The Marquess of Normanbypresented a petition from Hull, signed by upwards of 7,600 persons, praying for a repeal of the existing Corn-law. The petitioners stated that the only legitimate object of taxation was for the purposes of revenue, not of protection, and they wished to see all taxes for protection removed.
Lord Broughamsaid, that he entirely agreed with the petitioners in wishing for a total repeal, but he could not agree with them, if they meant to sanction any duty on food for the purposes of revenue.
The Marquess of Normanbyexplained that the petition he had presented the other day from the corporation of Hull was favourable to a fixed duty, but this was for a total repeal: it only drew a distinction between duties for revenue purposes and for protection.
Lord Broughamadmitted, that the only legitimate object of taxation was revenue, but placing a duty on food was the very worst mode in which that revenue could be collected. The exigencies of the State required a revenue, but the Government could not tell whether any would be produced or not by a tax on food, and this applied to all duty, whether it was fixed or levied by a sliding scale. Any duty, on food imported, not only raised the price of that brought in, but also the price of every quarter consumed by the people, so that the people lost on the whole food consumed, and the revenue gained only on the food imported. It raised the price of every quarter, and if the whole calculation that the people consumed a quarter per head per annum were to be maintained, it was nothing more than a poll-tax to the amount of the duty per quarter. If the amount of revenue, say one and a quarter million, must be raised, it would be far better to impose a tax of 1s. a quarter on the wheat ground, which would just make the amount; for although that would still be a poll-tax, and operate most prejudicially against the poorer man, who paid more for food in proportion to his income than the rich, yet it would be preferable to a tax on imports, for it would not raise the price of food beyond the amount that went into the public treasury. He certainly was far from approving of a fixed duty; but he did not on that account like the sliding scale, for he considered that a sliding scale was liable to most of the objections 435 of the fixed duty, and to one or two others, which were peculiar to itself. Seeing the President of the Board of Trade in his place he would ask one question. By the votes of the other House of Parliament he saw that a list of new places was given from which averages were to be taken, several counties such as Rutland and Hereford, and Stafford, and Shropshire, from which there were no returns now, were to furnish them; and whereas there was only one place now making returns from Wiltshire, there were in future to be eight or ten. He wished to know whether those places which were not in the present list of towns, but were proposed to he added, were places in which, generally speaking, the price of corn was lower than in the towns from which the averages had been already taken? Because if this were so, the consequence would be that there would be considerably lower averages, and a tendency to exclude corn. He entirely approved of lowering the duty, and he held that nothing but the grossest prejudice would make a man deny that lowering the duty would be a great advantage.
§ The Earl of Riponhad no objection to answer the question of the noble and learned Lord. The principle which had induced them to propose an addition to the number of towns was in order to prevent, as far as could be done, the possibility and to diminish the probability, of frauds. With respect to the selection of the new towns, it had not been done with any fraudulent design or intention, nor from any notion that the averages were lower there, but because Ministers had no doubt they would be considerably lessening fraud, if they greatly extended the number of places to be worked upon. They went upon the plan, as far as they had the means of judging, of taking the principal market towns, which were likely to give a fairer view of the real price throughout the country. If the noble Lord had looked at the list of towns he would have seen that, though there were towns in agricultural districts, yet there were also towns in important manufacturing and maritime districts, where the price was usually higher than in the agricultural places. The principle, he repeated, on which they had acted was neither to increase nor to alter the averages, but to give a fairer view of what they were, and to prevent frauds.
Lord Broughamhad not imputed any fraudulent design to the noble Lord or his Colleagues; but still the tendency might be, without any design, to lower the averages as he had described. If they selected the small agricultural towns, where grain was usually cheaper, the plan might have this tendency in its operation, although it might have been proposed with a different view.
§ The Earl of Riponsaid, that nothing would more clearly show the absurdity of supposing that the selection of a number of small towns in which the sales were inconsiderable would lessen the averages, than a description of the mode in which the averages were struck. This was done by adding together the number of quarters sold, and also all the money received, and then dividing one by the other. Therefore, putting in the small towns, where only limited quantities of grain were sold, would have only an imperceptible influence on the averages.
The Earl of Radnorthought, that if these towns made an imperceptible difference one way, they would make an imperceptible difference in another; if they had an imperceptible operation in lowering the averages, they would have an imperceptible operation likewise in preventing frauds. He had no supposition that these towns were selected because corn was usually sold at a lower price there; they were taken, doubtless, with the view which the noble Earl had stated, but he had not the least doubt that the result would be a lowering of the averages, and a consequent disadvantage to the people. If they took the prices in the small agricultural towns, they would take the prices in those towns which had pitched markets, where the corn was usually two or three shillings lower than in other places. He doubted too whether the proposed plan would have the tendency to prevent frauds. He believed that these frauds had operated beneficially for the consumer; these frauds tended to lower the duty on corn, and thus to introduce more wheat into the country than would otherwise have come. They operated beneficially in two ways: they were founded on the purchase and introduction of foreign corn, which might, perhaps, be injurious to the farmers, but which was advantageous to the people, and by raising the price they opened a greater field for our supply. However much, therefore, they might reprobate these fraudulent transactions, 437 the people had benefitted by these frauds. But there was another mode by which this new sliding scale would make the bill more stringent than it was before. By the Corn-bill protection was given to the arable farmers. Now, if protection is given, it is given against the interests with which the arable farmer had to contend. He had, among other things, to contend against persons cultivating grass land. Under the present laws grassland had a perfect monopoly in cattle, sheep, &c. He saw, however, by the public journals, that it had been announced in another place, that when the tariff was under consideration, it was intended to make an alteration in the law as to these articles, to do away with prohibition, and apply a duty They, therefore, intended to lower the protection of the pasture farmer as against the arable farmer. Thus, the arable land would not require so much protection as it now had against the pasture land. It appeared to him, that in divers ways, the new sliding scale would be a more stringent and more oppresive law, and of greater disadvantage to the people, than the old scale, whilst it would still leave open the door to all the frauds and be liable to all the objections which attached to any sliding scale. He could not conceive why the Government had introduced this bill. The right hon. Gentleman who moved it declared that he expected no benefit from it; he said the distresses of the country did not arise from the state of the Corn-laws, and that an alteration would do no good. Then why did he introduce it? He said that agriculture did not want so much protection as it obtained; but if that protection had done no harm to any one else, why was it taken away? He (Lord Radnor) believed that the farmers would be better off without any protection; but with the right hon. Gentleman this was pure innovation---for the purpose of innovation alone. Many who were opposed to the Corn-laws might be rejoiced at this; but why on earth the Gentleman who thought that the present Corn-law was beneficial, and that no good could come of the alteration, should propose it, he was at a loss to conceive, and he was more at a loss, because a short time ago her Majesty's Government had acted on a different principle, and had taken off taxes upon food. In September last a discovery was made that there was a great 438 scarcity in this kingdom of live turtle. Great dismay was produced. Live turtle was wanted, and live turtle was not to be bad; preserved turtle there was in plenty; but preserved turtle paid a duty, while live turtle did not. Whether live turtle came under the same category as turbot and lobster sauce, to which he had formerly drawn their Lordships' attention, he could not say. but it was discovered that there was no duty upon live turtle, though there was a duty of 20 per cent, upon preserved. What was to be done? The Treasury was memorialised. The Treasury referred the matter to the Board of Customs; the Board of Customs referred it back to the Treasury; they in turn sent it to the Board of Trade; the Board of Trade deliberated upon it; and after all the consideration which the importance of the subject deserved, because it involved the whole principle, it was laid before the Cabinet. He could well understand when the Cabinet was assembled how one noble Lord, the disciple of Mr. Huskisson, declared that this was a question of free trade, and that it was against all principle to levy the duty. He could fancy a noble Duke, not now in the Cabinet, saying, "Why, if preserved turtle be admitted duty free to feed the Lord Mayor, why should not corn be admitted duty free to feed the people? Oh ! this will never do." He could conceive the Chancellor of the Exchequer looking at the duty of 20 per cent., and saying, that in the present deplorable state of the public finances such a reduction was a matter of great importance; whilst the free trade would be supported with great power by the noble Earl opposite, who would declare that to impose a duty on preserved turtle was to impose a tax upon food, and of taxes upon food he had never heard in any country or at any time. How long the debate was carried on he did not know, but the result was, that a letter was addressed to the Commissioners of Customs, dated the 14th of October, 1841, by Sir George Clerk, stating that the petition of Henry Gunter, praying that preserved turtle might be admitted duty free, had been referred to the Board of Trade, and that my Lords acquiesced in the opinion of the Board that preserved turtle should be admitted on the same terms as live turtle; that was, duty free.
§ The Earl of Riponobserved, that there was a duty on live turtle.
The Earl of RadnorWould the noble Earl tell him what that duty was? He had inquired of a custom-house officer, and was told that there was no duty. The noble Lord did not answer his question; at any rate the duty was reduced. He (the Earl of Radnor) did not quarrel with this; it was a little step, but it was a step in the right direction, it was one step towards letting in food for the people; for he did not suppose it would be denied that if an alderman ate more turtle, he would eat less of something else; and if the change was to admit preserved turtle without any duty, the whole principle would have been admitted. It was a small step, still it was a step towards relieving the distresses of the people. He did not find that any other step was taken for several months, and he had to complain that one was then taken in a diametrically opposite direction, and in a matter, as he thought, of some importance. He alluded to the relief afforded to the Spitalfields weavers. He had seen a letter in the public papers signed by the same Sir George Clerk, dated in January last, in which it was said that the Lords of the Treasury had directed the Board of Ordnance to furnish several hundred blankets, palliasses, and sheets from the Ordnance stores, to supply the wants of the distressed weavers of Spitalfields. This appeared to him to be a gross misapplication of the stores purchased with the public money for the Board of Ordnance. Why should they give those stores to the weavers of Spitalfields any more than to the handloom weavers and the manufacturers of Paisley, of Glasgow, of Manchester, of Dewsbury, and of all other places in which there was distress? He had inquired, and been told, that this was not the only instance in which the same thing had been done; he saw by a printed memorial which he held in his hand, from Paisley, that they applied to have the same thing done, because it had been done in 1826; but because something improper had once been done, that was no reason why it should be repeated now. Then it was said that these articles were worthless. If they were worthless, how came they to find their road to the Ordnance stores? At any rate, it was no great kindness to give a worthless thing to the poor people. When her Majesty's Ministers made up their minds to a principle, they ought to adopt it in all cases. Now, the people of Paisley 440 had petitioned to take corn in store there and in Liverpool out of bond, without paying duty. He did not know what official reply had been given, but he had seen a letter, signed Robert Peel, stating that the request could not be complied w the Before their Lordships adjourned, he meant to move not only for copies of this correspondence, but also that relating to the relief from the Ordnance stores, and the turtle. On the main question, he repeated, that for the reasons he had stated, he had not the slightest doubt that the new Corn-law Bill was more stringent than the last, and that it would tend to raise the averages, and to exclude a great portion of wheat that found its road here.
§ The Earl of Riponwith respect to the correspondence upon the turtle, he had no objection to its production. All the noble Lord's jokes, however, he had before read in the newspapers [The Earl of Radnor had not read them]. Great wits jumped. When he had read them himself, he believed that he should hear them repeated in the House during the Session. His memory was not sufficiently accurate, and he was not able to carry his mind to the wonderfully important matters to which the noble Earl had alluded. If the noble Lord had condescended to give notice of his motion, he would have examined the documents, and would have been able to say whether there was any duty or not upon turtle, and what were the circumstances which gave rise to this important question. He believed, however, that a doubt arose as to what the duty on preserved turtle ought to be, whether it were to be taken as fish, or some other insignificant question of that kind, of no great interest except to the parties having preserved turtle. Questions of this trivial nature were not unfrequently before the Board. Some years ago a curious question had arisen. It regarded the importation of a quantity of ice from Norway. A doubt was started what duty it ought to pay, and the point was referred to the Treasury, and from thence to the Board of Trade, and it was ultimately decided, that the ice might be intro_ duced on the payment of the duty on dry goods.
§ The Earl of Riponadmitted that. The other documents to which the noble Earl 441 had alluded, related to a graver question than the mere importation of turtle. He was not aware of the particular circumstances of the case, but it could not be denied that there were many objections in principle to giving relief in the way referred to. He remembered, when the utmost distress existed in the west of Ireland, provisions were purchased and sent to the starving inhabitants, who had no food, and no means of obtaining it; the decision to relieve arose, therefore, out of the necessity of the case. With this important subject, it was not at all fair to mix up a ridiculous question about turtle.
The Marquess of Normanbyobserved, that the petitioners prayed for the repeal of all duties on corn, excepting generally as far as they were imposed for the purposes of revenue.
§ Lord Beaumontremarked, that markets sometimes differed for different reasons. At Doncaster, for instance, the price of grain was always higher than elsewhere, because the farmers gave over measure. One object of the Government plan was, to do away with the frauds of the factors, and if that could be accomplished, it would be a great gain; but he feared that the factors would be too many for the Government, and that no plan would be devised which they would not be able, by combination, to defeat. The true mode of ascertaining the real price of grain was, to obtain the return from the grower.
§ Petition laid on the Table.