Lords Sitting of 5 March 1822

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.
Lord Erskinesaid, he had fifteen petitions to present, complaining of Agricultural distress, and he could not help thinking that the petitioners were peculiarly entitled to their lordships' attention, inasmuch as they had failed in their endeavours to obtain any remedy from the other House. His lordship quoted the first paragraph of the report of the agricultural committee of the House of Commons of last session, acknowledging the reality of the distress of the agricultural interests, and that the receipts of an arable farm would not pay the expences of cultivation, which must be defrayed out of the capital of the farmer, and then referred to page 16 of the report stating, that it would be for the legislature to consider at a future period of establishing protecting duties, instead of the present system. Thus the evil was immediate, and yet the committee agreed in postponing the remedy. Now, what would be said of a physician who, after telling his patient that he was in great danger, and could not in all probability live a week, should afterwards tell him, that he would at a future period take his case into consideration? The petitioners did not complain of taxation, though they felt its pressure as well as others; but the fact was, that all that retrenchment could do would not be enough to relieve them; they wanted to be protected like our commerce and manufactures, and no more. He had heard, that it had been proposed in the revived agricultural committee to reduce the protecting duty from 80 s. to 67 s.; although foreign corn could be imported at
916
35 s. surely, when the farmers were nearly ruined when the protecting price was 80 s. it was a strange way of relieving them to reduce it to 67 s. What did their lordships look to but their rents? But if this system was to go on, that House might in a short time be called the house of paupers instead of the House of Lords, for it would be impossible to obtain any rent. He had read the works of Mr. Webbe Hall, and he must say that that gentleman had been much misrepresented; his object being merely that the agricultural interests of the country should have the same protection as our commercial and manufacturing interests. He agreed with those who urged the necessity of retrenchment. Their lordships must carry retrenchment as far as possible, but he did not think it possible that any retrenchment which could be made would be sufficient, if they let in foreign corn. A suspicion existed, that foreign corn had been introduced under the name of Irish; and he hoped the committee would pay attention to this point.
Ordered to lie on the table.