Darlaston, September 8, 1843.
Sir,--Twelve months ago the editor of the _Morning Chronicle_ allowed a
letter of mine, referring to the distress then prevailing in this town,
to appear in that journal; in it I stated that for our annual wake only
twenty-four cows had been killed, when but a few years previously
ninety-four had been slaughtered on a similar occasion. Perhaps you will
permit me to state in your columns that this year the festival, in this
particular, has afforded as melancholy and unquestionable proof of
distress as the last, while it bore other evidence, which though
trivial in itself, is not unworthy of notice. Last year two theatrical
shows visited us, displaying their "Red Barn" tragedies, and illuminated
ghosts, at threepence per head, at which they did well; as also did a
tremendous giantess, a monstrously fat boy, and several other "wonderful
works of nature:" this year only one show of any description attended,
and that, with kings and queens, and clowns, as well dressed and
efficient, and ghosts, as white and awe-inspiring as ever paraded before
an audience, has reaped but an indifferent harvest at the "low charge of
one penny each;" while the swing boats and wood horses, patronized with
such glee by the miniature men and women attending and enjoying wakes
and fairs, only worked half time. The physical-force majority in the
House, and their aiders and abettors, were they to see this, would
perhaps laugh at the petty details, but their doing so would not in the
least detract from their truth, or render questionable for a moment the
deductions I make from them,--that poverty is so wide spread and bitter
that the poor are compelled to make a stern sacrifice of innocent
amusements; that the parent cannot exercise the holiest affections of
his nature, by adding to the pleasures of his lisping little ones; that
the landowners' corn law, by its paralyzing influence, is rapidly
withering the great mass of the industry of the country into idle,
dispiriting pauperism.
From inquiries I have made I learn that through the country generally
the wakes, and fairs, and races, have presented similar features to
those I have described above, so far as money goes. And in face of the
distress, of which these things bear glaring witness, the Prime Minister
says "that the distress has been produced by over-production." Can Sir
Robert be serious when he talks of "over-production?" If he be, and will
condescend to honour me with a visit during his stay at Drayton Manor,
which is only a short drive of sixteen miles from here, I will show him
that the opinion is fallacious. He shall dispense with his carriage for
a short time, and I will walk him through all the streets of Darlaston,
Wednesbury, Willenhall, Bilstow, &c., and, forsaking the thoroughfares
frequented by the gay and well-to-do, he shall visit the back
streets--in which carriage passengers never deign to go--of Birmingham,
Wolverhampton, and Walsall, and what he will witness in the course of
the short ramble will "change the spirit of his dream." In Darlaston, as
a sample of what he would see, there are hundreds of men and women whose
clothes, made of the coarsest materials, are patched, and threadbare,
and valueless; hundreds of houses without anything in them deserving the
name of furniture; hundreds of beds without clothing, and hundreds of
children whose excuses for clothes are barely sufficient, with every
contrivance decent poverty can suggest, to cover the body as civilized
society demands. In the towns I have enumerated, in fact, if the least
reliance may be placed in newspaper reports, in every town and village
in the country the same want prevails to a much greater extent than can
be conceived by such as Sir Robert, "who fare sumptuously every
day,"--aye, even to a much greater extent than is generally supposed by
the above-want dwellers in large towns whom business may frequently
bring in contact with those who toil. With the millions, then, who in
this country must be next to naked, without furniture in their houses,
without clothes to cover their straw beds, is it not the nonsense of
nonsense to talk of "over-production." Enable these men to satisfy the
wants of themselves and families, enable them to make their homes
comfortable, and that alone would find employment for a goodly number,
while those so employed would also be enabled to purchase the articles
others are engaged in manufacturing. To produce so desirable a result,
nothing is wanted but FREE TRADE repeal the corn and provision laws, and
the shadow of "over production" could not exist: in three months there
is not a man in the kingdom who would not have full work. And when we
had supplied the physical wants of our population (a greater task than
it appears at the first view), we should have introduced from every
corner of the world the luxuries which refine civilization; the artisan
building himself a house would then make it more comfortable and
healthy, with wood floors, carpets, better furniture, &c.; and the
master manufacturer erecting a house would have marble stairs and floor
in his entrance hall, doors, &c. of mahogany, furniture, of rarer woods,
and ornaments of marble, paintings, plate glass, &c.; and when all these
things were procured, "over-production" would be still as far behind us
as during their acquisition, as we would then work but three days a week
instead of six, as with so much labour we should be able to procure the
necessaries and luxuries of life.
And all nations would be compelled to minister to our real and created
wants, for England is the only nation in the world incapable of
internally supplying its inhabitants with food, and therefore, under
Free Trade, has the command of the markets of the whole world. Then the
English merchant going to, say America, to dispose of manufactures need
not fear the merchant of France, Belgium, Germany, &c., he may meet
there with similar goods; for the American asking each what he requires
for the articles offered, is told by the former, "I will take your
surplus corn in exchange, we want every year from six to ten millions of
quarters;" and this latter answers, "We have more corn at home of our
own growth than we can consume, I must have cash;" the American,
preferring barter, will turn on his heel and trade with the Englishman;
the unsuccessful applicant takes back his goods, or visits the market no
more, and confines his future operations to the home supply of his own
country, which in a short time, from competition and want of a foreign
outlet, fail to realise a remunerating profit; trade is gradually
relinquished; the people turn again to the more extensive cultivation of
the land, and England obtains another customer. This is no "castle
building," if there be the least affinity between the results of great
things and small ones. If a grocer want a coat he will have it from the
tailor who will take sugar and tea in payment, in preference to
patronising one who requires pounds shillings and pence, and the owners
of land in all countries will take right good care that they derive some
sort of revenue from their possessions. I say, I think my premises are
no "castle buildings;" neither do I think I am indulging in aerial
erections when I predict that, under Free Trade, England, with her
capital, and energy, and enterprise, would shortly become the world's
granary, profitably supplying from her accumulated stores the
deficiencies resulting from bad harvests, or other casualties of her
continental neighbours.
Your obedient Servant,
G.W.G.
* * * * *
_We are much obliged to J. Livesay, of Preston, for his suggestion,
which, however, if he compare the_ ECONOMIST _with other weekly papers
he will perceive to be unnecessary. We presume we are indebted to Mr
Livesay for copies forwarded of his excellent little paper the_
Struggle.
* * * * *
R.B., Bristol.--_From the great press of room last week we were
obliged to omit everything that did not appear of very pressing
haste. In the Preliminary Number we have used no statistics but
such as we have derived from official sources, and we shall always
be glad to give the authority on which any statistical statement is
made. The statement of the quantity of sugar exported from Java and
Madeira, page 10 of the Preliminary Number, will be found in Part
VIII, 1838, page 408, of the_ Tables of Population, Revenue,
Commerce, &c., _presented by the Board of Trade to both Houses of
Parliament, from 1826 to 1837;--and the quantities, from 1837 to
1841, are derived from the Dutch official accounts._
H.H., S---- court, London.--_The returns showing the quantity of
flax imported up to the 5th of August, viz., 774,659 cwts., are
official, but do not distinguish the ports from which it was
shipped. The latest year for which such distinction has been made
to this time is for the year 1841; for which, or any preceding year
back to 1832, we shall be glad to furnish the particulars: for
example, in 1840 the imports of flax and tow were--from_
Cwts.
Russia 870,401
Denmark 1,094
Prussia 135,590
Germany 8,105
Holland 113,108
Belgium 80,748
France 43,295
Gibraltar 19
Italy and the Italian Islands 746
The Morea 3
Turkey 107
Egypt 12
United States 1
Guernsey, &c. 11
---------
Total - 1,253,240
C.D.F.----, near Rochdale.--_The question connected with the New
Customs Amendment Bill has engaged our best attention, but its
investigation has raised two or three very nice points of
international law, on which we are now taking the best opinion
which can be obtained, and before our next number we shall be able
to give a reply as satisfactory as can possibly be obtained from
any quarter on this important but very nice question. We have now
before us the whole of the particulars of the treaties in question,
but we wish to make our reply valuable by giving the best legal
construction on some disputable points. This, however, is only
another of those daily evidences which we have of the absurdity and
inconvenience of a great commercial country like this attempting to
regulate its laws and transactions by treaties, which, however
convenient they may be when made, may, by the ordinary course of
events, be rapidly changed._