The Statesman.
London, England, 1824-02-13 00:00:00

PRICE 7d.

The subject was no less than the propriety of appointing
a Select Committee to take into consideration those of d
Laws relating' to the Exportation of Machinery and the
Emigration of Artisans; laws in which a great portion of
the population of this country were deeply coacerned. it
was now two years ago since, as the house might recol-
lect, he presented a petition on this subject, signed by no
fewer than fifteen thousand of the inhabitants of the city
of London alone.—(Hear.) He could at the same time
have presented other petitions to the same effect ; but be
had then contented himself with giving notice, that it was
his intention to.hring forward the question for the repeal
of those laws. Part of that question was since taken up
snceessfully by a Right Honourable Gentleman on the
ether side. in the course of the last Session, he (Mr.
Hume) gave The house notice, thy he would, early in this
Session, take op the question for repealing the remainder
of those laws; and he did so, under the expectation aid
with the promise of the assistance of an Hon. Member,
now no more. The house was aware that be meant his
late friend- the Member for Portarlington; a man peen-
lijarly feed for the investigation of laws of this nature,
(Hear hear), from his profound knowledge of all ques-
tions relating to political economy. When be recollected
bow clearly and convincingly that lamented Member de-
livered his opinions on all subjezts, he wet sure that there
nis not one Hon. Gent. opposite to him—(hear, beat), or
around him—(hear, hear) —that did not consider that the
aid of such talents would be most useful on the present
occasion.—(Hear, hear.)—'float Honourable Member,
through good report and through bad report, went on to
establish, on a firm foundation, the institutions of his
country. Many of the prejudices that were excited against
him (Mr. Ricardo), and against his doctrines, were now
worn away, because the soun Iness of them was proved by
experience, and because many of his predictions also were
realized. In consequence of such a loss, he (Mr. Home),
was more earnest in claiming the indulgence of the house,
on introducing the subject of which he had given notice,
reai•lly depending on the support of his lamented friend,
He h .d no doubt but be would be favoured by the support
of mai), Honourable Members in seeking the repeal of
those antiquated laws which were no longer useful or ex.
pedient. This was a question which belonged to no party,
nor did he claim the assistance of any Honourable Member
from party motives. The house had last year a specimen
of those laws, the repeal of which lie was to propose to the
house. Much as Ise felt the importance of that measure

(we believe the Honourable Member meant the 13111 to re-
peal the Spitaltields' Acts), which the Right Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Wallace) succeeded in carrying through
that house, although it failed elsewhere; notwithstanding
that Mr. Ricardo gave it his support, yet he knew many
in both houses objected to it solely because they wished,
before they would remove those restrictions, to see what
the House of Commons would do with respect to the laws
that restrained artisans from going out of this country.
Under these circumstances, he undertook to submit tojhe
house a motion more comprehensive than that of which he
had given notice. His first intention was to consider the
laws restraining the emigration of artisans and the *epode,.
lion of machinery. That was the extent of his first notice;
but at the request of other Honourable Members he now
added the consideration of those laws, called the Combina-
tion Laws, which were much more ramified than sis ob-
servable on the first view. It was his purpose at present to
elude those with the other laws of elisiebie lasodlifisees
notice, because they were not to be separated. It was un-
necessary to say what advantage would redound to the
community by this inquiry. He hoped on that inquiry he
would be able to show the impropriety of introducing.
some legislative measure to alter and modify those laws.
He had no hesitation in saying that all laws limiting the
exertions of scientific men, or mechanics (provided such ex-
ertions did not interfere with the prosperity of their otvn
country) ought all to be removed.—(Hear, hear). He
could nor, he thought, better express his object, than by
quoting the words of Dr. Adam Smith, which were to the
effect that his own labour was the original foundation of
every man's property, and that such labour ought not to
be limited or restrained to any place or country. As the
law now stood, the artisan was restrained to his own
eountry, but the nobleman or gentleman of property might
go to France, or any other part of the continent. The law
Could neither restrain, nor bring them back. But further,

those persons might do more—they might carry with them
their property from England, Ireland, or Scotland.—
(Hear, hear.) The law to be just, ought to be general.
The only stock in trade which the poor artisan bad, was
the science which he had acquired. This knowledge was
property as to him, and why should he not be permitted to
carry it abroad, and turn it to the best account he could?
As the law stood at present, no artisan could go abroad.
If he went. he could be stopped; or even if a person went
before a Magistrate sad stated upon oath that he believed
such a person, being an artisan, purposed to withdraw
himself from the country, the Magistrate could im-
prison him until be gave good security that he would not
depart. But why should restrictions be imposed upon
this species of property more than any other; or why
should the artisan be placed in a worse situation than any
other man who hail an opportunity of making the be t
his industry? He hoped nobody would be found to dis-
sent from this principle—that in the eye of the law there ought
to be no inequality.—(Hear.) Certainly, when the science of
political economy was not so well uaderstood as at preseut, it
was thought that the principle for whi..th he was now contend-
ing was prejudicial to the interests of the State, but the Inure
enlightened Ideas of modern times showed that these restric-
tions were equally prejudicial to those who employed the arti-
sans and to the public. They wanted the merit of success to
recommend them; for be would ask, notwithstanding the
penalties awarded to artisans withdrawing themselves. al-
though they were starving at home, and could better them-
selves elsewhere, and the penalty of 3001. to be imposed upon
those who should entice artisans to withdraw themselves,
whether the objests of the law were answered? It was im-
possible, after conceding the principle of the nec-:ssity.ot
emi-
gratiou to the Cape, America, and other places, and vOthig
large sums, as we had done, to promote it, that the Am,
whieh was now asked, and which was but an extewsicji of that
principle, should be refused. For upon what riniscienig wok
that emigration granted, bet this—that there was no7employ.
went at home, and therefore erasaris might seek it elsewhere ?
Upon that principle then. be called upon the house seriously,
not to withhold from poor artisans the means of turning their
labour sad isdnstry to the best lbecouat. They might rest Ls-
need that the licesse.so given would not be abused, for h 4
areseldmodiselalie to say, there was no man who had the means
wfsattjag kit bread as well at home as. abroad who Would not
?refer remaining la rse oonatry which gairellm bittb. He welt
frepp!hat a great deal of prejittficdristilisid on this !object,
--4 that upon des ktrquky. It Would k dirsiriated.—
4't rePied ►
funk
thick
itcdnd