street, or even round the corner, until the price of bread has risen so
high in the street itself as to secure to its two or three bakers a
certain enormous scale of profit on their loaves. When the price of
bread has been forced up so high as to pass this scale of profit, then
it would be permissible for those who stood in need of bread to go round
the corner and buy their loaves of the baker in the next street; but the
moment that their continuing to do this caused the price of the baker's
bread in their own street to fall below the prescribed limit, they must
instantly take to buying bread within their own bounds and of their own
bakers again. This is a fair illustration of the principle on which the
corn laws were moulded. The Corn Law of 1815 was passed in order to
enable the landowners and farmers to recover from the depression caused
by the long era of foreign war. It was "rushed through" Parliament, if
we may use an American expression; petitions of the most urgent nature
poured in against it from all the commercial and manufacturing classes,
and in vain. Popular disturbances broke out in many places. The poor
everywhere saw the bread of their family threatened, saw the food of
their children almost taken out of their mouths, and they naturally
broke into wild extremes of anger. In London there were serious riots,
and the houses of some of the most prominent supporters of the bill were
attacked. The incendiary went to work in many parts of the country. At
that time it was still the way in England, as it is now in Russia and
other countries, for popular indignation to express itself in the
frequent incendiary fire. At one place near London a riot lasted for two
days and nights; the soldiers had to be called out to put it down, and
five men were hanged for taking part in it.

After the passing of the Corn Law of 1815, and when it had worked for
some time, there were sliding-scale acts introduced, which established a
varying system of duty, so that when the price of home-grown grain rose