304 LAND REFORM 



Touching the labour part of the question — during 

 the Corn Law agitation it was urged that Free Trade 

 meant "exchanging our manufactures for the corn of 

 other countries."^ The argument ever repeated 

 during the contest was that " every bushel of corn 

 imported would be paid for by British manufactures." 

 But this prediction, like almost every other made at 

 the time, has never been realized. The exact con- 

 trary result has been seen. 



Let us take the United States as an example. 

 Unfortunately the references to imports so far as 

 values are concerned cannot be carried further back 

 than 1854. But, taking quantities, we find that during 

 the first ten years (1847-56) after the repeal of the 

 Corn Laws the average yearly imports of wheat, wheat 

 meal, and flour from the United States were under 

 five million cwts. During the last ten years (1894- 

 1903) the average yearly imports of the same produce 

 were nearly fifty-six millions cwts. So that, accord- 

 ing to the Cobden theory — a theory which told so 

 effectively during the Corn Law agitation — our ex- 

 ports to the United States should have increased in 

 a like proportion.^ But the values of these exports 

 are available so far back as the years named, and 

 therefore a comparison can be made. We find that 

 during the first ten years (1847-56) our average yearly 

 exports of British and Irish produce to that country 

 were between 16 and 17 millions sterling, while during 

 the second period (1894- 1903), nearly fifty years later, 

 the, average yearly exports of the same kind of produce 



1 Cobden's speech, House of Commons, 25 August, 1841. 



* In this comparison the imports of wheat and wheat flour only are 

 taken. If the imports of other grain and meal are brought into account, 

 the disparity is enormously increased. 



