The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-24 00:00:00

surprised him quite, and had led him to believe that the
House was not going into that Committee then with any
prospect of a satisfactory issue.—(Hear, hear.) It was
a vary extraordinary occurrence in a Bill long projected,
carefully prepared, to which the utmost attention of the
Ministers must have been shown, that on going
into a Committee on that Bill, the Minister
should commence by telling them that he
meant to make a very important alteration.
Ha thought that the Government would have done much
better to have withdrawn the Bill altogether than at the
last moment to come down to the House with an im-
portant alteration, which totally altered its character.
He was not, however, disposed to offer any opposition;
to the Bill going into Committee. But this much he.
might observe that there had been- three separate Bills,.
and all founded upon three very different positions..
There was the Bill of the Government, the amended pro-
position of the Government, and the proposal of his
Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Gladstone), which, if introduced
earlier, might have been useful for the amendment of
the other two. He (Mr. Herries) always listened to
any proposal which came from that Right Hon. Gentle-
man with much respect, and only regretted on the pre-
sent occasion be had not been more active. He repeated
that he should offer no opposition to the Bill being taken
into Committee, but on the proposition that the Bill
pass into a law of the land—believing that it was es-
sentially and fundamentally an un-English Bill—he
shouldigive it his most decided and strenuous opposition.
Mr. ROBINSON stated his intention to oppose the
third reading of it.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
On the first clause being read,
Mr. LABOUCHERE proposed the introduction of
words into it, to the effect that the Bill should come
into operation on Ist January, 1850, which was agreed to.
Mr. BOUVERIE then moved the following proviso
as an amendment:—" That the several restrictions and
prohibitions in the aforesaid Acts contained, as to the
voyages in which ships of any foreign conntry may en-
gage, or as to the goods which they may import into, or
export from, the United Kingdom or any British pos-
session, or as to the goods and passengers they may carry
either coastwise frpm one part of the United Kingdom
to another part, or from any British possession in any
.part of the world to any.other British possession (except
such of the said restrictions and prohibitions as are
.hereby authorised to be removed or varied by the pro-
per legislative authorities of British posiessions), shall
remain and be in full force respectively till it shall be
made, to appear to the satisfaction of her Majesty in her
Privy Council, and it shall be declared by her Majesty's
order in Council, that British ships are not subjected in
such foreign country to the like several restrictions or pro-
hibitions, as to the voyages in which they may engage, or
as to the goods which they may import into or export
from such foreign country, or any possession thereof; or
curry coastwise in any part of such foreign country:
provided further, with respect to the restrictions and
prohibitions in the aforesaid Acts contained, as to the
goods which the ships of. any foreign country may im-
port into or export from any British possession, her Ma-
jesty, by her order in Council, may direct, that the whole,
or any part, of such restrictions and prohibitions, shall
cease to remain or be in full force as to the ships of any
foreign country; although the like restrictions and pro-
hibitions respectively, as to the goods which any British
snip may import into or export from any possession of
such foreiglecoun try, shall not in all respects have been re-
moved."Thellon.G entleman di.sclaimed alidesire to embar-
rass the Government, and also leaning towards protection.
He believed that as to these laws protection had not a
,leg to stand upon. The system of protection was radi-
.cally opposed to the best interests of the shipowners,
but he differed from the Government as to the mode in
Which the change should be effected. He did not pro-
pose his amendment with a view of retaining our restric-
tions, but to make it the instrument of forcing the re-
moval of the restrictions of other nations. The naviga-
tion laws of the United States were founded upon reci-
:procity, and the House could not do wrong in following
itheir example. It had been objected to the plan of Mr.
Gladstone that his amendment would involve the Go-
vernment in endless negotiations with foreign Powers.
Tfiat was, however, an objection which could by no
means be made to his (Mr. Bouverie's) amendment, as
,his clause would be self-working. Such an objection ap •
plied the rather to the proposal of the Government. But
of a score of maritime powers with whom we had tree-
,ties,there were not above three with whom we had the
west favoured nation clause. He might be told that the
gnvernment had failed in obtaining reciprocity of tariffs,
and, that they would also fail in obtaining treaties for
reciprocity in shipping. But the two cases were by no
means analogous. He excepted from his clause the co-
lonal coastine• trade and the inter-colonial trade, which
it would be better to leave to the Legislatures of
re-
sp'e tive colonies, and he would add a proviso giving
powser to her Majesty in Council to remove certain re-
strictions and prohibitions upon the trade of foreign
ships with those colonies, even although those restric
tions should not be removed by such foreign nations.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving his amendment.
Mr. WILSON, in opposing the amendment on the
part of the Government, did not' believe that the Hon.
Member was adverse to the liberal policy of the Go-
vernment with respect to the navigation-laws. The Go-
vernment plan was not only the best, but the only plan
by, which they could avoid repeated and intricate nego-
tiations with other powers. If they were to have con-
ditional legislation the Government must hold in their
hands the power of retaliation, so that they might re-
stoe the equilibrium by retaliatory measures. That re-
ciprocity for which the Hon. Gentleman was an advocate
must be regarded as a principle very nearly akin to re-
taliation. If we refused to other countries advantages
which they denied to us, that refusal would be quite in
the nature of a penalty for their non-compliance with
what we conceived to be a reasonable demand. The plan
of the Hon. Gentleman, and those who thought with him,
appeared to be nothing less than a distinct prohibition—
such, at least, he thought, would be its practical effect.
The Hon. Gentleman proposed this, that England should
not concede any commercial privileges except to those
nations which proved to the satisfaction of the Queen in
Council that they had made or were ready to make
similar concessions to England. What was that but re-
taliating upon them on account of their not being free-
traders? The Hon. Gentleman had talked of similar re-
strictions, appearing altogether to forget that there was
scarcely any such thing as similarity in the matter of
restriction. It seemed to him that the Hon. Gentleman
could scarcely have considered the probable conse-
quences of the proposition that he had made. He
.would take the case of Belgium, which was perhaps, more
'restrictive than any other country that could be named;
yet, with all its restrictions, it possessed not one which
could be [called similar to those which prevailed in
this country. In the first place, Belgium had no
colonies. She had no prohibitions whatever upon
the long voyage trade. She did not prohibit
the importation of goods from Asia, Africa, or America,
through England. All that she did was to lay on dif-
ferential duties. In this way he might go on through
all the countries of Europe, without finding one in which
the restrictions were precisely similar to those which
prevailed in England. Single instances might, perhaps,
be discovered here and there, but upon the whole it would
be found that dissimilarity was the rule, and resemblance
the exception. The restrictions which England imposed
were of the exclusive character. Many other nations
restricted by differential duties, but this country did so
for the most part by means of exclusions. Perhaps the
Hon. Gentleman would say that we ought to permit a
free trade with those, and with those only, which en-
tirely threw open their:trade to us. Suppose that were
to happen with the United States, and that that republic
were to repeal at once all their restrictions, what would
happen as soon as we allowed the United States to go
into our colonial trade? All the countries with which we
had' treaties would immediately demand like privileges.
Holland would at once insist upon such an advantage
on the ground of treaties. Holland by a treaty not
terminable had a right to trade to Java and the In-
dian Archipelago upon the terms of the most fa-
voured nation. He did not forget it might be said that
with some countries our treaties were terminable. He
would put this question to the House—were they pre-
pared to disturb the whole of our existing treaties with
foreign states for the purpose of carrying out the views
of the Hon. Gentleman ? In his opinion the course
which the Government proposed to take would better
carry out the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman than
his own plan. Let them suppose this intended recipro-
city system established to the fullest extent, what would

there be to prevent the cotton or the sugar of America
being conveyed to this country via Rotterdam? and,
surely that which could, under any circumstances, be
done indirectly, had much better be directly sanctioned.
Then let the House for a moment reflect upon the blow
which they would strike against the warehousing trade
of this country if they assented to the proposition of the
Hon. Gentleman. Our relations with Russia, Prussia
Spain, and France forbade the adoption of any such
proposition; and, in his opinion, nothing would do more
for our warehousing trade than the Bill which her Ma-
jesty's Government had submitted to the House.—
(Hear, hear.) In the present state of the law, no goods
were warehoused in this country excepting such as
oa
or
nr isvaemd
phtei
or en foreign shd iopos
t, Ghoo ordess
hi
pt
pe ne
dd e; dhfuotr
ifhome
Bill now before them passed into a law, the warehousing
trade might enjoy the benefit of articles intended for
home consumption. The Right Hon. Member for the
University of Oxford proposed or suggested to divide
the trade of this country into the foreign trade of the
whole empire, including that which our colonies carried
on with foreigners; and, secondly, into the domestic
trade of England, including her intercourse with her
own colonies; and, having made this division, the Right
Hon. Gentleman proposed that a foreign state might be
at liberty to give us the benefit of either division, and
f treturn—thath otherose
advantages.
accept a similar privilege in
o
might be free to give us one or both
Now, such plans were open to very grave practical ob-
jections. What, for example, were they to do with the
Dutch, as regarded Java and the East Indies? Suppose
Holland were to concede to us that class which related
to foreign trade, and that the United States of America
conceded both, Holland might then demand, upon the
ground of treaties, and without any further concession,
to be put on the same footing as the United States.
Upon the whole, then, he did not hesitate to say, that
the Government plan was better calculated than any
other to carry out even the views of the Hon. Member
for Kilmarnock.

Mr. GLADSTONE said he should state in one sen-
tence why he could not vote for the proposed clause.
There was this practical difficulty in the way of the plan
of the Hon. Member, that foreign restrictions were in-
commensurate with those which prevailed in this coun-
try, and the clause would, therefore, not attain the object
in view.

Mr. GIBSON observed that the only question was
ono which lay between the British shipowner and the
British public. The shipowner told the public that they
must use no vessels but his. It was not a haggling with
foreigners about a little more or a little less. The
object was, to get rid of restrictions upon the civil rights
of her Majesty's subjects. He was glad to find that
some Hon. Members had reached the reciprocity stage.