Chapter LVI: Section VI: Finance and Foreign Trade (2)

Can you speak to the population of Sheffield, and such parts of the neighbouring parishes as are concerned in the Sheffield manufacture?--The population of the parish of Sheffield, as returned by the overseers in the year 1811, was 53,000 odd; but including those parts of parishes in which Sheffield goods are manufactured, the population amounts to 60,000 at least.

Can you tell what proportion of hands are employed in manufacturing for the American market?--For the American market, about 4,000 male adults, and 2,000 women and children, making a total of 6,000.

* * * * *

How many do you estimate are employed in manufacturing for the home trade?--Six thousand male adults, and one thousand women and children.

How many do you calculate are employed in the remaining parts of the Sheffield trade, namely, manufactures for the foreign market, exclusive of the American?--Two thousand male adults, and one thousand women and children.

This last market includes Spain and Portugal?--Spain, Portugal, the West Indies, South America, and Canada, with some few other parts.

What proportion does the American market bear to the home market, as far as regards the Sheffield goods?--The American exports amount, as nearly as I have been able to ascertain, to one-third of the whole manufactures of Sheffield; the home trade to, I think, three-sixths.

[He adds that the American trade had been affected by the Orders in Council and the Non-importation Act of the United States. The home trade with towns in the American trade had been injured also. Goods to the value of £400,000 were waiting in Sheffield and Liverpool warehouses.]

* * * * *

[Evidence of Robert MacKerrell, London merchant, dealing in cottons and muslins, and manufacturer of Paisley.]

Can you inform the Committee what the state of the trade was in the years 1808, 1809, 1810, and 1811?--In 1807 we felt the whole effect of the Berlin decree, we were entirely excluded from the Continent; I speak with regard to my own transactions and those of a vast number of my friends. We had in 1807, and previous to that, trades to the South of Europe, particularly in Portugal, which were uninterrupted, but which were likewise put an end to by the French invasion in November of that year. In 1808 the trade revived considerably; a great quantity of our goods, and of English merchandise, was introduced into the Continent through Heligoland; considerable exports were made to the Baltic; the trade in the Mediterranean increased very considerably; a very great trade was opened to this country in consequence of the Royal Family of Portugal removing to the Brazils, which likewise made an opening to Spanish South America. In 1809 the trade through Heligoland was most extensive; Bonaparte had his hands full with the Emperor of Germany and with the Spaniards, and had no time to attend to the coast; the trade during that year I may say was uninterrupted. The trade to the Mediterranean increased very much; the quantity of goods taken out that year greatly exceeded any previous year, for reasons that at that time we could not account for. The trade to the Brazils was equally extensive with the year before, vast exportations took place to South America, and in general, trade in the line in which I am engaged was reckoned a fair trade; the markets were never heavy.

[The Orders in Council increased the English export trade to the South of Europe, and Africa and the Levant were supplied with English substitutes for Continental cottons and linens.]

What has been the state of your trade for the last eighteen months, and, as far as you have been informed, of the country in general?--The state of the trade during the last eighteen months has been depressed; for the last twelve months it has been recovering, but for the six months previous it was very much depressed indeed.

To what do you attribute that depression?--We attribute the depression of trade which took place to the effect of the Berlin and Milan decrees. [Northern Europe, the Baltic, etc., were shut against English trade, and English ships were sequestered even in Swedish ports.]

[Footnote 394: Brassfounding, hardware, plated ware, jewellery, etc.]

14. DEBATE ON THE CORN LAW [_Parliamentary History, 1st Series, Vol. XXIX, Cols. 798-818_], 1815.

_House of Commons. February 17, 1815._

_The State of the Corn Laws._

The _Hon. Frederick Robinson_ immediately rose.... He had never disguised from himself, and he was not ashamed to confess it, the extreme difficulty, as well as the extreme importance, of this question. He could not, however, but feel that the prejudices on this subject had, from further inquiry, been very much removed. But, above all, he was happy to see that the misrepresentations, for so he thought they were, with respect to the motives of those who supported this measure, and with reference to the effects which it was likely to produce, were done away with. There did not now exist in the public mind the feeling by which it was before influenced. It was not now supposed that the object sought to be accomplished by the alteration of the corn law was the mean and base and paltry one of getting, for a particular class of society, a certain profit at the expense of the rest. "For my part," said Mr. Robinson, "I declare to God, if I thought this was the motive which actuated any individual who supported the alteration; and, above all, if I conceived that such would be the effect of the measure, no consideration on earth could tempt me to bring it forward." ...

* * * * *

... The general result of his reasoning was, in the first place, that it was quite impossible for us safely to rely on a foreign import. If they so did, a necessary result would be a diminution of our own produce, which would become more and more extensive every year, and consequently call for a greater annual supply from foreign countries--a supply which must progressively increase as the agriculture of the kingdom became less encouraged; and that, when the fatal moment arrived, the system of foreign supply would prove completely illusory.

The next point to be considered was the extent to which protection should be given. That was a point on which, undoubtedly, a difference of opinion was most likely to prevail. Some gentlemen would be for going considerably higher than others. Many thought the prohibition ought to be carried to a price considerably above that, without he obtained which it was conceived the agriculturalist could not cultivate. Others would wish that it should be placed much lower; and contend that because a particular species and degree of burden was likely to be removed, the protecting price ought to be much reduced. Now he would be inclined to agree to the first of these propositions, if the necessary effect of it would not be to bring up the price of corn to the highest possible rate, within the limits of the sum at which importation should commence. This certainly might be the case at the first moment, but he believed the ultimate result would not be so. He thought the final effect of the system would be to give such a powerful support to our own agriculture as would greatly increase the general produce of the country. It would excite a strong competition between the different parts of England, and between England and Ireland; so that the growth of corn, if Providence blessed us with favourable seasons, would be sufficiently large to afford an ample supply for the people of this country, and would enable them to be fed at a much cheaper rate, in the long run, than could be effected by the adoption of any other system.

* * * * *

_Mr. Philips_ professed himself equally inclined either to proceed with, or defer the discussion, as might be most agreeable to the wishes of the House. Several members calling out "Go on," he began by stating his entire concurrence in the opinion of the right hon. gentleman who had moved the resolutions, that this was not a question on which the interests of the commercial and agricultural classes were at variance, but one in which those interests, when fairly and liberally considered, would be found to accord; for no resolution upon it calculated to promote the general prosperity of the country could be adopted without materially benefiting both classes. But if this were not the case, if the question were one in which the interests of two or more descriptions of our fellow-subjects were opposed, he should say that it was the duty of parliament not to legislate for the advantage of one class in contradistinction to, or at the expense of another, but to legislate for the benefit of the whole community. Looking at the question under the influence of this principle, he could not help feeling and expressing some surprise at the occasion of their present deliberations. What was the object of their deliberations? To provide a remedy for the low price of corn. That which all ages and countries had considered as a great national benefit was now discovered to be a great evil, against which we were imperiously called to legislate in self-defence. The real object of the resolutions, however disguised and disavowed, was to raise the price of corn. [Here Mr. Robinson expressed his dissent.] Mr. Philips proceeded to say that this not only was their object, but if that object were not attained, the advocates of the resolutions would regard them as nugatory. The right hon. gentleman must at least allow that their object was to raise the present price of grain; but he contended that moderation and uniformity of price would be their ultimate effect. It did seem somewhat inconsistent, on the part of the hon. gentleman, to tell the House that the effectual way to lower price was to acquiesce in a measure expressly intended to raise it. But how are this moderation and uniformity of price to be produced? By contracting the market of supply. Thus, while in all other instances moderation and uniformity of price are found to be in proportion to the extent of the market of supply, in the instance of corn they are to be in proportion to the limitation of it: and in a commodity peculiarly liable to be affected by the variation of seasons, moderation and uniformity of price, and abundance, are to be attained by preventing importations from foreign countries correcting the effect of varieties of climate, and of a scanty harvest in our own. To him it appeared that no measure could be better calculated to produce directly opposite consequences.

* * * * *

In considering the relation between the price of provisions and of labour, Mr. Philips observed that it was necessary to distinguish the countries and the trades from which examples were taken. In a new country where the value of land is extremely low, and agriculture rapidly progressive, in a new and thriving manufacture, the price of labour may be so high in proportion to that of the necessaries of life as to be little affected by their fluctuations.... But this state of things cannot exist in old manufactures, such as those generally established in this country, where competition has reduced profits, and that reduction of profit has brought the wages of the labourer to a level with his subsistence in tolerable comfort. In such manufactures if you raise the price of provisions without proportionately raising that of labour, to what privations and evils must you necessarily expose the labourer! He was ready to admit with the noble lord[395] that, _ceteris paribus_, the immediate effect of a high advance of provisions might probably be a reduction of the price of labour; because labourers being desirous of obtaining the same comforts that they had been used to, might be stimulated to more diligence. They might work sixteen hours a day instead of ten, and thus the competition for employment being increased among the same number of workmen, without any increase of demand, the price of labour might fall. But will any person contend that this state of affairs can long continue? The labourer must go to the parish, or turn to some more profitable employment, if by chance any can be found, or he must emigrate, or work himself out by overstrained exertion. The proportion being then altered between the demand for labour and the supply, its price will rise. This effect sooner or later must happen, but till it has actually taken place how dreadful must be the situation of the labourer!

* * * * *

Having thus shown both by reasoning and by reference to facts, that the price of provisions must ultimately and on the average regulate that of labour, he proceeded to show the effect that an advance of provisions must have on our manufacturing interests. And here Mr. Philips said that he wished on such topics, to reduce his reasoning as much as possible to numerical calculation. He would suppose, for the sake of argument, without at all entering into the enquiry, that three-fifths, or 60 per cent. of the labourer's wages were spent in provisions, and that provisions were 80 per cent. dearer here than they were in France, or any manufacturing country on the continent. By multiplying 60 by 80, and dividing by 100, the committee would see that the excess of the price of labour here above that of France would, from these datas, and according to his reasoning, be 48 per cent. He wished the committee to consider what must be the effect of such an excessive price of labour employed in our manufactures, when compared with the low price of labour employed in the manufactures of France, and what an advantage it must give to the French manufacturers in their attempts to rival us on the continent.

* * * * *

[After quoting Malthus] he observed that there were two ways of equalising subsistence and population, one by increasing food, the other by limiting population, and warned the committee against being led into measures whose tendency might be to produce that effect in the latter way. Why (said Mr. Philips) should a commercial and manufacturing country like this have such a jealousy and dread of the importation of corn? An importation of corn cannot take place without a corresponding export of commodities on which British industry has been employed. The export will increase your wealth, that wealth will increase your population, and that increased population will produce an increased demand for your agricultural produce.... Mr. Philips observed that no country in the world was so interested as this in establishing the principle of free trade, because no other country could profit equally by the general recognition of that principle. Foreign nations, mistaking, like the advocates of the regulation before the committee, the circumstances which have operated against our wealth for the causes of it, are now following our example. They are prohibiting or imposing restraints on the import of our fabrics, in order to encourage their own manufactures, from which they will receive inferior fabrics at a higher price. Let us convince them, by an example, of their mistake. Let us convince them that by leaving industry and enterprise unfettered, and by allowing capital to take its natural and voluntary direction, we are persuaded that the true interests of this country and of every other will be most effectually promoted.

Mr. Philips proceeded to say that Great Britain was geographically a commercial country, that commerce had stimulated her agriculture rather than agriculture had stimulated her commerce. It had given wealth to her people, and diffused fertility over her soil. Take care, said he, that in attempting to change the natural character of your country, you do not stop the progress of national prosperity....

[Footnote 395: Lord Lauderdale in evidence before a committee of the House of Lords.]

15. THE CORN LAW OF 1815 [_Statutes, 55 Geo. III, 26_]

An Act to amend the laws now in force regulating the Importation of Corn.

[Corn may at all times be imported and warehoused free of duty.]

III. And be it further enacted, that such foreign corn, meal or flour, shall and may be permitted to be imported into the said United Kingdom, for home consumption, under and subject to the provisions and regulations now in force, without payment of any duty whatever, whenever the average prices of the several sorts of British corn, made up and published in the manner now by law required, shall be at or above the prices hereafter mentioned; that is to say, whenever wheat shall be at or above the price of eighty shillings per quarter; whenever rye, pease and beans shall be at or above the price of fifty-three shillings per quarter; whenever barley, beer or bigg shall be at or above the price of forty shillings per quarter; and whenever oats shall be at or above the price of twenty-seven shillings per quarter.

IV. And be it further enacted, that whenever the average prices of British corn so made up and published shall respectively be below the prices hereinbefore stated, no foreign corn, or meal, or flour made from any of the respective sorts of foreign corn hereinbefore enumerated, shall be allowed to be imported into the United Kingdom for the purpose of home consumption, or taken out of warehouse for that purpose.

V. And be it further enacted, that the average price of the several sorts of British corn, by which the importation of foreign corn, meal or flour, into the United Kingdom shall be regulated and governed, shall continue to be made up and published in any manner now required by law; but that if it shall hereafter at any time after the importation of foreign corn, meal or flour shall be permitted, under the provisions of this Act, appear that the average prices of the different sorts of British corn respectively in the six weeks immediately succeeding the fifteenth day of February, the fifteenth day of May, the fifteenth day of August and the fifteenth day of November in each year, shall have fallen below the prices at which foreign corn, meal or flour may be, under the provisions of this Act, allowed to be imported for home consumption, no such foreign corn, meal or flour shall be allowed to be imported into the United Kingdom for home consumption from any place between the rivers Eyder and Bidassoa, both inclusive, until a new average shall be made up and published in the London Gazette for regulating the importation into the United Kingdom for the succeeding quarter.

16. FREE TRADE PETITION[396] [_Commons Journals, Vol. LXXV._], 1820.

The Petition, etc.,
Humbly sheweth

That foreign commerce is eminently conducive to the wealth and prosperity of a country, by enabling it to import the commodities for the production of which the soil, climate, capital, and industry of other countries are best calculated, and to export in payment those articles for which its own situation is better adapted.

That freedom from restraint is calculated to give the utmost extension to foreign trade, and the best direction to the capital and industry of the country.

That the maxim of buying in the cheapest market and selling in the dearest, which regulates every merchant in his individual dealings, is strictly applicable as the best rule for the trade of the whole nation.

That a policy founded on these principles would render the commerce of the world an interchange of mutual advantages, and diffuse an increase of wealth and enjoyments among the inhabitants of each State.

That, unfortunately, a policy the very reverse of this has been, and is, more or less, adopted and acted upon by the Government of this and of every other country....

That the prevailing prejudices in favour of the protective or restrictive system may be traced to the erroneous supposition that every importation of foreign commodities occasions a diminution or discouragement of our own productions to the same extent, whereas it may be clearly shown that although the particular description of production which could not stand against unrestrained foreign competition would be discouraged, yet, as no importation could be continued for any length of time without a corresponding exportation, direct or indirect, there would be an encouragement, for the purpose of that exportation, of some other production to which our situation might be better suited, thus affording at least an equal, and probably a greater, and certainly a more beneficial employment to our own capital and labour.

* * * * *

That, among the other evils of the restrictive or protective system, not the least is, that the artificial protection of one branch of industry, or source of production, against foreign competition, is set up as a ground of claim by other branches for similar protection, so that if the reasoning upon which these restrictive or prohibitory regulations are founded were followed out consistently, it would not stop short of excluding us from all foreign commerce whatsoever. And the same train of argument, which, with corresponding prohibitions and protective duties, should exclude us from foreign trade, might be brought forward to justify the re-enactment of restrictions upon the interchange of productions (unconnected with public revenue) among the kingdoms composing the union, or among the counties of the same kingdom.

That an investigation of the effects of the restrictive system at this time is peculiarly called for, as it may, in the opinions of your petitioners, lead to a strong presumption that the distress which now so generally prevails is considerably aggravated by that system, and that some relief may be obtained by the earliest practicable removal of such of the restraints as may be shown to be most injurious to the capital and industry of the community, and to be attended with no compensating benefit to the public revenue.

That a declaration against the anti-commercial principles of our restrictive system is of the more importance at the present juncture inasmuch as, in several instances of recent occurrence, the merchants and manufacturers in foreign States have assailed their respective Governments with applications for further protective or prohibitory duties and regulations, urging the example and authority of this country, against which they are almost exclusively directed, as a sanction for the policy of such measures. And certainly, if the reasoning upon which our restrictions have been defended is worth anything, it will apply in behalf of the regulations of foreign States against us. They insist upon our superiority in capital and machinery, as we do upon their comparative exemption from taxation, and with equal foundation.

That nothing would more tend to counteract the commercial hostility of foreign States than the adoption of a more enlightened and more conciliatory policy on the part of this country.

That, although, as a matter of mere diplomacy, it may sometimes answer to hold out the removal of particular prohibitions, or high duties, as depending upon corresponding concessions by other States in our favour, it does not follow that we should maintain our restrictions in cases where the desired concessions on their part cannot be obtained. Our restrictions would not be the less prejudicial to our capital and industry because other Governments persisted in preserving impolitic regulations.

* * * * *

That in thus declaring, as your petitioners do, their conviction of the impolicy and injustice of the restrictive system, and in desiring every practicable relaxation of it, they have in view only such parts of it as are not connected, or are only subordinately so, with the public revenue. As long as the necessity for the present amount of revenue subsists, your petitioners cannot expect so important a branch of it as the Customs to be given up, nor to be materially diminished, unless some substitute, less objectionable, be suggested. But it is against every restrictive regulation of trade not essential to the revenue--against all duties merely protective from foreign competition--and against the excess of such duties as are partly for the purpose of revenue and partly for that of protection, that the prayer of the present petition is respectfully submitted to the wisdom of Parliament.

[Footnote 396: Quoted in Hirst, _Free Trade and the Manchester School_, pp. 118-121.]

17. THE FOUNDATION OF THE ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE [_History of the Anti-Corn-Law League by Archibald Prentice, I, pp. 101-2, 1853_], 1839.

_Resolutions of meeting of delegates at Manchester, January 23, 1839._

Resolved--1. That this meeting of representatives from all the great sections of our manufacturing and commercial population, solemnly declare it to be their conviction that the prosperity of the great staples upon which their capital and industry are employed, is in imminent danger from the operation of the laws which interdict or interfere with the exchange of their productions for the corn and other produce of foreign nations, and thus check our trade, and artificially enhance the price of food in this country; and believing that the facts upon which this judgment is formed are little known, and of such national importance as to call for their disclosure before the people's representatives, they earnestly recommend that petitions be immediately forwarded from all parts of the Kingdom, praying to be heard by counsel and evidence at the bar of the House of Commons in the approaching session of Parliament.

2. That in order to secure unity and efficiency of action this meeting recommends that delegates be appointed by the several Anti-Corn-Law Associations of the kingdom. Those manufacturing and commercial towns not already possessing such societies are earnestly recommended to form Anti-Corn-Law Associations; and in case they require information or advice, they are invited to put themselves immediately in correspondence with the Manchester Association, whose fundamental rule, prohibiting the discussion of any party or political topics, is especially recommended for the adoption of all similar bodies elsewhere.

3. That the agricultural proprietor, capitalist, and labourer are benefited equally with the trader, by the creation and circulation of the wealth of the country; and this meeting appeals to all those classes to co-operate for the removal of a monopoly which, by restricting the foreign commerce of the country, retards the increase of the population, and restrains the growth of towns; thus depriving them of the manifold resources to be derived from the augmenting numbers and wealth of the country.

4. That this meeting cannot separate without expressing its deep sympathy with the present privations of that great and valuable class of their countrymen who earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow; many of whom are now suffering from hunger in the midst of boundless fields of employment, rendered unproductive solely by those unjust laws which prevent the exchange of the products of their industry for the food of other countries. So long as a plentiful supply of the first necessaries of life is denied by acts of the British legislation to the great body of the nation, so long will the government and the country be justly exposed to all the evils resulting from the discontent of the people. With a view to avert so great a danger by an act of universal justice, this meeting pledges itself to a united, energetic, and persevering effort for the total and immediate repeal of all laws affecting the free importation of grain.[397]

[Footnote 397: The Anti-Corn-Law League was created on the recommendation of a delegate meeting, March 20 following.]

18. THE BANK CHARTER ACT [_Statutes 7 and 8 Victoria 32_], 1844.

An Act to regulate the Issue of Bank Notes, and for giving to the
Governor and Company of the Bank of England certain Privileges for a
limited Period.

Be it enacted that from and after the thirty-first day of August, one thousand eight hundred and forty-four, the issue of Promissory Notes of the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, payable on demand, shall be separated and thenceforth kept wholly distinct from the general Banking business of the said Governor and Company; and the business of and relating to such issue shall be thenceforth conducted and carried on by the said Governor and Company in a separate department, to be called "The Issue Department of the Bank of England," subject to the rules and regulations hereinafter contained; and it shall be lawful for the Court of Directors of the said Governor and Company, if they shall think fit, to appoint a committee or committees of directors for the conduct and management of such Issue Department of the Bank of England, and from time to time remove the members, and define, alter, and regulate the constitution and powers of such committee, as they shall think fit, subject to any bye-laws, rules or regulations which may be made for that purpose: provided nevertheless, that the said Issue Department shall always be kept separate and distinct from the Banking Department of the said Governor and Company.

II. And be it enacted, that upon the thirty-first day of August, one thousand eight hundred and forty-four, there shall be transferred, appropriated, and set apart by the said Governor and Company to the Issue Department of the Bank of England securities to the value of fourteen million pounds, whereof the debt due by the public to the said Governor and Company shall be and be deemed a part; and there shall also at the same time be transferred, appropriated, and set apart by the said Governor and Company to the said Issue Department so much of the gold coin and gold and silver bullion then held by the Bank of England as shall not be required by the Banking Department thereof; and thereupon there shall be delivered out of the said Issue Department into the said Banking Department of the Bank of England such an amount of Bank of England notes as, together with the Bank of England notes then in circulation, shall be equal to the aggregate amount of the securities, coin and bullion so transferred to the said Issue Department of the Bank of England; and the whole amount of Bank of England notes then in circulation, including those delivered to the Banking Department of the Bank of England as aforesaid, shall be deemed to be issued on the credit of such securities, coin, and bullion so appropriated and set apart to the said Issue Department; and from thenceforth it shall not be lawful for the said Governor and Company to increase the amount of securities for the time being in the said Issue Department, save as hereinafter is mentioned, but it shall be lawful for the said Governor and Company to diminish the amount of such securities, and again to increase the same to any sum not exceeding in the whole the sum of fourteen million pounds, and so from time to time as they shall see occasion; and from and after such transfer and appropriation to the said Issue Department as aforesaid it shall not be lawful for the said Governor and Company to issue Bank of England notes, either into the Banking Department of the Bank of England, or to any persons or person whatsoever, save in exchange for other Bank of England notes, or for gold coin or for gold or silver bullion received or purchased for the said Issue Department under the provisions of this Act, or in exchange for securities acquired and taken in the said Issue Department under the provisions herein contained: provided always, that it shall be lawful for the said Governor and Company in their Banking Department to issue all such Bank of England notes as they shall at any time receive from the said Issue Department or otherwise, in the same manner in all respects as such issue would be lawful to any other person or persons.

IV. And be it enacted, that from and after the thirty-first day of August, one thousand eight hundred and forty-four, all persons shall be entitled to demand from the Issue Department of the Bank of England, Bank of England notes in exchange for gold bullion, at the rate of three pounds, seventeen shillings and ninepence per ounce of standard gold. Provided always, that the said Governor and Company shall in all cases be entitled to require such gold bullion to be melted and assayed by persons approved by the said Governor and Company at the expense of the parties tendering such gold bullion.

V. Provided always, and be it enacted, that if any banker who on the sixth day of May one thousand eight hundred and forty-four was issuing his own bank notes, shall cease to issue his own bank notes, it shall be lawful for Her Majesty in Council at any time after the cessation of such issue, upon the application of the said Governor and Company, to authorize and empower the said Governor and Company to increase the amount of securities in the said Issue Department beyond the total sum or value of fourteen million pounds, and thereupon to issue additional Bank of England notes to an amount not exceeding such increased amount of securities specified in such Order in Council, and so from time to time: provided always that such increased amount of securities specified in such Order in Council shall in no case exceed the proportion of two thirds the amount of bank notes which the banker so ceasing to issue may have been authorized to issue under the provisions of this Act; and every such order in Council shall be published in the next succeeding _London Gazette_.

XII. And be it enacted, that if any banker in any part of the United Kingdom who after the passing of this act shall be entitled to issue bank notes shall become bankrupt, or shall cease to carry on the business of a banker, or shall discontinue the issue of bank notes, either by agreement with the Governor and Company of the Bank of England or otherwise, it shall not be lawful for such Banker at any time thereafter to issue any such notes.

XIV. Provided always, and be it enacted, That if it shall be made to appear to the Commissioners of stamps and taxes that any two or more banks have, by written contract or agreement (which contract or agreement shall be produced to the said Commissioners), become united within the twelve weeks next preceding such twenty-seventh day of April as aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the said Commissioners to ascertain the average amount of the notes of each such bank in the manner hereinbefore directed, and to certify the average amount of the notes of the two or more banks so united as the amount which the united Bank shall thereafter be authorized to issue, subject to the regulations of this Act.

19. DEBATE ON THE CORN LAWS [_Parliamentary Debates, 3rd Series, Vol. 73, Cols. 68, 69-71, 849-850, 1345-1347_], 1846.

_Address in Answer to Her Majesty's Speech, January 22nd, 1846._

_House of Commons._
_Sir Robert Peel._

Sir, the immediate cause which led to the dissolution of the Government in the early part of last December, was that great and mysterious calamity which caused a lamentable failure in an article of food on which great numbers of the people in this part of the United Kingdom, and still larger numbers in the sister kingdom, depended mainly for their subsistence. That was the immediate and proximate cause, which led to the dissolution of the Government. But it would be unfair and uncandid on my part, if I attached undue importance to that particular cause. It certainly appeared to me to preclude further delay, and to require immediate decision--decision not only upon the measures which it was necessary at the time to adopt, but also as to the course to be ultimately taken with regard to the laws which govern the importation of grain. I will not assign to that cause too much weight. I will not withhold the homage which is due to the progress of reason and to truth, by denying that my opinions on the subject of protection have undergone a change.

* * * * *

Sir, those who contend for the removal of impediments upon the import of a great article of subsistence, such as corn, start with an immense advantage in the argument. The natural presumption is in favour of free and unrestricted importation. It may, indeed, be possible to combat that presumption; it may be possible to meet its advocates in the field of argument, by showing that there are other and greater advantages arising out of the system of prohibition than out of the system of unrestricted intercourse; but even those who so contend will, I think, admit that the natural feelings of mankind are strongly in favour of the absence of all restriction, and that the presumption is so strong, that we must combat it by an avowal of some great public danger to be avoided, or some great public benefit to be obtained by restriction on the importation of food. We all admit that the argument in favour of high protection or prohibition on the ground that it is for the benefit of a particular class, is untenable. The most strenuous advocates for protection have abandoned that argument; they rest, and wisely rest, the defence of protective duties upon higher principles. They have alleged, as I have myself alleged, that there were public reasons for retaining this protection. Sir, circumstances made it absolutely necessary for me, occupying the public station I do, and seeing the duty that must unavoidably devolve on me--it became absolutely necessary for me maturely to consider whether the grounds on which an alteration of the Corn Laws can be resisted are tenable. The arguments in favour of protection must be based either on the principle that protection to domestic industry is in itself sound policy, and that, therefore, agriculture, being a branch of domestic industry, is entitled to share in that protection; or, that in a country like ours, encumbered with an enormous load of debt, and subject to great taxation, it is necessary that domestic industry should be protected from competition with foreigners; or, again--the interests of the great body of the community, the laborious classes, being committed in this question--that the rate of wages varies with the price of provisions, that high prices imply high wages, and that low wages are the concomitants of low prices. Further, it may be said, that the land is entitled to protection on account of some peculiar burdens which it bears. But that is a question of justice rather than of policy; I have always felt and maintained that the land is subject to peculiar burdens; but you have the power of weakening the force of that argument by the removal of the burden, or making compensation. The first three objections to the removal of protection are objections founded on considerations of public policy. The last is a question of justice, which may be determined by giving some counterbalancing advantage. Now, I want not to deprive those who, arguing _a priori_, without the benefit of experience, have come to the conclusion that protection is objectionable in principle--I want not to deprive them of any of the credit which is fairly their due. Reason, unaided by experience, brought conviction to their minds. My opinions have been modified by the experience of the last three years. I have had the means and opportunity of comparing the results of periods of abundance and low prices with periods of scarcity and high prices. I have carefully watched the effects of the one system, and of the other--first, of the policy we have been steadily pursuing for some years, viz., the removal of protection from domestic industry; and next, of the policy which the friends of protection recommend. I have also had an opportunity of marking from day to day the effect upon great social interests of freedom of trade and comparative abundance. I have not failed to note the results of preceding years, and to contrast them with the results of the last three years; and I am led to the conclusion that the main grounds of public policy on which protection has been defended are not tenable; at least, I cannot maintain them. I do not believe, after the experience of the last three years, that the rate of wages varies with the price of food. I do not believe that with high prices, wages will necessarily rise in the same ratio. I do not believe that a low price of food necessarily implies a low rate of wages. Neither can I maintain that protection to domestic industry is necessarily good.

_Adjourned Debate. February 13, 1846._

_House of Commons._

SIR DOUGLAS HOWARD said:[398]

I have often imagined--and it was for this that I moved for, and obtained the order of this House for, the extensive returns which are now preparing, namely, the various colonial tariffs and commercial relations at present subsisting between all the Colonies of the Empire and the mother country, and between the Colonies themselves--that it might really be possible to treat Colonies like counties of the country, not only in direct trade with the United Kingdom, but in commercial intercourse with each other, by free trade among ourselves, under a reasonable moderate degree of protection from without, and so resolve the United Kingdom, and all her Colonies and possessions, into a commercial union such as might defy all rivalry, and defeat all combinations. Then might colonization proceed on a gigantic scale--then might British capital animate British labour, on British soil, for British objects, throughout the extended dominions of the British Empire. Such an union is the United States of America--a confederation of sovereign States, leagued together for commercial and political purposes, with the most perfect free trade within, and a stringent protection from without; and signally, surely, has that commercial league succeeded and flourished. Such an union, too, is the German Customs League; and it has succeeded to an extent that really is, in so short a time, miraculous. But free trade--the extinction of the protective principle--the repeal of the differential duties--would at once convert all our Colonies, in a commercial sense, into as many independent States. The colonial consumer of British productions would then be released from his part of the compact--that of dealing, in preference, with the British producer; and the British consumer of such articles as the Colonies produce, absolved from his; each party would be free to buy in the cheapest, and sell in the dearest market. I defy any hon. member opposite to say that this would not be a virtual dissolution of the colonial system.

_Adjourned Debate. February 20, 1846._

MR. B. DISRAELI:[399]

I have now nearly concluded the observations which I shall address to the House. I have omitted a great deal which I wished to urge upon the House; and I sincerely wish that what I have said had been urged with more ability; but I have endeavoured not to make a mere Corn Law speech; I have only taken corn as an illustration; but I don't like my friends here to enter upon that Corn Law debate which I suppose is impending, under a mistaken notion of the position in which they stand. I never did rest my defence of the Corn Laws on the burdens to which the land is subject. I believe that there are burdens, heavy burdens, on the land; but the land has great honours, and he who has great honours must have great burdens. But I wish them to bear in mind that their cause must be sustained by great principles. I venture feebly and slightly to indicate those principles, principles of high policy, on which their system ought to be sustained. First, without reference to England, looking at all countries, I say that it is the first duty of the Minister, and the first interest of the State, to maintain a balance between the two great branches of national industry; that is a principle which has been recognised by all great Ministers for the last two hundred years; and the reasons upon which it rests are so obvious, that it can hardly be necessary to mention them. Why we should maintain that balance between the two great branches of national industry, involves political considerations--social considerations, affecting the happiness, prosperity, and morality of the people, as well as the stability of the State. But I go further; I say that in England we are bound to do more--I repeat what I have repeated before, that in this country there are special reasons why we should not only maintain the balance between the two branches of our national industry, but why we should give a preponderance--I do not say a predominance, which was the word ascribed by the hon. member for Manchester to the noble lord the member for London, but which he never used--why we should give a preponderance, for that is the proper and constitutional word, to the agricultural branch; and the reason is, because in England we have a territorial Constitution. We have thrown upon the land the revenues of the Church, the administration of justice, and the estate of the poor; and this has been done, not to gratify the pride, or pamper the luxury of the proprietors of the land, but because, in a territorial Constitution, you, and those whom you have succeeded, have found the only security for self-government--the only barrier against that centralising system which has taken root in other countries. I have always maintained these opinions; my constituents are not landlords; they are not aristocrats; they are not great capitalists; they are the children of industry and toil; and they believe, first, that their material interests are involved in a system which favours native industry, by insuring at the same time real competition; but they believe also that their social and political interests are involved in a system by which their rights and liberties have been guaranteed; and I agree with them--I have these old-fashioned notions. I know that we have been told, and by one who on this subject should be the highest authority, that we shall derive from this great struggle, not merely the repeal of the Corn Laws, but the transfer of power from one class to another--to one distinguished for its intelligence and wealth, the manufacturers of England. My conscience assures me that I have not been slow in doing justice to the intelligence of that class; certain I am, that I am not one of those who envy them their wide and deserved prosperity; but I must confess my deep mortification, that in an age of political regeneration, when all social evils are ascribed to the operation of class interests, it should be suggested that we are to be rescued from the alleged power of one class only to sink under the avowed dominion of another. I, for one, if this is to be the end of all our struggles--if this is to be the great result of this enlightened age--I, for one, protest against the ignominious catastrophe. I believe that the monarchy of England, its sovereignty mitigated by the acknowledged authority of the estates of the realm, has its root in the hearts of the people, and is capable of securing the happiness of the nation and the power of the State. But, Sir, if this be a worn-out dream; if, indeed, there is to be a change, I, for one, anxious as I am to maintain the present polity of this country, ready to make as many sacrifices as any man for that object--if there is to be this great change, I, for one, hope that the foundations of it may be deep, the scheme comprehensive, and that instead of falling under such a thraldom, under the thraldom of Capital--under the thraldom of those who, while they boast of their intelligence, are more proud of their wealth--if we must find a new force to maintain the ancient throne and immemorial monarchy of England, I, for one, hope that we may find that novel power in the invigorating energies of an educated and enfranchised people.

[Footnote 398: _Ibid._ cols. 849-50.]

[Footnote 399: _Ibid._, cols. 1345-1347.]

INDEX

Acts of Parliament (_see_ Statutes)

Administration, central (_see_ Chancery, Commissions, Councils,
Crown, Exchequer, House of Commons, Parliament, Statutes);
local (_see_ Boroughs, County Courts, Hundreds, Justices,
Parishes, Sheriffs)

Agrarian changes, in Middle Ages, 53, 54, 83, 85-87;
in Tudor and Stuart periods, 227, 228, 234-277;
in 18th and 19th centuries, 523, 524, 525-542, 552

Agriculture, advantages of large scale, 530, 531;
capitalist, 228;
depression of, in 16th century, 407-412;
effect of Corn Laws on, 692-698 (_see also_ Corn Laws);
encouragement of, by Tudor and Stuart monarchy, 229, 260-277, 428-430;
improvements in, effected in 18th century, 523, 526, 530, 531, 532-536;
manorial, 3-9, 16, 17, 53-110, 227-277;
do., developments in, 53, 54, 83, 85-87;
provision for harvest labour, 78, 173, 328, 329, 347, 648;
reaction of commerce and industry on, 582, 697;
state of, in 18th and 19th centuries, 523-542 (_see also_ Arable,
Commons, Common Fields, Depopulation, Enclosures, Land, Manor,
Pasture, Smallholders)

Agriculture, Board of, surveys of, 524, 532-536

Agricultural houses and buildings, decay and restoration of, 267, 268,
272, 275, 276, 324, 392, 536, 567

Agricultural labourers, 7, 8, 62-64, 78, 164, 165, 170, 171-174,176-178,
324, 353, 355, 408;
apprenticeship of, 324, 325, 330, 388;
combinations of, 55, 105-110, 552, 553, 638-640;
condition of, in 19th century, 695, 696;
hiring of, 164-168, 170-174, 176-178;
housing of, 567;
regulation of conditions of service of, 171-178, 325-333, 352, 360, 361;
regulation of hours of, 327;
regulation of wages of, 173, 177, 328, 329, 342, 343, 346, 347, 351,
353, 360, 361, 405, 546, 547, 552-554;
restrictions of, as to apprenticeship to crafts, 174, 361

Alehouses, taverns, 378, 473, 536;
increase of, in 18th century, 489;
meeting of journeymen associations in, 624;
patent for licensing of, 442;
payment of wages in, prohibited, 599

Aliens, burgesses of English towns, 27, 28_n_;
jealousy of, 153, 186, 199, 200

Alien craftsmen, imported into Ireland, 471;
in London, 195-197, 199

Alien merchants, 127, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 189, 192-195, 197-199, 420;
admitted to a London company, 309;
arrest of goods of, 189, 190;
customs granted by, 208-216;
freedom of trade granted to, 127, 152, 209, 212;
of Almain, 194;
of Flanders, 193, 194;
of France, 192, 193;
of Italy, 43, 127, 199, 420-424

Almshouses, 483

Anti-Corn-Law League, foundation of, 701.

Anti-Slavery Society, 593

Apprentices, 113, 136, 138, 141, 142, 143, 147, 231, 282, 283, 295, 296,
300, 305, 307, 324-326, 330-334, 341, 344, 345, 348, 353, 356, 361,
437, 444, 455, 499, 500;
disciplinary rules touching, 113, 147, 345;
in factories, 571, 572;
fees exacted from, 284-286;
limitation of numbers of, in textile industry, 322;
oaths exacted from by masters, 285, 286;
pauper, 381, 505;
proportion of, to journeymen, regulations as to, 332, 550, 551, 573, 574;
runaway, 148;
unindentured, 353

Apprenticeship, 138, 174, 314, 479, 499, 500, 588, 589;
custom of London as to, 330;
debates in House of Commons on, 577-588;
effect of compulsory, on marriage, 322, 323_n_, 344;
enactment as to age of ending, 323, 344;
enforcement of statute as to, 386;
evasion of, by a company, 310;
fees on entering and leaving, 280;
half-pay, 590;
indentures of, 113, 147, 295;
municipal regulation of, 295, 305-307;
of agricultural labourers, 325, 330, 388;
to crafts, restricted, 174, 361;
of pauper children, 381, 388, 504, 652;
to woollen industry, 499, 500

Approvers, criminal, 39

Arable land, conversion of, to pasture, 55, 260-277, 392, 407, 408, 409;
enclosure of (_see_ Enclosure);
on a 14th century manor, 56

Artificers, Statute of (_see_ Statutes)

Assarts, 89

Assizes, 88, 89, 93, 97;
grand, 95;
of bread and ale, 37, 80, 117, 118, 133, 152, 155, 156, 388;
of cloth, 152, 154, 155, 319;
suspension of, 319, 320;
of _mort d'ancestor_, 94;
of novel disseisin, 88, 89, 93, 94, 96, 97_n_;
of weights and measures, 152, 154, 377, 388;
of wine, 152

Ball, John, and the Peasants' Revolt, 109

Bankers and Banking, 398, 420

Bankrupts, 474

Banks, 506;
country, 681

Bank of England, 667;
foundation of, 668, 676;
suspension of cash payments by, 681

Bee-keeping, 7

Beer, patent for export of, 442

Beggars, 166, 174, 175, 176, 324, 388, 483;
licensing of, 363, 364, 366
(_see also_ Poor, Vagrants)

Berlin Decrees, effect of, on commerce, 690, 692

Black Death, the, 54, 55, 65_n_, 102, 103, 104, 105, 164

Blackwell Hall, the London cloth market, 440, 460, 492-495

Bondage land (_see_ Villeinage)

Bondmen (_see_ Villeins)

Bordiers, 16, 17;
in boroughs, 12, 13