public revenue, but by the capitals and enterprize of individuals; if they look, at the same time, to the unexampled growth of manufactures and commerce-in the contemplation of this augmentation of internal wealth, which defies all Illustration from comparison with any former portion of our history, or of the history of any other state; Your Committee may entertain a doubt, (a doubt, however, which they wish to state with that diffidence which a subject so extensive naturally imposes upon their judgment,)—whether the only solid foundation of the flourishing state of Agriculture, is not laid in abstaining, as much as possible, from interference, either by protection or prohibition, with the application of capital, in any branch of industry?whether all fears for the decline of Agriculture, either from temporary vicissitudes to which all speculations are liable, or from the extension of other pursuits of general industry, are not, in a great degree, imaginary ?whether commerce can expand, manufactures thrive, and great public works be undertaken, without furnishing to the skill and labour which the capitals thus employed put in motion, increased means of paying for the productions of the land?-whether the principal part of those productions which contribute to the gratification of the wants and desires of the different classes of the community, must not necessarily be drawn from our own soil, the demand increasing with the population, as the population must increase with the riches of the country?-whether a great part of the same capital which is employed in supporting the industry connected with manufactures, commerce, and public works, does not, passing by a very rapid course into the hands of the occupier of the soil, serve also as a capital for the encouragement of Agriculture?-whether, in our own country in former times, and in other naturally fertile countries up to the present time, Agriculture has not languished from the want of such a stimulus ?—and whether, in those countries, the proprietors of the land are not themselves poor, and the people wretched, in proportion, as from want of capital, their labour is more exclusively confined to raising from their own soil, the means of their own scanty subsistence?

59. If these questions should be answered in the affirmative, it follows,

that the present solidity and future improvement of our national wealth depend on the continuance of that union by which our Agricultural prosperity is so closely connected with the preservation of our manufacturing and commercial greatness.

60. It will be for the House to appreciate this view of the subject, to watch the progress of events affecting any of the great branches of our industry, and, in its wisdom, to determine, according to circumstances, how far, and by what arrangements, it can best reconcile those considerations of state policy which make it desirable that this country should not become too habitually or extensively dependent, for the subsistence of its people on foreign supply, with the necessity of guarding, as much as possible, against creating by artificial means, too great a difference between the cost of that subsistence here and in other countries;-not only in regard to the people themselves, but also from the risk which must be in proportion to that difference, of driving much of the capital, by which their industry and labour are supported, to seek employment in other countries. For there cannot be a doubt that this difference operates, in the same manner as taxation, to diminish the profits of capital in this country, and there can be as little doubt, that though capital may migrate, the unoccupied population will remain;-and remain to be maintained by the landed interest, upon whose resources, diminished in proportion to diminished demand, this additional burthen would principally fall.

61. In some of the Petitions referred to Your Committee, the depression and distress of all those concerned in Agriculture, are mainly ascribed to the extent of our public burdens coupled with their diminished means of bearing them.

62. The general influence of taxation upon the state of the country, is a subject too extensive to be entered upon by Your Committee, without exceeding the bounds prescribed to them by the nature of the reference made to them by the House. They lament its weight, because, however imposed, taxes must necessarily abridge the resources and comforts of those by whom they are ultimately paid. But the question for more immediate consideration is, whether, in the distribution of this unavoidable evil, the profits

of farming capital have been heretofore, or can permanently be more affected, than the profits of capital engaged in other branches of industry. They cannot discover any grounds for be lieving that, during the war, when taxation was carried to its greatest amount, the profit of farming capital was lowered in its relative proportion to the profit of other active capitals; and whatever may be the temporary effect of a casual derangement, it is obvious that this proportion must permanently be maintained, because the application of capital would otherwise be changed from one mode of employment to the other, until the proper level was restored.

63. So far therefore as taxes fall upon the profits of the active capitals of the country, whatever may be the objects upon which they immediately attach, or the parties by whom they are, in the first instance, paid, they operate, in their ultimate effect, as an abatement of those profits, equally affecting the trading, the manufacture ing, and the farming interests, by diminishing their means either of enjoyment, or of accumulating further capital by savings from their annual incomes.

64. The manner and extent in which other classes of the community, and other sources of income may be affected by taxation, do not come directly within the scope of the present enquiry; but Your Committee think it necessary to notice a doctrine which has prevailed in some quarters,-that the price of corn in this country, in order to remunerate the grower, must increase in the same ratio as the amount of our public revenue, so that if the latter be doubled, the price of corn must be doubled also. If this assumption were well founded, it would follow, that, exclusively of any change in the value of money, the remunerating price in 1821, would be nearly onethird lower than it was in 1814, taxes not much short of that proportion to the whole of our revenue having been taken off in Great Britain since that year. But without denying that the price of corn may be in some degree affected by adding to our general taxation, and that any charges particularly paid by the farmer, such as tithes and poor rates, must tend more directly to raise that price, it is obvious, from what has been already stated, that the cost of growing corn in any

country is regulated by the amount of capital necessary to produce it upon lands paying no rent, and that it is the price of the portion of corn which is so raised that determines the price of all other corn; and that an increase of general taxes, affecting alike the profits of capital in all the different branches of industry, would not necessarily raise the price of the particular produce or any one. The price of corn, therefore, might fall in a country, notwithstanding additional taxation, if the quantity required for the consumption of that country could be raised, either by the cultivation of more fertile and productive soils, or by the application of a diminished capital to the same soil, in consequence of increased skill or improvements in husbandry.

65. In fact, no rise in the price of corn appears to have taken place during three of the wars in which this country was engaged during the last century, compared with the prices of the years preceding and succeeding those wars; and during the last of them, the American war, prices were lower than during the peace. This circumstance is the more to be remarked, as there never was perhaps a period at which the burthen of taxation appeared to press more heavily upon the resources of the country, and in which an annual increase of taxes, accompanied with an annual diminution of revenue, and a general stagnation of improvements, indicated more strongly that a part of those taxes must have been paid out of the capital, and not out of the income of the nation.

66. On the other hand, however immense the expenditure of the last war, it is impossible to review the vast private undertakings, begun and completed during that war, in every branch of industry, without feeling that those funds by which alone the productive powers of the country can be put in motion, must have been greatly increased, and that the accumulation of national capital, however impaired by loans, or retarded by taxes, has, upon the whole, been large and progressive during that period,

67. If in the same space of time the national capital of some other country has not increased, or has increased only in a much smaller proportion, the mere comparison of the nominal amount of the public revenue of that country with the public revenue of this country, as they stood at the com

mencement of the period, and as they now stand, might lead to an unfair inference in respect to the degree in which each country has been affected by increased taxation. If the weight of the public burthens of a country be considered in reference to its population only, then (with the exception of Holland perhaps,) England is the most taxed portion of Europe; but if it be measured by the aggregate of national capital, or income arising from capital, divided by the total number of people among whom that capital or income is distributed, it may then be doubted, whether, upon such an average, the proportion of tax to the income or capital of each individual, be not less in England than in several states of the continent, or even in Ireland; and whether, it be materially greater now than at former periods, when both the capital, the population, and the public revenue of England, were far below what they now are. But whatever might be the consolatory result of such a comparison, if the means of making it could be accurately ascertained, and however sanguine a hope Your Committee may entertain that peace will afford increased facility and encouragement to further accumulation, it is not less the duty of Government directly to aid that accumulation, by diminishing our expenditure, and thus both to improve the comforts and to stimulate the skill and enterprise of those classes, by whose industry and savings the capital of the whole kingdom is augmented. This duty, important at all times, appears to Your Committee to be still more so, under the present circumstances of the country; for, whilst they are desirous of correcting the mistaken opinion, that the depression under which our Agriculture now labours, is either exclusively or principally to be attributed to taxation, they cannot disguise from themselves, that the weight of the public burthens of the country, their nominal amount remaining the same, must be more severely felt, in proportion as the money incomes derived from trading, farming, and manufacturing capital and industry, are diminished. No exertion, therefore, should be omitted to endeavour to reduce those burthens, as nearly as circumstances will permit, in the degree in which such incomes may have been reduced; for, in considering this subject, it is important to bear in mind, that the general amount and real pres

sure of taxation have been positively increased in the proportion of the improved value of our currency.

68. Your Committee cannot conclude the Observations which they have found it their duty to submit to the House, without observing, that most of the Petitions referred them', complain of the inadequate and injurious operation of the present Corn Law, and pray generally for protection, not for grain only, but for all the productions of our Agriculture, equal to the protection given to the manufactures of this country.

69. Within this principle, the Petitioners appear to be friendly to an open trade; but in the application of it, as expounded in some of the petitions, and illustrated in the examination of some of the witnesses, Your Committee cannot but apprehend, that the duties which they contemplate, would be altogether prohibitory.

70. It cannot be necessary to enter into any statements to show, that, practically, this would be the result, in all but seasons of scarcity, of a fixed duty of 40s. a quarter upon wheat. Your Committee will merely repeat what they have already stated, that when the trade in corn with the continent was open, subject to the scale of duties imposed by the Acts of 1773, 1791 and 1804, and in force till 1815, there never was an importation of foreign_corn to any amount during the short intervals when the high duties were demandable; and yet those duties at no part of the time exceeded 24s. 3d. per quarter. To this fact, they will only add, that what is proposed, in addition to the amount of the duty, namely, that it should be permanent, "whatever may he the price," is a proposition which Your Committee are confident the legislature could never entertain, nor any considerable portion of the community ever countenance.

71. The suggestions with respect to duties equally prohibitory on every other article the production of the soil of this couutry, all come under the same principle, and are open to the same objection. The principle would, in fact, go far to annihilate commercial intercourse altogether; and is moreover founded, as it appears to Your Committee, upon a mistaken statement, as well as an erroneous view of what is deemed protection to our manufac

tures.

[C]

72. In the first place, they feel the more warranted in affirming, that the argument of the petitioners rests in part upon a misconception of facts; as they observe, that one of the witnesses, in order to illustrate his ideas and the wishes of the petitioners, has furnished a table of the duties payable on foreign manufactured articles, of which several are subject to direct heavy duties of excise in this country; and upon which the importation duty, as for instance upon the article of glass, is imposed in a great measure to countervail the duty upon that article manufactured in this kingdom.

73. But the main grounds upon which Your Committee are disposed to think that the House will look with some mistrust to the soundness of this principle, are, first, that it may be well doubted, whether (with the exception of silk) any of our considerable manufactures derive benefit from this assumed protection in the markets of this country: for how could the foreign manufactures of cotton, of woollens, of hardware, compete with our own in this country, when it is notorious that we can afford to undersell them in the products of those great branches of our manufacturing industry, even in their own markets, notwithstanding that cotton and wool are subject to a direct duty on importation, not drawn back upon their export in a manufactured state, as well as to all the indirect taxation, which affects capital in these branches, in common with that capital which is employed in raising the productions of the soil? Secondly, that there exists this most essential difference between the effect of protection given to the manufacturer, (even if he did not enjoy from natural causes, a preference in the home market) and the attempt at a similar protection and monopoly to the produce of the soil;that in all employment of capital, either in trade or manufactures, profits are limited by competition. If, for any length of time, or from any circumstances, profits are increased, in any particular branch, above the accustomed average, additional capital seeks employment in that branch, and profits are again speedily reduced to their former level. This would equally be the case if the demand for that particular article were doubled; and it may further frequently happen, as we have witnessed of late years, (in all goods, for instance, wrought of iron and cot.

ton,) that, owing to discoveries in mechanical and chemical science, and improvements in the manufacture, an immense increase of consumption may be concomitant with, and probably, in a great degree, the result of, a great fall in price.

74. The same principle, it is true, applies to the capital and business of the farmer; but with this important distinction, that the price of corn, taken for any series of years, is necessarily regulated by the expense of production upon the lands which, at that price, make no return beyond the charge of raising it, together with the ordinary profit of the capital employed upon those lauds. The cultivator of such lands, for the time, is upon a footing with the merchant and the manufacturer; but if the demand for corn were doubled, it would force into cultivation poorer lands, requiring a larger capital to raise the same quantity of produce; the price of that produce would determine the price of the whole, or those poorer lands could not be maintained in cultivation; for there cannot permanently be two rates of profit in the same occupation. It is sufficient for Your Committee to point out this ground of difference, and to leave it to the judgment of the House, in connexion with the observations which they have already submitted in a former part of this Report.

75. Another wish expressed by some of the Petitioners, and some of the witnesses, is for the repeal of that clause in the last Act, which allows the warehousing in the United Kingdom of foreign corn, when it cannot be taken out for home consumption.

76. The grounds upon which this alteration of the law is suggested, for the relief of the British grower are twofold. 1st. That the foreign corn ab. sorbs the capitals of the dealers which would otherwise be employed in speculating in corn of British growth; and, secondly, that it enables them to hold, in the warehouses of this country, a large stock of foreign wheat, the notoriety of which depresses the markets, from the dread of its being poured in so soon as it is set free by the prices rising above 80s.

77. The first objection proceeds upon two assumptions, both of which appear to Your Committee doubtful; 1st, that the capitals of the dealers are absorbed in this foreign speculation; and 2ndly, that, if not so employed, they would

1

speculate with them in British corn. Your Committee conceive that there is no fixed amount of capital assigned to this trade, and that it is governed by the same principles which stimulate 1. the application of capital in all other branches of foreign or domestic commerce. The value of all the foreign corn now in this country, which cannot be sold for home consumption till the price shall, for some weeks, have exceeded 80s. a quarter, is probably less than one million sterling. British corn, by the last return, was about 53s. per quarter. Can there be a doubt, if an impression prevailed generally, that it would rise to 79s. before the next harvest, that abundant capital would be found for speculation; and is not the want of it, at this moment, rather to be received as evidence of an apprehension, that in the event of another productive harvest, the present low prices would not be improved?

78. Upon the second objection, Your Committee have only to remark, that it is unquestionably true, that the present accumulation of a great quantity of foreign corn, the surplus of the two or three last harvests on the continent, would have a considerable influence upon the prices here, in the event of the ports being opened in consequence of a deficient harvest. But the question is, whether that influence would not be nearly, if not altogether, the same, under that contingency, if that accumulation were altogether at the shipping ports of Holland, or other parts of the continent, instead of being divided between them and the warehouses of this country? Should the prices here be fluctuating between 70s. and 80s. some small difference might perhaps be produced by the knowledge of the accumulation in our own warehouses, stimulating the British grower to bring his own corn to market, to keep down the price when it was approaching to the import rate, in order to shut out the foreign supply. But in this respect, accurate information must be to him an advantage. The time might also be a little varied at which a part of the foreign corn, upon the ports being opened, might find its way hither. But this difference would not be considerable, the ports of Flanders and Holland being as convenient for the Thames as most of our own ports from which corn is shipped for London.

79. Having stated the grounds upon which Your Committee are of opinion

that the expectations which have been entertained of advantage from the repeal of this clause, are not likely to be realized, they conceive that the views in which it was introduced of making this country a deposit of foreign grain, from which either our own occasional wants, or those of other nations, might be supplied, are, independent of other considerations, too much in unison with our general warehousing system, from which this country derives such important commercial advantages, to be abandoned, without further proof of their prejudicial effects to our Agriculture, than any which Your Committee have been able to collect from the evidence.

1

80. It is material to observe, also, that the warehousing of foreign corn in this country, has this great advantage, that it places the supply of our wants, to the extent of the quantity warehoused, out of the reach of foreign states, putting it out of their power, in a season of scarcity, to aggravate the pressure of those wants, either by prohibiting the export of corn, or by imposing a heavy duty upon that export. The fact of upwards of 100,000 of quarters of wheat having been recently sent from the warehouses of this country to the Mediterranean, further shows that this facility of deposit is not a matter of indifference to the commerce and navigation of this country.

81. An impression prevails in many quarters, that large quantities of corn, imported since February 1819, have recently been introduced into home consumption. This could only have occurred by a fraudulent evasion of the law. Of the existence of this practice to a great extent, Your Committee have received many intimations. They appear, however, to rest upon vague rumours, which the parties, when called upon, have not come forward, or not been able to substantiate, except in one instance, the particulars of which Your Committee forbear to state, as it is understood that the persons concerned in the attempt, are now under prosecution. They will only observe, that the quantity stated to have been withdrawn, was inconsiderable, and that it appears to them, if further security be requisite agast the recurrence of this fraud, that regulations for that purpose may easily be devised and introduced into the Bill, now before the House, for better ascertaining the averages.