of the consequent benefit of,
the removal of that small excess, the following an-
swers were given by Mr. Malthus :--
" 3258. Are you not of opinion that the general situa-
tion of the labourers is dete:iorated and prejudiced by a
comparatively small excess of the supply of labour over the
demand:—Very much so, and sometimes by a smaller ex-
cess than one might perhaps suppose.

" 3259. Are you of opinion that the removal of a coin-
paratively.small part of the population which now appears
to be in a state of destitution, might operate to create a
considerable improvement in the condition otpose who re-
main ?.-L_Not a very small part of those really out of work,
but a removal of a small part of the whole labouring popu-
lation might effect a very beneficial change in the condition
of the remainder.
" St 60! 4re you of opinion, therefore, that that law
which applies to commodities, and which is a matter of
notoriety in every market in the country, namely, that a
small excess of supply deteriorates the. value of au article,
applies completely and conclusively to labour, which is

the article a poor man has to bring to market ?.

'—Cer.

tainly it doei.. .
" 3261. Are you of opinion that, where it is admitted
that an excess of labour in all branches exists, any real re-
lief can accrue to the labourers, as long as labour remains
in that state of redundance?—Certainly not.

There are persons who are •supposed to argue that
a redundancy of labourers is calculated to promote
the interests of the proprietors and capitalists; for
the consequence of that redundancy will be a pro,
gressive:diininution of the wages of labour, and,
consequently, that although the labourer himself
may be miserable, in consequence of such,redun-
dancy, the lowness of wages will compensate the
proprietor and capitalist for any other expence which
a state of pauperism, under the-proposition of such
a condition of the population, must produce. But
even if it were admitted that the capitalist, for the
moment, wal.benefited, by the reduction of wages,
to the minimum of subsistence, your Committee
are satisfied that the House will in no degree'coun-
tenance the opinion, that such a state of things
would be desirable in a national point of view, but
that, on the contrary, the House will agree with
your Committee, that the general prosperity of the
country is incompatible with the degradation of any
class of the community, Much more so With the de-

. -
gradation of that class (by far the most extensive)
who have solely to depend upon the remuneration
of their labour for their means of subsistence. Upon
this subject the following questions were put to
Mr. Malthus, and his answers, to which the. Com-

mittee beg to call the attention of the House :
" 3,283. Are not the manufacturer's profits principally
dependent on the low rate of wages ?—I do not quite agree
to that doctrine ; I think that wages and profits very often
rise together. When the value of the whole commodity
rises from the state of the supply compared with the de-
mand, there is a greater value to divide between the capi-
talist and the labourer; the labourer will have higher
money-wages, and the profits of the stock may be higher
at the same time.

" 3,284. Is not the tendency of a redundant supply of
labour ready at all times to fill up the decrease of the la-
bouring population by want and disease, beneficial to the
manufacturing and commercial interests, inasmuch as it
lowers wages and raises profits, and readers possible a:suc-
cessful competition with foreign capitalists ?—I should
think that even if that is so, no persons could possibly bring
themselves to encourage such a system with that view.
" 3,285. Compassion to the labouring poor, and regard
to the public peace, may render the diminution of this
supply of labour desirable, but a redundaney is favourable
to trade and commerce, is it not ?—ln one respect it is,
and in, one respect.it is not; it may enable the capitalist
to work up his commodities cheaper, and to extend his
foreign trade; but'it certainly will have a tendency to di-
minish the home trade, and I think the home trade much
more important than the foreign. •

" 3,286. When the labouring class in the country:re-
ceive good wages, does not the demand for manufactured
goods on the part of that dais form one of the best markets
a manufacturer has ?—I think it forms a very important
part of the market for manufactured goods of a cheap kind.
" 3,287. Would you say that any country could be a
. .

prosperous country without having a degree of demand
existing amongst the labouring classes?—l think not; it
would only be partially prosperous."
It is sometimes laid down,ethat if any class of
labourers be rejected as unnecessary in any particu-
lar employment, they will be absorbed in some
other branch of industry. But the evidence before
your Committee induces them to believe, that there
is generally such a glut of labour throughout the
country, as to leave no -hope of such absorption by
traitsr.timflroin once employment to another.—
Witnesses were asked, whether there was any
chance of those redundant. paupers in their respec-
tive districts •,finding, employment elsewhere, and
the uniform answer was, that if they did go. out in
search of labour, they were returned on the parishes
and districts after an ineffectual effort. In this part
it of the subject, is necessary not to overlook the
difficulty and inconvenience of taking men from one
class of occupation, and expecting them immediately
to adjust themselves to another.
In such case of admitted redundancy, your Com-
mittee are aware that the doctrine frequently em-
ployed is, that it must correct itself—by the morta-
lity which diminished food and comfort must pro-
duce in the classes of the population in which such
redundancy exists.. Your Committee would be
most unwilling, in any degree, to encourage the
opinion, that.it was not, in the strictest sense, the
duty of a poor man to estimate his means of pro-
viding for a family before he places himself in a si-
tuation to have one to provide for; but maintaining,
in the strictest sense, the necessity of enforcing that
salutary principle, your Committee think that the
ordeal through which the redundant population must
pass before this kind of remedy can be administered,
is one which cannot be contemplated by any wise
Government with indifference.

, It is under this state of things that emigration ap-
pears to your Committee to be a remedy well worth
consideration, whether with reference to the improved
condition of the population at home, and the saving
of that expence which, as it appears to your Com-
mittee, is now incurred in maintaining a portion of
them, or with respect to the prosperity of our Co-
lonies, increasing thereby the general prosperity of
the empire. And they consider the resource of
emigration still more valuable, inasmuch as, unless
the evidence taken before your Committee, in itself
of the very highest authority, shall prove to be in-
accurate, the expence of emigration as a national
measure will be limited to the mere lending of the
capital of the country, with the certainty of not only
an indirect,but a direct return.

b.--THE EXPEDIENCY OF A PECUNIARY ADVANCE, IN

THE NATURE OF A LOAN, FOR THE PURPOSE OF rAci

LITATING A REGULATED SYSTEM OF EMIO RATION, *TUE

PROBABILITY or REPAYMENT OF SLICIf A LOAN, ANT)

THE XNDUCEMENTS WHICH THE COLONIES WOULD HAVE

TO FACILITATE SUCH REPAYMENT. THE SUCCESS OE

FORMER EMIGRATIONS, AS BEARING UPON THE PROBA-

RILITY OF REPAYMENT.

Ist. The expediency of a pecuniary advance, in
the nature of a loan, to facilitate a regulated system
of emigration.

Your Committee, taking into consideration the
evidence which they have received of the state of
the population in Ireland,England, and Scotland, as
well as the nature of the colonial evidence with
respect to the success of the emigration of 1823,
and 1825, and
the probability of future success, to
which they will presently refer, are prepared dis-
tinctly to recommend a pecuniary advance; in the
nature of a loan, for the purpose of facilitating
emigration. . _ _

In order to show practically how such a loan
might operate, your Committee propose to state a
hypothetical case of a loan advanced to the extent of
.240,000/. in the year 1828-29; of 360,000/. in the
„year 1829-30; and of 540,000/. in the year 1830-
31 ; in the aggregate, 1,140,000/. These sums to
be applied to the purpose of emigration, in the man-
ner which yoar Committee will proceed to describe.
The interest at four per cent. upon 1,140,0001.
amounts to 45,600/.; the interest at fiveper cent.
(that is, four per cent. with a Sinking Fund of one
per, cent.) amounts to 57,000/. ; but at the present
price of the funds this annual interest would be less,
as it is calculated on the presumption of the funds
not being higher than 75. Your Committee do not
presume to suggest how an emigration loan (were
it to be decided upon), should be raised, or when
raised in what manner it should be charged; but for
the purpose of bringing their proposition to a prac-
tical issue, let it be supposed that this sum of
1,140,0001. is raised 'in certain proportions during
three successive years; namely, the first year com-
mencing October, 1828, and terminating in October

The transaction then will stand thus :—Let the
Consolidated Fund be supposed to be charged with
an outlay of .57,000/. for that period, which will
enable a sinking Fund of one per cent. to liquidate
a loan of 1,140,0001.; on the other hand, if the an-
nual payments by the emigrants, to which you'
Committee will presently refer, be transferred to the
account of the Consolidated Fund for the period of
thirty years, the country will neither be a gainer nor
a loser by this transaction, as a mere pecuniary
transaction, inasmuch as supposing an equality of the
rate of interest to pervade the period, the annuity
received will be equivalent to the annual outlay from
the Consolidated Fund. It may, perhaps, be ob•
served, that the removal' of 19,000 families would
produce little effect in remedying the redundancy
of any superabundant portion of the population in
the mother country • and your Committee feel that
it would be extremely difficult, if not dangerous, to
attempt to lay down, with any pretension to accu--
racy, the precise number of the population which it
might be necessary to remove for such a purpose.
The progress of the measure would furnish the best
commentary upon that point; but under any circum-
stance it would be • necessary -to commence with
comparatively small numbers, and to increase them
progressively. The principle of increase in this hy-
pothetical proposition is, that each succeeding year
should carry out emigrants in the ratio of four, six,
and nine, in other words, increasing in the propor-
tion of one-half, as compared with the number of
the preceding year; and it appears to your Com-
mittee, from the necessity of food preceding popula-
tion, that whatever number may be selected for the
experiment of the first year, the successive emigra-
tions must be regulated by some principle o this
nature. With respect to the numbers that might
be sent in the first year, provided adequate means
be taken for preparing for their reception, and pro-
vided that the expense of food, in consequence of
their numbers, be not increased beyond the rate of
the estimate no necessary -limitation would be pre-
scribed. The loan suggested by your Committee
has reference to numbers which it would be clearly
practicable to locate. The proposal, as involved in
this 'hypothetical case, stands thus :—the first year,
4,000 families; the second, 6,000; the third, 9,000;
making in the whole 19,000. If, after that period,
Parliament were disposed to carry on emigration in
the same ratio, the number of families to be removed
in progressive years, would amount as follows :—the
fourth year, 13,500; the fifth year, 20,250; the
sixth year, 30,375; the. seventh year, 45,562; the
eighth, 68,343; and if those sums be added toge-
ther, they will form an aggregate of 197,030 fami-
lies, which, multiplied by 5, will give 985,150 in-
dividuals.

In this estimate no calculation is made for the
casual, collateral or unlocated emigration; although
as an auxiliary circumstance, it will operate, together
with regulated emigration, in lessening the redundant
population to a considerable extent.

It appears, then, that for an annual outlay of
.57,0001., for a limited period of years, nineteen
thousand families may be located in the British North
American Colonies ; and if the principles laid down
by your Committee be correct in themselves, and
duly acted upon in the selection of those 19,000
families, or 9.5,000 persons, if those persons are, in
the strictest sense, redundant labourers in the Mother
Country, their abstraction will create no diminution
of production ; whereas their presence imposes upon
the community a heavy annual expense, the extent
of which it is difficult to analyse. This proposition,
therefore, involves the location of 19,000 emigrant
settlers; heads of families, consisting of five persons
each ; and it will be perceived,. that if the following
scale of progressive annuity and repayment, cal-
culated in the case of a single head of a family, and
spreading itself over a period of only.thirty years, be
realized, the 1,140,0001. will have been actually re-
paid; and the receipts of this thirty years' annuit,
will restore the capital advanced, together with foul
per cent., accruing interest upon that capital.

t Amour, t to be received 1 Aggregate
2 :11, g from the different sets! Amount of
Q ° of Emigrants, forming Sums to be an-
= 19,000 families, locatecfnually received
'... o : in the space of 3 years. in liquidation
.-= & Vide preceding table. of the Sums ot
co
1,2 ir _ X. Year.
P° p . Second Third 240,000 1828
5,7 First set set of set of 360,000 1820
. ..7t grants, grants, grants,
..7 aof Emi- E,ni- Emi- 510,000 1830
s' 2 1828. 1829. 1830. 1,140,000
.C. s. 0. X'• X. X. X.
- - - - i
- -
- - -- -
0 10 0 2,000 _ - 2,000
I 0 0 4,000 3000 - 7,000
110 0 6,000 6,000 4,500 16,500 '
2 0 (I 8,000 2,000 6,000 26,000
210 0 10,000 12,000 13,500 35,500
S 0 0 12,000 15,000 18,000 45,000
310 0 14,000 18,000 22,500 54,500
4 0 0 16,000 21,000 27.L°0 64,000
410 0 16,000 04,000 31,000 73,500
5 0 0 20,000 27,000 30,000 83,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 40,500 ' 20,500
5 0 0 20,000 30,(I00 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 25,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000 '
5 0 i 20,000 30,000 45,000' 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
a 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
50 0 20,000 30,000 45,000 95,000
5 0 0 20,000 30,000 45,000
95,000
_ - 30,000 45,000 75,000
- - --. 45,000 4.5,000

Year ending
in October,

1829 to 18960
18:0,
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
12538
1831)
1840

The House will not fail 'to perceive, on reference
to the above table, that, at the end of three years,
the four thousand
,heads of families located in tlit
first year will be called upon to pay 2,000/.; and
upon the fact and facility of that payment will de
pend the probability of future annual payments beinp
realized according to the scale proposed. In, the
fourth year the first set of emigrants will have to m
4,00014 arid the second set 3,0001., and so on.
It will also be observed, that under this table th,
settler is not called upon to make any repayment
until he has been actually located
the year of .h
fortlre space
coat.
three years, reckoning 1828 as
tion. He is, in 1831, to pay in money or product
the value of ten shillings; and each succeeding yea,
an additional ten shillings, until the annual payment
amounts to .51, when it 15 W remain stationary, an.