by Jacques de Guenin [1]
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed persons can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has"
Margaret Mead
The epic that I am going to tell you is a perfect illustration of that statement.
We are in 1838, at which time the United Kingdom is divided into roughly six social classes :
- The elder branch of the aristocracy, who own practically all the land. They enjoy considerable fiscal privileges, and have a majority in parliament.
- The younger branch of the aristocracy, who own little or nothing, since in order to avoid the partition of properties, only the 1st child inherits property. Members of this class cannot sustain themselves, since noblemen despise creative work (exactly like our politico-administrative class today). They can sustain themselves only through the exploitation of the working classes : external exploitation through wars, conquests and colonies ; internal exploitation through taxes, tithes, charges, and monopolies. They make up the larger part of Army and Navy officers, the clergy, and colonial administrators. They also emigrate and in turn, become landowners in the colonies. (At that time, the U.K. had 45 colonies).
- Manufacturers, bankers, and traders. The Industrial revolution is in full swing, and this class is more and more significant.
- Shopkeepers and craftsmen
- Factory workers
- Farmers. The latter rent their land from the big landowners, lead a rather miserable life, and hire even more miserable agricultural workers.
The parliament has around 580 members, 160 of whom are elected by the Counties, and 420 by the Burroughs. There are two major parties, the Tories and the Whigs. Certain conditions are required in order to be an elector. These conditions are such that all the Counties elect aristocrats. The Burroughs elect aristocrats too, but they also elect representatives from the manufacturing and trade bourgeoisie. However each party is controlled by the aristocracy, so that whatever the majority, the parliament is controlled by the aristocracy.
In 1938, the kingdom was plagued by a law restricting the import of grains called the Corn Law. It was introduced in 1815, and amended several times. It concerned all grains, but its effect was particularly tragic in the case of wheat, a requisite for making bread, then a vital food for most people.
Before Napoleon's continental blockade, import of wheat was relatively free, and custom duties were not very high. The blockade gave English producers a quasi monopoly, followed by a rapid increase in prices. At the end of the Napoleonic wars, the price of wheat fell by half, and producers were alarmed. In 1815, they managed to promote a law whose object was to stabilise the price of corn at a high level. No foreign wheat could enter the market if the market price was below 80 shillings a quarter. Without ever reaching that level the price of wheat rose again considerably, as well as that of bread, the staple diet of the workers. Working classes became very poor. Their consumption of manufactured goods decreased. Exports also decreased, as ships could no longer carry return freight such as grain. Manufacturers were forced to make workers redundant, which increased poverty even more.
On the other hand, the system worked well for the aristocracy. The number of farmers willing to rent property far exceeded the available land, resulting in a stiff competition for land. The landlords were then able to lease their land at the maximum prices compatible with the survival of the farmers. Thus it was the aristocracy who benefited from the rent generated by the tariffs.
And of course, the aristocracy was opposed to any reform.
In 1828, however, the government of the duke of Wellington had managed to amend legislation a little. He was intelligent enough to perceive how precarious the situation was, and his prestige gave him a minimum freedom of manoeuvre. He introduced a so called "sliding scale", working thus : when the price of wheat reached 73 shillings per quarter, foreign wheat could be imported without duty. When it fell below that price, foreign wheat was charged a duty that was all the heavier as the domestic wheat was cheaper. It was a small improvement, but a very insufficient one.
Besides grain, there was a complicated protectionist system affecting a number of other vital food products such as sugar. These tariffs where called "differential" because they depended upon product origin. They guaranteed an outlet for colonial products, and a significant source of revenue for the colonists.
In 1838, therefore, the state of the kingdom was very dramatic. Social inequality was extreme ; destitution was prevalent ; criminality was high. The decrease of all consumption resulted in lower tax revenues. The State deficit was increasing to the point of threatening the Credit of the State.
In 1838, a so called "Anti-Corn Law Association" was created in London, but had a limited success. In October 1838, seven men from Manchester decided to take matters into their own hands. They modified the statutes and the name of the Association, which became "The Anti-Corn Law League", and more popularly, the League.
Its aim was to mobilize public opinion to put pressure on parliament in order to repeal the Corn Law, with the idea that it would then be easier to remove the other obstacles to complete freedom of exchange. The league proclaimed that the repelling of the Corn Law would have extraordinary benefits for the kingdom. It would
- increase industrial outlets
- develop employment
- decrease the price of bread
- increase industrial and agricultural productivity through competition
- promote peace between nations.
Manchester was a good choice because it was the major manufacturing city in the country, and its activity was particularly affected by the strangling of international trade.
The founders surrounded themselves with people from the middle class, industrialists, merchants, bankers, traders. Soon, a number of high quality people joined the league, and devoted to it much of their time, talent, and money. Among them, four people were to play a decisive role : George Wilson, the president, who administered the huge machinery of the League with great competence and rigor ; Charles Villiers, the spokesman of the league in Parliament ; Richard Cobden, its most active and most influential member ; John Bright, a great orator, and a faithful disciple and friend of Cobden.
Richard Cobden was born in 1804 in a poor farmer family. He was trained by an uncle to become a clerk in his warehouse. At 21, he became a travelling salesman, and was so successful that he was able to set up his own business by acquiring a factory making printed cloth. Thanks to his vision of the market and his sense of organisation, his company became very prosperous. Nevertheless, at the age of 30, he left the management of the company to his brother in order to travel. He wrote some remarkable articles in which he defended two great causes : pacifism, in the form of non intervention in foreign affairs, and free exchange. He revealed himself as a clear and brilliant economist, à la Bastiat.
From 1839, he devoted himself exclusively to the League, neglecting even his family, though he was very fond of them. There, he displayed the talents of a great tactician, rational, skilful, tenacious, and resolute. He was to be elected as MP for Stockport in 1841, 3 years after the beginning of this story.
John Bright was a manufacturer from Lancashire. He belonged to a Quaker family. He received a good education, without going to university. He was to be elected to the Commons in 1843. Even though he was self educated, he supported his eloquence with well chosen literary and historical references. He was indeed a very eloquent speaker, clear, precise, and moving, especially when describing poverty, since it was obvious that he had a deep conscience and a quasi religious sense of his responsibilities.
A determined individualist, he considered freedom of exchange as the remedy to all economic evils. He was very wary of State intervention in Economics and Society.
A non conformist, he pleaded for the equality of Religions under the law, criticized the privileges of the church of England, supported the separation of Church and State, asked for the right for Jews and atheists to swear a non Christian oath and be allowed to be elected to Parliament. Later, in 1869, he would become minister of the Board of trade in the Gladstone cabinet.
Within the League, he acted as the unconditional supporter of Cobden and a star speaker. But he avoided appearing as a formal forefront leader, because as a Quaker, he was not accepted by all groups.
These four people played the major roles for the League, but many more people of high quality and reputation spent a lot of their time, money, and talent for it.
For seven years, until the final victory, the League endeavoured to gain more and more people to its cause, radiating farther and farther from Manchester until it covered the whole kingdom. Then they brought the debate right into Parliament after having managed to get the maximum number of its members elected into it. Meetings were organized in the largest cities. In London, they became weekly for a certain period. Everywhere they took place into the largest rooms available, containing several thousand people in London, and up to ten thousand in Manchester Everywhere all seats were booked and many people were left outside. More and more subscriptions made it possible to finance books, brochures, periodicals in increasing number, and even to pay professors of Economics to spread understanding of economics among the general public.
The first spectacular breakthrough happened in 1841. That year, The League managed to win over the so called "dissident churches", i.e. the non Anglican ones. The State religion received the tithe from the State, while the others were only sustained through voluntary gifts. Sixteen hundred "dissident" priests responded to the call of the League, and seven hundred of them gathered in Manchester. They decided to preach the cause of freedom of exchanges throughout the kingdom, as it was "in agreement with the Laws of providence that it was their mission to propagate".
The League then endeavoured to put the farmers on their side. That was trickier insofar as the latter believed that their fate was linked to protection. Within two months, Cobden held forty meetings in the agricultural population. To quote Bastiat "There, often surrounded by thousands of farmers and labourers among whom no doubt also sneaked in some troublemakers, a cool, skilful and eloquent Cobden impressed his audience, and even aroused sympathy among his most implacable opponents."
The aristocracy, who until now had treated the League with the disdain resulting from the feeling of their political invulnerability, began to worry. They scrutinized the public and private lives of the principal leaders of the League, but soon realized that they had more to loose than win at this game. They then spread the litany of eternal protectionist sophisms : the protection of farmers against the invasion of foreign products, the lowering of workers' salaries by factory owners taking advantage of the lower cost of subsistence, national independence, outlets for colonial products, control of the sea, etc.
But a remarkable feature of the League was that its actors were surprisingly skilful economists, and none of those sophisms could stand up to them. Tirelessly, they demonstrated that only the full and unilateral repeal of all obstacles to free trade could bring about prosperity for all.
Poverty and its causes becoming more and more obvious, the aristocracy attempted to soothe the situation through charity. They organized subscriptions to help the poorest. They introduced laws reducing daily working hours. But manufacturers, in turn, took measures, obviously more discriminating and to the point, to help the truly needy. At the same time, they clearly showed that the only source of hardship was the spoliation exerted by the aristocracy.
But the Aristocracy still had one defence : the majority in parliament. Then, in a new phase of their action, the League methodically endeavoured to have the maximum number of its supporters elected to parliament. At the request of Cobden and Bright, several thousand free-traders registered on electoral lists, and kicked out all those that did not have any right to be on them.
At the elections of 1841, 5 League members, including Cobden, had been elected. Sir Robert Peel, the leader of the tories, had become prime minister. Former minister of Wellington, extremely clever and competent, he came from the manufacturing bourgeoisie, and he sought to attract members of this bourgeoisie into parliament. Being a lucid opportunist, he soon realized that the League held the truth about the causes of poverty, and that its progress was irreversible. But he felt obliged to defend the interests of the class which had brought him into power. He certainly foresaw that the supporters of the League would obtain a majority in parliament sooner or later, and thought he could as well implement himself the measures that would then become inevitable. During the next 5 years, he would on one hand take measures aimed at alleviating the most severe poverty, thus giving some tokens of satisfaction to the free-traders, and on the other hand try to broaden the outlook of the aristocracy.
In order to improve public finances, he introduced an income tax for 3 years, exempting revenues below 150 pounds. From 1842 to 1845, year after year, he introduced a series of custom duty reforms. Straight import prohibitions were abolished. Oxen, sheep, fresh or salted meat, the import of which had been prohibited, were now admitted with low duties. Duties on 650 basic consumer goods (such as flour, oil, rice, vinegar, beer, wool, cotton, linen, leather, etc.) were considerably reduced then completely eliminated for 430 of them in 1845. Export duties, which notably penalized machinery and coal, were abolished.
All this was to create a certain prosperity. Activity grew, poverty diminished, and in accordance with the Laffer Law, customs revenues increased.
Concerning the corn law, Peel acted very cleverly. Experience had shown that the price of wheat on the market fluctuated around 56 shillings, and never rose above 65 shillings. The ceiling of the "sliding scale", at 73 shillings, was therefore pointless. Peel changed it to a fixed rate at 56 shillings, which gave to the people the impression of a great discount, while allowing Peel to show the landlords, that their rent would not be affected.
Cobden feared that these improvements enervate the supporters of the League, even though their objectives were far from achieved. So he persuaded his friends to change gear. Until 1844, it seemed impossible to obtain MP's from the Counties, because one had to own rural property to be an elector. On closer inspection of the electoral law, Cobden discovered an obscure amendment called the Chandon clause, which granted the right to be an elector to any person owning a property yielding an annual revenue of at least 40 shillings. The aristocracy had used this clause in 1841 to register a number of their minions on electoral lists. Nothing prevented the manufacturing and trading classes from doing the same.
Cobden submitted his plan to the League Council in December 1844. The deadline for registration on the electoral lists was January 31, 1845. In ten weeks, Cobden organized no less than 35 meetings in the Northern counties of England in order to encourage suitable people to become electors, and give rise to candidacies.
Meanwhile, the support of the league from various corners was steadily increasing, and with it the means at their disposal. To illustrate the magnitude of their effort, let me project an extract from the annual report presented on January 22, 1845, by Mr Hickin, secretary of the league, in front of 10 000 people :
Year 1844
First of all, here is the income statement. Between bracket is an attempt to evaluate the sums in present day euros. It is, I agree, a very bold and fragile estimate. (1£ 1840 = 84 EUR 2000)
Revenues £ 86 009 (EUR 7 224 000)
Expenses £ 59 333 (EUR 4 984 000)
Balance £ 26 676 (EUR 2 240 000)
More than 200 meetings were held in England or Scotland, to mention only those attended by official representatives of the League.
Two million pamphlets and 1 340 000 copies of the weekly journal of the League (20 000 per week), were distributed.
The offices of the association received a huge number of letters, and sent about 300 000 !
The League professors opened courses in 36 Counties out of 40. Everywhere, and most particularly in agricultural counties, demand for professors largely exceeded supply.
England was divided into 13 electoral districts. Agents well versed into the knowledge and practice of Law were assigned to each district to supervise the preparation of the electoral lists and if necessary, obtain their rectification by judgment.
This operation was carried out in 160 boroughs. Up to then, free-traders had outnumbered the monopolists in 112 boroughs, resulting in a fair chance of a free-trade candidate being elected in many of these.
It was only recently that the League had directed their attention towards the electoral lists of the counties. Within a few days, the balance in favour of the free traders has increased by 1750 in North Lancaster, 500 in South Lancaster, and 500 for the Middlesex. The movement was spreading in the other counties.
Every year, Charles Villiers, an MP from the league, had proposed a motion to parliament in favour of the repeal of all protectionist laws. It had always been defeated, but the majority against the repeal decreased year after year : 303 in 1842, 256 in 1843, 206 in 1844, 132 in 1845. Peel started to prepare the minds of the MP's to a gradual repeal, but on one hand he came up against the resistance of the great landlords, and on the other hand against the determination of the free traders who wanted a complete and immediate repeal.
In 1846, a terrible famine struck Ireland, because heavy rains had rotted the potato crop, the staple diet of the Irish people. Bread was too expensive to replace potatoes. In December, Peel decided to apply an emergency reduction to duty on grain through government decrees, but he lost the majority in his own cabinet, and had to resign.
The Queen called upon the leader of the Whigs, but he was unable to form a cabinet. So she asked Peel to come back and form a new cabinet. He did it with Tories individually favourable to the repeal. He then proposed to parliament a more radical law abolishing the Corn Law. After numerous debates, after some to-and-fro with The House of Lords - who proved to be more open to freedom of exchange than expected - Parliament put an end to protectionism. On May 26, 1846, the law instituting unilateral freedom of exchange was definitively voted, by a composite majority including, besides representatives of the League, some whigs, some tories, and Irish representatives. The law lasted for 85 years, during which the United Kingdom enjoyed a brilliant period of freedom and prosperity known as the Victorian Era. We should call it instead the era of Free Trade.
The Tory party, however, was irreparably divided. On that same evening, Peel lost a vote of confidence on his Irish policy. He had to resign. Before leaving, he paid tribute to Cobden in his last parliamentary speech, saying :
"The merit of these measures, I declare it to the honourable members of the opposition as well as to ourselves, this merit does not belong to any party. There arose between parties a coalition which, helped by the government, led to the final success. But the name that should, and certainly will be, attached to these measures, is that of a man, driven by the most disinterested and the purest motive, who, with tireless energy, appealing to public reason, demonstrated their necessity with an eloquence all the more admirable as it was simple and without affectation, it is the name of Richard Cobden.
Sir, I now close the observations which it has been my duty to address to the House, thanking them sincerely for the favour with which they have listened to me in performing this last act of my official career. Within a few hours, probably, that power which I have held for a period of five years will be surrendered into the hands of another - without repining - without complaint on my part - with a more lively recollection of the support and confidence I have received during several years, than of the opposition which during a recent period I have encountered.
In relinquishing power, I shall leave a name, severely censured I fear by many who, on public grounds, deeply regret the severance of party ties - deeply regret that severance, not from interested or personal motives, but from the firm conviction that fidelity to party engagements - the existence and maintenance of a great party - constitutes a powerful instrument of government : I shall surrender power severely censured also, by others who, from no interested motive, adhere to the principle of protection, considering the maintenance of it to be essential to the welfare and interests of the country : I shall leave a name execrated by every monopolist who, from less honourable motives, clamours for protection because it conduces to his own individual benefit ; but it may be that I shall leave a name sometimes remembered with expressions of good will in the abodes of those whose lot it is to labour, and to earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow, when they shall recruit their exhausted strength with abundant and untaxed food, the sweeter because it is no longer leavened by a sense of injustice"
Sir Robert Peel left public life that same evening. He died four years later in a riding accident.
The League dissolved itself on July 22, 1846.
A commemorative ceremony took place on January 25, 1848. It was attended by 3000 people. Another was celebrated on February 1st, 1849.
Richard Cobden had gone to so much trouble, that he ended exhausted and ruined when the League finally reached victory in 1846, largely thanks to him. So the League organised a subscription in his favour which reached the unbelievable sum of 75 000 pounds ! (6,3 million EUR). The sum was handed to him with great cheers during the last meeting of the league.
This money allowed him to start another campaign of his own. For 14 months, he toured Europe with his wife in order to promote freedom of exchange and Peace. In 1849, he submitted to Parliament a law instituting compulsory international arbitration before any conflict, and, in 1851 a general reduction of armaments. Towards the end of the eighteen fifties, he was asked by the government to negotiate a freedom of exchange treaty with France. His opposite number was Michel Chevalier, a ministry of Napoleon the 3rd, and an all time friend and admirer of Bastiat. The treaty was signed by Cobden and Chevalier in 1860.
He died in 1865.
It is useful to try and sum up the reasons for the success of the league as they can serve as lessons for other libertarian projects :
- A single goal
- The right argumentation
- A moral, quasi religious crusade
- A remarkable organisation
- Single mindedness in the face of opposition
- Support by the middle class
- Parliamentary representation
- The intelligence and skill of the prime minister
This order is not irrelevant, since it can be expected that if the six first conditions are met, there will always be - sooner or later - enough politicians to espouse the cause. Of crucial importance is the first element : we libertarians are very wonderful people fascinated by a number of questions. But we shall never achieve anything if we do not focus our actions on a single cause. Remember reverend Martin Luther King and the abolition of segregation in the busses. From that standpoint, the idea of Bill Bradford to concentrate the last Libertarian presidential campaign on the single issue of repelling the drug laws was certainly not a bad one.
Remember the initial quotation :
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed persons can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has"
July 2002
Bastiat discovered the existence of the League by chance in 1844. He was enthused, and indignant at the French press which had not said a word about it.
In November 1844 he wrote to Cobden. Cobden answered him. Thus started a friendship which lasted until Bastiat's death.
Bastiat went to London in 1844. Soon after, he published his book "Cobden and the League".
He met Cobden once again in England in October 1848.
In January 1849, he received an invitation from M. Wilson, in the name of the free-traders, to take part in the commemorative ceremony of February 1st. He was not able to go, but he answered with a moving letter in praise of the League, writing in particular "Nothing more important than this reform has yet been accomplished in this world".
For several years Bastiat endeavoured to create an "Association for the freedom of exchange" on the model of the League in several large French cities. He was supported by Michel Chevalier, and even by Lamartine, the great poet, then a member of the government, but they never rose a public support comparable to that of the League.
He met Cobden again in Paris on August 1849, in a congress for Peace organized by Victor Hugo. He met Cobden once more for the last time in October of the same year, for a similar meeting in favour of Peace held in Bradford, in the North of England.
Bastiat died in 1850, ten years before Cobden and Chevalier signed the free trade treaty between France and the U.K.
[1] President of the Cercle Frédéric Bastiat, 40320, Saint-Loubouer, France. Paper delivered at the 21th convention of the International Society for Individual Liberty, Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, July 2002.
Cercle Frédéric Bastiat