Page:History of the Anti corn law league - Volume 2.pdf/179

 "If the noble lord intend it for revenue merely—if he think there is no claim on the part of the agricultural interest to protection in any shape whatever, then I retain my opinion that the noble lord will find it extremely difficult to resist the argument, that if this duty be laid on foreign corn for the purpose of revenue only, and not for protection, why not apply it to corn of domestic produce ? (Lond cries of Hear, bear, in which several of the free-trade members joined.) When the noble lord is defending his fixed duty on wheat, as a fixed duty imposed, not for protection, but for revenue, he will have the case of barley and of malt quoted against him (hear, hear); and would be told that with respect to other descriptions of corn, such as barley, we do raise a large revenge from our domestic produce, and that if you think it right to have a duty on wheat, not for protection, but for revenue, why not lay a tax on wheat ground at the mill, and not confine yourselves to taxes on the imports? (Loud cries of Hear, hear.) Why not pursue, with respect to wheat, the course you have taken with respect to barley, and subject both foreign and home produce to equal duties-provided you are sincere in enforcing your duty, not on account of protection, bat really for revenue"

Sir Robert went on to dispel the fears lurking in the "agricultural mind." After intimating that, should the agriculturists ever arrive at preference of a fixed duty over a sliding scale, it would devolve on Lord John Russell rather than on himself, he said:—The experience we have had of the present law has not shaken my preference for a graduated duty; and although I consider it inconsistent with my duty, to make engagements for adherence to existing laws, under all circumstances, in order to conciliate support, I can say, that the government have never contemplated, and do not contemplate any alteration in the existing law." With Sir Robert the contest was to be between entirely free trade in corn, and the existing law, which imposed a duty of 20s. a quarter on the importation of wheat, the price of which was then 50s. 9d. Lord Howick, with this distinction of contending parties, said he know which side to take:—

"The controversy had been kept up so long that he almost doubted whether, even without that very significant speech which had fallen