51 



Lord Fitzwilliam states, that when the wages of 

 labour increased during the war, the increase was 

 not occasioned by the high price of corn ; and he 

 goes on to say, " a very small share of reflection 

 will be requisite to convince us, that though the 

 prosperity of the labourers and a high price of corn 

 may have been contemporaneous, the latter was 

 not the cause of the former, except with the aid, 

 and through the intervention of concomitant causes, 

 which cannot again be brought into operation." 

 That, during the war, Lord Fitzwilliam says, the 

 higher rate of wages was occasioned by the in- 

 creased demand for labour, and not by the increased 

 price of corn. But what was the cause of the in- 

 creased demand for labour ? Why the great in- 

 creased demand for home grown corn, which raised 

 the price, and induced the improvement and exten- 

 sion of agriculture. Yet his lordship's main propo- 

 sition is,that the price of all labour is governed by the 

 price of corn . This he seems to consider an admitted 

 truth ; for he unqualifiedly states that high wages 

 are the result of dear corn. Yet in his zeal to 

 prove that the Corn Laws create unmixed evil, 

 that they inflict an injury upon the agricultural la 

 bourer, he affirms that the high price of corn did 

 not occasion the high rate of wages which the 

 labourer received during the war. Surely such 

 reasoning is conflicting and inconsistent. The price 

 of corn generally governs the rate of wages of the 

 labourer in husbandry, or it does not. The price 

 of the necessaries of life originally governed the 



E2 



