The Sun. — London, England, 1821-03-23 00:00:00

--_ -..--...,: ....,:i.:sit rrouuce ana lilanufactures exported to the Norh. of Europe and the British North American Colonies respectively, in the years 1799, 1800 and 1801, when the 'rood Trade was enjoyed almost exclusively by the former, contrasted with the Years 1817, 1 18 and IGI 9, when the Wcod Trade with the former was diminished, and had been extended with the latter. Extracted from the Official Accounts, pages 120 to 122. N.B.—No accurate Estimate can be made of the actual con su mpti o n o f e ith er , ~. ' for a great part of the intervening pntou from 1801 to 1810, as during the war, goods were exported to both ;or the consumption of other countries. ....= • —...., ...,..... _........._,_-,,.., 4, R ' " . PA ~,.. P. to‘e" e •- x - - fl -T - .. -, • - g ' q r., q cc a) ,.. -' ~. 0 G ti, • 1 S. c.- ..-I•>c _ v. .e 2 die 1 . -4 c-, , .A. c co ; c.. !:,: Z 4 • • • a 0 71 •-• 0 ... :7. :i. ,2 , . . co -...1,.... C r .., g L...., • . cc ..- c: ~: . r.. 4 . „ ~ _.______ -.4 ' 10 .• ha ti I '''° I:1 ;7.,.? CO ac cc ez, ~ 2: g zt .. t.: 1 5, co cc .c. cc :..: g 3 , c, .4. F) .;:- ~.. 0 i,' c) 2I 'l R -;.T C. 2 .5 4' P 4 io - -4 ";.= --4 .t. oc c 4. ?, F 4, ,:-.- . c - . 1. co to to wto zzi r pi- ~...., . c....., B. 27 1 a. `1 t„ .6. .k.. i:, ~.z.. 04. t.:, t.., i• , 5v 4 -. e ..p , .4. ...t .4 ~., ... ...,.... . ..., -,, I, -....,...,-_, .t . ' C 0 1... CJ C.. g. .. ~.. a.' ..... ..... = C. , : f 4 ..4 ...• 0 ••• 0 0 8 " a • r . g .., C.. 1 ^ isD CAD .... C.i. C , •0 C c, ' '. Cn " er , .A. USI 4 ':;= IN,^ Tzj tz - .4 ,' R . ' t.. 1 ..,. isc t 4 cc 4.. --4 = V IN: 0 0C" - 4 - s' , - ER - e 0 1g '' 4... CP ta k: OL C. - , G. fo:o 4. ;A - t.M t. .., -,-., iie :-- .44. ft. C.I. 01 .-. .4. .1... V 4 VI 5.....1., 1 5!. ..P .../ Q•AP CP 0 ... CP CO tr , - 14 t iaga sa .. . •-•• CO . r. ::=.. r i:i 4 t'l 4 CC c,.. -... .... 0 0 tt .4 8 cr: cc .- c, c: .1...: C> 2 ~-:' &E 3 t - :-.; ==' .. F- 7 .- X- .9= cow 1 .4 tf: 4. .6 ..& . '.• ' CO 0 . 4 9 k • ..„ .... .-4-.. . _ c „ ..,.. Cb 4. fo. 'a"-. is:: .., p 5• - • ' ""*. .....t O. G . " Go • oS' ••,, 1.. ------____. n• II - I . F 1 „ O . c I C., CC .2 CA: .14 cr 4. Co •-•4 C O [IC C7O 0 ._• " r • 5 k's - : F Is not the fair inference from that fact, that the inclination of the Russians to teceive our manufactures and produce was such, that if their means were increased of Paying for the m by an i ncrease d i mport f rom that country, it is probable that those Manufactures would be sent in still greater quantitizs ?—The increased ex port of wood could contribute to it, but to a very limited extent from its very inconsiderable value. But in proportion to that influence you think it wou ld contr ibute to it ?—That 1 .. ! a probl emat i cal question, but I conceive the existing state of the trade enables mem to take annuch of our manufactures as they 'require. laDo you not conceive, that the Norway deals being a ll o f sma ll di mens i ons , h ave boured under an unfair disadvantage in the British market, in consequence of the present system or duties, and the exemption from duties of the Colonial deals ? No, I do not think they have. State your reason ?—I conceive Norway has its full share of the deal trade, as Will appear by a paper I beg to submit. [The witness delivered in the paper, which was read as follows :1 By the official account s , p age 13 0 St 141, it appears, that on an averagc of th? last four years 1816, 1817, 1818, and 1819, the relative imports were, From Norway . Sweden . Russia . Hundreds of Deals. 7,065 3,941 8,115 2,686 Deal ends. 3 5 'ei83 1,128 2,638 1,002 pieces. ! Battens. 2,331 414 1,271 Prussia British Not th American Colonies. 21,807 5,357 S 8,651 Deals andl Deal ends! 4,032 1223 Batts.l Total. 13,279 5,183 12,024 3,704 34,590 5,580 . 'Total. Mr. Stewart. In answer to t h e i r trade labouring under unf a i r di sa d van t ages , I have brought another statement which contains the contrast of the Norway deal e, and the Canada deal trade, which ur.der the existing system would leave .;• 9 s. Id. p er l oa d o f fif ty cu bi c f eet to the importer of Christiana deals; which a ; 1 4 ! 1 ,1ated sc a l e o f d ut i es wou ld a d vance to 'zl. 19s. 4d. while the Canada trade -.. "' r t hey contend, has the monopoly of the market, leaves only 11. 6s. 7d. ? he wi i tness delivered in the statement, which was read as follows:] ()m ay bezt Trade, contrasted with the Canad a Deal Trade, February 1821. NORWAY, under the existing system of duty : 4( )ling price of a hundred of Christiana deals, viz. piece s of 12-feet 3-inch by 9-inch. Pre ight calculated a t th e rate of 245. per 120 pieces, 11-feet 14-inch by 9-inch . Litherge, landing charges, discount and com l., 4 ni 4' ssion • ' l 'in a foreign ship . . lach al , _ — alice for prime cost of 120 pieces 12-feet 3- inch deals, on board the ship in Norway 1. s. d. 3 3 - 3 18 - 121 10 8 1. s. d. 136 - -1 28 11 7 8 4 ►. s. d. per load of 50 cub. ft. 1 9 1 Under a graduated Scale of Duty in Ireland, b e i hn price as above . Frei g h t landing charges, discount com mission • • • D uty in a foreign s hip • • • • • Dina ee for prime cost of 120 pieces, le-f e et 3- 9- inch deal s , on board the ship in Norway 5 3 3 -! 3 18 12 18 6, Or . L., 36 - 19 19 61 l - 61 per load of 50 cub. ft. 2 19 4 CANADA : ,R ; Price of a hundred o f yellow pine deals, viz. Fr : et es, 12-feet 3-inch 11-inch . . from Quebec, 71. ss. and 5 per cent. 1 .41iQ . 11 24 pieces 12-feet 11-inch 11-inch - "ge, landing charges, and commission ' -I Prime c os t o f 120 pi eces , 12-f eet 3- nch deals, on board the ship at Quebec 15 4 Or . L.I 127 - -- 18 4 61 I 1 Or . L.; 'per load of 50 cub. ft. 1 6 7 le ss tchcording i 1 1 pays to the present system of duty, the standard hundred of deals . net h an w 'uld be chargeable on the same quantity of timber in the log, would it e an t 44 additional o approximate those duties ?—The effect of that would be to give 10trade to Norway, Long deals now pay a less duty than timber in the angd;eshort deals, a higher duty. . The effect of equalizing the duty between deals iri, inther in the log would be to cause a reduction of duty on the short deals ierted from Norway, and to increase the duty on the deals imported from the r 1 in the proportion s which appear in the paper I beg to submit, [The witness delivered in the paper ; and it was read as follows:] 12 0 P i eces of 12 f eet 3 inch nine inch deals c on t a i n 5 l oa d s 20 fee:. "d ray duty _ 5 loads 20 feet timber, in the log pay duty ...'bucTlolf or - DUTY on 120 pie ces 12 f eet 3 i nch nine-inch' pals (the dimensions usually imported from Norway, agreeably to k po of the Commissioners cf, Customs) is charged upon the cubit contents,,at the same rate as timber in the log . L. s. d. 20 15 8 17 11 3 4 8 ,--- l2O pi eces of I C feet 3 i nc h ten- i nch.deals contain 8 loads, and pa y duty' 5 8 load s o f timber, in the log, pay duty - • -I (IttAsE or DUTY on 120 pieces of 16 feet 3 inch ten-inch deae' lsi (the dimen s i ons usually imported from the Baltic, agreeably to th i leport of the Commissioners of Customs) if charged upon tl i e Cubic contents, at the same rate as timber in the log - 5 4 4 ; Is not the effect of the present regulation, as to the duties ;If ,on deals. to render il Irety dis advantageous for the importer to bring into this emu Atry any deals under . le length s of from 16 to 20 feet? Of course upon the prese ,nt principle of collect '„l"R d uty, the longer lengths the merchant can import the nJore wood 4 brings for wi e same duty, and he necessarily derives a proportionate. udvantage. 1 Jhtrefore in all the lengths of deals, at present the (I.4ty upon deals from 8 to fe et is so excessive that they cannot be imported Pato this countr*, excepting at a very great Increased duty to deals of a greater length?. Th 3 shorter desk certainly pay higher in proportion than the long . deals; but the short deals are imported, from Norway, .which, from its proximity, is able to bringlhem at a less expense of freight. Might not many deals from Russia, Prussia and Sweden, from whence the long deals are at present sent, be brought of shorter lengths but which are at present excluded, in consequence of the scale by *Tell the duties are regulated? The timber of those countries is of larger dimensions, rind I aril not aware that it Would be of any importance to them to bring short deals ; - the Norway timber is of small dimensions. In of fact, do you know that before the late great increase in the duties on deals', a very large proportion of short deals used to come from those places ? I am not aware, whether that Was or was not the ease. Lookin,4 to the. interest, ihd Consurner in tins country, is it for his advantage that the short deals Ahdithl be eieliftied troni conics to this market ? The short deals are not excluded, fbr they come in Immense qtlantitldi. But at an increased price from the higher proportion of duty ? Certainly, What effect would be produced, in your opinion, on the consumption of colonial wood if a duty of 20s. per load was imposed upon it, without altering the present duties on faeign, timber? Ido not believe the colonial timber could be brought, except to a very limited extent, If such a duty were laid. What effect would be produced by imposing a deity on the colonial wood of I Os. ? The effect would be to reduce the consumption from the colonies, drici in copse (pence of communications I have lately had with persons from thence, I am dish posed to think that the reduction would be in the article of inferior quality, con sequently the general character of the imprtation would be improved. What Would be the effect of imposing 10s. on the colonial wood, and taking I Os. off the existing duties on foreign Wood ? An almost total exclusion of the colonial, I should' think. State your *sopa There.is at loss upon the . iiiiirket price at present; and my reason for thinking the duty which would be sufficient to correct the evil of ship ping large quantities of an interior description, might be of service, would be, that the market price would in consequence be i advanced ; if the market price did not advance, the colonial could not bear any duty at all. What, in your opinion, would be the effect of laying ss. on the colonial timber, and taking ss. off the foreign timber ? Ido not think it would produce the same beneficial effect as laying 10s. on tho colonial timber, because I think that to whatever extent it may be possible for the colonial wdod to bear a duty, it will effect a greater reduction in the export of inferior quality, and will therefore tend more to advance the general character of the colonial wood ; because also I think that ss. taken off the foreign duties would be immediately laid on in the shipping price on the other side, and become a benefit to foreigners at the expense of our revenue. What would be the effect, in your opinion, of taking 10s. from the duty on foreign wood without imposing any duty on colonial wood? I think that there would be no improvement in the character of the colonial wood, and therefore I think the measure would be injurious both to the revenue and the colonial trade. My reason for thinking it is possible the colonial wood might bear a duty, is the expectation that it might improve the general character. %%That effect do you think might be produced by taking 20s. off the duty on foreign timber upon the consumption of colonial timber ? I conceive it would scarcely be used at all ; I think taking 20s. off the present duty would nearly exclude it from the market. lam of opinion, a reduction of the foreign duty is not likely to produce ire same result as a duty upon the colonial. Then your opinion is, that 455. which would then be the difference in duty, be tween the importation of foreign and colonial timber, would net be a sufficient protection to colonial timber ? The difference which would be a protection is en tirely a matter of speculative opinion ; and I would rather answer that question by reference to figures, shewing what have been the relative importations and the re lative prices, - leaving the Comfnittee to. draw their conclusion ; I have brought a statement of the relative importations, and the relative prices for six years. [The NCitness delivered in the same, and it was read as follows :] Timber per -IA the Import of eal ad in LoxpoN ; h preceding year. American :Difference Yellow Pine per Load. Imports into GREAT extracted from the 0 counts, pages 130 to I Foreign Timber. 3RITATN, licial Ac- Memel. Years. - IL.s. d. 14. s. (1. 4 15 4 12 6 s. (1. 1 5 1 12 6 1 12 6 2 5 2 , 5 2 17 6 Colonial Timber. YearF. Loads. I 67,809 Loads. 107,552 1816 Jan. 6 18:7 6 5 1010 612 0 1819 6 17 6 1820 6 1821 16 2 6 4 12 6 3 15 - 3 5 - 11315 - 1816 - 1817 - 18111 - 'lBl9 - 1820 - 60,153 80,968 130,654 102,864 131,842 140,28 . 2 ,14,102 2.67,065 Returns not published From your knowledge of the timber market here, to what extent do you think the consumption of colonial, timber would be reduced, if the difference which now ex ists in price between Memel timber ; the price of Memel timber being 61. Ss. and colonial timber,,the 'price of colonial timber being 31. :)s. The existing difference being therefore - 31. should be reduced to 30s. ? Judging from the previous rela tive differences which have obtained in the market -I should say the colonial would be reduced one half by being brought within that compass. Is not the colonial timber as valuable for some uses as the foreign timber? Quite as suitable I believe for some purposes,and more suitable in many instances, because it is wider. Then if a difference of :ios. was to exist between them, would it not be used in preference for those particular purposes ? Certainly, for those particular purposes. You stated, that laying on a duty of ten shillings on the colonial timber might be advantageous to the trade of the Colonies, and that taking off ten shillings from the duty on foreign timber would be very disadvantageous ; why do you make this difference in the two modes of bringing the prices of the two sorts of timber to the same relative difference ? ' I explained in a former answer, that I understood it was probable the effect of laying on a duty might lie to improve the general character of the importation, and by improving the general character an advance in the market price might arise. Why do you think that taking the ten shillings off the Baltic timber would not have the same effect ? Because the character of the colonial wood would not he improved by that measure ; but the imposition of the duty. would prevent the same speculative importations. Would not the effect be tomake the duty in either case, as a distinction, ten shil lings less between the two timbers than it is at present ; that if a duty to the extent of ten shillings were taken off; the person shipping American timber must ship it under the impression of that duty being taken off, and therefore' that he must pre pare for the increased Competition : does not it approximate in the same way ? There is only the same difference in the figures, but I consider the effect would be different. I do not know how to assign any other cause then I have already ex pressed for that opinion, but I conceive from my communication with colonists and others, that the result would be as I have stated. Would not the effect of the imposition of 10s. in the duty be to raise American timber 10s. or more than 10s. ? If it improved the character of the wood and re duced the supply, the market price would advance, I think that 10s. duty would re duce the supply, and then an advance in the market price might take place. Is not the timber trade at present very much carried on by the colonial merchant and the ship-owner ? The trade is not now confined to merchants, but the ship owners have latterly been large importers. Do you consider that the natural state of the trade ? I consider that it is not the natural state of the trade. Can you state in what years you conceive the wood trade to have been in its most natural state ? That is a question I ..am not prepared to answer. Would you say it was in its natural state about the year 1817 ? Ido not feel myself able to answer the question at present. You have adverted to the loss sustained at present upon the importation of wood ; do not you attribute that to the excessive importations that have taken place for the last two years ? Yes ; I consider it to arise from the redundant importations. You have stated, that there are some purposes to which the American wood is preferable, and many to which it is equally applicable with the wood from the north of Europe? Ido consider, that for purposes where.a large surface is required, it is preferable for a g i reat many purposes ; the preference is always given to the cheapest article that can be procured. Do not yon consider those, generally speaking, the inferior purposes of the country? I do. Do you know what proportion the consumption of wood, in these inferior pur poses, bears to the general consumption of wood in the country? It constitutes a very large feature in the consumption. Do not you think, that for those purposes a comparative cheapness, to the amount of five and thirty shillings, would be sufficient to cast the balance in favour of the American timber? As a speculative opinion I should say yes, for some purposes. Are you acquainted writh the nature of the timber trade between the United States and Canada ? I have same knowledge of it from report, not from a resi dence in the colonies, for X never' was there. Is there much timber, or any great quantity of deals brought into Canada from the United States, which are exported and received in this country on the same terms with Canadian timber? I should conceive a considerable quantity. What regulations would, in your opinion, be best adapted to ascertain at Quebec what timber and deals were of the produce of Canada, and what was the produce of the United States? Certificates of origin. . Would it not be expedient, that th e c ustom-house at Quebec shoul d themselves inquire into the truth of the origin, and grant those certificates only upon beinge satisfied that such proof was correct ? I should conceive there would be no other way of obtaining correct certificates of origin. 'Filen such examination at Quebec, and such certificates. would, in your opinion, secure Abe revenue against any attempt at imposition by shipping timber, the pro duce of America as the produce of the colonies? If proper precautions were ob -served by the officers granting the certificates. • Rave you any account of the annual imports from Russia, extracted from the official returns, and th e average exports flour great Britain to Russia, fro m the official returns ? I hav e . - [The witness delivered in the same, and it was read as follows :I Average ANNUAL EurouTsfrom Russia, extracted from the official returns. Timber. Deals. Deal Ends. 1799 to 1802 1816 to 1819 Loads. 16,948 11),625 Hundreds. I Hundreds. 6,448 I 1.465 8,115 I 3,909 No t 2. R. SEPPINGS. Navy Office, 19 Feb 1821. An Account of the Frigates built in the Years 1P.12 and 1813, of American Fir, showing the Places where built, and the-Names of the Builders. Place where built. Builders' Names. No. 4 R. SEPPINGS. Navy Office, I 9th February, 1821.- An Account of the Specific Gravity, Strength, and Deflection, of the several kindk Lf Foreign Fir, as found by Mr. Peter Barlow, by experiments made under: his inspection, from Timber supplied from his Majesty's Yard at Woolwich. N. B.—The pieces tried were 8 feet long, 2 inches square,_ supported by props -7 feet apart, and had the weights placed in the middle of each piece. Average I Breaking Ultimate Names of the Woods. Specific Weight. reflection. Gravity. lhs. •• in. Red Pine . . . . 657 511 , 5.82 American Red Pine . . New England Fir, or Yellow Pine . Riga Fir . . Norway Spar . . . . . 657 )53 753 577 lhs. 511 420 422 655 5.82 4.66 6.00 4.00 These experiments dd not appear to have been extended to Dantzic fir but, from the best judgment 1 can form, the Dantzic and Riga timber as similate in quality and strength when equally clear of knots. No. 5 It. SEPPINGS. An Account of the number of Loads of Timber, with the expense per load, required in building a Frigate of 4 guns, of Canada Fir, and Baltic Fir, respectively. For the building of a frigate of 46 guns wholly of fir timber, which can be done with very few exceptions, by the present method of constructing ships, about 1,100 loads will be required. The contract prices of Baltic fir, with the duty added, and Canada fir, exclusive of the duty, are the same, viz. 61. 12s. 6d. per load ; this, for a frigate built of Canada fir, will amoant to 7,2871. The duty on the Baltic fir is 31. 4s. 1 Id. per load; deducting this, it will cost the government for timber 3,7171. The workmanship and other materials will be the same in each case. When sold out of the service, the value of either will be the same or nearly so, as the wood is generally used fur fuel. R. SEPPINGS. Navy Office, 19th February, 1821. No. 6. To the right honourable the Lords of his Majesty's Privy Council, for the Affairs of Trade. Memorial of the Russia Company, by their Governor,'Sam. Thornton, Esq. The period fixed by act of parliament for the importation of wood du'ty free, from our North American colonies, being about to expire,:-- Your Memorialists beg leave to .represent the grievance which they feel from the present system, and to submit the following considerations, which may show, that while it is ruinous to the trade in which your memorialists were, till the intro duction of that system, beneficially engaged, it is injurious to the general com merce of the country and to the interests of the community at large, and unpro ductive of public revenue in any proportion to these d!sadvantages. When the present high duties on Russia and Baltic timber, deals, &c. were first laid on, the difference between the Baltic and Canada freights in favour of the former was equivalent to the exemption of duty in favour of the latter. Thus, in the instance of fir timber, the freight in 1812 from_ the colonies was 61. to 61. ss. per load, while that from the Baltic was 21. 1 Os. to 21. Iss: and the duty on the latter 31 ss. ; making the aggregate of freight and duty on Baltic timber somewhat less than the freight alone from Canada. But since the peace, freights ha\Ting declined to 21. ss. on timber from Canada, and to 11. from the Baltic, the comparison will stand thus : Freight from the colonies No duty I. s. d. .2 5 0 .0 0 0 Freight from the Baltic Duty . 2 5 0 .1 0 0 .3 5 0 4 5 0 making the aggregate of freight and duty on Baltic exceed the expences of impor tation on American timber by 21. per load, or equal to about 100 or 150 per cent. on the prime cost. The effect of this difference, which is in fact an enormous bounty on wood from America, has been to force the exportation from thence hither to a very extra ordinary extent, and to reduce the price in this country below what similar descrip tions from the Baltic can be afforded at, assuming the lowest possible cost of pro duction. The tendency of this measure, however, was not fully anticipated, and the Russia and other Baltic merchants were accordingly not early enough aware of the impossibility of maintaining the competition: They therefore for some time after the peace continued and even extended their importations; but these being at tended with ruin to many, and loss to all the parties concerned, a sensible diminu tion has of late taken place; and if the present scale of duties is to be continued, there can be no doubt that as soon as the few remaining capitals can be disengaged (a process always requiring some lapse of time) from this branch of business, it must be abandoned wholly, or continued only for specific and very partial pur poses, such as the use of his Majesty's dock-yards or other public, works. The detrimental effects arising from the present scale of duties are not confined to the Baltic timber trade, but will be found to extend to important branches of the export trade of this country ; inasmuch as the power of consumption of British manufactures and colonial produce, by very.nurnerous classes of the inhabitants of Russia, Prussia, and Sweden, is very much reduced by their inability to make payments to the extent that they otherwise would do in the article of wood, to which the present duties, nearly prohibitory, apply ; while, on the other hand, there is every reason to presume that a reduction of those obnoxious duties would be viewed with particular satisfaction by the governments of the above-mentioned states, and might probably be followed by important concessions and facilities on their part. With a view, too, to the general interests of trade, it is clearly desirable that our merchant vessels should be built as cheaply as possible, consistent with their durability, in order to encounter the competition of foreign shipping ; but this ob ject is counteracted in an eminent degree by the high price at which every-descrip tion of wood is artificially kept by the present system of duties. -= To the community at large it is a serious evil, arising out of the present system of a forced and almost exclusive importation of American timber, to be confined to use at a comparatively high price a d escr ipti on o f woo d w hi c h , independently of its inferiority of quality in other respects, is ,supposed, upon apparently strong grounds, to have spread, to an enormous extent among ships and houses, the pre viously rare disease of the Dry Rot; and the public is thus taxed in the worst possible way, without any corresponding benefit to the revenue of the state, or rather to the detriment of that revenue; as there is every reason to believe, that, if the duty on Baltic timber were reduced to what it was prior to 1810, the total re ceipt of custom's on that branch of trade would be increased. Your memorialists therefore presume to hope that the opportunity which now legitimately presents itself May be embraced, for the purpose of revising and alter ing a system, which is not inure injurious and unjust to 'the, importers of Baltic timber than disadvantageous and impolitic in a national point of view. March, 1820. No. 7. Remarks on the Trade of Memel, particularly as regards the article of Timber. This branch of trade was for many years the only one carried on to any extent at Memel ; it was the chief source of opulence to a great portion of the people resi dent in the interior of Poland and Prussia; it 'afforded them the means of living in affluence, and of providing themselves with a variety of articles of luxury, which were principally the produce of Great Britain and her )lonies. The ships by which this trade was carried on were chiefly British, and to this day they have by much the greatest share of it; but the difference of tonnage required to convey timber from Memel to Great Britain, previous to the year 1807, as compared with that now employed in this way, is very celsiderable indeed, as will be shown in the sequel. Whilst the duty on Baltic wood was at the former low rates in England, the quantity of timber exported annually from Memel was from 150,000 to 200,000 loads ; and for the twenty years Elm 1787 to 1 EO7 it may be computed at a yearly aver►ge of 180,000, reckoning 50 running feet to the load, as is usual there. Whilst the continental system was in force little business was done. During that period the rates cf duty were raised in England on wood from the north of Europe, • which, remaining in force after peace had been restored, served greatly to depress ' the timber trade of Prussia; and so much to reduce the quantity required for the British markets, that the intercourse between the Prussian sea-ports and the interior of that'country and Poland, and the sale of foreign commodities to the inhabitants of those districts, were greatly diminished. The decrease of the trade will by ,verage FAPOILTS Great Britain to ,ussia, Tom the 01 accounts. Britsh Produce & Manufacture Pereign & Colo nial Mercliandize. TOTAL. 343,351 1 949.129 471,584 1 ' 2,310,672 1799 to, 1802 - 181 G to 1819 - 602,778 1,839,088 The trade in timber from 'Norway being at present, in a chief degree, carried on in Norwegian ships, what Would the dcrnsequence be if the duty on Norway ships was so laid as to give a preference of the carrying trade to British ships ? It would be advantageous to the British shipping interest. Ido not sce any objection to it ; for I do not think Norway has any claim, upon the ground of reciprocity, to the benefits she now enjoys. I will submit a statement which shows that Nor way has annually a large balance to receive from Great Britain ; therefore, her alledged debt is ndt the natural result of the trade between the two countries. [The viitness delivered in th Imports of loon Into (feat B: acc9unts, pages 1 30 and 131 re account, which was read, as follows :I ;ritain from Norway, agreeably to the official in which paling boards, spar, and lathwood are not included. Oak Masts. Deal Ends Timber. tider 12 inches diameter. I& 12 inches diameter. Battens. Deals. Loads. 15,502 26,257 24,750 1817 - 1818 - 1819 - Timber Plank. Loads. Number. 6,132 8,516 4,644 Loads. 45 55 24 Hundredso t r iTgEri 9 800 8,466 )fl2O pieces --- Ti -- Th?3 8,850 7,584 1- 1 60,509 1 733 19.292 1 124 1 24,963 1 22,668 The invoice cost of these imports at the most moderate estimate, is upwards of - . - - . - 450,000 Freight on that portion imported in Norwegian vessels; viz. 221,836 tons (vide official accounts, page 124), after deducting the dis bursements in Great Britain - - - - 170,000 £ 620,000 To which add cost and freight of wood imported into Ireland from Norway during the same period, both of which arc paid for by bills on London - - - - - - - 200,000 TOTAL Imports, &C. 7 X. 82..,000 OFFICIAL VALUE of EXPORTS from Great Britain to Norway, in the years 1817, 1818, 1819 ; extracted in the official accounts, pages 120 and 121. IBritish produce IForeign & Colo- TOTAL. manufactures. nial merchandize. • X 1817 - 41,452 31,915 73,367 1818 - 76,466 54,506 130,772 1819 - - 60,172 29,174 89,246 - 293,485 Total Exports. To which may be added the amount of goods allowed under a treasury warrant to be exported to Norkay without en try, viz. 51. for each of the crew, and 201. for the captain ; 30,000 although the collectors of the customs can prove they sel- £ dom avail themselves of the privilege . - - j- 323,185 496,515 BALANCE payable to Norway in money, being more than one-half the z cost of the imports from that country into Great Britain & Ireland You have stated to the committee, that you are intimately acquainted with the timber trade from our North American colonies to this !country, as a commission merchant resident here, receiving consignments ? I am. Can you inform the committee, for account of whom the timber so imported in the years 1816, 1817, and 181 - 8, generally, were shipped ? Partly for account of the persons having establishments in the colonies, partly for merchants resident in this country. In 1819 and 1820, has the trade undergone any particular change ? Yes; the reduction in the rate of freights has induced ship. owners to import on speculation. Daring those years, has the merchant resident in. this country continued to or der shipments of timber, on his own account, from the colonies? The yard keeper, or timber merchant, has not imported so largely as in the preceding years, owing to the unnatural and depressed state of the trade. Can you state, whether the operation of the present duties has not been to produce an importation of caygoes of deal ends ? The present regulations, with regard to deal ends, have been the means of introducing entire cargoes of that description, to the injury of the revenue, which will be illustrated by a statement I beg to submit to the committee. [The witness delivered in the same, and it was read, as follows :] 'The duty payable on 120 pieces 12 ft. 3 in. Deals by a foreign ship, is £2l 10 B Loss to the revenue. X Which on 185 pieces 12 ft. 21. in. battens being 1 .£ s• d. y s. d. the same cubic contents, - is f 16 13 6 onl 4 17 2 - - - 180 pieces 8 ft. 3 in. deal ends, d° do 11 011 - -10 9 ()) - - ... 120 - ..12 ft. 3 in. paling boards, d° do 3 7 8 - -17 13 The evil might be remedied by admitting at the low duty, as deal ends, those only not exceeding six feet, which would confine the import to the limit intended by the legislature, viz. such proportion as is necessary for stowage ; and the ar ticle laterly introduced under the denomination of paling boards being of the same substance and dimensions as deals, and applicable to the same purposes, instead of being admitted at - - - - - - 3 I 7 8 Ought to pay the full duty of - - 21 10 8 Under the present regulations that apply to paling boards, has not a great deal of wood, applicable to all the best purposes, been introduced under that name ? A great deal ; and I should venture to recommend to the consideration of the committee, that the duty on deal ends should therefore commence from six feet, and that measures should be taken entirely to exclude the article now deno minated paling boards, which is not that which was originally in the contempla tion of the legislature. Navy Office, 17th Feb. - 1811. An Account showing the Time when the Frigates, built in the Merchants' Yardsi, in the years 18 13 and 1 8 4, of Timber imparted from Canada, were launched; and when the Timber was received. Year in which Guns. Ships' Names. When laid down. When finished. the Timber was received. 32 Maidstone - March 1795 December 1795 f I 794 andl79s. Shannon - April 1795 February 17P6 I 38 Clyde - June 1795 March 1796 ) Cannot be ac — Tamar - June 1795 March 1796 1 curately stated. 36 Glenmore - March 1795 March 96 7 1 1- - 1793 and 1794. Trent .. March 1795 February 1796, j 32 Circe - June 1804 0 November 1804 June 1804 November 1804 -} 1802 and 1803. Pallas - Hebe - August 1804 'December 1804 1803 and 1804. Jason - August 1804 November 1804 1804. . Minerva - August 1804 October 1805 1803 and 1804. . Alexandria - October 1804 February 1806 1804. Red Pine. Cydnus . . Eurotas . . Niger . . Meander . . Pactolus . . Tiber . . Araxes . . Tanais . . Tagus . . Eridanus . Tigris . . Ister . . Seamander . Orontes . , . Euphrates Yellow. Hebrus . ) Granicus. . j Alpheus . _ Blackwall • Narthfleet • Deptford Fishbourne . Northfleet • Rochester Fishbourne • Rochester Frinsbury • Blackwall Frinsbury • Upnor . • Lirnehonse . Blackwall . 'SVigram and Co. Messrs. Pitchers. Barnard and Co. D. List. Messrs. Pitchers. Mary Ross. D. List. Mary Ross. John Pelham. W. Wallis. Messrs. Brindleys. John King. John Barton. W. Wallit. R. SEPPINGS. the Guns. Ships', Names. When launched. When rec Timber was eived. RED PINE. •46 Cydnus . . April. . 1813 Eurotas . . April. 1813 Niger . . . May . 1813 -- 1 Meander . . August . 18 13 1 - The timber issued to the j Pactolus . . August . 1813 merchant builders for - .Tiber . • . November . 1813 the construction of Araxes . . . 'September . 1813 these frigates was re — Tanais . . . October . 1813 ceived in the years 42 Tagus • • July . . 1 813 1809, 1810, 1811, Eridanus . May . . 1813 1812, and 1813; but Tigris . . • Julie • • 11313 as it was used by them Ister . . July . . 1813 indiscriminately, no Seaman der . . July . . 1813 particulars can be Orontes . . June . . 1 31 3 given. Eiiphrates . . November . - 1813 YELLOW PINE. 42 I Hebrus . Granicus . I Alpheus . . September . 1813 . October . April. . 1813 . 1814 APPENDIX. No. 1. • Navy Office, An Account showing the Time when the Frigates, built in his 17th Feb. 1821.1 Majesty's Yards in the Years 1795, 1804, 1805, and 1806, of Baltic Fir, were laid down, and when launched ; also in what Years the Timber was received.