The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-08 00:00:00

COASTING TRADE BILL:

- -
On the question that the bill be read a third time,
Mr. H. LIDDE LL put a question, whether foreigners
would have to pay duty on the stores they used, other
than those that were unlocked ?
Mr. G. THOMPSON expressed his gratification at
this measure, which removed the last rag of protection,
and only trusted that the Americans would meet us in
Ile spirit of reciprocity.
Mr. CARDWELL said that with regard to the ques-
tion of stores, foreigners would by this act be admitted
to exactly the same privileges on this point as British
subjects, and to no more ; and, therefore, foreigners
coming into our coasting trade would enjoy no privilege
with regard to duty-paid stores whatever ; but, on
the
.contrary, would be placed on exactly the same
footing with the Queen's subjects. (Hear, hear.) That
wags the law of common justice, and that was the law

which would be carried out by the bill now before the
house. Before the measure took its final departure from
this house, he was anxious to say a word or two on the
subject of reciprocity. Apprehensions had been expressed
not only lest we should fail to obtain reciprocity from
other countries, but lest at some future period, upon any
reverse of our prosperity, we should find the evil conse-
quences of opening our trade to all the world. Now, he
was glad to find that the Liverpool Shipowners' Society,
the members of which could ant be considered insensible
to the interests of the shipowners of the United King.
dom, had sent to him an official record of their approval
of this bill, and they not unreasonably coupled the ex-
pression of that approval with a desire that the Govern-
ment should urge upon foreign countries the duty of
conferring upon British subjects privileges identical with
these which in our ports we conferred upon them.
When the Government did urge that course upon foreign
countries, by what plea would they be most likely to
prevail I If, by retaining some fragment of the pro-
tective system, they betrayed a want of confidence in
their principles, the Government would naturally fail
in the argument they addressed to foreign countries.
It was not by reciprocal bargaining upon the subject of
trade that they were so likely to carry out their views
with regard to foreign countries as they were by show-
ing them the success of our own example, by pointing
to the unparalleled prosperity which had followed every
successive relaxation of our restrictive system, by show-
ing that we had adopted it from a conviction that it
was for the benefit our own people, and that it re-
dounded to the national advantage, thus tending to pro-
duce in their minds an anxiety to reap the same ad-
vantages for themselves. (Hear, hear.) Particular
attention had been drawn to the case of the United
States, the most important of all the countries with
which we had relations upon this subject. It had been
said that the United States would not give us recipro-
city unless we could satisfy them that it was for their
advantage to do so. Now, we should most easily satisfy
them that it was for their advantage by urging upon
them our own successful example. We had a right to
say to her that, having made every concession with re-
gard to her citizens, having shown an undoubted confi
dente in the soundness of our own principles, we were
not open to any retort when we claimed reciprocal
advantages. The Government neglected to take the
steps which became them in order to obtain reciprocity
with other countries. His noble friend the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs had, at the opening of the
session, called the attention of every country, and
more especially the attention of the United States, to
the steps which her Majesty was recommending Par-
liament to take. There had not been sufficient time
for the answers to those inquiries to be generally re-
ceived, but it was his (Mr. Card well's) good fortune to
be able to state that already the circular issued
by his noble friend had not been unproductive of re-
sults, and, in the case of a neighbouring country, not
unimportant as regarded its commerce—he alluded to
Holland —most satisfactory assurances had been already
received of intended immediate action on the subject of
reciprocity. (Hear.) It must be extremely satisfactory
to the community to find that this measure had been
permitted to pass through this house without a dissen-
tient voice, supported on this occasion and on others by
the testimony of those who either had a large personal
interest in the shipping trade or represented the largest
shipping communities, and he did believe that it was
a most important step in the progress of universal free
trade that England with the unanimous concurrence of
the House of Commons, was throwing open the free
navigation of her shores, and was banishing the last
remnant of protection. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR, referring to a resolution
of the Shipowners' Committee of Sunderland, condemn-
ing the opinion he had expressed on a previous occasion
in this house, denied that that resolution expressed the
sentiments of the great majority of the people of that
town. The press of Sunderland—Tory, Whig, and Ra-
dical—had united in expressing their approval of the
course he had taken in supporting her Majesty's Govern-
ment, and he might add, to their credit, that the seamen
of Sunderland had come to the conclusion that the
throwing open of the coasting trade and the extension
in that way of free-trade principles would, while it pro-
moted the prosperity of the country generally, promote
also, if not at the present moment, at least in the end,
the prosperity of the interests which they represented.
The bill was then read a third time and passed, amid
general cheering.
The Mutiny Bill was brought in and read a first time.
The house adjourned at a quarter-past 7 o'clock.