Agricultural Revolution \ i 



period of abundance came to an end. Between that year and 1791 

 there were very fe\y_ie_alljrood harvests 1 . In the second place, 

 while the home production oTwheaF\vas thus decreasing, population 

 \vasjncreasing. As a natural consequence, England passed soon after 

 1750 from the position of a corn-exporting J^thaJLQL^ corn-importing 

 country. But even increasing imports could not reduce the price to 

 the low level of the first half of the century, in view of the growing 

 demand and the lessened home supply. On the contrary, it rose 

 higher and higher. Conditions became still more unfavourable with 

 the outbreak of the French war in 1793. In the period which followed 

 (1792 to 1813) the harvests were quite extraordinarily bad 2 , while 

 population was still increasing rapidly, viz. by 3,000,000 persons in 

 the twenty years 1790 to 1811. These two circumstances by them- 

 selves would have sufficed to drive up corn-prices, but further the 

 wars, and above all Napoleon's ContinentaLjSystem, hindered and 

 even prevented the necessary, regular ^ jmportation of^ corn. While an 

 import "of about i^ million quarters in 1801 had not been sufficient to 

 stave off dearth and starvation, between 1806 and 1813 the imports 

 never exceeded 400,000 quarters, though the home harvests were 

 most unfavourable 3 . This conjunction of bad seasons, inadequate im- 

 ports and rapidly growing population seems fully sufficient to explain 

 the rise in prices. 



The e ffect_of_the rise on the mass of the^ people was terrible. 

 After the 'good times they had enjoyed in the period oraFuridarice 

 they now found themselves plunged into misery, privation and famine. 

 The increase of population seemed to be a curse. All the progress 

 made in the first half of the eighteenth century was lost again. The 

 very word "labourers" was almost universally replaced by the term 

 " labouring poor." 



The deterioration in the position of the working classes is especially 

 traceable in the decrease in the purchasing power ofjvages. It is 

 true that wagegjjd^Tise^with the rise In corn^pnees- But that rise 

 was insigrSficantTin face~~oF~tIie facTTrlaT^trre --price of provisions 

 generally had risen in a much greater proportion. The nominal wage 

 did indeed increase, but real wages fell lower and lower. Thus 

 according to the figures given by various authorities, the wages of 

 the agricultural labourer rose between 1760 and 1813 by 60 per cent., 



1 Tooke, op. cit. pp. 50, 81 f. 



2 Ibid., pp. 84 f., 179 ff., 258 ff., 293 ff. 



3 Reports respecting Grain and the Corn Laws, November 1814, p. 121. 



