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

the extreme importance of maintaining our commercial
marine, and the danger of any measure calculated to
weaken or diminish an arm so essential to the welfare
and power of this nation.—(Hear, hear.) On this last
point he, for one, could only say that he was not
aware what was the ground on which any
apprehen-
sion was based of any such danger to that commercial
marine.—(lfeer, hear.) He sincerely believed, that in the
event of this Bill passing, our commercial marine, of all
the other national interests of the country, would be
that whose stability it would most contribute to.—(Hear.)
But the whole question before the House really was,
whether the measure now before their Lordships was
.
calculated to produce those effects which her Majesty e
Ministers, in bringing it forward proposed to realise,
from it, or those which its adversaries supposed would
certainly flow from it. All the declamation the House
heel heard from Noble Lords on so great a variety of
other topics—(much as it was calculated to gratify theirle
Lordships by the opportunity it afforded to Nob
speakers to display their great oratorical talent)—was
beside the real question. As to all other grounds on
which the matter now under di.eussion had been opposed
—they were but so much matter out of
place—so much
breath thrown away—so much gunpowder blazed away
where there was no enemy to direct it against—so mucha
in fact of the time of that House (as fars any practical
object or business was concerned) wasted.—( Hear, boar.)
He must repeat, then—for it was of great lin•
portance to bear in mind the simple point raised by the
motion for the second reading—that the only question
their Lordships were called to pronounce upon was,
whether or not the measure proposed was calculated to
benefit and advance the great interests cf this commer-
cial country. lie was prepared to prove that it would
give strength and stability to that mercantile marine
by the passing of the measure before the House. But
when it was contended that such a measure would put in
jeopardy its future prosperity, and that of the other
groat interests inseparably
connected with it, he begged
Noble Lords to recollect that the system of laws which
it went to repeal was, in fact, but a fragmentary one,
for a large portion of those navigation laws was repealed
by Mr. Huskisson in 1821 and 1827. He could not
doubt that our countrymen would prove themselves just
as well able to cope with foreign competition at sea—
which heretofore had been proverbially considered the
home of Englishmen as on land; and in all that
regarded a mercantile marine, they would establish the
same superiority over all rivalry, as their industry and
enterprise had long since established with regard to ma-
nufactures. The Noble Earl then proceeded to re-
mark that it had been his fortune ever since he first
occupied a position in the House of Commons—now,
unhappily for him, very many years ago, as far back as
1821—to hear arguments against measures like the pre-
sent so exactly similar to those which had been brought
forward that night, that they might very well hare
passed, notwithstanding the difference of dates, for
those which the present motion had elicited.—(Hear,
hear.) For example, in 1826-27, precisely the same
arguments were raised in the speeches then uttered in
opposition to Mr. Huskisson's measures. And it was
really marvellous, after the crushing refutation they had
at that time received in the answers given to them
by that great matt, that they should now be resaci-
tated, when it might have been reasonably ima-
gined that they had been all of them laid for ever at rest.
The difficulty which he felt in arguing this question was
to meet antagonists who were inconsistent and indis-
tinct. If they told him in what respect the navigation
laws advantaged British shipowners, he should know
how to meet them; but, in the absence of that, ho could
only refer to the provisions of the law, and ask which of
them it was that was so desirable. Did the British ship-
owner gain much from that provision which prohibited
the importation of the produce of Asia, Africa, or
America, from any port in Europe? It was to him
utterly incomprehensible in what way a law could bene-
fit
the
American shipowuerswhich said that an
to England; but that an English ship should not bring
ship mighetf
it from Havre. What did the shipowner gain by a law
btrhiiesacotbuent producery,
of
New
Orleans
which said he should not, in a British ship, bring Bra-
zilian rosewood from Hamburgh, but, when it was
made into furniture, the Dutch ship might bring it?
That was not protection to the British shipowner,
but to the German furniture-maker. It was a restric-
tion bearing equally upon our own shipping and the
shipping of foreign countries.—(Hear, hear.) Another
provision was very much of the same character, which
prohibited the importation of certain enumerated arti-
cles being the produce of Europe, except in our own
ships, or in the ships of the country of which those
articles were the produce. Now, upon what principle
was the enumeration settled ? It appeared to him to be
very much like chance. Why one article was to be
prohibited and another not, hacould not see. They pro-
hibited masts, tar, oils, corn or grain, and a variety of
other articles; but while they prohibited corn or grain,
they admitted flour. In the same way the whole range
of foreign manufactures was nottouched,
import from France or Hamburgh, in the ships of any
nation, any manufactured goods. But if the principle
d why not extend it ? And again, he asked,
for they might
were goo ,
on what grounds was the enumeration made ?—(Hear,
hear.) Then, again, the rule was established that
we were to import the majority of goods either
in British ships or in ships of the country of which they
were the produce. On what principle was that prohi-
bition made? Did that secure the British shipowner
from competition? Not at all. In importing corn from
Dantzic we were left in full competition with the Prus-
sian shipowner. So, in importing from America, we
were left to compete with American ships. In fact, in
every case, we were left to compete with that rival whom
we had the most reason to fear. The perverSity of such
a law he could not understand. It left the shipowner
exposed to full competition with America between New
York and England, but saved him from competition with
the America between Dantzic and England.—(Hear.)
These were the main provisions of the navigation-laws.
There was very little else in them; and those were what
he now called on their Lordships to alter. Those
provisions might b© right, or they might be wrong;
but, at all events, he totally denied that they afforded
the slightest protection to the British shipowner. And,
more than that, the shipowners had said so themselves,
because, when it was a question of reciprocity, they
always said " if you allow that, we shall be exposed to
complete competition; we shall be utterly ruined, and
there will be an end to British shipping." That was what
was said 20 and 25 years ago. Fortunately, however,
the affairs of this
,country wore directed by men who
know the interests of the shipowners much better than
they knew their own; for if they had had their
own way they would
have impeled and restricted
commerce, and by compellieg each country to send
out in ballast to its neighbour, in order to bring
back the produce in her own ships, they would have been
making two ships do the work of one. Would that, he
asked, have been a benefit to the shipowner ?
These capricious restrictions upon our own shipping,
as well as on the shipping
of toreignsrs, were what
really constituted the navigation-laws. To say that we
should lose nothing by repealing those laws—to say
that there was no possible danger in removing these re-
strictions—was, as it appeared to him, greatly under-
stating the fact. What he said was, that the British
shipowner was deeply interested in getting rid of these
laws with the least possible delay.—(Hear, hear.) Let
him remind them that the Noble Earl the Vice-Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade told them on the previous
night that the great part of the wealth of this country
arose from our warehousing system. But were they
ignorant that if they retained these laws upon
the statute-book, the warehousing sy stem must be
destroyed ?—(Hear, hear.) If foreign nations ap-
plied to us the principles of monopoly involved in
that barbarous and disgraceful statute—for so be must
term it—the warehousing system was at an end. We
refused to take from Hamburgh, or from Rotterdam, or
any great continental port, the produce of Asia, Africa,or America. If the same principle were applied
t. to us,
eame
e
our warehousing system would be ruined. In _
way we refused to allow foreign shipping to
u be engaged
in in the indirect trade of this county_we
would .
a Russian ship to bring American goods to this country;
buttre
e i f t
iteus,wasit would be de-
of such import-
oneow
de-
structive bsfa
thatme indirect
1111C0 to us. We would no longer be able to carry sugar
rule were
trade which
from liio to St. Petcrsburgh. The Noble Earl (Earl of
Harrowby) spoke in a contemptuous tone about " frag.
meats of voyages." But our ships would not be able
to compete with Russian ships in bringing corn from
Odessa, without those fragments of voyages. How did
we do it, however ? We took out a cargo, perhaps of
coals, or of some other not very profitable cargo, to Con-
stantinople, or Malta, or somewhere in the Mediterra-
nean, whore again we got some small freight, at a low
charge, to Odessa, and thus assisted we were able to
bring corn from Odessa; but, under other circumstances,
if we had to go out direct to Odessa in ballast, it would
be impossible for us to bring anything from that port, in
competition with Russian ships.—(Clear.) Russia had
already passed a law by which the ships of foreign na-
tions coming to her ports were to be exposed to the same
restrictions to which her ships were subjected by the
law of thosenations. For the present, the treaty which we
had with Russia relieved us from the operation of the
Russian law. That treaty would expire in 1853; and
when it expired, we knew that Russia would apply to
us the same rule we applied to her: we should lose this
indirect trade, which was of so much value; we should
cut up the warehousing system, which was one of the
main props and supports of our trade. It was the same
with Germany, Austria, the United States, and various
other countries. What we gave to them we should have
in return. It might surprise some of their Lordships
that it was this statute which was the main difficulty in
competing with the American shipowner. By the law
of the United States, the ships of all foreign countries
which subjected them to certain restrictions were not
allowed to carry to the ports of the United States
any produce but their own. This law being in force,
we came within the nations to which this prohibi-
tion of the United States applied ; we could carry
nothing to the United States but our own produce: we
could not make up an assorted cargo. The United States
were crippled in their power of assorting cargoes. A
ship coming from America had comparatively little in-
terest in assorting her cargo. In nine eases out of ten
the cargo of a ship arum America to this country was
made up of bulky goods, cotton and flour, the produce
of the United States herself. In the trade the other way
the question was entirely altered. The trade to America
consisted principally of manufactured articles of various
kinds, and every gentleman who had considered the
commercial questim was well aware that in sending
out manufactured goods, the whole profit depended oa
the power of assorting a cargo. At this moment,
in a very important branch of the trade between
America and this country, an immense advantage
was conferred on America. Their Lordships were
aware that America had lately established steam-
packets between New York and this country. He
was informed, and ho believed the information to be
perfectly correct, that one great advantage which the
American steam-boat had over the British, was that the_
articles that paid best in the steam navigation to Ame-
rica were articles of taste and millinery. They. went
almost entirely by stem, and he Wu told that, is the