severance made on this occasion between the case of the grower and that of the consumer; and to shew why trade is to be free against the latter, while it is to be restricted when it operates in his favour? How came he not to call for a statement of the grounds on which they justify this apparent partiality? Reasonings savouring of the sentimental might not very well become Mr.Rose, nor do they figure much in his pages; and though it be true that considerations of humanity speak powerfully in favour of his conclusions, yet it is not less clear that those of policy alone are sufficient for his purpose. Were men mere automata, incapable of suffering distress and pain from oppressive enactments, or of being pinched by want and hunger, still Mr. Rose's objections would be well founded.

The case of this veteran statesman is somewhat curious. Having, during the whole of his active life, assisted in imposing those burdens on the country under which it now groans, having never been known to object to any measure on popular or constitutional grounds, but on the contrary_having been always regarded as the most pliant of men in office, and supposed to have no will but that of his principals, he has lately shewn himself the champion of the popular side of the present question, has been posted on our walls as the friend of the poor, and been charged by patriots with being seditious! Though, however, Mr. Rose has incurred the displeasure of land-holders, he is very averse from an entire freedom of trade as applied to corn; and he is a friend to restrictions, equally with the committee which he arraigns: he only objects to the scale on which they have been framed, and with which he professes (as we think, not without reason,) to be shocked.

On the side of the arena opposite to that on which Mr. Rose appears, we find Mr. Western. This gentleman comes forwards as the avowed defender of the corn-laws, but professes to be a warm friend and admirer of the freedom of trade. If, says he, an entire freedom of trade could be established, it would be for the advantage of mankind in general; and yet he elsewhere states that, on the plan of free import, even supposing the foreign trade to receive no interruption, the consumer would be miserably disappointed in his expectation of producing a cheaper or more abundant supply.' He observes, with much apparent complacency, that the duties imposed on importation by the old corn-laws amounted to a prohibition;' while, from the praises which he takes every occasion to bestow on them, we infer that laws which would have a similar present effect would meet with his cordial approbation. Apprehensions that the restrictions should be carried too far are never expressed by him, while he avows his fears

that

that they may not be sufficiently high. Our old corn-laws are extolled for having, as he asserts, rendered us an exporting country; and he inveighs against our later legislation, because under it we have uniformly been large importers: but may it not be asked what signifies it that we have exported at one time and imported at another, unless it be shewn to what cause this difference is to be ascribed? Will Mr. Western say that corn has been produced in less quantities in later times; or rather must he not, and does he not in these pages, distinctly admit that its production has increased in a degree that almost surpasses belief? As Mr. Western cannot deny this to be the case, he is driven to contend that, under such legislation as he would establish, the abundance would have been much greater: but no attempt is made to shew how this would be effected. The honourable member can see no limit to our possible production, but the limit of demand! He was not, we dare say, aware that, when he thus expressed himself, he was asserting the direct reverse of a proposition which forms as it were the text of a celebrated modern treatise*,-a treatise which has conferred immortality on its author, and placed him in the foremost rank of philosophers. Until free trade and the restrictions on it shall have changed places, and the latter be made the rule and the former the exception, the present speech can receive from intelligent men no other commendation than that of being well meant. Mr. Western is a valuable member of parliament, and a very worthy private gentleman; and if he appears too exclusively to consult the interest of the grower, it must be recollected that in his mind such interest is identified with that of the consumer.

A nobleman of great abilities, who, when any question af fecting the general welfare is in agitation, uniformly displays plebeian industry and energy, closes our present list of publicists. Like Mr. Western, he is the warm advocate of the corn-laws, and is equally anxious not to be supposed to be wanting in respect for free trade. The two staunch whigs seem as it were to vie with each other in professions of this kind: but, if we believe them, free trade, although most excellent, is only such in given circumstances, circumstances which unfortunately never have been and are never likely to be realized. While much general praise is bestowed by both these senators on free trade, the real objects of their partiality are the protecting duties, and the monopoly of the home-market. These they recommend with equal zeal and earnestness to the support as well of the consumer as the grower; these, they tell us, are

See Malthus's Essay on Population.

the

the only sure and permanent sources of abundance, and ultimately even of cheapness!

In perusing the greater part of the present labours of Lord Lauderdale, we were surprized to perceive that he did not advert to those obvious considerations, which overset the principal positions that his work is intended to establish. It is not until near the close of it that any allusion is made to them; and they are, when we find them, very briefly stated, and as slightly noticed. These are, in the words of the author, our increased population, the greater number of horses and cattle at this day maintained, and an augmentation of consumption arising from our present opulence. Had the noble Earl given as much consideration to these facts as to the topics before us, his present tract, we are persuaded, would never have seen the light; and, if he were now to take them up and expatiate on them to the same extent and with the same ability which he employs in these pages, he would completely refute his own publication, and produce a work more worthy of his talents, and more consistent with his principles. If he would compare the agriculture of this day, as it respects the quantity of land and the capital invested in it, the manner of carrying it on, and the amount of its produce, with the agriculture of his admired times, -if he would compare the improvements which have been made in it, and the extension which it has undergone during the latter part of the period which he decries, with its progress in any part of our history, or at any time in any country, we have no doubt that he would find it to be without parallel. Surely, if he had asked his intelligent mind what proportion the most abundant year of his favorite epoch bears to our present annual produce, the repeated praises of the same times and the corre sponding censures of those which followed would have found no place in the present Letter.' Is it fair, then, is it reasonable, is it worthy of a liberal manly mind, to refer to our own agriculture as something that languishes, or advances slowly? The noble author says that agriculture has not made so rapid a progress as some other branches of industry: but, admitting this to be the fact, what follows? Is the cause of the difference to be found in human negligence, or in the nature of things? Is Lord Lauderdale to have it impressed on him, for the first time, that the machinery concerned in the manufacture of corn, if we may so express ourselves, is incapable of being extended within our own dominions beyond a certain limit, and in course that there is a limit to the produce that can be derived from it, -although this limit cannot be seen by Mr. Western? Who knows better than the noble author, how little can be effected by legislation for the necessary arts? Although very rash asser

tions occur in his present tract, he will not deliberately deny that, from legislative interference, injury more frequently arises than benefit. He well recollects the celebrated answer of the Lyonese merchants, Laissez nous faire, which has since grown into an axiom. Will he insist that it would not have been better for British agriculture if it had never been made the subject of legislation?

With regard to the exportation of corn, are we not precisely in the same situation in which we should have been, had no law ever been made on this point? All the untenable positions which occur in Mr. Western's speech, with scarcely a single exception, are not less broadly laid down by Lord Lauderdale; who, equally with Mr. W., disregards the received laws of political economy, and equally excludes the agency of free trade from our foreign concerns. We are here taught that our distresses have been caused, not by our departing from free trade, but by our not having departed sufficiently from it; that our manufactures owe their flourishing state to legislative enactments; that, if any branch of industry is to be advanced, it must be by legislative provisions; that it must be fenced by protecting duties; that an established and favoured branch of industry requires the aid of bounties; that prohibitions produce abundance; and that monopoly causes cheapness. It is curious to observe how confidently these two statesmen ascribe the abundance of their favourite period to the legislation of that day; with which, except as far as it removed the mischiefs arising from former pernicious laws, we believe it had just as much connection as with the Acts of Uniformity and Toleration. Mr. W. and Lord L. seem at times to forget that abundance is a relative term, and not to be aware what a pitiful figure the abundance of their chosen epoch would make by the side of our scarcities. It would have gratified us much, if it had been attempted to be shewn in what manner legislation could have promoted agricultural improvements, beyond the effect produced by the high prices of late years. Would prohibitions, would the monopoly of the home market, would bounties on exportation, which are here so confidently recommended, have superseded, or in the least obviated, our late distresses?

Lord Lauderdale criticizes with great acuteness, and exposes with much ability, an erroneous observation which Dr. Smith uses as an argument against bounties: but thence his Lordship too hastily concludes that the proposition, which the argument was brought to overturn, is established. The abilities and intelligence of the noble Earl are well known; he has at times devoted much attention to the study of political economy,

economy, and has thrown light on several of its doctrines: but we do not think that he is intitled to place himself on the same platform with the immortal author of the "Treatise on the Wealth of Nations :"-much less has he any right to assume a sort of superiority over that profound writer, or to treat him as if he had only palmed errors on the world. Surely a more appropriate epithet than voluminous might have been applied to a work which reflected lustre on the age in which it appeared, and which is not exceeded in utility by any human production.

We must not forget to state that the last two authors wholly overlook the prejudice which would be occasioned to our manufactures by the legislation for which they contend; and that they do not at all advert to the objections which apply to excessive restrictions. Lord Lauderdale contends that, in the case of free trade being allowed, our taxes have the effect of a bounty in favour of the foreign grower. If this be the case, what reason can be urged to shew that foreign corn should not be liable to taxation, but should be on a better footing than that which is raised at home? If our necessities require that the corn which we raise should be taxed, surely the corn which we import should be subjected to a like imposition. Such a tax would not be a duty on importation, but a mere financial measure, a matter of necessary regulation. We are wholly unable to discover in what manner the tragic tale of the Vizier, or the relation of the tyrannical exactions and the impolitic distributions of corn among the antient Romans, bear on any practice relating to the present subject which prevails in this country.

The tract of Lord Lauderdale shews, as strongly as any that has ever fallen in our way, the powerful influence which preconceived notions may exercise over a vigorous and enlightened mind. We can no otherwise account for the many instances of loose observation and inconclusive reasoning, which a writer of such acknowleged ability and industry has here betrayed.

ART. XV.

Essays on the Principles of Political Philosophy, designed to illustrate and establish the Civil and Religious Rights of Man n; chiefly in reference to the present State of the British Empire. Inscribed by Permission to S. Whitbread, Esq., M.P. By Thomas Finch. 8vo. pp. 523. Baldwin. 1812.

THE

HE author of this work seems to entertain a humble opinion of himself, but a very exalted one of us or of some of our brethren; since he deprecates the sentence of criticism on his performance, and wishes his reviewers to confine their functions. to giving a fair analysis of his labours:

Should