The Express.
London, England, 1847-02-10 00:00:00

1

Lord CAMPBELL drew a distinction between impropriate
and rectorial tithes, inasmuch as the latter wereerelesiestical
property, and had ecclesiastical duties connected with them.
In his opinion the penalty impaled on the dean and chapter
for absence showed th residence was invaded by the tes-
tator, and that the payment of the tine. did nut free one
from the duties.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that ha expressed no
opinion as to whether the terms of the charter had been
complied with in these instances, but merely called the
attention of their lordships to the nature of the property.
Lord STANLEY said that it wan not his intention, at
first, to en:. r on the legal point on which the question stood,
but ha thought the property was rectorial property. and
should be devoted to rectorial purposes!, according to the
act of 3rd and 4th Vie, chap. 114, which treated these SIP
rectories not having the cure of souls, and which deprived
the chap' erof the eltsention which they exercised of using the
funds, and appropriating to themselves or their succession
an amount of innome out of the general funds of the et-
clesiasical corporation. Ile did not !soh to go into the legal
construction of the charter, but he would state that a body
of Christian men conducting themselves as the peti-
tioners represented, could not imagine that they performed
their duty. If the law was such that they could act so, it
should not be allowed to minutia incapable of remedy. If it
be left without remedy, then the inhabitant. of Manchester,
having the sum of 5,0001. left to them for the purposes Co
spiritual instruction, mast be content to lose that spiritual
instruction, and see their funds vested in persons who
conceived that they had no claims upon them,
and no duties to perform. They would he age
liable to have the property invested fur rectorial purposes,
taken from them by the eceleeiastical COUIMiaiOO, and ap-
plied to chapter purposes. The establishment of the see of
Mancheet, may also be involved independently of thin.
There was no doubt that the object of the tesator was in
this instance defeated by a technicality which he was sorry
to see taken advantage of—The subject then
PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND).—CAPT...kroVNNE.
Lord BROUGHAM mid that there was • !statement
which he bad seen in • blue book, made by Capt. Wynne,
to the effect that two members of parliament, of rank ME
property, had placed tenants of theirs on the public works,
there to receive sustenance and money. That statement
had been most positively denied by these members. He
was now induced to ask the noble marquis! whether Copt.
Wynne was in the confidence of the government, and
whether he woe still employed in the same rapacity ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that he had r.sd the
rate:neat alluded to and the denial, and that it was impos-
sible to give hie opinion as to the propriety of every particular
act of Capt. Wynne. Captain Wynne continued to receive
the (oafish nee and also the gratitude of the government.
Lord MONTEAGLE praised the efficienty and seal of
an lie germ striker weeks in fished.
Lord BROUCSHAM suggested that there would be no
harm in applying to Captain Wynne for the information on
which be grounded his charge.
USE OF SUGAR IN DISTILLERIES.
The Pod of EOLINTON. in presenting the petition
above noticed, said he ebbed to call the attention of the
house to the hardship which would be thrown anon the
distillers by the hill which would in a short time come be-
fore their lordships' house, entitled "A Bill for the further
Encouragement of Distillation in the United liinta."
That bill proposed to reduce the duties on colonial spirits
from Ss. 10d. to 4s. 2d., the duty generally in Scotland re-
maining at 3s. Bd., thereby making a difference of 6d. to
cover the excise restrictions, the loss by on tape, and the
other difficulties with which the distillers had to contend.
The framers of the bill bad apparently thought that a
reasonable sum ; but they bad forgot that the malt-tax
operated very grievously on the distillers of spirits, as nine-
tenths of the spirits in that country were made from malt.
By this means the Scotch spirits were placed in a disadvan-
tage of 2d. per gallon, besides the excise restrictions. An
art passed is 1835, prohibiting the importation from Jersey
and the other Channel Islands o f spirits made from malt, except
under a du' of 4s. 10d. per gallon, strengthened the cam
of the Scotch distillers very much. He trusted the bill he-
fore the other house would he modified so as to render it
more palatable to the Scotch dirtillers.
The Earl of CLARENDON said, there had heen no wish
or intention to bear hard on the Scotch distillers, deputa-
tions from whom had had interviews with himself and the
Chancellor of the Exchequer ; and that right hoc. gentle-
mar, so well as himself. thought that the Scotch distillers
had no foundation for their complaints, and that they were
only entitled to the same protection as the distillers in
this country.
After a few words from Lord S btut.ay, eaplanatory of the
nperation of the act to which the Earl of Eglinten had re-
ferred,
The Earl of CLARENDON said it had been considered
that the reduction of sixpence in the duty was considered a
fair equivali of to the Scotch distiller, who was entitled to a
drawback of half the duty on his malt.
Lord STANLEY said the Scotch distiller was, *hac all,
left in a disadvantage of Bd.
Lord MONTEAGLE, in presenting • similar petition,
which, he said, was signed by nearly all the distills.. in Ire-
land, said the object of the bill, as contemplated by the
government, was the same object which the distillers bad
in view the only difference was as to the facts. The dis-
advantage to the distillers lay in the latent duties to which
they were subject ; and the cue of the Irish distillers wee
even harder than that of the Scotch.
Lord GREY said the fact of the malt duty payable by the
distillers bad not been nvi !looked. Great pains had bees
takes by the Board of Excise to ralcalsta the burden which
fell in this way on the Scotch distillers, and to name a proper
allowance for it. He regretted that this discussion had arisen
incidentally and without notice. Had it been otherwise, his
noble friend the President of the Board of Trade might
have been presared with details, to show that the emptied*
of the distiller* were groundless.
THE LAW OF SETTLEMENT.
In reply to the Marquis of SALISBURY, the Mar-
quis of LANSDOWNE. said it was not the intention of
government to propose any measure on the subject, or
to take an. step, until the report of the select committee of
the other house on the law of settlement had been made and
considered.

HOUSE OF COM HONS.—TUESDAY, FEB. 9.
The 8 took the chair shortly before four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
PETITIONS.-By Mr. Weatt.wros, from Mt. Greenock, wart
the Regent'. Company (Paddington and Limehoose Moray sal
Branch), bill. By BB B. Haus, from inhalStams in the oelifehour-
hood of the keeping proposed Use. asainet the bill. By Mr. T.
Descorsar., from the traders en I whnreagers convected with the
stove, in favour of the bill.
BECOND READINGS.-Norkr& Railway (Branch from Norineh
to Aylabam, with a Branch to North Waikato). North BMW, Rail-
way (No. 1). may, Micheal, and lbw* Hallway. Southampton
and Dorchester Railway 1 Weymouth Blearaij,
LEAVE OF ABSENCE.-To CM. Witenwors, on account of di
health, one month. To Mr. 0. E. Wear, as suount of a (loosest.
athletic., one month.
PUBLIC BURNER.
PETITIONS. -By Mr. LIDDiLL from the shipowners of Booth
SUN& la avow of the euepension., but spinet the permission alters-
Ikea of the Navigation Laws.-Mr. Hopson from eh/pawners of Sus.
dolma and Whet., to the mete effect -Mr. Htua from Montrose to
the ((nerve(.-Me. Brumvn from the Member of Ocanmeree of
lissalwatig,_b favour of an alterstion in the Navigitics Laws.
now ttairlittal.-811l foe the linproveratat et agricultin,l
Ti=tDeeritate Fessois (bard) Bill ; Matthias from
Illarsiamsol Ifewodas tam Nome NIL
0110111612X-rouce (lamem).-Baterna el the
nozakoref pellemememetoyed as sensate bp amesise 'Ems, their
=ftie. ; pamishars of the peke sweet WI me piper-
hat, aM the swat of • I I prim rombrogrardem from
thiretra6eitylog WWII et the bob Ibis ahem b
OF 1101,0111.-Oseems Ow.-Mr.Sim 1111.1•11• TOW
(thin day) to move to who of all sesseseleb sad pledges he the
reCoof. the 111111:4Fsew
Ithoma ker-ilses -Mr. T. Dencona poinpoord
he en W *the thd be.
Connemn thwoantammicvr.-br. &warn ea rimeilay toe
WIN tomes bra wawa ed aB entraischtsmals la per of being
near heClapybed Act.
lbw on Kam. We or Man. -Dr. Meths pthposed La
modsams Y WSW use the Nth aslant.
Demme Psalm (Imams) Btu..-11r. flnaw, en third read-
ing of rfs MU, to sew a 4•11•• maths Wilma, te ism raw
• eepeemeat of he directly tram *sir (mMo as he theeave
Mellen
thutesms. Ptvisamens is on Nam.--111, C. tomor-
row Wie iby), to move kr a wyelthe freers remft by
the Milky, ntstbat to wearer -pmelsmnta in the wy.
REGENT'S CANAL COMPANY (PADDINGTON
AND LIMEHOUSE RAILWAY AND BRANCH)
BILL.
Sir W. CLAY moved the sessmi twilit. alibis bill.
Mr. WARBURTON said, be thought be esehl thew suf-
Releat reason why the bill shield not, be the peened at
Mean be reed • second time. It or.. ueeler the emethisration
of the Cowniesimers of Woods end Fonwe. whether the
eleiment of the crown should be glees, et net, M the bother
=of the bill, and, before Bo ingwenb allowed it to
dsi • second time, they were entitled to Wow what was
the determination of the Commissionem of Weeds sio,l
Fermi, bemuse if they were left in they molt be put
in mesdng its preemies Wire stemensittee,
Lend
oat be tresteig dwelt hilly.
RPESII maid its bmi for see 4life folehred
=arand heard statemoste the Mimes if the
k, part of ita preeeitees, who mold is Its
/wow aogweente of public °tameless, owl keeewoof Mode ;
owl hours the part of its emsestente, who, beelike ether
IrmaVrid of.ng‘ord tltamb :re par. of the een tae moan ."
wee that would outweigh every other ormAgen-
Won. , hem.) They thought it right to rda that
menden to the law. ems and angineen of the nowt, beat
the enquiry was net tedifiremdo.stured to enable him to
make any strteaseat to the
81r B. HALL said, that the Crown entered into certain
stipulations that no wharf should be erected on the lime
the canal, that so steam-engine should be allowed there, sod
it would be extremely hard, that persons who had imaged
larm sass of money on the faith of the crown should now
earn from any claw in the views of its present Gabon.
Many people would likewise be deprived of a place of en.
)(Twat to which they had been accustomed. He would
move on an amendment, that the bill be read a sewed time,
that day six months, if it should not be postponed far a week
or fortnight.
Col. BIBTHORP mid he came down to the house for the
purpose of supporting the amendment.
Sir W. CLAY armed as a reason why the home shouts
net moment to the postponement of the second (reading of
the bill, that this railway complied with all the conditio..s
laid down with respect to railroads near the metropolis by
the 001•11a11111011011 on railways in the metropolis.
Mr. HUME did sot think the railway could pas through
the park under any circumstances. It would he in violation
of the general plan, which might be seen up sears.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS mid, if the crown viol•• ad its bosom
and good faith towards irs tenants, it would produce feelings
ef a mee:dariebasestar.
elf C. 1414 wiel, that the canal *mosey woe hewed
nit to ,twoiae pea more than one hot above the
ethel, bet pima itf tie railway tympany it weld be
noised sin thst abemlL Ow, hear.) Many people were
iedlsose to *ow wee tbe park, becalm of the quiet
the pleof lowa "SW • but what an aoreanyeaksent would
be nappy In * srp;fpg. earring, awl whining abrog, to

a young lady playing ner pianoforte t (Laughter.) He
hoped the fa Mon would be withdrawn.
Sir R. INGLIS sa.d, he had heard no answer to the state-
ment of the hoe. member for Kendal, but If there was an
ganderstandhg that nothing would be done for three weeks,
he thought it would be better to have the motion and amend-
ment withdrawn, and the second reading flied for a future

After a few weeds from Lord Monrirrn in explanation,
Mr. S TIM M' was in favour of postponement. If the
how.e paned the bill in its present state they would deprive
the opposing parties of en opportunity of stating their case.
If the lion. gentleman who bed moved the 1100.,Uti reading
perd.ted in preying it, he could not support him.
With the consent of Sir B.
H -ALL, the bill was then post-
_

poised for a formignt.
INDIAN SALT TAX.
AN Hon. M wished to ask the right hon. gentle-
man the President of the Board of Trade • question re-
lating to the regulations for the importation of salt into
India. It would be in his recollection that in December last,
be received • deputation on the subject. He wished to
know whether the governmi,nt had since made any com-
munication to the Governor-General on the subject, and if
so, whether they would ley the result before the house.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said that in consequence of what
his hon. friend had alluded to, the Court of Directors and
the Based of Control had taken this important subject into
their consideration, and had framed a despatch which ha be-
liend nut to India on the previous day, end the pur-
port of which he had not the leant objection to state. Cer-
tain regulations were framed in 1841, which, in the opinion
of the importers of salt, bad very much impeded the impor-
tation of thst article. On examining the matter the other day
it was the opinion of the home authorities that the com-
plaints msdo respecting those regulati ms were well founded.
In consequence of this • despatch was prepared, ordering
the government of India to mama those regulations, and to
give to the importers of salt all the advantages of the sys-
tem of 1836, from which they were excluded by the act of
1811.

RAILWAYS IN INDIA.
In reply 10 a question from Lord MAHON,
Sir J. C. HOISHOUSE said that the report of the rail-
way commission, which was sent out to India, in June,
1845, was presented to the Board of Control on the 4th of
July, 1816, and he had no objection to its being laid on the
table. Since that period there had been communications on
the subject, the molt important of which was a minute of
the Governor-General of India, which he was also willing
to produce.
In reply to a question from Mr. Heave on the same
subject,
:sir J. C. HOBHOIJSE a ad that the East Indio Company
and the Board of Control had agreed on certain conditions
which they had proposed to different railway companies.
Until it was known whether or nut the terms would be ac-
cepted, it was twelve to frame any despatch.
HOLYHEAD HARBOUR.
Mr. W. COLLETT asked the Secretary of the Admiralty
what steps her Majeatil. government had taken respecting
the construction of Holyhead harbour, and whether any
additional powers were required for obtaining possession of
the lands adjoining the refuge harbour ; and, if so, whether
the mini rantent were prepared with a bill for that purpose ?
Mr. WARD said it was at first thought that an agreement
might be made with the landowners in the neighbourhood
which would obviate the necessity for an act of parliament ;
but that expectation having leen disappointed, au act con-
Wiling the necessary powers was is preparation.
NAVIGATION LAWS.
Mr. RICARDO rose to move for a select committee on the
aavigation laws. The hon. member said that these laws
having been framed in 1.561, no material alteration had since
taken place. In 1815 the legislature relaxed the eystom
as regarded the United States, and afterward' as re-
spected PortugaL It was not until 1822 that any
star sman or individual was found bold enough to attack the
law. In that year Mr. Wallace brought forward tire billy,
the object of which was to amend sad explain various acts
which had bees passed respecting the trade and navigation
of this country. In 1824, he believed, Mr. Huskieson brought
forward the famous reciprocity act, enabling the king in
council to admit foreign shipping into British ports on the
same terms as those on which British shipping was admitted
into foreign. Since then there had been some trifling alte-
rations, including one,in 1845, relating to the island of Hong
Kong. Now. he did not move that the act should be re-
pealed; he simply asked for inquiry. He thought his
motion ought not to be opposed by hon. gentlemen opposite
(the protectionists). In 1844 a committee was ap-
pointed, and two-thirds of the members belonged to the party.
opposite. The committee reported that they had not found it
possible to complete their investigation, and asked to be reap-
pointed at an early period of the next session. In the next
amnion they were reappointed, and they reported that they
had been prevented by unforeseen circumstances from going
(tally into the inquiry, and submitted to the house the expe-
diency of their being again appointed at an early period of
the following session. (Laughter.) This request was not
granted, and he contended that they could not now consis-
wily oppose inquiry. So many of the evil results of the
system had been already shewn, that he had a right
to demand investigation. Mr. Soames was inked in
the house by the honourable member for Gateshead
if it would not be an advantage to the producer to
have goods brought from India at the rate of 31. rather than
41. per ton. His reply was, "To those who had to pay the
freight it would be an advantage, but, looking at it in a com-
mercial point of view, you ought to keep up your commercial
marine.' It must be obvious that for eviry ton of shipping
they drove away from their posts, they alike deprived the con-
sumer, the labourer, end the revenue of England of an ad.
vantage. The merchant and his ship should, in his opinion,
leo like • pedlar and his paek-horse, ready to sell to all who
would buy, and ready to buy from all who would sell, and ft
must be obvious that the more they interfered with his tease.
actions the more they diminished his opportunities and deem.
ecrib,d his profits. The Englishman wanted wine,the Spaniard
wanted earthenware, and the Frenchman wanted sugar.
LE them suppose • Spaniard to bring a cargo of sugar from
Cuba to Marseilles for the Frenehman, and then to ship a
oargo of wine to London for the Englishman. When be
arrived here, our custom-house officer would say to him :
"We cannot take your wine." " Why not ?" he would
rejoin ; " you want our wine, and I want your earthen-
ware." " I cannot help that," would be the response ; " our
navigation laws, which are the bulwark of our country, the
wooden walls of Old England, and all that sort of thiig,
prohibit your bringing French wines to our ports ; but I'll
tell you what you may do : yen may take hack your wine to
Span and land it there, and then reship it and bring it here
again, and thea well give you some earthenware in exchange
foe it." (Heir, hear.) Why,, could anything equal the
absurdity of this arrangement ? There was actually a case
the other day of a French ship which took a cargo to Mar-
seilles from New York, and not finding a sale for it there
took it to Ameterdam; and NISI finding it without a customer,
brought it to Liverpool, where it was actually subjected to
aeis are. It was released upon petition, but on whatcondition ?
Why, to add absurdity upon absurdity, on the sole condition
that it should be taken back to New York in the same vessel.
(Hear, hear). This was the way in which they destroyed
that indirect or triangular trade, which was, as be believed,
the most profitable.bnuich of our commercial marine. And
if it was the moat profitable, why should they enact laws to
obstruct it ? They might depend on it that human wisdom
could never pall laws interfering with the natural regula-
tions of trade and commerce, without creating waste, loxes,
and expense. Let them call it what they pleased—a naviga-
tion law—a charts, maritime—or what they would—this
enactment only *sieved the purpose of protecting" the
British shipowner by raising freights higher than they need
be. Now if this were the case ; if freighta were raised by the
operation of these laws, it was worth while waiting to inquire
what was the result? In 1843, there were in the ports of
Great Britain 7,181,179 tons of British shipping.
If by the operation of this law, freights were raised
only 10s. per ton, a tax would have then been
imposed on the consumer of 3,590.000/. In 184.5,
there were entered and cleared 8,546,090 tons, whiei,
at 101, per ton, would create a tax of 4,273,0151. Now, he
(Mr. Ricardo) was far from saying that the operation of them
laws raised the price of freights at all. All he meant to lay
down was, that If they were operative in any way, they were
operative in raising freights. But he did not intend to stop
at showing that these laws operated as a tax on England.
Their evils were not peculiar to this country; they were
equally felt and appreciated in our colonies. Many years
ego, Mr. Marriott, a member of that house, had told them
that " if they touched the navigation laws, the West India
monopoly must go with them. ' The legislature had now
begun at the other end. They had taken away the mono-
poly from which the West Indians fancied they derived ad-
vantage, and the colonists had now a fair right to say that,
inasmuch as the navigation laws restricted them in their trade
and opposed an ohetscle to the independence of their commerce,
the trade in ',hipping ought to be as free as the trade in
sugar. (Hear. hear) And he would remind the house
that it was the .totem of isolating colonies from the mother
country, which had loot the Brazils to Portugal and the
United States to Great Britain, which had left Holland
with Java as a solitary possession, and Spain with Cuba
and Porto Rico, oat of all her immense dependencies. Was
there, then, he would ask, any adequate motive of political
expediency to justify this mischief and oppression ? But he
knew how be should be answered. He should have mem-
bers on the other side quoting Adam Smith as an authority
against him. (Hear, hear.) Let them remember, however,
that, its this peculiar instance, Adam Smith had for on'*,
contrary to his practice, made an assertion without an
argument to support it. (Ministerial cheers.) It would be
argued 090, he had no doubt, that our commercial
marine was the nursery of our naval marine.
He admitted that position also ; but he deed. d,
stoutly and emphatically, that the way to encou.
rage our isommercial marine was by upholding a protective
system. (Cheers.) Protection meant scarcity; scarcity' meant
inferior_fty. (Renewed cheers.) He could prove this posi-
tion. Why, at the present time, was our commercial ma-
rine inferior to that of the United States? Some one would
reply, because timber was dearer here. Was that a foot ?
lie (Mr. Ricardo) very much doubted whether, before a
committee, the contrary could not be proved, at least as re-
garded eel( and teak. Some one else would probably ex-
dein " Wages." In our outoorta, however, ehipbuild, rs
were paid only Is. 6d. to 4s. a day ; in London, where there
was a combination against masters, they were paid only
a day ; whilst, in the United States the average was two
dollars, or nearly 7s. a day. (Hear, hear.) Then, 'se
to iron and copper, no one could doubt that they were
cheaper bore then in America. Canvss and cordage were
alio cheaper. But others, probably, would talk of the com-
parative costs of no,. imoion, end would cite the Swedes end
Dorn 3as classes of seamen who could be hired at lower
waxes, nod whose cost of maintenance would be inflnitel
Ins,s. But if the envoi went of foreign sailors wade Po Si, -
ninon a cliff. Move, how was it that the American Marlow
was filled with English tinhorn, and that our own shipmasters
did not avail themselvee of t'e opportunity afforded under
our navieatinn laws of employing foreigners to the extent iif
onanurth of a Olio's crew ? (Hear, hear.) if the con.-
, Mee was granted, he (Mr. Ricardo) would undertake to

!ay bare the secret springs of all these mysteries. He would
show that British shipowners and British seamen needed no
protection ; that we could best the shipping of the world just
as we beat the manufacturers of the world. (Chet rs) But he
now came to • part of the suhj pecan which he must claim is slight
indulgence whilst he entered into • few details. lie held in his
hand an estimate of the comparative toona.e of British and
foreign shipping in the British ports in 1814, the last year of
the war ; 1624, the year of the first reciprocity treaty; and
1845, when 27 of those treaties were in existence. The
return gave the following results :
British. Foreign.
lilt ....
1,797,320
4,310,858
TY, pregatioas being as follows :
1014
1821
„ „ 29
1853
The excesa of British shipping 7in 1145 being double the
amount of 1824, and nearly four times as much as in
1814. (Hear, hear.) But he had also • return of the ton-
nage of protected and unprotected shipping in the years
1828 and 1844, from which it appeared that there were, mea-
sured in tons:

Protected. linproteated.
In ISIS
In 1814 ........ ..... .._ .. 3012.113
showing an excess of 1,233.254 twe or 69 per cent., as
respected protected shipping, but of ea lees than 2,578,976, or
135 per cent. as respected unprotected shipping, just double
the amount of increase in the other class. ilenid cries of
"hear, hear.") These were facts which spoke fir them-
selves. They were facet, he believed, which clearly proved
that protection had not answered its purpose, and that there
were better and surer muds I of encouraging our marine than
by systems of protection eel prohibition. (Hear, hear.) If
our commercial =aim was a nursery for our nay',
1 what was the nursery of our commercial marine 1 The
amwer was evident, commerce itself. (Ilea, hear.) If
they stifled commerce they stiffed our commercial marine ;
the two must go hand in hand together, and must prosper
by each other's prosperity. (Repeated cheeriag.) And, that
freedom of trade had been the best nouris' her of our mart-
time navy, could be proved by several forcible illustration*.
Let them take the cab of the timber trade. In 1843 there
were 841 ships employed in the timber trade with Canada:
in 1841, the very first year after the reduction of the timber-
dutise, the number of ships si emplod was 2608. (Loud
cheers.) Take the Chita tr .de. Before that trade was
opened, very few ships were employed in it. In 1835 the
number was not 100; in 1843, it was 200. (Renewed cheers.)
But he held in his hand a return before which these ratifi-
ers sunk into comparative insignificance. It exhibited the
state of our trade in the years immediately before and after
the repeal of many of our worn protective imposts. He found
by that return that the amount of tonnage entered inwards
and outwards in this country was,
In 1144 4,352,821 tons.
In 1846
(Loud cheers from the free traders,) showing an increase
of no lees than 2711 ships. (Repeated cheers.) But he
would not trouble the house with any more statistics. tithe
facts he had stated had had the good effect of making an
impression on the mind of any one who had heard him ; if
he had been able to show that, even in the slightest degree,
the operation of those laws was oppressive and unjust; if
had raised a doubt as to the efficiency of the protection they
affected to secure ; in either case he submitted that he had
made out a case for gnawing this enquiry. One of two
courses must be taken that night, either they must refute his
facts and figures, or they must allow him to substantiate them
before a committee of the house. (Cheers.) The hon. mem-
ber moved for a select committee to inquire into the ope-
ration and policy of the navigation laws.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
Mr. M. GIBSON, on the part of the government, was
prepared to give the committee, and he hoped the house
would add its assent. The motion of his hon. friend did not
pledge any gentleman who sanctioned it to measures which
his hen. friend might afterwards deem it expedient to pro-
pose ; it merely went thus far, that there was a ease for
inquiry. In agreeing to the committee, the government ,
were acting in strict accordance with the report of the com-
mittee of 1845, the object of inquiry with which appeared to
be just the same as that now moved for by the hon. gentle-
man, the business delegated to the comnutte., in the former
case tieing to inquire iota the best means of extending and
encouraging the employment of British shipping, and the
proposed object here being to inquire into the operation and
policy of the navigation laws, which laws w. re professedly
IM the encouragement of British shipping. The committee
of 1815 having, from unforeseen circumstances, brought
its labours to an early close, recommended, in its brief
report, that the inquiry should be continued by some suttee-
quent committee. In adopting the motion of the hon. gent.,
therefore, the house would be carrying out the views of
the former committee. It must, besides, have occurred to
the minds of most gentlemen that after the great commer-
cial changes of late years, it was desirable to inquire into the
i present operation of those laws which regulated our trade
with foreign countries. (Hear, hear.) The reciprocal
treaties which had been alluded to had themselves been
forced upon the country by the necessities of the time, and
the changes which had arisen in the commercial relations
between England and other countries. In assenting to the
committee, the government were most desirous that it should
he composed of men whose position and talents should en-
title them to the confidence of the country.
Mr. LIDDELL felt himself called upon to oppose the
motion. The hon. gentleman, indeed, said /hat he had no
intention of abolishing the navigation laws, but he by no
means desired to give the hon. gentleman an opportunity of
effecting such an object, lest the intention should then occur
to him. Ever since the reciprocity treaties, the British ship.
owners had been complaining of a moat unequal pressure
upon their industry in competition with other carrying
nations, but it was not until 1844 that they could obtain a
committee to inquire into the subject. That committee not
having completed its labours on the close of the session 1841,
obtained leave to sit again in the session of 1845. In the
latter year, a gleam of prosperity for the first time shone upon
the British shipping interest, a circumstance which
rendered it less necessary to proceed with the inquiry. (A
laugh.) And a serious &amity befalling the family
of tie hon. member for London, the chairman of the cons
mittee, at the juncture, the committee brought its labours
to a close, and made the brief report referred to by the right
hon. gent. The object of the committee of 1845-, however,
was quite different from that of the committee now moved
for, the ultimate intention of the hon. member, as he and
his Mends admitted, being the material modification, if not
the entire repeal, of the navigation laws. When he and
those around him supported the reasonable propoeition of
the noble lord opposite forsumending the navigation laws for
twelvemonths to meet a peculiar and pressing emergency, he
little thoughtthat this sanction would be made a peg whereon
to hang a propositioa tending to the entire abolition of these
laws. U. really trusted the government would withdraw
the sment they had, through the mouth of the right hon.
gentleman, given to this committee. They were within a
very few months of a general election, and meantime they
had quite enough on their hands, without creating, at the sug
gentian of an individual member of the house, the alarm and
excitement throughout all the maritime districts of this
country, which would be occasioned by the appoint-
ment of the proposed committee. (Hear, hear, hear.)
He would quote the returns for the port of Hull for the
year 1844, to show what had been the effect of foreign corn.
petition on the shipping interest of that port. In 1844 there
entered that port from Norway only two British ships with
a tonnage of 116 tons, while of Norwegian vessels there were
' 29 ships with a tonnage of 3,043 tons. From Denmark in the
' same year there was not a single British ship, but there were
no lee than 492 Danish ships with a tonnage of 34,445 tons.
(Heir, hoar.) From Prussia there were 80 British ships,
10,812 tons, Prue inns, 222 ships, tonnage 32,698 tons. (Hear,
hear.) With all these facts be fore them they were still ex-
pected to believe in the advantages of unrestricted competi-
tion. He trusted that the house would not be misled by the
delusive statements of hon. members opposite, but would con-
sider the interests of British shipping and British commerce not
wholly beneath their notice. Mr. Huskismn had estimated the
amount of British shippiag in 1816 (which he admitted was
immediately after the war, whin the whole carrying trade
of the world was in our hands) and in 1826, ten years after.
In the first of these years the tonnage was nearly three mil-
lions, and in 1826 it had diminished about 150,000 tons. In
1844, after many years of peace, the British tonnage
amounted to only three millions. It might be said, we did
well to keep up the amount ; but then it should he recol-
lected how enormously our rommerce and manufactures had
increased in that time. (Hear, hear.) In 1816 we im-
ported 60,000,0001 M. of cotton; in 1846 our imports had
increased to 646,000,00011 re., and every other article of im-
port in proportion. (Hear, hear.) It might be said in
favour of this committee that there were many restrictions,'
to which British ships were subject that required investiga-
tion and revision. Granted, but if reform in that direction
was the hon. member's object, why not confine his inqui-
ries to that point? He trusted that the house would not consent
to withdraw the reeled= under which our shipping had
arrived at its premed megeitude. If we destroyed the
main element of near national dehnees, the country
might maintain or lessen Its opalsoat, bet where
would be the security whisk inabial mi to enjoy it?
Without our ships and ear semen we should be-
come an object of attraction to the cupidity of
foreign nations, while we should be without any means
of defence from their attacks. We should appear to them
in the foolish light of having, in ohedienes to the wide-
spread theories of free-trade, abandoned tiMes advantages
which had so long made us the envy and admiration of the
world. Where was this to end ? If we made tide mostry
one universal workshop, where woo we to rehdlmes our
army or our navy ? Was it menegelles dented Inhabitants
of our cities, or the *latched laboaram et the feetoriet?
Nee bejuelens ens pareeffileas
taloa wpm aaaska Posies t
Peugsmente,fit Metspeem eel&
__Nlll4 dims:
M regiseruss sensesis nentum
Panes
He trusted, then, that send Would be had to the great ins
tenses of the country, ma else house would not, in a
moinent of delusion, spat ittee now sought far.
min
Mr. HUME supportad motion for a committee. He
was yet to learn what there was in Englishmen to prevent
them competing on equal teems with men in any part of
the world. (Hear, hear.) What had been the consequences
of protection The Americans had acquired 'even hundred
ship.. (Cheers from-the protectionist members.) Yes, it
we. in consequence of our protective system. In fact, never
hod a great interest been worse treated than the shipping
intetest of this country, and this fact he expected to see
elearly proved before the proposed committee. He held in
his hand a copy of the report of the Montreal Board of
Trade, from which it appeared that the principal grievances
from which our colonists sought redress, were the repeal of
WI 11:(fcrential duties, the abolition of the three shilling
frontier duty on corn (these points had been conceded), and
siieh a modification of the navigation laws, as would
enable them to employ the cheapest vessels In the transit
of 'heir productions, At present their corn was shut out of
the Liverpool mcrket by the competition of New York,