The Sun. — London, England, 1824-07-10 00:00:00

RECIPROCITY* OF DUTIES NAVIGATION. 'The PROCEEDINGS of the SPECIAL COMMITTEE of SHIP OWNERS of LONDON, appointed to oppose the Adoption of the Principle of Admitting Foreign Vessels to Trade with this Kingdom on the same Terms as British h i ps.—(Conclarkd from yesterday': Su x.) APPENDIX. (C.) • Po the tionDs of 111.5 MAJESTY'S MOST UOIVOURARLE PRIVY COUNCIL. The !nimble Petition of the Ship Owners of the Port of l on.lon, SitEweern,—That the Bill to authoriee his Majesty under certain circumstenees to regulate the Duties on Drawbacks ox goods imported or exported in Foreign Vessels, which declares it to be expedient teed his Majesty should be " empowered to " allow the importation or exportation ofuny goods, wares, and merchandize, when imported or exported in Foreign vessels, " from or to those countries in which no other duties are charg. " ed, or other drawbacks, bounties, or allowances granted upon the importation or exportation of any goods, wares, " and merchandize, into or from such country, in British " vessels, than arc charged, or granted, upon such goods, when " imported or exported into or from such countries in Foreign " vessels," having passed into a law, and your petitioners be ing the more convinced, the more they have inquired and re flected upon the subject, that if the powers given to your Lord ships by the said Bill should be, acted upon, and the rules there by laid down be applied to the trading intercourse between this kingdom and the rest of the commercial world (particularly the Northern States of Europe), the most destructive consequences Must result to the merchant shipping of (great Britain, and thereby to the nursery of seamen which it is the means of main taining; your petitioners, as individuals practically acquainted with the subjecti feel it to be theit duty to make the present most solemn appeal to your Lordship', against the adoption of measures so minims to British shying, and of such infinite danger to the must Important National Interests ; or, at all events, they do entreat your Lordship's to defer the same, until you shall have received that evidence which your Petitioners were prepared to 'give, if an opportunity had heen liffbrded them, upon the important question, of whether the British Ship Owner will eventually be likely to retain any, and what portion of the trade with the several Ship-building States of Europe, if the protection by differences of duty, and • draw. bucks and allowances, which have hitherto been found necese vary, should he withdrawn. That your Petitioners have no hesitation in declaring to your Lordshipe, as their most decided conviction, that the disadvan tages to which the British Ship Owners would be thereby sub ject, would be such as to make it impossible for them to com pete with the shipping of other countries, particularly those in the North of Europe,' and censequently that the greater part of that portion of the British trade with them, which the Bri tish Ship Owners now enjoy, will eventually be carried on by the Shipping of those countries; in like manner as the inter-. course with the United States, under the same system, is chief ly carried on in American Shipping. That the Petition of the Ship Owners of' London to the lion. the House of Contmons against the said Bill, contains extracts front the official accounts, which clearly show that the amount of British tonnage is annually diminishing ;_that Brie tish ship building is rapidly declining ;-- and that, of the late increased trade with Norway, Prussia, and Sweden, Foreign Shipping bus had much the greatest proportion. That in the discussions in the House of Commons upon the said Bill, the evidence afforded by those extracts frogs the offi cial accounts was opposed by, further quotations from them, • which shewed, that the number of arrivals of British ships in the year 11122 exceeded by 1,474 ships and 126,423 tons, the number of arrivals in the preceding year. That upon this head your Petitioners humbly beg to submit fo your Lordships, that although an increase in the number of repeated voyages! made in tiny one year tut be evidence of the increased trade of the Coentry, it would by no means follow that the Shipping Interest was therefore in a flourishing state ; with respect however to the fact itself, your -Petitioners beg leave to observe, that although the official accounts of time number of vessels arrived in (great Britain (including the arri vals from Ireland) exhibit an increase in the year 1822 beyond that of 1821 (as above stated), yet those accounts also spew, that the number of arrivals in the United Kingdom in the year 1022 (which, your Petitioners humbly submit, presents the cor rect view of the subject) was only 282 vessels, and 11.1,204 tons beyond those in 11121 : , and that, it' the comparison of the arri vals in the year 1022 he made with those in time year 1820, there is a falling off of 193 somas, and 4',433 tons ; and that, if' the comparison beenade with the year 1819, the falling off Is 1187 ships and 144,501 toes. That your Petitioners, however, beg 'to submit to your Lord. ships, that in order to see the state of the Foreign Trade of the Country, the account should be taken exclusive uf .the number of ships arrived in this Kingdom from Ireletid ; when it will appear, that the arrivals in thieUnited Kingdom front foreign parts, .in the year .1822, ;exceeded those in MI, by no more gem 236 you's, and 57,9116 tons t and that the arrivals in 11322 were less titan in 1020 by 311'shipe and 18,1130' tons; and lessehan 1810, by 832 ships and 108,8e0 tons That on the occasion of those discussions in Parliament, your Petitioners perceived, with the most painful feelings, the preva lenteolgrent m isappreheneion on the part of those Bon. Members by whom the Bill wits supported, on the subject of the relative du- rability of British and Foreign Shipping ; and of the power of the British Ship Owner to build, equip, and navigate his Ships, upon such terms as to enable him to compete with his rivals in the North of Europe. That your Petitioners are prepared to prove to your Lord. shin that this maintenance of such competition is Impossible t and that it must continue so, notwithstanding any remission of Duties on articles used in the building and equipment of Ships, which it may he in the power of the Legislature to grant, as the British ship Owner will always have to struggle against the effects of Fr:ight and Expences, on the Materials necessary for building and equipment, and likewise of indirect Taxation, which raises the price of labour, and extends to every home pro duction used in their coeetruction ; together with the unavoid able and important &armee in the expence of provisions and wages, which remain, and form an irremediable disadvan tage; and your Petitioners trust that the matter will appear in the mute light to your Lordships, when you consider the follow fn circumstances', First. That no Vessel is entitled to Registry, unless British built, or prize. Second. That every British Vessel must be manned with a Matter and three-fourths of the Crew British Seamen ; and if exceeding 80 tons, must have a certain number of Appren tices, according to their Register Tonnage. Third. That no British Vessel can be repaired in a Foreign Port (unless such repair as may be absolutely necessary to suable her to return home) to an amount exceeding Fifteen Shillings per Ton.` Fourth.—That any sails with which it may be found neces sary to provide a British Ship, in a Foreign Port, are subject ore the vcssere arrival, to a Duty of 1041.9 x. 2d. per cent. ad valorem. 'Fifth.--That heavy thdies are in like manner chargeable on any spat*, cables, cordage er anchors, which a British vessel may have occasion to provide in a Foreign Port. That the effect of these burthens, with time other ditties and charges to which British Ship Owners are liable, (as your pe titioners are prepared to prove) is, that a British S!lip cannot be built and equipped for less than front 141. to 231. per ton whilst the Prussian pays from 7/. 15a. to 10/. per ditto; the Swede and Norwegian about 71. per ditto; the Frenchman about 10/, That the disproportion in the wages and victualling is net less than in that of the cost of the vessel, viz : Present rate of wages for British Seamen, 455. to hss. per month, according to the voyage. The average may he eoe. per Month- Prussian-Ze4 e . to Mils. Average 255. Do. Swede--123. 6d. to 20. Do. 171. Do. Dutchman Do. 2135. Do. That the ditferenee in the expence of provivioning being ex tzscnely variabki, cannot be stated with accuracy, but is in pro portion to - that of the wages i the result of all which is, that the Foreigner has an advantage of 40 pet Cent. in the employment of his capital over the Brinell Ship OWner. That under such dietitivatitages, nothing but time protecting diffkreneee of duty, drawbacks, &c. end the co-operating regu latimes of the Navigation 'AWN hew hitherto enabled nut Uri tish Ship Owners to compote hith these of Foreign Powers ; and therefore roar petitioner* submit to your Lordships, that if that protection be withdrawn, the exclusion of the British Ship Owner from it participation in many of the tra d es w i t h other countries wel be inontable; whilst what remains will be unproductive of income ; and that, in time event of war between Cheat Britain and any other Power, which wintlit "abje c t fish Shipping IQ war expences, alp the comiiderete ene herein • The New Regi‘try Act Uwe 208. yet Tun, submitted to your Lordships, would apply with double force; especially if any further permanent stipulation be made with other countries us to Duties. . --- Tiiill --- S4)/ort of what is thus set forth, your petitioners beg to state to your Lordships, that previous to the protecting bounties ou certain articles exported in British Ships, the whole of the trade to Ilamburgh was carried on in Foreign vessels; — that, at the present time, British Ships have but a very small proportion of the trade of the world not carried on from or to British Ports; as will be evident from the fact, that out of 208 vessels arrived at the free port of Ilamburgh between the Ist January and 3d July 1823, only about twelve were British; — and that, at the present time, Prussian vessels are engaged for freight at 20s. to 225. per load, for the supply of his Majesty's Dock-yards and the London market with timber, &c. from Prussia, whilst a lower rate than 28s. to 30s. per load, will not yield to the British Ship Owner an adequate remuneration for the employment of his capital. That since the peace, your petitioners have been struggling against ruinous rates of k reight, and immense depreciation of capital, in a degree nothing interior to that which the Agricul tural or Manufacturing Interests have sustained ; and by the Navigation Act of the 3d of his present Majesty, together with the West India Intercourse Bill, and the Warehousing Act of last Session, Foreign Vessels are permitted to engage in various branches of the carrying Trade, which previous to the passing of those Acts had been confined to British Shipping. That under all these circumstances, and there being many branches of the carrying Trade in which it is impossible for British Shipping successfully to compete with Foreigners with out the aid of some advantages in respect of duties : Your petitioners most earnestly entreat, that your Lordships will be pleased not to exercise the powers given to you by the Act of Parliament in question, without affording them an op portunity ofproving to your Lordships in what manner and de gree the interests of British Shipping will be thereby effected. And your petitioners will ever pray. London, 4th August, 1823. Office of Committee of Privy Council pr Trade, Whitehall, August' 14, 11123. TO LIAT,PH FEN WICK , ESQ • Stn—l am directed by the Lords of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade, to acknowledge the receipt of the memorial of the Ship Owners of the Port of London, dated the 4th inst. on the subject of the powers vested in his Majesty, by the Act of the last Session, commonly called the Reciprocity of Duties llill, and I am at the same time to acquaint you, for the in. formation of the Gentlemen who are parties to that Memorial, that the Lords of this Committee,. will at any time be ready to receive the further evidence wnich the Memorialists state themselves to be prepared to give; and that their Lordships will feel it to, be their duty to bring such evidence. together with your Memorial, under the notice of his Majesty's Govern ment, in reference to the exercise of the discretion vested in the Crown under the Act above referred to, for the protection of the commerce of the United Kingdom, against the system of discriminating duties adopted by other States. 1 um, &e. (Signed) • THOMAS LACK. We the Undersigned Members of a Special Committee ap pointed to prepare evidence in support of the Petition to the Lords of his Alajesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, dated 4th August last, praying that'their Lordships would be pleased not to exercise the powers vested in them by the Reciprocity of Duties Bill, until opportunity had been afforded to the Peti tioners of proving to .their Lordships in what manner and de gree the Interests of British Shipping would be thereby effect ed ; having used our utmost endeavours to obtain such evidence as might place in the clearest point of view the important ques tion, whether the British Ship Owner will eventually be likely to retain any, and what portion of Trade with the several Ship. building States of Europe, if the protection by differences of Duty, Drawbacks, and Allowances, which have hitherto been found necessary, should be withdrawn; Ina to submit the following „ REPORT. In entering on this momentous question, it , was obvious to your Committee, that whatever reciprocity of advantage might be mutually conceded as between British and Foreign Shipping, by the reciprocal removal of those protections by which'Mantime States have hitherto endeavoureti to support their native Ship. ping, the balance of actual benefit must ultimately, under such 'a system of unrestricted competition, devolve on that Nation whose Shipping could be built, equipped, and navigated; on • the cheapest terms. To ascertain therefore, the relative expence of building, equipping, manning, victualling, and sailing British and Fe.. reign Shipping, was the first and most anxious inquiry of your. Committees and when, by concurrent testimony, it• became ep. parent to them that in all these particulars the Northern States or Europe possessed a decided advantage, they next endeavour ed to ascertain how far any ellicitinteounterpoise to such :Wyatt tap might, reasonably be anticipated, in any superiority of con struction or durability in British ships, in the skill and activity of British seamen, or the capital and enterprise of British Ship Owners. _.... ... With respect to the relative cxpence of Ship-building, your Committee considering that from the various dimensions, scantling, and modes of construction, adopted . In ships of the same tonnage, 'any actual statement of cost might alone be deemed inconclusive, have prepared a calculation of the cost of a vessel iii Great Britain and in several of the ports of the North of Europe, in which the same quantities of materials and labour as were actually expended on the British vessel, ate up. plied to the existing prices of those materials and labour in the Foreign ports respectively. . • , , This calculation, which exhibits an enormous difference in favour of tbreign-built shipping, will be found in the Appendix marked A ; and your Committee cannot forbea r remar ki ng, that they are confirmed in their belief of its accuracy, by hav ing 'ascertained that a vessel is At present building in London nearly similar in description to that on which this calculation is founded, at a price corresponding very nearly with the result of calculation itself. But in further corroboration of this point, your Committee beg to retCr to Appendix 11; containing a statement of the actual cost of a number of ahips built in the different ports of England, ! and in foreign , countries ; from which it will be perceived, duct while in England the price varies from 2111. to 151., it amounts in Prussia to only from 11/s. lis. to 101. 10s.--and that in several other countries it is con. dorably lower. The greater part of these statements can be verified by documents, and the remainder are derived from sources on which your Committee believe that implicit confi dence may 4e placed. • While on this branch of the subject your Committee would remark, that it has been clearly proved to them, that a very small proportion of the difference in the . coast building and equipment of British ships, arise* from direct &idea payable on articles employed therein; and that therefore, any relief to be expected by a reduction, or even a total remission of inch duties would be inconsiderable; and any hope of reducing thereby the scale of expencu to. • any. approximation to that of Foreigners, altogether fallacious, The next iniportent article of Maritime eipence is the wages paid to the Officers anti Seamen employed in Navigation ; on this point your Committ ee request particu l ar at t ent ion to Ap pendix C, from which it will appear, that in this particular the advantage on the side of the Foreigner is no less striking than than in the cost of the ship; .British seamen's wages, in the Baltic Trade, being at the present moment from bOs. to 3/., while the Prussian seamen receives but 245. the Swede 20s. and the Russian 15s. per month. With respect to the British wages, abundance of documents can be adduced in proof; and though the nature of the case does not admit of similar de. monstration in the case of the wages of Foreigners, your Corn. mittee have satisfied themselves of the truth of the statement, by personal inquiry on board ships of the respective countries. In the article of provisions your Committee have experienced considerable embarrassment ? from the difficulty of establish. ing any general standard of victualling. The scale, however, taken for British ships, is that usually,,adopted in the West India trade; and for Foreigners, it has been ascertained by the most careful inquiry. A number of minor article* of provision mud comfort usually afforded in the British merchant service are omitted, in the desire of not overstating the comparison; and a further advantage to the Foreigner, in this relative view, will be perceived in the fact, that in British ships engaged in the Baltic trade, no limitation of provisions is practised ; and that the quantity actually consumed, exceeds that exhibited by the' calculation referred to i The result will be found in Appendix D, and completes the chain of evidence by which it is proved' that the positive expense of building, equipping, manning, and victualling, is infinitely less in the ports of 'the Baltic than - in those of the United Kingdom. But it has not escaped the attention of your Committee, that great as are the advantages, in point of abstract cheapness, pos. timed by Foreigners, circumstances of a countervailing nature might possibly exist, calculated in is great measure to restore the equilibrium thus totally subverted by difference of cost : From the belief indeed which appears to be entertained, that such difference does actually exist, your Committee were scarcely prepared to anticipate, the result to which they beg next to solicit the most attentive consideration. It has been asserted, that vessels built in those Ports, the ri. valry of whose shipping is most seriously angelic:tided, though cheaper as to first cost, are wanting in and are there. fore ultimately as expensive as British-Ludt ships: lit order to arrive at a correct conclusion on this point, your Committee be. ginning at a part of Lloyd's It eotcr . Book takes indiacrimi. nately, abstracted'from tiu.nee in the succession in whi c h they stand, the first 20 ships of the fonolOng (,:ountriett4 land, Prussia, Sweden, Iknroark, Atisstit, and. Norway % mark. ing the ages of each ; to the result.of this abstraet 4 . 4 wi nc h win be found in Appendix they would entreat particular awn» lion, as it not only refutes the asiertioo of th 2 fupoiorAlurhbi ity of British Shipping, huh exhibits chum m the.k a s t duxtbk, of the whole; while the Istorwegian Shipping, which is the cheapest, and has been considered in quality almost worthless, is actually proved to last longer than any, and to exceed the durability of the British by more than one half ! Your Committee next directed their consideration to the question, of how far the comparative view of the cost and ex. pences f British and foreign shipping was affected by the alleged difference in the mode of measurement. A reference to Appendix F will prove that whatever force this argument may possess with respect to American and French shipping, it has no application to the vessels of the North of Europe, which are stated, on competent evidence, to stow larger cargoes in gene rid than British-built vessels, according to their nominal ton nage, ascertained by the rules prescribed by the British Re gistry Laws. A reference to the manifests of the cargoes of some of these ships, has convinced your Committee that this opinion is correct, though the difficulty of reducing mixed car goes to a uniform standard capable of accurate relative com parison, has prevented them from rendering the fact the sub ject of documentary evidence. The next point that suggested itself to your Committee was, whether the disadvantage to British Ship Owners, in the high wages and expensive provisions allowed to their crews, is com pensated by such a reduction in the number of seamen as might be expected to be consequent on the alleged superiority of British sailors in activity and skill. Appendix G establishes, that instead of this being the fact, in the cases therein referred to, the foreign ship employed but four men to five in the Bri tish ; while an extract from a Parliamentary return H shews, that the number of men employed in navigating the whole of the ships cleared outwards, from the several ports of the United Kingdom, during the last nine years, including their repeated voyages, was in the proportion of about .six men to every 100 tons British, and only five to every 100 tons foreign. But as, notwithstanding these conclusive demonstrations, it has been asserted that British ships make quicker and more re peated voyages than foreign, and compensate thereby for their mrccased expence ; your Committee have been at some pains to ascertain this point, as regards the Baltic trade ; they annex in Appendix I the certificate of two experienced brokers, con versant with that trade, stating that the number of voyages made annually by each description of ships is equal; and though they have not been enabled to obtain more conclusive corroboration of the fact, which indeed is scarcely susceptible of direct demonstration, the result of all their inquiries on the subject leads them decidedly to the same conclusion. It has further been asserted, that from the general prevalence of Associations for mutual insurance, the rate of premiums paid by the British Ship Owner is comparatively trifling. Appen dix K contains the most ample refutation of this assertion, in the fact, that in the port o f Newcastle, in which a greater num ber of ships are insured on that principle than in any other in the kingdom, the average contributions paid by the owners for actual losses on ships insured in all the Associations of the port during the last four years, was 91. 17s. per cent. per annum ; nearly equal to the rate of premium paid at Lloyd's, which is about 101. per cent. The result of these diflimences on the employment of capital in British and foreign shipping will be found in Appendix 14, exhibiting an advantage in favour of the Prussian of 39/. 1 Is. sd. per cent. on his capital, if admitted to embark in the carrying trade on equality . of duties with British shipping. In the prosecution of the foregoing inquiries, your Committee have had to contend with many difficulties ; and on that part of the subject more immediately embracing information only to be derived from foreigners, or those connected with foreign trading interests, they regret to have experienced a very general unwillingness to impart it: their investigations have, however, been conducted with all possible diligence and circumspection ; and in every important calculation they have been anxious to avoid any charge of partiality, by giving to the foreign interest the benefit of any doubt that may have arisen. But with the most anxious desire to disaird every prejudice, and to take the fairest and most impartial review of all the bearings of this inte. resting question, it can scarcely be matter of surprise, after the evidence they have adduced, that your Committee should come to the decided Conclusion that all the apprehensions expressed by the Ship Owners in t h ei Petition which has given rise to the present report, must be fully realized, should his Majesty's Government determine on exercising the powers vested in them by the reciprocity of Duties Act, in regulating the future trad ing intercourse with the Northern States of Europe. Nor is it on the abstract nature of the evidence alone that the Committee ground this deduction; they are supported in their conviction of its correctness by the more general observations they have been enabled to make in the progress of the inquiry, by remarking the increasing degree in which Foreign Ships are even at present superseding British tonnage in. the Baltic trade, —that they are sailing at rates, of freight so low as to defy all British competition,—that in the Contracts by British Merchants for the supply of his Majesty's dock-yard~ with Naval Stores, Foreign Ships are very extensively employed in the conveyance of those artieles,:-.4.14at the , recant equalization of the duties on Lights, of Pilotage, Balsistage, eca., have tin increased their 'facilities, its to enable them already to engross the trade for the supply of this Country with timber, to the extent to which they possess Tonnage to enibark in it. Under all these circum. stances, it appears clearly to your Committee, that they only require the further advantage of the encouragement they would receive by the abrogation of the protecting Duties hitherto 'afforded to British freight, to induce such further embarkation of Capital in Shipping as would lead to their monopolizing the entire Trade with their respective Countries. Assuming, in deed, that this must be the result, if 'they are actually enabled to build, equip, and navigate their Ships at a cheaper rate than the British Ship Owner, it appears to your Committee an ex traordinary inconsistency, thatliilt ot. itsho ch u le ld ap a n t es o s n , c t e io b e e s et no in t te e n x d is e d that such advantage, in In while the necessity for restricting British Navigation to Na- - £126 0 0 . 60 0. 0 64 0 0 - 360 0 0 60 0 0 „. • • . £O6O 0 0 (1)) A Comparative Statement of the Scale of Victualling, am manned by 20 Seamen, in the British and . Prussian lllei URI !I Mr. Dread, 71b; 47 man, if , ' week, 72801 b. at cwt. 205..£65 0 0 Beef, B.lb. ~ 83201 b. tierce 100 s. 136 13 4 Pdrk, 441 h• 11; 46801 b. barrel 755. 87 15 0 Pease, l'a pints I, 1500 pints bushel 11$1. 13 8' 0 Flour, 41b. 1$ 41601 b..• cwt. 255. 46 5 0 The Interest in England may he taVen at P. cent, which on'the above Capital is MO 0 0 Ships depreciate at the rate of 10 itk cent. r an num, which on said Qapital,arnounts to 760 0 0 The expence of insuring Ships at bloyd's for 12 months, is Si Guineas and Policy ss. cent. ; and to ibis may be added those risks to which the Underwriters are not liable, making it about 10 V' cent. - . 760 0 0 tire Shipping and Native Seamen is defended. If British Ships, either in point of actual cost, or from superiority of construction, are eventually as cheap as those built in Foreign Ports, the Provisions of the Registry Act can be considered in no other light than an absurd and useless restriction on Trade; nor could any evil result from their repeal, since self-interest, the best and. surest guide in matters of' Trade, would most effectually prevent the British Ship Owner from seeking in a Foreign Country what he could pro cure on equal terms at home. But if the continuance of the Act be necessary for the protection of the various branches of native industry connected with the equipment of Shipping, from the overwhelming effects of unrestricted Foreign competion, the admission of such necessity involves also the admission of the superior cheapness of Foreign Shipping, and establishes at once the claim to protection ; and it appears to your Committee, that to continue the restriction on the Ship Owners, and at the same time to open the channels of his employment to unreserved competition, would be to place him in a situation of such pe culiar hardship, as it could never have been the intention of the Legislature to sanction. The same observation applies with equal force to the restrictions on manning by British Sea men. If their wages be equal, or their peculiar skill and activity compensate for any difference that may exist, the same universal law of self-interest will induce the em ployment of Native crews, without the intervention of the compulsory regulations of the Navigation Act. If, there fore, the Legislature or the Executive Government, pro ceeding on a conviction that the British Ship Owner can suc cessfully maintain competition with his foreign rivals, deter mine to annul the distinctions by which his freight has hereto fore been protected, your Committee would strongly advise an appeal to be made for the abrogation of all those restrictions by which he is at present prevented from maintaining it, as well as those by which Agriculture and Manufactures are supported. How far such abrogation may be consistent with the mainten ance of the important national objects for which these restric tions were imposed, it would ill become your Committee to in quire ; but though they are by no means of opinion that the time has arrived when perfect freedom of trade can safely be resorted to, they yet entertain a confident conviction, that such an appeal to the justice of his Majesty's Government could not fail to induce either the continuance of those protective laws under which Ship Owners have vested their capitals, under an assurance of that protection being continued to them which is extended to the other great departments of 'national industry, or, such a relaxation of the restrictions under which they exclusively labour, as would afford them some chance of maintaining that competition to which the measure in question would expose them. Having thus, they trust, succeeded in demonstrating that the manner in which British Shipping would he affected by the operation of the Reciprocity of Duties Act, would be such as to expose it to the most unequal competition ; and having proved that the degree in which it would be injured, would be little short of its gradual annihilation in the trade between this country and the Northern States of Europe, your Committee cannot chise their Report without suggesting the expediency of embracing the opportunity afforded by the production of the evidence thus collected, to bring under the consideration of his Majesty's Government not only the propriety of continuing the existing protection to the Shipping Interest, but also its pre sent inadequacy to enable them to maintain competition with their Foreign and more favoured rivals, and the strong neces sity established by the evidence, for a still further extension of assistance and protection, if either, on the ground of individual justice or national policy, the maintenance of the Naval supre macy of Britian be considered an object of importance. George Frederick Young, Ra. Eenwick, Richard Smith, Henry Nelson, Thomas Urquhart, Chris. Tennant, Edward Hurry, William Tindall, Thomas Forrest, Robert Douglas, J. Nickols, Thomas Gillespy, Henry Blanchard, J. D. Fowles, William Parker, J. M. Maude. London, Dec. 9, 1E123. Office of Comniittee of Privy Council for • Trade, Feb. 27, 1024. Sra—The Lords of the Committee of Ptivy Council for Trade, having had under their most attentive consideration the Report of the Committee of British Ship OviCers, dated 9th of December last, as well as all the previous communications re ceived from you on the same subject, they determined to submit these documents, together .with the representations which had been received from Prussia, and other States in the North of Europe, respecting our 'COmmercial Intercourse with those States, to his: Majesty's Government, accompanied with such Observations as it became the duty of this Committee to offer on a matter of so much importance. I am now directed to acquaint you that,after the most mature deliberation, embracing all the various interests involved in the question, us well present as contingent, upon which his Ma jesty's (loventment had to form their decision, they have' felt themselves called upon to declare their readiness to give effect to the Act of last Session, by equalizing the duties, bounties, &c. on articles imported into, or exported from, the ports of the United Kingdom, in the vessels of those Powers, with the duties, bounties, &c. paid on similar articles imported or ex ported in British vessels. am, at the same time, directed to assure you, beat in com municating to you this decision, it is a matter of personal regret to the Lords of this Committee, that it is not in accordance with, the sentiments entertained by the Committee of British Ship Owners. I am, Sir, Your most obedient humble Servant, (Signed) THOMAS LACK. George Lyall, Esq. &c. &c. &c. . . . , __.__ r _,.....__ . . ... .. •,. Summary of the Documents referred to in the preceding Report. A) Is'a Stat,Otten.l /hewing the relative e x p ence of building the Hull of a Staii,of 220 Tons at the under-mentioned place s ; in s w ta h n ic c l e i c t ) i t e a ti v u e 4 s t s ' e t l iti r e tte ° n l tl t y he bu s i e l v t Tha,mes ; and the calculation is made on the application of the same Own eglgeatitirivael: are taken front artaccurato Account of their actual expenditure, iu an in- Mier to the present prices in the other places .reqieetfully. .14 the Statement is detailed at great length, it has been deemed deslrable to giv e h ero on l y tho respective results, viz. : • In the River Thames - • - • 4t Dantzic - • - - . ...... Copenhagen - - - -- Kiel, in Holstein - (13) This Statement, like the preceding one,. is detailed at cons port, the particulars arc omitted in this place. (C) Details of this table are for the same reason also omitted . ; , . . Espence of' Manning for 0, . , . . Ewa - usu.' 1 Master for 12 months, at 10 Guineas 1 Mate ,12 „ £5 0 0 1 Carpenter 12 4 10 0 12 Seamen tee') 12-1 1 44 months 2 10 0 5 Boys averaging 20s. pa inolith £l3 11 3 per Ton. 12 10 ditto 8 10 7 'ditto 6 5 11 ditto derable length: as the results are given in the body of the Re- but the following calculation is founded on the results : re Year a Skip rf 400 Tons. PRUSSIAN. 1 Master, 4 voyages, at - X25 0 0 . .ClOO 0 0 Mate for 12 months,'.„ -2i Guineas - 81 10 0 1 Carpenter 12 „ . 31 10 0 12 Seamen 12-14,1 months,' 265. - 187 4 0 5 Oidimay Seamen and Boya, inch 12-40 39 0 0 months, Ins. 389 4 0 Balance in favour of the Prussian . 270 16 0 XO6O 0 the expence thereof, for 52 Weeks, in a Ship of 400 Tons, :hart Service : PRUSSIAN. Bread, 71b.p man, li , week, 721101 b. at p cwt. , 9s. Od. £29 5 0 Beef, 11th. " " 52001 b. lb. 011.3 d. 66 0 0 Pork,l4ltl. " " 15601 b. lb. Os. 3d. 19 10 0 Grey Pease, 2 pints 2080 pints bus. 211.0 d. 3 6 0 White ditto, 1 i do. .1560 do. do. 26. 3d. 214 10 Barley, 1i quarts „ 1560 tits. do. 3s. Od. 76 3 Butter, llb. ~ 13001 b. lb. Or. 6d. 32 10 0 Or, 51d. men, per diem 159 11 1 Balance in favour of the Prussian - 199 13 3 - Or, I i i t i. t' man, v. di em . £ :149 14 I (E) The . results of tkisic a bl et g i ve t h e eve vags duration of Ships as under, viz. : Years. Siontlis. . . English Ships - - . . - 11 : 3 ;11ussian ditto - - - - - 12 . i ~ 9 PTUfliiiiiil ditto - - - - 14:, i 3 Swedish ditto - - . . , 12 10 . Norwegian ditto _ ~ 4 - 20 .' 4 (F) h the declaration Of certa i n experi enced Brokers, stating that Ships of tits North of Europe arc of capacity for Stowage equal to British ships. (G II I It) The results are stated m the body of then Report. (L) A Comparative Statement of die effect produced by t h e difference of value between an English and Prussian Ship of 40(1 tons, employed each for one year v.— , .. ExoLisii S I I IP. An English Ship of 400 tons, may be triton on an avera g e ' at 191. 19. ton ; her' value therefore is .171100 0 0 £O9 1 4 PRUSSIAN SUIP. A Prussian Ship of 400 tons, may be calculated at 91. ton, to be of. equal goodness SCOO 0 0 The Interest of Money in Prussia .is 0 P cent. which on the above Capital is - - 2113 0 0 The depreciation of value, as in England, is 10 Pont. - • - 360 0 0 The expense of ltlsuring may a l s o . be taken at io p cent. - - 360 0 0 Balance in favour of the Prussian in one year is 063 0 0 £l9OO 0 0 RE lIIP. Etalsnee in favour of the Prussian, on Capital; as above . r'i r c ag tulinii eals, vide e viti C C D. - 11 - £06 , 1 0 0 . 270 16 0 - 183 10 3 Or, 991.11 x. 31d. I,* cent. on ilia Capital FOR THE SUN. SPANISH CORTEZ. MR. EDlTOR—Havitsg met with the following piece of information upon this subject in an old periodical publication, entitled " The Universal Advertiser," I send it, fancying it may prove ac ceptable to some of your readers : P. " On a late occasion, chance directed m• to the history of the Spanish Cortez, written by the diligent and ingenious Dr. GEDDES, a sketch of which will probably be agreeable to your readers, as the book is but in few hands. " King Henry 11. of Castile, intending to have a war with the Moorish King of Granada, called a Cortez (or Parliament) to meet at Toledo, the 29th of November, 1406, which was opened by a speech from Don Fernando, the King's brother. " The whole Cortez unanimously voted to as sist the King, but minutely computing the charges of the war, found it was two-thirds more than the people could bear, and passed a bill accord.; ingly to be presented to the throne. The Infant told them the King expected the whole chargei but the Cortez adhering strictly to their bill, the King at last passed it ; but at the same time dr- 1 , sired, that in case the sum they had given shon be found insufficient, they would empower him raise money on the people, without assembling Cortez, which would require time ; and thutt.; l l the giving him such a power was fiercely opposed by a great many of the Procurators, as a thing that struck at the very root of their power, ye( it was carried by a majority, and though granted but for one year, created a precedent,' and en.• couraged other Kings to desire the same power ) and to take it very ill if it were denied them; and by such weak and corrupt concessions as these it was that the Spanish Cortez came to lose all their authority: t--.(Page 331, Svc' Edition.) " I must add, out of the history of Gongales D'Avilla, that from the day that vote passed, the Cortez of Castile never had any authority, and that the Commons made a little struggle under the Junto in the minority of Charles the Fifth to recover their ancient rights : and though the Junto often defeated the King's forces, under the brave Padilla, bid fair for success and set.. tlement in their old Constitution ; yet the opi• nion which the King artfully spread among them, that if they proceeded they would never be pardoned, and if they returned to obedience would be well received, so split and divided them, that the enterprise came to nothing, and they all fell a sacrifice to Orir own folly and the King's resentment; to their own folly, for ime. gining that they could possibly offend any Prince more by success than by declaring against him ; or mitigate his resentment by being unfortunate, and lying at his mercy —(The Universal Adver• tier, Saturday, Dec. 29, 1753.) At a meeting of the Catholic Association on Saturday, Mr. O'GoamArt begged the Chair. man not to withdraw for a moment, and read a letter from Bandon, dated Ist of July, aigned Denis Quinlan, which stated, that on the even• ing of the Ist of July an armed procession of Orangemen had taken place at Bandon. The procession was excluded from the Church, the gates of which were closed against them.-- (Cries of hear, hear.)—The yeomanry drumsand fifes played party tunes, and after proceeding to a Dissenters'Meet ing-hou se,an altercation between them and some Catholics took place,which ended in blood ; that 8 Roman Catholics were mortally wounded, and three others killed I—Mr. O'Con. nel thought they had better not act on this letter, as it might be a quiz against them—a proof that the Learned Gentleman is sometimes sensible. £1424 N B,—The Original 4eeounn4 of which.the foregoing are abridgments, may be inspected by any Ship Owner, on, calling a ' ' the (Ace Of the ship Owners' Society, New Broad -street, London.. £l9OO 0 0 COURSE OF EXCIIANGE, July 9. flistettlent • lt 1 C. F. Ditto, at Sight 11 IS Rotterdam 12 2 A tit iverp (-L 12 4 imburg!' 3 a 91 156 A.ltoint 3 7 4 Os' Paris, 3 Day's sight 37 a 2S 50 0 us. Ditto . Bourdeaux, ditto Berlin 7 10 Frankfort on the thin Pet er :burgh . 9 Vienna lO S 'Trieste Madrid Cadiz Bilhoa 35 Effective Barcelona Reville Gibraltar Leghorn 47* Gei,t4s ".. . 44 -Venice, Ital. Liv 27 0 Malta 47 -Naples 3B Palermo 1 OA per Oa, Lisbon Oporto Rio Janeiro 48 Bahia •. 49 Dublin ....'9i Cul+ 9i pet Cent. BULLION. Portugal Gold,in Coin /.0 0 0 pet o*. Foreign Gold, in Bars :s 17 6 New Donnloons .... 3 14 9 New Dollars 0 4 PI Silver in Bars. Standard BIRTHS. On the Bth inst., at Brewers'-hall, tile lady of Bury Hutchhl. son, jun., Esq., of a daughter. On Tuesday last, at Chumleigh, Devon, the lady of the neY* George Hole, of a son. MARRIED. On Tuesday, the 6th inst., at Bath, George Miles, Bs+, to Jane Theodosia, eldest daughter of Captain J. J. Short, of the Royal Navy. On the 22d ult., at St. Andrew's, Holborn, Mr. John Winch,• late of Hammersmith, to Miss Cromwell, of Fekhan), Mid' dlesex. DIED. On Thursday evening, from inflammation in the bowels, after an illness of two days, George Earl of Tyrone, eldest ion of the Marquis of Waterford. On the 7th inst., at his house, Pentonville Mr. John Ed , ward Pilgrim , of th e ' Stock Exchange, aged £lO . On the 7th inst., Edward Robinson, only son of the Ref. Edward Irish, of Hackney, Middlesex, aged 6. On the 3d inst., at Clifton, at the advanced age of 93, 'Wit' liam Compton, Esq., Chancellor of the diocese of Ely . On the 6th inst., at his seat, Moor•hall, Harlow, Essex , John Perry, Esq., aged 50, On the 6th inst., George Hyde Clarke, Eq. of o *a fw a i Chester, st r eet ageder k e t l e r f. s quare, and of Hyde-hall, in the county o Printed and Published fur the PROPRIETOIti, at thc SU'(' Orricz, 112, Strand, by J. B. CABOT Alai.