Star.
London, England, 1814-03-24 00:00:00

THE CORN

Important alterations ate propbsecl in the state of
the Corn Laws-their object is to prevent the ittipore
tatinn of corn except at a very high ptice. Though
It is well known that the torn produced in this coun-
try is not etiough for our consumption, and that we
must therefore depend ott a foreign supply, it is pro.
posed to prevent the consumer, who is straitened for
provisions at home, from having his wants relieved
nut of the abundant supply of the foreign tnarket--J-it
is a plan for keeping back corn from the market, for
the avowed purpose of encouraging agriculttire, by
raising its price. The object of encouraging agricul,
Lure is, that we may have cheap provisions; but by
the proposed plan, this natural order of things is in-
verted, and the consumer is to be straitened, in the
first place, that agriculture may be encouraged, and
that, :it some future period, provisions may be cheap.
There are, we apprehend, very few among the consu-
mers who, in their zeal for a reduction of prices,
tvoulal have ever thought of such a far fetched pro-
Jett to effect their purpose. They would, it is be•
lieved, rather have stood the chances of the market,
than have straitened themselves at present on the un-
certain contingency or futtire cheapness. But in
whatever views the plan originates, we think it may
be shewn to be founded in error. Before entering
More particularly into the question, it may be proper,
shortly, to consider the general policy ou which the
corn trade has been regulated in this country.
In the early legislation of most countries, k has al-
ways been accounted a capital object to keeit 44in
the price of corn, and, with thieyiew, such perlalties
balm been imposed on its transportation from one
place to another, that it beeame trinsinal to bring to
Market the necessary owl,' ief produce: An act.
was passed in the reign ofWtrles 11. whirls, though
it sanctioned the prejuditteu- tkOinst the evil effect of
which it was providing, #aree*the inland trade in
torn all the freedom whuth ittimelinjeys ; and thir
la, as Dr. SPlith jitstly rentitvt*irltlyall its imper-
fections, has done mere fdr-* est ouragement of
agriculture than all the other “titver:passed on the
fobject. About the same tin*, the foundition was
laid for that system of laws of which theebject is, ul-
timately to make corn ch ap, by prohibiting impor..-
tation, and encouraging exportation by Me4llo off'
bounty. Corn, accordingly, was subjected, on
.portation, to a duty of 16s. per quarter, unless when
the price exceeded 535. 441. to which it never rose brit
in consequence of extreme scarcity ; and exportation
Mss, at the same time, permitted at 40s. per quarter,
mid afterwards at 48s.- per quarter. At last, a bounty
of 5.. per quarter was granted in the reign of William
on all corn exported, at whatever, prices
This system continued till the year 1765, when,
importation was allowed duty free, and exportation
was prohibited. In 1773, the high duties on impor-
portation, imposed during the reign of Charles 11.
amounting to a prohibition, were taken off when the
price of wheat rose to 48s. and the bounty on expor-
tation ceased when it rose to 445. In 171, a new
law was made, by which the high duty of 16s. was
paid on all wheat imported under 50s. above 50s. and
under 545. a duty of 2s. 6d. was paid ; and above
-545. the duty on importation was lowered to 6d.-
The bounty of ss. was payable only when wheat was
under 445. per quarter, and when it rose to 465. ex-
portation was prohibited.
In 1804, the prices at which wheat became liable
to a duty on importation were raised ; the high duty
of sixteen shillings being payable until the price rose
to 635. ; above 635. and under 6435. the duty was re-
duced s.
to 2s. 6d. ; and above 665. it was still further
reduced to 6d.
The effect of these various laws was, from the time
of Charles 11. to the year 1765, to prohibit importa-
tion, while exportation was, from the reign of Wil-
liam 111. encouraged by a bounty. From 1765 to
1773; exportation was prohibited and importation Was
allowed. The laws which remained in force from
1773 to 179!, virtually repealed the bounty on ex-
portation, as corn was always above the price at which
the bounty was granted. In like manner, after the
year 1791, importation was generally free, as it was
almost always above the price at which the high duty
teas A Cigible.
It was proposed in the last Session of Parliament
to revive those, laws into greater efficacy by continu-
ing the high duty of sixteen shillings ou importation
till the quarter of wheat reached 1055.-above 105 s.
and una-r 13.45. a duty of 2s. 6d. to be imposed. It
is likely that the plan now proposed will proieed on
the same principle. •
In defence of such a measure, it is stated, that
while the exportation of corn was excouraged by a
bounty, and while importation was prohibited, prices
were comparatively low, and that after the year 1773,
when the encouragement to exportation was virtually
done away, and importation was allowed, they gra-
dually rose higher-and hence, say the advocates of
restrictions on importation, arises a clear argument
in favour of that system which prohibits importation
and encourages exportation. But it is not very easy
tobelieve, that this lowness of price in the home mar-
ket was produced by the law, which, by encouraging
exportation, manifestly tended to reduce the supply
;it that market, and thus to raise the price. Will any
one beilevi, that the way to make an article cheap is
to semi it awayirom the market ? We always under-
stood, that the price of commodities was fixed by the
proportion between the demand and the supply. In-
crease the demand or diminish the supply, and the
price rises. Now, exportation surely tends to diminish
the supply in the home market, and how then can it
lower the price ? By encouraging agriculture, say
the. advocates of the system. Here, then, the incon-
siueecy of the argument manifestly appears. Agri-
culture, we are told, is encouraged by a high price of
corn-by restricting importation and encouraging
exportation, this high price is produced-and yet the
project is recommended to us on account of its ten=
dency 40 produce low prices. Where, then, is the en-
couragement to agriculture? The prices must either
be limb or low. If they are high, where are the
boasted advantages of the system to the community?
If they ave low, where is the encouragement to agri-
culture ? Bet has not agriculture the most ample en-
couragement, when, according to the statement in the
Report of the Committee of the House of Commons,
the average price few the Last nine years has been
88s. 11d. per quarter..
As the however,fact, la undoubted, that the money
Pr" of corn low has ga• puristic* was iambi.

~~~

bited -and exportatibn eticouraged. and that it rose
while the trade was fret, the question is, if the law
is dot the cause of the high and lu* price, to what
other ptinciple is it to be traced ? And on this point
we now propose offering some observations. .
It may be remarked, in the first place, that a rise
in theprice of corn may be occasioned as Mitch by
i a fall n .the value of the money as by a rise in the
value of the corn. It does not,follow, that because
more money is given for corn than heretofore, its real
value has risen ; as the same effect may be equally
produced by another cause. From the time of the
Revolution to the year 1773, the period when the
bounty on exportation was in force, prices were com-
paratively low. From the year 1773 to the present
time, they have been much higher. But does not
every one know, that the value of money is greatly
fallen during that latter period, and that every article
of consumption, as well as corn, has consequently
risen in price ? Here, then, is a reason for the rise
which has taken place in the price of corn, and one
every wAy sufficient to produce the effect; so that
there is no reason for ascribing it to the law prohibit.
ingimportation, which does not, besides, account for
the fact. _ _

But were it even true that the real value, and not
the money price of corn, were lower in the former
than in the latter period, there are other causes to
which it must be ascribed. The great trade of every
community consists in the exchange which takes place
between the town and the country, of manufactured
produce for the produce of the soil ; and, in the pro-
gress of national-wealth, it happens at one time that
the value of what is manufactured exceeds the value
of what is produced, and at another, that the manu-
factures exceed in value the produce of the soil; in
either of which cases, an exportation will take place
at one timed. manufactures, and at another time of
corn. Now, at the time that the laws were passed
granting a bounty on the exportation of corn, the
agriculture of the country had got the start of its
trade—there was more corn produced than the manu-
factures could provide an equivalent for. Corn was,
of course, plentiful, and its price would be reasonable.
Far from being lower, however, on account of the
bounty granted on its exportation, it must have been
higher on this account; the quantity in the market
must have been diminished by the quantity exported,
ands accOrcling to the rule by which prices arc inva-
riahly4ttsted, a .higher price must have been the
connwpacce of this diminished supply.
Since the year 1772, the trade and manufactures of
the country have taken the lead of its agriculture.-
-There has been such an increase of capital, and such
an improvement of industry in all its branches, for the
last thirty or forty years, that its preduee has ex.
ceeded in value the produce of the soil, and it has in
consequence been exported for the produce of other
countries, where there is not such an overflow of
wealth and industry. This state of things, too, has
been auended with an increase in our population, for
the maintenance of which we are in part indebted to
other countries. There has thus been a great demand
for industry, a great demand for an increase of peo
ple, and a great demand for provisions for then. sup-
port. It is natural to think, therefore, that in this
latter period, the real value of corn *lust have risen,
and it is by means of this higher price that an ade-
quate supply has been procured from other countries.
By violently cheeking this necessary supply, a great
hardship must, in the first instance, be imposed on
the consumer, the natural course of the country to
improvement must be checked, and one great stimu-
lus to agriculture, namely, the improvement of our
manufactures, must be partially counteracted. We
do not say that those effects will go any great length,
because there is in every country a principle of rigour
to remedy the effect of faulty legislation, and because
also, in all those laws that regard the exoortation and
importation of corn, a dispensing power has been,
from time to time, exercised by the Privy Council,
by which the law has been suspended when it was
likely to produce any bad effects—an undeniable
proof, as Dr. Smith justly remarks, that a system
thus continually interrupted by exceptions must have
been defective in its principle. It now seems, indeed,
to be generally agreed upon, that a community will
flourish most when trade is left perfectly Iree ; and
we are well convinced, that the trade in corn, both in
respect to the landholder, the dealer, and the con-
sumer, far from being an exception, would be bene-
fited, in a most especial manner, were it left to find its
level under the operation of this excellent principle.

BOW-STRLET.—Yesterday Thomat Castle w asbrought
to the Office, charged with robbing Mr. Russo:*, the
Comedian, on Tuesday evening, in Newcastle-street,
Strand. .The charge being satisfactorily proved, he
was committed for trial.

George. Burion was charged with felonioubly stealing
eleven pair of boots, the property of John Gamble, of
York-terrace, in the Kent Road. He was committed
for trial.

At Sussex Assizes, held on Monday, at Horsham,
John Morris Was indicted for a highway robbery,
for robbing Henry Page, on the 10th of December
last, at Hastings, and taking from him six £1 notes.
—The prosecutor, Page, stated, that 'Thomas Gib-
son and himself were returning from Bexhill,
when they stopped at the Anchor public house, at
Hastings, to drink. Gibson was tipsy, and gave him
his notes to keep. The prisoner was drinking in the
same room, and after some conversation, said he
would go with them ; they agreed, but he had net
gone far on the road when he knocked Gibson out of
the cart, and robbed the witness of the notes. He
was taken the next morning. Verdict—Guilty.
Saturday evening last, as Mr. BUTTERHELD, of
Orsett, Essex, was returning home in his chaise from
Benge, the carriage was upset within a few yards of
his own house, and Mr. BUTTERFIELD, falling with
his head in a ditch, was taken up dead, having been
literally drowned, although the depth of the water
did not exceed six inches.

A boy who had fallen asleep on the shafts of the
Herefordshire waggon, was on Tuesday thrown from
his seat in Holborn, and the wheelr passing over both
legs, crushed them, so as to render amputation ne-
cessary.

Yesterday, as a coal waggon was passing the cros-
sing from Plarntree-street to Hanover-yard, in St.
Giles's( the hind wheel came off, and, shocking ,to
relate, fell upon a poor Ina% who sweeps that crossing,
and broke both his legs.