The Sun.
London, England, 1840-11-13 00:00:00

THE SUfNiPuotipos,, firti.l).Ai,.Neov,i4.Biu..git 151._, 1i,*46.

I IMPORT DUTIES.-INUTILITY OF
PROTECTION DUTIES.

SECOND ARTICLE.
IRON.-The informatiou thrown by the, Com-
mittee on the subject of Import Duties levied for
protection, is most valuable. First, let us show
that our most important manufactures, though pio-
tected, owe nothing to that protection. Iron, silk,
cotton, cloth, are surely amongst the most important
of our manufactures. Now, let the reader mark
the important evidence as to iron, of Sir John
Guest :

A great alteraiion in the iron trade took place
about the year 1741), when pit coal, for making iron,
came into use : previously to that time, iron had been
all made of charcc.al. In 1740 the import was about
`25,000 tons a year, consisting almost entjrely of bar
iron ; and the average import, from 1760 to 1786, was
40,000 a year. The trade then began to flourish.
The price of iron was 18/. to 20/. per ton.

BATE OF DUTY.
The rate of duty then charged was 2/. 10s. per ton
when brought in foreign ships, and 2/. Is. 6d. when
brought in British ships. In 1786 the import was
44,330 tons ; the duty was 2/. 163. 2d. per ton ; and
the price began to be reduced, in consequence of the
introduction of pit coal, to 141. or 15/. per ton. From
1786 to 1796, the quantity imported ranged from
44,000 tons, the lowest, to 54,000 tons, the highest ;
the duty was then the same, 21. 16s. 2d. In 1796, the
duty was raised to 3/. Is. 9d. per ton ; in 1797, to
3/. 4s. 7d. ; in 1798, to 31. 153. 5d., and the import of
that year was 45,964 tons. In 1799, the import was
42,479 tons. After that year, I have no account of
the imports till 1820 ; but the duty was raised in those
years, during the war. In 1802 it was raised to
4/. 4s. 41. per ton ; in 1805, to 51. Is. ; in I'Bo6, to
51. 7s. 5d.; in 1809, to 51. 9s. 10d.; in 181z3, to
6/. 9s. 10d. ; in 1819 it was 61. 10s. upon iron brought
by British ships, and upon iron brought by foreign
ships the duty was 61. 18s. 101. The import in 1820
was 10,995 tons. The duty was then very high, and
the make of iron in this country was rapidly increasing.

QUANTITY OF IRON MADE.
I will give the make of iron in this country at diffe-
rent periods. In 1740 almost the whole of the iron of
this country was made from charcoal, and the make
was 17,350 tons. In 1788, in consequence of the in-
troduction of this new process of making iron with pit
coal, the quantity increased to 68,300 tons, about which
time Mr. Watt brought his improvements to bear upon
the iron trade by the introduction of steam-engines for
blowing the furnaces ; after which time there was a
still more rapid increase. In 1796 the quantity pro-
duced was 125,000 tons. In the next ten years, down
to 1806, the quantity was increased to 258,000 tons.
In 1823 the quantity produced was 452,000 tuns. The
quantity in 1825 was 581,000 tons (this was all pig
iron). In 1828 the quantity was 703,000 tons. From
that time to 1831 it became stationary ; it rather dimi-
nished in 1830 in consequence of the distress which
prevailed in the country at that time ; from which time
the increase has been still more rapid. In 1835 it
was estimated at about a million of tons ; in 1836

it was estimated at 1,200,000 tons ; and the estimate
made by a very intelligent person who went round the
works in 1839 was 1,512,000' tons, which is rather
increasing. A very large proportion of the great in-
crease latterly has been produced by the introduction of
hot air in the blast furnace. in 1821 the import was
10,995 tons ; in 1822 it was 13,967 tons ; in 1824 it
came to 14,478 tons ; and in 1825 the import was
23,657 tons, there being a very large speculation in
that year. At the end of 1825 an alteration took place
in the duty. The duty on bar iron was reduced, under
Mr. Huskisson's advice, from 6/. 10s. to 1/. 10s., whe-
ther the ships bringing the iron were British or foreign ;
and the duty on pig iron was reduced from 17s. 6d. to
10s. Other sorts of wrought iron, not enumerated,
charged a duty of 50 per cent., at that time were re-
duced to 20 per cent, ad valorem. Wire, which had
previously been Si. 18s. 9d. the cwt., was reduced to
11. a cwt. Hoops, which were 1/. 3s. 9d. per cwt., re-
mained at the same duty. The duty on steel was re-
duced from 50 to 20 percent. ad valorem.- The duty
remains at present, except that there is -asAiscriminat-
ing duty upon iron brought from our:colonies,' which is
not practically in operation. In • 1826,- the import
was 18,587 tons, at a duty of 30s. a ton. In 1827 it
was 18,826 tons ; in 1828 it was 15,495 tons ; in
1829, 15,720 tons ; in 1830, 15,223 tons ; in 1831,
17,872 tons ; in 1832, 19,437 tons ; in 1833, 17,913
tons ; in 1834, 16,215 tons ; in 1835, 19,750 tons ; in
1836, 19,100 tons ; in 1837, 19,930 tons ; in 1838,
24,600 tons. All this is the kind of iron that is used
for steel. Instead of being an importing, country, as we were
previously to making iron from pit coal, we now export very
largely from our producing iron cheaper than other coun-
tries. The protecting duty hasnot caused any difference in
the increased quantity produced in this country. It has
arisen entirely from the increased demand. the foreign
iron imported is used almost entirely for steel, for which
there would at this time be an increased demand, but
that there is a great deal of English iron used for steel,
for inferior purposes. The duty, as a protection, is
therefore nugatory. There is something peculiar in the
Ssedish and Russian iron, with regard to the peculiar
fitness for making steel, which we cannot understand.
The produce of that duty is extremely small, if you de-
duct the quantity exported, which was about 2,000 or
3,000 tons a year. Ido not think it produces above
20,000/. to 25,000/. a year. The best proof with re-
gard to iron being made cheaper in this country than
in other countries, is, that in America, where there is a
large import of Swedish iron, which meets our iron, al-
though not upon fair terms, as they have a discriminating
duty between Swedish iron and English iron in this
way : all iron in this country is manufactured by rolling,
and the Swedish by hammering, and by way of putting
a discriminating duty, they have affixed a different
and larger duty upon iron made by rolling than upon
that made by hammering. • The Swedish iron is not
so uniform in its quality as ours, but ham-
mered iron is the more valuable of the two,
if made with charcoal. The present duty on the impor-
tation of iron might be taken away without affecting
the trade. If the price were reduced to-morrow Ido
not think it would affect the interests of the trade.
'There are some few persons in this country who make
iron for steel ; they may consider that less of their iron
would be made for steel if the duty were taken off. The
present price of Swedish is about 121. ss. in bond, and
of common British iron about 71. Except for the pur-
poses of steel, the country has not imported iron since
1790 ; upon the first introduction of British iron there
was a great prejudice in the minds of smiths against its
use ; that wore off about 1800 ; it continued a little
longer than that in Ireland, but now ours is entirely an
exporting country, with the exception, as I stated be-
fore, of iron being imported for steel.
It is here quite plain that the trade has thriven,
because of the ingenuity of the people in applying
coal to making iron, and in using blast-furnaces.
Protection had no influence over them.
Mr. Walker also gave some important evidence,
which is particularly valuable as showing, by the
example of hardware, how the protection given to
one article impedes the manufacture of another.
The same principle holds good in almost all cases.
Such as wool, for example, the protection given to
which was injurious to the cloth manufacturer ; such
as thrown-silk, the protection to which operates
against the silk-weaver ; such as timber, the dis-
criminating duty on which is injuring the ship-
builder. The 30s. per ton duty on bar iron has an
injurious effect on the sale of goods for which it
must be used. Mr. Walker is a large iron-factor
at Wolverhampton, and his evidence on the sub-
ject of protection was to the following effect :
Thu articles principally manufactured at Wolver-
hampton, chiefly from iron goods, arc locks of all de-
scriptions, latches, hinges and bolts for doors, screws for
carpenters, &c. &c. ; anvils, vices, and hammers, files,
and other smiths' tools ; carpenters' tools, as chisels,
axes, adzes, augers, &c. &c. ; iron saucepans, kettles,
pots, &c. ; frying-pans, gridirons, coffee and corn mills,
cork-screws, &c. ; agricultural implements, as lines,
ploughs, spades, shovels, rakes, scythes, &c. ; steelyards
and scale-beams, chains for plough traces, cart traces,
&c. ; tin articles of all descriptions ; japanned ditto, as
trays, waiters, &c. The amount of protecting duty upon
those articles is understood to be about 25 to 35 per cent.
Hitherto the protecting duty has been quite nugatory,
inasmuch as if the duties were repealed no foreign hard-
ware would come into England, inasmuch as in the
competition in our home markets we should save the ex-
pense of exporting, and they would have it. No
protective duty is at all required for any of those arti-
cles in England. A duty of 30s. per ton is levied on
foreign iron ; now there is a certain portion of the ma-
nufactures of our neighbourhood that require foreign
iron ; therefore we import the foreign iron, and pay an
extra price for it in Wolverhampton, because of that
protective duty; and yet the manufacturer has to take
his goods to a neutral market and to sell them at the
same price as the foreigner, who has no protective duty
to pay. 'There is no drawback. That 30s. duty upon
Swedish iron, a portion of which is required for some of
our manufactures, does not prevent the meeting the
foreigner, because we do meet him, but it operates as a
reduction of the wages of labour. That difference must
come out of the wages of labour here ; for we actually
export the goods that we make of foreign iron, and when
we export them, we must sell them at the price the fo-
reigner does ; that burden obliges us to reduce the
wages so as to enable us to compete with the foreigner.
All the duties put upon the importation of food of all
descriptions, on coffee, sugar, corn, and everything of
that sort, are a direct disadvantage to the labouring men
of England, because it is evident that the manufacturer
MUST SELL HIS GOODS AT THE rater: AT WHICH
THE FOREIGNER SELLS HIS, and in order to do that he
must reduce his wages to the workmen. The manufac-
turer has really no choice but to take those prices or
starve ; and whatever enhances the cost of living to his
workmen is a serious injury to them if their wages are
lowered. The articles in the manufacture of which fo-
reign iron is used are the finer sorts of edged tools chi, fly,

which require a permanent edge, and yet ore light, such
as scythes, for instance, and carpenters' tools.
So much for iron.
such large quantities proves et of
i o
the complete exportingteituitl
ity
of a protecting duty, while the fact that the duty on
Swedish iron raises the cost of scythes, carpenters
tools, &c., which are in extensive demand, proves
that such a duty, without yielding more to the re-
venue than a few thousand pounds, inflicts a serious
i:jury on our trade, and both tends to lower the
es of our workmen, a remarkable and important
w,;„
consequence, and to deprive them of employment.
SILK teaches a similar lesson. Mr. rsl'Gregor
shows by his evidence that the difference of cost in
silk goods was so great that the very high protect-
ing duty formerly in existence did not prevent
both legal and illegal importation to a great extent.
The striking fact, however, as to silk, is the great
increase of the manufacture which has taken place
since the prohibitory duty was taken off. To this
all the witnesses testify, confirming the statements
previously made. Mr. Dillon said—
The effect of the reduction of the duties on the trade
in manufactured silk goods generally, has been very
beneficial, both to the public and to the manufacture
itself; it has restored the trade to a much more sound
and healthy state than it existed in at that time, and has,
perhaps, prevented its extinction in some branches. If the
duties had not been taken off, it would have been
impossible to have checked the extension of the contra-
band trade, considering the great intercourse existing
between this country and France, and that silk is an
article of luxury and fashion. The general business of
the silk manufacture of this country, in consequence of
the protection, as it was falsely called, was conducted
on such bad principles, that it could not have been
carried on to a profit. Taking off the prohibition, and
allowing the import of foreign silks at the present high
duties, have tended to extend the silk trade generally
in this country, and to prevent some branches of it from
being extinguished.
Taking the actual importations of raw silk only, the
average importations will be found to have increased as
fol:ows :
For the 6 years preceding the admis- lbs.
sion of foreignmanufactured goods,
that is from lB2O to 1825 2,459,444 per anc.
For the 6 years succeeding the ad-
mission 1827 to 1832 3,511,854 do.
For the 5 years 1833 to 1837 3,753,276 do.
For the 2 s ears lB3B & 1839 3,602,121 do.
This shows an increase of 50 per cent.
The imports of foreign thrown silk have decreased in
the following proportions :
For the 6 years preceding the alters- lbs.
tion of the law, the average impor-
tation was
For the 6 years succeeding the ad-
misson
For the 5 years 1833 to 1837 253,009 do.
For the 2 years lB3B & 1839 244,944 do.
Showing a reduction in favour of English thrown
silk, a partially m umfactured article.
Taking the balances, or quantities of all kinds re-
tained for the purpose of home manufacture, they will
be found to have increased in the following proportions :
For the 6 years preceding the admis- lbs.
sion of foreign manufactured
goods lB2O to 1825 2,984,889 per ann.
For the 6 years succeeding the ad-
mission
For the 5 yrs.... 1833 to 1837 4,966,836 do.
A table of this kind must be taken with some limita-
tions. Tue mere quantity of pounds weight of raw silk
is not in the exact ratio of the prosperity of the busi-
ness, because the silk imported may be of a commoner
kind, or for commoner purposes ; but still it is impos-
sible to look at this increasing import of the raw mate-
rial, without seeng that it involves a state of increased
prosperity mid extent of the manufacture on the whole.
The silk manufacture is distinguished into two large
branches—the ribbon and narrow trade, and the broad
silks for garments and other purposes. When French
goods were first imported, they manufactured for the
English .market a great many kinds of goods which they
expected to sell largely. They came in competition at
first, I believe, with almost every branch of our manu-
facture. The thing has, however, now found its level.
The great mass of the common silk goods are made in
England. The great m cgs of the middle run of goods
are also made in England ; chiefly now at Manchester.
The French trade has settled down into a rich or fancy
trade ; they keep that because they appear superior to
us not only in the arts of design, but in everything in
which taste and fancy are required ; they not only make
a higher description of goads, actually more beautiful,
but they put them up in a better manner, and finish
them in a better style, and, as silk is altogether an article
of luxury and of fashion, the finish of the goods, and
the mode of placing them before the customer, is an es-
sential, and not a mere accidental circumstance. The
extension of the trade is mainly to be attributed to that
reduction.

Are you aware (Mr. Dillon was asked) of the
apprehensions entertained by the silk manufactu-
rers at the time that the duties were reduced ?—Per-
fectly aware of them; they predicted the utter ruin of
the English manufacture of silk goods, and even two
years after the passing of Mr. Iluskisson's law, a gene-
ral meeting was held of the silk trade in 1828, at which
a Committee of 28 persons was appointed to communi-
cate with the Government, and I hold in my band their
final report, in which they use the following language :
The Right Honourable President of the Board of
Trade having on that occasion" [that is, at an interview
which they had with him on the part of the silk manu-
facturers of England], " expressed a desire to have some
plan submitted to him which might procure relief to the
silk trade, consistent with the principles laid down by
his Majesty's Government in the year 1826, for the
regulation of this branch of British industry, the
Committee most respectfully state, that after having I
given the subject their most mature consideration, they
are still of opinion that the interests of the silk trade
of the United Kingdom are so utterly at variance with
those principles, that his Majesty's Government will
ultimately find themselves placed in a position which
renders it necessary for them to decide upon surren-
dering up either the One or the other." Notwithstand-
ing that prediction, it is the fact that every year the
silk trade goes on increasing. 'rte same predictions
were strongly urged before the Committee four years
ago on the silk trade. It was foretold that if the pro-
position to reduce the duty on thrown silk were carried
Nut .t.:l)°lloiltson:victteloir:uels tnsbastnyrh3do' tiliiill ge
ittnliteco snei
tell likx:etcuttirha tairdrteu:f‘a'h' c°yatuesulardrbese.bei enn
prosperous. the
uttertl'
s course
ruin
predic-
tions ooi.f'
Mr. Leaf's evidence was to the same effect :
Previously to 1826 foreign silk manufactures were
entirely prohibited ; at that period an alteration was
made in the law, by which they are admitted at 80 per
diu:. Fire proposed change created very great
is amongst the manufacturers, and it was stead-
fastlycli'n'ss;
meintained that it would be impossible for them
to carry on the business : both the Spitalfields and the
Macclesfield manufacturers contended that they could
notilTolutilidY meet the proposed competition, that their
mills become quits valueless, and that both the
employer and employed would be ruined, and reduced
to pauperism. Those fears were not only not realized,
but from that time a very great increase in the trade
took place, much greater than at any former period.
Up to the period when the prohibition was removed,
much less improvement took piece in the silk manulae.
ture than in any other branch of trade, but as soon as is
werepov en mode
cheaper and
enabied thes
was removed, there was a great stimulus given to tile
trade by foreign competition, and by improved triodes
of
manufacturing,
tu'lrlir7ClrbeYetwsiolifeltrhgoosaed ism r
English manufacturer still to continue the chief
of the home market, and it also enabled him to coniP
with France in our export trade. Prom that time :ttrvr
export of silk goods to America, and to other neutral
to States, has increased very much upthe present Cl a
We have chiefly exported to those countries plain
.z., ""Ide'
When I first knew Manchester, which was about the.
year 1816 or 1817, there was but one silk
rnan u ee
turer, and be upon a very small scale ; and "ea u ' to
the year 1825, when the reduction of (lure e
on silk tpouk
there were but ten manufacturers i
place, silk in emulacturers
Man-
chester, and those ten n a employed about
3.000 weavers, as nearly as I can calculate, three-
fourths of their produce bung mixed goods, silk and
cotton, and silk and worst Those manufacturers
hove gradually increased to about thirty at the
present
time, as near as I can ascertain ; who employ about
15,000 weavers at the present moment. I speak
simply of weavers ; r.i. leave out of the question warners
and winders. I estimate the whole
return of Manchester
in silk goods in 1825 at 430,0001., and
now the return in
goods, entirely of silk, is from 1,600,0001. to 1,800,000/.
There are very few articles sold now of
per annum.
the prohibition has
mixed goods. Since
.i. been removed,
the quantity of mixed goods
which s
gradually diminished.
With this great increase
f has taken place in
Manchester, there has beet' no al trig off in
any place.
I believe there has been anmercase in all the seats of
the silk manufacture, for although in some places there
may be a decreased numb r of manufacturers, still the
increased business which they do, more than counter-
balances the diminution of number- From my own
observation, there has been more money made in the
silk trade, and more fortunes realized since the prohibi-
tion was removed, than at any period prior to that
time. The operatives have been, I he ~
aeve, more
regularly employed, trod better paid. A fatality ap-
reared to attend Spitalfields during the
prohibi-
tion ; up to the period of 1824 to 1825 every
two or three years there were periods of very
severe distress in the winter, and subscriptions
were raised in the city for the purpose of relieving the
distress ; for the purpose of establishing soup com-
mittees,thgiving soup to e poor.
and Since that period
1 the silk manufacturers in Spitalfields have suffered only
I in common with the other manufacturers of the country,
but never to the same extent es they did before. Cer-
I tainlv the distress has never been so severe ; in fact I
do not remember an instance since the prohibition was
removed, of a subscription having been required for the
silk weavers of Spitalfields. While more money has been

made, and higher wages received by the operatives, the
pablic have been supplied with a much better article.
There is no difference in the price of the raw material
to account for this great difference ; silk is at this ma-
m,mt higher than it has been for the last ten years ; and
yet goods range now from 20 to 30 per cent. lower than
they did in 1825 and 1826. I believe it arises entirely
from unproved modes of manufacturing. 1 find that in
1826, when the present system came into operation; the
whole quantity of raw silk, including waste and thrown,
imported into this country, was only 2,665,2251b5., and
that since that time, the imports have gradually in-
creased until. in 1839, the quantity imported I find to
be 5,020,0341b5., independently of which, the stock on
hand of raw silk has been gradually diminishing. In
1827 our exports of silk manufactures, chiefly to our fo-
reign possessions, were only to the extent of 236,1131.,
aril they have increased until, in 1839, they amounted
to 865,768/. They are plain goods chiefly. Our greatest
increase has been to the United States, which before
1807 supplied themselves almost exclusively from France.
In 1827, I find the amount of exports of silk manufac-
tures from this country to the United States, was only
67,1111., whilst in 1838 they amounted to 348,506/. ;
n d they have been larger than that in previous years ;
but America not being in a very wholesome state, she
cannot take so much now as she did. Again, the trade
to the Channel Islands. to Guernsey and Jersey, is a
striking illustration. The dealers in those islands have
the privilege of going to any market they please, and im.
porting from every market on the same terms ; previ-
ously to 1827, those islands took their goods almost
exclusively from France. In the year 1827, the exports
from England to those islands were only 1851., and they
have gradually increased till they amounted in 1838 to
6,084/. Chiefly plain goods. Silk manufactures imported
from France to the Channel Islands consist of fancy arti-
cles ; consequently plain goods are supplied cheaper from
England than from France, a proof of our being able
ti) meet the French manufacture in those plain goods.
There is another branch of the export trade, which
shows our increasing ability to compete with France—
our exports to France itself ; for it appears now that we
are able to exports goods even to France. I find that,
in 1827, our exports to France were only 4,6611., and
since that period they hare been gradually going on, till,
in 1838, they had increased to 56,598/., notwithstand-
ing the duty payable, which I think is about 10 per
cent. The goods exported to France consist chiefly of
handkerchiefs ; I do not think they are articles of ladies'
dress; they are handkerchiefs of various kinds, manu-
factured in Macclesfield and in Manchester, but in Mac-
clesfield chiefly, I believe.

We might quote, to the same effect, the evidence
of Mr. Gibson and Mr. Hilton, silk manufactu-
rers, but that would only serve to overlay the sub-
ject ; and. we presume enough has been quoted to
satisfy the reader that the benevolent intention of the
Legislature in prohibiting all rivalry with our silk
manufacturers in our own markets, was most inju-
rious to the progress of the manufacture. It pre-
vented the manufacture from being improved, and
so stopped its growth. England has now become
an exporter of silk goods, and in some species,
that is, all plain goods, can successfully compete
with the French in the. common markets of the
world. We have no doubt that the removal of the
remaining protecting duty, letting in figured silks,
&c., at a cheap rate, would give a stimulus to the
ingenuity of our workmen,.. and soon enable them
to compete with the figured silks of France, parti-
cularly if the onerous duty on organzine and tram
were abolished, and the food of the people were as
cheap as it might be. The silk manufacturers, ac-
cording to Mr. Gibson, would ask no protection, if
the trade in food were free. Again, therefore, the
tact is made apparent.that one political error carries
a host of errors in its train, and many restraints must
be continued, because the landowner persists, for his
own base purposes, in levying a tax on the
people's bread.
COTTON, which has always been one of the
least protected of all our manufactures, and at the
same time one of the most flourishing, teaches a
similar lesson, but the facts are so well known that

it is hardly necessary to quote it as an illustration.
Two brief extracts, however, from the evidence of
Dr. Bowring and Mr. T. D. Hume may be quoted
as elucidations. The former said—

It is known that the cotton trade in England is the
least protected of our trades ; that it was in fact a per-
secuted trade in its origin ; that taxation was levied
upon cotton goods, in the interest of the woollen trade ;
that cotton manufacturers have been throughout the
advocates for free trade, yet the development of that
trade in England is perfectly unexampled. In France
the cotton trade is the most protected of trades ; it was
protected from its origin ; it is only within a few years
that the finest numbers of cotton twists bare been ad.
mitted into France ; there is an absolute prohibition on
all articles of cotton manufacture except the very high
' numbers of cotton twists, which are used for making
lac:. The cotton trade,has made very small progress
in Franee compared with, the. cotton trade in England ;
the state of the cotton labourers is frequently one of
very great suffering ; the number.• of the bankrupts
among the cotton manufaciturers France has been
great, and when the home market is glutted there is no
means of relief by going to the foreign market, inasmuch
as the price, at which they produce the fictitious price
created by the protective system, is much higher than
the prices of the nations 'with which they compete.
The consequence is, that, as a means of relief, the Go-
vernment have been in the habit of giving a large pre-
mium on exportation, which is another taxation levied
upon the French people ; they paying in the first case
a much greater sum than they need pay for the cotton
garments they wear ; and secondly, paying the cost of
the increased price upon the article which France ex-
ports, in order to enable her to get rid of her super-
fluous production. France has every facility of obtain-
ing the raw material of cotton as cheap as England.
The latter gave this evidence :
In the last year, taking cotton manufactures and cot-
ton yarn, upwards of 34 millions and a half of declared
value was exported ; at the same time, by the tariff,
the protective duty upon cotton manufactures was, for
every 1001. of ♦alue, 101., and for articles of cotton,
whole or in part made up, 20/. I conceive that the
amount of our export is a perfect proof that the pro-
tection is futile, and wholly uncalled for and useless.
I would remove the present duty on cotton manufac-
tures for the sake of holding out to the world an ex-
ample. The protection could be removed without any
injury to the existing interests. It appears to me that
the duty of 10 per cent. upon foreign cottons is as use-
less to 'our cotton manufactures as our duty of 2/. the
ton is to our coal trade. Foreign countries, in the
duties they have imposed, have very often been led by
our example in England to impose protective duties.
They imagine we have risen to our present state of pros-
perity through the system of protections, and that they
have only to adopt the same system in order to succeed
+►s we have done. I feel the strongest confidence that
if we were to give up our protective system altogether,
it would be impossible for other countries to retain theirs
much longer.
Our protective system, which is not beneficial in
itself, is bad as an example. It is the parent not
only of much mischief at home, but of mischief
throughout the world. If, as some moralists very
erroneously, in our estimation, measure criminality

ward state, is it rash to call it a general truth? If
there were not a harmony and homogeneity in the
effects of similar or the same causes, knowledge
would want all connection, and it would constitute
the anarchy of which Tories continually rave. In
fact the axiom that like causes produce like effects
is the basis of all philosophy, and the invariable
connection of causation rivets all knowledge into
order. No empiriee, consequently, are more boldly
ignorant and more mischievous than those who
deny the general law; and when protection-is proved
in so many cases to be injurious, to persist, at least
in the absense of all proof to the contrary, to affirm
that protection must be good i❑ the case of agri-
culture. They are theorists, and without a fact to
justify their theory. They are, it is true, practical
men; they act no doubt; but cannot we say the
same for the pickpockets of London and the
Thugs of India ? They are all practical men,
and, like the authors of the so-called protecting
Corn-law, they abstract property unjustly from their
neighbours, and unceremoniously put them out of
existence.