Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1825-07-01
BRITISH PARLIAMENT.
- vi NO"iNIONS.-. APRIL ~, 1928.
Deoate on a motion to rerise the Cor, Lar.

20 advert to the details which his hon. friend Mr.
Whl,more) had, with such great labour and re-
search, submitted TO the consideration of the House
he hoped his hon. friend would not think IL ,n,,
dlsrespect to him, if he only stated that he concur
red with him in his general principle, that the trade
In corn ought 10 be conducted with the same heal
Pohcy which was adopted with respect TO other |
ranches OF the commerce of the country No, IN |
tending, therefore, 10 follow his honorable fr;onl
through the facts he had mentioned, he SHOULD NOT |
nave occasion 10 Iespass for any great length of |
time oa the attention of the House He aoree1 ,b,, |
the question before them deserve their most ser.
Gus attention, although he felt it his duty 10 s,v
TINS was not the fit season for bringing The consider
ton OF the Corn Law before the House ITTnr !
House agreed they should 80 into the Committee !
ms opinion was, he confessed, still unchanged 1t
was ON record upon the face OF the proceedings OF
the House, and from that opinion he felt no incina-
ton 10 swerve. He referred to the Report OF 1921
to which he had been most cordial subscrber and
he hoped the House would entertain an opinion |
less hostile, than II would seem some did, to the
Report, when they saw what Were the results of
proceeding upon the principle OF the Corn Law as
at present established. He did not mean to show
any dsrespec to the respectable elias, OF individu-
ais whose petitions had been presented that evening
against any alteration in the present corn laws; but
he could not shut his eyes the fact, that some Of
those very petitioners had heretofore prayed the
House TO have those very laws reconsidered and
revised, and as not aifordng them sufficient proec-
uon. Looking at those laws, and at the crcum-
stances which had since occurred, he would con
tend, that there inconsistency in defending
their principle, and at the same time maintaining
that the present was not the proper time Tor max
ing any alteration with respect to Them He would
assert that, with the facts before him. OF corn being
sold In the ports Of France and the Netherlands at
haii Tie price at which 1t could be purchased here
no man would be warranted in contendng that the
C,1r NIL h., H. i
system. (Helr, hear.) We were now in the tenth
year oil peace, and 1t was not unreasonable TO ex-
pect that the price OF corn here could not continue so
much above that at which it might be procured at the
ports on The Continent; but if this fact was worthy
oi consideration, there another which it was
also oilmportance to bear in mind For 40 years
TINS country above ed free trade in corn and for
every year of that time imported a quantity
more or less, from the Continent. That importa-
uon had been discontinued for the last six years
during which, we did not receive from abroad any
addition TO our home supply. This interruption
created one OF the greatest difficulties under W ich
we called upon TO revise the present corn laws
| Tor, the consequence of the interruption was
great accumulation of in all the countries from
which formerly in the habit of importinp
TO this was to be added, that since we had ceased
| 10 import corn, our haIvests at home had been
more tlian usually productive; and he believed the
same might be said of the other corn countries OF
Europe There was then great increase in the
stock of corn on hand in all the continental norris
from which we had usually imported and this was
farther increase by the fact Spain and Portugal
initiating our example, had latterly received less
than their usual supply from the northern ports-
The result of all these circumstances was, that the
supply was at present so much beyond the demand
IN many OF the European ports, that in some corn
did not produce half, in others not one-third and
IN others again not one fourth OF the average prices
| OF the last 40 bafOre tha, ba,
port corn TO this country. (Hear, hear Now it
was not travelling into any theory of political
economy TO assert that the average price in those
ports OF the last forty years. might be taken as the
falr price; which would give some remuneration TO
the grower, and that any thing less than that would
be loss to him. From returns which he had SEEN
1t appeared that the average price in Dantzic for the
last forty years, before importation 10 this country
was interrupted, was 45s and fraction. 1t must
then be evident that any thing much below that price
would be loss TO the grower. 1t No I'D be unfair
to infer the real price, the present day. from
what the corn would fetch in the market He
would ask the hon. member, who introduced this
Inotion---he would appeal 10 the hon. members for
ir Gland, and ask what difference would il not have
made to that country if, some years back, we had
removed its free trade in the export of corn to Great
Britain, and moi allowed vent for its s1perabun-
dant harvests! Would any man say, that the price
10 which corn would have fallen after such inter
rupon, should be taken fair criterion of the cost
OF production! lie was sure no such poot would
be commended, and he maintained that neither could
1t be contended with respect to the cost of growing
the article in those countries whose import of corn
TO England had been interrupted. He did not saw
this out OF any particular compassion for the hold
ers OF corn IN foreign ports, but merely to point
ont TO the attention OF the house, that when we
came to any permanent measure for regulating the
importation of corn, should look rather at the
~ng a., It,,i, tt -, IL.
now so cheap, than at the price which it might
bring the grower after so long an interruption of
his exports. Another view Of the question was !
that some OF the countries from which we had for
mery imported grain, having her vent for their
surplus produce but what our wants under particu- /
lar circumstances might create, would discontinue |
to grow corn, and employ their lands 20 some more
profitable purpose; and that thus the surplus in the
market would remedy itself This was an impor-
tant feature in The case, when they came to look at
tie question in another light. His non. friend had
stated, on the authority OF several letters from the
continent, that this had already been the case i'm
some places-lh many individuals had discoutinu-
ed the cultivation of corn and had laid down their
lands under pasture for large hocks OF sheep.-As
he was on this subject he would say that the tax on
foreign wool, which had now happily ceased 10
exist; was a source Of injury to The woollen manu-
lecturers Of this country. In consequence of no,
finding market for their produce here, the wool
growers Of Sesia and sorse parts OF Germany, es-
tablshcd manufactures for coarse cloths, which /
were sold at more reduced price than we could sell
them and the sale Of them in the American market |
produced competition injurious to our trade. The /
removal of the tax on foreign wool however, re- /
NEEDED that evil As soon as il could be imported /
here, rose in price to the manufactures abroad |
from twenty-three to thirty-three forms. We were
thus enabled 10 compete with them and in a short
time drove them from their own and the American