HOW TO GET RID OF THE CORN-LAWS.
THE Globe and the Nonconformist have noticed our last paper on the Corn question—both characteristically. The former, with its usual flippancy, and incapability of seeing any thing in a political dis- cussion but a game at dialectics and personalities between news- papers; and with a degage looseness of statement, the consequence, at may be, of the writer s not taking the trouble to apprehend cor- rectly the views he professes to controvert, or it may be, of wilful perversion to serve some small purpose of the hour. The Non- conformist, on the other hand, with the candour of one earnestly in search of truth, expresses regret for its precipitation in imputing motives, in a tone that would have disarmed us even though we had been seriously angry with a journal the talent and evident sincerity of which we respect. We hope we have now done with personalities, and that on any future occasion the merits of the question immediately under discussion may be alone attended to.
The first weighty consideration urged by the Nonconformist as militating against our recent suggestion, is, that "unanimity among the advocates of abolition would be instantly endangered by it." We fear that this hazard must be incurred in every case when the time comes for passing from the discussion of the abstract merits of any measure to the concerting of means for carrying it into effect—the modus operandi. It is easy to bring a number of men to express their acquiescence in the propriety of doing some- thing; but when you prepare to set to work, every man, accord- ing to his natural temper, position in society, and peculiar habits of thought, sees difficulties which others overlook, or makes light of impediments at which they boggle. Differences of opinion as to the best method of obtaining a common aim, are the causes, not the consequence of discussion among those who have the same end in 'View. They are to be overcome and set aside, not by keeping silent about them, but dispassionately receiving and considering every suggestion, not in a mere controversial spirit, butwith a determina- tion to seek for good advice everywhere, and to adopt or reject pro- posals on the sole ground of their appearing adequate or inadequate. Such differences of opinion are means by which Nature enables men to mature plans for accomplishing their purposes. To sup- press such discussions, were to reject the means provided by Nature for our instruction. We admit the danger of their degenerating into angry controversy ; but the risk must be run : "out of this nettle danger we pluck this flower safety." At the outset of their career, the Anti-Corn-law League said, wisely—" We are not statesmen to devise laws and ordinances ; we are private citizens complaining of a grievance, and asking statesmen to devise the means of removing it. Our object is to convince as many as we can of the truth of our representations ; and with that view, to avoid being entangled in subordinate or irrelevant discussions, we simply affirm that the Corn-laws are noxious and ought to be abolished." This was sound policy in those who, at that time, were only commencing their career as missionaries of the truth : but our recent remarks were addressed to those who ought to be preparing to give effect to that truth by practical measures. When the League itself passed from mere teaching to the practical measure of agitating constituencies, it incurred the risk of exciting differences of opinion among its coadjutors : and such differences did arise; but, knowing they were inevitable, the League kept on the even tenour of its way. Following up this train of thought, we feel inclined, instead of adverting in the present paper to the rest of the objections of the Nonconformist against our suggestion, to pass under review the leading plans that have .as yet been proposed with a view to obtain the repeal of the Corn-laws. They all come under one of three classes. There are some who see no hope of getting rid of the Corn-laws but through a previous change in our political institu- tions; and there are some who believe that their repeal may be accomplished by the instrumentality of the existing Legislature. Again, those who are averse to or hopeless of political change, differ as to the best method of inducing the Legislature to repeal the Corn-laws : some see nothing for it but addressing their fears ; others, more hopeful, are of opinion that a closer scrutiny of the real interests of all parties, and the adoption of a more conciliatory tone than has hitherto been taken by the opponents of the Corn- laws, might prove more successful. The minor varieties and dis- crepancies among the plans falling under these heads are infinite. A groundwork may be laid, however, for a satisfactory discussion of their various merits, by a previous estimate of the generic cha- racter of the classes to which they belong. As a contribution to- wards this, we offer a few remarks upon the three methods of ob- taining Corn-law Repeal, above enumerated,—more -as hints for reflection than as an exhaustive discussion and solution of the diffi- culties which surround the subject.
I. The proposal to carry Corn-law Repeal by the instrumentality of a change in our political institutions. This is the method of the Chartists ; who say it is hopeless to look for redress to aLegia- lature constituted as ours now is. A similar view was entertained by Mr. STANSFRLD and others in their ephemeral movement for Par- liamentary Reform g Leeds. This, too, would almost seem to be the course towards which the Nonconformist points. "Nor must we forget," says that journal, "that the machinery for awarding com- pensation must after all be constructed by the landlords them- selves": and "With their majority in the House of Commons, and their all but unanimity in the House of Lords, we should be foolish indeed to expect that the guarantee-fund would be fenced about with strong restrictions." True ; the Legislature in which a class preponderates will legislate for the interest of that class : but this is a reason for distrusting any and every modification that can be wrung from Parliament as at present constituted. And such, it would appear, is the opinion of the Nonconformist—" Were the Corn, laws the only grievance of which the nation has to complain, the thing might be worth further consideration. But they are not. Other monopolies exist. Our whole system of taxation needs revision. A great struggle is setting in between Democracy and Aristocracy, and the question is yet to be decided whether government shall be for the many or for the few. We may buy off the Corn-law monopoly; but are we wise in doing so while we leave the power untouched which originally created it and can provide a substitute for it?" If these views are correct, Corn-laws are only one of many equally or nearly equally oppressive laws, and an orgauic change in our insti- tutions is a prerequisite to their abolition. That a more perfect constitution of government is the proper guarantee for better laws —that a struggle between Aristocracy and Democracy is "setting in "—we potently believe : but that no improvement in legislation or national policy can be accomplished before the constitution be altered, we deny ; and that Corn-law Repeal would be insured or even accelerated by organic changes, we must take leave to doubt. After seein our system of restrictive commercial policy broken in upon, the lest-laws and the disqualification of Catholics repealed, by close borough Parliaments, through the instrumentality of public discussion, we are not prepared to assume that a ten. pounder Parlia- ment is made of more unyielding materials. And on the other hand, we are so convinced of the evils inflicted by the Corn-laws on the - community, and so certain that the struggle for organic changes must be a protracted one, that we deem it inhumane to post- pone efforts for the repeal of the former till the latter have been obtained. If unanimity is necessary to insure the repeal of the Corn-laws, so must it be to obtain Parliamentary Reform. What unanimity is there among Parliamentary Reformers ? Those of the middle classes are at odds with those of the working classes ; innumerable shades of difference divide the middle-class Reformers ; while a deadly feud is raging between the believers in O'Cormos and the coadjutors of LOVETT and HETHERINGTON. The day of' Parliamentary Reform is, to all human appearance, too far distant to render it advisable to surcease any effort for Corn-law Repeal in the mean time. Nor are we certain that even a Democratic Parliament would immediately repeal the Corn-laws : the fallacies by which they are defended have still a strong hold on a large pro- portion even of the middle and working classes. Fully admitting the necessity of further organic reforms, and that the struggle for them has begun, we are of opinion that Corn-law Repeal may be successfully urged even in an Unreformed Parliament; that the necessity for it is so urgent as to render its postponement inex- pedient; and that to mix it up as only one of many equally mis- chievous oppression; would detract from its real importance and retard its attainment.
II. The proposal to wring Corn-law Repeal from the existing Legislature by the instrumentality of intimidation. This has been the influence chiefly relied upon hitherto by those Repealers who either do not hope for or are averse to further changes in our political institutions. They have been in the habit of painting the landowners as oppressors and extortioners, in the most glowing colours, with a view to stir up the public mind to a state of excitement that may enable them to say to the landowning majority in the Legislature—" You cannot refuse to repeal these laws, unless you are prepared to brave, and put down by force, riot and popular insurrection." The expediency and morality of this plan are extremely questionable. The oli- garchy, indeed, which governed us under the old Boroughmonger- ing Parliament, and seem to be little less masters of the Re- formed, have no right to complain of such tactics : by their con- duct in reference to Catholic Emanciption and Reform they have taught the people the terrible lesson that they will yield to intimi- dation what they refuse to argument. It is the poisoned cha- lice themselves have brewed that is held to their lips. But, for the sake of the people, we are averse to the system of intimidation. Those who uphold institutions that vest power in men from whom justice can only be wrung through fear, act as foolishly as the idols- tors who who flog their gods when any thing goes amiss, and set them up again in their places when times of prosperity return. They create and feed a spirit of lawlessness in the people, subversive of civil order and destructive of true liberty. A go- vernment which can only be moved by fear to act justly, is only fit to be abolished. But, waiving the question of morality, we doubt the efficacy of the plan of intimidation, especially in the present instance. The advocates of Corn-law Repeal are not in a condi- tion to intimidate the Legislature. Corn law Repeal is not yet popular with the masses: it is essentially a middle-class agitation— an agitation confined to the most timid class of the community. The 'hostility manifested by the working classes to the agitation of Corn- law Repeal, at the outset, has been overcome in most places ; but they do not yet give it more than a lukewarm assent, even where they give it so much. An unanimous and a persevering assault on the Corn-laws is not yet to be expected from the masses : and meal-mobs, partial and temporary, will be met by partial and tem- porary relaxations of the obnoxious law, not by its abrogation.
III. The proposal to seek Corn-law Repeal by an appeal to rea- son; by a closer scrutiny into the real interests of all the parties, -and by the adoption of a more conciliatory tone. This is the view that we have been acting upon. The proposal to encourage a portion of the dissentients by the offer of a guarantee-fund, which has been so exclusively singled out and controversially dwelt upon, was only a subordinate—a very subordinate part of our method of forwarding a settlement. We undertook to show, that the direct and immediate effect of the Corn-law is to produce scarcity by act of Parliament. We undertook to show, that this scarcity operates to the disadvantage of every class in society. We undertook to show, that even the owner of the land—owner, as he is in Britain, of all from the surface to the centre, of the minerals as well as the soil—would gain more from the increased value of his property oc- casioned by free trade, than from the miserable pittance he wrings from the other classes through the instrumentality of the Corn-law. But as we knew, that although permanently the whole class would be benefited, there were individuals so circumstanced that the transition might possibly crush them before the advantages of the change were developed, we proposed to obviate their opposition by removing their apprehensions. Our object was, to win the land- owners—theer-holders—to discuss the question on its own merits, free d'07. personal apprehensions. Our object was, to in- duce the opponents of the Corn-laws to abstain from that tenour of acrimonious invective, which, when it does not intimidate, (as in the present case it cannot intimidate,) irritates, and prevents the angry parties from seeing the true bearings of a question. Believing that it is possible to carry Corn-law Repeal by a Parliamentary agitation of the question, our object was, to point out the temper in which that agitation could be conducted with the greatest prospect of success. The only use to be made of Parliament at present, is as an instrument of political discussion. People from curiosity read Parliamentary speeches, who will read no other political arguments. Most people attribute more weight, pay more deference, to opinions uttered in Parliament than to anonymous opinions or those of unofficial per- sons. By pertinacious discussion of a question in Parliament, a public opinion is formed in time, that operates on the constituency, and through it upon the House of Commons. The temperate, the conciliatory tone we recommend, is necessary in order to win more than the landowners. The spirit of deference to the aristocracy, which pervades the middle classes in England, causes a large por- tion of them to feel quite as much offended by invectives against the aristocracy as its own members. Temperate and decorous lan- guage is necessary to gain a fair hearing from them. We must work first through Parliament upon the constituencies, and then through the constituencies upon Parliament. This may be ob- jected to as too tedious a process : it will not effect its aim with magical celerity, but more quickly than any other. It is the pro- cess by which organic changes must be carried, unless carried by physical force : and surely, there is as much chance of bringing Parliament, and as soon, to grant Corn-law Repeal, as of bringing it to grant organic changes, the recommendations of which are that they will insure Corn-law Repeal and other innovations quite as un- palatable to the aristocracy. Supposing Parliament to continue ob- stinate, it is a preliminary discipline, through which the majority of the constituencies hostile to further organic changes must pass in order to be prepared for supporting them. Even the advocates of plans which fall under the second head we have enumerated— who occupy the same position among Corn-law Repealera and are quite as foolish as the "physical force" section amon the Chart- ists—may rest assured, that conviction of the oppressive character of the Corn-law must precede such a universal feeling of indigna- tion against it and its supporters as their plans presuppose ; and that such conviction is only to be produced by temperate, unex- aggerated reasoning.
These remarks, we repeat, are offered merely as hints for reflec- tion, not as calculated to be conclusive with others in favour of any of the modes of action alluded to ; although our own opinions are strong and decided in favour of the last. Our immediate concern is, to persuade Free-traders of the necessity of acting upon some plan, instead of squandering time and efforts in vague declamation and aimless struggles.
Previous page
