Source 1

Transcript

Corn Laws: one of the Causes of Public Distress

As the Duke of Wellington has stated in Parliament, that the distress prevalent in the country, is owing to Steam Power and Machinery, some researches seem to want making in order to arrive at the truth of this assertion. The subject is a very interesting one, and it seems to ask the question, “how happens it that machinery has gained so much ascendancy [importance] ?”- that manual labour has become not so necessary, and that machinery is no longer subservient [less important] to its use as formerly; but that the time has arrived when this artificial power predominates over natural power, excluding it almost from any participation of its advantages; a strange revolution, indeed, as compared with former times! Can it be said that the ingenuity and skill of the British character have made such rapid improvements as to gain a monopoly of labour used in its manufactures? May it not rather be said that the English Corn Laws have lowered bread, &c. so much on the Continent, as only to be at half prices to what the same are generally in England? Does not this low price in a country so nearly approximating to this, give to foreigners many local advantages, if disposed to improve them? Is it not observable that foreigners of late years have excelled in manufactures common to both countries, and that in spite of our machinery conferring upon us its boasted advantages? And have not the continental manufacturers not only in a great degree excluded British goods amongst them, but have become our rivals in other places abroad? It would, therefore, seem that this low price of bread, &c. is equal if not superior to our machinery, as for many years past employment in manufacture has been increasing upon the continent, whilst manual labour in England has been decreasing; and as our machinery has become the monopolist of labour, it will have the work in all cases applicable to it, leaving the labouring classes distressed for want of it.

The commencement of this inequality in the price of bread, was in 1815, at which time 63s.[shillings] was advanced up to the 80s. as the free importing price of corn [when foreign corn could be imported without duties]. There can be no question, but it was this law which raised machinery to an unnatural and artificial value, enabling it to predominate over manufactures and the labouring classes- sowing also at the same time, those pernicious [harmful] seeds which have been growing up ever since- and now has arrived at such a maturity as to inflict great distress upon all the great interests of the state. The evil is made worse by a change of the currency. As this is presumed to be the actual operation of the Corn Laws, no wonder that the time has arrived, when all the best interests of society appear to be fast dissolving and breaking up- and even to endanger public tranquillity. Does not this great difference in the price of bread if continued, appear as dangerous to the welfare of the state, as if the current coin of the realm and paper money had assumed two different values?

Look at what would ensure if this country had a gold and paper currency varying as much in value as the price of bread doth betwixt England and the Continent. It is easy to contemplate the commotions that would be thus excited; and does not a continuance of the present Corn Laws, augur [be a sign of] as likely for producing so dangerous a calamity? No inequality of the English and foreign prices so great as those which have occurred within the last fourteen or fifteen years ever happened before. Distress amongst the labouring classes has been growing up during all this interval with but little intermission, owing as may be presumed to such an artificial and disturbed equilibrium of prices, depriving both manufacturers of profits as well as the labouring classes of employment, and there seems no question but this inequality is the effect of the English Corn Laws, it being well known that the market at Hamburgh is governed mainly by the average prices of corn made up at Mark-lane. And in further proof thereof, only about a year ago the average admitted corn at the low duty of one shilling per quarter, at which time foreign corn had advanced to the par of British. So long as this difference remains so high, no diminution of revenue taxation will scarcely be adequate to cure this monstrous and unnatural evil. It is in vain to expect these laws will be sufficient to establish a double price for bread in England and half price on the Continent and regard the anomaly [oddity] with indifference. The attempt of establishing such a difference in the price of bread might not be altogether in vain if England was as far distant from the Continent as America.

As to the professed intention of the Corn Laws, mutually guarding the interests of agriculture and those of the country, from great fluctuations, thereby balancing both sides of the question, so as to preserve both interests fairly, it seems altogether a visionary speculation as to this mode accomplishing it. Proof seems already given that they do not suit manufacturers and the labouring classes, in the injury done to the foreign as well as the home trade, and the distresses which are produced by want of employment. Proof seems also given that these laws do not suit farmers, in depriving them of all renumeration, and in many instances requiring rent to be paid out of capital instead of profits, until they can pay no longer; and the landowners themselves seem at last invaded, by its being required of them to make large returns in the way of per centages, because perhaps unable to obtain more. Hence the corn laws may be said to have completely failed answering any one of the objects professed by them, and their enactment seems altogether the effect of infatuation, as they do not even give a protection to legislators themselves. Hence these laws appear to have a right to be repealed, as not suiting either the interests of the landowner, farmer, or manufacturer. But if the repeal altogether be considered too much of a boon to be given, they appear to have an undoubted right to be placed as they were before the act of 1815. In that state many of the present evils will be lessened, and [will?] confer important benefits on the country, as well as to the Legislators themselves if they are disposed to take a fair and impartial view of their operation. In 1792, when the war begun, 48s. was the free import price of corn. During the war this was advanced to 63. But in 1815, after the war was over, it was more natural to suppose permission should have been granted to have receded again, than have been augmented, if the effects of the war had been suffered to die away, instead of aggravating them by making higher enactments. Hence where is the reward for the labour of the farmer as well as the manufacturer, as professed to be given them by the Corn Laws? It rather appears that these laws have taken it all away.

It is a fact, and only wants a recurrence to former times to prove it, that previous to 1815, the value of land to the landowner, as well as the produce of the farmer, was better protected previously from any injurious depression, than either of them have been since this act of the legislature in 1815. That law which made 63s. into 80s. is too evident has operated prejudicially to both interests as well to that of manufacturers and labouring classes: and the evidence of many years past, seem fully to prove it. The Corn Laws, therefore, appear to be the root of the evil from which so much distress has grown up; and the sooner the better they are placed again in their former state as previous to the alteration in 1815, if they cannot be repealed altogether. A great benefit would be conferred on the landowner, farmer, and manufacturer; for it must be understood that prosperity or otherwise will be the inseparable companions of all these several interests, and that it is not possible for either of the two latter to feel benefitted or the contrary, without all others presently participating thereof. A measure of this sort is the more necessary to be adopted, in order to restore the home trade to a healthy state; and this will not be effected without manufactures flourish, then agriculture will not only partake thereof, but the labouring classes will find employment, and the time will then come to pass when machinery will be reduced to its proper level, that level most consistent with the true interests of society.

Leeds, March 10, 1830.