The Works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Volume 10

Littleton, Mr.

Lockwood, Mr.

Lord Chancellor,

Lovel, Lord,

Marlborough, Duke of,

Mordaunt, Col.

Newcastle, Duke of,

Norris, Admiral,

Onslow, Mr.

Ord, Mr.

Pelham, Mr.

Pitt, Mr.

Pulteney, Mr.

Quarendon, Lord,

Salisbury, Bishop of,

Sandys, Mr.

Shippen, Mr.

Sloper, Mr.

Southwell, Mr.

Talbot, Lord,

Thompson, Lord,

Tracey, Mr.

Tyrconnel,

Vyner, Mr.

Wade, General,

Wager, Sir Charles,

Waller, Mr.

Walpole, Sir Robert,

Walpole, Mr.

Westmoreland, Lord,

Willimot, Mr.

Winnington, Mr.

Yonge, Sir Wm.

DEBATES IN PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS, NOVEMBER 19, 1740

PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATE, WITH REGARD TO THE BILL

FOR PROHIBITING THE EXPORTATION OF CORN, ETC

On the first day of the session, his majesty, in his speech from the throne, recommended to parliament to consider of some good law to prevent the growing mischief of the exportation of corn to foreign countries.

On the fourth day, a bill for preventing, for a limited time, the exportation, etc, was read a first time in the house of commons, and the question put, whether it should be printed, which passed in the negative.

This day the agent for the colonies of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, presented a petition against the said corn bill, which was referred to the committee.

Another petition was also presented by the agent for the colony of Connecticut, in New England, setting forth that the chief trade of that colony arose from supplying other British colonies with corn, so that unless that colony be excepted from the restraints intended by this bill, both that and those which are supplied by it will be reduced to great distress, and praying, therefore, that such exception may be allowed.

The allegations in this petition were confirmed by another, from one of the provinces supplied by the colony of Connecticut.

Another petition was presented by the agent for South Carolina, setting forth, that unless the rice produced in that province were allowed to be exported, the colony must be ruined by the irretrievable loss of their whole trade, as the countries now supplied from thence might easily procure rice from the French settlements, already too much their rivals in trade.

This petition was supported by another, offered at the same time by the merchants of Bristol.

A petition was likewise presented by the agent for the sugar islands, in which it was alleged, that if no provisions be imported thither from Britain, they must, in one month, suffer the extremities of famine.

All these petitions were referred to the committee for the bill.

A printed paper was also delivered to the members, entitled, 'considerations on the embargo,' which enumerated many dangerous consequences likely to be produced by an embargo on provisions, and suggested that it was no better than a wicked scheme for private profit, with other reflections, for which the paper was deemed a libel, and the author committed to prison.

The bill being read in the committee, produced the following memorable debate.

Mr. PULTNEY spoke to this effect:—Sir, after all the attention which has been bestowed upon the bill now before us, I cannot yet conceive it such as can benefit the nation, or such as will not produce far greater inconveniencies than those which it is intended to obviate, and therefore, as those inconveniencies may be prevented by other means, I cannot but declare that I am far from approving it.

Our ancestors, sir, have always thought it the great business of this house to watch against the encroachments of the prerogative, and to prevent an increase of the power of the minister; and the commons have always been considered as more faithful to their trust, and more properly the representatives of the people, in proportion as they have considered this great end with more attention, and prosecuted it with more invariable resolution. If we inquire into the different degrees of reputation, which the several assemblies of commons have obtained, and consider why some are remembered with reverence and gratitude, and others never mentioned but with detestation and contempt, we shall always find that their conduct, with regard to this single point, has produced their renown or their infamy. Those are always, by the general suffrage of mankind, applauded as the patterns of their country, who have struggled with the influence of the crown, and those condemned as traitors, who have either promoted it by unreasonable grants, or seen it increase by slow degrees, without resistance.