Page:History of the Anti corn law league - Volume 2.pdf/204

 member for Knaresborough, who had thought it decent to give notice of an amendment on the present occasion, to meet and answer this point."

Effect on the demand for agricultural labour:—

"With respect to the notion of the repeal of the Corn Laws displacing agricultural labour, the right honourable gentleman gave the House none of the data upon which that fancy was founded. He supposed, of course, that the right hon. gentleman calculated upon agricultural labour being displaced, as the consequence of certain lands being thrown out of cultivation. Now, looking at what had been said by agriculturists themselves, he was at a loss to understand that the neccessary consequence of a reduction of prices would be to throw any considerable quantity of land out of cultivation. The fact, he believed, was that, if a little science and economy were applied to the cultivation of the land, a low price might pay the labour of cultivation, and yield a good profit. A nobleman, distinguished for his knowledge of agriculture, Lord Ducie, declared publicly, that all apprehension upon this score was a fallacy, and that without paying rent they could produce wheat on almost any land at lower prices than those quoted at any port. (Hear.) Now, it was obvious, that before land could be thrown out of cultivation, it must have given up paying rent; and before it ceased to support the labourer, it must go to waste. The right hon. gentleman ought to have shown at what prices land could not be cultivated with a prospect of profit; and he would have to show that it would not be worth the mere application of industry required for cultivation, before he declared that the lowering of prices in the market would be followed by the displacement of labour. He (Mr. Villiers) thought it probable that the right hon. gentleman would not repeat this argument again to-night. Since he had formerly used it, he had possibly read what had been said by men who knew something about the subject, and he had doubtless profited by it. But there was another argument which the right hon. gentleman had since advanced; it was to this effect:—that we should be careful how far we risked the reduction of rent, lest owners of land should themselves become farmers. The right hon. gentleman was afraid that the farmers themselves would be ousted from their tenancies, and the landowners, by cultivating their own land, become useful members of society. ('Hear, hear,' and a laugh.) Now, he did not think that the right hon. gentleman need labour under any very serious apprehension on this score. He did not think that the firstborn of the land would be very likely to take to a very industrious and laborious pursuit as long as they could be more agreeably employed in doing nothing. Let him not be alarmed—let him rest satisfied that, during his time at least, those who