The Express.
London, England, 1851-08-06 00:00:00

OUR NAVIGATION LAWS.

•
The immense damage which the repeal of the old
navigation laws of Great Britain has inflicted on the mari-
time interest of that nation is one of the most favourite
points in the arguments of the protectionist party in Eng-
land. To listen to them, since that step was taken the
foreign flag is every slay taking a more and more consider-
able pert in the carrying on of English trade, aad the
American tie, which they especially denounce, the must
formidable and most menacing enemy to their prosperity.
The United States, it must be admitted, is, of all the mari-
time powers., the oar which, in virtue of its immense re-
sources' is best able to enter into a strung competition with
England : at the same time, that power has not hesitated
to reciprocate the concessions of the new Naviga-
tion Act by abrogating all the restrictions of its
maritime code in their application to the flag of
Great Britain. The struggle between the two nations
has begun; it has lasted already eighteen mouths,
and to-day we are able to compute some of its results. 'these
results, by a system of manieurres habitual to party apir.t,
have hitherto been presented by the protectionists under
only one of their aspects. With the navigation and coin-
' mereial return, in their hands, the udversarita of free trade
have shown that during the year 1810 the foreign flag, anal
particularly th at of the United States, has taken a
more considerable share in the general trade than
in preceding veers, and they have proceeded from
this assertion to denounce the new legislative economy as
ruinous. But while thus deriving inconveniences from the
new legislation, ineonvenienei s which moreover were
clearly foreseen and predicted—the protectionists have ne•
glected to notice their compensations, which have likewise
sprung front the same source. Then they have dwelt
strongly on the share lately taken by the American flag in
the commercial activity of England; but they have not
said one word of the part which British amps have taken
in the commerce of the United States. They have con-
cealed, in one word, one of the terms of the comparison,
one of the essential elements of the question. Let us
endeavour to redress the balance. For this purpose we con-
sult two reports on cuirmierec and navigation during the
year 1850, drawn up, on: by the Secretary of State of the
American government, the ether issued by the English
Board of Trade, and submitted to parliament in February
last. From the documents it results that the general move-
ment of this United States navigation, inward us well us
outward, amounted, in MO, to 8,689,611 tons. In this
statement, the share of the American ft ig was 5,201,5404
tons • that of all foreign flags, 3,043,837 tons. In analysing
this just item, we find that the English flag figures to the
amount of 2,8.15,338 tons, leaving for all others but 626,199
tons. Thus, in the general movement of American mari-
time commerce with other nations, the national flag obtains
60 per cent. of employments, and the foreign flags 10 per
cent.; while the British flag has obtained 32 per cent. on the
whole, and S 2 percent. on the part belonging to foreigners.
On the other hand, the general movement of British mari-
time commerce in 1850 was to the amount of 12,020,674
tons both ways. The figures when analysed give the fol-
lowing results—English ships employed, 8,039,308 tons;
foreign ships, 3,981;i60 tons, of which 1,215425 represent
the share of American vessels, and 2,766,111 that of ships
of other stations. Whence it &Lows that in the general
movement of England's commerce with the world, the na-
tional
fig figures as high us 60 per cent., and foreign flags
collectively 33 per cent. ; that thus the share of the Ame-
rican flag in the general movement has only been II per
cent., and only 33 per cent. of the share of business which
has fallen to the vessels of foreign states. A comparison
of these figures mows pretty plainly how great are the ad-
vantages England has derived front the new navigation
hill, and the compensation which this assures to her in ex-
change fur the concessions she Is as made to other maritime
powers. And yet M. Thiere, in his protectionist discourse,
Hesitated not to denounce as disastrous, as already tried and
Icondemned, a reform which, as we have just shown by the
aid or ens example only, is in a remarkable degree favour
able to the maritime prosperity of England.—Journal do
horns.