The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-24 00:00:00

Mr. ROBINSON agreed with his Right Hon. Friend,
that the answers from foreign nations, in reply to the
invitations addressed to them, emeunts d to this, that if
we repealed the navigation-laws, then we should see
what they would do.—(Hear.) He could not see what
commensurate advantage any foreign countries could
give this country. The letter of Mr. Bancroft in the
case of America might serve as a comment; that gentle-
man stated that America would reciprocate with this
country, but it was well known that America never
meant to give up their coasting trade. With
regard to the application of the principle of free-
trade to agriculture, it was said that the depression
of that interest was not owing to free-trade, but to
other disturbing causes, such as the failure of the
potato crop, which he allowed to a certain extent
operated in that direction ; but he felt satisfied that
when these disturbing causes ceased they would still
experience depression. There could be no doubt that if
these laws passed, although ship building would not stop
altogether in this country, still it would be ersatly di-
minished. No one except Captain Stieing would hold
the opinion that a mercantile navy was not essential to a
Military navy. The plan of Captain Stirling was to have
voluntary enlistment in the navy, and a shorter term of
service—of three years. Now, that was altogether irn •
practicable. His objection to the Bill was that it would
throw open to foreigners the direct colonial trade, which
he would no more allow them to participate in than ho
would suffer them in the coasting trade Mr. Huskis-
son and Lord Cornwallis held the inter-colonial and fish-
ing trade to be essential to the maritime pre-eminence of
this country. Much had been said by gentlemen oppo-
site of retaliation. He should like to know what country
could retaliate upon this country without injuring itself.
There was notsone of them which was not more depen-
dent on our markets than we were on theirs. Take
the case of America, the most formidable rival we had.
It appeared that more than half of the entire exports of
that country were made to the markets of this country.
In fact, we had nothing to fear from the retaliation of
other countries. He wished to do away with monopolies,
if other countries would imitate their example ; but
since the time of Mr. Huskissou, now twenty-seven
years, nothing of that kind had taken place. On looking
over the evidence before the Committee, he found that
seventeen of the principal merchants, connected with the
East and West Indies, Australia, and other parts of the
world, one and all declared, that they never rotted the
least difficulty in obtaining freights at moderate prices.
Ile was for forty years a merchant in the city of London,
pretty actively engaged, and he could also testify to
that fact, notwithstanding the new-fangled notions which
had sprung up in this country of late years on that and
other portions of their commercial system. The
Manchester gentlemen thought every thing was
to be sacrificed in order to set them and
their spinning jennies at work—(A. laugh)—but he
could tell them that every year the great commercial
States of America were rivalling them more and more,
either by drawing away their best artisans, or copying
their works, and even France and Italy were not only
supplying themselves with articles independently of Eng-
land, but determined to keep up a system of protection.
Ile should give the measure every opposition in his
power, and ardently hoped that it would be rejected by
the Legislature.
Mr. MeGREGOR would not have obtruded himself 1
upon the House on the present occasion were it not that
be represented one of the greatest shipbuilding towns in
the empire, and one of those most interested in com-
merce. In entering upon the discussion of this measure
he must begin by saying that he did not complain of
what the measure did for foreign ships, so much
as of what it left undone for foreign ships. He was far
from entertaining the opinion which others did, that dis-
astrous consequences would ensue from the passing of
this Bill. At the same time he Wishe 1 that every re-
striction and burden which it imposed upon British ship-
owners should be removed, and he alluded to that clause
especially which restricted British shipowners from man-
ning their ships in any way they thought best for their
own convenience and advantage. He believed that was
the only clause in the Bill which he would like to see
altered. But there were other burdens upon the ship-
owners of this country—he meant the stamps upon ma-
rine insurances on bills of lading, and on other docu-
ments and instruments connected with the shipping
interest. He should also wish to see that law abolished
which interfered with the victualling of British ships.
Re should also wish to see the lighthouses of this coun •
try put upon the same footing with those in the United
States, where the whole were in the hands of the Go-
vernment, and where their expense did not exceed half
their amount in this country. If these restrictions were
removed he feared no competition with other countries.
Re would go further, and say he could not discover that
the navigation-laws had at any one period been of ad-
vantage to the British shipowner and British shipbuilder.
Mere than that, from their establishment up to 1815,
this country had during the greater part of the time
been engaged in war with other countries, and due.
ing that whole period they were actually break-
ing the navigation-laws, for they captured ships
from the enemy, and then it was considered that
they strengthened the power of this country by regis-
tering them as British ships. Now he could not
see
that there was the least difference between the British
shipowner being allowed to buy a foreign ship and regis•
ter her as a British vessel, and the British navy captur-
ing a foreign ship in war, and then having her registered
With regard to our Norh American colonies, it was re-
markable that every subject of discontent between those
colonies and this country had reference to the restric-
tions on trade, which lasted up to the period of the de
claretion of war. He saw no reason now why they should
dread competition with foreigners. In the case of neu-
tral ports, such as Porto Rico, Cuba, and the Brazils, he
found that British ships contended tuecess'udy with the
ships of every other country except those of Spain in the
Spanish colonies, which gave a preference to Spani-h
ships, by allowing a draw oack of 33 1-3 upon the duti•
on goods imported in Spanish vessels. But on the
other hand, England had her revenge with respect to
Spain; for he found that those high duties were not
equal to the advantages we possessed, in being able to
send goods into Spain by way of Gibraltar.
With regard to competition with the different countries
of Europe, he would begin with Sweden and Nor-
way. Comparing their ships with British ships, he found
tnat every article which entered into the constitution of
a British ship, paid no duty except on the little foreign
timber that entered into her construction, while the
Swedish ships paid duty upon their cannon, their anchors,
their cordage, their copper sheathing, and often came
over to this country very slenderly equipped, in order to
obtain the principal part of their rigging and stores here.
It so happened that we had full and entire reciprocity
with Sweden, Denmark, and Norway, before the navi-
gation-laws existed. It was true that there were more
Swedish than British ships employed in the trade, but
that was because our importations consisted of manufac-
tured goods, which required small tonnage, while the
return cargoes were of great bulk, which made it not
worth the while of British vessels to engage in the trade.
But their ships had not greatly increased over ours, for
he found that nearly the same proportions existed
in 1702 as now. With regard to the Hanse
Towns, they had always allowed the ships of
every country in the world to come into their har-
bours with any cargo, not even imposing light-house
duties upon them. And how did British ships
stand at Hamburgh? lie found that there had been
a gradual increase of British shipping, and that, taking
one year with another, they amounted to one-third of
the whole tonnage in that part. Then with regard to
Prussia. Their ships were much on the same footing
with Sweden. Their exportations also consisted of
cargoes of heavy bulk, which made it not worth the
while of British ships to engage in the trade. But he
did not find that Prussian ships entered largely into
competition with British ships where there were no navi-
gation-laws, such as Cuba and Porto Rico. By a refer-
ence to the trade returns fur the past quarter, ho found
that the departures of British ships for various ports not
British were constant and frequent; In Holland, British
ships were subjected to no higher port charges than
Dutch vessels. Freedom of trade and from the re-
striction of navigation-laws had been the rule in the
Lsw Countries from the establishment of their power
to the present time ; and if Holland prospered and grew
great under a system of perfect free trade, he could not
conceive why any other country, with eg.tal energy.
equal enterprise, equal advantages, and positive and
equal economy, might not defy competition with
every country on earth.—(Hear.) In the l)utch settle-
ments in Java and Batavia the English had not the same
advantages as the Hollanders; but the reason was that
we subjected
,the produce of our Indian possessions to
double dutia s. Let England remove the restrictions
upon the trade of Holland with British India, and he
was certain the Dutch would permit English vessels to
trade with Java and Batavia upon equal terms with them-
selves. In Belgium there was the same desire to reci-
procate. As to France, he should say that the present
commercial and maritime policy of the country was
extremely illiberal. The arrangements entered into
between Mr. Pitt and the then French Ministry, in
1793, were the most liberal ever known. But the
breaking out of the war put an end to that state of
thiees,
and it had never since been thoroughly restored.
In Genoa the most liberal maritime policy prevailed.
With Rome and Tuscany nothing mid bei more
liberal. The kingdom of the Two Sirsilp s al-
lowed British ships to trade on exactly the
same terms as their own. In the ports belonging
to Austria on the Adriatic our vessels were allowed
to enter on the same terms as Austrian. If he went
further, he should point to Turkey, whore no restric-
tions whatever existed. And as to Russia, there our
Vessels were allowed to enter their ports from all coun-
tries in the world exactly on the same footing as Bus-
0-"nitli,,shiPs. He had thus gone through all the countries
1,;,,""e continent of Europe, and shown that in every
13renittniensnhccietirethateythtermea;ted the British much better than the
co wilst, with regard to their power of
they nr, lag with us inship-building, they might do so if
the-
n the
possessed people more skilful and
more economical
cneap People of England. For they had labour
er, Whilst our only advantage lay in having a
__ price.
Much better quality of timber than they had, and at a
lees
say that Upon the subject of timber, he should only
oa, he hoped to see the duty entirely removed from
close`' At the risk of tiring the Heusi), he could not
States observations without alluding to the United
of America. Ile took a much higher view of
le great republic than as a mere opponent of England.
_ .wished to sec established between the United States
and England all the bonds of social and material alli-
ance,
the lie wished them to be considered as a peop'e of
, same origin as the English, a people to a great ex-
te_ent professing the same religion, and up to a very re•
!_l3 period possessing a common history. In their
schools nearly the same lessons were taught as in those
ngland, and by their fire sides mothers instilled into
their children's minds the same moral instruction. An
unrestricted maritime and commercial alliance between
the English and the United States was of far more im-
portance than it would be with any other. When it
!as considered that in the year 1759 there was not a
'lngle British merchant who possessed an acre of