Page:History of the Anti corn law league - Volume 2.pdf/248

due to this house that I should point out certain fallacies into which those who support the present motion have fallen, and lay before it the different situation of Ireland, as contrasted with the situation of this country. The situation of Ireland is this: we are a great agricultural country without manufactures, and we depend, as a vent for our produce, on the markets of England. If, then, you admit the importation of foreign corn, duty free, you will throw us completely out of the English market; agriculture in Ireland will be neglected; and not only will you sacrifice the only interest existing in that country, but also the landed interest of England, for the benefit of the continental growers of corn. When we shall have ceased to cultivate our land at home, and when foreign nations find that we have so ceased, they will take advantage of our want of home production, and raise the price of their own corn at pleasure, and thus we should be left at the mercy or the whim and caprice of the foreign market. It has been said that the Irish members are unanimous in their determination to oppose it. I think I speak the sentiments of a large majority of those members, when I state that the agitation of this question will do considerable mischief in Ireland, and that mischief will be increased, if a determination to put it aside for some time is not manifested by a very large majority of this house. This is the only question, as it appears to me, in which the interests of the two countries are completely united and identical. The honourable member for Middlesex says that this is a question of justice against injustice—of the many against the few. But what is the reason that we have not heard of any manifestations of public opinion against the Corn Law? It is this—that while those persons who oppose the present system reside in large towns, and are easily called together in order to express their wishes to this house, the great agricultural population, who are interested in the continuance of the system, are spread thickly over the face of the country, and have not the same facilities for meeting together to declare their opinions upon the subject. It is said that the repeal of the Corn Lays will make bread cheap, without reducing the value of the land. This is a doctrine I cannot comprehend. If you reduce the price of the produce, rent must fall; if you keep up the standard of rent, you cannot reduce prices; and if not, how can you give the people cheap bread? I rose with a determination not to mix ap any extraneous matter with the subject of this debate. I appeal again to the house not to allow itself to be led away by the absurdities or assertions of the honourable member for Middlesex. Without troubling the house any farther, I conclude by imploring the members from Ireland to consider this as a neutral question, threatening in its consequences, if carried, the annihilation of the liberty, rights, and protection of the poor man, and unanimously to resist the motion,'