TOPICS OF THE DAY.
Then, why do they not set themselves to prove the advantages of the Corn-law to the tenant-farmer, in this way ? They would not themselves be convinced by mere syllogisms, or authorita- tive statements at second-hand—how can they expect others to be so ? The advantages which they say the tenant-farmer derives from the Corn-laws are denied—denied by parties who, they say, are ignorant of agricultural economy, and therefore unable to form an opinion. Well, it is for them to instruct the ignoramuses—to begin by teaching them the details of agricultural economy—to show by what applications of capital and industry agricultural pro- duce is brought to market—to show what effect the protective -duties on foreign grain have upon the tenant-farmer engaged in bringing it to market—to show that under and in consequence of that protection he is prosperous, and that before he got it he was not prosperous. This, of course, is the way in which " practical men" like them have formed their opinions ; and the only way in which they can make others as well informed as themselves is by leading then through the same process. This is the only way in -which any thing can be taught.
But this the advocates of the Corn-law refuse to do. Mr. COB- DEN'S motion on Tuesday last, though it embraced the case both of the tenant-farmers and the agricultural labourers, did not make it imperative to examine into both cases at the same time : they might have been taken one after the other. And that motion afforded those advocates of the Corn-law who maintain that the .duties on foreign grain increase the profits of the farmer as well as the rents of the landlord, an opportunity of proving their case. Mr. COBDEN offered to allow the advocates of the Corn-law to put a majority of their own side on the Committee, and to have a Chair- man of their own number : all he asks is, that they will allow him and one or two others of his way of thinking to be on the Com- mittee also, and that they will examine tenant-farmers as to their experience of the working of the protective system. Here was a noble opportunity offered to the advocates of the Corn-law of teaching their ignorant opponents the true working of the law. The -Chairman and his associates of course would know the working to a nicety : they would only have to call intelligent witnesses before the Committee, to make such witnesses tell in plain language their own experience, to classify the witnesses and arrange the heads upon which they should be examined, so that their evidence should give a complete picture of the actual working of the system from its simplest to its most complicated details. The cross- examination of shrewd practical farmers by the hostile Committee- men would only strengthen the evidence by throwing light upon points which had not been sufficiently explained. Here was an opportunity of demonstrating once for all the benefits which tenant- farmers derive from the Corn-law—of putting an end for ever to all assertions and insinuations that they derive no benefit from it. And yet the supporters of that law refuse to avail themselves of the opportunity. This refusal looks ill. The House has appointed Committees to inquire into the supply of labour in the West Indies, the trade to Western Africa, the working of Joint-Stock Banks, the operation of the Customs-duties—nay, into the distress of the agricultural interest—in short, into any and every thing. Why is the bearing of prohibitive duties on the interests of the tenant-farmers to be alone excluded from investigation ? The reasons assigned in the House of Commons are any thing but satisfactory. Mr. GLADSTONE thought, that if the Committee were granted, the House could not, without stultifying itself, discuss the Corn-law question again (!) until the report of the Committee were received. That might be a valid objection to a general debate on the subject while the Committee was sitting, but not to the appointment of the Com- mittee itself. Again, Mr. GLADSTONE adverted to the difficulty of -dealing with the Sugar-duties, which constitute such an important item of the revenue. The facts elicited by the Committee illus- trative of the operation of the Sugar-duties, and other restrictive or prohibitive duties on the interest of the tenant-farmer, would not precipitate legislation without reference to the other bearings of those duties. Again, Mr. GLADSTONE hinted at the length of time that " fifteen gentlemen of the House, holding fifteen different opi- nions," would take to examine witnesses ; and to the possibility of the Committee withholding its report from session to session, in order to prevent the discussion of the Corn question. Mr. GLAD-
STONE, and those who concurred with him in refusing the Commit- tee, must have been sadly at a loss for arguments against it, when they rested upon their own incapacity and possible delinquency as a ground of refusal.
The truth is, that a Committee of the House could throw much light upon the operation of the system of prohibitive duties on the tenant-farmers, if it were to set honestly and earnestly about it. Committees are indeed too apt to make wide and scrambling work of inquiry : but this may be amended by setting to work in a more orderly way—by taking the form of proceedings in a court of justice, or in their own Election Committees, as a guide. They can appoint one member to conduct the case for the claimants of protective-duties, and another for their opponents; while the rest, under the guidance of the Chair- man, combine the office of judge and jury. For example, Mr. GLADSTONE, we will suppose, undertakes to show by the evi- dence of tenant-farmers that they are thriving under the prohibi- tive system ; Mr. COBDEN undertakes to prove by similar evidence the reverse. A Committee of seven members is appointed ; the Chairman of which is to maintain order in its proceedings. Mr. GLADSTONE gives in a list of the witnesses he intends to call, which is communicated to Mr. COBDEN; and Mr. COBDEN gives in a list of his witnesses, which is communicated to Mr. GLAD- STONE. The proceedings are opened : Mr. GLADSTONE states his case, and proceeds to examine his witnesses. After the examina- tion-in-chief of each witness, Mr. COBDEN is allowed to cross-exa- mine him ; and after he is done, the members of the Committee, in an order agreed upon among themselves, may put any questions they think proper. When all Mr. GLADSTONE S witnesses have been examined, Mr. COBDEN opens his case, and his witnesses are examined in the same manner. After their examination is con- cluded, Messrs. GLADSTONE and COBDEN are allowed to sum up. Witnesses may then be called by the Committee to any point which does not appear to have been sufficiently cleared up. After they have been examined, the Chairman submits a draft of a report to the Committee. Any member may propose a counter-report, or amendments on any part of the report. If the Committee agree upon a report, it is presented with the evidence, and both are printed : if it cannot agree, an intimation to this effect, with a record of the discussions in Committee, and the draft-reports and evidence, are laid before the House, and printed. In this way, the inquiries of the Committee would be kept from rambling from the question at issue, its inquiries concluded within a reasonable time, and the House and the public put in possession of a body of well- sifted evidence as to facts throwing light on the operation of the Corn-law on the interests of tenant-farmers. This, it may be said, is only a part of the question : but Committees might be appointed simultaneously, or in succession, to inquire in the same way into the operation of the Corn-law on the landlords, the agricultural labourers, and on the mercantile and manufacturing classes. The result of their labours would be to substitute a body of ascertained facts, systematically arranged, for the vague and partial assertions with which hostile parties are now pelting each other. Mr. COBDEN gave the advocates of the Corn-law fair warning of the use which he and his colleagues can and will make of the re- fusal to grant his Committee. It is clear that no decisive legis- lation affecting the duties on corn is to be expected during the present session ; and by the time Parliament meets again, our agricultural Members will have learned that Mr. COBDEN'S warn- ing was no empty threat. A renewed application on his part for a Committee will then be received in a different manner. Mr. COBDEN must be convinced, from the embarrassed manner in which Mr. GLADSTONE met his motion, that this his new move is felt to be an effective one. Mr. GLADSTONE was much afraid that by granting the Committee he would interfere with "the annual discussion on the Corn-laws." Mr. GLADSTONE felt that the annual discussion is a ceremony which relieves the consciences of Members and enables them to remain satisfied with doing no- thing ; but that a Committee might oblige Ministers to adopt a decided course—which would be inconvenient.
N.B.—The tenant-farmers have votes.
Previous page
