§ Order for Committee of Supply read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair."
§ MR. CAIRDsaid, he rose pursuant to notice, to call the attention of the House to the serious deficiency of the late harvest, and the consequent necessity for increased economy in the public expenditure. He was aware that, in taking that course, he was assuming considerable responsibility; but as the question had not been touched upon either in the Speech from the Throne or in the observations which fell from Ministers or the leaders of Opposition, he felt it a public duty to bring the matter under the notice of the House. It would be necessary for him to give a short history of the weather during the last season, and its effects upon the harvest. In October, 1859, we were visited by an early frost more severe, probably, than any in the memory of persons now living. This not only prevented a large breadth of wheat from being sown, but its effects were felt in the almost total destruction of some of the green fodder crops. It was followed by a severe winter, which caused great suffering to the stock farmers; and the cold wet spring which ensued put them to enormous expense in buying fodder and carrying their stock forward to grass. A cold wet summer followed the cold spring, and though there were heavy crops of grass, little progress could be made in getting them in, and very few crops were well saved. The same unpropitious weather continued during the harvest, and, for thirty-five out of the forty days preceding the end of August rain fell, and the temperature was thirteen degrees below what it had been in the previous season. The few intervals of sunshine did not admit of the crops being harvested to any extent, except in the finest and earliest parts of the country, and in some of the later counties—Derbyshire, Staffordshire, Northumberland, and elsewhere—part of the crops remained in the field as late as January. The scarcity in the corn crop was aggravated by a failure in the potato crop, which, although not of as much importance in this country as in Ireland, nevertheless involved an increased demand for corn. He was sorry to say that the prospects of a future harvest were, likewise, seriously affected by the unpropitious weather which had lasted through 1089 the autumn seed time, and had rendered it impossible that they could hope, even at the best, for more than an average crop this year. The House would not be surprised to hear that the result of so much bad weather had been highly disastrous. No reliable data existed as to the breadth of corn sowed, and all that they could hope to do was, therefore, to form an approximate estimate. He had frequently pressed on the House the advantage of procuring returns of the acreage of the crops, and the advantage of such a system must now be evident. No objection would be offered by the great body of the tenant farmers, and the returns could be obtained at a very small expense. They had, however, no accurate data of that kind with regard to England. With regard to Ireland they had; and from them it appeared that the wheat crop in that country had declined in extent one-sixth as compared with what it was in 1857. He did not know nor did he think that there was a diminution to the same extent in England; but, though they had no accurate statistics to guide them in respect to the extent of the crop, they did possess some facts which enabled them to form an opinion as to the yield. During many years observation he had found the Board of Trade returns to afford good comparative data of the yield. He had examined those returns from the various market towns; and, taking the five months from the 1st of September to the 1st of February for the last five years, he found that the returns for the last year showed a deficiency of no less than 36 per cent from the average. Besides the Returns taken by the Board of Trade, very praiseworthy efforts were made by newspapers to supply the public with authentic data. The Agricultural Gazette had done much in that way, and as a result of its inquiries made an estimate in August which was subsequently confirmed by a Return published in February in The Mark Lane Express. He found that out of 313 Returns regarding the wheat crop, more than three-fourths represented that there was a deficiency varying from 20 to 60 per cent below an average crop. There was a similar deficiency in potatoes. He had made private inquiries of eminent agriculturists in various parts of the country, and had received full corroboration of the facts which he had now laid before the House. Other evidence also confirmed these facts. The returns of 1090 railways, running through corn-producing counties, did so. The Great Northern Company complained that, for the last six months, there had been a falling off in the traffic in consequence of the deficiency; the Eastern Counties repeated the same tale, and the North Western had suffered from the same cause. With all these facts before him, he came to the conclusion that, estimating both quantity and quality—for there was even a greater deficiency in quality—the yield of corn at the last wheat harvest would prove at least one-third deficient. In Scotland, he was happy to say, things would be very different. The wheat harvest there had been favourable; but hon. Gentlemen would understand how little that told on the general consumption of the country when he stated that the entire wheat yield of Scotland would not supply more than ten days' consumption for the whole country. From Ireland the accounts were conflicting. It appeared that in the earlier districts there was an average, but that, in the later, the results had been, as disastrous as in England. But the best proof of the deficiency of our own crops would be found in the consumption of foreign corn. He had obtained from the Custom House the comparative returns of imports during the last five years. From these he found that, for the five years preceding last year, the imports of wheat and flour, during the six months from August to February, were on the average 2,438,000 quarters, while for the six months from August to February last they were 5,627,000 quarters, or more than double the average of the preceding five years, and more in those six months than in any one whole year, except the year 1853. Such had been the beneficent results of free trade. While there was famine in our fields there was none among our people. He believed that we had just reaped the worst crop since 1846–47, the time of the failure of the potato crop. He would say a few words on the result of previous deficient harvests. In 1828, 1829, and 1830 there were throe consecutive deficient crops, which were not—as was very much the case with the present deficiency—confined to this country, but extended over Europe. These were followed by the French and Belgian revolutions, and in this country the great agitation for the Reform Bill. From 1836 to 1841 there were six partially deficient crops. In 1839 there were large imports and severe pres- 1091 sure, and discounts rose. In 1845, 1846, and 1847 there were bad crops, with the potato famine in Ireland. There were many failures in 1847, and high rates of discount; and the second French revolution and disturbances in all parts of the Continent took place in the following year. They then came to the period when free trade was in operation. The first deficient harvest after 1848 was in 1853. It was a deficiency of 29 per cent, as tested by the com returns of the Board of Trade. That of the present year he took, by the same test, at 36 per cent; but the deficient harvest of 1853 was followed by a magnificent harvest in 1854, and there was no monetary pressure of any serious character, and no disaster occurred in the country. They now came to 1860, which appeared to be the worst crop we had had since free trade; and, unlike 1853, we had not only a bad crop, but a bad crop following a series of years of great public expenditure, while the deficient crop of 1853 followed a series of years in which there was only a very moderate expenditure. Mr. Porter, in his work on the Progress of the Nation, calculated that during the first fifty years of the present century this country did not on an average receive more than three weeks' consumption of foreign corn in each year. In the present year it would probably receive not less than six months' consumption for the whole population. The demand for meat and wool had naturally turned the attention of the farmers more to that branch of their business. Accompanying that there had been a gradual rise in the rate of agricultural wages throughout the country. Both tended to diminish the breadth of corn. The consequence of this had been that within the last six months we had imported more foreign grain than we had done in the ten years between 1820 and 1830. "We had the satisfaction of knowing that, while there had been a shortcoming in this country, there had been a good crop on the Continent of Europe, and a superabundant crop in the United States of America; so that the people of this country had no reason to fear that bread would, get either excessively dear or scarce. During the six months that elapsed between August and January, 1859, our imports of corn from America amounted to 148,000 quarters; for the corresponding six months of the last and present year our imports were 2,195,000 quarters, for which we paid 1092 nearly twenty times as much as the American corn cost us in the previous year. From Russia and France the imports of corn were also large. Altogether, and looking to the increased prices, we had already paid for our imports of corn of this year an excess of £12,200,000 over last year. In making these largo imports of grain we had necessarily incurred a great expense, and the increase in the price of bread to the people of this country had been very considerable. If we assumed, which he thought we might fairly do, that the wheat consumed in this country amounted to 20,000,000 quarters annually, it was obvious that Is. a quarter on that quantity, when the price rose or fell, amounted to £1,000,000. We had, during the last six months to pay 14s. a quarter more than in the preceding year, so that the cost to the country was thus an increase of £14,000,000. In the last deficient year, 1853, the crops were one-fourth better than this year, and there was then no severe pressure of expenditure upon the country. But now, with a much worse crop, with an increased population, with money at 8 per cent, and apprehensions of commercial distress, with our trade with America interrupted, the pressure upon us would prove much greater than in 1853. In these circumstances the Army and Navy Estimates had been laid before the House. The reductions in these Estimates were very small and did not in any degree correspond to the great loss we had sustained in our resources from the causes he had stated. The circumstances of the country this year were very different from the last. Then there was great uneasiness on the Continent, and we were engaged in a war with China, the expense of which could not be computed. There was now less apprehension of the peace of Europe being disturbed, we had security at home, and the war with China had been brought to a close. In those circumstances, he thought there ought to be a far greater reduction in the expenditure of the country, and he trusted the House would not consent to pass one item of expenditure that was not strictly demanded by the necessity of the country.