THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, he heartily concurred in the expression of regret at the loss sustained by the death of Mr. Fawcett, whom he had had the good fortune to know. The noble Earl said, that in considering the subject before their Lordships, there were two things they should bear in mind. First, they had to consider whether there had been a case made out worthy of inquiry; and then, in the next place, whether the mode suggested was the best way of dealing with the matter? The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Kimberley) deprecated any inquiry, because it would mean a preconceived opinion as to the measures to be adopted. With regard to the condition of the trade and commerce of the country, he was not prepared to agree with the argument that, in accepting the Motion, the question would practically be Free Trade or Protection. He denied that Free Trade ought to be made a sort of idol or fetish, before which everything should be judged. It 1077 seemed to him that nothing could be more unreasonable or absurd than to say that, because they took off the duty on corn 40 years ago, they should not now have an inquiry into commercial and agricultural distress. That depression existed no one could doubt. It was depression in some cases, but in others it was misery and almost ruin; and it affected not one, but many classes. There had been none of that recuperative vigour and force which they had seen on former occasions. The depression which now existed had continued over a period of eight or 10 years, and there was no sign of recovery. On the contrary, every sign there was pointed to a still further downward course, It was true there was abundance in the exports of manufactured articles, just as there had been in the harvest; but, on the other hand, there was a diminution of profits. One might attribute that state of things to one reason, and another to another reason; but they ought, in his opinion, to try and ascertain what this phenomenon, which was new to them, really meant. It had been stated that the cause of the depression was the removal of British capital to foreign countries. In such a case as that no sign could be more alarming; but was it so? The answer was, inquire. By instituting an inquiry, the truth of such statements might be ascertained. Then there was the enormous competition which existed at this moment in many trades. That competition existed in large as well as in small trades. It was only the other day that he heard that the whole of the ironwork of an enormous railway station in the Midlands had been imported into this country from Belgium, and he knew from his own knowledge that iron for railway bridges had been brought over from abroad. It was precisely the same in smaller industries. When all these matters were put together, they produced an alarming result; and when he looked to the terribly severe winter which was in prospect, he, for one, could not contemplate the future without apprehension. He greatly regretted that the Government had opposed the investigation asked for. Scarcely anything had been said about agricultural distress, a subject which would require a long discussion to itself. During the last few years a vast amount of land 1078 had been thrown out of cultivation. No doubt, no blessing could be more greater than that which we had derived from cheap bread, which had carried us through many seasons of distress during the last 30 years. Still we ought to recognize what the throwing of land out of cultivation really meant. During the last 10 years 1,000,000 acres had been changed from arable to grass; 1,000,000 acres of grain would be about one-fourth of the total grain production of the country. All conversion of arable into pasture involved two consequences, one social and the other political. It meant the displacement of so many families and individuals, who were driven either to emigrate, or to contribute to the overcrowding of the large towns. He was not one of those who objected to emigration, for he had seen its advantages; but he did say that the driving of agriculturists and their families into the towns was in itself an unmitigated curse, which increased populations for whom the means of industrial employment were already too limited, and increased the struggle for life, and the general distress. Then it meant another very serious matter; it practically reduced the area of land devoted to the food supply of this country. We already depended for two-thirds of our food supply upon foreign countries, and it was a very great risk for the country to live on the sufferance of foreign nations. It had been said by the Prime Minister that farmers should recover their losses by growing fruit and rearing poultry. He could not understand anyone who knew anything of agricultural matters speaking of such small and potty agricultural pursuits as the substitute for growing corn; and, although these industries might be developed, we could not depend upon them as a means of subsistence, and the bulk of the land in England must always be farmed upon different principles. It was a mere fraction of the land of the country that could be applied to these purposes. Little had been said about our commercial relations with our Colonies; but for many years our Colonies had been our best customers, and a merchant or tradesman generally desired to meet the wants of a customer. Why had not we done anything of the sort? Our Colonial Empire was one of such extent, fertility, and variety of production, that we could get everything we 1079 wanted from them. Canada could supyly us with all the wheat we wanted at 30s. a-quarter, and in time of war we could hold the lines of communication, which would be a much more simple matter than living upon the sufferance of others. One of the best things we could do would be to see if we could not devise some form of commercial connection between the Colonies and the Mother Country. He believed that the case made out by the noble Earl (the Earl of Dunraven) was one worthy of inquiry, and that it was wise to ask for a Joint Committee of both Houses, because the weakness of this House in its knowledge of commercial subjects could be made up by the abundant knowledge in the other House. It would save public discussion and public time if the inquiry were granted, and in proportion as Free Traders were confident of the soundness of their principles, they ought to be willing and eager to submit them to the test of an inquiry. The Government were making a mistake in refusing an investigation on which the heart of the country was more set than it was on any other matter, and public feeling would be intensified by the distress of the coming winter.
§ EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) had called special attention to the arguments that arable land had been turned into pasture. Did he suggest that inquiry might lead to legislation to prevent farmers and landlords cultivating land in the way they thought most profitable, or that this should be done by adopting the obvious course of putting such a duty on pasture as to bring land under the plough when wheat ought never to be sown, as was done by the Corn Laws?
THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, that the inquiry of the noble Earl showed the supreme inattention with which he had listened to his remarks. What he had contended was that the large acreage of land which had gone out of cultivation had partly caused a distress which should be fully inquired into.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, I should be sorry that this debate should close without my saying one word, which is to express the hope that my noble Friend will not push his Motion to a Division. Although I deeply regret that Her Majesty's Government have not granted the inquiry, yet the 1080 very structure of the Motion would have made it obviously inconvenient for us to resolve upon inquiry when we know that Her Majesty's Government are determined to arrest it. I am sorry that the Government have come to that conclusion. But I am more sorry that they have done so on arguments which I am sure will seem to the country to imply considerable scepticism as to the existence of this general depression. The noble Earl (Earl Granville) gave us statistics; he poured upon us all the columns of the Statistical Abstract. But I am sure, that if he had done that in the other House to anything like the same extent, he would have been told by a great authority that he was dealing with this country as though he were dealing with Jupiter or Saturn. He was treating us with scientific formulas, and elaborate quotations of statistics, in order to traverse the existence of a thing which anybody, who moves about in England at all, knows to exist as well as he knows that the sun shines in summer. The noble Earl admits the existence of this distress, at all events among certain classes. He admits its extreme severity. I do not know how much of human misery is necessary, in his mind, in order to call the attention of Parliament to its existence, and the powers of Parliament to inquire into its cause. But the Government, in this debate, have given us a reason against inquiry which certainly cannot be applied to any other department of life. The noble Earl almost angrily corrected my noble Friend for not having asked for this inquiry with a foregone conclusion as to its results. I have heard the advice not to prophesy unless you know. But this is the first time I have ever heard the doctrine propounded that you ought not to inquire unless you know what the result of the inquiry will be. The noble Earl (Earl Granville) used to-day a favourite argument with the Government—a quotation from a speech of Lord Beaconsfield delivered five years ago, which appears now to impress them with a reverence which it did not produce at the time. Lord Beaconsfield spoke in 1879, and although he was a man of marvellous powers, he could not have foreseen what would be the state of things in 1884. At all events, whatever may have been in Lord Beaconsfield's mind on that subject, I can prove that he did not go on 1081 the doctrine of "Never inquire unless you know what the result will be." When the late Government assented to the Royal Commission on Agriculture, he never required that the Duke of Richmond should write down his ideas of the conclusions to which the Commission would come.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYRecommendations which I very much wish you would carry out.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYUpon local taxation. I regret this view of Her Majesty's Government, and I shall remember it when they bring forward any Departmental Inquiry, and I shall bear in mind that it would not have been undertaken unless the result had been known beforehand. But, my Lords, I do not take that view, The objects of inquiry are to ascertain facts and to form conclusions—to ascertain whether legislation is required, and, if so, to lay the basis on which that legislation should rest. But inquiry has another important function—namely, to inform the minds of the people of the country. We are governed by public opinion, and it is our highest interest that that public opinion should be rightly stored with facts and rightly guided. Therefore, it is of great importance that the matters of fact in dispute should, as far as possible, be ascertained, and that the materials for the judgment of the country should be placed before it in a form in which they can be dealt with. The noble Earl (the Earl of Kimberley) cannot ignore the fact that this notion of Fair Trade is gaining force in every quarter—that there is a mass of public opinion forming which, if his view is correct, is most pernicious in its aims, and which ought for that reason to receive the attention of Parliament. I think I am at one with the noble Earl as to the point of Reciprocity, and that the use of countervailing duties would be legitimate as weapons of offence if there were fair grounds to believe that that species of warfare would be successful. The noble Earl's opposition is based upon scepticism as to the success of that kind of warfare. Surely in that he forgets the 1082 experience of his own official career—he forgets the Reciprocity Treaties which he himself has had a hand in negotiating. It was by an offer of reduction of tariffs that the French agreed to a relaxation of their prohibitory and protective system. Therefore, I think that the experience of the noble Earl himself should have warned him that this kind of threat is not so entirely without its influence with Foreign Powers as he is disposed to think. But, on the other hand, I agree with him, as Lord Beaconsfield said five years ago, that the difficulties surrounding any such undertaking are very great and enormously enhanced by the excessive and somewhat imprudent facility with which we have allowed our own free action to be bound. But, at all events, is it not wise that these difficulties should be faced by inquiry, and that it should be shown whether or not they are insuperable? I cannot understand that from any point of view more light would be an evil. We have strange and new phenomena to deal with. We wish the mysteries which attach to our present difficulties should be dissipated. We wish the misery, whose existence is more or less freely admitted, to be explained as far as possible, and I cannot see that any evil whatever could arise from exposing to the free light of inquiry the fiscal policy of the last 40 years, which, if it be sound, will only emerge the stronger from any inquiry which may be held.
THE EARL OF DUNRAVENsaid, that after the debate that had taken place, he was willing to withdraw his Motion.
§ Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
-
c1076
- MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE. 2 words