The Express.
London, England, 1849-05-09 00:00:00

ea lewd lituZ
the mown of
the weiporty
was quite aim
Vs Dew bad
• mom weird
rere orodeded,
re la the aril.
Okla woo, that
07 welarn not
w *Pest el
'rat el en
were bond w
seesadal te ,
i
no with Pied
to woks thew,
reeldibiwq *ea
derdbotallei
le warn ono
mei etchas
mild* Ibt
taw so
yr wee la
reach
thet dupla d
a he pews hi'
Siehei
*NM In
boatman weed
eatielled with dr
with the wad.
it it had his
ppm to
lythe NIL
asevoo di ell
p of the Wag
ity y he oveseededldie ha
se dimporval—te
wisdom of odd
of the sew es.
y Involved. !et
he hit himself
its. (Miss of
relastsat M la.
hods tele weeds
at Ind the deli
we
sow wised it
lelSt lwma*
d d solved, le
iagende is the
ved
= rißead
It was es ill doe
1 pet to
pesistrai=jl4
on oboes we Id
the past .ea
datty aor
I of polled die
lief to ate Ned
• is bit
e—witea hoer
de sad dens
to apes the heel
• of ibe sweep
he ems s=
eedlw rat
ied.osa(troo.)
tbe
ht the nab d
beat of their We
r the whole NI
abloids/lig tbo
amotholled.gedoloss
WNW
e ewe Tao
oil bees allowed bf
I hove 61101=
Oa they
imisseeeradis:dos 11.•
owl hev
▪ siellokoll
laws
a SISISIMMIL
Mee es both dere
Mere d midair
Ws of sal wows
a ess se eseeedd
lea (Heart 1"114
ealy ay that he ow
=szruNi•
imela
egret wee W
rtetide
set
that *HMO
ray hawed, IWO.
model wiehmelal_o
why, wend *low
l The only galas
Moto wee, whothelf
ld le bawds wade
swell smutty. *
ve dew* Mad OW*
wag el the also!
wateolled that les
awe peeepetta.
e irepood*
e kale to
at to 1•10 trier
r law Iwo
Mat di
lin oda
ea ifooldsPoove •
do
Mod sad ha el*
NU establish the
siseary awl sated.
-war wasside.
wok thatpolities It bad Ile
red
y fott lie, wry
sae argameaW nor
goollor so those

Ur erpU)Sfi.

OUTGOING IdAIL3.

DUO for semi -tTie oatbd letatea will be
made m cm the eundog MOM 1 Rh May.
'I'M mho fee Moo. Madeira. Oadk. aad Gibralta..
MU be made up oa the amulog of Um DM et Map
M Weat laCa Mohr eziodlos lionaado. antassa. Xmas,
Maw Odom% and Iledro, aoI leriedlog dim for
Wddrti it hormeaoilmradaa. Mot eggimel/2 lei lax, viii
bs =de ye co the wombs anha ITS Nap.
Tao mew tat Oitamllo. Yeas. a. Moho Mask UM,
Ada. aid Mao. as Oselhampeek
he lash, so ea the malts at the let\ May.
The monk era Maarraeor to the Meditarrasisk M.
Meagams, lera. Ma be made up ea the Will*, lat
2:7it=,
Mer lee Madden. ale 111111.11. sad Bares Ayres, will be made
apes the effloshrg cd the eik of

Wel WATIA AT LONDON KAMM
Two Do' —llonaw. IT Ms. wet Winslow 88 NIA wet $
To.aiwowo—nonolsy WA put I; Allowsw. I N. pa a

LONDON,WEDNESDAY,MA Y 9.
THE debate in the Lords has virtually turned upon
the validity of the tables of the Board of Trade. Lord
BROI7GHAN attacked them with reckless v.rulence
—they stood in the way of all display of eloquence on
the protectionist side. It was not preeible
even for him to argue against such plain, practical
proof of our success with foreigners. At any cost,
therefore, the tables must be brought into disrepute,
on the principle "of taking any counts for a client."
Statistics are denounced by wholesale • the tables
declared utterly fallacious, got no, =Lie to prove
anything. No figurer, no facts are given to refute
them : nothing but wild aodecity of assertion.
Let us, however, examine the matter, for they
put an end to the preterce of maintaining the
navigation laws for the benefit of the royal navy.
For now more than a quarter of a century we have
sestet upon the sees the comparative value of excla-
sive advantages and open competition. The results ,
prove that the public have had nothing in return foe
the navigation laws but " cramped trade" and
cramped shipping. We have kept certain lines of
trade to ourselves; in others we have entered into
competition with foreigners. The most accurate ac-
counts of the work done by our ships in both have been
kept. They show that ea e have fiend moat to do in com-
petition with foreigner,. These farts, however, do not
suit the protectionists : they have to sarport the
theo.ry " that it is impossible for us to compete with
foreigners ;" and in their attempta to do so some of
them have not been ever-scrupulous. Before the
Commons committee Mr. GEORGE FREDERICK YOUNG
was asked, " Do you consider that the navigation law
as it now stands affords an adequate protection to
British shipping ?" He answered " No, because the
principles on which it is founded are entirely abro-
gated with reference to the direct trade with all those
countries with which we have made reciprocity
treaties, and therefore we are left in open competition
with them" (Q. 6,896), and again (Q. 5,992). " With
respect to the countries with which we have made
treaties of reciprocity, the navigation laws are virtually
rerakd, and we have no protection whatever. And I
think I 1 eve shown conclusively that in all cases
where that has been done, and we have b: en com-
pelled to run a race with sm, they have outrun us."
In view of this evidence, an account was ordered of
our trade with countries under the reciprocity trea-
ties and countries under full protection. It allowed
that our shipping had from 1824 to 1846 increased
under protection, omitting fractions 94 per cent, and
in the name years had increased with respect to the
countries with which we had made treaties of remPro-
city, and the navigation laws were virtually repealed,
and we had no protection whatever, 182 per cent.
But it seems that Mr. Youno did not in his
answers to the committee in June, 1847, quite mean
what he said. A good deal of it was flourish and
figure of speoch--so at least we learn from a letter of
Ibis published in the Morning Poet of July 5, 1848 :
Will it believed that the tonnage employed in every one
of the trades enumerated in the column described as " unpro
tested trade," is actually protected in a high degree, and, In
some ass, to an extent amountieg w exclusion as absolute
as that of the colonial trade, and this by the very laws which
are invidiously, and, I must add, insidiously, represented es
applicable alone to the "protected trades," enume
rated in the opposite column ? Yet such is the in-
disputable fact, as an examination of the sot of navigation
will instantly orathem. I take the trade with China as an
illustratim. It is denominated an unprotected trade, and,
as such, is described as having increased from 28,270 tons in
1824 to 63,603 tone In 1846. Now did the compiler of this
document ever hear of a single foreign ship entering the porta
of the United Kingdom within the whole period from China ?
Ll=eases of Ma ever imgrted from China for the
of this imutry except in British ships ?
he denalist. that the omen ot American ships would eagerly
avast themselves of pirmission to othsystw with British stair
ping is this valuable trade? What is it that prevents
them? The law. What law? Why, the navigation
law. Row then, I must ask, could the coin filer of
this "statement"" have the effrontery to make her
lffujesty tell her parliament and people that the trade
with China is an unprotected trade, and that, therefore, it
flourishes ? Sir, he mast know well that the case is the same
with many of the states of South America, and with all
that do net possess merchant shipping of their own.
Knowing that, by the navigation laws, goods, the produce of
foreign countries, an not permitted to be imported into this
country to be used therein, except in British ships, or ships
of the country of which such goods are the growth re po-
dia, or in which in some cases they may be found, he cannot
but be aware that this restriction, varying, it is true, in
sleet, in proportion to the tonnage possessed by each onus
try, but acting as an exclusive privilege to British ships is
seem, and Insuring to them a proportion of all, does ocesU-
tets a great, an 'indent, and a valuable protection.
This letter—a flat contradiction by Mr. YOUNG him-
self of his own evidence before the COMBOS! commit-
tee—is the manifest authority for Lord BROUGHAM'S
attack upon the tables. It was Mr. YoeNia himself
who gave the description for the column of unpro
toted trade • but then he thought he had shown con.
,elusively that in all these cases foreigners had outrun
vs. The tables showed conclusively the contrary ;
therefore, without having the candour to admit that
he himself had drawn the line of distinction behve n
protected and unprotected trades, he impugned the
tables. Some countries have no ships, and u
the reciprocity treaties do not admit third coan-
tries as c inure, we are to set down these ship-
lees countries in the protected list. Brazil has
no ships. China has no ships, at least none
to set out on voyages, unless as curiosities for
imbibition. The navigation law of the celestial
empire is a perfect spout= of protection—a complete
safeguard against all competition, all improvements,
ofrogram. Aes ago it fixed thejunk as the model
a ship and interdicted all change. Any ship of
any other shape or any finer finish was to be con-
sidered foreign, and to pay the tonnage dues of bar-
barians. The Chinese are clever mechanics and not
bad sailors, but they have no en-going ships
—nothing bat their navigation law and their
junks. Still, it is not a fact that our trade
with China is as close as the colonial trade.
American vessels an carry any goods from us
to China, then tea from China to America, then
American goods back to us; or may even 'bring tea
here to be warehoused for export, and annually we
do export about 5,000,000 lbs. of tea. China and
Brazil, however, are transferred from the unprotected
to the protected side of the table. The protected in-
crease is then 92 per cent., and the unprotected 234
per cent.
Then it is objected that Mexico and other South
American states are also without ships, and that
Ruda has no ships. Russia figuring, to suit the
protectionists, in a double capacity : first, her ships are,
so cheap that it is impoesibre for us to compete with
them ; then she has no ships, and we have these-1
fore no competition with Russia. So these
tries are are also transferred to the protected side of the
account, and then its increase is 99 per cent., and the
the epro.cltee:rtel—B2thatlu9t
thPewerne °eitdniaotdo:Sioaprri.etett:thtscatocesstheZrocililly withthalis
but irect competition—and, therefore, does constitute
a great, an efficient, and a valuable protection, varying
in effect in proportion to the tonnage of each country;
wirich,:if it have_ any meaning, means that in a country
with little shipping we have great protection under
the reciprocity treaties, and that the only cue in
which they would be no protection would be the un-
findable ene of a country with as great a commercial
marine as our own. The fact, however, is ingeniously
kept out of view that we are carrying on this direct
competition with every country.having a commercial
marine, and that the tables in question show the
result of our competition with all. It is in the law of
competition with them all that oar shipping has so
much more increased than under protection from times
all, and it is absurd to suppou that they could seer
pets to any ester advantage in any crom trade than
to the direct trade between their o an ports mid ours.
We leave it, therefore, to our readers to choose for ,
themselves between the two Altamonte.
rtiantuted
bya realm, an elleisakvitauml
and
i"dsaidaßeeivalt:cluabt lElphrdorteliwason
go
the
countries
wis
aim
we have made treaties of reciprocity, the siesolpoliset

kilos were virtually repealed, and we have no protection
whatever." This contradicion ez&tee no indignation
no the put of Lord BECOUGIIAII, he is indignat.t only
with the facts.
He has another charge, lab3rionsly dwelt upon
by the Lords' committee. &earners are entered every
voyage, and" in 1846 we lad 47 of them trading with
France, their united tonnage be'mg 17,101 tone, and
they are made to figure in the tafres as 228.189 tops
of British shipping, declared to be engaged in the
trade with France, and advanced to prove the ineffi-
ciency of protection, and the propriety of repealing
the navigation laws."
The reprated voyages of steamers are deducted,
the account then stands—P,o.tcted intrtase, 94
_ . . .

123 per Went. ; and it is with these facts,
we will not say before him (for it better suited
Lord BROUGHAM'S purpose to be crammed by some
shipowner than to investigate the facts himself), that
he takes upon him to say that the returns to Mr.
'Malmo's committee were cooked to serve a purpose
—making every change in the tables that the protec-
tionists themselves suggested—still tt ere stand. the
fact, we are successful in our competition with fo-
reigners, and in the face of that competition we have
most ships and most sailors, and are therefore in the
best condition to aid the royal navy, if it need the aid
of the commercial marine.
But is it not true that these 47 vessels carried to
many tons of goods, and represent just so many
sailing vessels, as with their slow voyages would
have -been needed to esrry the same number of
tons? Hu France better opportunity of surpassing
us in a steam than a sailing commercial marine?
Or would Lord BROUGHAM prohibit steamers from
trade? Would he take a leaf out of the Chinese
book, and stop all improvement in shipping?
Interdict all use of auxiliary screw-power to mer-
chant vessels, prohibit every project for cutting
canals through Panama and Suez, and enact
that for the encouragem. nt of British ship-
ping, all vessels shall sail leisurely land slowly
and shall never make a short voyage when a long
one is possible? Unfortunately, however, for those
, who would grumble on aa they are, this is an age for
speeding; men, messages, and merchandise ; people
have learned that there is no profit in time spent upon
the road. They feel no indignation at tie multiplied
voyages of those 47 steamers. No one thinks they
came or went too fist, bat many look forward to a
time when they may come and go with double speed,
and when no vessel on the seas shall be wholly in the
power of wind, or tide, or weather. The transit of
goods is one stage in their manufacture, and in it, as
to every other stage, delay is lose. Lord Barmen/ad
and his clients may amuse themselves with dreamy
calculations as to hew many ships our present trade
would have employed had we had no steam-vessels,
no steam-tugs, no cranks or cranes, or expeditive
means of lading or unladieg. Perhaps they may
work out a result of some millionsof tons more shipping
and dream of the naval greatness that might have
been nursed in it. It is teyond their capacity to
understand that this compressing of time, this speed
of transit, this gathering of the world into smaller com-
pass, this rapid interchange of commodities, has
spread the impulse of production, waked up new
wants, new enterprise, new power', new industries.
Those steam engines in mills and mines, and locomo-
tives, and ships, have made our present greatness;
and there is yet more abundance to be produced,
more bade to be created, more employment to be
Lund for ships.
The navigation laws were proclaimed by the pro-
tsetionists as the battle-ground of reaction. Land-
owners, shipowners, and West Indians united their
bras. Their reliance war upon the Lords. No
matter what might be the majority in the Commons
—no matter for the facts—the Lords were to reject
the bill, brine about a dissolution, gain a majority in
the new parliament, change the ministry, and restore
the whole system of protection. Doulelees a few
peers did entertain some such project, and comforted
deputations of shipowners, and dazzled Lord
BROUGHAM, with it. But there's an end of the de-
lesion. Mr. RICARDO has achieved the completion
of free trade. The navigation laws are repealed; the
lest of the monopolies Is at an end, and their restora-
tion impossible.