92 



put the country to such danger ? I will answer in 

 the words of Mr. Huskisson, * " the history of the 

 country for the last one hundred and seventy years 

 clearly proves, on the one hand, that cheapness pro- 

 duced by foreign import is the sure forerunner of 

 scarcity, and on the other, that steady home supply is 

 the only foundation of steady and moderate prices." 

 And Mr. Jacob states in his evidence, " that if we 

 were to diminish th egrowth of English .wheat by 

 one-tenth part of that now produced, we should be in 

 an unsafe state in case of a deficient harvest, for all 

 the world could not make up the deficiency." If this 

 opinion be correct, or if it approximate to correct- 

 ness, how very necessary it is to encourage our own 

 agriculture, that we may not be placed in this state 

 of fearful dependence. 



Trade and commerce it is true, have been a means 

 of stimulating our agriculture, increasing our wealth, 

 adding to our enjoyments, extending our intercourse 

 and our power. Though it is true that they have 

 been a means of developing the productive powers of 

 the country, of extending our resources, and adding 

 Jo our glory ; yet trade and commerce are not sure 

 foundations for the power and wealth of a great State 

 to rest upon. They are ephemeral, but agriculture is 

 enduring. Which should policy most regard ? Which 

 should Legislators most care for, that which is per- 

 manent, or that which is precarious ? It is not for 

 the interest of this kingdom that the exotic and 

 weaker plant should usurp the place of the British 

 oa k ; that huge mis-shapen manufacturing piles 

 * Mr. Huskisson's Letter, page 9. 



