172 APPENDICES. 



VCheers.) That is one side of the (lucscicm— one side of 

 The comperisxm with France. But let us look at the other. 

 Does this system in France raise the cost of living? lie- 

 member that the duties in France are much greater t];an 

 anything I propose. The duty on corn in Franco to-day 

 is ]2s. 2id. a quarter— more than six times as much as 

 anything that I propose. The duty on meat is Id. a lb., 

 which is more than double what I propose. Now, if the 

 Kadioals were telling the Irutii — if what they say Were 

 correct — the cost of living in France ought to ba enormous, 

 and yet it is much lower than it is here.' (' Ecar, hear.') 

 It is probably true that the French peasant pays a little 

 more for his bread, but he gains so much on his meat, on 

 his vegetables, on his poultrj^ on his eggs — on all thesa 

 other things — that on the whole the cost of his living is 

 much lower and his margin at the end of the v»-cok is much 

 greater than that cf the labov.rer here. (' Hear, hear.') Now 

 these duties I speak of were imponed in France in the year 

 1892, and the latest figures only come down to 1900. But 

 in those eight years the price of wheat fell in France 20 

 per cent., while at the same time it only fell 11 per cent, in 

 this country. The price of beef fell 10 per cent, in France 

 and it rose 2 per cent, iu this country, and the price cf 

 beef in 1900 in France was G.^d. a lb., while the price of 

 the same beef in England averaged 9d. a lb. 



The Pkice cf Food. 

 "Now what is the result of the foregoing figures? The 

 result is tliis — that the duty, any duty, placed on the 

 products of agriculture does not necessarily increase the 

 price of food (' hear, liear ') ; and I will say more than that ; 

 I will say tliat it never has in our experience, or in the 

 (Xjierience of any foreign country, increased the 2^rice of 

 food to a 2Jro2wrf.ionate or equivalent amount. (Cheers.) Bid 

 if it does not increase the price of food it doei*, in all ca.eft, 

 extend the production of food, increase the employment of 

 labour, and cheapen the ultimate cod to the consumer. My 

 proposals, therefore, I say, will bring to the labourer more 

 employm^ent, and will not raise the cost of his living. Bat 



* Headers will find further farts on this iti(vrc':iiv.(j i-'ohd 

 fif'vhere in this book. 



