time, £ 100 in money would purchase £142 in stock, yielding 40 per cent., for which he could have wheat at 67s. 4d. per quarter, and all other provisions in proportion. In 1810, £100 would command £147 of stock, yielding 4 per cent. interest. Wheat was then at 112s. per quarter, and commodities of all descriptions had greatly advanced. The improvements by building were not greater, notwithstanding the increase of population, than in 1803, the number of bricks consumed being little more in 1810 than in the former year, and the number of tiles being almost precisely the same. The owner of land near the cities was debarred from the advantage that would have arisen out of the increase of capital, and consequent growth of cities and towns. The owner of that in cultivation, had acquired a right to levy a tax upon the consumer of corn and other provisions, but he in his turn was taxed for the support of the labourers who were thereby deprived of the powers of supporting themselves, and at the same time subjected to the payment of a heavy tax upon his income for the maintenance of government.

From 1802 to 1810, the bankruptcies were as follows:

The debt contracted since 1793, demanded 26 millions for the payment of interest, and was a mortgage upon the capital of Great Britain, for the amount of the principal. All that could be supplied by the labouring classes had been taken, while most of that which should have been contributed by the capitalists, had been lent. Had the capital now been assessed upon that body, it would have been found that they had not increased in wealth as they had supposed. We have abundant evidence that the labouring classes were impoverished by the war, and there is equal evidence that the capitalists were so, in the fact of the very slow increase of investments for the benefit of their landed property; in the diminished quantity of commodities that could be obtained in return for the use of any given quantity of capital; and in the increased taxes on capital, in the form of poor rates.

Large as had been the expenditure between 1803 and 1810, the nation had, nevertheless, grown in wealth, so as to be enabled to bear the burthen with some ease, and agricultural production at the close of that period, had attained the same height as in 1802 and 1803, with a considerable increase of manufacturing production. The expenditure of 1811 and 1812 increased considerably, and the average amount of shipping employed was less in those years than in 1810; the foreign produce consumed fell off; the cotton, wool, and silk imported was greatly diminished; the average of enclosures of those years was less than in 1810, and the average of cattle and sheep brought to market diminished, and the price of grain, which was rather less in 1811, rose in 1812, to 128s. per quarter. Wages in money remained the same, but the power of obtaining commodities was still further diminished. The interest of capital rose, but would not command as large an amount of provisions as in 1810. The number of buildings, as shown by the consumption of bricks and tiles, increased in 1811, but again fell off in 1812, and continued to do so. The bankruptcies in those years were,

being greater by 150 per cent. than in 1792.

In 1813, and the following years to 1816, the expenditure still further increased. The tonnage employed increased rapidly; but a large portion, if not the whole of the additional quantity was unproductively used as transports, adding nothing to the national wealth. The consumption of foreign produce fell off; the importation of cotton was greatly reduced, while that of wool and of silk increased in consequence of the facility of obtaining supplies from the continent now opened to British commerce. The number of enclosures diminished; the quantity of cattle and of sheep brought to market fell off greatly; the amount of building was greatly reduced, and the consumption of bricks fell below that of 1792. Wages remained the same, but grain fell to the price of 1805 and 1806.

The markets which had been closed to British manufactures were now opened, and grain was imported to a considerable extent, thus increasing the facility of production. The ability to purchase provisions on the part of the labouring class was increased, and their condition improved. During this period, the sum expended for the relief of the poor fell from £6,294,581 to £5,724,839. A period of extraordinary changes like that under consideration,

was, of course, attended with immense losses among traders and capitalists, and we find, of course, a vast number of bankruptcies, to wit:

Capitalists, traders, and farmers were involved in one common ruin. The diminished power of production had enabled capitalists generally to retain a large proportion of the commodities produced, and particularly of corn. In consequence of this diminished production, those persons who were engaged in producing silver and gold found that in exchange for a given quantity thereof they could not obtain as large a quantity of corn as they had been accustomed to receive, and thus they suffered by the waste caused by the wars of Europe. The occupier of land, accustomed to obtain a given quantity of gold in exchange for a given quantity of wheat, had contracted to pay a certain money rent to his landlord. The increased facility of producing corn now enabled the producer of gold to obtain a larger quantity in exchange for his products, by which he was benefited; but the tenant who had contracted to pay a given rent was ruined, because his contract was to deliver gold, and not corn, the commodity which he produced. He would have been willing to deliver a larger quantity of wheat than could ever before have been obtained by his landlord as rent, but the latter wanted gold, and not wheat. To enable him to deliver the quantity of the commodity that he had contracted for, it was deemed necessary to diminish the power of production, by forbidding importation when the price was below 80s. From that time to the present, there has been an almost constant fall in the money prices of commodities generally, attended by a constant effort, by means of restrictions, to maintain the price of corn, in Great Britain, for the purpose of preventing a reduction of money rents.

In the succeeding ten years, the debt underwent a reduction of forty millions. The gross receipts from taxation, which in 1817 were 82 millions, fell to 63 millions. The waste of the war was over, and capital increased rapidly. The consequence was a rapid increase of production, accompanied by a great increase in the proportion assigned to the labourer. His wages remained at nearly the same rate, while the prices of all commodities fell, and thus his situation gradually improved.

On a former occasion, we gave an extract from a report of the Agricultural Committee of the House of Commons, showing that no material change had taken place in the money wages of agricultural labour since the war; and the following statement of wages of young women in cotton mills at Manchester, compared with the prices of articles of necessity, shows that in manufactures there has been no material change of wages, while the prices of all commodities required by them have fallen greatly.

The interest of capital has fallen during that time, and the three per cents, which in 1813 would afford the holder 4 per cent. interest, will now give him but about 3 per cent. With that he could, however, in 1833, purchase 60 per cent. more of flour, potatoes, meat, coals, and calicoes, than he could do in the former period. Here we have increased production yielding to the capitalist a diminished proportion with a constant increase in the real profit of capital, and to the labourer an increased proportion, enabling both labourer and capitalist to increase their consumption, a result corresponding precisely with that which we have already shown to have taken place in the United States.†

* Vol. I. p. 255.

† Vol. I. p. 93.

For the tables we have here given we are indebted to Mr. Tooke's excellent work "On High and Low Prices." The object of that gentleman was to disabuse the public mind in regard to the too prevalent notion that war expenditure produced high profits, and to show that the nation advanced more rapidly in peace than in war. He attributes, as we do, the high prices to deficient production, but he attributes deficient production mainly to bad seasons. Unfavourable seasons may occur in periods of peace as well as of war, and the apprehension of them will not induce a love of peace; but if Mr. Tooke had shown that the natural effect of a waste of capital, was to increase greatly the effect of bad seasons, and that in all

The most striking fact that is to be observed, on a review of this period, is the entire abstinence of the government from taxes on capital, until forced thereto by absolute necessity. During

seasons it tended to lessen the power of production, and to diminish the proportion obtained by the labourer, how strong would have beent he argument in favour of peace!

Deficient production must always be attended with the same effect, be the cause what it may, and we agree with Mr. Tooke that unfavourable seasons contributed. to produce the state of things we have reviewed, but we differ much in our estimate of the amount of influence exercised by them, and believe that vastly more is to be attributed to the waste of capital by war.

To show the difference of effect produced by unfavourable seasons in time of peace, from that produced when the waste of capital by war combined therewith, we shall give a brief view of the seasons from 1783 to 1800, with the prices of wheat.

1783, not remarkably unfavourable, followed by a severe winter,
1784, cold and ungenial-severe winter,
1785, -

Average price of wheat per bushel.t

1786, committee appointed by the corporation of London, to inquire into the cause of the dearth of provisions, and their high price. The magistrates of Sunderland, state that "for the last three years we have had two very dry summers, and three very severe winters,"

1787, 1788,

1789, crops indifferent, 1790,

1791, remarkably abundant, 1792, scanty and indifferent,

On a review of the whole period from 1782 to 1792, both inclusive, says Mr. Tooke-p. 255-there seems to have been, after the very bad harvest in 1782, a large proportion of severe winters and backward springs in the earlier part of the series, and with the exception of 1791, no instance of very abundant produce. 1793, a very dry summer-wheat moderate-spring crops deficient, 1794, wheat deficient. Leguminous crops failed totally,

7s. 6d.

7 03

6 21

5 111

7 01

7 31

8 1

7 7

6 0 761

6 5

7 111

1795, an unfavourable season. Bounty granted on importation of wheat,

168. to 20s. per quarter,

11 9

1796, a plentiful harvest,

8 5

1797, crops somewhat deficient in quantity and quality,

6 9

1798, moderately abundant,

7 0

1799, "as ungenial to the productions of the earth, and to the animal creation, as any on record,"

13 8

1800, a highly unfavourable season,

19 0

In this period, "after the indifferent and scanty crops of 1792, there were no

In making this average we have taken the two returns that are affected by the crop of the year. Thus, for 17-3, we have taken the price at Michaelmas, 1783, and Lady-day, 1784.

+ From the Eton College return, quoted by Tooke, p. 28 Appendix.

Arthur Young says, "the leguminous crops have scarcely returned even the seed committed to the ground for them."

VOL. II.-43.