The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-03-05 00:00:00

.~~;

MR. BOOTH'S ESSAY ON FREE TRADE,
EFFECTS ON THE PEOPLE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STAND.

SlR,—Absence from home has prevented me from sOO%
suming the consideration of Mr. Booth's proposition
principal and remaining branch of his system not yet n
is, " Free Trade in Food," which I now propose to
He exerts all his energy and power to persuade us to apPJ
the free importation of all the necessaries of life; he ass'
that the industry of our working classes would thereby be
lated and encouraged, and that those foreigners, who suPP
with food, would-willingly receive payment in our manufal

and he then tells us, that it is bad policy to protect our home
culture, because it is more expensive than to encourage d
the foreign grower—having assumed these assertions as
that ought to be admitted, he proceeds in the way most c
nient for his purpbse, to enumerate what he considers to 1
objections made to his system, and having disposed of th 6
way which he seems perfectly satisfied, he hails with de fig
consummation of his labours, and the approval of his doe
by a Reformed Parliament.

It, however, happens in the course of his career, he alsc
stumbling-blocks in his way, which it is rather difficult fet
to deal with; he finds himself forced to adinit, that one a
results of his measures is likely to be the breaking doict
ruin of our agricultural community; but to obviate the
e.
of this evil, he proposes that a tax should be laid on the ju
tation of foreign food, and applied to the support of the ra
that body, when thrown out of employment, and reduced
state of pauperism, until means are provided to enable tIO
emigrate elsewhere; this may astonish the credulous, but
•
nevertheless, true ! He next admits, that notwithstandiol
prospects of a happy change of circumstances, which lie
up to the working classes, they must, nevertheless, be ref
to look forward to lower- rates of wages than they at preset
ceive; but then he consoles them with the promise of the Ce
supply of cheaper food, and that they shall also have the a'
taxes of enlarged education, with increased intelligence, t

prove their moral and intellectual state, which he lament.o'
present, generally depraved, and worthless • he also warest
that whilst the number of, labourers exceeds the means t 0
ployment, wages must unavoidably continue low, and tbYO
proposes to meet, or avert, by recommending caution in es
ing into the married state ! I think I might fairly urge, tb
these admissions he destroys the fabric' his, fertile imagin
had created, and, therefore, safely leave him to extricate
self from them as he best can—but to proceed:—
The basis on which Mr. Booth builds his system of free
is, to increase the value of money, and in that proportion,,,
tile value of. all productive labour. Under such a system, `
tent of our circulating currency would necessarily be cue.
the income of all classes, (with' the exception of the anun'i
mortgagee, and fund-holder,) he diminished in amount, 3°
that degree the pressure of our public burthens must be
creased.- On the other hand, I contend that whilst the va
money can be kept down, that of productive labour will be
portiouabl.y high, and the pressure of taxation in that a,
diminished. The great amount of revenue required to p3'
interest of our public debt, as well as to support our ests'
ments, has placed this country in an artificial state, for
no precedent is to be found in the situation of auy otbet:
deal with it, so as to fulfil our engagements with good fait,
uphold.general prosperity, is certainly a work of increasin/
ficulty, but I contend that that difficulty would be incres.,
rather than diminished, by the adoption of Mr. Booth's
trade system. At the present period, the.abundance of p '
tion beyond consumption, forces up the value of moneYl
tends to increase that difficulty, but we must take things 3'
are, and deal with them accordingly; we cannot obtain re
or relief by either deprecating or -lamenting the causes
have placed us in this situation, although Mr. Booth has
indulged himself in the abuse of them.
To return to " The Free Trade in Food," as advocati
Mr. Booth. I consider it to be admitted, that the first an
perative duty of the government of any country, howeve(,
government may be constituted, is by every means witls
power to protect the permanent supply of food for "the peoe4
—in applying this principle, where it is practicable to l
that supply of home growth, it has ever been considered the'
certain, safe, and beneficial course to do so, only resort's')
foreign importation when' bad seasons, and deficient crops,'ol
it necessary. Holland' as stated by Mr. Booth as an ci!o
in favour of his system, is an exception to this rule, and 51.,,
be fairly asked wily it should be so ? The reasons are obl'i
in that limited kingdom the population is unusually crowd',
proportion to the surface it occupies; their growth of e.o°)
therefore uniformly unequal to their consumption, and
foreign supply necessary; the lands of Holland, lying ejj
low, are more suited for pasture than corn; the dairy .5)4.5
therefore very generally adopted ; in consequence they 1
and export large quantities of butter and cheese, with flOi
clover seeds, with which•they pay for the foreign corn theYo
sume. As these supplies are received from necessity an
from choice, they are admitted free ; the cultivators of tb
do not require protection by duty, and to impose it for re ,
would be to burthen the consumer in a country where tOl
appears to be moderate, when compared with ours, aO.,
population not above one-eighth part of that of Great /3r',
Holland has long been used as a granary andthe interw
depot of the corn of the Baltic, which there waits for the de
from countries in which the failure of crops may render it n
sary to have foreign supply, at a season when it could not be
tamed direct from the Baltic ports. This branch of trade our
-housing system is calculated to encourage, but, in no other
spect is there any analogybetween our case and that of Ile
With a population of sixteen miliions,with Ireland almost #
dependent on her agriculttire, and compeled as we are to I
large revenue within ourselves to Meet our public burthe
seems to me, that were we not to protect our home sin)
food, we should not only put to hazard a great public Yes'
but risk having to encounter famine and national bankro
The protection now given to our agricUlture, Mr. Bee
relates to corn, taxes the country to the extent of ten
annually ; and in the same gratuitous manner, he assume'„l
animal food (potatoes) and other contingencies, cost as
more—his estimates are immaterial, the principle, and the 07
of this protection is all. The country is unavoidably be,'
taied, and it is therefore necessary that each branch of the
=nits- should- contribute to promote the industry and beil!o
the whole, as their interests cannot be separated without inti;''
general injury. Mr. Booth informs us that our militia!"
sumption of corn amounts to, or exceeds, fifty millions of qu"'el
this is at present provided by our home growths, when tb
sons are favourable, and this source of occupation afforbi
ployment and support for a full third part of the whole cod"
nity of the united kingdom, who are the principal consuelio
our manufactures, who take off a large proportion of the f°,l
produce, which is received in payment for manufacture,'
ported, and .who pay for the whole with the fruits of their la'
all thus reciprocating mutual advantages.
Mr. Booth has asked "for whose benefit is this ap1395141
tax imposed on the people of England ?" I answer, #frd
hesitation, that it is not taxation, but the price of prote.
afforded to a regular and safe supply of food, from soun'o
which they are all deeply interested, each with the othel,j
as they could not obtain to the same extent, and on the .;
terms, from any other quarter whatever.—He then atteo
persuade us, that if a free trade in corn was permitte..,l
Foreign grower would take payment for his supplies 1"1
nianufactoi ics. have already stated that experience
-ft-rcivedthncontrary to be thelaet,—as an illustration,
refer to the conduct of the Americans of the United
their vessels carry cargoes of lumber, fish, and proyisioo,
sale; to our West India Colonies, but they refuse to barter'
for sugar, rum, or molasses; 'their general practice is tb:
for cash alone, and they go from colony to colony, Brits,
Foreign, until they obtain it. The time was when the9l
lingly received' payment in produce, but it is no longer b,
interest to do so, because they have abundant supplies of
distilled spirits all over the -Union, and of sugar froze,
Orleans, which their government 'protect by heavy cluti
those of foreign production; yet we hear this govert
lauded as wise and liberal by those who think with 111 r. P,
whilst they call loudly for the extinction of all such prole.
here! Is this then not evidence of what we may justly 3v
pate from Mr. Booth's reciprocal system, and might we ni
pect to be similarly treated by the nations in the Or
Europe, were we to place ourselves in a state of depen'
upon them for food ? To carry this species of illustration
a different channel,—lumber, fish, and provisions; • are
taken in a similar manner, from our North American CO
to those in the West Indies, but they take their paymen
produce, because they have neither 'distilleries to supplY,
with spirits in quantity, nor home-made sugar; this is
fore a simple reciprocal barter, beneficial to both, and sni
at present takes place between our home agriculturists Sio'
manufacturers. _ _ _