The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Abbreviations
• 300.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 290 & 299]
• 301.: Ricardo to Murray1
• 302.: Ricardo to Mill1[answered By 303]
• 303.: Mill to Ricardo2[reply to 298 & 302]
• 304.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 295.—ANSWERED By 307]
• 305.: Ricardo to Place2
• 306.: Sharp to Ricardo2
• 307.: Ricardo to Trower2[reply to 304]
• 308.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[answered By 309]
• 309.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 308.—ANSWERED By 310]
• 310.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 309.—ANSWERED By 314]
• 311.: Trower to Ricardo1[answered By 312]
• 312.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 311]
• 313.: Ricardo to Trower2
• 314.: Mcculloch to Ricardo4[reply to 310.—ANSWERED By 315]
• 315.: Ricardo to Mcculloch3[reply to 314]
• 316.: Trower to Ricardo1[answered By 317]
• 317.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 316]
• 318.: Ricardo to Mill2[answered By 319]
• 319.: Mill to Ricardo1[reply to 318]
• 320.: Mill to Ricardo1
• 321.: Ricardo to Mill4[answered By 322]
• 322.: Mill to Ricardo3[reply to 321.—ANSWERED By 323]
• 323.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 322.—ANSWERED By 325]
• 324.: Malthus to Ricardo2[answered By 328]
• 325.: Mill to Ricardo4[reply to 323.—ANSWERED By 329]
• 326.: Ricardo to Place1
• 327.: Trower to Ricardo3[answered By 330]
• 328.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 324.—ANSWERED By 338]
• 329.: Ricardo to Mill2[reply to 325.—ANSWERED By 332 & 337]
• 330.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 327.—ANSWERED By 339]
• 331.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[answered By 333]
• 332.: Mill to Ricardo2[reply to 329]
• 333.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 331.—ANSWERED By 344]
• 334.: Brown to Ricardo1[answered By 336]
• 335.: Brown to Ricardo1[answered By 336]
• 336.: Ricardo to Brown1[reply to 334 & 335]
• 337.: Mill to Ricardo1[reply to 329]
• 338.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 328.—ANSWERED By 345]
• 339.: Trower to Ricardo3[reply to 330.—ANSWERED By 346]
• 340.: Bentham to Ricardo1
• 341.: Ricardo to Place2
• 342.: Place to Ricardo1[answered By 343]
• 343.: Ricardo to Place1[reply to 342]
• 344.: Mcculloch to Ricardo2[reply to 333.—ANSWERED By 349]
• 345.: Ricardo to Malthus2[reply to 338]
• 346.: Ricardo to Trower2[reply to 339]
• 347.: Say to Ricardo1[answered By 352]
• 348.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[answered By 349]
• 349.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 344 & 348]
• 350.: Ricardo to Heathfield1
• 351.: Ricardo to Trower1
• 352.: Ricardo to Say1[reply to 347.—ANSWERED By 356]
• 353.: Lord Grenville to Ricardo2
• 354.: Ricardo to Trower1
• 355.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[answered By 358]
• 356.: Say to Ricardo1[reply to 352]
• 357.: Ricardo to Trower1
• 358.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 355.—ANSWERED By 359]
• 359.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 358.—ANSWERED By 360]
• 360.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 359.—ANSWERED By 361]
• 361.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 360—answered By 366]
• 362.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[answered By 366]
• 363.: Ricardo to Malthus2
• 364.: Ricardo to Sinclair1
• 365.: Ricardo to Napier1
• 366.: Mcculloch to Ricardo3[reply to 361 & 362.—ANSWERED By 368]
• 367.: Ricardo to Bentham2
• 368.: Ricardo to Mcculloch3[reply to 366.—ANSWERED By 372]
• 369.: Bentham to Ricardo5
• 370.: Ricardo to Mill3
• 371.: Trower to Ricardo3[answered By 373]
• 372.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 368.—ANSWERED By 375]
• 373.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 371.—ANSWERED By 376]
• 374.: Ricardo to Mill2
• 375.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[reply to 372.—ANSWERED By 377]
• 376.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 373—answered By 380]
• 377.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 375.—ANSWERED By 381]
• 378.: Malthus to Ricardo1[answered By 379]
• 379.: Ricardo to Malthus2[reply to 378.—ANSWERED By 388]
• 380.: Ricardo to Trower2[reply to 376.—ANSWERED By 384]
• 381.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 377]
• 382.: Mill to Ricardo1[answered By 383]
• 383.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 382]
• 384.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 380.—ANSWERED By 387]
• 385.: Mill to Ricardo2[answered By 386]
• 386.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 385.—ANSWERED By 389]
• 387.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 384.—ANSWERED By 390]
• 388.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 379.—ANSWERED By 392]
• 389.: Mill to Ricardo1[reply to 386.—ANSWERED By 394]
• 390.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 387.—ANSWERED By 391]
• 391.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 390.—ANSWERED By 397]
• 392.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 388.—ANSWERED By 395]
• 393.: Say to Ricardo1[answered By 430]
• 394.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 389.—ANSWERED By 398]
• 395.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 392.—ANSWERED By 402]
• 396.: Grenfell to Ricardo1
• 397.: Trower to Ricardo4[reply to 391.—ANSWERED By 403]
• 398.: Mill to Ricardo2[reply to 394.—ANSWERED By 400]
• 399.: Mill to Ricardo2[answered By 400]
• 400.: Ricardo to Mill3[reply to 398 & 399]
• 401.: Ricardo to Mccullochcculloch3[answered By 406]
• 402.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 395.—ANSWERED By 404]
• 403.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 397.—ANSWERED By 410]
• 404.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 402.—ANSWERED By 405]
• 405.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 404.—ANSWERED By 408]
• 406.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 401.—ANSWERED By 407]
• 407.: Ricardo to Mccullochcculloch1[reply to 406.—ANSWERED By 412]
• 408.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 405]
• 409.: Ricardo to Mcculloch3[answered By 412]
• 410.: Trower to Ricardo2[reply to 403.—ANSWERED By 415]
• 411.: Malthus to Ricardo2
• 412.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 407 & 409.—ANSWERED By 416]
• 413.: Mill to Ricardo3[answered By 414]
• 414.: Ricardo to Mill2[reply to 413]
• 415.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 410.—ANSWERED By 419]
• 416.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[reply to 412.—ANSWERED By 417]
• 417.: Mcculloch to Ricardo2[reply to 416.—ANSWERED By 418]
• 418.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 417.—ANSWERED By 421]
• 419.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 415.—ANSWERED By 420]
• 420.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 419]
• 421.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 418.—ANSWERED By 422]
• 422.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 421.—ANSWERED By 424]
• 423.: Trower to Ricardo3[answered By 426]
• 424.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 422.—ANSWERED By 428]
• 425.: Tooke to Ricardo3
• 426.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 423]
• 427.: Tooke to Ricardo2
• 428.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 424.—ANSWERED By 431]
• Malthus to Sismondi1
• 429.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1
• 430.: Ricardo to Say2[reply to 393.—ANSWERED By 446]
• 431.: Mcculloch to Ricardo2[reply to 428.—ANSWERED By 433]
• 432.: Ricardo to Sinclair1
• 433.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[reply to 431.—ANSWERED By 434]
• 434.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 433.—ANSWERED By 436]
• 435.: Trower to Ricardo1[answered By 437]
• 436.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 434.—ANSWERED By 474]

355.

ricardo to m^cculloch1
[Answered by 358]

London 28 Feb^y. [1820]2

My dear Sir

It is a long time since I have written to you, and now I fear I have little to say worthy of engaging your attention. The death of the King has suspended all public business, and the great object of interest with all those by whom I am surrounded is the approaching election.3 To some it is an object of hope, and to others of fear, but as far as regards the strength of the two parties opposed to each other, I am told by the learned in those matters, that the ensuing parliament will not materially differ from the present one. My seat I believe is very secure, I shall represent the same place for which I am now returned. There has not been the least foundation for the report that I was to be a candidate for the County of Gloucester; I have not been invited to become such, nor if I had been, should I have consented to embark on so perilous an undertaking as a contest with the family of Beaufort.4 Col^l. Torrens will I fear have little chance of success at Rochester, and the probability, I think, is, that he will decline going to a Poll.1

I read with great pleasure the able articles which I see every week in the Scotsman. They continue to advocate the good cause without being betrayed into violence and intemperance of language. For the support which you have given to my hint in the House of Commons about the payment of the National Debt I am grateful.2 It always gives me satisfaction to find my opinion confirmed by yours, and I am glad to know that you think it desirable that we should submit to the necessary sacrifices, to get rid of the overwhelming incumbrance which palsies all our efforts. The Stockholders are a very unreasonable class, and in all their remarks on my proposal, complain bitterly of my thinking they should not receive more than 70 for their 3 pc^ts. I do not know what they would say to you, who propose to pay them only at 40. A Reformed House of Commons, if ever we should possess so great a good, and if we should not the debt I believe may as well remain as it is, should on this question of price, do strict justice between the payers and receivers of taxes, and not heed the clamour which the selfish on either side should raise. From what I observe I am confident that this will not be the mode in which we shall get rid of the debt. Our burthens may, and will probably, continue to weigh us down for many years to come, but finally they will be forcibly thrown from our shoulders, and the stockholders instead of complaining, with injustice, as I think, that they were not to be paid at 100 for their 3 pc^ts., will have justly to complain of losing both their principal and interest.

The landholders and those concerned in Agriculture are loud in their complaints of the present corn laws, and will I expect make a forcible appeal to Parliament for their improvement, as they will call it. If we are to have laws to protect the landed interest I agree with the complainers that they should not be in the form in which they now exist, for they are calculated to produce the most mischievous variations in the price of corn which can neither be desirable to the grower nor to the consumer. A permanent tax on importation, to the amount only of the peculiar taxes to which the growth of corn1 is subject, would be I think the wisest policy, but it is probable that such a limited tax would be far from satisfying the landed interest. We should then have to chuse between a higher permanent tax, or a tax varying with the price. If the object be to sustain the price of corn at 80/p^r quarter it might be allowed to enter duty free when at that price—to pay a duty of 1s. p^r. q^r. when it fell to 79—2 when it fell to 78, and so on. A serious objection against this latter mode is that 80/- would become in some measure the maximum of price, whilst no means could be adopted to fix a minimum. The corn grower would not have much chance of selling his corn under any circumstances above 80/, but there is no limit to the low price, at which, on other occasions, he might be forced to sell. This is a disadvantage to which no other trade is exposed—if a manufacturer be subject to a glut of his commodity, and consequently to low prices, he is also benefited at times by an unusual demand and high prices. It is true the farmer might make allowances for this peculiar disadvantage, and might therefore insist on a greater general average of profits on that account. If he did so, this would of itself be in its operation a tax on corn, for it would necessarily fall on the consumer, and not on the landlord. Before any discussion takes place in the House of Commons I mean to refresh my memory with the substance of your excellent article on the Corn Laws.1 I do not at present recollect whether you have made any observation on that part of the subject on which I have now been writing.

I was very much pleased with Col. Torrens essay in the last Edinb^h. Review.2 I do not think there is more than one proposition in it which I should be disposed to dispute.3 Mr. Malthus, who passed 2 or 3 hours with me last week, was fully persuaded, till I undeceived him, that the article was written by you; he could hardly believe that Col. Torrens agreed so completely with the doctrines which both you and I have advocated.4 Mr. Malthus continues stoutly to deny that demand is only limited by production—he thinks that capital might be very mischievously augmented in a country, and he intends in his new publication to make some remarks on this which he conceives to be an erroneous doctrine on the part of the Reviewer.1 His book has been in the press a very long time, and must now be nearly ready for publication. In our conversation the other evening he maintained stoutly the opinions which he has long held, and which I cannot but think very far from being the correct ones. On the whole however he appears to me to have made some approximation to us, and I suspect that in his book the differences between us will not appear so great as they do in our conversations.

I hope your other engagements will not prevent you from bestowing a portion of your time on Political Economy. The science is already greatly indebted to you, but the public mind is not yet so informed as not to stand in need of all the aid which your pen can give it—I hope to see an article of yours in the next number of the Review.

I have lately seen Mr. Leonard Horner.2 On enquiring of him after you I was glad to find he was acquainted with you, and had so good an account to give of your health. Mr. F. Horner was a great loss to the House of Commons, he was a powerful supporter of all the good principles of Political Economy.

I am with the greatest esteem Yours very faithfully

David Ricardo

[1 ]Addressed: ‘J. R. MCulloch Esqr. / College Street / Edinburgh’.

MS in British Museum.—Letters to McCulloch, XI.

[2 ]In MS ‘1821’; but Ricardo’s frank on the cover and the postmark are dated 1820.

[3 ]George III died on 29 Jan., and Parliament was dissolved on 28 Feb. 1820.

[4 ]The Duke of Beaufort, whose son Lord R. E. H. Somerset was again returned for the County with Sir B. W. Guise. Mallet, in a Diary entry of 1823, after mentioning ‘the respect entertained for Mr Ricardo by his country neighbours and the gentlemen of the County’ which he had observed during his visit to Gloucestershire in 1817, adds: ‘but I am sorry to say, that an illiberal political feeling was generated by his exertions in the House, in favour of financial and political reform, and more particularly against all criminal proceedings for matters of opinion and works of religious controversy. This feeling grew so strong that notwithstanding his station in the County, his large landed property, his endeavours to promote industry and true charity in his neighbourhood, and the general esteem in which he was held, the Duke of Beaufort declined three years ago placing him in the Commission of the Peace for the County.’ (Political Economy Club, Centenary Volume, 1921, p. 213.)

[1 ]Torrens was induced, apparently after some resistance, to withdraw in favour of the other opposition candidate, Ralph Bernal, thus securing the latter’s unopposed return together with a Government candidate. He announced his decision in a somewhat embittered speech to the Rochester Electors on 6 March (reported in the Scotsman, 18 March 1820).

[2 ]‘Expediency and Practicability of Mr. Ricardo’s Plan for paying off the National Debt’, leading article in the Scotsman, 8 Jan. 1820. In this article McCulloch proposes paying off the 3 per cents. at 60, minus a further 15 or 20 per cent. because of the rise in the bullion value of money.

[1 ]‘the growth of corn’ replaces ‘land’.

[1 ]In the Supplement to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

[2 ]Edinburgh Review, Oct. 1819 (this was then ‘the last’ number; that for Jan. 1820 was not published till March, see below, p. 164), Art. XI, ‘Mr. Owen’s Plans for relieving the National Distress’. Cp. above, p. 82, n. 3.

[3 ]See below, p. 227.

[4 ]Cp. below, p. 376.

[1 ]See Malthus’s Principles of Political Economy, above, II, 313 ff.

[2 ]The brother and biographer of Francis Horner; he was one of the early members of the Geological Society.