mentioned, has slid into that part of your argument, p. 24., where you point out the advantages the labourer may derive from a high money price of corn, and conse quently high wages to himself. Do not you assume that, though corn should fall and bring down wages, yet there will be no fall in the prices of any other articles of his consumption?

In considering the influence of a low price of corn upon the condition and comforts of the labourer, you have wholly omitted this consideration, that such a fall will release thousands and tens of thousands from the parochial pauper list, and restore them to the pride of earning their bread by free labour. I could not read without indignation, in the evidence of Mr. Benett, of Pyt House, who seems the very model of a witness for Corn Committees, his cool statement of the rule he makes, and unmakes, for the distribution of rations of provender and fodder among the prædial slaves of a whole district of Wiltshire. It is this audacious and presumptuous spirit of regulating, by the wisdom of country squires, the whole economy and partition of national industry and wealth, that makes me more keenly averse to this Corn Bill of theirs than I should have been in earlier days of our time, when the principles of rational government were more widely understood, and were maintained by stronger hands at the head of affairs. The narrow conceit of managing the happiness of the labouring population, and of directing the application of industry, as well as the competition of the market, works in the present day upon a much larger scale than when it busied itself with the pedlar items of the foreign trade.

You have stated, p. 27., rather like a skilful advocate than quite fully, the experience of the last hundred

years respecting the fluctuations of the price of corn. You have shown but one side of that experience, which has two sides, very much alike. You take one period of fourteen years, and show a considerable fluctuation, by including remarkable years of dearth. This is during the time of imports being in excess. But take another period of fourteen years, while the excess was on the side of exports; for instance, the period from 1706 to 1720; the price of wheat in 1706 was 26s.; in 1709 and 1710 was 788.; in 1719 was 35s. Take the first seven years of the last century, the average price was 30s.; in the seven subsequent years the average price was as high as 578. In 1740, the price I find was 50s.; in 1743 only 248.; in 1757 again 60s. After this, it must be admitted that the argument concerning fluctuations rests still in theory; and then my theory would be, that, upon the whole, nothing will contribute so much to make prices steady as by our leaving our own corn factors unfettered by restrictions and regulations of our own making; and, without embarrassment from that source, to make their own arrangements for bringing corn, when it is wanted, from the various large and independent markets, of which, in the present circumstances of the world, they have their choice. And though one may argue from experience, it can never be a sound inference from the state of prices, under the imports of the last seven or eight years, to conclude that there will be the same uncertainty in the new position of political circumstances.

Though I have something more to object, I must release you for the present. Excuse the perfect freedom with which I have very hurriedly written these animadversions; and treat me still as one of whose conversion from heresy some hopes may be entertained. I should

of an abolition by all Europe. You have now all that I know or think on the subject.

Nobody can be here without feeling the great hatred entertained against us by all ranks and parties. It has been a little abated during the last three weeks, by the debates of the House of Commons, which have been more important, and I hope more beneficial, on the Continent, than at any former period of our parliamentary history. The general sentiment wanted an organ, and the only popular assembly in Europe partially supplied it. You gave the sanction of a public body to the principles of common sense; and you have certainly contributed to all the success which may attend Talleyrand in his new office of assertor of justice and protector of weakness. I feel sorrow at having taken no part in these good works. But at the beginning I consulted my friends, among others your neighbour, whether I should return to the short session, or pursue my historical inquiries here.

I have been pretty successful here, though, for the last three weeks, my public researches have been suspended, in consequence of the hostility of Hauterive, the absence of Talleyrand, and the jealousy of Lemontey, who is writing the History of Louis XV., from the archives opened to him by Napoleon. Mr. Falck is, however, to send me a copy of King William's Correspondence, by M. Fagel; and, for my first volume at least, I shall be very rich in materials. In the course of next week I shall probably set out for London; but if you have any further inquiries to make, your letter would probably still find me in Paris, and, at the worst, would

* John Whishaw, Esq., whose chambers adjoined those of Mr. Horner, in New Square, Lincoln's Inn. — Ed.

be taken care of, as I shall leave my son-in-law in my lodgings; which are, Hôtel de Bourbon, Rue de la Paix. I am, my dear Horner,

We who are here, Lord Grenville, his brother, Elliot, Newport, and myself, have been talking over the first operations fit to take place upon the meeting of the House; and we have agreed that the best motion to begin with, (upon notice,) is one relative to America; and that the best form will be to move for a committee to inquire into the conduct of the war. The papers which have been published, and the peace which has been concluded, since the adjournment, seem to render such a motion peculiarly expedient; for there can be no doubt that the feelings of the country must be strongly excited by the disclosure of the facts contained in those papers, and by the conclusion of a peace, justifiable only (in the opinion of those who concluded it) by necessity; a necessity arising solely from their own mismanagement of the war. We hope you will concur in our view of this subject; and that you will have the goodness to give, when the House meets, a notice of your intention of moving for the Committee upon Thursday the 16th of February. I am myself persuaded of the utility of early and constant action in the House; and I am sure

* At that time, the acknowledged leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons. ED.

the public interest demands and the public expectation requires it. To our friends I have written some time ago, requesting their attendance; and I have every reason to be confident of their compliance.

I shall be in town, to remain, on Friday, and will endeavour to find you at leisure, to converse a little upon these matters, very soon after.

I

am, with the truest regard,

Yours,

GEORGE PONSONBY.

LETTER CCXXVIII. TO J. A. MURRAY, ESQ.

My dear Murray,

Lincoln's Inn, 30th Jan. 1815.

I thank you for your kind attention to all my commissions, contained in my two last notes. I never entertained any doubt that, upon the question of the unanimity of verdicts, a concession must be made to strong prejudice or misconception; as upon every other part of the Bill, or of any new measure that respects the administration of justice. The word unanimity has done the mischief, which is none of ours. The principle of the English jury is no more than this, that they should agree before they give in their verdict; which, practically, secures all those benefits of discussion, of a disposition in all to be reasonable and moderate, and of an opportunity still left to a single dissentient to have his arguments heard, that would be excluded by the rule of a majority. Substantially and practically, in nine cases out of ten, the verdict must go by the sentiments of the majority; but the operation is very different from what it would be, if it went of course by the voice of the majority. I cannot speak from much of what can be called experience; though, with something of that sort,