HL Deb 21 March 1826 vol 15 cc36-40
Lord King

said, he had to present to their lordships a petition against the Corn-laws from one of the largest parishes in the metropolis. The petitioners stated, that they had confidence in the good intentions of his majesty's government. He also had confidence in ministers, and he was glad to see that they were likely to receive real support from without; for otherwise they might expect little from within parliament. He sincerely trusted they would not be deterred from proceeding in their course, and that the public would not slacken their efforts; for, unless ministers were supported by petitions, it would be impossible for them to carry their good intentions into effect. In consequence of the part he had taken on this question, a great deal of advice had been offered to him by different persons. Some had requested him to desist, hinting that his speeches were like sermons in Lent, and repeated as often. Others were of opinion that he had a vicious propensity to make corn cheap; and as they thought that a vicious propensity in him, he must suppose that they considered a disposition to make corn dear a virtuous propensity. A third party complained that he treated these worthy Corn-laws like a miscreant at the bar of the Old Bailey, giving them all kinds of bad names. He was blamed for stigmatizing them with more aliases than ever was given to a thief on his trial: for he had called them the Corn-laws, alias the bread-tax, alias the dead-weight, alias the landlords' tax, and, worst of all, alias the job of jobs. Now, as so much kindness had been shown to him in the way of advice, he wished to give the House some good advice in return. In the first place, he would beg of noble lords to reflect what the situation of the country would be if the price of corn were to rise considerably? That such an event might happen was no vain fear. He could state it as matter of fact, that there was at this time less corn than usual in granaries in the country; that the markets were less crowded with supplies; and that in the warehouses there was less corn than had ever been known at any former period. Now he would seriously ask the House to consider what the state of things would be if corn were to rise considerably before harvest? By such a rise, this country would be thrown into a state of much greater difficulty than it experienced in 1796, 1797, and 1801, because the population was now much greater than at that time; and because there had been for a long time past no importation from abroad. Besides, he believed that a sufficient supply could not be at once obtained by importation; for he understood that it would appear from the report which the noble lord opposite had promised to Jay on the table, that the state of the foreign markets did not hold out much expectation of large importations, and, at least, that they could not be looked to for any sudden supply to a large extent. But it was above all things to be recollected, that according to the present law, our ports could not be opened, and no foreign corn could be admitted, until the price rose in this country to 80s.—to an amount which, in the present state of things, would be a starving price, indicative of a period of famine. He had lately seen a report made to the French minister of the interior, in which the average price of corn in different countries was stated. The price was given in franks, but the proportion showed the difference in several parts of Europe. According to this statement, the price in England which was 27f. 32c., was higher than in any other country. At Amsterdam the average was 12f. 32c. In France it was higher; the average there being nearly 16f. The only place in Europe in which the price of corn approached the height at which it stood in England, was Spain, under the misgovernment of Ferdinand. Thus their lordships divided between them and that despot the disgrace of making corn dearer in England and in Spain than in any other country of Europe. How was this disgrace to be wiped off, and the evil of high prices to be corrected? The only resource their lordships had for accomplishing that object, was a revision of the Corn-laws. That, however, he believed, would not be done until the noble earl opposite was resolved to clear away all the lumber and cobwebs which embarrassed and darkened the cabinet—until he dismissed all useless members, to go, if they liked, to king Ferdinand, whose ministers they were well fitted to be. If the noble earl would take this advice, he would, when he came to the task of revision, find that House as plastic as a piece of potter's clay. But if he did not choose to do this, there was another way in which the business might be managed. When the usual circular at the commencement of next session came to be written, the noble earl had better address his old friends in these terms:—"My lord, parliament is to meet for the despatch of very important business on the 3rd of February next, when your lordship's absence is most earnestly requested." All that was needful was to get his old friends to stay away. This was his advice to the noble earl; but he had said that he would give advice to the House, and he would now give it in one word. His advice to them was simply "Do justice." What right had that House, or any legislative assembly, to devise means to raise the price of food? It would be a breach of trust, if it could be supposed that so monstrous a proposition was acted upon by any parties in parliament, as to make corn dear for their own advantage. Such a course, if persisted in, was calculated to bring on one of those political convulsions, in which a lawless power might step in, as was once done in another place, and say to one, "You are an extortioner," to another "You are a tithemonger" "Get you gone, and give place to honester men."

Lord Calthorpe

thought, that the discussion of the subject had better be postponed to the next session. He did not think it was for the interest of the landlords to maintain the present Corn-laws, but that importation, under a moderate duty, would be more to their advantage. He did not conceive that those laws had been proposed from any interested motive* On the contrary, he believed that they were submitted to parliament under the honest conviction that they were not only good for the landed interest, but for the public at large. There certainly would be great evil in allowing the question to remain long in its present state. If any delusion existed on the subject, the best way to remove it would be to submit the question to the investigation of a com- mittee. The noble earl had very properly taken this course on a recent occasion. To neglect to institute an inquiry was not so much abstaining from discussion as shutting out that light which it was their lordships' duty to seek. He thought he was not reflecting on the agricultural classes of this country, when he said that they were not so enlightened, or so ready to form just views on great national questions, as other classes of the community. Ministers ought not to hesitate to enter upon a revision of the Corn-laws; for if they were even to be defeated in both Houses of parliament, the attempt to lower the duty would raise them still higher in the public esteem. He did not expect that any great difference in the price of corn would be the result of an alteration of the law; but he regarded that alteration as an indispensable step in the system of wise policy which ministers had adopted with respect to commerce.

The Earl of Limerick

thought, that the first noble lord's obvervations, though very inflammatory, carried with them their own cure. He was struck with the singular coincidence between the noble lord's speech, and the name of the place whence the petition came. It was the petition of the parish of St. Luke, and much of what had fallen from the noble lord appeared to be strongly impregnated with the quality which was generally supposed to abound in that parish. The noble lord had been very free with his advice; but he was satisfied that both his majesty's ministers and the House had too much sense to take it.

Lord Clifden

approved of the determination of his majesty's ministers to postpone the discussion of the corn question to the next session. The consideration of the currency occupied parliament to such a degree as would render it very inconvenient to enter upon a revision of the Corn-laws. He hoped, however, that the subject would be brought forward early next session, and that importation on a moderate duty would be allowed. He understood that the gentlemen who had been sent abroad to make inquiries, were of opinion that no such quantity of foreign corn could be introduced as would hurt the agricultural interest. Some gentlemen said that the agricultural interest would be ruined by importations. He did not believe this. The ports had been opened for barley, and since that period, barley had been at 52s. per quarter. It had afterwards fallen to 32s., but that was not in consequence of importation. He was in Munster when the ports were opened for the admission of oats, and there the people all expected to be ruined. They were horror-struck, and said that oats would be down to 5s. the barrel or 15s. a quarter; but this was not the case. He was not one of those who thought that corn must be very cheap before the labourers could be comfortable; but until they had the value of a bushel and a half of wheat a week, they could not be comfortable. As long as they only received about 7s. a week, when wheat was at 10s. a bushel, their lot must be miserable. This, or worse than this, was the case in the south and west of England. The farmers gave the labourers 5s. a week; and made up their wages out of the poor rates.

Ordered to lie on the table.