The Express.
London, England, 1848-06-10 00:00:00

leaguer of that petition, that it induced him to give his
vote with the government—end no wonder, if he believed
what it contained. (Hear, hear.) If the repeal of the navi-
gation laws had the effect of pumping the ocean dry--of
saving the nation, in some 200 years, 800,000,0001. in the
employment of the poor, besides 100,000,0001. which was
now spent in the prevention of crime—all of which wag
promised by the petition from the City of London—those
who opposed their repeal had a great deal to answer for is.
deed. (Laughter.) He did not see the noble lord the mem-
ber few Windsor (Lord .1. Hey) in his place. That noble
lord jollied in the clamour raised against the captains, mates,
end seamen of the British nit rehant service, and bore testi.
mony to the frequency of the dispute's between the
tins and the men. The noble lord was
to swear to every statement contained in the reports
of the consuls, forgetting haw contradictory thou statements
were in themselves. Wiping some of tie consul. spoke of
British seamen as most brutal, Mr. Brooker, of Cronstadt,
and Mr. Mac.gregor, of Elsineur, bore testimony to their
goad conduct. (Near.) The charges that were made against
them were owing to the letter of Mr. Murray, which applied
to only one side of the question. (Hear.) The right hoe,
gentlemen the memb,r for the University of Oxford made
an ingenious speech on the present cqm stion, and not having
heard the first sentence ofthat speech, in which he said he
intended to support the government, hut having heard the
rest of it, he cont.-wit that ha end,: hardly believe
that he was not speaking on has (Lerd G. Bei-
tinck's) side. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) lie was
surprieed to hear the right hon. gentleman say that
recipe oity was the rule of action in tide country. Why,
were they not of late going hand over head without bargain-
ing for reciprocity ? What was the act of 1816, hut free trade
without reciprocity ? (Cheers.) The rulel It was, indeed,
the good old rule in ether dime, but it was ehandoned in
1846, and 021 y were now reaping the dire consequences in a
ruined trade and a starving people. (Hear, hear ) The
right hon. gentleman said teat with regard to steam
the petition of the British marine was unapproachable.
He would show the right hon. gentleman that he
laboured under • mistake iii this respect, as he did with
regard to the price of silk and timber. The number
of registered steam-vin eta built in the United Kingitom
in the year 1546 was 77 of 15,000 tons; the registered num-
her built in pH? was 103 of 16 000 bins. He had a return
of the United States steamship., by which he founii that
103 steamers were built in 1814 ; 163 in 1845 ; 235 in 1810 ;
198 in 1847. He was not able to star their tonnage, because
they were sized up with other vessels; but in four years
they built 693 steamers, mid 3 118 mailing vessels, which
measured 613,929 tons. In 1817 twelve live-geing steam-
ships, measuring 16,288 tone, were built in New York. a
numeer of tons easeeding the united tonnage of all the
steam chile of the United Kit gdom. Daring the
present year there were eighteen such boats, measuring
23,000 tons and upwards in course ut building. What then did
the member fur the University mean whoa he talked of this
counter h peg unapproachable in respect of her seagoing
vessel.? (liner, hear.) 'f he member for Manchester
alleged that he (Lord G. Beane k) bed charged him per-
sonally with a freud in the preparation of certain returns
laid on the table by command of her Majesty. It must have
been some other monitor—pokey, that "conscience which
made cowards of us all"—which made the right hon. gen.
dentin imagine he bad said inything of the kind. Having
instructed Mr. Porter to put the Queen's name to a return
which wes since admitted to he false, the right hon. gentle-
men no doubt telt some quints upon the subject. The right
hon. gentleman had since, indeed, end d t bolster up
the return ; hut Mr. Porter, on his oath before the House of
Lends, declared that be made the return by order of
the late Vice-President of the Board of Trade, and that he
knew the terms " protected" and " unprotected" were
wrong. Of course every one who knew anything of the
subject knew it to be wrong; but the free-trade party and
the free-trade newspapers tar weeks end weeks made use of
a return which its very author. new acknowledged to be
deceitful. (Cries of " N r," and hear.)
Mr. M. GI LISON —Read Ise evidence. Mr. Porter never
acknowledged the return to be wrong.
Lord G. BENTINCK contended that he did. He ad-
mitted that China ought not to be in the return, and that
other countries ought not to be included in it, and if so,
was not the return deceitful and fallacious? (Cheers.)
Then look at the description of the trade with
France. One steam- boat, the Prinoe Ernest, of no more
than 95 tons, was calculate d at many thousand tons, because
she bed made 14.5 tripe. Why, at this rate, the halfpenny
steam-boats on the river would represent more tonnage than ell
the *hirer engaged in our commerce with America put toge-
ther. Ile held in his hand a statement of our trade with
other countries, fairly compiled, end showing only those coun-
tries the trade with which was really protected or unpro•
tected. The result wee this, that the really bon,: fide Pro.
tected trade had advanced 14:1 per cent., whilst the mire.
ti eted trade bad nnly advanced 9.1 per cent. Did not that
prove that a fraud, by means of Mr. Peeler's return, had been
committed on tee country These were the tricks the Board
of Trade continually hod recourse to.to try and sway the legis-
lature of the country. The member fer Manchester said the
clamour fur the suspension of the navigation laws came from
that (the opposition) aide of the house What would not the
free trade party say next ? The right hon. gentleman talked
of " clamour." Why, he thought the rivht bon. gentleman
had been wafted into office by clamour—(hear, hear) —that,
after running away from Suffolk, free trade clamour found
him •s at for the place he now represented. (Cheers.)
Surely the right hon. gentleman was ungrateful. Then the
learned doctor the member for Bolton (Dr. Bowring) talked
of the " iron hand of competition," which wan to do so much
good to the shipowners. Ile used to talk about the "free
and invigorating air of free trade," but now he talked
of the "iron hand of competition." Yes, it was, indeed,
• right description—the "iron hand of competition. It was the
" iron hand of competition" that had doubled the pauperism
of this country, and that had ruined her colonial dependen-
cies. It wee the " iron hand of competition", that had re-
duced the price of lined at Stockport from nine farthings to
seven farthings a pound, and had increased the paupers in
that town from 5,500 to 25,000. (Loud protectionist cheers.)
There had been • committee up stairs which had brought
the truth out at last. That committee, on weighing the
evidence adduced before them, had declared that the opera-
tion of freedrade principles had materieliy diminished the
wages of labour. The next time the right hon. gentleman
the member for Manchester went down to that town let the
operatives of that town take him by the button and beg him
to explain what difference there was between protection
for sugar and protection for any other articles ?
The mesh. r for South Lancashire said no one would
be bold enough to say that cheap corn meant
cheap wages. Ile (Lord G. Bentiock) remembered when
the member for Ripon (Sir J. Graham) declared that such
was its meaning in • celebrated pamphlet, and certainly
experience proved that he was right. In Manchester pen.
perism had Isere ,sad fearfully. Would any one desire to
adopt the principle of free trade any further in the face of
such experience ? Surely, if ever there was a time to stop
it it was now. (Hear, hear.) Would they venture to put
another great interest of forty millions or more into the
free-trade crucible toles what would come up? The learned
member for Bolton talked of the masters and mates of our
merchant service, and said we ought to examine somewhat
more closely before we appointed them. He (Lord G. See-
-1 tinck) thought the mutters and metes, recollecting the
cost to the nation of Dr. Bowring's pleasure-trip
through the continent, might fairly retort, and might
suggest that we ought to examine our diplomatists somewhat
more carefully before we appointed them. The learned
gentleman's reports had turned out anything but correct.
He had predicted a great reduction in the duties of the
Zollverein if we adopted a moderate tariff. The learned
gentleman in those days never asked for free trade. A small
fixed duty was all that great philosopher desired at that
time. Well, the government of Sir Robert Peel adopted
free-trade principles. Did the Zollverein reduce their
duties ? On the contrary, the minister was so incensed et
the demands of Prumia that he threatened that power
with retaliatory messeres. The learned member for
Bolton, therefore the paid commissioner of free
trade—had misinformed and misled his coot trymen.
As to America, he del not undervalue the power of that
country, but he saw no reason why we should truckle to
her, or give her so large and import int a portion of our car-
rying trade, exacting no equivalent concession whatever. Of
the Cuba carrying trade, of which Great Britain now pee-
sewed seven-eighths. America, if this measure passed, would
very speedily enjoy the entire monopoly, as she would of
that of Port Rico. He did not say that shipping could flou-
rish without ships ; but when the Manchester people talked
of the dependence of ships upon manufactures, he begged to
ask them how manufacturers could proceed without -Ships—
how they could, without ships, import their raw material, or
how, without ships, export their completed fabrics? The
manufacturing reformers over the way talked of cutting down
some 17 millions of the expenditure upon our army and upon
our navy ? Did they reflect that if they destroyed our mer-
cantile marine, they must, if they desired to keep the country
preperly protected against the chance of invasion, make a large
addition to our navy and consequently to our expenditure ?
Mr. HUME denied that the object of those who advocated
the present measure was in any way to injure the commer•
cial marine of this country. On the contrary, it was their
earnest desire rather to improve the condition of that ser-
vice than to deteriorate it. The hon. member vindicated
the hon. member for Dolton from the depreciating estimate
which the noble member for Lynn sought to impress upon
the house with reference to the bon. member's public ser-
vices. He considered that no reports in the library of the
house contained more valuable matter than those of the hon.
and learned member were replete with. As to the sneer of
the noble lord about the hon. and learned member's predic-
tions, the noble lord, had he well considered the sub-
ject, would have found reason, in all probability, to believe
that if the landed interest had assented in time to a moderate
fixed duty on corn , as en equivalent for canoeosions
on the part of foreign powers, that interest might
have secured that moderate duty, instead of having been
compelled to submit to no duty at ail. (Hear, hear.) As to
the distress of the country, great as it unhappily was, it
would have been fearfully aggravated but for the relaxations
which the advocates of free trade bad effected. (Hear, hear.)
The charges made by the noble lord against Mr. Porter's
statistics were altegether unfounded ; he (Mr. Hume) had
given the subject of those statistics his most careful Wen-
lion, and he was perfectly convinced of the securely of Mr.
Porter's returns. The noble toed asked, for what purpose
was this change proposed It was proposed and supported
for the purpose of giving effect to those measures of free trade
which had been with such difficulty carried, and which re-
quired, for their full and satisfactory development, the re-
moval of the restrictions imposed by the navigation laws.
The noble lord spoke of the lons to the trade of this country
of several hundred whaling vessels. Was it free trade which
had driven these ships from England to America? No ; but
the infinite restrictions which it was now proposed to remove.
(lieu, hear.) He had every expectation, however, that
a large proportion of this trade, under the
change of system, would return to us. (Hear, hear.)
One ground on which our protectionist shipowners set up a
claim to monopoly war the coat of shipbuilding ; but it was
these same shipowner who bad resisted a reduction in the