date

21 Decr 1801 Maximum Mode
21 Decr 1801

Maximum

Mode

Execution

3

a way in which, /in point of/ consistently with the rules of justice and

expediency, (two rules which when putably[?] understood can never disagree) a

man can not /ought not to/ be made a sufferer by the dispensations of the

legislature. The public would indeed in this case have the benefit of his corn:

but it would be only for one crop – and even then it would amount to no more

than the difference between a crop of corn and a crop of something else: and for

this hairs breadth difference, it will see a shock given to that security which

so many other crops look to as their source.
Similar Items
  • Title: [10 Decr 1801 Maximum 6. Scarcity]
    Description: 10 Decr 1801

    Maximum

    6. Scarcity Crops

    2

    Here as before, the Hon: Gentleman having wrapped up his argument in an interrogation, at the peril of the charge of misconception and misrepresentation, I find myself obliged to make a proposition for the Hon Gentleman which I do with all imaginable diffidence and reluctance, prepared and resolved to discard it /turn it out of doors/ the very instant he disowns it: protesting most sincerely that if this be not what he means I am altogether unable to conjecture what else it can be

    { In this paragraph a proposition will I think be found eventually included /assumed/ a proposition, which the Hon:ble Gentleman upon further /maturer/ reflection, to the Hon: Gentleman himself will, I am inclined to think appear untenable:} This is – that the price of corn ought at all times to be of such a height, as to afford something not much less than living profit to a farmer whose crop has “almost totally failed”. I could wish the proposition were /had been/more determinate: but had I made it so, I might have been accused /taxed/ not without ground, of misrepresenting it. This, if the Hon.ble Gentleman will take the trouble /have the goodness/ to take pen and ink to it, or even without pen and ink bestow a little thought upon it in the line of calculation is what he will find rather an expensive mode of insurance.
  • Title: [21 Decr 1801 Maximum Mode]
    Description: 21 Decr 1801

    Maximum

    Mode

    Execution

    2

    set, could he know what dependence he could with safety place on the continuance

    of it. {The farmer, understanding that wheat at 90s a quarter would pay him

    better than any other crop.}

    Whereas, if from the first he were to know what price the law would allow him to

    take, supposing the state of the market to keep the article up at that price,

    his operations would rest on a basis /be grounded on /supported by/ a degree of

    assurance/ much firmer than in the other case. If from the first in virtue of a

    fresh Act for that purpose the maximum were to be fixed suppose at 90s a

    quarter, the farmer according to whose calculations wheat at that price would

    pay him better than any other crop he could raise, at the same time that

    circumstances in his estimation seemed to warrant the expectation of its keeping

    up at that price would take his measures accordingly. These measures he would

    perhaps not take with a maximum at a pitch altogether uncertain hanging over his

    head: and supposing his expectations dangerous[?] enough to get the better of

    his apprehensions on that score still, if the maximum price eventually set under

    the discretionary power were in his part of the country to stand so low for

    example as 80s, he would be a sufferer, in a way
  • Title: [10 Decr 1801 Maximum 6. Scarcity]
    Description: 10 Decr 1801

    Maximum

    6. Scarcity Crops

    1

    6. “It is not enough to say, that the maximum shall be set so high, that

    generally speaking, the farmer shall be a gainer” – (Certainly – but quere was

    this ever said by any body?) What (continues the Hon. Gentleman) will that man

    say to your average[?] whose crop has almost totally failed, and who even at the

    very high price of the market may possibly be a loser? Will you make him a

    greater loser by arbitrarily reducing the price of his corn?”

    Thus far the Hon: Gentleman: for my own part I must confess I see not what true

    light can /will/ be thrown on the subject by a dialogue /conversation/ between a

    man {placed} /put into/ a case from which nothing can be concluded, and a

    supposed simpleton of a legislator – such an one as the man would never meet

    with.