The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-02-21 00:00:00

own interests seem to their muddy understandings
to be involved. They are utterly incapable of taking
a comprehensive view of the subject as it affects the
interests of the whole population. Like the " three
Tailors of Tooley-street," immortalised by Canning,
in one of his bitter philippics, they seem to think that
they constitute the people of England. They forget
entirely that the agricultural classes, and those 'im-
mediately dependent upon them, form at least three-
fourths of the whole population. Their ignorance of
this fact will, at once, account for the strange hallucina-
tions into which they have been betrayed by their free-
trade fallacies. It is really amusing to witness these
men, who can scarcely see further than the end of their
noses, setting themselves up as public instructors, and
uttering forth to the world as splendid discoveries the
result of their molelike gropings in the dark. But it
is still more amusing to find men who profess to have
studied the science of political economy yielding them-
selves up as willing dupes to recommend the nostrums
of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce. The
facility with which such men have allowed themselves
to be deceiVed by the specious statements of the
tyrannical cotton lords is anything but a credit to their
judgments or their understandings.
In spite, however, of the diligent agitation of the
ANTI-CORN LAW LEAGUE and their itinerant lec-
turers, the grand humbug, which they have been ido-
lizing for the last two years, is becoming more and
more unpopular. The pe6ple are beginning to find
out that the outcry against the corn laws is a complete
delusion. The presence of the arch-impostor O'Con-
nell at the " grand demonstration," recently made at
Manchester, has contributed, more than any other cir-
cumstance, to bring the whole proceedings of the cot-
ton lords into contempt. The advocacy of such a man
as O'Connell is sufficient to condemn any cause. His
praise and commendation beget an instinctive suspicion
that the objects of the Anti-Corn Law League are dis-
honest.

It is still possible, however, that a few simple-mind-
ed, gullible, but honest individuals, may labour under
wrong impressions on the subject of the corn laws.
For the benefit of such persons, we will adduce a few
arguments in opposition to the anti-corn law agitators.

It will he an instructive comment upon the bluster-
ing vaunts of the enemies of the corn laws, to examine
the relative amount of capital employed in manufac-
tures, and invested in land and agricultural property of
every description. This examination will prove the
utter insignificance of the manufacturing when com-
pared with the agricultural interest. The tabular state.
ments which we subjoin are derived from government

and parliamentary documents, the authenticity of which
cannot be impeached. We will first take the agricul-
tural property, It Great Britain and Ireland the land
rental and value, at thirty years' purchase, is—

In Gt. Britain Value at 30 years'
and Ireland. purchase.
£33,395,684 £1,901,870,520
5,000,000 150,000,000
3,000,000 90,000,000
1,203,578 36,107,340
4,811,053 145,231,590

Land Rental
Residences..
Timber, yearly produce,
Land Tax, 1834
Tithes, yearly value
Poor Rates, perpetual charge,
exclusive of rent
Mines, Minerals, and Fisheries

5,434,890
3,994,031

163,046,700
119,820,930

Property of Proprietors..
The removal of protective duties on agricultural pro-
duce would, of necessity, inflict a loss upon the landed
proprietors. The anti-corn-law agitators acknowledge
that this would be the case. At what amount may we
fairly estimate the amount of property which would be
destroyed ? Shall we take it at 25 per cent ? Let us
suppose it to be no more than this, and what would
be the consequence ? The money arising to the land-
lord may be put down in round numbers, at £80,000,000.
A. loss of 25 per cent. would reduce his income by
.€20,000,1000, and his capital by £615,000,000, which
would be nearly sufficient to pay off the national debt.
In other words, the landed interest would consume less
by £80,000,000 yearly of articles imported into, or ma-
nufactured in, this country. What corresponding ad-
vantage could be realised by the abolition of the corn-
laws ? Where are we to find an equivalent gain to
counterbalance this enormous loss ?

• So much for the landed proprietors. We shall, in
the next place, examine the quantity and value of the
produce of agriculture. In doing so, we shall fix upon
the scale price of 50s per quarter for wheat. The esti-
mate may be thus stated :

Grain of all sorts, Wheat at 50s £111,000,000
Potatoes . 20,000,000

Hay, Grasses, Turnips, Straw, &c. 183,802,000
Cattle, Sheep, Poultry, Gam e,Fisheries,&c. 94,783,759
Milk, Butter, Vegetable 4, &c. 48,500,000
Allowed for consumption by farmers, and

articles not enumerated ...... •
Wool

2,500,000
13,979,166
41,470,276

Hops, Seeds, Flax, Mines, Coals, &c...

Total produce....

£539,036,291

Taking wheat at 50s. per quarter—which is a very
moderate estimate,—and allowing that the repeal of
the corn-laws, would cause a reduction of 25 per
cent. in the price of grain, what would be the con-
Fequence ? It is acknowledged that the price of grain
regulates the prices of other articles of agricultural
produce. The repeal of the corn-laws would cause a
reduction in the aggregate receipts from the sale of
grain of £33,500,000 yearly, and in all the articles
,enumerated above a reduction of £135,000,000. Upon
vhom would this enormous loss ultimately fall ?
Vould it not be felt by the tnannfacturers and
of ieratives of the country ? Where could they expect
to find customers to compensate them for so large a
re. auction in the amount of the home trade I)
We shall now take into consideration the amount of
car ►ital invested in manufactures in this country. That
cap ital has been estimated at £205,773,870. The
avant tal produce of this capital is said to be £259,412,709,
or about 125 per cent., upon the whole amount.
Surely, the manufacturing interest ought to be satis-
fied with such a large return. But how much of this
large amount of manufactured produce is exported
from. this country? In 1834, the official value of
goods exported was £73,495,535, and the declared
value was £111,286,594. After deducting the latter
amount from the gross produce of the manufacturing
industry of this country,—\-:e have a residue of
£218,126,115 to be consumed at home. From this
statement-it is quite evident that the best customers
which the manufacturers possess are, the landed pro-
prietors and the agriculturalists of Great Britain.
What would becotae of the manufacturers if they were
deprived of custom in the-home market to the tune of
of £135,000,000.

We may here mention another circumstance which
very little thought of by the manufacturers, in their
clamour 'or ext.tiL,34,ll of the foreign trado, or,
rather, for the ruin of British interests. The exports
to the Colonial and other possessions of Great Britain
amount to nearly one third of the total amount of ex-
ports. If the manufacturers really wish to extend their
exports without inflicting any injury upon their own
country—without seeking the destruction of the landed
and agricultural interests—and without giving foreign-
ers the benefit of British capital to enable them to
compete with our own manufactures—let them culti-
vate and extend the trade to the Colonies of Great
Britain. Let them unite in raising the cry of " Ships,
Colonies, and Commerce." Let them petition the
Legislature for the removal of all impediments to, and
restrictions upon, the Colonial trade of this country.
Here they have a boundless field of enterprise lying
before them, and only waiting to be cultivated. Let
it be borne in mind that the addition of a single indi-
vidual to the population of any of our Colonies, will
give full employment to two additional mechanics or
operatives at home, and a proportionate impulse to
manufacturing prosperity. It is, therefore, an object
of paramount importance that we should seek, by all
legitimate means, to increase the population and to ex-
the trade of our Colonies. Let the Manchester Cham-
ber of Commerce take this matter into their con-
sideration.

The " tyrant majority" in the House of Counnons
are involving themselves still more inextricably in the
labyrinth of their folly, by their absurd and despotic
pursuance of the vexatious question of privilege, Al-
ready have they wasted seventeen days—the better part
of the present session, as far as it has gone---in their==
,
vain endeavour to set aside the laws of the country•
We say vain, because it is utterly impossible that the
self-assumed privileges of the House of Commons call
be permanently recognised as superior to the statute