when wheat did not exceed 48s. per quarter, then it shall be lawful for all and every person (not forestalling nor selling the same in the open market within three months after the buying thereof) to buy in open market, and to keep in his or their granaries or houses, and to sell again, such corn and grain,' any statute to the contrary notwithstanding. The latter part of this statute may be regarded as indicating a juster view than others passed since the 5 and 6 Edw. VI. c. 14.

In 1670 a further important change was made in the same direction, exportation being permitted as long as wheat should be under 53s. 4d. the quarter, the customs duty being only 1s. per quarter. Corn imported from foreign countries was at the same time loaded with duties so heavy as effectually to exclude it, being 16s. when the price in this country was at or under 53s. 4d. per quarter, and 8s. when above that price and under 80s., at which latter price importation became free. The object of this act was to relieve the agricultural interests from the depression under which they were laboring from the low prices of produce which had existed for twenty years, more particularly from 1646 to 1665, and also more or less during the greater part of the century.'

An important measure was carried by the landowners immediately after the revolution of 1688. The high price of wheat a few years prior to that event, had naturally led to a vast extension of tillage, which, in combination with a series of favorable seasons, had greatly depreciated the value of agricultural produce, and thus suggested to the landed interest their obtaining from the legislature, in the shape of bounty, what they could not secure in their legitimate character as traders. In 1689 a statute was passed entitled An Act for Encouraging the Exportation of Corn, the preamble of which states that it had been found by experience that the exportation of corn and ' grain into foreign countries, when the price thereof is at a low rate in this kingdom, hath been a great advantage, not only to the owners of land, but to the traders of this kingdom in 'general.' A bounty of 5s. a quarter was to be granted on the exportation of wheat so long as the price in the English market did not exceed 48s. Unfavorable seasons soon followed, so as to reduce the quantity, and to increase the price of wheat to 56s. 6d. per quarter. During this period the act of 1689 was of course inoperative, and the bounty was suspended by parliament, from the 9th of February, 1699, to the 29th of September, 1700. In this latter year the encouragement of the home grower was carried still further by the abolition of all duties on the export of corn. We are told in a parliamentary report of 1821, on agricultural distress, that from 1697 to 1773, the total excess of exports was 30,968,366 quarters, upon which export bounties, amounting to £6,237,176, were paid out of the public revenue.' The national resources were thus largely employed to enable the English agriculturist to compete with

the foreign corn-grower in the markets of the continent. It might have been presumed from the theories which are current amongst our agriculturists, that the abundant crops and low prices which marked this period, must have been attended by a reduction of wages and a general deterioration in the condition of the laborer. The very reverse, however, was the case, as will appear from the following statement of our author.

In 1750 the sum of £324,176 was paid in bounties on corn. The exports of 1748-9-50 (during which, moreover, the price of wheat fell from 32s. 10 d. to 28s. 10 d. the quarter) amounted to 2,120,000 quarters of wheat, and of all kinds of corn and grain to 3,825,000 quarters. This was the result of a cycle of abundant years. In the twenty-three years from 1692 to 1715, says Mr. Tooke, in his elaborate History of Prices,' there were eleven bad seasons, during which the average price of wheat was 45s. 8d. the quarter; in the fifty years ending 1765 there were only five deficient harvests, and the average price for the whole half century ranged at 34s. 11d.; or, taking the ten years ending 1751, during which the crops were above an average, the price of wheat was only 29s. 24d. the quarter.

These years of plenty seem to have been a very happy period to the bulk of the population. Adam Smith refers to the peculiarly happy circumstances' of the country during these times of plenty ; and Mr. Hallam describes the reign of George II. as 'the most prosperous period that England had ever experienced. The effect was similar to that which took place during the plentiful seasons of the preceding century, and the improved condition of the people was marked by the enjoyment of greater comforts, and the resort to a superior diet, which their command over the necessaries of life enabled them to obtain. 'Bread made of wheat is become more generally the food of the laboring people,' observes the author of the Corn Tracts,' writing in 1765. Referring to the same period, Mr. Malthus remarks: It is well known that during this period the price of corn fell considerably, while the wages of labor are stated to have risen. During the last forty years of the seventeenth century, and the first twenty of the eighteenth, the average price of corn was such as, compared with the wages of labor, would enable the laborer to purchase with a day's earnings twothirds of a peck of wheat. From 1720 to 1750 the price of wheat had so fallen, while wages had risen, that, instead of two-thirds, the laborer could purchase the whole of a peck of wheat with a day's labor.' Mr. Malthus adds that the result of this increased command over the necessaries of life was not attended with an increase of population exclusively,' a considerable portion of their increased net wages was expended in a marked improvement of the quality of the food consumed, and a decided elevation in the standard of their comforts and conveniences.' Trade was flourishing, and the exports and imports progressively increasing during this period of abundance.'

This plenty was followed by a succession of bad seasons, which increased the price of corn, and caused great dissatis

faction throughout the country. In 1766 the price of the quartern loaf in London was 1s. 6d., and exportation was in consequence suspended; and in the latter part of 1773 the city of London offered a bounty of 4s. the quarter for 20,000 quarters of wheat, to be imported between March and June. The Corn Act of 1773 was designed to prevent the fluctuations of price consequent on previous statutes. A permanent law, it was alleged, would afford encouragement to the grower, be the means of increasing the growth of that necessary commodity, and of affording a cheaper and more constant supply to the poor.' The following is Mr. Platt's account of the provisions of this law, and of the effect which they had on the supply of the English market. The act was to come into operation on the 1st of January, 1774.

6

Whenever the price of middling British wheat, at ports of importation, was at or above 48s. per quarter, a duty of only 6d. per quarter was to be taken on all foreign wheat imported during the continuance of that price. When the price was at or above 44s., exportation and the bounty together were to cease; and the carrying of British grain coastwise ceased also. Under this act, corn and grain might be shipped to Ireland when exportation was prohibited from that country. Foreign corn warehoused under bond in twenty-five ports of Great Britain mentioned in the act might be re-exported duty free. Adam Smith's opinion of this act was, that, though not the best in itself, it is the best which the interests, prejudices, and temper of the times would admit of: it may perhaps,' he adds, in due time prepare the way for a better.' This expectation has not as yet been fulfilled.

The home market was now opened to foreign supplies of corn under much more advantageous terms than before. Importation was constant and considerable, and prices were steadier on the whole, during the eighteen years from 1775 to 1792-notwithstanding the occurrence of five seasons in which the harvests were more or less deficient than they had been in ten years preceding 1773. The balance of imports of wheat was now decidedly against this country. In the ten years ending 1769 the excess of exports had amounted to 1,384,561 quarters; but in the next ten years, ending 1779, the excess was on the side of the imports to the extent of 431,566 quarters; and in the ten years ending 1789 there was an excess on the same side amounting to 233,502 quarters. The extension of tillage which took place was certainly more likely to be permanent than when it had been caused by the artificial stimulus that had previously been maintained. From 1760 to 1780 the number of acres enclosed under local acts was 1,912,350; in the ten years ending 1789 the proportion had fallen off, the number of acres enclosed being 450,180. The average price of wheat was 45s. the quarter in the ten years ending 1779, and 45s. 9d. in the ten years ending 1789. The extension of cultivation in the twenty years from 1760 to 1780, together with the improve

ment of agriculture, sufficed for the increased demands of the country, without breaking up so much fresh land.'

The landed interest was not long satisfied with this law. By keeping down the price of corn it prevented their obtaining the bounty on which they had calculated, and their complaints were consequently loud and reiterated. Like every other selfish faction, they affected a regard for the public interests, and were unhappily too successful with the legislature. The act of 1773, it was alleged, rendered us dependent on a foreign supply, and thus jeopardied the means of subsistence to our people. The hollowness of the pretext is now sufficiently obvious, but it had force in the apprehensions of our fathers, or rather the influence of the landowners was so predominant in the two houses, as to secure the alteration which they desired. This occurred in 1791, when an act was passed founded upon stricter principles than the law of 1773. It enacted that after Nov. 15th, a bounty of 5s. per quarter should be paid when wheat was under 44s., and that when wheat was at or above 46s. exportation should cease. The new scale of import duties was as follows:-For wheat under 50s. per quarter, the high duty' of 24s. 3d. was payable; at 50s., but under 54s., the "first low duty' of 2s. 6d. ; at or above 54s., the second low 'duty' of 6d. was payable. The protecting price was thus 'raised from 48s. to 54s. the quarter; and this main feature of 'the act was intended to shut out supplies from abroad, and of 'course to raise prices at home. The duty of 24s. 3d., so long as the price of wheat was under 50s. the quarter, was equivalent to a prohibition.' This was emphatically a landlord's law, and its effects were just such as might be anticipated from such selfish legislation.

The thirteen years,' remarks Mr. Platt, from 1791 to 1804 form a very eventful period in the history of the corn laws. Under the comparatively free system established by the corn act of 1773, the excess of imports had been comparatively trifling; but under an act expressly constructed to prevent importation as far as possible, the excess of imports in the thirteen years from 1791 to 1803 amounted to 6,458,901 quarters of wheat and wheat-flour, and enormous sacrifices were made to obtain this quantity. The seasons in their courses fought against the enactments of the legislature; and the dependence on foreign supplies was never so complete as at the very period when hopes had been entertained that the produce of the home grower would prove sufficiently ample for the wants of the country.'

The greatest distress prevailed throughout the country under the operation of this law. In 1795 the average price of wheat rose from 55s. 7d. to 108s. 4d., and large bounties were in consequence offered by parliament on the importation of wheat.

Neutral vessels laden with grain were forcibly seized on the high seas, and the masters compelled to sell their cargoes to the government agents. The members of both houses of parliament bound themselves by a written pledge to observe the ' utmost frugality in the use of bread in their respective households; and engaged to reduce the consumption of wheat by at 'least one-third of the usual quantity consumed in ordinary times, unless the average price of wheat should be reduced to 8s. the bushel. The hair-powder tax was imposed at this ❝ period, as a means of diminishing the consumption of wheat.' The agricultural districts were extensively disturbed by riots, and that most fatal of all measures for the independence and moral welfare of the laboring population-the allowance system —was introduced. The attention of parliament was directed in 1800 to the fearful scarcity which existed, and various expedients were adopted in order to preserve the people from starvation. Serious apprehensions of such a calamity were entertained, which were only partially allayed by the miserable, because limited and selfish remedies, which were proposed. The condition of the poorer classes was pitiable in the extreme, and strikingly exposed the fallacy of the theory so prevalent among our agriculturists, of dear food being balanced by high wages. The absurdity of this theory is now generally admitted by all who have not a pecuniary interest in its maintenance, and should any of our readers continue to give it credit, we recommend their careful perusal of the following extract.

The money wages of the agricultural laborer, in order to have been equal to those which he received in the reign of George II., should have risen to about 30s. per week. Arthur Young gives a list of articles which, when the laborer was paid 5s. per week, he could have purchased with that 5s., namely, a bushel of malt, a bushel of wheat, a pound of butter, a pound of cheese, and a pennyworth of tobacco; and he states that in 1801 these articles would have cost him 26s. 5d.; while wages having risen only to 9s., and the allowance from the parish being estimated at 6s., his real wages were still 11s. 5d. less than under the former period. Thus even the parish allowance, which equalled two-thirds of his wages, left him in a state of distress. There is a table in the Appendix to one of the Parliamentary Reports on the subject of the high price of provisions, which shows that the most indispensable necessaries of life had risen 200 per cent. in 1800 as compared with 1773. Both in 1795 and 1800 Mr. Whitbread had proposed a bill for regulating the wages of labor by the price of provisions, and fixing a minimum of wages, but such an expedient was wisely rejected. The rise of wages, without which actual starvation would have ensued, inadequate as it proved, was better than such a plan. Several trades succeeded in obtaining an advance; and from the statements of the tailors and printers of London, in support of their claims, we take the following particulars :-The wages of the former