Those who demanded and received upwards of twenty fhillings a bufhel for their corn, candidly owned that they would be contented with ten, provided that other farmers would bring down their prices to that ftandard. What then was to be done? If he might venture to give his opinion on fo delicate a fubject, he would certainly propofe an exception to the general rule of protecting men in the abfolute difpofal of their property. In short, he would recommend the adoption of a maximum, by which no wheat fhould be fold at a higher price than ten fhillings per bufhel. Although, under any other circumftances, he should be hostile to a measure of this kind, yet, fituated as the country was at prefent, he conceived it abfolutely neceffary. Lord Grenville agreed with the earl of Warwick, that the price of labour was by no means fufficient for the fupport of the labourer and his family; and also that men ought to receive fo much wages as fhould fupply them with all the neceffaries of life. But how the diftreffes of those people were to be relieved, was a queftion of great difficulty. With refpect to what the noble earl had faid concerning the abundance of the harvest in the particular diftrict where he refided, no general conclusion, either as to abundance or fcarcity, could be drawn from that affertion. As to the maximum propofed, he should never hear that word mentioned in the fenfe in which it had been used that day, without expreffing the difapproba tion he must feel at hearing that measure recommended, which of all others would have the moft injurious and dangerous tendency, and which was most of all likely to defeat its own object. In every country where it had ever been adopted, it was found productive of the most dread ful mifchief and danger. The houfe having again entered on the fubject of the fcarcity of corn, on the 17th of November, the earl of Warwick having apologized for the ufe he had inadvertently made on a former occafion, of the word maximum, took the liberty of faying a few words in juftification, not of the unfortunate word that he had dropped, but of the principle on which he had grounded his argument. He ftill contended that the gains of the farmers were enormous. He fpoke from what he knew. The crops in his country, and for a dif trict of 400 miles that he had travelled, were apparently moft plentiful. He had fent his fteward among the farmers, his own tenants, to remonftrate with them, and inquire why corn could not be fold at a cheaper rate. He brought him no very fatisfactory anfwer. His lordhip then took his horfe, and, in order to make the neceflary inquiry, rode among them himself: when the farmers admitted, that wheat might be fold at a much lower price, and yet afford them a competent profit; and that they would willingly fubfcribe their names to an association to fell their corn at a reduced price, if other farmers would do the fame. He, as a farmer, believed that there was corn enough in the country to meet its wants, if any means were taken to compel the corn growers to bring it to market, and difpofe of it at a reafonable profit: but as to corn-factors and great growers of corn, who wild moft likely be the witneffes called before the committee, they were interested in mifleading them, and therefore their teftimony ought not to be implicitly relied on. The idea of reforting at all to the the principle of a maximum, on fach an occafion as the prefent, was reprobated by the lord chancelor in the strongest terms. It was dangerous, he faid, in the extreme, to hold forth fuch doctrines, or to inculcate that even the smalleft proportion of relief was to be expected from their application. This fubject of the dearth of provifions, and the mode of relief by a compulsory reduction in the price of wheat, was refumed by the earl of Warwick, in the houfe of lords, on the 5th of December. That by the laws of England, all property was fecure, as had been justly fet forth by the lord chancellor, when the prefent queftion was under their lordships confideration, he admitted: and allo that the fecurity of property was a maxim not to be loft fight of in any government. But he obferved, at the fame time, that the laws of England did not protect property acquired by fraudulent and nefarious means. They did not protect the acquifitions of highwaymen. And he defied any one to thew, on the ftatute books, the recognition of any fach profeffion as that of corn-factor. On the contrary, the law fpoke of perfons employed in agriculture, as labourers or farmers: but the name of corn-factor was not to be met with. He did not deny the utility of middle-men to tranfport grain from one part of the kingdom to the other, in fuch proportion as it might be wanted: but he was of opinion, that they should be licenced, and be obliged to deal only on commiffion, and not permitted to trade on their own acconnt. He appealed to the reverend bench, whether there was any paffage in holy writ, which, any more than the law of the land, re cognised or fanctioned the business of a corn-factor! On the contrary, Providence had given the productions of the earth for the ufe of its inhabitants: the grower and confumer had a joint property in the produce of the field; and it was never intended that ten or twenty men fitting together, fhould be enabled to buy up the greatest part of the grain neceflary for the fubfiftence of the people, and regulate the price of provifions as fuited their own intereft. With regard to the particular maximum he had propofed, it was very different from that French maximum which fome of their lordships had fo juflly repro-. bated. The French maximum went to all kinds of articles for the fultenance of man, which were to be paid for in a paper of no value, and therefore ftruck at the very root of property. His fuggeftion, on the contrary, tended to lecure to the farmer a fair and li beral profit, at the fame time that it would fecure the public from thofe impofitions, which, in his confcience, he believed to be the fource of all the prefent diftrefles of the country. As a proof that the fearcity was artificial, lord Warwick mentioned a fplendid inftance of difinterestedness and generofity in a tenant of his, whofe name hall go down with his noble landlord's, as far as the Annual Regifier may penetrate into the receffes of future times. Mr. John Radford, of Warwick, during the whole of the feareity, fol his corn at half the market price. Lord Warwick had alfo converfed with feveral other farmers, who all declared that the prices were exorbitant, but that they had a right to the fame prices as their neighbours. In proof that [C 3] the the fearcity was artificial, lord Warwick adverted to another circumstance. Within thefe few months, there had been no lefs than 400 convictions throughout the country for foreftalling, regrating, and monopolizing. What was the effect of this? A man of the name of Ruby was convicted. The price of outs, from fifty fhillings per quarter, fell from day to day, till it came down fo low as ferenteen fhillings and fixpence. It had fince rifen no doubt, as the impreffion made by that verdict had gradually worn off. On the general fubject of dearth and diftrels, lord Warwick obferved, that it was the duty of every good government to find employment, if poffible, for thole who were wil ling to labour. There were numerous wafle and uncultivated lands in the country, which the legifla ture, in its wildom and difcretion, might portion out to the poor, who he was fure would be willing and defirous to cultivate them. The enclojure and cultivation of the wafle lands was alfo warmly recommended by the earl of Moira, and other fpeakers in both houfes. The earl of Warwick faid, that neither be, nor any of their lordships, could have any other inducement than the public good, and the, with to alleviate the fufferings under which the people now laboured. These alone were the motives which induced him to move the following refolution: "That from the 10th of this inftant, December, to the 10th of June, 1801, the magiftrates of every county in the kingdom fhall be authorized, upon fuch evidence as may be given before them, to affix a certain determinate price, hot only on corn, but on agricultural labour." Lord Grenville most readily af fented to the truth of what had been declared by lord Warwick, respecting the motives that had induced him to move the refolution: but he reminded him that the fubject of it had already been twice difcuffed in that houfe, and almoft unanimoufly condemned. Lord Grenville proceeded to condemn it a third time, on the old ground of protection of property, and the dangers to be apprehended from any violation of that principle.-The motion was, then put, and negatived. * In As this is no a queftion of party or politics, but of great and univerfal importance, and even anxious concern, the few obfervation, we take an opportunity to make on this intereftig fu ject will ot be imputed a ani dication of any improper bias in our narrativ. Though the idea of fixiga raximum for corn was juttiy defapproved, as tendin to aggravate, in he long run, inftead of alviatg the public diftiefs, yet, if there reall was ro fcarcity, a matter which, appears to us to le doubtful, there was fomething monstrous in idle c piralifts, whether in the character of gent even armers, corn-factors, contractors for government, or other derominations, muzzling the ox that treads out the cern, end ro, ing in luxury, while the actual cultivator of the foil, with his family, wanted bread. The laws that fupport fuch a flate of fociety are not to be violated, but thyn ay be gradually mo fi ded charged. Though the fuggeftion of a reftriction on the price of grain be rejected, might ot the idea of licenfing corn-brokers, and restraining them from deali go their account, be adopted and improved? In all civilized nations, in proportion as they are induft ious and commercial, there is a progreffive disjunction and divorce between accumulated capital, and perforial labour.. Every one who has got money becomes unwilling to work, and speculates on the labour of others. There is a multiplication of master farmers, mafter carpenters, mafter tailors, mafter In the reports of both houses of parliament, there are many ufeful hints of means both for enlarging the refources, and economizing fubfitence. In both houfes there appeared a fincere and anxious co-operation, both for the relief of the prelent preffure, and preventing the recurrence of a fimilar calamity in future. A measure, intimately connected with the prevention of fuch recurrence, was introduced into parliament by Mr. Abbot, on the 19th of November, 1800. This was a bill for afcertaining the population of Great Britain. To Mr. Abbot it had leng been a matter of furprile and ationifhment, that a great, powerful, and enlightened nation, like this, fhould have remained hitherto unacquainted with the ftate of its popu lation: the knowledge of which mufi be ferviceable for fo many important purposes of wife legiflation and good government, and without mifter fhoemakers, mafter chimney-fweepers, and mafter artificers of all forts. It was this difinion hetween capit 1 and labour, and this growing difpofition to fpeculation, that, by fapping the industry, formed one of the leading caufes of the dec'ine and fall of the feven united provinces. The most healthy, happy, virtuous, and profperous state of fociety, is that in which the un on between perfonal industry, and capital acquired by perfonal industry, is the longest and the most effectually preferved. What has been the main caule of the wretchednefs of the Irish and the Highlanders of Scotland? The midsmen of the former; and the tacksmen of the latter: the letting and fubletting of land withcut end. In order to ftrike at the root of the great caufe of the dearth of provifions, difcourage monopolization of land, and combination, which is monopolization, in circulating ts produce. All idle fpeculation on the productive labour of others, beyond what is neceffary for the transference of various articles from one place to another, is an interphon of the bounty of heaven falling on the earth in dews and rains, and fruitful feafrs, terded by Providence to fill the hearts of men with food and gl dness. To tuch speculation there is indeed, as just obf rved, a natural tendency in the progreffion of fociety: which cannot. with impunity, be altogether quashed, or even rudely checked. It is the duty of legislatures to provide fome palliative, and counterpoife to an evil, which grows out of what is, to a certain extent, good. The id.a propofed by lord Warwick of licencing, and regulating the conduct of corn-dealers, appears to us to be highly worth of all approbation. This measure, adopted and executed with due confidevation, might, in the natural progrefs of ideas, be found to have a connexion with other measures of wife and falutary improvement: among which, one of the first would probably be, to difcourage and restrain the exceffive monopolization of land, and on the other band to encourage and enable, by all practicable, fafe, easy, and gentle mears, the actual cultivators of the ground, to become cultivators on their own account, and venders too, of grain, directly, in markets to the people This laft measure has been explained and recommended to legiflatures more than 20 years ago, with great learning, ability, wisdom, and prudence, by the author of " An Efay on the Right of Property in Land," who is now well enough known to be profeffor Ogilvie, of the univerfity of Aberdeen; and fince alfo, by Mr. Newte, of Tiverton, in his "Tour in Ergland and Scotland," who after acknowledging the great merit of the ingenious profeffo, confirms his doctrine, and fhews its practicability and advantage by various new illuftrations. Their dor ne, we are happy to find, appears to gain ground. It has been efpoufed and ably maintained by other writers. As to the enclosure, divifion, and cultivation of wafte-lands, recommended by lord Warwick and other friends to their country, the g eat dithculty here, is, that poor la bourers have not a capital, which is neceffary for that purpose. To this a complete remedy is propofed by general Fullarton, in a pamphlet, addreffed to lord Carrington. Let a bank be established for lending money to the cultivators of and on registered mortgages, or what, in the northern part of this ifland, is called heritable fecurity. [C 4] which which no country could avail itfelf of the full extent of its refources, or effectually and permanently provide for its wants. "But, fir," Mr. Abbot continued, " in times like thefe, when the fubfiftence of the people is in queftion, this knowledge becomes of the higheft importance. It is furely important to know the extent of the demand, for which we are to provide a fupply; and we fhould fet about obtaining it immediately, not only for the ufes of the current year (for which it muft neceffarily come late), but alfo for the year that is to follow; a confideration infeparably connected with the former, and to which we are bound to look forward with all its poffible circumftances. It is important alfo to obtain this information, for the purpofe of knowing whether one of the chief caufes, which for the laft thirty years has made this country ccafe to export, and obliged it to depend for fuccour on its neighbours, is not an increased and increafing population; becaufe this may fix our opinions not only upon the neceffity of extending our fcale of agriculture, but may ferve alfo to fhew us the degree and point to which that extenfion must neceffarily be carried; and if it be true that we have three millions of acres in this ifland fit for the plough, and hitherto uncultivated, we may fee in what proportion we are called upon to render them most profitable for the public fubfiftence; and what-, ever the plan and arrangement to be devifed for preventing the recurrence of this evil, which his majefty in his fpeech has fo earnestly exhorted us to provide againft, the extent and nature of the population of Great Britain muft form a pri mary object in all fuch confidera← tions. Affuming, therefore, that the meafure which I am propofing is right in itself, and that the prefent times call upon us to carry it into effect, I will take the liberty of ftating to the houfe what lights we have derived from the tranfactions of former times to guide us in the fubject before us, and what fort of refults we have hitherto obtained, before I proceed to fubmit to the confideration of the house what appears to me to be the most advisable courfe for our own conduct at prefent. au "Some numerations of the people of England appear to have been made in former times by public au thority, but certainly with particular views, and for limited purpofes. In the reign of Edward III. we have a fubfidy roll for England, county by county, from whence the population of that period is eftimated at 2,353,000 fouls. "In the reign of queen Elizabeth, the privy council called upon all the bishops for certificates of the number of families in their refpective diocefes; and the population of that period is eftimated at about 5,000,000. In the reign of James I. the bishops, in like manner, certified the number of communicants and recufants; and the people are estimated to have amounted at the reftoration to 6,500,000. From thefe and other documents, fuch as the military mufters, affeffments, and parish regifters, many private perfons of fkill and learning have eftimated the people of England to have amounted, at the revolution, to about 7,000,000. Some deiponding men have afferted, that the population afterwards decreased by a million |