The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-07 00:00:00

THE NAVIGATION LAWS.

The Committee appointed by the House of Commons
to inquire into the operation of the navigation laws met
on Thursday in Committee-room No. 2. There were pre-
sent Mr. Milner Gibson, chairman ; Mr. Ricardo, Mr.
Mitchell, Mr. Lyall, Sir George Clerk, Alderman Thomp-
son, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Hume, Hon. Mr. Liddell,
Admiral Dundas, Sir Howard Douglas, Hon. Mr. Vil-
liers, and Mr. M'Carthy.
Mr. Young was recalled.
Mr. Mitchell called the attention of the witness to
that part of his evidence given on a former day, where
he stated that British and foreign ships could be insured
at an equal rate of 6 per cent. He read to him a letter,
written by Messrs. Carruthers and Budd, the under-
'writers at Lloyd's, stating that they had themselves
maderwrittenosk-built Prussian ships, standing, for seven
Tears, A 1, at Lloyd's, at a rate of 12 guineas per cent.
:for a twelvemonth without limitations, and that they had
ascertained that other foreign ships of the same class had
been insured at the rate of ten guineas, while British
ships standing for twelve years A 1, at Lloyd's, were in-
aurad for 7 to 8 guineas per cent. for a twelvemonth
without limitations. Having read that letter, he wished
to know whether Mr. Young still adhered to his former
answer, that the rates of insurance were the same for
both English and foreign ships?
Afir. Young did not think that letter shook his opinion
M all ; for he did not perceive in it any allusion to the
nature of the voyages in which these ships were to be
engaged, and which would materially affect the rates of
insurance; so that no inference could be drawn as to a
correct comparison between these English and foreign
vessels. He might state that the class of ships he spoke
of in the evidence he formerly gave were ships all
engaged in the East India trade.
Mr. Mitthell—And would you still adhere to your
former evidence regarding the price of Baltic timber
belt* 100 s. per load, when we are informed, on the
returns, that the average
authority of Parliamentary
prices of Baltic timber were, for 1841 and 1842, 1025.;
tor 1843, 104 s. ; for 1844, 745. ; for 1845, 795. ; and for
1846, 865.?
Mr. Young—l know nothing about the average prices.
loan only say that I am a consumer of timber—that I
go to the cheapest market, and that I buy the best; and
that I have here a statement of what I paid for timber
-during the last seven years, which was the ground on
.which I spoke.
Mx. Hume wished Mr. Young to read this statement,
bat Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Ricardo objected to its being
put in competition with the Parliamentary returns.
By Sir Robert Peel—ln 1842, after the reduction of
the duty, there was an enormous increase in the demand
for Baltic timber, which no doubt to some extent affected
the price. He did not know that the district which pro-
duced the best Baltic timber was of limited extent. He
had heard so, indeed, but from some other sources he
had heard the contrary. The Canada timber had also
risen in price as well as the Baltic, which was also caused
by the increased demand. This was particularly the
ease with the Canadian red pine, which competed with
the Baltic, but there was very little of that timber in
Canada.

By Mr. Ricardo—lt appeared from the parliamentary
returns that from 1815 to 1824—that was during the
height of protection—the British mercantile marine had,
upon the whole, diminished; whereas, from 1824 to 1846,
that was the period during which the reciprocity treaties
had been in action, it had greatly increased ; but that
he considered was not a fair test, especially as regarded
she period between 1815 and 1824, because a few years
before 1824 it was discovered that a considerable num-
ber of ships were borne on tho registration books that
had oeased to exist, and these were struck off the books,
which in some measure accounted for the decrease.
Sir George Clerk—No, that was in 1827.
Mr. Young thought it was previous to 1824. With
regard to the increase since then, he thought there was
a great fallacy involved in it, as every voyage of a
Bteanaer backwards and forwards was counted into the
amount of tonnage belonging to this country, than which
nothing could be more fallacious, as a mode of ascer-
taining the effective strength of England.
3lr. Ricardo—Perhaps it is, if taken to show the
ctive strength of the country ; but it is surely a fair
mode of showing how much of the carrying trade is in
<air hands.

Mr. Young—But foreigners have chiefly sailing-
In2ssels, while England employs steamers. Now, sup-
?posing them to be of 200 tons, and the one to make two
voyages, in a month, while the other made two voyages
in a week, it was plain that in the course of the year the
tailing-ship would be ranked as 48,006 tons, while the
steamer would be considered as 208,000 tons, than which
nothing could be more fallacious.
Examination continued—He was disposed to uphold
the navigation laws, not only because they formed a
nursery for the royal navy, but also because, however
=popular the notion might now be, he thought it was
right to support the cause of native industry by mode-
rate protection. He applied that principle to every
branch of British industry ; but it was more especially
applicable, he thought, to the shipping interest. In the
case of the corn trade, for instance, though the duty on
foreign corn had been altogether removed, the farmer
still retained a protection—he would give no opinion
whether or not it was an adequate protection—on the
siost of importing such a bulky article as corn, which
amounted on an average, he thought, to Bs. per quarter.
PeL,t in the ca.se of competition with foreign ships, there
would be no such protection, but rather a direct bounty
tl foreign ships to come here, in the shape of the freights
they woad receive for their cargoes. That argnment of
-course only applied to ship-building. He thought it
would not be an advantage to have the power of pur-
chasing foreign ships, because that would be the destruc-
tion of ship-building in this country, and an additional
4 'Tense would be thrown upon the country in providing
3 .tval artisans who had more than once within his recol-
SL.stion been drafted from private dockyards to supply
rite wants of the public.
The Chairman—Are you aware, Mr. Young, that
more than one foreign ship of war has been built in
England?

Sir. Youag—l am aware of one built for Mexico,
which has no facilities for ship-building.
The Chairman —No, but we have built one for
Autetris.

Mr. Young—l am not aware of that.
The Chairman—Bat I have been all over her myself.
By Mr. Ricardo—The navy has been manned in time
of war by impressment. He was no advocate for im-
pressment ; but he was an advocate for having the
navy manned, in time of war, at all el ,ease and at all
hazards. He thought that the practice ul impressment
might be superseded, if better wages were given in
the navy, and if the men were more kindly treated.
The almost total abolition of flogging in the navy
had done much to conciliate sailors to the service, and
he could state from personal acquaintance with the sea-
-teen of the Tyne, who were the most intelligent of their
class, that with proper treatment they would not object
even too compulsory service for a limited period. .Hi 4
o•.vn opinion, however, was, that it was unnecessary to
man the navy alltogather with able seamen ; because as
a great part of those on board were only required for
the purposes of warfaKe, he thought that a supply of
naval marines might be secured for that purpose, w.ho
would answer equally well when they had got what
sailors called their sea legs. He should doubt Sir James
Stirling's estimate of only 1,000 merchant seamen being
now ir, the naval service, at least ho knew that seamen
were eontinually volunteering into the navy from his
ships, and other owners made the same complaint. He
though t the great advantage of foreign shipowners over
English was the advantages they possessed in cheapness
or matt dial and the cheapness of labour.
The Committee then adjourned till Tuesday next.

HAIL STORM.

THE PRIVILEGES of the COURTS
OF ALDERMEN AND COMMON COUNCIL.
QUESTIONS ON THE CASE PREPARED BY ORDER OF
THE COURT OF ALDERMEN, WITH THE OPINIONS OF
COUNSEL THEREON.
1. -Whether the alteration of the qualification of a
Common Councilman, proposed by the Bill in ques-
tion, can be legally made ?
2. If such alteration can be made, whether it
must not be made under the charter of 15 Edward
111. ; and, if so, in what manner, and by whom
should it be made, in order to render the same valid
and effectual ?
3. Whether a meeting of the Lord Mayor, Al-
dermen, and Commons, in Common Council assem-
bled (legally and properly constituted), have the
power to pass an Act of Common Council for making
such alterations ?
4. Whether there must be a Court of Aldermen,
composed of thirteen members (the whole having
been summoned), present at a meeting of the Com-
mon Council, to make a good assembly of the body ?
5. Whether the assent of a majority of the Alder-
men so present is not legally necessary ?
6. If a Court of Aldermen need not be present,
whether at all events the assent of a majority of the
Aldermen who do attend is not necessary ; in other
words, whether the Aldermen as such have any ne-
gative voice in passing Acts of Common Council.
7. With reference to the Common Council, whether
a majority of the Commons (the whole being sum-
moned) is not necessary to be present to constitute a
good Common Coancil meeting, and whether a ma-
jority of such members present must not assent.
8. Or if the majority of the Commons need not
attend, whether the assent of a majority of those who
do attend will be sufficient ?
And generally to advise the Court of Aldermen
whether it may not be desirable for that Court to
come to certain resolutions as to their views and
opinions relative to the passing of the Bill ; and as to
what are the proper means of staying the progress of
and defeating the said Bill, if Council should be of
opinion that the measure proposed is a legal measure,
or a measure that ought not to be passed with re-
ference to the privileges of the householders, citizens
of the city of London.
COPY OF OPINION.
" We are of opinion that there exist grave doubts
whether the alteration of the qualification of a Com-
mon Councilman, proposed by the Bill in question,
can be legally made, even assuming the consent of
the Mayor and Aldermen has been duly accorded—
the meeting of the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Com-
mons, in Common Council assembled, and the Bill
properly passed.
" It is not necessary, for the present purpose, to
answer the intermediate queries, the subjects of which
may be yet further considered ; but we are prepared
to advise the Court of Aldermen, that it is not only
desirable, but essentially necessary, for that Court to
record their opinion in relation to the proposed Bill.
If this Bill be allowed to pass in the manner proposed,
without the concurrence and against the consent of
the Court of Aldermen, the Common Council will be
equally competent to pass any other Act in the same
manner, by which any of the most important rights
of the Courts of Alderman, or privileges of the
citizens of London, dependent on the ancient custom
of the City, may be annihilated.
" We are further of opinion that the Bill in ques-
tion cannot be passed without the consent of the
Mayor and Aldermen. Should the Mayor and Alder-
men come to the resolution to withhold their consent
to the proposed Bill, we recommend them to express
their dissent through the Recorder in the Common
Council, which was the mode adopted by the Court
of Alderman in February, A.D. 1723.
" CHAS. E. LAW, Recorder.
" J. MIREHOUSE, Common Sergeant.
" P. PEACOCK.
" JAMES WILDE."
Within the last fortnight the following answers
were added to the above opinion.
" 2. We think`the alteration must be made in con-
formity with the charter of Edward 111., granted in
Parliament, and confirmed by the statute of Richard
11. ; for although the custom existed before the
charter, the custom has been invariably pleaded in
the terms of the charter.
" 4 and 6. We do not think that there must be a
Court of Alderman composed of thirteen members
present at a meeting of the Common Council to make
a good assembly of that body ; but the Mayor and
Aldermen as such have, in our opinion, a negative
voice in passing Acts of Common Council, that nega-
tive being exercised in a Court of Aldermen.
" 7. We are of opinion that a majority of the Com-
moners (who are the delegates of the commonality for
certain purposes), is not necessary to be present to
constitute a good Common Council meeting, provided
the whole of the Common Council are duly sum-
moned.
"8. We think that the assent of the majority of
those who do attend will be sufficient.
" CHAS. E. LAW, Recorder.
"JOHN MIREHOUSE, Common Sergeant.
" P. PEACOCK.
"JAMES WILDE.
" Temple, May 17."
The opinions of Newman Knowles, Esq., Recorder;
Thomas Denman, Esq., Common Sergeant : and Ar-
thur Belland, Esq., Senior Common Pleader, upon a
case submitted to them by order of the Court of
Common Council, November, 1824 :
QUESTION.
Whether a Court of Common Council is dissolved
or broken up, if all the Aldermen present thereat, or
if all such Aldermen except one, withdraw themselves
therefrom? and
What number ofAldermen is necessary to be assem-
bled and present with the Commoners, to constitute
s uch Court ?

THE SU N,