The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-12-05 00:00:00

•

ret,*at:Oige 12, admits that the present system of Corn
laws tends to aggravate the evil of scarcity, and tia,
render more severe the depression price front abundance:'
—And at page 13, it admits that, • should the average
of the six weeks. preceding the 15th of August be Sits.
Id. per quarter for wheat, whatever may be the abun-
dance of the forthcoming harvest, tile ports and the
warehtinsee of Foreign Corn, will he opened for at least
six weeks, and is reference to the principal exporting.
countries for three months thus fully acknowledging
that the present Corn Laws are no protection to the Bri-
tish Farmer.
That the Select Committee, at page 16 of the Re-
part, express their great anxiety to • suggest to Par-
haitient, as a matter highly deserving of their future
consideration, whether a trade in corn constantly open
to all nations of the world, and subject only to such a
fixed duty as might compensate to the grower the loss of
that encouragement which he received during the late
war from the obstacles thrown in the way of free im-
portation, and thereby protect the capitals now vested
in Agriculture from an tip:vial competition in the
home market, is not, as a permanent systetn, prefer.
able to that state of law by which the corn trait is
now regulated.' The Committee also said, that it
would be indispensable for the just execution of this
prieciple, that such duty should be calculated fairly
to countervail the difference of expense, including the
ordinary rate of profit, of producing it in any of those
countries from whence our principal supplies of fo-
reign corn have usually been drawn, joined to the or-
dinary charges of conveying it from thence to our
onerirets."flius admitting in its fullest extent the
principle for which the different agricultural Associ-
ation, byre at all times contended, viz. dirty on
.411fOreign produce, to the growth of which our own
sail is congenial, equal to the difereacC in the expense
ci raising ft, hereand abroad.
That after reading these arguments so ably put,
and so impossihle to refute, it is with the greatest sur-
prise that we find it stated in the snug Report, that by
the present Corn Laws, there is an absolute prohibi-
tion against the introduction of every description of
foreign grain, meal, or flour, into. theeonstimption of
the United Kingdom. Wheo the average plyer, • aseer-
tained according to the pilule established by former
acts, arc below certairipecitied rates;' when it is known,
so far from this'-being the case, that any quantity,
however unlituited,Of foreign grain, meal or 11.rttr, im-
ported previous to the shutting of the ports, is, from-
the moment it arrives, amalgamated with the British
corn, and enter into the consumption of the United
Kingdom for months, nay, years afterwards, although
the price may have fallen fifty per cent. below stilt
specified rates—which has been fully exemplified by
our having had foreign corn free for sale on the Lon-
don Market, from the 15th Feb. 1818, to the very day
the Report of the Select Committee was made, I S
June, 1821, a period of nearly two years and a half.
That this meeting are the more surprised at this
description of the present Corn Laws, in page 1, seeing
Vint it is in direct opposition to the description given of
them in page 13 of the same Report.
" That this Meeting also feel great surprise that the
Report should state that ' The ruinously low prices of
agneeltnral produce, at this moment, cannot he ascribed
to any deficiency in the protecting power of the law.—
That protection cannot be carried further than mono-
poly, and that this monopoly the British grower has
enjoyed for the produce of the two last harvests.' When
ti:e very deficiency in Me protecting power of the law,
which -the Honourable Committee so freely admit in
page 13 of the Report as quoted before, was taken ad-
vantaxe of in 1918, when the Ports continued open for
three months after the 15th of August of that year. by
a very small excess above the import price, at the mo-
ment we were reaping an early an.l abundant barren!,
and when we did out stand in need of a single bushel of
foreign grain: and that in the opinion of this Meeting,
one great cause of the present distress of the farmers
bas been the 'nonsense importation which then took
place, superseding the use of an equal quantity of lid-
filth corn, and glutting the markets of this kingdom with
foreign corn, comparatively untitled anal untaxed.
" That were it possible`to take one-tenth of all foreign
produce imported for tithe, one-tenth for the relief of
the poor, one-tenth fur the repairs of highways, county
rates, church rates, he.; and two-tenths for the payment
of the national debt, pay of army and navy, support of
tioverninent, and so forth ;*the British Farmers would
not object to the admission of all foreign produce, duty
free; but till this he done, they merely pray for such a
duty to he imposed on ituportanon here, as stay be equal
to thine expenses to which our own produce is subjected :
so that the British and Foreign Farmer way meet on
equal terms in the British market.
" That the Report of the Select Committee, in brief-
ly noticing the evidence of some of the Petitioners, who
gave it as their opinion that a duty of alts. per quarter
would be the lowest amount of duty that could secure
the British fanner, states as an objection to the proposi-
tion, that it would he a prohibition, except in seasons of
scarrity. But that this Meeting, so far front thinking
this an evil, suppose that Corn Laws are enacted for
this express purpose. They are the more confirmed in
this Opinion. as they find in the Report of the Select
Committee of the House of Commons in 1814, which sat
on the same subject, the following words on this very
• point :--• Looking to the important change in our situa-
tion, to the abundance which we now enjoy, and to the
great and extensive improvement made in cultivation
both here and in Ireland, your Committee cannot but
100111.011 A eons that we have nearly arrived at that
state in which 'nothing but a discouragement and conse-
quent falling off of our own agriculture can again drive
us to the necessity of trusting to large importations of
foreign corn, KXCEPT ix ITKPORTIMATZ SCUMS% when
it may be necessary to resort to this resource to supply
the deficiency of our own harvest.'
'6 That although the Report of the Select Committee
of 1821, one part, recommends a fixed duty as the best
possible protection to the Agriculture of the United
Kingdom ; still, in another part, it considers the pre-
seat moment unfit for making such alteration. it re-
commends a continuance of the present average system ;
urging, however. that the import price should be lower-
ed; because, the Report adds. it is obvious that the
duty would otherwise not only check the sudden and
overwhelming amount of import, but also enhance the
price beyond what it might reach under the present
law.' Thit this Meeting. so far from thinking this Is obvi-
ous, believe it would make no difference in that respect,
pirticularlary as in page 13 of their Report. the Select
Committee expressly admit that the prices ofcorn on the
Continent are not regulated by the cost of production,
but entirely by the price of other coentries in which
there is a demand for it. That the Report at page 23,
allrms that the demand of the Agricultural Petitionsoor
elitel protection with manufactures, rests in part upon
misconception of facts, because the duties payable on
sevetal titamsfaciared articles are imposed to counteract
the excise duties on the manufactory of them in this
kingdom ; but that this Meeting, with due submission.
coseeive, whether taxation be cermet, as in case of the
manufacture aegis's. or inilveet. as in the cue of the
growth, or as it may be called manufacture of corn, it
can maw so diatom, as to the justice of their &hos