The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Prefatory Note
• Introduction to the Speeches In Parliament
• Lord Brougham’s Sketch of Ricardo In Parliament [from Historical Sketches of Statesmen Who Flourished In the Time of George Iii, Second Series, By Henry Lord Brougham, London, Charles Knight, 1839, Pp. 188–191]
• Speeches In the House of Commons
• Session 1819
• Poor Rates Misapplication Bill 25 March 1819
• First Report From the Bank of England Committee— Cash Payments Bill 5 April 1819
• Mr. Lyttelton’s Motion Respecting State Lotteries 4 May 1819
• Sinking Fund 13 May 1819
• Poor Rates Misapplication Bill 17 May 1819
• Bank of England— Resumption of Cash Payments 24 May 1819
• Exchequer Bills 2 June 1819
• The Budget 9 June 1819
• Bank Advances Bill 16 June 1819
• Excise Duties Bill 18 June 1819
• Session 1819–1820
• Seditious Meetings Prevention Bill 6 December 1819
• Sir W. De Crespigny’s Motion Respecting Mr. Owen’s Plan116 December 1819
• Motion For Papers Respecting the Bank of England and Exchequer Bills 22 December 1819
• Petition of the Merchants of London Respecting Commercial Distress 24 December 1819
• Session 1820
• Commercial Restrictions—petition of the Merchants of London18 May 1820
• Agricultural Distress 12 May 1820
• Agricultural Distress 30 May 1820
• Irish Protecting Duties12 June 1820
• Loan—ways and Means 9 June 1820
• Bank of England Accounts 13 June 1820
• The Budget 19 June 1820
• Committee of Supply121 June 1820
• Cotton Weavers 28 June 1820
• The Coronation 3 July 1820
• Session 1821
• Supply—bank of Ireland 2 February 1821
• Trade of Birmingham— Petition of the Merchants 8 February 1821
• Corn Averages 26 February 1821
• State of the Revenue—repeal of the House and Window Duties 6 March 1821
• Mr. Gooch’s Motion For a Committee On Agricultural Distress 7 March 1821
• Bank Cash Payments Bill 19 March 1821
• Bank Cash Payments128 March 1821
• Public Accounts129 March 1821
• Agricultural Horses Tax 5 April 1821
• Timber Duties15 April 1821
• Bank Cash Payments Bill 9 April 1821
• Usury Laws 12 April 1821
• Bank Cash Payments Bill 13 April 1821
• Timber Duties Bill 16 April 1821
• Reform of Parliament 18 April 1821
• Poor Relief Bill 8 May 1821
• Ordnance Estimates131 May 1821
• The Budget 1 June 1821
• Ill-treatment of Horses Bill 1 June 1821
• Session 1822
• Address On the King’s Speech At the Opening of the Session 5 February 1822
• Mr. Brougham’s Motion On the Distressed State of the Country 11 February 1822
• Saving Banks 18 February 1822
• Motion For a Committee On the Agricultural Distress 18 February 1822
• Ways and Means222 February 1822
• Navy Five Per Cents 25 February 1822
• Agricultural Distress 5 March 1822
• Banks of England, and of Ireland 8 March 1822
• Distress In Canada 13 March 1822
• Motion Respecting the Simplifying and Better Arrangement of the Public Accounts 14 March 1822
• Mr. Curwen’s Motion Respecting the Duties On Tallow and Candles 20 March 1822
• Extra Post—petition of Mr. Burgess 2 April 1822
• Agricultural Distress 3 April 1822
• Agricultural Distress and the Financial and Other Measures For Its Relief 29 April 1822
• Naval and Military Pensions 1 May 1822
• Agricultural Distress Report 7 May 1822
• Absentees 16 May 1822
• Colonial Trade Bill 17 May 1822
• Navigation Bill 20 May 1822
• Naval and Military Pensions 24 May 1822
• Bank Charter 31 May 1822
• Naval and Military Pensions 3 June 1822
• Corn Importation Bill 3 June 1822
• Navigation Bill14 June 1822
• Mr. Western’s Motion Concerning the Resumption of Cash Payments 12 June 1822
• Labourers’ Wages 17 June 1822
• Irish Butter Trade 20 June 1822
• Warehousing Bill 21 June 1822
• The Budget 1 July 1822
• Mr. Western’s Motion Respecting the Altered State of the Currency 10 July 1822
• Proposed Resolutions
• Session 1823
• Foreign Trade of the Country 12 February 1823
• Bank Balances 18 February 1823
• Financial Situation of the Country 21 February 1823
• Agricultural Distress—surrey Petition 26 February 1823
• Mr. Whitmore’s Motion Respecting the Corn Laws 26 February 1823
• Mr. Maberly’s Motion For the Reduction of Taxation 28 February 1823
• National Debt Reduction Bill 6 March 1823
• Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill 13 March 1823
• Mutiny Bill—foreign Relations 18 March 1823
• Coal Duties121 March 1823
• Warehousing Bill 21 March 1823
• Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill 24 March 1823
• Petition From Mary Ann Carlile For Release From Imprisonment 26 March 1823
• Crown Debtors—contempt of Court 10 April 1823
• Military and Naval Pensions Bill 18 April 1823
• Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill 18 April 1823
• Lord John Russell’s Motion For a Reform of Parliament 24 April 1823
• Scotch Linen Laws17 May 1823
• Tallow17 May 1823
• Spitalfields Silk Manufacture Acts—petition For the Repeal Thereof 9 May 1823
• Law of Principal and Factor—petition For an Alteration Thereof 12 May 1823
• Importation of Tallow—petition For an Additional Duty On 12 May 1823
• Beer Duties Bill 12 May 1823
• Silk Manufacture Bill 21 May 1823
• East and West India Sugars 22 May 1823
• Malt and Beer Tax 28 May 1823
• Wages of Manufacturers—use of Machinery 30 May 1823
• Irish Tithes Composition Bill 30 May 1823
• Reciprocity of Duties 6 June 1823
• Silk Manufacture Bill 9 June 1823
• Mr. Western’s Motion Respecting the Resumption of Cash Payments 11 June 1823
• Beer Duties Bill 13 June 1823
• Usury Laws Repeal Bill 17 June 1823
• Religious Opinions—petition of Ministers of the Christian Religion For Free Discussion 1 July 1823
• Ricardo’s Autograph Transcript of His Own Speech of 24 May 1819
• Evidence On the Usury Laws 1818
• Note On the Evidence On the Usury Laws
• Minutes of Evidence Taken Before the Select Committee On the Usury Laws
• Evidence On the Resumption of Cash Payments 1819
• Notes On the Evidence On the Resumption of Cash Payments
• Minutes of Evidence Taken Before the Secret Committee On the Expediency of the Bank Resuming Cash Payments
• Minutes of Evidence Taken Before the Lords Committees Appointed a Secret Committee to Enquire Into the State of the Bank of England, With Reference to the Expediency of the Resumption of Cash Payments At the Period Now Fixed By Law
• Speeches On Various Occasions
• I: General Court of Proprietors of the Bank of England121 March 1811
• II: General Court of Proprietors of the Bank of England121 December 1815
• III: General Court of Proprietors of the Bank of England18 February 1816
• IV: General Court of Proprietors of the Bank of England118 March 1819
• V: Meeting On Mr. Owen’s Plan226 June 1819
• VI: Gloucester County Meeting130 December 1820
• VII: Meeting At Hereford In Honour of Joseph Hume17 December 1821
• VIII: Westminster Reform Dinner123 May 1822
• IX: General Court of the East India Company112 June 1822
• X: General Court of the East India Company119 March 1823
• XI: Westminster Reform Dinner123 May 1823
• Two Papers On Parliamentary Reform
• Note On Two Papers On Parliamentary Reform
• Observations On Parliamentary Reform1by the Latemr. Ricardo
• Defence of the Plan of Voting By Ballot1by the Latemr. Ricardo
• Appendices
• I: Draft of a Letter to a Newspaper On the Effects of Peel’s Bill
• II: Notes On Western’s ‘second Address to the Landowners’, 1822

CORN IMPORTATION BILL
3 June 1822

The new corn bill based on Lord Londonderry’s resolutions [cp. above, p. 155], having been brought in, Mr. Canning proposed the addition of a clause to allow the taking of foreign corn out of the warehouse for being ground into flour for exportation. Sir T. Lethbridge opposed the clause as likely to promote the introduction into the home market of foreign corn in the shape of flour.

Mr. Ricardo agreed, that if the clause could not be introduced with a full security against the flour coming into the home market it ought not to be admitted; but, if that security could be found, it would be most unjust to deprive the holders of foreign corn of it. He thought the bill of the noble lord would be a great improvement on the present law. The hon. member for Cumberland1 founded all his arguments on the value of corn in pounds sterling; but he (Mr. R.) did not regard the pound sterling. He was anxious that the people should have an abundant supply of corn and an increase of their comforts, and he thought a greater freedom in the trade calculated to produce those effects. He differed entirely from the hon. member, as to the ill effects which it would have upon the demand for labour.

The clause was agreed to.

On the question that 70s. be the permanent price at which wheat shall be imported, Mr. Whitmore moved to substitute 64s.; Mr. Wodehouse moved to substitute 75s.

Mr. Ricardo1 expressed his surprise at the proposition of the hon. member for Norfolk;2 since the most active supporters of the agricultural interest had declared that 67s. would afford adequate protection to the farmer. He thought the proposition of the hon. member for Bridgenorth3 deserving the support of the House. High protecting prices would only benefit the landlord at the expense of the rest of the community, not excepting even the farmer.

The original clause was agreed to.

10 June 1822

On the report stage, Lord Londonderry said that as there was so strong an opinion against the clause for grinding foreign wheat, he would oppose it.

Mr. Ricardo said, that unless the agriculturists could show that injury would arise to them from the adoption of the clause, parliament should not hesitate to give to the foreign importer the proposed relief.

The house divided on the clause: Ayes, 21; Noes, 116. Ricardo voted for the clause. The bill was then passed.

[1 ]Mr. Curwen. His speech is not reported in Hansard.

[1 ]This speech is reported more at length in the Morning Chronicle: ‘Mr. Ricardo observed, that it had been not long ago admitted by the Member for Wiltshire (Mr. Benett), who could not be supposed too favourable to his views, that 65s. or 66s. was a fair protecting price. His Honourable Friend, however, did not propose that the import price should be reduced to 64s. till the price had previously reached 80s.; for such would be the effect of the Amendment engrafted on the Bill. When that had happened the markets of the world would be restored to that state in which such an import price would be perfectly safe. The Amendment, therefore, was not rash or theoretical, but a sound and well matured proposition, and was to be received with the greater attention, as it came from a Gentleman whose property entirely consisted of land. All they had hitherto heard of the necessity of raising prices was very well if they legislated only for the landlords; but they could give nothing to them without taking it out of the pockets of the people, and unfortunately, for every one pound they gave the landlord they took two or three from the consumer, the difference being swallowed up in the cost of production. He had hitherto asked in vain what protection this measure would afford to the farmer? To the farmer it must be ruinous. When his crop was defective he was deprived of his high price, and when his harvest was abundant it was impossible for him to get anything like a remunerating price.’

[2 ]Mr. Wodehouse.

[3 ]Mr. Whitmore.