ALTERED STATE OF THE CURRENCY.

HC Deb 10 July 1822 vol 7 cc1596-633

Mr. Western

said, that several honourable friends were absent who wished to take part in the discussion of his resolutions. Perhaps, therefore, he might be allowed to move the first seventeen now, without debate, and to bring forward the last on a future day. He was resolved that the subject should be again considered before the close of the session.

Mr. Ricardo

said, he could not agree to any of the resolutions in their present form; several of them contained mistakes in fact, and all of them were pervaded by an erroneous principle.

Mr. Huskisson

strongly objected to the postponement of the discussion.

Mr. Western

said, he was quite ready to proceed, if it was the desire of the House [go on, go on!]. It might be thought that he was pertinacious on this subject, but if those, who were of that opinion felt, as deeply as he did, the importance of the question, the unparalleled situation of the country, the unexampled ruin that had already spread around, the apprehension that that ruin was but the precursor of more extensive evils, and the conviction, that all was attributable to the cause to which he had already called the attention of the House, he was persuaded, that they would not blame him for his perseverance. It was his most decided opinion, that if the bill of 1819, was allowed to continue n force, its operation would involve this and the sister island in the most unprecedented condition of peril. He utterly denied that there was any exaggeration in this statement. Of this fact he was convinced, that by the operation of the measure to which he had alluded, two-thirds of the cultivators of the soil, had, in the course of a few years, and in a time of profound peace, been rendered insolvent. The turn of the landowners would soon come. They would soon be involved in the ruin of their tenantry. There were very many proprietors of estates, at the present moment, who did not receive 20 per cent of their rents. That was but a foretaste of what they must expect, should the present course of policy be persevered in. The noblemen and gentlemen of the country would be dragged down from their proud elevation, and degraded from their rank, in a manner which had never before occurred in the annals of the world. They would have to undergo the transfer and confiscation of all their property. Adverting to the bill of 1819, he had no doubt it originated in a laudable wish to maintain those sound principles of justice and honesty by which this country had ever been distinguished. But it was not too much to say, that, with all their excellence of intention, the, authors of the measure had fallen into error. Not only the misery in this country, but the excess of misery which had appeared in Ireland, was, he was perfectly convinced, attributable to the present state of the currency. He had received many letters from Ireland, all of which stated, that in the distressed districts there was a want of employment, a want of money, not a want of food. Was there ever any thing so anomalous as the present state of Ireland? To see a large portion of the population of a country dying for want, while ministers asserted, that in another part of that country there was a superabundance of food! To see human beings starving, with the cup of plenty close to their lips! The fact was, that the farmers of Ireland, having no money, could not employ the poor; and that the poor, having no employment, could not buy food. When he considered these things—when he looked also at the poor of this country, who were absolutely at this very moment living on the capital of the country, he entertained the most fearful apprehensions that we should, ere long, have a high price of corn arising out of a deficiency of supply. He would read to the House the resolutions that it was his intention to propose, and make a few comments on them as he proceeded.—Ad- verting to what had been said of the necessity under which landlords were placed, in the present times, of being liberal and giving up a portion of their rents to their tenants, he said that he held in contempt the use of the word "liberality," in such circumstances. The landlords were bound to do their duty. They had a right to expect from their tenants their just due, but they had no right to expect more. It was, however, evidently impossible that tenants could continue to fulfil contracts made under circumstances entirely different from those under which they were now called upon to perform them. All the contracts which had been made for many years antecedently to the bill of 1819, were, in fact, violated by that bill. It was not just, therefore, to attempt to hold the tenant to the contracts which he made before that period. The hon. gentleman here entered into a statement of the prices of corn at various periods in support of his argument. When he contemplated the situation of the landowners, from the highest peer of the realm downwards; when he calculated all their outgoings, their fixed payments, their jointures, their allowances to younger children, their mortgages, their law agents, their land agents, the necessary appendages of their rank and station, it was his perfect conviction, that they amounted to full half their actual rent. He absolutely denied, that any of the landlords of the country, from the highest to the lowest, had evinced any sordidness of disposition. It was an aspersion of which he would rather be the object than the author. On the country, the landed interest had manifested too deficient an attention to their own interests. Their patrimonial estates were melting away from them; and the operation which was now going on must eventually strip, them of their rank and property.—With respect to the question of taxation, he contended, that the natural amount of any payment was not to be estimated by the pounds, shillings and pence, in which the payment was made, but by the quantity commodities which would be required to produce the pounds, shillings, and pence, in which the payment was made. To estimate taxation by the quantity of labour necessary to raise its amount, was indisputably the only fair means of ascertaining the real pressure on the people. He most fully believed that the effects of the bill of 1819, were not at all in the contempla- tion of the author and the supporters of the measure. He put it to them, and to the House, whether, if they had anticipated what had taken place, they would have enacted the measure? It could only be in ignorance that the measure was agreed to. Perhaps he might be accused of aiming at a breach of public faith. If he were so charged, or rather if he were so aspersed, he would not say that he would treat the accusation with contempt, but he would say that it would not produce on him the slightest effect. In answer to such an accusation, he would say, that faith had not been kept with the public debtor. There had already been a breach of faith towards the public, and a breach of great extent, productive of the most pernicious consequences. Had the events which had since occurred been anticipated in 1819, an arbitration between the parties liable to injury, a kind of adjustment of their interests, ought to have taken place. So far, however, was that from having been the case, that a great breach of faith had taken place towards the public. He apprehended that the restoration of the metallic currency had been intended merely to do justice to the stockholders prior to 1797. Such an object was, however, totally unattainable. In a period of nearly a quarter of a century, how large a proportion of those ancient proprietors of stock must have ceased to be holders of stock, and must necessarily and unavoidably have converted their stock into land, into manufactories, and into the means of pursuing all the various active employments of society. Thousands, however, were receiving their death-blow in consequence of this act of retributive justice, as it was called; and the confidence which the people had hitherto reposed in parliament, as the conservators of property of every kind, had been most decidedly shaken. With regard to high prices, it had been asserted by many, that higher money prices than those now existing would be injurious to the poorer classes of society. In his opinion, however, it was indispensable to the interests of the country, and to all the classes of its population, that all commodities, that all the produce of the earth, and that labour should bear a higher price than they did at present. A rapid declension of every interest in the state would otherwise take place. To what did many persons look for the relief of agriculture? To an advance of price occasioned by a reduction in the quantity of produce. He, however, maintained, that it was not necessary to reduce the quantity of produce for that purpose. He was decidedly for affording protection to agriculture; but he would at that very hour willingly open all our ports, and allow all the hoarded corn in the granaries to be poured into the country, or sent to the distressed districts in Ireland, provided that extended circulation was afforded, which was so necessary to the vast concerns of the country. Were that done, it would soon be found that there was no superabundance of corn in the country. When did any man before, see, hear, or read of a country ruined by superabundance? Such a thing had never entered into the head of any but modern philosophers! Never country had shown so much industry, patience, and patriotism as this country had shown; and but for this fatal law, no country had ever enjoyed greater prosperity than it would be now enjoying. The hon. gentleman concluded with moving the following Resolutions:

1. 1. "That the Select Committee appointed last session to inquire into the petitions complaining of the distressed state of the agriculture of the United Kingdom, reported, That it was with deep regret they had to commence their report by stating, that in their judgment the complaints of the petitioners were founded in fact, and that at the price of corn, at that time, the returns to the occupiers of arable farms, after allowing for the interest of their investments, were by no means adequate to the charges and out-goings; and that a considerable portion thereof must have, therefore, been paid our of their capitals:—That the price of grain having experienced a still farther depression, viz., from 55s. 6d. per quarter of wheat to 45s.; and all other grain, and all other articles, having undergone a similar or greater decline, the insufficiency of the receipts of the farmers to cover their charges must be proportionably increased. Which is farther confirmed by the numerous petitions on the table of the House, representing in the strongest terms their aggravated and excessive distress; and that, in consequence thereof, the labourers in many districts are destitute of employment and the consequent means to purchase food, and have broken out into acts of violence and aggression, and for which the lives of 1601 some have been forfeited under sanction of the law.
2. 2. "That it appears by the papers relating to the state of Ireland, laid before this House by his majesty's command, that serious disturbances had broken out in that country, of which the demand and collection of rents had been, on the part of the insurgents, the alleged causes; and subsequent information has been received, that the labourers in agriculture, from a partial failure in the crop of potatoes, together with a total want of employment, and consequent means to purchase other food, are in the most calamitous and deplorable situation; and that many have died from the want of nourishment, whilst the price of provisions still continues so low, as not to afford to the occupiers of land the means of defraying the various charges to which they are subject.
3. 3. "That in the same report of the Select Committee of last session, it is stated, 'That the measures taken for the restoration of the currency have contributed to lower the price of grain and other commodities generally, and consequently to cause a severe pressure upon the industry of the country, and not only to have occasioned a proportion of the fall of prices here, but to have produced a similar, though not equal effect in other countries; and, in a degree, to have deranged the markets of every part of the civilized world.' That in proportion as all commodities, whether the produce of the soil, manufactures, or commerce, have experienced a depression of their money value; so must the proprietors have suffered a direct injury; and whatever may be the degree, it was impossible that the commercial and manufacturing classes of the community can long continue to prosper, whilst the cultivators of the soil are rapidly sinking into ruin and decay, and the labourers sulfating in consequence of the want of their usual employment.
4. 4."That soon after the passing of the act of 1791, by which the Bank of England was restricted from paying its notes in specie, the ancient metallic, standard of value having been thus departed from, the currency of the country, composed of Bank-notes, became depreciated, which depreciation was evinced, and may be estimated by the amount of Bank paper money above 3l. 17s. 10½d. necessary to purchase an ounce of gold; and which fluctuating from that sum to 5l. 11s. was, 1602 on the average of eighteen years to 1816, 4l. 10s. 10d. thence to 1819, 4l. 1s., and the last ten years of the war, 4l. 16s. 1d. That this depreciation may be farther and more accurately estimated by the price of commodities, particularly of wheat, at different periods, by which it will also appear, that the value of gold was reduced by the issue of paper, which became its nearly exclusive substitute; that the price of wheat, according to the Eton College tables, during 150 years prior to the commencement of the late war, calculated in periods of 10 on the average, exceeded 51s. 7d. per quarter, and on averages of 50 years, had not exceeded 44s. 9d., and an ounce of gold would consequently, during all that time, exchange for about one quarter 4 bushels; that from 1797 to 1816, the average price of wheat fluctuated from 50s. to 125s. per quarter, the average of the last eight years of the war being 101s. 9½d. and the average of the gold would 81s. 10d. and an ounce of gold would therefore only exchange for one quarter; that the price of grain thus became, in its nominal or money value, nearly double its amount at any former period; the rent of land and commodities acquired a similar additional value, and consequently all possessors of fixed incomes sustained an injury to the extent of such alteration.
5. 5. "That the average price of wheat between the years 1797 and 1819 having been, therefore, in that currency about 80s. per quarter, existing leases were formed according thereto; that the average price since 1819 has been 55s. 6d. and last year and this about 50s.; that, upon the supposition of rent being estimated at one-fourth, or two-eights of the gross produce, it is evident, at the price of 50s. being a reduction of three-eights, that so much of the money value of the gross produce is annihilated, as constitutes the present entire rental of the kingdom, and likewise so much of the receipts of the occupier as amount to one-eight; that the tenant is, therefore, liable to utter ruin if held to his engagement, or the landlord to the loss of his income, subject, at the same time, to the payment of all charges and settlements increased in their amount in the ratio of the increased nominal or money price of grain and other commodities; and in case of mortgage to the extent of half the value, at the period, a reduction of rent in proportion to the fall in the money 1603 price of produce, places the mortgagee in full possession of the estate.
6. 6. "That, from the year 1797 to 1816, the country was, with short intervals, engaged in a war of unprecedented expense; the taxes were quadrupled, as well as county and parochial assessments, and a heavy public debt created.—That this period was at the same time distinguished by extraordinary, efforts of national industry, applied to its agriculture, manufactures and commerce, by a facility and extension of credit in all those branches, giving more immediate activity to capital, and a consequent extent and complication of money engagements beyond all former precedent:—That the national debt, which on the 5th Jan., 1793, was 227,989,148l. at an annual charge of 8,911,050l. progressively increased to the amount of 795,312;767l. of capital of various denominations, on the 5th Jan., 1822, at an annual charge, inclusive of terminable and life annuities of 30,015,785l.; and the tota1 of taxes, which on the 5th Jan., 1793, amounted to 17,656,418l. 11s. 3d. progressively increased, till in the year 1815, it amounted to 78,431,489l.: that, subsequent to the war, it has been reduced; and the total on the 5th Jan., 1822, was 60,671,025l.
7. 7. "That this taxation has acquired an additional weight by the act of 1819, and the measures preparatory thereto, the degree of which can in part be ascertained by a comparison of the price of gold, but more justly by the money price of commodities, by which the real value of all payments must be determined: that the equivalent in gold to 60,571,025l. was, in the former period, 13,358,934 ozs.; and, in the present, 15,657,264 ozs.; or in current money of the former period, 71,109,992l.; and that taxation is therefore further and unjustly increased, as paid in gold, 2,298,312 ozs. or 10,138,067l. in money.
8. 8. "That the average price of wheat of the former period having been 81s. 10d. per quarter, the equivalent of the taxes in wheat was 14,228,155 quarters; and the price, since 1819, having been on an average 55s. 6d. the equivalent at that price is 21,863,720 quarters; or, in money, 89,459,050l. and the increase of taxation paid in wheat is consequently 7,035,565 quarters, equal to 28,787,233l..
9. 9. "That it appears from various evidence, given in successive committees appointed to consider the petitions of, the agriculturists, that the wages of labour of 1604 an able husbandman, did, during the former period, amount to 15 or 16s. per week; and that, at 15s. the labour of 5,000,000 of persons for 15 weeks, was then equivalent to the discharge of the present taxes. That the price of labour being now reduced to about 9s. per week, the labour of 27 weeks of the same number of persons is now necessary; and which, at 15s. per week, amounts to 101,150,000l.; and that taxation paid in labour is consequently increased to the amount of 40,468,175l.
10. 10 "That it appears by a comparison of the official and declared value of exports of British commodities, that in the year 1814, the declared value of the exports was 47,859,388l. and the official value 36,120,733l. being 32½ per cent of the declared, above the official value; and that in 1821, the quantity in official value amounted to 10,191,893l. and the declared value to 35,826,083l. being 11 per cent, of the official above the declared, making a total decline in value of 43½ percent and the general price currents exhibit a similar decline. That the total amount of taxation in commodities, is therefore equivalent to 87,003,397l. of the former period, and the increased taxation paid in commodities to 26,331,572l.
11. 11 "That the farther reduction of wheat from 55s. 6d. to 45s. and other agricultural produce, together with any farther decline in the money, wages of labour, and price of commodities, additionally increases the burthen of taxation, as well as all other charges, both public and private, upon the property and industry of the country, to an extent proportionate to such farther reduction;—and that as wheat never exceeded, upon the average, the present rate in the old money standard, it must be expected that it will on an average there remain, unless enhanced by scarcity; and that the price of commodities, and wages of labour, will continue at the money value they now bear, or be further reduced.
12. 12. "That such effects could not by possibility have been in the contemplation of the legislature, still less of the people of England, at the time of the passing the act of 1819:—That its destructive consequences are now visible—that individuals held to their contract, either have been or must be ruined; an unexampled revolution of property follow, and the burthens of taxation become absolutely intolerable.
1605
13. 13. "That by the parliamentary paper, No. 145, of the present session, columns 1 and 2, it appears, that from the 5th Jan. 1798, to the 5th Jan. 1816, the sum of 159,630,826l. of money, including bills funded, was paid into the Treasury on account of loans, for which an annual charge for interest and annuities was created of 23,860,020l. which sum converted into a three per cent capital is equal to 795,331,000l.
14. 14. "That the average price of gold having been during that period 90s. 10d. the equivalent in gold to the money so lent and capital created was 101,203,117 ozs.; and the 3 per cent stock being now at 80, the said capital is equal to 110,095,550 ozs. of gold, at the before-mentioned average price of 90s. 10d. and that at the present price of gold 77s. 6d. to 163,107,,306 ozs.; the difference, being 23,311,836 ozs., constitutes an undue gain to the public creditor, at the expense of the public, equal in money to 110,974,691l.
15. 15. "That the average price of wheat having been during the above period 81s. 10d. the equivalent in wheat to the money so lent was 112,333,400 quarters; and the price of 3 per cent stock being now 80, and wheat at the same average, the equivalent would now be 155,533,185 quarters; but at 55s. 6d. the average price since 1819, it is equal to 229,285,478 quarters, or in money, 958,159,330l. being an increased gain of 73,782,215 quarters by the alteration of the currency; or in money 301,892,228l.
16. 16. "That the annual charge of 23,860,020l. created in the period above stated, as equal to 5,253,502 ozs. and is now equal to 6,127,174 ozs. being an increase of 871,192 ozs. or 3,403,886l.; that the above annual charge in wheat was equal to 5,831,370 quarters; is, at the average since 1819, equal to 8,600,000 quarters, or in money 35,196,666l. being an increased gain of 2,799,000 quarters, or in money of 11,328,311l. and that by comparison with commodities and labour, in the proportion of difference of their money value in those two periods, an equally undue advantage to the public creditor is proved to have been given at the charge of the public.
17. 17. "That all public creditors prior to 1798, and others subsequent, have suffered in proportion to the depreciation that followed their respective loans; that they are therefore entitled, in strict justice, to be 1606 paid in money, of, value equal to that of those periods, and be indemnified for the diminished value of their income during the interval; that many of those creditors having probably, in such a length of time, sold their stock and purchased property, have since undergone another and more fatal injury, by the restoration of the old currency, injury, consequent diminution of the value of their, property so bought;—on the other hand, those who lent their money when the currency was depreciated below the average of the whole period, gained a farther undue advantage than is shown by the foregoing statements; and the depreciation was at its greatest extent during the latter years of the war, when the largest proportion of money was lent, and capital created; in addition to which the public have, upon very advantageous terms to the stockholder, redeemed a larger capital, debt than existed prior to 1797.
18. 18. "That under all these circumstances, it it evidently and indispensably, necessary, to take into immediate consideration the destructive effects that have arisen out of the alterations made in the currency, by the acts of 1797 and 1819, as well respecting the enormous public burthens created and so augmented by the act of 1815, as the revolution of property in the vast and complicated intercourse of individuals throughout this country occasioned thereby; in order that, by a final arrangement of the currency, as equitable to all parties as circumstances will admit, or by a reduction of taxation equal to the advance occasioned by the act of l819, together with the establishment of some principle for the adjustment of private contracts, justice may, as far as possible, be administered to all, and the country saved from a revolution of property, and also from a pressure to taxation beyond the ability of the people to sustain."

The first Resolution having been put,

Mr. Ricardo

commenced by saying that if he should not succeed in refuting the arguments of the hon. gentleman, it would be owing, not to the force of those arguments, but to his inability to reply to them. The hon. member had said, that the alteration which had taken place in prices was to be solely imputed to the alteration in the state of the currency brought about by the act of 1819; but the hon. gentleman seemed to forget, that the country had been subjected to such alterations in prices, when no such cause existed as the bill of 1819, or any similar bill. There could be no difference of opinion with respect to the fact of distress. The question was, what was the best means of removing that distress? The causes of low prices might be traced to various sources—the great influx of gold into this country—the improvements in agriculture—those and other causes operated. How, then, could the distress of the agriculturists be solely imputed to the alteration that had taken place in the currency? In an enlarged point of view, he was prepared to contend that the alteration in the currency had no effect upon taxation. The question of taxation ought to be argued as if no change had been made in the currency since 1797. The alterations that had been made might have affected individual classes—might have affected landlords and tenants, in their relations to the state; but if the value of produce was affected by the change in the currency, it should be recollected also that the value of all other productions was affected in the same way. He was willing to admit that to whatever extent the value of the currency had been affected by the bill of 1797, to that extent had taxation been increased. But it was impossible to prove that the depression of the agricultural interest was in any greater extent to be traced to the measure of 1819. As to the situation of Ireland, which had been alluded to, could any reasonable man suppose that the distress and misery of Ireland grew out of the measure of 1819? He thought it perfectly compatible that they should be suffering for want in Ireland, and from superabundance in this country. In a country Where the people lived on the cheapest food—such as potatoes—if that food failed, how could their wages afford the means of procuring corn? The hon. gentleman should have considered that wages were not regulated by the price of corn. In England, where food was not so cheap, such a calamity as afflicted Ireland was net so likely to occur.—The hon. gentleman here entered into a correction of a passage within inverted commas, as if quoted from the agricultural report, while there was no such passage in the report. There was even one passage in italics, representing that the currency was the cause of the severe pressure on the industry of the community, yet there was no such statement in the report. This was calculated to mislead; though of course there could have been no such intention. It did not follow that a fall of prices, which the report stated, occasioned any distress to the producer; for the cost of production might have fallen. If justice was to be done in one instance, it ought to be done in another. The parties who had suffered from the introduction of the paper system were not to be recompensed, it seemed, because their loss had occurred 25 years ago; but the main loss, in fact, had occurred at no such distant period, for the depreciation of the bank-note up to the year 1809 did not go farther than 2½ per cent. If those were to be compensated who were losers by the return to cash payments, certainly those had an equal right to remuneration who had been damnified by the departure from it. The hon. member was not Consistent in his resolutions. When he estimated the depreciation of bank paper by the quantity of it over and above 3l. 17s. 10d. which was necessary to purchase an ounce of gold, he admitted gold to be the standard of value. Why, then, did he afterwards come forward with arguments in which corn and other articles of produce were assumed to be the standard of value? Such a principle would justify every man in calling for an alteration in the currency of the country, according to the rise or fall of the commodity in which he dealt. He (Mr. R.) did not think the annihilation of rent by any means a necessary consequence of a fall in the price of corn. The cost of production might be diminished. But the hon. member for Essex, holding that opinion, was certainly bound to support his (Mr. R's.) plan for paying off the national debt, by a partial sacrifice of capital; because under that arrangement, he would forfeit only a part of his possesions, while, under the existing system, he lost the whole.—The hon. gentleman had said, that the effect of the bill of 1819 had increased taxation to the amount of ten millions; but to make out that point, he calculated gold at 4l. l0s 10d. instead of 3l. 17s. 6d. With respect to the general complaint of the hon. member, that corn and other articles of produce had been brought down in price by the bill of 1819, was it not a notorious fact, that before that bill had passed, those articles had fallen in price? How, then, could the hon. member charge the measure of 1819 with effects which could be traced to an earlier period, and which had been going on increasing in operation before the bill had been passed? He now came to another resolution of the hon. member's—that resolution made a mistake of no less a sum than 154 millions. That resolution stated a sum of 459,650,826l. of money, including bills funded, had been paid into the Treasury, from Jan. 1798, to Jan. 1816. Now he (Mr. R.) contended, that, out of that sum 154 millions had been paid towards the discharge of the national debt. If the chancellor of the exchequer had done away with the delusion of the sinking fund, would he have raised so much money from the country? No, there would have been 154 millions less: so much was applied, and by so much had the debt been diminished from 1798 to 1816. The hon. gentleman seemed to insinuate, that certain individuals were in the habit of making public attacks upon the landlords of this country. The charge could not be brought against him. It was true, he looked upon rents in the same light as he did every other article in the market, liable to fluctuations, and to be regulated according to the demand fir the produce of the soil. He had never said that the country would be ruined by a super abundant supply; on the contrary, that the country would greatly benefit by that supply; the greater the supply the greater the comfort. Great supply induced low prices; low prices injured the grower, but gave an advantage to the country. It was not, however, that kind of advantage which he should wish it to possess. On the contrary, he would always wish to see the grower receive a fair remunerating price; because he was convinced, that all classes in the country would go on better and more prosperously when the farmer received a fair remunerating price. But a remunerating price had nothing to do with the state of the currency. If corn were down so low even as 20s. and the price of labour and all other outgoings were regulated by that price, the grower could go on paying his rent as well perhaps as when he received 80s. and when his outgoings were in proportion to that prim—With respect to the advantage that one class had gained over the other by the bill of 1819, he would say, that it certainly was impossible to tamper with the currency of a country, without producing such effects. The payers of taxes had lost at one period and gained at another, in consequence of the fluctuations of the currency; but it was quite remarkable to see how nearly at par stood the loss and gain. In his opinion, the great mischief sprung out of the original error, he meant the bill of 1797.—That was the great error—the measure of 1819 was the remedy. The House acknowledged the mischief of the measure of 1797, and they were bound to support the bill of 1819, which was only intended to remedy the original error. If the House at a fatal moment interfered with that bill, what would be the consequence—what would be the state of London the next day? What wild speculation—what ruin would follow! So strong were the evils that would follow such a step, that he anticipated from that House its decided negative to the motion of the hon. member.

Lord Milton

contended, that the distress and embarrassment under which the country laboured were not to be imputed to the simple measure of 1819, but were to be traced to the fatal measure of 1797, and the effects which followed, to the fluctuations of the currency, and the efforts which had been made with a view of returning to cash payments. He agreed that the agricultural body came with an ill grace to that House, not in fact to be relieved from distress, but with a demand to raise the price of bread upon the people. He thanked God that the House had not the power to do so if they would. He would regret any invasion on the public creditor: he hoped the House would keep faith with him; but whether the taxes would keep faith with him was another question. The House would not sanction an invasion of the debt; but he greatly feared that the taxes would not be able to meet the demand of the creditor. There were two ways to relieve the farmer; the one, to increase his receipts; the other, to diminish his outgoings: the first was impossible, the other might be effected. And how could it be effected but by a reduction of taxation. He thought that ten millions of taxes might have been remitted this session. Had so much been remitted, it would have afforded great relief to the agricultural interest. It would not afford the same relief next year; because there were scarcely any farmers who were not now paying their rent out of their capital. The noble lord referred, in proof of the extent of the agricultural distress, to the petition from Leicestershire, which had been signed by all classes, from the lord-lieutenant to the lowest occupier of land. The consequence must be, that in 1823 the farmer would have less capital titan in 1822, and that the reduction of taxes which would have been effectual this year, would not be then effectual. He was quite sure that before the next session, they would hear many great lords and many knights of the shires, who had hitherto been silent, clamorously calling for relief. He therefore implored the public creditor, as a matter of prudence, to consider whether it was not his interest as well as his duty, to compel the minister to retrench, in order to prevent the landholder from being tempted to make an inroad upon his property. The public creditor ought to recollect what had taken place at the late meeting of the county of Kent. He sincerely trusted that the example then set would not be followed; but what had been done in Kent might be done in Cornwall and Northumberland; and there was no security against the repetition of such a proposal at any public meeting whatsoever. After stating that he felt no pity for the landholders as a class, inasmuch as they had always been rigid supporters of the loan system, of which the evils were now beginning to be felt, the noble lord proceeded to declare, that he could not agree to the last resolution. As to the rest of his resolutions, his hon. friend might be right, or might be wrong; but sure he was, that to seek a remedy for our present distress in reverting to a paper currency, or in creating high prices, would be as absurd as it would be useless. The only efficient remedy left for the country to adopt was, a reduction of taxation by giving up the sinking fund, which in all probability, if not so given up, would shortly give itself up. He trusted that gentlemen would come to the next session of parliament convinced of the impropriety of keeping up a heavy taxation for such a purpose. The noble lord took a review of the leading measures which had been proposed during the present session, and maintained that neither side of the House had done for the country, that which the country had a right to expect at their hands. Indeed, there had not been a single motion, with the exception of that made by his learned friend the member for Winchelsea respecting the sinking fund, and that made by the hon. member for York (Mr. Wyvill), respecting the reduction of taxation, that would have done the country the slightest good had it been carried.

Mr. Attwood

commenced by remarking upon the speech of the hon. member for Portarlington, which he said contained views exceedingly mistaken and un candid of the resolutions before the House, and of the arguments of his hon. friend who had introduced them; but he said, that the errors into which the hon. member had fallen, had been for the greater part exposed in so unanswerable a manner by the noble lord who had followed him in the debate, that he should be reluctant at that hour to occupy the House with remarks on any parts of the hon. member's arguments, except those which were directly opposed to the main grounds on which the resolutions before the House rested. The main fact asserted in these resolutions—that on which they all depended—was, that that fall of monied prices, the effects of which were so destructive and ruinous, had been occasioned by the alterations which had taken place in the currency. This the hon. member for Portarlington denied. He maintained that the fall of prices was to be ascribed chiefly to other causes, and undoubtedly, if the hon. member was right in this opinion, there existed no ground for any one of the resolutions before the House. They rested on this, that a great depreciation had taken place of that money which was established by the act of 1797; and it was perfectly indisputable that a rise of prices to the extent of that depreciation, whatever it was, must necessarily have been occasioned by it; and that the return to the old metal standard must have been of necessity accompanied with a fall of prices, to the extent of the rise which had been thus occasioned. This would not be denied, and the question therefore between the hon. member for Portarlington and the hon. mover of these resolutions was reduced to this—to what extent had that depreciation gone? for to the same extent had the re-establishment of the old metal standard occasioned a fall in the price of agricultural produce, entirely unconnected with, and independent of those productive harvests and improvements in agriculture, by which the hon. member explained the fall in agricultural prices. Now, on this point that the depreciation had been very great and extensive, he should not proceed to establish that by any abstruse argument; but should content himself with resting it entirely on an authority which he was quite satisfied would be received as conclusive by the hon. member himself, and probably would satisfy the House. For it was the authority of the hon. member who now contested that point: and he would read his opinion on a former occasion given on that subject. [Mr. Ricardo here said he admitted it]. The question therefore was at an end. There was no grout for the confident attack which the hon. member had made on the principle of these resolutions; imputing to them the absurdity of ascribing that to alterations in the standard of value, which had been occasioned by accidental causes; and of asking for a reduction of taxes and burthens on no better ground than that of a productive harvest. The resolutions state, that by acts of the legislature, the standard of value has been first greatly lowered, and then as much raised. This the hon. member admits, and he must admit with it, that those measures of the legislature have occasioned great injustice, derangement, and ruin; that a great fall of prices, with all its destructiove effects, acting on high monied engagements, has been occasioned by those measures, and the resolutions go farther than the hon. member only in calling on the legislature to provide remedies, for evils, and injustice it has itself occasioned.

The hon. member had asserted, that prices on the continent had fallen to as great an extent as in this country; that of course this could only have been occasioned by abundant production; and he had asked whether we should find in France so great an absurdity as a demand for a reduction of taxes on the ground of an abundant harvest and a glut of corn? The question as to foreign prices, was one on which much mis-statement had taken place, and on which it was of importance to have the real facts before them, as they threw light on our own situation. But first be desired, the House to consider to what extent, and how universal the fall of prices in this country had been, and to exhibit that, he would refer again to that paper, which had been delivered to the agricultural committee of the last session of parliament, by Mr. Tooke, and which contained a list of the prices of thirty of the most important articles of commerce and manufactures, selected as exhibiting the extent of fall of prices which had taken place on all commercial commodities generally. If these prices were continued down to the present time, the result which the list would exhibit was this, that from the month of May 1818, to May 1822—the first of these pe- riods being that when the second experiment for altering the standard of value had commenced—the prices of all those commodities had fallen to the extent of 40l. in the 100l., and that was nearly equal to the fall of agricultural prices since the same time. Let this fact, then, be applied to the question as to foreign prices. Was it asserted that a fall of prices, as sudden, as great and universal as this had taken place on the continent at large? If so, it led necessarily to one of these two conclusions; either that all productions had everywhere suddenly increased, in quantity; or that money had been reduced in its quantity; for the proportion between money and commodities had altered, and one of these two conclusions must therefore be of necessity admitted. Either all the productions of all industry, all climates, and all countries, had suddenly increased (which it was impossible to believe); or otherwise, from whatever cause, a reduction in the amount of money generally in circulation had taken place. With respect to this country, where, beyond any question, the fall of prices which had taken place, was to the extent of nearly one half on all property and commodities, the reduction which we had forcibly made in the amount of money in circulation, was fully adequate td occasion that fall; it was, in, fact, impossible, that such a reduction could be effected without such a fall of prices following; and doubtless these operations on English currency, must have materially deranged the monied system of Europe, and have affected more particularly those countries more exclusively connected with England, and which formed the channels through which the bullion of England had at tad period been dispersed on the continents and at another period been drawn back.

But the real fact was that no such fall of prices as that experienced here, had taken place generally on the continent; and he referred individually to France, which the hon. member for Portarlington had particularly referred to, as exhibiting a fall of prices as great as in this country, and this fact he distinctly contradicted and asserted, that no material depression in agricultural produce or in property generally existed in France. He maintained that no material rise, in the monied price of agricultural productions, had taken place in France during the whole period of the war—during that period which had been distinguished by so great a rise of prices in this country; and that no material de- pression had taken place since the peace; and as this must be of necessity well known to many members present, and as he saw that hon. gentlemen opposite assented to that fact, he would not therefore go into the proof of it, from tables and authorities which he possessed. But it followed from thence, that the rise and fall of prices which had been experienced here, had arisen from causes peculiar to this country, and not common to us with the continent at large, as had been repeatedly asserted. It appeared, however, that there was one part of the continent, which was Flanders, where—whether from its more intimate connexion wit England, from a derangement at one time in its own currency, which there was, he understood, some reason to believe had existed, or from whatever cause—a rise and fall of prices, nearly equivalent to our own, had taken place: but so far was the example of Flanders from affording any support to the opinion which the hon. member for Portarlington had expressed, of its being absurd to demand a reduction of burthens on the ground of a fall of prices, that he (Mr. Attwood) believed, that great reductions had been there effected on that very ground; and he could not reply to the argument of the hon. member better, than by referring him to what had been recently stated on that subject, by the minister of the king of the Netherlands, in a speech delivered to the states; in which speech would be found a complete answer to the question which he had put to the hon. member for Essex, as to whether he expected to see so great an absurdity on the continent, as a reduction of taxes on account of a fall of prices? That minister, after describing a state of things somewhat similar to our own, first a great rise of prices, accompanied with much prosperity; and then as great a fall, and corresponding distress, proceeded to meet these difficulties by referring to the public burthens; and he said, that during the high prices proportionate taxation had been imposed; and that it would not now be just, for the same extent of taxation to be continued. "It is but just," said this minister, "that the taxes should be, reduced in proportion to the decline in produce." "The taxes which took away when "they were imposed one-fourth or one-"fifth of the revenue of land, would now, "if they mere continued, take away a "half. It was just, therefore, that they "should be reduced. The fiscus (by "which he presumed was to be under "stood the Dutch exchequer) would not "lose by that. The fiscus said this "minister will gain in all its disbursements. "Cheap times, reducing at once receipts "and disbursements were not, said he, "to be considered unfavourable to the "exchequer." This was the manner in which that government had encountered difficulties somewhat similar to our own, whose government had displayed no such firmness, nor such wisdom.

Considering, therefore, the facts and principles embodied in the resolutions before the House as completely established—for the acute ability of the hon. member for Portarlington had entirely failed in attempting to impugn, them—he thought that it must be universally felt, that it was the duty of the House to proceed to an examination of the measures, now brought under its consideration; in order to determine what steps now remained to be taken for preventing their farther progress, and to redress, as far as was practicable, the injustice they had already committed. He was far from, agreeing with those, who thought that this task had been so long neglected that it could not now be advantageously performed; and considered, on the contrary, that it had become more urgent in proportion as it had been delayed; that it would ultimately be forced upon them; and that though the duty, which it belonged, under present circumstances, to the House to discharge, had become most extensive, and complicated, and difficult; yet for the House to desert that duty on those grounds, would be to abandon the most important functions, which a government could be called on to discharge. Let the House consider in what situation its measures had placed the country, not as that rested on opinions maintained by one set of men, and contested by others; but as far as might be now said to be concurred in, by all those, whose attention had been particularly directed to the subject. The depreciation of money which we had effected, he believed he might now say was estimated by none at less than one-fourth, by others, and on good grounds, it was estimated at one-half; so that from one-fourth at the lowest, to one-half at ft highest estimate, was the extent to which the House had, by legislative measures, effected a rise and fall, or prices, and had altered the monied value of every man's property. When they considered the debts they had contracted in money thus depreciated; the taxes imposed; that all contracts and leases for near the fourth part of a century, had been founded on this depreciated money; no measure could be conceived, more rash, ill-advised, impolitic, and unjust, none more urgently demanding revision, and a consideration which it had never yet received, than that which imposed the old metal standard on all these debts, contracts and taxes; without any measure of preparation or of investigation, which might have shown the full extent of the operation they were engaging in; which could apprize the country of the nature and extent of the change to which they were subjecting its most important and extensive interests; and which might have enabled the different classes of the community to have avoided, in some degree, that ruin, to which they had now been exposed, as completely as if the measures of parliament had been adopted with the purpose of ensnaring and deceiving the people: and which had done all this, above all, without any previous measure of reduction of taxation, or of expenditure on the part of the government. [Hear, hear!]

But, ill-advised, and impolitic, and unjust as that measure was, there was another circumstance connected with these operations which was still more extraordinary, and which now most urgently demanded their consideration; and it was, that down to this present time, when the alteration in the value of money, they were told, was complete, when the old standard was said to be completely established; not one of the proceedings of parliament had been founded on it, or had been adapted to the altered condition, in which that measure had placed the country. They had carried into effect a measure which had altered the existing condition of the country, but the government refused to recognize or to act upon it, and still proceeded as though no such alteration had taken place. They had altered the existing condition of all the great classes of society, in relation to each other, and in their own condition; but the authors of that measure, proceeded as though utterly unconscious that any such change had been accomplished; or had been even in contemplation. That evil had pervaded all the proceedings of the present and several past sessions of parliament. They had proceeded in their system of taxation, and of expenditure; had fixed prices for the import of grain, had proposed measures for increasing the circulation; over which they had no power, on the footing it was now placed upon, either to increase the circulation by a single shilling, or to diminish it, and in all this had acted as though the paper money, its prices and prosperity still continued, and had been entirely forgetful of the altered circumstances of themselves and the country. The House had been occupied in reducing the people, from that condition of false and fictitious prosperity, as it was now called; from that condition of drunken prosperity as the right hon. secretary called it, to which it had advanced during the system of paper money: but the hon. secretary had forgotten that the government had participated in that fictitious and false prosperity; that it had become as drunken as the people; and that it was necessary to extend to the government also, his system of discipline and reduction. If they were to consider the establishment of the old standard as complete, as permanent:—if no further measures were to follow, what spectacle should they exhibit? A government still adapted to the bloated prosperity of one state of things, and a people reduced to the sober misery of another. A government in possession of taxes, salaries, pensions, and magnificent establishments, all arising out of, and adjusted to the condition of false and drunken prosperity, which arose out of the paper standard; whilst the people were groaning under the poverty brought on them by the return of the metal standard. Was this to be considered part of the experiment of cash payments; were they to be called on to determine whether incongruities and disorders like these could be reconciled and supported? It was impossible that they could continue to consider a state of things like that, as safe or satisfactory, or attempt to render it permanent. They could not remain in the position in which they had placed themselves. It was necessary to go further, or to return. Either to reduce the expenditure of the government, to a level with the altered means and condition of the country; or to place the country in a condition of enduring its burthens, by adjusting the standard of value to that in which they had been imposed.

He would call the attention of the House to a single instance, of the manner in which they lost sight in their proceed- ings, of the alteration they had themselves effected. The House had before it an act for the purpose of reducing salaries; brought forward under the name of the Superannuation act. It was a measure introduced to the House, as one of great importance. On that measure they were told, the labours of the administration had been employed, during the whole of the last summer. The chancellor of the exchequer proposed it, in a very elaborate and detailed speech, taking a review of all official situations and their emoluments, and stating grounds on which it was proposed to effect general reduction in salaries. But in the whole of that speech, there did not fall from him one single word, respecting the altered value of that money, in which these salaries were paid. This had been totally left out of consideration by his majesty's government, in considering the grounds on which salaries could properly be rendered less burthensome to the country; and this was their conduct at the very moment when the value of money had been recently raised, by a disguised operation, to an extent which was estimated by none at less than 25 per cent, amidst the unexampled sufferings and distress of the country. The chancellor of the exchequer said, that to reduce salaries was a painful task: he had not courage to accomplish it: but he forgot that the question was as to increasing them: whether it were fitting at that moment that salaries should be virtually raised, by an indirect measure, without any one ground of service or of justice; or if it were not rather necessary, to adjust them to the altered value of the money, in which they were paid? Could there be a doubt entertained as to the reality of that alteration or its effects? It was perfectly undeniable that, if they had continued their system of circulation, such as it existed during the war; or if, on returning to a metal standard, they had adjusted, as was fitting, that standard to the value of the paper money of the war; then it would have required a measure, giving a direct nominal advance of nearly double, to every pension and every salary under the Crown, to place the holders of these pensions and salaries on the same footing as that on which the alteration in the currency had now placed them. The chancellor of the exchequer was slow to believe in the depreciation of money, or in its enhancement. Let him inquire, then, of the holders of pensions and official situations, if they do not find that the alteration in the value of money had placed in their hands increased means, increased affluence, increased wealth, beyond that to which their emoluments had been adjusted or fixed during the prosperity of the war; and if all this had not taken place at the precise time when they had heard of the increasing distress of the country at large? [Hear, hear!]. But it was said, that it would be hard to reduce salaries, because all prices had not fallen! Was not that an evil common to all classes of the community? Had not the landed men with reduced incomes to contend against expences not alike and equally reduced? All prices had fallen that were not upheld by taxation. And what is the remedy? To reduce at once the salaries and the taxes together, and that would give relief to the holders of office and of pensions, and to all other classes of the community at the same time. On this subject there appeared to exist a systematic determination, to keep our of view, the connexion between the altered value of money, and its effects on these situations. When the right hon. secretary reviewed the effects of his bill, on the different classes of the community, and brought into prominent consideration the manner in which it had, as he estimated, operated to the advantage of particular classes, he held out that disputed advantage as a consolation to others who suffered from it, but lost sight altogether of this great and important class of society, to whose advantage it had so unequivocally operated. The chancellor of the exchequer, in like manner, in his estimate of official emoluments, left out of view the increase they had received by the altered value of money. But these two circumstances were connected more immediately, than any others in the whole range of the interests of the country. Their connexion was so immediate and essential, that the House could never discharge its duty, if it considered one of them, without going at once into a consideration of the other. The House would not discharge its duty, if it considered the question, of the alteration in the value of money, without proceeding to consider its effect on the salaries of the public servants; and it was a mockery to regulate or to refer to these salaries, without taking into view the manner in which they had been by that alteration enhanced.

But this was one instance only of the incongruous nature of their proceedings, and not the most important, though sufficiently apparent and striking; for that inconsistency pervaded the whole of their proceedings, and the effects of the measures before them were to be mainly seen in their pernicious consequences on the great body of the people, and in the extensive derangement and disorder which they had produced, in all their interests. And was the House to be surprised, if, when they refused all inquiry into measures so extensively connected with the national interests, endeavoured to avoid discussion as to those measures, and refused to take them into view, as the foundation of their own proceedings—were they to be surprised, if they found great bodies of the people, occupied in those discussions which the House avoided, and examining, the bearing of those measures in their utmost extent, and the grounds of justice or policy on which they rested? To suppose the contrary, would be to imagine that they could extinguish in the people, all disposition to avail themselves of the benefit of experience; or to guide their future conduct by observation of the past. For what had the experience of the present generation of active men shown them? Had they not seen all the common operations of life rendered ruinous; all the efforts of industry become pernicious, and all prudence and foresight frustrated, and the different orders and interests, of society sacrificed in their turn, one to the other? At one period, the interest of every man who granted a lease, of his land was sacrificed; at another, all those who took leases were ruined; at one time, it was the lender, of money who was sacrificed, at another the borrower was destroyed. And did they expect that the people were to continue these operations, granting and taking leases, borrowing and lending money, with all this experience before them, and without attempting to understand the ground of all this ruin and derangement, to discover the justice of these measures, whether they had any and what claim for relief and redress, how much further they were to be carried, and whether, and how often, and on what ground they were to be repeated? Nothing more extensively important to the interests of the country, had ever taken place in that House, than the resolution they had lately come to respect- ing those measures, coupled with the grounds on which that resolution had been proposed and supported. They had resolved, that they would not alter the money standard of 3l. 17s. 10½d.; and the noble marquis at the head of his majesty's government in that House said, that the meaning of that resolution was, that they would not now alter that standard; but that it did not follow they were not in future to make such an alteration if they found it necessary. And of what nature was this necessity thus referred to. A necessity of which the government was first to judge; and parliament be afterwards called on to sanction? And this they called giving a fixed standard to the country; on which it might depend, and on which its operations were to be founded. But what appearance and probable prospect of necessity was now before them, and to which they were exposed from the very attempt to establish the standard of 3l. 17s. 10½d.? First, there was the necessity which would arise from a defalcation, in the produce of the revenue; derived under present circumstances from precarious sources, which could not be possibility be permanent, and the present situation of which, as compared with the destitute condition of those from whose resources it was drawn, was a subject of astonishment to every man [Hear, hear!]. Let any material defalcation in the revenue take place, approaching, for instance, to that which tool place in 1820, in the revenue of Ireland—a defalcation of one-fifth, or one-sixth, and the standard is gone at once,—that standard to which the people were to work, on which they were recommended to found their operations, but which none but a madman would found any operation upon. Then there was another contingency, that was, a demand on the part of the people, and yielded to by their representatives, for a general system of reduction in the establishments of government. Did any man believe that the present administration, or any other administration, would carry such a reduction of establishments into effect, or that they could do it and maintain their own places; or that such a demand would not be met or eluded, rather by a sacrifice of that standard to which we had sacrificed every thing else? This was precisely that conduct which they ought not to adopt; that situation in which they ought not to place the people. They ought not to attempt to establish a standard of value, the difficulties of establishing which were so great, that no reliance could be placed on their being able to succeed; nor respecting which were they able to give any assurance to the country as to its permanence. It was precisely the step they ought to avoid. Their duty was, to proceed to an investigation of the whole of the subject, to lay its whole operation open to the view of the people, that they might under stand from, whence this unnatural state of things had arisen; to come to a final settlement and adjudication, which should render that imperfect justice, which was now alone in their power, to the different orders of society; to adopt permanently and finally a standard of value which should reconcile, as far as could now be done, all existing rights and interests; to render that standard final, to secure it by every pledge and every penalty; to fence round with protection of every kind, to make it penal for any administration to tamper with it, under any plea of necessity; that thus the country might have confidence in the stability of their standard of value, and in their measures, and in their integrity, which at present they neither had, nor could have; and there was not one of all those who proposed to adhere to the standard of 3l. 17s. 10½d. on the ground of the advantage of preserving a standard permanent, who would now venture to say, that he had any confidence in its permanence, or that he would now proceed in his own affairs, to grant leases of lands, to provide for children, and rely in these affairs on the permanence of the present standard of value. This was their proper duty; and if they neglected, or shrunk from it, they forced upon the people the discussion of questions, which could not be by the people discussed, when their interests are connected with them, without danger,—questions of abstract right, of abstruse principles, of those principles on which the right of property itself depends, and they were accountable for the consequences, what ever they might be, Let them consider the situation in which they left the country, whilst they were engaged in this attempt of establishing a doubtful standard. All the foundations of, property had been unsettled, no security remained for it. There was not a debt nor a contract now in existence, of which its equity was not questionable. [Hear; hear]! Let them consider the case of lord King. During the depreciation of money, lord King demanded from his tenant, a sum greater than, that which the tenant was bound by contract nominally to pay. The value of money had been lowered by measures of the government, and haying found that to be the case, and that the alteration in value was to the extent of 14l. 12s. per cent, a he demanded of his tenant 114l. 12s. for every 100l. stipulated in his lease. A clamour had been attempted to be raised against that noble person; imputations had been thrown out against his motives; but where was there a single individual now, who would maintain, that his conducts was not most just and upright, and consistent with the high character and station of him who adopted it; or, that he was not subjected to a flagrant injustice, when parliament took away from him, the means of enforcing his just demand? But, if that demand were just, there is not now a tenant in the kingdom whose lease was granted during the depreciation of money, whose claim for reduction not equally just, and who is not equally defrauded, if required to pay the full nominal amount of his contract. No such rent so contracted for, could now be honestly received. The tenant was directly defrauded if compelled to pay it. And all the receivers of pensions, and all creditors, were placed on a similar footing. Whether they could honestly receive their nominal claim; that depended on the date of the agreement. No man could, deny it, on grounds worthy even of discussion. This was the condition in which all debts, and contracts, and leases stood, and in which they proposed to leave them.

He adverted next to the argument of the right hon. secretary, who had placed the question, as respected the reversal of the act of 1819, on fair and manly grounds; for he had said, that it would require a case of strong necessity to justify such a measure, and that he himself did not recognise in the existing condition of the kingdom any suck necessity. He considered rather that his bill had operated to the advantage, of the main interests of the country. The right hon. secretary rested the main defence of the act of 1819 on this, that it was calculated, in his opinion, to improve the condition of the lower classes of society. This important body had been reduced, in his opinion, to great indigence during the depreciation of money, and in consequence of that rise of prices, which had been accompanied with so extraordinary a degree of prosperity in the country at large. It was principally from entertaining this opinion, and from believing that a fall of prices and the re-establishment of the old standard, would reinstate the labouring classes in their former prosperity, that he had originally promoted, and now supported, the inviolability of the act of 1819. Undoubtedly, no measures of any government could rest on a basis more satisfactory, than their tendency to improve the condition of the labouring classes, if they were capable of permanently effecting that great object. These classes formed a great majority of this, and of every country, and the interest of the greater number it was, in whatever condition placed, that it was the duty of all governments to consult. It was not for the advantage of those classes, which were in possession of distinctions and wealth, exclusively, or particularly, that the measures of government could be justly directed; those distinctions, the right of property itself, rested on no other foundation than this, that they were necessary not for the good alone of those by whom they were possessed, but for the good also of those by whom they were not possessed, the great body of the community. If the act of 1819, therefore, or any other measure, could be shown to be permanently capable of improving the condition, of the labourers, it should have his support. But, in fact, no error in the whole course of these proceedings, had been more palpable and obvious than that of the right hon. secretary, when he imagined that the act of 1819 could be otherwise than greatly injurious to the lower classes. This effect was so obvious, indeed, that the slightest consideration would show him (Mr. Peel), that it was only with respect to a very small part of that important question, that any difference of opinion could at all exist. Such difference of opinion as to the effect on the labourer of a rise or fall of prices, occasioned by a depreciation of money, or a restoration of it, was confined to the period when such rise or fall of prices was in process. Ultimately and permanently, the wages of labour rose or fell with the price of pro- perty, of commodities, and provisions: they adjusted themselves to the alteration in the value of money, whatever that alteration might be; and the condition of the labourer after that operation, was left precisely the same as that in which he was found. But that equality of condition under such circumstances could only take place where taxes existed on the wages of labour, or, in other words, on the necessaries of life. Where such taxes existed, there the effect of the operation they had now been engaged in—of raising the value of money—on the condition of the labourer, sufficiently difficult at all times, was, that it became necessarily, finally, and irretrievably, deteriorated, degraded and depressed; the wages of labour sunk to the price of provisions, but the taxes remained, and were to be paid out of diminished earnings [Hear, hear!] It was this effect of the act of 1819 on the condition of the labourer, the necessarily destructive influence which it must exercise on that condition, unless that act were accompanied with a repeal of taxes, to which he called the attention of the House, and to which their attention would be more urgently required, than by any other circumstance in the whole range of the interests of the country. When the wages of labour should have sunk generally, to the level of the old metal standard; when after that short period of difficulty and misery, which must always precede a fall in the wages of labour; that period, of industry without employment, and labour without reward; when wages should have sunk to 1s. to 10d. to 8d. for the wages of the labour of a day, as they had already fallen, and now existed in many parts of the country; then it would be for the House to consider, what would be the difficulty, the sufferings, the utter impossibility of draining from these miserable earnings, by taxes on the necessaries of life, the means of supporting the magnificent establishments, the enormous and cumbrous expenses of this governments, all adapted to a different state of things, value of money, and rate of wages. He desired them to consider what derangement, what suffering, must be carried by even the smallest reduction, by means of taxation into that severe economy, by which a family was to be supported in independence, out of such wages as he had described t and what then were they to expect from the almost universal extent of taxation that now prevailed; but that it would extinguish all economy and independence together, and convert the labourers in a body into paupers; when all wages had fallen but all taxes were maintained? But these taxes could never be maintained; they could not exist in, conjunction with the act of 1819; they muse be abandoned, whatever interests suffered from their being given up. These taxes must be yielded to the sufferings of those by whom they were paid, to their destructive effects on the great body of the community, and on productive industry. But it was most extraordinary that the right hon. secretary had supported opinion by a reference to the poor-rates. The labourers had been oppressed during the depreciation of money, and amidst the general prosperity of the country; that was his opinion. They had been relieved amidst a condition of general calamity and distress; and all this was to be seen by an examination of the poor-rate returns. Now it was on these very returns that he would rest that question. He would not refer the right hon. secretary to the principles, concurred in on this subject by every one of the writers on political economy, of any authority which this country had produced, and which were in direct opposition to the opinion he entertained; and who would tell him, that the interests of the labourers, were inseparably connected with those of the productive classes at large [Hear, hear!], but he would refer to the poor-rate returns. The committee which presented those returns to the House, had accompanied them very judiciously with a table of the price of wheat; for the mere nominal amount of money paid to the poor, unless accompanied with some measure of its value, neither showed the actual extent of relief given, nor of distress existing. It appeared by these returns, that the nominal amount of money paid to the poor in the three last years of the war, 1812, 1813, and 1814, the years of the greatest depreciation money, when, consequently, If the right hon. secretary were right, the indigence of the poor would have reached its greatest height; and when that indigence would be marked by the poor-rates, the nominal amount paid in these three years, was 6,600,000l., 6,300,000l. and 5,400,000l., which was 6,190,000l. for the average of the three years; and the average price of wheat for these three years was 99s. the quarter. But the money of that time was of a different value, as admitted in the argument of the right hon. secretary, from the money of his bill; for he said, that money was then depreciated, and that the poor suffered from that depreciation; and if we take off one-third to make it equal to our present money, then it would appear that the average paid to the poor in those three years, was 4,000,000l., and the amount paid in 1814, the last year of the war, and the greatest if depreciation was no more than 3,6000,000l. in money of our present value. This was a fact well worthy the attention of those individuals, who had directed their labours to the evils of our poor-laws, and who believed they saw in these laws, a source of great, and increasing, and interminable evil; threatening to sap the foundations of property, and to destroy the independent character of the labouring classes. Up to the close of the war these laws developed no such dangers. The labourers then supported their independence in spite of yearly increasing burthens; and the sums given in relief, showed no tendency to absorb the property of the landowners, nor were felt as a great burthen; corn being at 99s. a quarter at that time. There is no fact more incontestable than this—that during the war—during that depreciation of money represented by the right hon. secretary as destructive to the poor, pauperism decreased. It is so stated, and in these words, by an authority to which the hon. secretary would be inclined to defer—by Dr. Coplestone—who had investigated that branch of his subject candidly and ably, and who came to that conclusion. He took the period from 1802 to 1814, ending March 1815, and said, as the result of his examination, that during that period "pauperism was decreasing." He would refer then to the poor-rates at the time when the depreciation of money was corrected—when prices had fallen—when, according to the right hon. secretary, the indigence of the labourers was relieved, and that this would be seen by the poor-rates. The amount of money paid to the poor in the last year, of which returns were before the House, was no less than 7,390,000l. or double the amount paid in money of the present value, in 1814, the year of the greatest depreciation of money. The returns for the subsequent year were not yet before the House, but he believed they showed a reduction of about 400,000l., leaving the poor rates 6,900,000l.; and this reduction had taken place at the period when the establishment of select vestries and assistant overseers, generally throughout the country, had introduced a better system of administration, into the management of the poor; and he believed that that improved management would alone account for all the reductions which had taken place. But bread was now supplied to the prisons of the metropolis at 6d. and 1–16th for a quartern loaf, and in many parts of the country, the contract price of meat for the poor-houses was 2d. and 2½d. a pound; and with such prices as these, if there were not an exceedingly great reduction in the amount of the poor-rates, there was an exceedingly great increase of pauperism. This, then, was the evidence, which the poor-returns gave of the condition of the labourer, as affected, first, by the fall, and then by the rise in the value of money; and it was on such grounds as these, and so taken up, that the right hon. secretary told them he originally supported the act of 1819, and now recommends its continuance. It would be extraordinary, indeed, if a measure which increased taxation, should diminish pauperism; when it was taxation in which our pauperism consisted, out of which it had arisen, and into which it must be resolved. It was not the act of the 43rd of Elizabeth, to which the evils of the poor-rates were to be ascribed. It was the taxes on the necessaries of life. Up to the commencement of the last reign, the whole amount paid for the support of the poor was no more than 600,000l. a year; and the act of the 43rd of Elizabeth had then existed for a century and a half, but then the taxes had been dormant also; the whole amount of annual taxation at that time was under eight millions. The Excise was four millions, the Land-tax two millions, and the Customs two millions; and the money expended in the relief of the poor was little more than half a million. These facts sufficiently explained the nature and origin of the evils of the poor-laws; and they pointed most unequivocally to some principle, whatever it was, and that could be no other than the depreciation of money, operating most powerfully on the condition of the labourers, not in an hostile direction, but beneficially during the period of the war, and which had enabled them to bear up against all the burthens and difficulties of that period, without an increase of pauperism. He could not quit this part of the question, without expressing again his surprise at the manner in which the right hon. secretary on so important a subject had formed his opinions; the little attention which he had directed to the nature of the evidence which he had examined; and that formed another reason, why the Mouse should now interfere, and direct their attention to a measure which still continued to be persevered in by government, on grounds as erroneous as those on which it had been originally adopted.

The hon. member adverted next to the condition of Ireland, as connected with this subject; for the House was not to take a partial view of the condition of the labourers, but their estimate must embrace the whole; and he requested them to consider the extraordinary statement made respecting Ireland by the right hon. member for Kilkenny, who informed them that in the midst of the present distress, the price of provisions was still as low as it had been, except on one or two occasions, in the whole course of his long experience: and what he said, extraordinary as it was, was confirmed in every word of it, by the communications and information respecting the state of Ireland, now before the committee in the city of London for the relief of Irish distress. The whole tenor of these communications was of this nature; they stated, in one sentence, that the population was perishing with hunger; and in the next they deprecated the sending them food; that was the general tenor of these communications. The causes of the distress, as collected from those communications, were, the want of money and of employment; these were the main causes, though it was aggravated greatly, by the partial failure of the potatoe crop. That it was not a deficiency of potatoes alone, which they suffered from, was manifest from this, that it was not desired by the Irish themselves, that potatoes should be sent to Ireland. It was deceiving themselves to confine their views to the failure of the potatoe crop. The potatoe crop was subject to accidental deficiencies at all times; but at no former time bad calamities such as the present followed. [Mr. Peel here said, that as great distress as the present, had on former occasions taken place in Ireland.] He again asserted it: Could any former period be pointed out, when distress in Ireland had been so extraordinary as to call for the universal consideration, and spontaneous assistance of the people of this country? Or was it to be supposed, that at times of greater prosperity for England than the present, the people of Ireland could have perished, as they were now perishing, and no relief be given? The present distress was not confined to the labourers. It reached to persons not dependent on potatoes, or existing on them, or suffering from any deficieny in the crop. The want of food (in the midst of its cheapness) had reached to the farmers and smaller shopkeepers those above the labourers. Let them consider what state of things that was. There was a famine—but it was not accompanied with dearth: the people perished with hunger—but there was no deficiency of food. The farmers were destroyed for want of a market for their productions—the people died without the means of purchase. That was a condition, extraordinary, unnatural, monstrous—a famine which it was in the power of a government to relieve; which could never have had existence but in its measures. The right hon. member for Kilkenny might well say, there was something in the condition of Ireland, mysterious, obscure, and difficult to be solved. He requested his attention to some observations applying to that subject, of Mr. Malthus, printed in 1815. That gentleman had inquired into the effect of the fall of prices which then took place, on the different interests and orders of society, and he referred to its effects on Ireland, and there it was his opinion, that if the low rate of prices should continue, if corn should remain as low as 50s. or 60s. a quarter, the effect on the population of Ireland,—always somewhat redundant, protected by no poor-laws, where there was little surplus capital, and little trade—the effect on that population, he expected would be one which was indeed nearly similar to that now existing. He recommended this opinion to the consideration of the right hon. secretary, who believed that low prices would better the condition of the poor. Mr. Malthus had come to a different conclusion. The condition of Ireland more than verified his opinion. Here were accounts of the cattle of the tenantry on a considerable estate, all seized for rent; these miserable cattle were sold by public sale, in the public market of the town; the prices they produced were 4s. on an average, for a cow, and 1s. 3d. for the average price of a sheep; and the price of potatoes was no more than 1s. 6d. per bushel, and of wheat 5s. a bushel, and of oatmeal very low; and in that town, and around it, with that scene before them, the people were perishing with want. He referred also to the expressions of a rev. prelate, who said provisions in the market were not unreasonably dear, or scantily supplied;" but there was, he said, "a total want of employment; "no scarcity of provisions—but the "spade, the plough, the trowel, the "shuttle were all at rest; and where "there was no employment, there could "be little or no food for the general mass "of the people." Doubtless there could be no food if there were no means of purchase; and that there could never permanently be, if there were no remunerative return to those who should employ them. It was the low price of agricultural produce from whence all this suffering had arisen, however it had been itself occasioned; and he (Mr. Attwood) did not again expect, after what had passed in that debate, to hear it ascribed to any other cause than to the act of 1819. It was the fall of prices in which this famine originated—that fall prevented the tenant from discharging his rent. Then came the inferior landlord, bound by contract to the superior lord, and unable to make any abatement. The ground landlord himself, bound by debts and engagements, all founded in a state of high rents and prices, was equally unable to consent to reductions. Then the miserable stock of the miserable tenantry was seized—then the labourer was left destitute of employment—then ensued a short scene of violence, insubordination, tumult and bloodshed, and that was suppressed by military force—and then ensued a scene of famine and despair. That was the short history, he said, of the distress of Ireland. It sprang from that scarcity of money which they had themselves effected, and on them who had urged forward that measure, rested the responsibility of all the sufferings of that unhappy country. He would not further occupy the attention of the House. They had before them the experience of the effects of their measures; they had before them the experience of the past, the sufferings of the present, and the uncertainty of the future. Every thing about and around them was full of change, difficulty suffering, and danger; and if the present state of things before parliament was not one to call forth its earnest attention and exertion, he thought there could exist no condition of the people, of which that House might not be Content to remain tranquil spectators. [Hear, hear!].

Mr. Secretary Peel

asked, what reason there was for the House to revoke the decision it had come to not a month ago, without one new fact alleged; and begged gentlemen to consider the effect on all commercial intercourse of a declaration, that all transactions since 1797 were of doubtful equity, and should be revised. He contended, that the distress in Ireland was in no way attributable to the state of the currency, but to the failure of the potatoe crop, which was the chief reliance of a population, out of proportion to the means of employment.

Mr. Alderman Heygate

thought the restoration of the old standard was, to a considerable extent, the cause of the agricultural distress, but not the only cause. There was, in addition, the cessation of the war demand, five more than usually abundant, harvests, and an enormous importation within those five years of foreign corn. Parliament neither could nor would obviate the two first causes, by endeavouring to counteract the bounty of Providence, or by plunging the country into new and ruinous wars. They had that session endeavoured to regulate the import of foreign corn. The violent reduction of the circulation, occasioned by the premature act of 1819, had affected this country, and in a still greater degree Ireland. He was not, however, for again abandoning the gold standard, but rather for augmenting moderately and cautiously the diminished circulation. If this were effected with prudence and good sense he did not doubt the return, not of high, but of fair and remunerating prices.

Sir F. Burdett

supported the motion in an elaborate speech, of which, from the lateness of the hour, no report has been preserved, and concluded with stating, that the only resolution for which he felt himself responsible was the last, seeing that it pledged the House to inquiry.

The resolutions were negatived; and at four in the morning the House adjourned.