The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-25 00:00:00

wit tbeiroS 11A years. A merchant of high re-
sroliabiliti-berfttiaishod mit with a statement.of tho
dif-
fat costs of building's ship in Sunderland in 1841
a inllsl. ln i 8 an A 1 ship, 12 years, cost 181. per
ton. to build.' Ir 1861 tliat same ship could be built
for 141. 1' . per ton; and time appears to be a correspond-
" In respect to ships of an inferior description.
socrlsoceed - • • '
"'of

upon the East India trade, which had created some
alarm, he allowed wee not founded in fact ; by the
lust mail it appeared that British shipping was becoming
scarce in the Indian ports, awl that freights had risen.
lie contended that for the last nine years there had been an
increase in oar mercantile marine unparalleled in the his-
tory of this or any other country. Ile deprecated the id,
- for retaliatory measures (after only
. , .

~. 10s. ,
ing reduction
(Hear hear.) -.eel to discussthe third point
in thi;question—the cam cifehe British ship builder. The
,shiPowner would inibture get his ships built abroad. Now
predietion of the right hese gentleman was that the British
Lthe het is that in 1850 there were only 10,000 tons of
leterp built ships registered in this country ; and
that in the first three months of 1831 there were
not more than 511 WWI of foreign built ships registered
here. (lieu, hear.) So much with regard to the United
Statee,whorn we were told to fear. (Hear, hear) With
regard to our colonies, it was much the same. In 1830
there trees only about 8,000 tons of foreign built ships re-
gistered in the whole of the British colonies ; and of that
00 tons, more than one-half was registered in the island
of Malta. Malta is resorted to thus extensively simply be-
muse it is an unfavourable place for ship-building, and be.
moos it is cheaper for the Maltese to get their small vessels
for the Mediterranean trade built elsewhere.
An Hos. M here moved that the house be counted,
but there being 40 lumbers present,
Mr. LABOUCHERB proceeded. I had been observ-
ing when the house was counted, that from the small num-
ber of foreign-built ships admitted to British registration at
home or in the colonies, I felt confident the British ship-
owners need be under no apprehension from the change in
the navigation laws. I have taken some pains to he in-
formed on this subset, and I challenge contradiction when
I state that, speaking generally, so far from there being
any decay in British ship-building, it is in a state of great
prosperity and activity. I hold in my hand a return of the
ships built and registered in the three last years in the
United Kingdom, from which it appeared that there were
registered of British ships in 1848, 817 ships of 122,000
tons; in 1819, 730 ships of 117,000 tow; and in 1850, 689
ships of 133,000 tons. The right hon. gentleman dwelt on
the fact that there were a fewer number of ships registered
at Lloyds', but that was explained by the circumstance that
though the ships were fewer, the tonnage was greater.
(Hear.) In 1848 the average tonnage of the ships registered
was 143 tons ; du 1849 it was 161, and in 1830 it was 194
tons. (Hear.) On this point I made inquiry in some of
the principal pore of the kingdom, and I find
that in Sunderland, which is perhaps the largest
ship-building port in the world, the business
of ship-building has been in unprecedented activity during
the past year. (Hear, hear.) No person will deny this.
More ships have been built in this port in 1850 than in any
year since it became a ship-building port. One of the
local papers states that the change of the navigation laws
has not rained the trade • on the contrary, there has bean •
large increase in the trade over the average of the Ind Me
years. There has been in 1850 an increase of 10,000 tons
over 1849, and of 16,000 tons over 1848. Along with the
increase in the number of vessels there has been an im-
provement in the model of the vessels and in the
tonnage. The amount of tonnage which was launched
in 1848 was 36,000 tons , in 1349, 38,000 tons ; but
in 1850 we launched 51,000 tons. (Hear, hear.) That this
prosperity is likely to continue may be conjectured from
the great number of vessels on the stocks. In 1818 there
were 13,000 tom on the stocks ; in 1849, 23,000 ; and in
1830 there were 28,500, so that in 1851 we may expect that
the trade will be quite as active as in 1850. (Hear, hear.)
In consequence of the complaints which have been made
from the port of London I have made inquiry into that
port, and through the Surveyor-General of Customs who
obtained his intormation from every shipbuilder in London
with one exception,and this lithe result. Of sea-going vessels,
including those built on foreign account—and in the light
of a ship-building question this is very important—(hear,
hear)—though it does not affect the question regarded as a
ship-owning one—there were built in 1818 three ships of
iron of 1,34.3 tons, and seven of wood of 3,142 tons, making
ten ships of 4,442 tons ; in 1849 seven iron vessels of 1,6.54
tons, ten of wood of 5,,03 tons, making seventeen ships of
7,757 tow; in 1830 thirteen iron ships of 4,562 tons, and
seventeen of wood of 9,935 tons, making thirty
ships of 14,000 tons in round numbers, being
double the amount of 1849. (Hear, hear.) I shall
be told that these ships were built for foreign go-
vernments, and for great companies ; but regarded in the
light of a ship-building question, it was clear that as these
companies would go for their vessels where they could get
them cheapest—to New York or Bremen, if they could get
them cheaper than on tho banks of the Thames or the
Clyde—we need fear no competition in ship-building.
(Hear, hear.) I have said that a great improvement has
taken place us the quality of the vessels, as well as in the
tonnage, and that all the aids that science could afford have
been applied to the construction of vessels. On this point
I beg leave to read an extract which I received front a re-
spectable ship-owner of Liverpool. This gentleman says :
" Speaking generally, we fancy that there can be no doubt
that the repeal has given an immense impetus to the trade.
A conviction has become general that if the English builder ,
is to maintain his position he must hold it by means of
scientific application. The ' Rule of Thumb' was previously
almost the only rule acknowledged in a ship-yard. A vast
deal more attention is now given to the sources of mathema-
tical
and nu chanical knowledge, and that is taking place
which in this country seems always the sign of the elevation
of a trade or profession, namely, the application to it of the
educated and higher classes. But a year or two ago, a
shipbuilder was looked upon as a mere mechanic. All
that seems suddenly changed, and it is a curious thing to
see how many of the educated classes are just now seeking
out the means of making their children into shipbuilders."
I now come to that part of the speech of the right hon.
gentleman which has reference to the motion before the house,
for by far the greater part of his speech had little or no
reference to the motion which he put into the Speaker's
hands. (Hear, hear.) Even supposing it true that the
policy we have recently punned is wrong, and ought to be
reversed, the remedy which the right hon. gentleman calls
on the house to adopt is quite inadequate. (Hear, hear.)
The speaker then referred to the various nations with which
we are commereislly connected, and stated that in moot
Imes we were deriving great benefit from intercourse with
them under the new system. With respect to the degree
of reciprocity with which our concessions had been met by
ether nations, he premised that we had avoided great evils
by the change; but other nations, he contended, had fol-
lowed our example, and with some of the great states we
enjoyed substantial equality. Negotiations were going
on with others—France, Belgium, and Spain—from
which ke confidently expected beneficial results. If
the motion meant anything, its object was to reta-
liate those absurd restrictions which some nations had put
upon our shipping at less cost to us than to themselves. He
still thought the crown should possess this retaliatory power,
to be exercised on fit occasiorus ; but hitherto the conduct of
no foreign state had been such as to justify its exertion.
He dilated upon the brilliant prospects which he believed
were in store for the trade of England, and for
the interesting cause Mr. Berries had undertaken,
and concluded as follows: I think I have now
proved the world's commerce has been generally fostered
and encouraged by the change of our navigation laws, and
that there is no reason to suppose that British navigation
has not had her full share in the benefits of that general in-
crease. (Hear, hear.) I think I have proved, beyond the
possibility of contradiction, that so far from the trade of
ship building decaying, there never was a period in which
there appeared to be fewer symptoms of decay, and in
which its future prospects were more encouraging. (Hear,
hear.) If the house thinks that our recent policy,
has beau successful, I trust they will not come to a resolution
understand,
a rill t he
.tionnse
which would interfere with its maintenance Mr the future.
oufntdhee r
wthoreld
I entertain no apprehensions as to the prospects of our
mari
smysateyg menofag we.mlPenctivteiorncoiunldwh ich
it in other departments of industry and activity we have
no reason to fear and are able to compete with other
nations, why, "with a fair field and no favour;" we cannot
compete in the business of shipowaing and building with
every nation of the world. The motion of the right hon.
gentleman pledges the house' to a course which I believe
to be impolitic and destructive; it calls on the house

of prematurely taking for ly
s
eighteen months' trial of a new system) against these na-
tion, who have sot as yet been able to see the wisdom 4 a
course which we ourselves were NO long in adopting. Be-
sides which, any such effort on our part, would hr read, d
with the utmost ease. He admitted there was great com-
petition, but it was between British owners, and not be-
tween them and foreigners, and with this competition there
was a rapidly inert:minute:We. Shipbuilders now refused to
bind themselves to time, on account of the abundance of
work, and their men were unmanageable for the same
reason. Ito concluded by saying that, though in great
changes there must always be individual inconvenience, the
facts which he had laid before the house showed that our
policy was working most advantageously, and he hoped tho
house would pause before they consented to alter it.
Mr. DISRAELI, assuming as a fact undenied that the
shipowners were distressed, and that the means they once
possessed of employing industry had dwindled away, thought
that it would have been very impolitic tor parliament to Se-
parate without considering their condition. You might
account for the existing distress, you might talk of a state
of transition, but you could not ignore the suffering arising
from our novel legislation. The means of employing labour
were diminished, and there was a diminution of 500,000
tons of British shipping. The amendment of to-night
involved no new attempt at legislation, it merely
asked the carrying into effect a provision expressly
and prospectively framed to remedy such a state of things
as now existed. And the shipowners were informed that
negotiations were going on with no fewer than three powers
to obtain the object for which that very provision was de-
signed. Mr. Disraeli then indulged in some sarcasms upon
Mr. Wilson, for objecting to a provision which his superiors
were actually carrying out, and supposed that Mr. Wilson
was not favoured with Lord Palmerston's confidence. Ito
thought the repeal of the navigation-laws a hasty and a
perilous act; but that was not the question before them.
It was admitted that there might be difficulty. in dealing
with the retaliatory act, which was the matter in question ;
but that was the business of her Majesty's govern-
ment. lie must say, however, that as it had been that
night officially . announced that a negotiation with three
powers was going on, he did not think that Mr. 'ferries
would be justified in interfering with those negotiations by
forcing a division upon the house. (Prolonged ironical
sounds from the ministerial side.) Yes, the responsibilities
of negotiation were great, though gentlemen not yet in
office might not understand their importance. Ile repeated
that the question having been fully and fairly stated, ho
trusted there would be no division. (" Divide, divide.")
Colonel THOMPSON thought the kind of retaliation
proposed would be cutting off one's nose to be revenged on
one's face.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I confess, sir, Ido not quite under-
stand, after the speech of the hon. member for Bucks, with
what view the motion has been brought forward. (Hear,
hear.) The hon. gentleman says, and witk great truth and
much justice, that when a government is engaged in nego-
tiating with foreign powers, it is not fitting, without some
ground of distrust, to take those negotiations out of the
hands of the government, to interrupt its course, and to
prescribe the mode in which it shall be conducted. The
lion. gentleman is perfectly right in that view—(hear)---
and his argument in that respect is no doubt conclusive;
but I wonder it did not occur to the right hon. gentleman
the member for Stamford, before he announced his motion
with so much solemnity, or, at all events, before he, with
such pomp and circumstance, asked the assent of the house
to it. (Cheers and laughter.) It was well known when
the right hon. gentleman first intimated his intention to
make this motion, that, with all the first mara•
time nations, we had already obtained the bene-
fit which, by the clause referred to, it is pro-
posed to secure. We had obtained the advantage
in respect to the United States, to Holland, to Prussia, and
the northern powers, and the question was whether some
other powers of less mercantile marine could be induced by
negotiations to give us similar reciprocity. And with regard
to one of those powers—Spain—the question has already
been referred to in the house, and neither the right hon.
gentleman nor any who sit near him could be ignorant that
negotiations were pending. (Bear, hear.) It is strange,
then, after so many weeks of preparation, after so many
grandiloquent announcements, now to learn from the
hon. gentleman that it is improper to interfere with
negotiations that were well known to be going on
when the notice of the right hon. gentleman was first
given. (Hear.) lam glad to find even this tardy acknow-
ledgment on the subject from the hon. member for Bucks.
(" Hear" and laughter.) But I believe, though the motion
is a narrow one, and not directed in terms to the restora-
tion of the navigation laws or the restoration of proteetio, ,
the argument of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. }terries)
and the argument of the hon. member for Scarborough
(Mr. Young) went far beyond and were, intended to prove
that we have been all along on a wrong course, and their
object was, if it was anything, not to carry into effect a
single clause in the act for repealing the navigation laws, but
to repeal that act altogether, and to restore the navigation
laws in all their original vigour—(cheers)—which, if wo
were to do, we should be depraving ourselves of the carrying
trade and commerce of the L niteal States of America.
(Hear, hear.) But if hon. gentlemen opposite are satisfied
that they have had a complete answer upon that question—
(loud ministerial cheers)—if they are now satisfied that
their whole case has broken down—(renewed :cheers and
laughter from the same quarter)—and that so far from the
facts supporting their allegations, my right hon. friend the
President of the Board of Trade and the hon. member for
Westbury have given to those allegations a complete refuta-
tion—(" Ilear,"and a laugh)—and tha4thc policy adopted by
parliament now for these two years past has been a successful
policy—(cheers)—if they now admit and are forced to admit
—(more cheering)—that all the statistics brought forward—
all the statements—all the investigations of facts that have
been made, prove that they have been completely in error—
(renewed cheering and laughter)—and that the majority of
the house has been completely iu the right on this question.
—1
am glad to find that confession is now to be ratified and
recorded by the course now proposed to be taken by the
hon. gentlemen on the other side, and by the decision of the
house, and on these grounds I am glad to hear the hon.
member for Buckingham recommend the withdrawal of
the motion. (Loud cheers and much laughter.)
Mr. WAWN next spoke, whose voice was drowned by
the calls fur a division, and observed that many votes had been
given in favour of the bill for repealing the navigation laws
on the faith of the clause referred to.
Mr. MUNTZ wanted to know why the Chancellor of the
Exchequer and the President of the Board of Trade did not
carry out their free trade principles ultogether, and es-
pecially why they did not reduce the duty ou tin. (A
laugh.)
Mr. BERRIES insinuated that he would withdraw his
amendment, but the members at the back of the ministerial
benches insisted on a division, and the gallery was cleared.
After a few minutes stranger* were readmitted, the amend-
ment having meanwhile been withdrawn or negatived
without a division.
On the motion for reading the bat a third time being
again put,
Mr. LABOUCIIEIIE, in reference to the question asked
by Mr. :Shantz as to the reduction of the duty on tin, said
it WnS a subject well worth attention. At this period of the
session, however, it could hardly be expected that the sub-
ject should be introduced into the Customs Bill. but on env
future occasion when the Customs were being dealt wit!:
the tin duties should not escape attention.
Sir J. I'AKIN')TON moved that the debate be ad-
journed.
Lord J. RUSSELL complained that after the discussion
which had taken place such a course was most unfair. It
would be wasting the time of the house.
Sir J. PA KINOTON was TISONt. anxious not to do any-
thing that could for a moment be considered unfair. but he
was anxious to bring under the attention of the house the
claims of a most inljlON. it interest, :nut as it would oecuay

; n or a most
to address the crown to adopt a system of re- some time, it would hardly be thought &nub:,
taliation, not upon any well understood sense of one's should bring on the question at that hour.
own interest, but to retaliate restrictions, however absurd. After u few words from Mr. Wswsr,
(Hear, hear.) Such a policy, I think, would be unworthy Mr. CARDWELL explained •hat the case his hon.
the parliament and the people of this country, and on this friend wished to bring under the attention of the house was
ground 1 confidently call on the house to reject the motion that of the West Indians and others engaged in the sugar
of the right hon. gentleman. (Cheers.) trade, who claimed to have the privilege of refining sugar
Mr. G. F. YOL NG denied the fundamental allegation of in bond. He thought, however, it was impossible to post-
Mr. Labouchere—the general prosperity under free trade, pone further the third reading of the Customs bill, which
in which the shipping interest participated. Nosuch general was of importance to the sugar-grower, inasmuch as it
prosperity existed in the agricultural interest, the colonial reduced the duty on coffee, and also to the shipping trade
interest, the al ipping interwit, nor, he believed, the manu- by reducing the duty on timber. (Hear, hear.)
factoring interest. Mr. Young then stated, and adduced Mr. G. F. YOUNG remarked that the shipping trade
figures to show, that whatever increase there hail been in considered that the reduction of the timber duty would be
our tonnage was not due to the repeal of the navigation of no benefit to them, but that it would operate as a
laws, and then contended that there had actually been no bounty on the introduction of Baltic timber in foreign
increase in our tonnage in the aggregate. He insulted upon shilis.
the slow advance of British tonnage, and the accelerated The house then divided on the motion for the adjourn-
progress of foreign, since the date f free trade. If the meat :
United States and this country kept their respective courses, Ayes
158-10 S the fernier, he contended, would poetess a larger mercantile Noes
marine than Great Britain. The ship-building trade, which On strangers being readmited,
Mr. Labouchere had represented in a highly prosperous Mr. DISRAELI was on his legs, asserting that the house
state, Mr. Young asserted to be most deplorably depressed. had something more to do than to pass the measures of the
He showed the injury which British shipping experienced government. It was not, he said, to be tolerated, when
in the east from the competition of the large fleets of Ame- , questions concerning the great interests of the country were
rican vessels from California, which had reduced freight I brought forward that a minister should get up and say, it
so low that the capital of the shipowner was absorbed. was a waste of the time of the house to entertain them.
Denying the truth of Mr. Laboucherc's propositions, He protested against the tone adopted by the minister.
warning the house and the country not to rely too' The CHANCELLOIt of the EXCHEQI:EIt said ho
much on official returns, he urged a recurrence to a . had no objection to discuss the motion, but there were
sounder policy before it should be too late. He reiterated : many opportunities of bringing it on during the session,
the complaint that, as a British shipwner, exposed I and it would be very inconvenient to bring it on now.
to foreign competition, he was precluded by act of paella- I Lord J. RUSSELL said he did not say that the night
meat from employing men whom he could obtain for half had been wasted, but that it had been occupied.
the wages he had to pay to British sailors. He stated, of (Laughter.
his own knowledge, that, whereas an English sailor de- I Mr. HARMS hoped that an opportunity would be
minded 506. per month, and meat every day, a Swedish given to discuss the question.
sailor could be had for 30a, and meat twice a week. He • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there
here incidentally urged the importance of educating our would be opportunities of discussing the question beam the
mariners, and declared his conviction that the British close of the ression.
shipping interest was trembling on the very verge of ruin, . Sir J. PAKINOTON lisped that he would be allowed to
and that if the cheapest market principle was to Ise followed bring on the motion to-morrow.
out, this country could never maintain a great mercantile I Mr. V. SMITH said the hon. baronet Illieat bring on his
marine. motion now. (" Oh, oh.")
Mr. J. WILSON observed that the speech of Mr. Young Mr. NEWDEGATE moved that the b'euso adjourn. The
was in contradiction to the motion, for he traced the min- motion of his hon. friend involved a aura of 400,0001. and it
chiefs upon which he had expatiated to the reciprocity ought to he fully discussed.
policy of Mr. Huskisson ; whereas the motion sought to Sir J. PAKINGTON did not want to divide the house,
carry out that principle. From documentary evidence be if the government made some arreangement so that he could
drew conclusions inconsistent with these of Mr. Herrin and I bring on his motion.—The houve divided :
Mr. Young, and from a contrast between the American and For the adjournment 22
British trade, he made it appear that the latter was less Against it 146--124
encroached upon by foreigners than the former; of the The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought up
8,000,000 tons entered inwards and outwards is the United a clause to rectify a passage in one of the clauses of the Cus-
States, 3,500,000 were foreign ; whereas of the 12,000,000 toms Bill, in which occurred an accidental contradiction of
tons entered in Great Britain, only 3,900,000 were foreign. I a clause in an act paned soma years ago.
The allegation tweeting the inroads of American vowels The bill wan then read a third time and passed.