REPEAL THE CORN-LAW, WHAT BECOMES OF THE FARMER?
A CORRESPONDENT, alive to the mischief of the Corn-laws, dreads the consequences of repealing them to the agricultural tenantry. Ile is a person . of experience in the ways of landlords, and be- lieves that although the price of wheat would be materially lowered, nearly the same rents would still he extorted from the occupiers of land. To them the result would be ruin ; yet, such is the eagerness of' competition for farms, there would be no lack of applicants for the succession, at perhaps even higher rents Knowing this, the needy landlord would only in rare instances be. compelled to lower his demands; he would reduce another set of farmers to poverty.
This is an extreme view of the case. In this country an entire class of industrious men, possessed too of some capital, cannot be reduced to ruin at a blow. It is incredible that, in a large number of instances landlords would not aid their tenantry in changing the course of cultivation, substituting pasture for erable land ; and, inasmuch as the demand for animal food would be incalculably increased by the repeal of the Corn-laws, which would stimulate population, and by reducing the cost of bread leave a larger balance for other articles of consumption, it is to be expected that grazing farms would become as profitable to the owner and the occupier as those now devoted chiefly to the growth of wheat. But let it be granted, for the sake of argument, that our correspondent's alarm is not excessive ; let us admit that this poverty-striking process would ensue, to the extent assumed; and before exclaiming against the landowner, let his case also be shortly stated. The gross income from his estate may be 4,000/, a year ; of which 2,000/. is swallowed up in family settlements, interest on debts, and expenses of management. Suppose that, owing to the abolition of the Corn-laws, his tenantry make out a fair demand for a reduction of 25 per cent.; that would he one-fourth only of the gross rental, but one-half of the net income ; cutting him down from 2,000/. to 1,000/. a year. " Why should I submit," he says, " to this curtailment, when I know that, if my present tenants refuse to pay the old rents, there are meny ready to take their places ? They may be ruined; well— that's their concern : the question is, which of us must be the losing party ; I have the advantage in the struggle, and will use it." Suppose that a large proportion of the lauded gentlemen of the Three Kingdoms are in the position described, and would act as in the instance put; still, that they are more selfish or un- feeling than the majority of other " interests," it would be unjust to assert. Lawyers, bankers, merchants, mechanics, ay and par- sons too, make the most of the commodity they have for sale, and are not content with less than the full market-price. Country gentlemen do the same. Unhappily, they have greater powers of extortion.
Admit, then, that the anticipations of our correspondent would be realized ; that rents would be kept up, though the price of wheat fell; and that, after a brief struggle, a majority of the pre- sent holders of farms would become bankrupt. The question occurs, whether, even in this extreme view, the amount of evil in- flicted by the Corn-laws is not infinitely greater than that which the agricultural tenantry would suffer it the hands of their land• lords? To prove the affirmative, would not be difficult, but tire- some. The injury to foreign trade and domestic manufactures is incalculable in its full extent, and far exceeds the evil produced simply by the enhanced price of breath; though that amounts to many millions per annum, and is severely felt at the present time by the bulk of the people, with the prospect before them of still greater • privation. Did the Legislature regard the public benefit instead of giving undue advantages to an " interest," the claims of the few would give way before the welfare of the many ; and the complaints of farmers would be treated like those of the hand-loom-weavers. Farmers would be told, that their ease was a very hard one but that the community at large must not be compelled to take their produce when better and cheaper could be obteined elsewhere; that thee had attached an undue value to the holding of land, and must suffer for their mistake; that the increase of population necessi- tated the opening of new markets fer the supplv of food; and that they could not expect the other classes, forming the invnense ma- jority in the country, to submit to semi-starvation, and all the suf- fering occasioned by a capricious and uncertain market fur manu- facturing labour, in order then farmers might go on paving exorbi- tant rents to extravagant lords and sqs ires. Such would be the reply of a Leg ishi t ure really representing the People, and equally careful of the welfare of the whole. Aial we do not see what re- joinder the farmers could make, which the haud-loum-weavers might not urge wilt squat justice. The latter are told, that to compel the people to purchase their articles, while cheaper and better can be obtained iii abundance from owners of the power- looms, is an absurdity not to be thouald of : so the weavers, being pour and helpless, have no remedy, and starve. And the time must come, when the agricultural interest will learn, that the possession of land gives no better title to a msnopoly of the supply of food, than the hand-weavers now possess to stop the improved machinery which has pushed their wares out of the market. But, though there would be no infriegement of strict justice in giving such a reception to the complaints of the oppressed farmers, and it would in fact be only dealing with them as they have treated others, wisdom and mercy should prompt the Legislature to open all practicable ways for their relief. Much might be done by assisting emigration. The case supposed is that of farmers, required to pay the same or nearly the saute rents without as with exclusive "protection," under the dreaded penalty of notices to quit, and that rather than leave their farms, a large portion of the tenaetry will rub on as long as possible, and end their lives as paupers, or as workmen on the roads at six shillings a week— unless some means are offered them of continuing, in another country if not in this, the only business they are fit fur. The Colonies afford such means. With the remnant of their capital many farmers might profitably recommence life in Australia ; whither, indeed, some are new voluntarily removing, without even the pressure of the circumstances supposed by our correspondent. The emigration of no very large number would mitigate the com- petition at home, and force landlords to bear their share of the loss consequent upon the abolition of their atrocious monopoly— the -discontinuance of a system of plundering the public directly to the extent of some twenty or thirty millions a year, indirectly to a far greater amount. To provide free passages for a limited number of emigrant farmers and their families, would not be grudged by a people just escaped from the fangs of the "landed interest." And if it be said that the proposition is unmerciful— that the honest farmers of England must not be banished from their native country—let it be answered, that for hundreds likely to suffer inconvenience in this form, hundreds of thousands suffer a lingering death in England, for lack of that wholesome food which the supporters of the corn monopoly deny to them ; that it is not merely banishment to the Colonies which they have to shrink from, but starvation, the workhouse, and the grave. To no other class, whom a change of circumstances might throw out of their wonted means of subsistence, could the Government afford so eligible a resource as that suggested, to all over-rented farmers. There is land in abundance to those who are accustomed and fitted to cultivate it ; but no market for the inferior products of the poor weavers. It would be wise in those not over well- provided farmers who have now the power to emigrate, not to wait for the inevitable repeal of the Corn-laws and the fight with their landlords. 'lime Colonial field is now open, and most inviting, to the small capitalist and the industrious labourer.
Previous page
