been had, with the duty of Ss., for 56s. On the 6th of August the price rose to 60s.: your law afforded special reasons for believing that a still better price could be obtained for it; and on the 3d September, only two months after it could have been sold at 48s., it was sold at 70s. in bond; thereby adding 22s. to the price, without the slightest benefit to the farmer or landholder, and with no advantage but to the foreign speculator." It was calculated by Mr. Greg that the sum paid to owners and growers of foreign corn last year was 6,000,000l.; he would assume that it was 4,000,000l. or 5,000,000l., a loss which was entailed upon the country by the sliding-scale. Another evil of the sliding-scale lay in the fact, that take the averages as fairly as you may, they cannot tell the quality of the corn: During the past year and some of the preceding years, a great portion of the corn of the country was greatly damaged, to the extent, as alleged by some persons well acquainted with agriculture, of one-fifth of the whole crop of England. The consequence was a considerable reduction in the market price. But did the people get their bread a whit the cheaper? No; when corn comes to that degree of cheapness, it is not cheapness to the consumer of bread, because he is paying as much as when the averages are much higher. This has been made out in figures by a gentleman who sent me a statement on the subject. He shows that in the month of January, 1841, the average price of wheat was 61s. 2d.; and that in the same month in 1842 the average was also 61s. 2d. You may therefore say that the average price being the same at both pe

riods, and the duty being also the same, the people obtained bread at the same price. But is it so? Far from it; because, according to the Mark Lane return, I found that the price of the best flour in the first four weeks of 1841 was 55s. per sack, while in the first four weeks of 1842 it was 61s. per sack; making a difference of no less than 6s. per sack in that description of flour from which bread is made, while no alteration took place either in the averages or the amount of the duty."

The sudden rise after a bad harvest, when perhaps there has been a prohibition for two or three years, causes the necessity of a sudden supply from abroad: there is no regular trade; and bullion is sent to meet the demand; the Bank of England contracts its issues, and there is derangement of the currency. He was aware that corn must be dearer at some seasons than at others; but where nature places difficulties in yonr way, you should not aggravate them by bad legislation. With respect to the frauds in the averages, the Committee of 1820 exposed a great number; and a fraudulent rise in price to the extent of 9s. in one week, was exposed in 1839. He quoted Mr. Buckingham, to show the importance of extending our commercial intercourse with America. According to his statements, there were in the five States of

Michigan, Missisippi, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, 280,000 square miles of cultivable land, into which a vast population was constantly flowing. If the increase continued there at the same rate as it had hitherto done, the population of these five States would, in the year 1850, exceed 6,000,000. From these States, on account of the

great distance and expences of transit, corn could not be brought to our markets for less than 45s. or 47s. a quarter, a competition which the home-grower need not greatly fear. He called upon the House to estimate the advantages which this country must receive from the consumption which markets containing 6,000,000 of people, who were, from their habits and circumstances, naturally more addicted to agricultural occupations, would open up to our increasing manufactures. The ministerial proposition included a contrivance for throwing a new obstacle in the way of the importation of wheat from America-not by a sliding-scale, but by a fixed duty on wheat which might come to this country through the St. Lawrence. He trusted, indeed, that that part of the project would be abandoned. It was monstrous that in legislating on the corntrade, the products of the ports of the Black Sea, and of the fine Western States of America, so well calculated to supply our deficiency, should be excluded. It should be borne in mind, that the latitudes of America and Europe are materially different, and do not present the same influence of seasons. Sir Robert Peel had adverted to the advantages which the advocates of a free-trade in corn had over their opponents: "I admit," said Lord John Russell, "that it is an advantage; but it is one that we have a right to hold." The principle of a fixed duty came before the House recommended by names entitled to great consideration. Mr. Ricardo recommended a duty of 20s., falling 1s. every year, to stand finally at 10s.; Mr. M'Culloch recommended a fixed duty of 5s., as equivalent VOL. LXXXIV.

to the burthens on agriculture; the Committee of 1821, of which Sir Edward Knatchbull and other eminent men, skilled in agricultural matters, were Members, and of which Sir Thomas Gooch was Chairman, recommended a fixed duty; the person by whom the report was drawn up, appeared to think a fixed duty only a temporary measure, and to contemplate doing away with all protection and prohibition; and the same principle was recognised by Mr. Huskisson, in 1827, 1828, and 1830. If a fixed duty were adopted, however, many things would require serious consideration. When he (Lord John Russell) proposed his plan last Session, to obviate the inconvenience of a fixed duty in times of dearth, he had suggested that the Crown should have power to open the ports, and to admit corn duty free; perhaps, however, it would be well to fix the admission to a certain point, as when the average price should rise to 73s. or 74s. the quarter. He admitted that he did not regard the Cornlaws as the cause of the whole of the present distress; but he thought that they tended very greatly to aggravate it, and that a considerable relaxation would tend greatly to mitigate the distress. He quoted the Manchester circular, addressed to the wholesale London cottondealers, in which it was stated that the home consumption of manufactures had fallen off in consequence of the high price of corn. That statement was supported by all who had communication with the working class in various parts of the country. The freer admission of corn would enable that numerous class to consume more manufactures, while it would provide a better market for our goods [D]

abroad. It appeared to him that Sir Robert Peel did not understand the true position of the country: if the causes of distress had been the number of joint-stock banks and the excess of production, it would have passed away. The whole history of the country since the introduction of manufactures, disproved the assertion that the increase of machinery diminishes employment; for markets have always been created or extended in proportion to the increase of machinery. And, indeed, had it been so, what could have called into existence the great towns of Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow and Birmingham? He believed that our commerce had not attained its highest point, if its produce should be increased instead of restricted.

Sir Robert Peel had said that an alteration of the Corn-laws would not relieve the distress: "Why, Sir, I agree to that description, when it is made applicable to the measures of the Government. I agree that it is impossible to hope that any material alleviation of distress should result from a measure which is only made to look apparently a little better than the former one-which keeps up all the vicious principles of the old law-which forbids the import of corn by a prohibitory duty which encourages speculation which cramps your commerce, and prevents your resorting for food to the Black Sea and the United States. To such a measure, the description that it will do nothing to relieve the distress is strictly applicable. Lord Bacon said, with a wisdom which has been often admired, that the froward retention of custom is as turbulent in a State as the rashness of innovation

But he never dreamt that there might be a measure which should have all the evils of a froward retention of custom, and yet contain within it all the mischiefs of innovation; a measure which should change and therefore disturb, but which should not improve; and therefore not alleviate distress; a measure which, having caused much speculation and excited great hopes for a long period, should be in appearance a change, and yet in reality be founded on the same principles, and produce similar evils with that which has been condemned by the public voice."

The present proposal would call up a formidable spirit of discontent. If the land proprietors adhered to a sliding-scale, now generally condemned, as the basis of a law, could the people believe that they alone took an impartial view of the question? They would attribute to them a bias towards those interests that were preserved. Anything would be better for the Legislature than that: "Be in error if you will. Enact laws which partake of the ignorance of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, upon matters of trade; it is mere ignorance, you will excite no feelings of hostility by such a course. But if you will proclaim that the Commons of Eng land have acted on this question, which concerns the food of the whole community, with a selfish and partial view to their own advantage, it is impossible but that the Legislature must suffer in estimation."

Lord John Russell concluded by moving as his amendment:"That this House, considering the evils which have been caused by the present Corn-laws, and especially by the fluctuations of the

graduated or sliding-scale, is not prepared to adopt the measure of her Majesty's Government, which is founded upon the same principles, and is likely to be attended by similar results."

Mr. W. E. Gladstone opposed the amendment. He thought that some of Lord John Russell's principles ought, in point of consistency, to have made him a supporter of the Government measure. Mr. Huskisson had been decidedly of opinion that this country should be made independent of foreign supply. The proposed plan was not founded on the same principle as the existing one, except indeed as both involved a sliding-scale, but the structure of the two scales was widely different. The existing law had not perhaps worked so favourably for the consumer as it had been expected to do; but he denied that it was chargeable with the present mass of distress, which he attributed rather to the unavoidable fluctuations of the seasons. It was one effect too of new applications of machinery, though certainly not to diminish employment eventually, yet to cause great temporary gluts,-and, consequently, great depression of markets. Four successive bad harvests could not have occurred without producing high prices of food. But was it true that these fluctuations, una voidable in themselves, were aggravated by the Corn-laws? He showed that in the cotton trade there had been similar fluctuations according to authentic statements, and that in times antecedent to the present Corn-laws the fluctuations of the prices of wheat had been as great as under the existing system; also that in Prussia, where Corn laws are unknown, there had been similar fluctuations in the price of

rye, which is the food of the people there as wheat is in England. He argued against the probability that under a fixed duty prices would have been as moderate as they had lately been. He then proceeded to congratulate Lord John Russell on the improved maturity of his views, since he was now almost a convert to the minimum duty. He contrasted at some length the probable working of the noble Lord's plan and of Sir Robert Peel's. "What would be the comparative temptation to commit fraud and work upon the averages? Under his right honourable Friend's scheme, the importer knew when the price of wheat was at 64s. that there was no chance of getting the duty down to the minimum without holding out for a rise of 9s. If wheat rose to 66s., the duty would be 6s., and it would become a matter of considerable uncertainty, certainly one of more than an average and ordinary chance, whether the price would rise so as to bring the duty very much lower. But the importer, under a fixed duty of 8s., knew that he had no chance of a diminution of duty unless he could work the averages up to 738., when he got his corn in at 1s. duty. When, therefore, there was a short supply of corn in the country, there was almost an absolute certainty that the price would go up to 73s.; and in proportion as the premium of the importer would then be large, he would set to work to starve the market and torture the consumer←→ to revive and increase, indeed, all those means of fraud said to be employed in the old scale, which the noble Lord professed a desire to prevent. How would the noble Lord's scheme work for America? When wheat went down to 1s. duty, then those who sent to the

nearest port of the Continent might have a chance of getting it in port in time; but the American would have comparatively no chance of doing so, for before his corn arrived in this country the duty might have leaped from 1s. up again to 8s. Now, let the House try his right honourable Friend's plan by applying its operation to the same country. If when the American importer brought his corn to this country he found that the price of wheat had fallen from the highest point, he would only have to pay a duty in proportion to the fall; and, if the price had got so low as 66.s., the duty would not then be higher than 6s., instead of Ss. as proposed by the noble Lord. In fact, the objection with respect to America was, not the variation of duty, but the enormous rapidity of the variation. But this objection in no way applied to the measure of his right honourable Friend; for supposing, as he had a right to do, that before corn was imported a fall of 6s. or 7s. had taken place, to state the utmost, from the price of 73s., the duty would then be only 6s., instead of 20s. 8d."

It had been said, that the Ministers were doing nothing by such a change as this; but perhaps doing nothing was not very different from proposing measures which the proposers knew they had no chance of carrying. He showed, however, that the details of the new plan differed much from those of the existing system in their checks upon speculation. He then illustrated the advantages of the proposed measure with reference to the inferior kinds of grain. The noble Lord had called this variable duty at its inaximum a prohibitory one; but could there have been a

For almost

fixed duty, which in certain states of the market would not have been prohibitory? The question was whether the price which caused the maximum duty, was a price indicating plenty : if it were, he trusted this protection would be maintained by Parliament. He did not, however, agree that it amounted to prohibition; he believed that the prices of corn at Dantzic were practically much lower than the noble Lord had assumed them to be. 140 years, and during the very times to which the Anti-Corn-law party were fond of appealing as the healthy period of the law, there had been a maximum protection amounting to 20s. He admitted that a fixed duty would encourage exportation of manufactures; but there was no very close relation between our exports to foreign countries, and the corn we might take from them. They, too, had their legal restrictions, of which he gave examples, and he objected to legislate on the wild speculation of their making sudden changes in their entire systems for the sake of following our example. He did not believe that the late drains of our currency could have been prevented by a fixed duty; they must have followed as necessary consequences, from a succession of bad harvests, whatever the law of import duties had been. In a choice of difficulties it was light objection against a fixed duty that it was an entire novelty. Mr. Huskisson, though once favourable to it had altered his opinion, and embraced the principle of a graduated scale. But it was also a delusion-for at a high price it could never be maintained-the noble Lord himself had to-night abandoned his fixed position, and

no