CORN LAWS. (Hansard, 25 April 1834)

§ Mr. Childers
presented Petitions from Melton, and twelve other places, complaining of agricultural distress, and against any alterations in the Corn-laws.

§ Mr. Cartwright
said, that those interested in agriculture in Northamptonshire, felt strongly aggrieved that relief had not been extended to them, and had formed no part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's scheme of appropriating his surplus revenue; on the contrary, that surplus was applied to relieve the taxation pressing on interests comparatively flourishing. Why should not the land participate in the relief? Why was it still to bear all the burthens heretofore imposed, besides having the burthen of increased county-rates? As to the Repeal of the Corn-laws, which was so strongly called for, and in favour of which the Government gave such feeble support, if that Repeal were to take place, it would lead to the greatest convulsion, and involve thousands of farmers in ruin.

§ Sir Harry Verney
must bear testimony to the increasing distress which prevailed in the agricultural districts, and considered that the peaceable character of the meetings which were everywhere taking place, and the constitutional means by which they made their grievances known to the House, were circumstances which rendered their petitions worthy of the most serious consideration.

§ Lord Althorp
said, nothing would afford him more pleasure than to bring forward a measure that would give relief to the agricultural interest of the country, particularly if that measure would be consistent with the general public good. With respect to the selection of those taxes, it was his intention to remit, he admitted he had not proposed the repeal of any taxes which were entirely confined to agriculture; indeed, in looking at the public taxation of the country, it was not easy to find one tax that pressed specifically and exclusively on the agriculturist. The removal of the County-rates, he was willing to admit, would be a relief, and with this view he had himself moved for a Committee on the subject. He anxiously hoped, that the labours of that Committee would furnish some proposition that would relieve the agricultural districts. His opinion was, and he had expressed that opinion more than once, that the farmer was more oppressed by the local than by the general taxation of the country. Entertaining this opinion, he had brought in a measure to 4 amend the Poor-laws, which, notwithstanding what had been stated by some hon. Members, he hoped the Government would be able to pass through the House during the present Session; for, if it should not pass, it would be because it was rejected by the House, and not from any desire on his part to delay its progress. It had been stated, that the effect of the measure would be, not to give immediate relief, but that its benefit would be prospective. He differed entirely from such an opinion. He could mention the instance of a parish, to which allusion had been made, where a suggestion contained in the Report of the Poor-law Commissioners had been adopted, the consequence of which was, to effect a reduction in the rate upon the whole year of thirty per cent. Therefore, he contended that a good administration of the Poor-laws would afford immediate relief. With respect to the Corn-laws, he did not think this was a fit opportunity for the discussion of that subject. On several occasions, it had been shown, that the agricultural interest was adequately represented in that House; he did not, therefore, see how it could be said, that it was borne down by the influence the Reform Bill had given to the large towns of England. He Wished further to state, that he should endeavour, in any remission of taxes that might take place, to give relief to the landed interest; but he felt assured, that the only way to afford relief to the farmer would be, to find means for the employment of the poor.

§ Sir Thomas Fremantle
agreed with what had fallen from his hon. colleague (Sir Harry Verney), that it was not by tumultuous meetings, and endeavours to intimidate, that the distresses of the agriculturists had been made known, but by the more constitutional means of petitioning Parliament. He differed very much in opinion from the noble Lord (the Clancelcellor of the Exchequer), as to the discussion which had taken place on the Corn-laws, and thought the agricultural interest was not adequately represented in that House, but that it had much to apprehend from it, as well as from the present Government, it having been stated by the noble Lord, that the Government would not oppose a measure for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.

§ Lord Althorp
denied having made such an assertion. What he said was, that the Government, as a Government, did not intend to bring forward any proposition with respect to the Corn-laws; but that 5 if the subject was brought forward by any Member, it would not receive the sanction or opposition of the Government, as a Government.

Mr. Heathcote
regretted so low a tone was taken in that House by the supporters of the agricultural interest, with respect to the maintenance of the present system of Corn-laws. He did not think, after the division of a former night, there was any danger to be apprehended. The noble Lord, he believed, would not alter the Corn-laws if he could, nor did he believe he could if he would.

The Marquess of Chandos
was sorry to see no hope held out by the noble Lord to alleviate the distress of the agriculturists. The noble Lord had expressed a hope, that great relief would be afforded by measures which were now in progress through the House; but what the agriculturists required was, immediate relief; and not to be kept in a state of suspense till the end of the Session, when they would be told it was too late to afford it. The very existence of the country depended upon the former; and, if something was, not done by the Government to relieve the distress under which they now laboured, he should feel it to be his duty again to bring forward a Motion on the subject, and he trusted he should not be left in so small a minority as he was on a former occasion during the present Session.