Your letter arrived here whilst I was in Gloucestershire. I came to town
last night, having on Monday presided at the County meeting, and made a
return of our two members.
I thank you for your inquiries after the infant[189] that you left so
ill.... It died ... on the day you left London. Dr. Holland was
surprised at the rapidity with which the disease advanced....
I believe it is now finally settled that I am not to be in Parliament,
and truly glad I am that the question is at any rate settled, for the
certainty of a seat could hardly compensate me for the disagreeables
attending the negociation for it. Mr. Clutterbuck's[190] answer
announced to me that the seat he had in view for me was disposed of; and
thus end my dreams of ambition.
Having once consented to yield to the opinion of my friends, I let no
opportunity slip of getting into the Honourable House; but I am fully
persuaded that, if I consult my own happiness only, I shall do wisely in
stopping where I am. It is easier to animadvert on the actions of others
than to act with wisdom ourselves; and I strongly fear that I want both
the judgment and discretion which are requisite to make a tolerable
senator. I am surprised at the kindness and consideration with which my
friends now treat me, and it would be a great want of prudence to afford
them more easy means of sifting my claims.
I am equally pleased with you that Sir Samuel Romilly's election is
going on so well in Westminster, and more pleased than you will be at
Sir Francis Burdett's recent success on the poll[191]. Sir Francis is, I
think, a consistent man. I believe Bentham's book has satisfied him that
there would be no danger in universal suffrage; but his main object, I
am sure, is to get a real representative government; and he would think
that object might be [secur]ed by stopping very far short of universal
suffrage. [With] such opinions it is a mere question of prin[ciple][192]
(as to the obtaining of his object) whether he shall ask for the more or
the less extended suffrage. I agree with you that it would be more
prudent to ask for the less, and I agree also with you in thinking that
with our present experience we should not venture on universal suffrage
if it could be had. I am glad, however, to find, that you think the
election in Westminster will afford us a fair sample of the sense of the
nation.
I will take care that all demands against you shall be faithfully
discharged.
I have not left myself room to enter at any length into the question of
the comparative advantage of employing capital in agriculture or on
manufactures[193]. If by wealth you mean as I do all those things which
are desirable to man, wealth I think would be most effectually increased
by allowing corn to be grown or imported as best suits those concerned
in the trade. You say that in the one case the corn obtained would only
be sufficient to support the workmen employed _and pay fully the profits
of stock_; and in the other case it would pay in addition the increased
amount of rent, and support an additional population proportioned to it.
Now, _if the profits of stock to be paid fully_ in one case would be
much greater both in value as defined by you, and in value as defined by
me, than in the other, it is evident that the difference might not only
equal the additional amount of rent but exceed it. I contend that the
profits of stock would be higher than this whole amount if we consented
to import corn, and therefore, although I will admit that in the case
supposed our wealth has increased by the increase of rent from 1790 to
1818, yet I would contend that, if the trade had been free, and corn had
been imported in preference to growing it, under the new and improved
circumstances of agriculture, our wealth would have increased in a still
greater ratio than it now has done....
Truly yours,
DAVID RICARDO.
NOTE.--In the new Parliament of 1818 Portarlington was represented,
as in the last Parliament, by Richard Sharp, who seems to have
retired in the course of six or seven months, for we find Ricardo's
name in a division list as early as March 2, 1819. (Hansard, _sub
dato_, p. 846.) It was a pocket borough, and there is nothing to
show that Ricardo ever visited his constituents; but this did not
prevent him from strongly denouncing the system of election. The
biographer of J. B. Say asserts (apparently on pure conjecture) that
Ricardo had bought an estate at Portarlington, and with it the seat
in Parliament as one of its appurtenances (Say, Oeuvres Diverses,
p. 406): 'Possesseur de vastes domaines, il s'en trouvait qui, par
un abus deplore par lui-meme, lui donnaient entree au parlement.' In
his Biography of James Mill, p. 172, Professor Bain speaks as if
Ricardo had entered Parliament at the General Election in 1818.