Part 30 (1/2)
_Folly of carrying on war with a peace establishment._
This country is at war--at war in two quarters of the world--at war in America and at war in Asia; and what I say is this, that when a country is at war, I understand that the fleet of that country should be put upon a war establishment; whereas, these returns are made on a peace establishment--nay, I believe on one much lower,--on a reduced peace establishment; and yet we are pretending to carry on war in two countries of the world with such means! I warned your lords.h.i.+ps a year and a half ago--indeed nearly two years ago, against any such attempt. I believe that we have been feeling the inconvenience of such an attempt from that period up to the present time, and I only hope and trust in G.o.d, that we shall not experience still further inconvenience and disasters from our perseverance in it. A peace establishment, and a reduced peace establishment, may be very fit and very proper for carrying on the service of the country in time of peace; but when we come to carry on war, our peace establishment is not found equal to the performance of the duties required from the establishment in time of peace, and still less to those extended duties which must be performed in time of war.
We are carrying on a war in North America, and a most expensive war in Asia; and both of them require all the force this country can employ in order to bring them to an early and an honourable termination. We are, however, engaging in both with a reduced peace establishment, and we are incurring all descriptions of risks, in every other part of the world, in order to do this. The n.o.ble earl (Minto) has been talking about a few masts and sails, when the whole force which the country can command ought to be engaged in the war now waging, in order to bring the contest to the honourable termination I speak of. I said this about a year and a half ago, and I now repeat it.
_March 7, 1839._
_The Corn Laws have improved Agriculture._
The system which it is the object of the existing law to establish, is one of encouragement to agriculture--a system which was established at the termination of the last century, and under which I will venture to a.s.sert, the agriculture of this country has made a progress, and has risen to a degree of superiority throughout these kingdoms, greater than exists in any other part of the world, not excepting even the Netherlands. Under this system of encouragement to agriculture, large sums of money have been laid out and invested in land, and property relating to land; and great sums are at this moment in the course of investment in the same way; and I call on your lords.h.i.+ps not to agree to any resolution, or to any measure of the government (if they should think proper to propose any such measure), which will have the effect of withdrawing from agriculture this protection, and thus putting a stop to those great improvements which are at present in progress, and which, I say, have had such an influence on agriculture, that the amount of produce raised in this country is thereby greatly increased. I believe that the produce of the country has been immensely increased, and particularly in the valuable article of wheat, the annual production of which is now nearly equal to its greatest annual consumption. Such is the supply of wheat that the very lowest order of the people subsist mostly upon it; which is not, I believe, the practice in any other country. The practice is not known any where else; it is not known in France; it is not known in Germany; it is not known in the Netherlands; nor is it, in short, the case any where else. In fact, the lower orders live upon wheaten bread in no country of the world except England. I entreat your lords.h.i.+ps to bear this in mind; I entreat you not to break down a system which has carried cultivation to such a pitch, that an amount of produce is raised in England, alone, which is found to be nearly equal to her greatest annual consumption. I think the annual amount of produce will increase. This is my firm belief; and I am confident that with the increase of produce there must come, and come naturally too, a corresponding decrease of price; and it is to that consequence that I look as being the solution of all the difficulties which at present attend this question. But, let your lords.h.i.+ps recollect, it is absolutely necessary to keep up this encouragement in order to arrive at the desired result of the reduction of price. Very lately, when wheat in this country was at 78s. the quarter, and the duty on importation was a merely nominal one of 1s. a quarter, was there any such quant.i.ty of foreign wheat introduced as was sufficient to lower the price? Not at all. The moment the ports were opened, the merchant importer stood on the same ground as the farmer, and he would not sell his corn for 1s. less than the price of the day. Did we ever hear of corn coming in from abroad, and being brought to market at a cheaper rate than it was selling for in this country? Never. But look to the operation of the law prevailing in the former part of the war; the prices varied from 70s. to 150s. the quarter. Did we ever hear of foreign corn being sold for 1s. less than what could be got for it in the general markets of this country? It must be sold by the merchant importer at the very same price as by the farmer. It is all very fine to say that the price would be exceedingly low, if these laws were abolished, and corn were allowed to be introduced without restriction.
Why, if the price of corn raised in this country were low, the foreigner could not get more for his corn here, than the farmer; but if the price of home grown corn were necessarily high, the introduction of foreign corn would not reduce it.
_March 14, 1839._
_Repeal of the Corn Laws will raise the price of Corn._
It is very important to look at this question with reference to the interests of the commerce of the country, and also to consider the effect of the abolition of the corn laws on the price of provisions and on the price of manufactures. Now, if we discourage agriculture to such a degree that any large body of persons and a great amount of capital come to be withdrawn from it, the price of native produce must rise; there would be so much less produce raised than before, that its price--the price of the native produce I mean--must rise. Now, the price of the corn imported will be the price of the diminished quant.i.ty of the home-raised corn. Would the manufacturing labourer benefit by this?
Would the manufacturer find any advantage in it, when the diminished value of their wages was forcing the labourers to raise the market upon him? Would the merchant exporter gain anything by the change? Would it not be found that, in proportion as the manufacturer must pay a larger amount of wages, the prices of his manufactures must be augmented; and therefore the disadvantages of compet.i.tion with merchants abroad be augmented likewise?
_March 14, 1839._
_Foreign Governments would Tax the Export of their Corn._
There is another view of the question which I beseech your lords.h.i.+ps to take--I mean the question of our dependence on foreign produce for a great part of our annual consumption, which would be caused by the abolition of the present law. On looking over the papers which have been produced on former discussions of this subject, I have seen proofs that in certain countries duties are paid upon the exportation of corn thence hither; and that statements are made by the sovereigns of those countries to this effect:--”As the corn is wanted by Great Britain, and her subjects can afford to pay the duty, therefore they shall pay it.”
This duty must come out of the pocket of her majesty's subjects, and be taken into account in the price of the goods of the manufacturers. Your lords.h.i.+ps have heard a great deal upon the compet.i.tion of foreign manufacturers with our own in foreign markets. I certainly am one who does not despise the consideration of these subjects; which, on the contrary, I think of very high importance; but this question is a large one, and it is necessary to consider it on rather broader grounds. This very consideration may be material with respect to some countries of which we have been the creditors; but I do not see how our relations with those which are not corn countries can be affected by any change in the corn laws. The power of taxation, which would be thrown into the hands of foreign powers, in the event of the repeal of the corn laws, const.i.tutes, in my view, a most important feature of the case. Suppose we were involved in an arduous compet.i.tion with Prussian or Russian manufacturers for the supply of a particular article: if we should make up our minds to rely solely on those countries for a supply of corn, as we are called upon to do by the opponents of the corn laws,--and if the success of our manufactures depends on the abundance and cheapness of corn among our population--must we not expect, according to the usual course of such affairs among mankind, that the corn exported from those countries would be taxed so as to render the food of our manufacturers as dear as it would be under any other circ.u.mstances? If that is likely to be the case, I would strongly advise you, my lords, to agree to no measure which may render this country dependent upon others for its supply of food. Let us persevere in those measures which have been successful in raising the agriculture of this country and increasing its produce; let us increase its produce to the utmost possible degree, and render all the articles of food as cheap as possible; and then let us see what can be done with reference to commerce and its interests; but let us, I entreat, begin by securing to her majesty's subjects a supply of the best food from the produce of her majesty's own dominions.
_March 14, 1839._
_As a public man, stands on public grounds._
The n.o.ble earl (Radnor) says that I am an advocate for a monopoly; and he talks about my not a.s.sisting the landlords, not a.s.sisting the farmers, and not a.s.sisting the labourers. My lords, I know nothing about landlords, farmers, or labourers, when I am advocating a legislative question of a public nature in this house. I have nothing to say to them any farther than as their interests are identified with those of the community at large. I beg the n.o.ble lord to understand, when I come into this house, I come here upon the public interest. I have no more to say to landlords, farmers, or labourers, than the n.o.ble earl himself; and I am thoroughly convinced there is not a n.o.ble friend near me who does not look at this question solely on public grounds, and those which he conceives it to be for the interest of the country to take.
_March 14, 1839._
_Objections to a free press in Malta._
I am one of those who have always thought, that if there existed any part of her majesty's dominions in which a free press was not necessary, Malta was that part. Our business there is to maintain a garrison and a great naval station. Malta contains a population of 100,000 persons, for whom I entertain the highest respect and regard, being convinced that her majesty has no better or more devoted subjects than they are. It is the duty of government, and the duty of this house, as far as it can, to superintend the good government of the people of Malta--a people who talk the Maltese language, and the Maltese language alone--a people, of whom not one in 500 can read a line. Surely, of all the inst.i.tutions of this country which are the least necessary for men of this description, and I declare my belief that it is a true description of the people of Malta, I may venture to a.s.sert a free press is that one inst.i.tution. I will not dispute that hereafter much good may arise from a free press, but education is much more necessary for the people of Malta. A free press cannot be rendered useful to them, much less advantageous, without that training which they require, and that education which ought to be given to them. There is a certain liberal set of gentlemen in this country who think a free press in Malta exceedingly desirable, not for the sake of any advantage to the inhabitants, but for the sake of the advantage to be produced on the neighbouring coast of France, and Spain, and Italy. This is the truth with respect to this free press. * * I believe that we have now had enough of private wars, and I believe that we now seek what advantage it would have been, if we had never undertaken those private wars, not only in other parts of the world, but also a little nearer home. I must say that the objects of them are inconsistent with the interests--aye, and inconsistent with the honour--of this country; inconsistent with the interests of the country, because, as I always have maintained, and always shall maintain, the interests of this country must depend, not only on the maintenance of peace for itself, but on its preventing, if possible, disturbances among other nations; and inconsistent with its honour, because I will say, that its honour does depend on not exciting rebellions and insurrections in other nations, at the same moment that the government here is ostensibly at peace with those nations. Now, that is the ground on which I have always objected to a free press in Malta. I object to it, because I contend that the intention entertained is to have a free press, not for Malta, but for the neighbouring regions of Italy, France, and Spain; and if you must have a free press for the Maltese, in the name of G.o.d let it be in the Maltese language!