The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-24 00:00:00

Ti?
COMMITTEE ON THE NAV 011-4-":"
TION LAWS.
°
The Select Committee appointed by the
Commons, to inquire into the operation of the
„i; g:
tion-laws, met again on Tuesday. The fol XL "jf
Members were present :—Mr. Liddell, Mr. T. Bir
n‘of
Mr. Ricardo, Sir Howard Douglas, AdMiral Dun , virijabir
Sir George Clerk, Mr. Villierc, 'Mitchell, and
Mr. M`Carthy. Li the absence of Mr. M. Gibson
the chair was taken by Mr. Ricardo.
Mr. Phillips was called and examined.
By Mr. T. Baring.—He was a shipowner and
shipbroker, and had considerable experience in
shipping. If the navigation-laws were repealed
the value of BritiLl shipping would immediately
be reduced to 30 per cent., and he should be
very unwilling to own ships on such terms. -He
could purchase shipping in a foreign country at a
much lower rate than he could here ; and there were
many ports abroad to which they would not be ad-
mitted, while all ships would be admitted into our
ports. From the cheapness, it would be an advan-
tage to the British ship owners to buy foreign ships,
and to navigate them with foreign sailors. Mr. Col-
quhoun stated in his evidence that a ship could be
built, coppered, and copper-fastened at Lubeck, and
fitted for a voyage to India, at from 81. to 81. 16s.
per ton ; a similar ship could not he built and fitted
out in England under from 161. to 171. per ton.
Taking the statement of Mr. Swale, that the wages
of a crew of thirteen men on board a Hamburg ship
of 350 tons amounted to 251. 2s. 10d. per month,
while the wages on board a British ship of the same
tonnage amounted to 401. 10s. per month, many foreign
countries gave their own ships great privileges, which
was an advantage to them. Mr. M`Gregor stated
in his evidence that a British ship could take French
produce to the United States ; he (Mr. P.)
knew of an instance when, by a mistake of an agent
at Liverpool, some articles of French produce were
shipped on board a vessel with a British cargo, and
that vessel, on its arrival in the United States, was
placed under seizure, and the owner was put ,to a
very great expense. Mr. M‘Gregor had, he thought,
made a great many mistakes in the course of his
evidence. If England repealed her navigation laws,
and foreign countries maintained theirs, it would be
' an advantage to the British shipowner to own foreign
ships. If a foreigner could own a French ship, it
would be a fortune to him to trade between Havre
and India, as the French navigation laws were so
exclusive. He understood that the expense of build-
ing a good oak ship at Danzic, with the exception of
coppering and fitting her for sea, would be 8,3001.
for a ship of 800 tons, or 101. 17s. 6d. per ton.
The freight received on her voyage from Danzic to
London, with a cargo of railway sleepers, would pay the
expense of coppering her and provisioning her for an
Indian voyage. Such a vessel could not be built in
England under 15/. per ton, and there would be a
difference in the rate of insurance. The Prussian
ship would stand quite as long as the British ship.
The expense of building a similar ship in the United
States would be about 12/. or 131. per ton. As a
general rule, all foreign ships were navigated cheaper
than English vessels, and, of course, every one would
employ the foreign rather than the English seamen.
With regard to ship-building, if the navigation laws
were repealed, the number of naval artisans would
be greatly reduced; and in consequence, the Govern-
ment, when it wanted hands in the dockyards,
would be very much inconvenienced, unless they
also employed foreign shipwrights. About 200,000
seamen would either be thrown out of employ-
ment, or compelled to serve at a much lower
rate of wages, and rather than do that he
thought they would seek some other employment,
In fact, he believed that the repeal of the navigation-
laws would involve pecuniary loss to about 2,000,000
of people in this country. The greatest disadvantage
from the repeal of those laws would be the difficulty
of manning the navy, which could not be obviated
in any emergency unless they also employed
foreigners. At present, in any emergency, the navy
could obtain from 10,000 to 20,000 seamen from the
British mercantile marine. The effect of throwing
open only the foreig4 trade, and not the coasting
and colonial trade, would be a disadvantage, as they
had all the restrictions to submit to which they were
willing to put up with while protected, and in foreign
ports would have to compete with the foreigner who
had not those restrictions, who were badly paid
and badly fed. In taking a cargo to South Australia
he should be obliged to charge a higher freight
in consequence of the impossibility of obtain-
ing a return cargo, and from there on going to India
the ship would come into competition with the cheap
foreigners. If a return freight from the colonies were
to be obtained, it would not be of so much importance ;
but it was notorious that 19 ships out of 20 did not
obtain a return cargo from the colonies, but were
obliged to go on to India for a cargo. He had been
much amused at the statements made by former wit-
nesses that the Australian colonies were inconveni-
enced by a dearth of British shipping to send their
produce home. The admission of Asiatic and
American produce in all bottoms would deprive the
British shipowner of the greatest advantage he at
present possessed, by giving the foreigners the long
voyage, as they built and navigated thir ships cheaper.
The repeal of the navigation laws of America and
Great Britain would throw into the American ship-
ping the great bulk of the carrying trade to this
country, as they would as a matter of course use their
own ships. The trade between America and this
country was almost exclusively an import trade.
By Mr. Mitchell.—The Americans at the present
moment were in possession of the great bulk of the
carrying trade. The American ships were nearly as
cheap as the cheapest foreign ships. The advantage
that would arise from allowing foreigners to compete
with Americans would be very small in this trade,
while the disadvantages would be very great.
By Mr. Ricardo.—The reciprocity treaties put the
United States on a better footing than we were,
because we admitted them to trade to our colonies,
and they had no colonies. He did not think that the
Americans had anything to fear from the ships of the
ports north of Europe. The north country ships
were more cheap, but more clumsily built
and fitted out. Our case with regard to com-
petition with these ships was very different from
that of the Americans. The Americans had many
great advantages over us. For example, they built
their ships cheaper, and they manned them as they
pleased ; they were subject to no restrictions such as
were under the Merchant Seamen's Act, and they
usually sailed with a very fair proportion of fo-
feigners. On the whole they navigated their ships a
great deal cheaper than we did.
By Sir George Clerk.—Although the navigation
laws had been suspended, he was not aware that ad-
vantage of the privilege to bring provisions to this
country had been taken by foreign ships up to the
present period. He believed the reason was that at
the time those laws were suspended foreign ships
were frozen up in their ports, and were unprepared
' for the trade. Now, he understood, that several fo-
reign ships were on their way to America for the
purpose of bringing provisions to this country.
By Mr. Mitchell—He did not think that a re-
duction of freight of 11. per ton on sugar from the
West Indies would ever be felt by the consumers of
the article; the difference would be absorbed by the
importers and the exporters.
By Admiral Dundas—ln his opinion the repeal of
the navigation-laws would cause a great reduction in
first•class shipping of the country, and that
40,000,0001. of capital, which was at present em-
ployed in shipping here, would be transferred to
foreign countries. He was an advocate for the
examination of masters and mates.

By Mr. Ricardo—The Americans could build
ships 30 per cent. cheaper than we could, but our
ships lasted 30 per cent. better. He did not think
that we could build as cheaply as the Americans
with the exception of insurance, because after a
certain number of years all ships, foreign and
English, lost ()lass at Lloyd's. The Americans for
the same amount of capital were enabled to send one-
third more vessels to sea than the British • ship-
builders.
The Committee adjourned till Thursday.