The Law of Civilization and Decay: An Essay on HistoryAdams, Brooks
Philosophy
The Law of Civilization and Decay: An Essay on History
Adams, Brooks
Civilization -- History; Degeneration; History -- Philosophy
This statute, though frequently amended to make it more effective,
partially failed of its purpose. A contracting currency did its
resistless work, prices dropped, tenants went bankrupt, and, as the
value of money rose, encumbered estates passed more frequently into
the hands of creditors. Thus when Peel took office in 1841, the Corn
Laws were regarded by the gentry as their only hope, and Peel as their
chosen champion; but only a few years elapsed before it became evident
that the policy of Lombard Street must precipitate a struggle for life
between the manufacturers and the landlords. In the famine of 1846
the decisive moment came, and when Sir Robert sided, as was his wont,
with the strongest, and abandoned his followers to their fate, he only
yielded to the impulsion of a resistless force.
As a class both landlords and manufacturers were debtors, and, by
1844, cheap bread appeared to be as vital to the one as dear corn was
to the other. With a steadily falling market the manufacturers saw
their margin of profit shrink, and at last Manchester and Birmingham
believed themselves to be confronted with ruin unless wages fell
proportionately, or they could broaden the market for their wares by
means of international exchanges. The Corn Laws closed both avenues of
relief; therefore there was war to the death between the manufacturers
and the aristocracy. The savageness of the attack can be judged
by Cobden’s jeers at gentlemen who admitted that free corn meant
insolvency:--
“Sir Edward Knatchbull could not have made a better speech for
the League than that which he made lately, even if he were paid
for it. I roared so with laughter that he called me specially
to order, and I begged his pardon, for he is the last man in
the world I would offend, we are all so much obliged to him.
He said they could not do without this Corn Law, because, if
it were repealed, they could not pay the jointures, charged on
their estates. Lord Mountcashel, too (he’s not over-sharp) said
that one half the land was mortgaged, and they could not pay
the interest unless they had a tax upon bread. In Lancashire,
when a man gets into debt and can’t pay, he goes into the
_Gazette_, and what is good for a manufacturer is, I think,
good for a landlord.”[362]
In such a contest the gentry were overmatched, for they were but
nature’s first effort toward creating the economic type, and they
were pitted against later forms which had long distanced them in the
competition of life. Bright and Cobden, as well as Loyd and Peel,
belonged to a race which had been driven into trade, by the loss
of their freeholds to the fortunate ancestors of the men who lay at
their mercy in 1846. Peel himself was the son of a cotton-spinner, and
the grandson of a yeoman, who, only in middle life, had quitted his
hand-loom to make his fortune in the “industrial revolution.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account