to Pay tilt Interest of the National Debt. 



18160 



loss sustained by those who derive their 

 income from agricultural produce. It 

 was stated in the House of Commons, 

 by some of the most respectable mem- 

 bers, tliat the agricultural proiiuce of 

 the kingdom had sold for one hundred 

 millions less in the year 1815, than 

 what it was sold for in the year 1812. 

 But, if we compare the prices of the 

 produce in 1815, with what it was in 

 1803, we shall find that it was quite as 

 high iu the former as in the latter; con- 

 sequently, if they received one hundred 

 > millions less in 1S15 than in 1812, they 

 -7: also received one hundred millions more 

 in 1812 than in 1803 ! Yet in the year 

 1812, when, in addition to the one hun- 

 dred millions levied since 1803 on the 

 community at large, for the benefit of 

 the agriculturists, we payed nearly 

 twenty millions in taxes, from which 

 ■we are now exempt; we are assured by 

 Mr. Western that every thing was on a 

 fair level! Be that, however, as it 

 may, it must be abundantly evident 

 that the aggiegate amount of the in- 

 comes of a state must be immense, 

 wliieh can admit, without material in- 

 jury, of a fluctuation iu the mode of its 

 distribution, of the amount of one hun- 

 dred and tM'enty millions, in the course 

 of only a few years, as was the case 

 from 1803 to 1812; and that nothing 

 can be more absurd than to suppose, 

 that with such an income, it is unable 

 to pay the interest on its debt, which 

 scarcely amounts to one-fomth of that 

 fluctuation. 



Nothing, snrely, can be more ridi- 

 culous than to sujipose that the country 

 is grown poorer because the price of 

 agricultural produce is less now than it 

 was in 1812; on the contrary, as the 

 price depends entirely on the proportion 

 of the supply to the demand, it is evi- 

 dent, tiiat, considered as a whole, wc arc 

 richer, as it is a sure sign the produce 

 is mure abundant; consequently, the 

 advantage to the consumer is greater 

 than the loss sustained by the producer, 

 us he is remunerated in part lor the re- 

 dnction in the price of his commodities 

 by an increase in the quantity. Be 

 tfaat, liowever, as it may, whatever is 

 lost by the producer is gained by the 

 consumer; and, wimtevor is gained by 

 Uie former, is lost hy the latter. Who 

 payed the additional hundred millions 

 obtained liy the agriculturists in 1812, 

 but the consumers at larg<! ? and if they 

 were again able to raise the prices to 

 what llicy wvfc ill 1V12, wUich, by tJu» 



415 



help of the Corn-bill, and another such 

 season, they will probably etfect; who 

 will pay the additional hundred millions 

 but the consumers ? The addition of a 

 hundred millions to the incomes of tho 

 agriculturists, must, therefore, of neces- 

 sity, be deducted from all the other in- 

 comes in the community; and it is 

 therefore evident, that, although all great 

 and sudden tluctuations in the distri- 

 bution of income are much to be la- 

 mented, on account of t!ic evils thence 

 arising to individuals or classes, yet, as 

 a whole, the community is neither 

 richer or i)oorer on tiiat account. Lln- 

 questionably those wiio make a distinc- 

 tion between tho cU'tcts produced by 

 rent and profit, and those produced by 

 taxes, have not sufiiciently considered 

 the subject. They are all obtained by 

 the same means — by raising the price 

 of commodities. They are all derived 

 from the same sources — from the la- 

 bours or property of the society at large. 

 They diii'er not in ellect, but in the mag- 

 nitude of their eflects ; and this difler- 

 ence we have seen to be immense — 

 " Rent and profit," (as observed by 

 Doctor Smith,) t;it up the wages of 

 labour; and although taxes act in the 

 same manner, yet it is in a proportion 

 of only about filteen to one, in respect 

 to the otiier two sonrccs of income. 

 As, however, it must be evident that 

 the income of every individual class is 

 taken out of the income of all the other 

 classes, and as cotisC(|iicntly we are all 

 reciprocally dejiendant on each other; 

 let ail be contented with what the law 

 allows them, and not attempt to wrest 

 the law in their own favour; much less 

 to avail themselves of the power with 

 which they may be invcsitcd to niako 

 laws in their own favour, or to the in- 

 jury of others. 



Mr. Ponsonby, in contending for the 

 general benefit to be derived from the 

 Corn-bill, was too honest to deny that 

 it was calculated (o raise the prict? of 

 rent. Can it then ever be supposed that 

 the aristocracy of tliis country, which 

 has ever boasted of its magnanimitj', 

 justice, humanity, integrity, and unsul- 

 lied honour, after passing a law avow- 

 edly for its own benefit, would ever 

 think of passing another, which would 

 reduce to beggary a clas^ already ac- 

 knowledged to be the most oppressed 

 in the whole community? No, Sir, the 

 stockholder has nothing to fear; I ani 

 pcrsuad(!d that Mr. Vansittart's dedl»» 

 ratioii was perfectly correct --" 'i1)» 

 lJous» 



