The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-18 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 18, 1863.

in asserting that the Foreign-office had nothing to do with
the French treaty. The Foreign-office took up the matter
warmly, and the hon. member for Rochdale had himself ac-
knowledged I he hearty and valuable co-operation he received
from Lord Cowley in the negotiations on the subject. (Hear.)
When the hon. member for Rochdale went to Paris on that
mission the first thing he was asked—what had he to offer ?

If he had gone to Paris with his hands empty, it was not
probable that he would have succeeeed in obtaining the
concessions which the French Government made to him.

Fortunately, however, the hon. gentleman had much to

offer. There were heavy duties on wine and other articles
of French produce and manufactures, and in consideration
of a reduction in those duties the French Government con•
rented to various changes in their tariff which had proved
very beneficial not only to this country but to France. It
was necessary to bear in mind that in our domestic legisla•
Lion we differed from France. We at once gave the whole

world the benefit of the concessions which had been made to

our ally. France, on the other hand, withheld from others
the privileges she had conceded to us. and thus retained in

her hands the means of bargaining with other Powers for
mutual commercial concessions. When one nation sought

any favour from another nation, there were various grounds
on which the request might be based. An appeal might be
made to the generosity of the other Power, but it was doubt-
ful whether that would have much effect ; or an appeal might

be made to a treaty which gave the applicants the privileges

of the most favoured nation, and a claim advanced for

certain privileges which had been granted to another
State. Therefore it was, above all things, desirable that
when one had no concessions to offer in return for the ad-

vantages sought, some other Power, which possessed the
means of bargaining, should commence the negotiations.
That was the reason why France had been allowed to pre-
cede us in the present instance, and every concession which
was made to her gave us a right to claim the same. If we

had taken the initiative, the Italian Government would very
naturally have said, "You have nothing to give us in ex-
change for what we give you, and if we freely concede your
demands we shall be placed in a bad position in making
terms with France." So far from her Majesty's Govern-
ment not having endeavoured to make treaties of commerce
with other nations, the fact was that there was scarcely a
Power in Europe with whom negotiations had not been
opened during the last year or two. Treaties had been con-
cluded with Turkey and Belgium. The treaty with the
former was a very important one, The Turkish Government,
always adopting a very liberal policy in its commercial rela-
tions with other nations, had reduced its export duties to the
very lowest scale, and had placed the import duties on a fa-
vourable footing. (Hear.) The remarks he had just made
applied with peculiar force to the case of the Belgian treaty.
The Belgian Government were asked to make a treaty of
commerce with us, as they had done with France, and it was
pointed out to them that it would be an unfriendly act, hav-
ing entered into a treaty with France, to refuse to negotiate
one with England. They replied by asking what we could
give them in return, and they suggested that if they gave
to us what they had given to France we should consent to
capitalise the Scheldt dues. Now, the capitalisation of the
Scheldt dues had nothing whatever to do with a treaty of
commerce, and our Government at once refused to admit the
principle of purchasing a treaty. Again and again they in-
sisted upon the unfriendliness of refusing to us what had
been given to France. Eventually that argument prevailed,
and in the end the Belgian Government made a treaty of
commerce with us, abandoning their demand for the capi-
talisation of the Scheldt dues, which formed the subject of a
separate negotiation. The right hen. member for Horsham
had been misinformed with respect to the Italian treaty. Last
year the French Government, desiring to place their com-
mercial relations with Italy upon a better footing, proposed
a treaty of commerce. The British and Italian Governments
were equally desirous of a treaty being negotiated between
Italy and this country. The Italian Government accord-
ingly sent an agent to England, Signor Mariani, who was
now a distinguished senator, to negotiate a treaty. It was
not true, as had been stated, that Signor Mariani had no
communication with the Board of Trade or the Foreign-
office. On the contrary, he had many interviews with the
President of the Board of Trade, while the Foreign-office
introduced him to some of our leading traders, and fur-
nished him with all the information he required. What,
however, was his invariable language ? He always said that
he could not negotiate a treaty with us until he knew what
had been done in Paris, because, he argued, if Italy gave us
concessions for which we could give her nothing in return
France would insist upon the same advantages without
Italy obtaining the equivalent which she was then trying
to procure from the French Government. The treaty be-
tween France and Italy was not concluded until recently,
and hence up to the present time no treaty had been nego-
tiated between Italy and Great Britain. It was almost un-
necessary to say that before any treaty should be made with
the Italian Government the tariff would be referred to the
various Chambers of Commerce throughout the country,
and that our Government would be only too well pleased to
receive reports from them on the subject. While on the
subject of Italy, he could assure the house that our Govern.
ment were fully alive to the great importance of increasing
our trade with Italy. Italian trade was growing every day,
promoted by liberty and unity— a proof of which he had
just presented to the house in the shape of a report from
our Consul- General at Naples. During the recess the hon.
and learned member for King's County made, through the
newspapers, certain assertions relative to Neapolitan trade
which filled him with amazement, and induced the
Foreign-office to write to our Consul-General at Naples for
an explanation. The explanation thus obtained was so im-
portant, and so completely refuted the statements of the
hon, and learned member, that he hoped the house would
permit him to give a few facts from it. The number of Bri-
tish steamers to Naples had increased between 1859, the
last year of the Bourbons, and the end of 1862, from 66 to
119 ; and the tonnage from 41,675 to 95,292. Sailing vessels
showed the same enormous increase. Foreign steamers of
all nations had risen from 656 in 1859 to 1,303 at the end of
1862, and the tonnage from 192,378 to 442,832. The actual
trade from Naples in 1859 amounted to £476,821; in 1862 it
was £850,708. An equally satisfactory account was fur-
nished by the Board of Trade with respect to Tuscany. But
to return to the subject of our negotiations with foreign
countries with respect to commerce, the house was aware
that last year the French Government were negotiating a
treaty with Prussia and the Zollverein. As soon as that
fact became known, our Government applied to Prussia and
the Zollverein to make with us a similar treatyof commerce.
The reply was precisely the same we received from Belgium
—that negotiations could not be entered into with us until
those in progress with France were concluded. " France,"
it was said in effect, " can give us an equivalent. You can
give us none. When we have ascertained what France will
give us we shall be ready to give to you, as a friendly na-
tion, what we have given to France.'"--Our Government
told them that though their tariff might be acceptable to
France it might not be so to us. It had been bald that a re-
ference should have been made to the Board of Trade. What
our Government really did was this—they accepted the offer
of Prussia and the Zollverein to make with us a treaty as
favourable as that made with France, but they said that the
question was a question of tariff, and that the question of
tariff should be discussed before the treaty. Prussia and the
Zollverein consented, and our Government sent to Berlin
Mr. Mallott, a most distinguished officer of the Board of
Trade, to communicate with the Prussian Government as to
the tariff which England would require. Unfortunately, for
various reasons, political and others, up to this moment the
treaty with France had not been concluded. The Prussian
Government had consented to the treaty, but the other
States of Zollverein, for political reasons had refused to do
so. It had consequently been found impossible to negotiate
a treaty between this country and the Zollverein. As re-
gards Austria it was quite true that at the beginning of last
year we heard that the Austrian Government were dis-
posed to negotiate a treaty with this country; and we at
once proposed a basis. But we were told, however well-
disposed they were to a liberal commercial policy with this
country, there were political difficulties in the way, and
until the question of the Zollverein was settled they could
not enter into a treaty with us. He had heard it asked why
did we not insist on the privilege of what was called an in-
termediate treaty being given to England P An interme-
diate treaty was one by which articles of commerce were
subject to a different tariff, according as they were, or were
not, imported into Austria or Prussia by a conterminous
frontier. But that was the result of a mutual arrangement,
and we had no chance whatever in present circumstances
of such a concession. Then, as regards Denmark, the Go-
vernment had reason to believe that there were parties, po-
litical and commercial, who were willing to enter into a
liberal treaty of commerce with this country ; and we
availed ourselves of the opportunity that offered. The
Danish Government accepted our proposal, but what was
their first question ? It was this, " What will you give us
in return ?" We replied, that Danish manufacturers and
Danish ships were placed in this country on the same fa-
vourable footing as other countries, but at last nothing was
done, they would not negotiate with us. But suppose the
Danish Government were to negotiate with another Go-
vernment on a liberal basis, we should have a right to come
forward and say our favourable relations entitle us to a simi-
lar treaty, and that argument would have its weight. He
might say the; same with regard to Spain and Portugal.
What they wished from us was the reduction of the duty on
their wines, but that they obtained from the French treaty,
and it was hopeless at tne present moment to obtain either
from Spain or Portugal a treaty of commerce on liberal
terms. But certainly, if an opportunity offered the Govern-
ment would take the necessary steps. His hon. friend the
member for Bradford had adverted to the advantage which
he thought would arise from bringing the Foreign-office
into immediate connection with the Board of Trade. His
bon. friend had often spoken to him of the necessity of
having in the Foreign-office a special department on trade.
Now, he had considered that point, and he had come to the
conclusion that his hon. friend's plan was not feasible. To
be at all useful and important:that special department;would
occasion very great expense; there would, in fact, be a
double office and a double staff.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER had wished that there should be
a commercial officer in connection with the Foreign-office,
to be in constant communication with the Board of Trade.
Mr LAYARD assured his hon. friend that on all com-
mercial matters the Board of Trade was referred to by the
Foreign-office, just as the Home-office was referred to in
matters coming within its immediate cognizance. He thought
he had said enough to show that the complaints made by
the lion. gentleman opposite were not well founded. lie