The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LOND'ON, WEDNESDAY IVORNING., FEBRUARY 10, 1847

I rank, and Ile, belonging to the Rc ,yal Marines, who from
the Ist day of January, 1844, tc the 31st day of De-
cember, 1846, have suffered cc rporal punishment or
imprisonment on shore, showing the nature of offences,
in classes, for which such p unishment has been
awarded, and the number in ea oh class, and showing
the greatest and the smallest nun iber of lashes inflicted;
also, the longest and shortest period of confinement
awarded as punishment to each ierson, and the average
period of confinement for each crass of offence, and the
average number flogged; stating the total number of
rank and file, and also the nuts iber of commissioned and
non-commissioned officers on, shore in each year
Of the tot:il number of soldiers. belonging to the Royal
Artillery and Ordnance corps. in Great Britain and
Ireland, who, between the Ist. day of January, 1844,
and the 31st day of December,. 1846, have suffered cor-
poral punishment or imprisonraent ; showing the nature
of the offences, in classes, for which such corporal punish-
ment or imprisonment had been a,waellt d, and the num-
ber in each class ; and showing also the greatest and
the smallest number of lashes ; a lso' the longest and
shortest period of confinement awarded as punishment,
the average number flogged, and the average pericd of
confinement for each class of offer ces; distinguishing also
the total number of rank and file liable to be flogged,
and also the total number; of commissioned and non-
commissioned officers in the United Kingdom, in each of
those years. Also, returns, of the same tenor, of the
Royal Artillery and Ordnance corps serving abroad; the
total number of soldiers, belonging to regiments
and depots in Groat Britain and Ireland, wile,
from the Ist day January, 1844, to the 31st day of
December, 1846, have suffered either corporal punish.
ment or imprisonment ; and whenever either corporal
pun4inment or imprisonment has been inflicted on the
same person more than once, specifying how often it
has been so inflicted ; with abstract of the totd
number of soldiers belonging to regiments in tl.e
colonies and possessions of Great Britain, who
in each year, from the first day of January, 1844, to the
31st of December, 1846, have suffered corporal punish-
ments or imprisonments ; showing the nature of
the offences. in classes, for which such corporal punish.
ment or imprisonment has been awarded, and the num-
ber in each class ; stating also the greatest number and
the lowest number of lashes inflicted on any person in
each year ; also the longest 'and shortest period of con-
finement awarded as punishment, the average num-
ber flogged, and the average period of confinement for
each class in each year ; also distinguishing the total
number of rank and file, and also the number of com-
missioned and nen commissioned officers in each year.
Of the number of soldiers who, from the Ist day of Ja-
nuary, 1844, to the 31st of December, 1846, have suffered
corporal punishment or imprisonment, and whether either
corporal punishment or imprisonment has been inflicted
on the same person more than once, specifying how often
it has been so inflicted; and distinguishing the num-
bers in regiments in the colonies in possession of
her Majesty from regiments in depots in Great Britain
and Ireland ; distinguishing also the total number of
rank and file, and also the number of commissioned and
non-commissioned officers in each year ; also stating
the number or name of the regiment or corps, with the
names of the commanding officers, in which no corporal
punishment has been inflicted in any of these years (in
continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 308, of ses-
sion 1845).—Agreed to.
RATE-PAYING CLAUSES OF THE REFORM
BILL.

might be all very true ; but they had only to deal with
that Gallant Officer as a public man, and it was neces-
sary that the country should have some certain know-
ledge of the way in which this money was s,plied.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE perfectly agreed in
the supposition that there ought to be every care for
the proper application of the money under the Labour-
rate Act, but this much he could say that. no set of men
could have discharged their duties better than the
superintendents under the Labour rate Act, and
he could affirm, from the information trans-

such an inquiry. It was obvious to every one that, for
every ton of shipping which they drove from their shores
they deprived the home merchant of the opportunity of
disposing of an equal quantity of goods. The more they
obstructed the merchant from pursuing his avocations
either by fixing him to any particular place, or imposing
restrictions upon him, they circumscribe his means of
profit. As an instance, he would give the fact that an
American ship brought hides to Marseilles, and the
French consignee sent them to Rotterdam, where, not
meeting with a ready sale, the French merchant, con-
sidering them sufficiently naturalised by the transaction,
sent them to Liverpool. They were their seized by the
Custom-house officers, and were relieved on petition,
and on condition that they should be sent back to New
York. They were accordingly sent, after being re-salted.
It was what was called the triangular trade that was
considered profitable, and why should they attempt to
interfere with it ? If the direct trade was more &Ivan-.
tageous, they would find all the capital of their mer-
chants embarked. They would never find that human
laws would work so well as the natural laws that regu-
lated commerce ; and say attempt to interfere with
these natural laws would be sure to be followed by wi.lste
and extravatzance. Why, corn was ni:inttfaetureti into
flour, and flax into linen, and bah these were Enr-pean
manufactures, and all the impositions upon Pe•itish ma,
nufectures amounted to a protection of British
owners. Now, look at the co sequences if th.y only
put a protection of ten zthilliuzs a ton on 13riii,sh
ping. In 1943 there ,tere 7,181,796 tens Brit sh
shipping entered inwards a:4l outiwuitls. and if t!;22; only
impose!: a protection ~f ten shilling. a too, it act
as a tax to that extent for the Broisil ship,.wner,
would be a tax of 3,590.0001 'loon the people t f •his
country. In 1845, there were 8,526,090 tons of British
shipping entered inwards and outwards and the raising
the freights to ten s'nillin..;s a to ik”p,s,d a tlx of
4.273,045/. upon the manufacturers of 13rrain. He did
not mean to say that the profits would be raised to that
extent; but, if they raised freights at all, it acted as a
tax to that amount ; and, if they did nut raise freights,
it acted as no protection ; and, at any rate, the people
of this country had been taxed to upwards of four mil-
lions sterling. When the propositions of Mr.
fluskisson were made known to Mr. Marriott
that gentleman had given his opinion very strongly.
It was stated by Mr. Marriott, a staunch friend to pro-
tection, that if the navigation laws were repealed, the
monopoly with the West Indies would be at an end.
I'he system operated most injuriously for the colonies,
and they had good reason to complain. It was a bad
system to disintegrate the colonies from the rest of the
country for the advantage of the mother country, as
was done by the operation of the navigation laws. It
was through the operation of such laws as these that
Portugal lost Brazils, this country the United States,
Portugal Java, and S' Cubt

milted to her Majesty's Government, that Cap-
tain Wynne had discharged his duties with
great diligence, fiklity, and discretion. That of-
ficer had evinced the greatest courage in the discharge of
his duties, and far from being instrumental in imposing
persons on the rate who were not entitled to it, he had
absolutely removed more than eleven hundred persona
from the rate whom he thought ineligible fur the relief.
Lard MONTEAGLE could bear ample testimony to
the ability and zeal with which the superintendants had
discharged their difficult, arduous, and trying duties. He
could, from his own knowledge speak as to the way in
which a great number of gentlemen had endeavoured to
carry out the wishes of their superiors. and if they had
in any one instance been mistaken in their judgment,
they were not to be blamed. It might be that Captain
Wynne had been mistaken in his views, but even if that
were so, yet, unless he had been guilty of wilful negli-
gence, in imposing persons on the rate, without ascer-
taining from his personal knowledge whether they were
entitled or not to the relief; he ought to be exonerated
fora all blame.

Lord BROUGHAM thought the evidence ought to
be produced upon which the report was made. Probably
Captain Wynne was right after all.
The subject then dropped,
The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from
the distillers of Scotland, against the reduction of the
duty on rum. By the Bill now before Parliament, ruin
could be introduced into this country at $ less duty than
Scotch spirits.
The Earl of CLARENDON said the petitioners had
waited upon him, and his Right Hon. Friend the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, and he must confess that they
did not make out any case why they should have addi-
tional protection.
Lord MONTEAGLE said he had a petition from Ire-
land of precisely the same effect as the one which had
just been presented. The case of Ireland, however, was
harder than that of Scotland, for Ireland had no draw.
back, where Scotland had.
After a few words from Lord STANLEY and Earl
GREY, the subject dropped.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 9.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
REGENT'S CANAL COMPANY (PADDINGTON
AND LIMEHOUSE RAILWAY AND BRANCH).
Sir WILLIAM CLAY moved the second reading of
this Bill.
Mr. WARBURTON said the present Bill was under the
consideration of the Woods and Forests, and he thought
the opponents of the Bill were entitled to ask, before it
was read a second time, what was the decision of the
Commissioners upon it—was it to be sanctioned by the
Crown, or must the opponents come up and resist
the Bill at an enormous expense ? If the Crown
refused to sanction the measure there would
be no necessity to oppose the Bill ; and he should, there-
fore, be glad to hear from the Noble Lord at the head
of the Wcods and Forests what he intended to do in

_pain is and her other extensive
colonies. Under the circumstances he might again ask,
whether there were any political or natural advantages
that justified their maintenance in future. He expected
that Adam Smith would be qu 'fed by the other side
against him, but on this question he had departed
from his usual g eod course by failing to give
the arguments on which he based his opinion.
He was quite willing to give Hon. Gentlemen the pro-
position, if they would give him the argument. All he
asked was, that if they quoted the opinion of Adam
Smith, they would read the sentence to an end, and not
tkheeep back
detee any
siv.,eaPvc;ltiwoansotfheit.safcTuwar, d itof wt
ha sestßatedh to ht
na
pire. Perhaps he might then make some admissions
which would simplify his arguments ; first of all he ad-
mitted that the defensive navy was of the first impor-
tance to the country; but they, on that side, also ad-
mitted that the mercantile navy was the nucleus from
which the defensive navy was supplied, inasmuch as it fur-
nished the elements for its maintenance. He would ad
mit that at once; but he denied that they were encourag-
ing the commercial navy by throwing protection around
them, or restricting them in their commercial intercourse
with other nations. These Were the drags which
cramped all their efforts. Restriction and protection
rendered them inferior to the navies of other countries.
When an English merchant wrote to an American and
ordered goods from him, he gave particular instructions
to ship them, if possible, by an American ship L.
fact they had only a home trade, because no other natio?,
although obliged to use foreign vessels, would ship their
merchandise on board ot British vessels. Tli• American
navy was
the second navy in the world, for their tonnage
amp unted to two and a half millions. It was said that
America had a great advantage over England in its
timber. For his part he was nut at all clear about it.
As far as regarded oak and teeth, they were in as good
a condition as the Americans were. 'I hen, with relyet
to wages, the wages of shipwri;,;hts in Siriderlatid, and
the other out ports, averaked li-cm 3s. 6d. to 4s. Well,
what are wages in the,United States ? Soy. n shillings a
day. One shilling higher than the wages .1 this country.
Then they came to iron; it could not be cheaper than in
this country. Carriage was certainly cheaper in I,,ngland.
What then was the me.ini:)g of this err—that they could
not protect themselves ? They would find that the cost
era vessel built in Loudon was 5/ or 6/ oler that of one
built. in Sunderland or Prisfo!. There was another
thing asserted, as emitling the British shipowners to
some protection, namely, that they could not navigate
their ships as cheaply from this c•antre as from 'oreign
ones. It was stated that the Swedes and Danes had less
wages, and that they lived on biscuits and oil, and that
it would be a great convenience to be enabled to tak-
them. If that was the case, how was it that the Ameri
cans manned their navy principally with British sea-
men? how was it that they paid them higher wa-

_ 'russian vessels, with a tonnage of 22,688 tons. He
would now ask why they were told of the benefits and advan-
tages of free and unrestricted competition with the world. It
could surely not be evidenced by those returns. He hoped the
House would not be misled by clamour on this subject, and
would not take any steps that would be injurious to British
commerce, to the wealth of England, and the varied interests
supported by this protection. The Hon. Member then referred
to Mr. Hetchinson's returns of the shipping of the United
Kingdom during 1816 and 1826, which showed that there had
been an increase in the number of vessels. An argument
might be drawn from this, that if they could maintain si large
an amount of shipping, that they had not suffered much from
the competition to which they were subjected; but it must be
remembered that there had' been an immense increase in
the exports and imports. In the article of cotton there had
been, in 1816, sixty millions of pounds imported, while in
1826 there had been one hundred and fifty millions, and in
1843, six hundred and seventy three millions. In wood, wine,
tobacco, tea, wool, coffee, dry stuffs, alkali, and manures of all
kinds, who could fail to perceive that there had been the most
incredible traffic, which must necessarily have given great
employment to the shipping interest of this country, had it not
been for the competition in the carrying trade, which they had
experienced ?—that competition, which was now sought to be
made more severe by the removal of the protection which it
possessed. He purp ,rely abstained from going into further
details. it was stated that if the Committee sat upon these
laws, certain evidence might be given which would show that
the shipping i terest were fettered with restrictions which
would not be known without that investigation. But if that
wer'• the object of the Hon. Gentleman, why did he not state
that as a reason for his motion? Why did he confine himself
to the alleged injury which he said these laws did to the com-
merce of the country, and make statements of the most un-
founded nature with reference to this subject—assuming that
they imposed an addition on freight of 10s, per ton, and were
a taxation on the commerce of the country to the amount of four
and a half millions.
Mr. RICARDO begged to correct the Hon. Gentleman.
He only put an hypothetical case.
Mr. LIDDELL said that that was the reason why he
objected to the statements of the Hon. Member.--( Hear.
hear.) Passing over that, however. he would say, if the
Government would fully take the question up, and appoint a
committee, he would have no objection to their doing so, pro-
vided they gave him an assurance that before they removed
protection they uou!d remove restriction.—( Hear, hear. )
That, however, was so much better stated the Shipownet-
Society that he would take the liberty of reading their senti-
ments on the subject. The Hon. Member here read extract-
from a report of that siciety to the effect " that the shipowners
idvanced no claim to exclusive protection, hut if for the
purposes of the State, and for questions of puhle
prudence burdens had been imposed upon them, then
did not think they should be placed on the %sm.
footing with these who were free from them. "
Upon his honour and conscience, be considered, if they re-
moved that protection which the British shipping enjoyed at
present, that these important interests would decline, and they
should appear in the eyes of foreign nations in a ridiculous
light, if they carried out the principles of free trade with re-
spect to shipping to the extent proposed. They wanted to
'aka hi . .

Mr. DUNCOMBE gave notice, that on the 18th inst.
(that day fortnight), he should move for leave to bring
in a Bill for the repeal of the rate-paying clauses in the
Reform Bill.
RESOLUTIONS OF THE RAILWAY BOARD.
Mr. EDWARD ELLICE said that, as he understood
that the Right Hon. Gentleman at, the head of the rail-
way board intended that night to state what were the
intentions of the Government with respect to railway
business, he (Mr. Ellice) should defer the question of
which he bad given notice until the House should have
heard that exposition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER trusted
that the Hon. and Learned Member for Bolton would
defer the resolutions standing on the paper with respect
to the House of Keys, in order to give his Right
Hon. Friend an opportunity of laying his statement
before the Howe.
Dr. BOW RING would have great pleasure in con-
curring in the opinion of his Right Hon. Friend, and
would postpne hie motion until the 18th inst.
IMPORTATION OF SALT INTO INDIA.
An Hon. BARONET, who stood so closely under the
chair t.ha►t he could not be seen, asked a question of the
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Board of Control,
the purport of which was to inquire whether a regula-
tion had been sent out respecting the importation of salt
into India.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said that the Home authori-
ties found oa inquiry that the complaints of the im-
porters of salt were well founded, and they had accord-
ingly sent out instructions to repeal the regulations of
the Indian Government, and to give the importers of
salt the advantages of the bonding system of 1836.
RAILROADS IN INDIA.
Lord MAHON inquired whether the Right Hon.
Baronet the President of the Board of Control had re-
ceived auy report on railways in In lie, and, if so, whether
he had any objection to lay it on the table of the House?
Sir J. HOBHOUSE said that the report of the Com-
missioners sent out to India in June. 1845, had been
male, which was received on July 4th, 1846. That
report had never been ma -e public, and he did not know
whether the Noble Lord had seen it. He had not the
slightest objection to present the report if it was desired.
He had also received a communication from the Go-
vernor-General respecting the lands to be taken for the
railroads, which 'might accompany the report.
Mr. HUME wished to ask, whether the Right Hon.
Baronet had any objections to lay any papers or dis-
patches also that accompa tied the report c n the table.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE had no objection to produce
the papers which were necessary to show the terms of
the engagements.

the matter. The Crown had conceded certain rights to
Mr. Greenhaugh, who had built a villa in the Regent's-
park, at an expense of 20,0001., under the pro-
tection of the Government, who covenanted that
this property should not be interfered with, without his
consent, and theref ore if the Crown sanctioned this
scheme it would cola mit a direct breach of good faith.—
(Hear, hear.) Mr. Greenhaugh's villa would be within
thirty feet of the railway, and as that gentleman had
invested his money, relying on the honour of the Crown,
he should propose that the second reading of the Rill
should be postponed until such time as the Woods and
Forests came to a decision upon the subject.
Lord MORPETH said a matter of good faith between
a subject and the Crown ought not to be trifled with.
He had received many deputations, both of the sup-
porters and the opponents of the Bill, and although he
might not have said anything upon the second reading,
he certainly should have asked for a postponement of
the committal of the Bill till the Government had had
an opportunity of consulting their engineers and law
advisers on the subject.
Sir B. HALL moved that the Bill be read a second
time that day six months,

Colonel SIBTHORP supported the motion of the
Hon. Member for Ilarylebotie. This was another at
tempted inroad up an private property by speculators,
and he would oppi use it to the utmost. It was his duty,
and he hoped he should always fearlessly perform his
duty, to raise hi a bumble voice against all aggression
upon private property. He would always oppose what
he considered (In unjust interference with the rights of
British subjectts. It was all very well to say thet it was
for the public good—no such thing. It was nothing mon,
than aggrandisement that was sought by a gang of specu-
lators, to encourage the grossest kind of gambling. This
country was once called " the land of freedom, but if
the Government went on in this manner, encouraging
these speculators, tine country would be nothing more
nor less than a land of oppression and lyranny.
Sir W. CLAY thought the better course would be to
allow the Bill to be read a second time, and reserve any
future proceedings upon the Bill until the Government
had had the opport unity of consulting with the authori-
ties and their legal advisers upon the subject of the rela-
tions existing betwe en the Crown and the tenants.

. this Committee were granted, he would undertake to
show that the British shipowners needed no protection
In the year 1814, at the close of the war, when the Eng-
lish ports were not very acceptable, and when they were
still under the Navigation Laws of Charles 11., in that
year there were 8,975 British ships in port, representing
a tonnage of 1,248,000 tons, and 5,286 foreign ships, re.
presenting 699,287 tons. In the year 1824 there were
ships representing 1,797,320 tons, and foreign ships re-
presenting 759,541 tons. In 1845, when no less than
twenty-seven treaties had been carried into effect, there
were ships representing 4,310,639 tons in port, and fo-
reign ships representing 1,735,000 tons, showing a con-
siderably greater proportion of British and foreign ships.
lie had made a calculation of the protected and unpro-
tected tonnage of this country since 1826. The protected
tonnage were the ships belonging to Canada
and this country ; and those unprotected tonnage
belonging to foreign countries, who traded with Great
Britain. In 1826, the protected tonnage was 778,879 ;
in 1844, it was 3,012,133 ; showing an increase of
1.233,224 tons, or 69 per cent In 1826,
the unprotected tonnage was 1,905,176 ; in 1824
it was 4,447,152. Showing an increase of
2,578,976, or 135 per cent. These facts he thought
proved satisfactorily, that protection had not operated
beneficially for the navy. They ought, therefore, to
look to some other means of encouraging that branch of
the service than the navigation laws. Hon. Members
may depend upon it that the extension of factories in
the towns would ensure the extension of the navy, and
if they looked to the effects of the relaxations which
had been made by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, it
was extraordinary to see how these relaxations
had worked for the better. In proof of this,
he would just refer to the article of timber.
In 1843, the year before the restriction of the duty o
timber, there were in that trade 1,841 ships, represent-
ingethe
a tonnage of 689.731. In 1845, the year alt_r,ifil.
reduction of the duty, there were employed in the '
ber trade 2,608 ships, representing 964,276
showing an increase in the course of one year•
of
nine months ending the 10th Oct.,
than two thirds. Let them now !sic' tl'e quantityin the
ships employed in the Foreign and Britishtrade of more
in the cog
1844,
Ba4n6. tuns;
Now, they
responding nine months endieg 10th Oct.,
all knew that there were great relaxationl
months ending
s between these
months ending in 1846,
periods. They found, then, that. in the ninean din
the nine
in 1844, there were employed 4,352,821;
loved 5,153,631
2,111 ships,
tons; showing an increase in the last year
there were emP ,0 .
in t' at time
for the five years ending 1839 ; the inereasz
for the five
represented 1,503,673 ton, and the increase
These were
years ending 1845 was 2,055,600 tons'
and above 800,000 tens, Let them take the colonial trade
If he had ill
facts awl figures which spoke volumes.od of any iion.
the slightest degree made out to the
Gentleman that this law -how that
—if he had made out the lightensi,,re
~fticaeious than
relaxed duties as a principlit
w35/1. they botind to grant
protection or restriction, thenTwhee
were b . und to refute
the inquiry which he asked.
hire to. substantiate them
how 11,n3 ()"
his facts ar.d figures or a hi- „of Coannons in
before a Committee of the
owk
d the H,•
Umber thAn e ,Ise for thi‘
conclusion the Hon. :‘ •
had listened to ;lira throughout
i
attention with which they
his address.—(Cheers.) wa,,,hitsnuislietFvornlitnldicha,t),is
soraitttioend
Mr. M. GIBSON said that
interest, •
f mach and in
to the House a motion of ..,the origin
. doing so he
operation of which, he proposed t
the Hon.
of those laws, into the Th Hen. Member had
an inquiry sheuld take ?
- lacthe policy of these laws ,andprefaced
had called the attention of the nouse totne engin and history
his motion by questioning
ofpointed
• anomalies in the workingoutnotany
M these laws.
Hon. ember to any
course of conduct proposed Member, for the
If the
settlement of the question. Government
. gave their
The present motion
appointment of the Committee, they would
consent to the le with thr be
"n by

. .
:e this country one large workshop; but if their design
were carried out, he would ask, where would they recruit their
army and navy ? Not from the inhabitants of the crowded
cities, or from the ranks of factory labourers, but from those
engaged in maritime and in agricultural pursuits. They ought
not to fritter away those great defences, the welfare of which
had been committed to their charge.
Mr. HUME was not surprised that the Hon. Gentleman
objected to an inquiry, seeing that it could not fail to afford
the House an opportunity of ascertaining how injurious the
navigation laws had proved. Undoubtedly the Hon. Gentle-
man, as a protectionist, was bound to maintain the principle of
protection to the last ; but he could not blame the Govern-
ment for having carried out the principles of free trade, because
they had simply yielded to the wishes of the people. The
shipping interest was the only one that now looked for protec-
tion ; this was the more remarkable since treaties of recipro-
city had been entered into with other countries which offered
them advantages ; and by not availing themselves of
them they had committed a great mistake; but now
that the House and the Government had admitted that
protection was unjust to the community, and advantageous
only to the few, he was surprised that the Hon. Gentleman
could call upon the House to support him in maintaining the
last remnant of protection that remained.—( Hear, hear.)
He had referred so far back as 1816 to show that protection
mum not to be removed; but, after a great change had taken
place-''
in the opinions of the people and of that House, and no
'Government could now long continue which did not carry out
the principles of free trade to the utmost, for himself he
would say,
Do not stop with shipping; do not stop any-
where."—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Gentleman
had talked of the disadvantages under which Englishmen would
labour if this protection was removed ; but he (Mr. Hume)
could not understand why they could not compete with the
people of other countries if they gave them the means of doing
so by freeing their labour from injurious restrictions. He had
never concealed his opinion that the shipowners carried on
their business under great disadvantages, but the fault rested
with those who favoured protection, as food had been kept at a
high price, and their expenses had been proportionably high.
They had a fleet of six hundred South Sea whalers, but pro-
tection had allowed the United States to construct seven
hundred ships for a similar purpose. (An Hon. Member
opposite called the Hon. Gentleman's attention to a Com-
mittee which had sat on the subject of the navigation laws. )
The object of that Committee was to obtain a greater degree
of protection than heretofore, but the evidence in favour of
it broke down, still he admitted that whenever taxes bad been
imposed that the shipowners had more than their share of
them. The duties on timber were exceedingly heavy, on
foreign fir it was as much as 250/. per cent., but
if these restrictions had been removed, no doubt
the shipping would have increased. ( Hear, hear.)
But who was to blame? In 1833, when the Government
wished to remove the taxes upon timber, the protectionists
joined the corn protectors, if he might so speak, and threw out
the measure ; so that if the shipping in'erests had improved,
they had improved under great disadvantage ; but he apprea
hended that the time was not far distant when those who now;
supported this protection would be anxious to have it icenoteek
because he was of opinion that the interests of the 43ritiih
shipowner depended up:in perfect freedom, twit so lotig,Se this
Navigation Laws remained, his exertions a:44ld be eled
and no doubt it would be incontestably proved; if the Committle
were appointed, that those laws were not out,' injurioukto•tte
shipping interests at home, but in the coloniet, With rapect
reciprocity, he might tell the Hon. Gentleman (114r.ldell)
that Mr. Fluskisson found it necesbiry either A) .ado itt that
principle or to have our ships shut out entirelF from the natiots
on the Continent, and he adopted the prinesii: le wisely.. +Bs
(Mr. Hume's) opinion was, that every man_ who was in favoir
of Protection carried in his mind a principle of injustice.-?--
( Ironical cheers.) That was his interpretation of the meaning
of protection.—(Hear.) But one material thing to be ascer-
tained by such a Committee was, how far the navigation laws
had been modified; for he was correct in stating that modifi-
cations had taken place which might, on investigation, be
found to have destroyed those advantages which the Hon.
Gentleman was so desirous to have maintained. The colonies
had a right to he placed on an equal footing with this country
in respect to those laws, as he was at a loss to understand why
they should not participate in those reductions which had been
made in favour of similar interests at home. The Hon. Gen-
leman then read a paper to show that the navigation laws

Mr. H nit tho,ight the House should be decided by
the speech of the Woble Lord connected with the Woods
and Forests. He apprehended the railroad could not be
legally made through the park, and he hoped that ample
time would be given for the further consideration of the
Bill.

Mr. WILLIAMS said that the parties opposed to the
Bill were the ground tenants and the public at large.
These tenants apprehended that they were justly entitled
to the quiet possession of the park, and that they were
entitled to the protection of the Crows ; for it this were
not afforded the greatest apprehension would be ex-
cited among all Crown tenants. The company was a
pure speculative reffair, and the House should not coun-
tenance it in inflic ting an injury on the tenant of the
Crown. The Reqent's Park was one of the principal
lungs of the metropolis • but if they made a railway on
the banks of the canal ;he most favourite parts would
be deserted. That part of the park was now frequented
by carriages, and ladies and gentlemen on horse-
back, but they could not then frequent it, owing to the
danger to which their lives would be exposed, in con-
sequence of the horses taking fright at the noise of the
engines.

HOLYHEAD HARBOUR.
Mr. W. COLLETT said that he did not think that
the Government were making that progress with the
Holyhead Harbour which they ought to have made, and
he would accordingly ask of the Secretary of the Admi-
rrealstpyenwt
ihnagt st theep sn
nhnesrt r
uMn
taijnens t
ny
f' s
HGovernment
ahr ab vn en
rt,a
akne
dn
whether any additional powers are required for obtain-
ing possession of the lands adjoining the Refuge Har-
bour ; and if so, whether the Government are prepared
with
Mr.a Rfortr thsaatidputrhpaotseit?
was at first supposed that
the common consent of the parties interested would
have prevented the necessity of an application to Par-
liament, but as that supposition had proved fallacious, an
Act of Parliament was in preparation, and he
could assure the Hon. Member that not a day should be
lost. As to the harbour itself, the works were proceeding
under private contract.
Lord CASTLEREAGH desired to know, whether, in
consequence of the statements which had been made in
that House the Government intended to call upon
Captain Wynne for an explanation of his report.
Mr. WARD said that measures had been taken to
put the matter fairly before the House.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. AGLIONBY gave notice, that on Thursday the
18th instant, he should move for a return of all the en-
franchisements effected, or in progress of being effected,
under the Copyhold Commission Act. Also the esti-
mates made of all manors, and an explanation of what
was meant by fines arbitrary, and on what event these
fines became payable.

Sir C. NAPIER said the Hon. Gentleman had stated
the objections to the Bill so fully and so ably, that it
would be unnecessary for him to say anything on that
subject. He had had the honour that day to be
a member of a deputation which had waited upon
the First Commissioner of the Woods and
Forests upon the subject. The Noble Lord showed them
a plan of the railway, which he (Sir C. Napier) admitted
was certainly very beautifully drawn, but it struck him
very forcibly that the canal was to be sunk considerably,
• and the parts round it considerably raised, and that the
towing path was only to be raised one foot above the
canal, whereas, in the original plan, the height of the
path was to be six feet above the canal. The gentleman
mentioned was not the only one who had complained.
He wanted to know how long it would take to train
all the high-spirited horses to the noise of the
engines? But the greatest objection of all was
this. By a map which he held in his hand
it appeared that the railway would run between the
north and south banks, where there were no less than
forty houses, many of which were double, the gardens
attached to which sloped down to the banks of the canal,
and in fact looked out upon a very pretty river.
'rho towing path was not large enough ft r
a railway, so that additional ground wuukl have
to be taken by which the carriages would
be brought touch nearer the windows of thehou. es. If
the line was made in the way proposed what a pleasant
accompaniment the carriages nod the engines, snorting
and whizzing along, would be to a lady play ing.ra a piano-
forte in one of the houses.—(Laughter.) He thoutht
the parties ought to come towards Eustore-square by
some other route. No doubt, if the Government would
state that they would compel the parties not to
injure those houses, that the amendment would be with-
drawn.—(Hear.)
Sir 11, H. INGLIS commented upon the proceedings
which had taken place with respect to the Bill, and sug-
gested that the original motion and the amendment
should be withdrawn, and the Bill postponed until the
Government could make the necessary inquiries.
Lord MORPETH said that his Hon. Friend stated
that he gave his consent to the second reading of the
Bill. Now he did not wish that he should
be mistaken. What he said was this,
that until answers to certain inquiries were
made he did not feel himself authorised to prevent the
progress of the Bill. He would not vote himself tor the
second reading, but until he received the answer to
which he alluded he would not oppose it.--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. STRUTT said that he had no sufficient answer at
present to make to the observations of his Hon. Friend.
He considered that the question ought to be postponed
for a limited time.
Sir B. HALL then withdrew his amendment, that the
Bill be read that day six months.
Sir W. CLAY immediately withdrew the motion that
the Bill be read a second time that night, on the under-
standing that it was to stand over until some communi-
cation was received from the Commissioners of Woods
and Forests.
u
REGENT'S CANAL RAILWAY.
Mr. T S. DUNCOMBE
grralvle!: S borough a
from
f
the Regent's Canal Railway, o
Mr. HUMD.Er nOotNiceCtOhaPtPEtoßlnorOßr.,
he should
move fee a copy of all me • • •
mortals and petitions praying
fee the repeal of the duty on copper ore.
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT.
Mr. HUME also moved for a copy of the returns of
corporal and other punishments on board each or her
Majesty's ships in the royal navy, in each year from the
lit of January, 1844, to the 31st of December, 1846,
statinc the name, rating, nature of the offerce, date of
punishment,the number of lashes, and remarks of Com-
mender in-Chief ..r senior of as to -Illy excess of
punishments
or ocher wise, according to the schedules
published and ordered in the Admiralty instructions,
dated the Ist day of January, 1844, for the government
of her Majesty's naval service; stating also the number
of seamen and marines employed in each year, and
the average number flogged ; distinguishing the num-
ber of commissioned and warrant and pert} officer. ;
also, speeifying the names of her Majesty's ships and
vessels, and the names of the commtiedere, in which no
corporal punishments hare been inflicted in any of these I
years. Address for abstracts of the total number of men,

Mr. RICARDO presented a petition from the ship-
owners of South Shields, signed by 150 persons, and
representing above 400 proprietors, expressing their con-
currence in the present suspension of the Navigation
Laws, but praying that what little protection did remain
to them might be continued.

NAVIGATION LAWS.
Mr. HUDSON presented a petition from 200 ship-
owners of Sunderland against any alteration in the
Navigation Laws; also, a petition from the seamen of
Sunderland to the same effect.
Mr. lIIIME presented a similar petition from the
shipowners of Montrose, though he could not concur in

Mr.
M RICARDO then proceeded, in pursuance of the
notice he hid given, to move for a Select Committee to
inquire into the Navigation Laws. He begged to as.ure
the Hun, Member for Sunderland, that he did not seek
to abrogate these laws at present, but simply wished to
have an inquiry. In 1651, the Act was first
pa-sed, which passed under the name. of the
nav
altered
nedlau7
toa 1822,
dth2e2r
when a n,drib
laws hnandbiee„ntri.:. mt
Time to
time
modifies.
tion took place. In that year Mr. Wallace introduced
five separate Acts, to alter, explain, and amend the
law as it then stood. Shortly after this, the Reci-
procity Act of Mr. Huskisson was passed, which
tbtp.ohel
footing
ctnpier:dsgee
svteeht
nhretaa
Insmhoiiptt
ipohinnagd amendments.
was ,
nenof reignnrsorhane,reehoapaunednda countries
sincelorre of the
atdholitt
aae
wrebeahst t
observed,ai'idrt
t
furnished
thoseto_hr efficiency
est
rienmsdt existed, doa,
thef btru
that
toi
oppositermmt po motion
bohefnoni
ern
expressedhha
ens
he
e inquiry ; a course which
theffi i.,Hriienlyseo:f_th“eysioauvrigcatoimonmihad
woasugni
would
some
just
osttno b
tri
sne
an
dlfBt4:4oe.
laws.tte prNoocweedthedis Ctoominmvietstteie.
gate the subject submitted to their consideration,
but is consequence of the late period of the session at
which they were appointed, they found that it
e was •
not possible ta come to a satisfactory conclu-
sion. sion. They would, therefore, lay before the
house the necessity of their beikg re-appointed
at an early period in the next session." At an early
period of the next session the Committee was reap-
pointed, and they reported again, " Your Com-
mittee have been prevented by unavoidable cir-
cumstances from making that inquiry which
he importance of the subject demands, and they beg to
recommend that they be re-appointed at an early period
next session.—(Laughter.) They were not appointed at
an early period of the next session, he could not tell why,
but as they acknowledged the importanceof the inquiry,
fairdoubt
th ofa
that
the h efficiencyy o. fsh tohnel
dn navigation
gt aa tki
taken
a
int off;wni but t
he f hreecini shouldred be
laahad• s ,e xi
tp rwe as soneed
ch
duepniwedherethetheyinvheasdtiglaefttio
thought he would be enabled to show so much
ton!' thee eniv ialn
nefaffnetcntrse
rs a nd
and
• tice and oppression towards
mischiefisbeiphpieinf g °off tthhee coluanw-
try ; so much of trips
their colonial fellow-subjects, that he would have a
right to demand that inquiry from the justice of
the House which was denied by their courtesy. The
Hon Member then read from the evidence of Mr.
Somes before the Committee, to show that, in the opi
nion of that eminent shipowner, the laws, as then exist-
ing, were mischievous and absurd, whether as they re-
gard the interests of the shipawner3 or the manufacturers
Mr. Somes, in his evidence, further stated that many
sacrifices were made by the home merchant and mana-
iacturer tar c.e parpoae of eocoui agnag luarittiKt, C,
merce ; an 1 he con,,idered that some --tcriiizte should be
made for the general security of the country ; but the
question had never been put in such a light as to raise

•
to principles which allowed
h - appointed • • tee to ain the year 1845,
the Comratt inquiry
was the same as that
. sought by the
the object of whose
• The report of that committee was, that they
present motion.
to conclude their . inquiry, and they recommended
were enable
t of Chad committee, with a viewof • •
continuing
the re-appointmeo
e d i '
and that the same
hieh they --oramenec . st must have occurred
the inquiry w
most Hon. Members that •
to the minds of . . in consequence of
the navigation laws,
commercial changes which had taken place in this
the great comm few
years, that a
country within these necessity would arise
acting in strict accordance
reasons existing for the. continuance. of the navigation
laws, considerable modifications would be required.
He was quite sure that the opirtion expressed by the Hon.
the Committee should be impartial, would be
Member, that
Member
assented to by every Hon. present. On the part of
he wished to see the appointment of an
of the Government,
for an inquiry into
impartial Committee, selected of such persons whose position
and talent would enti'le the report of the Committee to the
attention of the it,;use. He wouLl not nowt enter into the
merits of the case, he would reserve that. until the report of
the Committee had been received, and the House knew whether
the Committee would recommen I legislative interf retice with
those laws. The Committee which his Hon. Friend had moved
for should be ect•erted to by the Government.
Mr. LIDDELL regretted that I,e could not agree with the
motion of his Hon. Friend, and he hoped the House would
bear with him for a short time, while he stated the grounds of
his opposition to the motion to the House- —( Hear hear.)
He looked with suspicion to the quarter from whence,th mo-
tion
originated, notwithstanding the disclaimer e
of the Hon.
Mover that he did not intend to abolish the • •
navigationlaws.
The whale object of his speech was not so much to show the
necessity of any inquiry into the subject,
but rather to point
out the hardships endured by the shipowners of this country.
Adam Smith had said that the na •
vigation laws were the most
essential bulwarks to the extended commerce of the country,
The object of the Committee, appointed in 1845, was totally
mdifferent from that sought by the Hen Member t
in his present
otion. Twenty yt ars light h ?tad .
e movud for a Committee

operated injuriously in ibis respect, particularly in reference to
the conveyance of grain between Montreal, New York, and
this country. The time was come when they could no
longer delay such an inquiry as was demanded. If, in that
inquiry, it could not be proved that the removal of these re-
strictions would tend to the advantage of the country, if it
could not be proved that they would promote an increase of
their seamen, be should not be the person to urge their
abandonment. He was glad that his Hon. Friend had brought
forward the motion. He would say more, that the Hon.
Gentleman was not more anxious to forward the shipping
interest of the country, than he was. If they would allow
the importation of timber and materials into the country,
without duty, their ports would not be overburdened with
colonial shipping. They would establish England as the work-
shop of ships; and he knew no reason why they should not
manufacture ships much better and much cheaper than in any
other country—it was the natural manufacture of the country
—whilst the Irishmen objected to the sea, the Scotehman and
the Englishmen had an affection for it, they had stopped the
natural bent of their inclinations by their course of legislation.
He would conclude by seconding the motion.
Sir WALTER JAMES said he had paid the strictest at-
tention to the speech of the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for
Stoke-upon-Trent, of which he could not speak too highly,
and which was well deserving of the name he hornes.
He must say, that it appeared to him, no fair groundv
had
been made to resist inquiry, and that when such an inrmira.odedd
been conceded by the Government, and
had
been demanded
a'ssump-
by the parties themselves—it was a piece of gratuitous
could
see
tion on the part of some gentlemen to resistiti
was a sort of
no reason why they should do sto —of
those gentlemen
high-flying patriotism on the
P°itn;
sibility to say, "this shall not
but inquiry and investi-
gation. Why, what was asked? Nothing
had something to conceal, and
It looked as tehewirill neovrtnpermreit6
s of the debility of their case. The
that they were conscious
dto him to bear a most remarkable analogy
to come forward, and
outpobnelLarw
motion appeare
• law upon t'+e • -
to one made by Mr. Cobden, for an. inquiry into the

said that theft Were sonde hardships under the operation of the
nivigition lift, still these laws were known to all the world,
and the shipowners of the world had only to act in conformity
with those laws 1n order to prevent the recurrence of those
Lordships. The Hon. Member had said that the navigation
laws did not foster the commerce and shipping of the country,
and quoted as a proof the d.flbrent prices paid for labour con-
nected with the shipping trade in various parts of the world.
Mr. Huskisson had said that the navigation laws were twofold,
first, to maintain a great commercial marine for the purpose
of national defence, and, secondly, to prevent any other nation
from engrossing too much of the navigation of the world. The
coasting and fishing trade were also materially affected by the
operation of those laws. Mr. Huskisson also said that the
altered condition of the world, referring to the period at the
close of the long war, when the British navy had swept all hos-
tile fleets from the face of the earth, demanded the existence of
thew navigation laws, and that, so far as exclusion of oth r
nations was c..neerned, it was right to grant a perfect mono-
poly of the carrying trade to the shipping of England, not for
the purpose of affording advantages to the shipowners, but be-
cause the merchant service was always to be looked
upon as the nursery for the British navy. He
(Mr. Liddell) little thought that when the shipowners were
willing to give their sanction to a temporary suspension of the
navigation Liws a short time since, that that would be made use
of as a peg upon which to hang the present Committee. The
present Parliament must be dissul:ed to a few in tithe, wit; he
thought it was not wise on the part of the Government to
commence an inquiry of so complicated a nature as the present
would be. He was sure the No)le Lord had plenty of other
work to attend to than entutni.oice so protracted and lengthened
an inquiry, as an inquiry into the navigation laws would prove.
The wages of a shipwright in London was 6s. per day. bile
at Toulon it was only one franc and a half per day. There eats
no more certain indication of s prosperous country than that
wages
Hon.aienigesanartidh ivieentmheyb rieh,rcsieg. high prices of food.—( Cheers and
tcHorofoudnhni.ctiftuerh d,.aeheers ) He should be glad to hear that fact con-
aeidfedthetyo wereread
abreletutrons of Britishdoso.The
enormously
rifts,
.3dß:rinfiotorli esuBhis4gl2yvn, ships thatand hilaidlBp a4s4s,e
whichthe
showed Sound
thein I
proportion
olrtitirio6n,
ei:ns,erheatsoedberrcaorepwarhaiteivhelhyaodnspthrueedgecurpeahsee.mulsrt,
say
that there would hove been ample means to give
e nployrnent to British shipping, bad it not been
for the very great and the unequal competition
to which they were exposed. He would now take those
countries,!in both of which the shipping interest had to contend
to show the effect in 1844 of that competition. He would take
Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Prussia, to show the propor-
tion of ships belonging to those countries that entered the port
of Hull, as compared with British shipping. He would first of
all compare with Sweden. There were of 'British ships 30,
with a tonnage of 5,387 tons, and of Swedish ships 120, with
a tonnage of 1,400 tons. Of Norwegian vessels there were 29,
with a tonnage of 3,043 tons; while of British vessels there
were only 2, with a tonnage of 160 tons. With Denmark the
proportion was still more unfavourable. The British ships
were 37, while of Danish ships there were 492, with a
tonnage of 34,445 tons. The proportion with Prussia
was 80 British ships, with a tonnage of 10,812 tons.
and 222 P

the most opposite b'eliefs. The Hon. Member for Stoke said that the navigation laws were only fair-weather laws, and
would not suit the country in times of difficulty and danger.
The Hon. Member for Westmoreland said that the Committee
appointed in 1844. was not a Committee to inquire into the
navigation laws. He (Mr. Bright) thought that it was not,
upon the reference ; but he appealed to any Member, on that
Committee, whether the principal bearing of the evidence,
brought forward on behalf of the shipowners, was not to show
that the depress-ca existing in the shipping trade, was
to be attributed to the navigation laws, under the
Reciprocity Act ; and if the Honourable Member
had read further into the examination of Mr. G. F.
Young, he would have found that that gentleman stated that
a relaxation of the navigation laws caused the misfortune of
the fall in the shipping interest. As an instance, he would
state that a gentleman some time since purchased cotton in
Havre when the prices were rising in England, with a view of
bringing it into market, but the navigation laws prevented any
American cotton whatever being brought to this country, and
the parties were obliged to send it back to the United States,
and then bring it over into this country, thus leaving the
market unsupplied, and inflicting a serious evil on
the merchants. Another instance was in the know-
ledge of the Hoe. Member for South Lancashire.
A ship arrived in Liverpool from the United States to take
in a cargo of British manufactures for Hong Kong. An
objection was raised by the collector, and after some discussion,
it was decided that the vessel could not go to Hong Kong, and
a cargo worth 20,000/. or 30,0001. was obliged to be sent on
to Canton ; and, in these circumstances, he for one should vote
for the inquiry proposed. ,
Lord SANDON said, that if a question of such moment
was to be brought forward at all, it ought to be brought for-
ward by the Government, instead of by a siitgli. Member of
the House. He thought that an inquiry was necessary to be
made from time to time, to see how the laws were o orating
and to see if it was necessary to change their principle. He
did think it was not right of the Government to leave a ques-
tion of this magnitude without guidance or responsibility in
the hands of a private Member of the Howie. He thought
that some inquiry was absolutely necessary, for the purpose of
protecting the shipowners in their present helpless state, and he
should therefore support t to motion.
Mr. L 4.130UC HERE thought it very unust, to ski that
ttlis question ought to be in the hauls of a private Member of
that House He differed very much from his Noble Friend,
for he thought this a very fit goestion for the House to deter_
mine. These laws should be the subject of cautious, deliberate,
nd earefte ronsideratien, to see how far any modification of
t hem should extend. H s Hon. Friend showed it was alto-
:,ether w-rottg to leave the q mention to be brought on in the
House of Commons. When be retro nbered what subject had
been brought on in that Ht use. he hoped he never should see
he time when any Government of this country should assume
such a control in the House of Commons, as to reply to any
lewb -r bringing forward a motion, that it was not
a fit subject for a Committee -f the House to consider.
lie could appeal to the recollection of that House, whether the
gravest and met important questions had not been dealt with
under all Governments in this manner ; gin stions affecting the
shipping interest, the timber duties, an other matters involv
mg the greatest considerations had been IT ;ht fi

roug forward on
the motion of the independent members, and referred to Com-
mittees. There had been questions involving colonial interests
recently investigated by Select Committees. Undoubtedly it
was• impossible to deny, that inquiries of this sort, might in a
certain degree, be thrown in doubt in the minds of persons
connected with the interests to which they referred.
He confessed he saw no objection whatever to the motion, nor
could he agree with the Noble Lord as to the course the Go•-
vernment ought to have pursued. He did not think the Go-
vernment or the House ought to interfere with independent
Members bringing forward motions of this kind, nor did he con-
sider the Government would be committing themselves to any
opinion on the navigation laws, by assenting to the appointment
of the Committee. There was no difficulty whatever in the
course. The Government and the House, he was persuaded,
in the altered circumstances of the country, the change which
had taken place in commercial policy, and in consideration of
the respect which was due to their great colonial interests,
whose prosperity was so materially affected, should consent to the
question being scrutinised. A Select Committee was the best
place for that inquiry to take place, as he believed the repre-
sentatives of the colonial interests would be then duly consi-
dered and reported. The colonial interests in the recent
changes which had taken place had complained that they had
been badly used, and if such a Committee were appointed
they would have an opportunity of fairly stating their case.
In the petitions which the representatives of those interests
had preferred to this House they asked an opportunity of
doing so; if so, there could be no better or fairer means than
a Committee fairly selected by the House.—(Hear,
hear.) He must protect against the doctrine laid
down by the Noble Lord, that it was the duty
of the Government to preclude independent Members
from bringing forward such motions as this. As a member of
the Government, he would never shrink from a fair degree of
responsibility for the measures submitted by them to the House,
but on the other hand, he would never question the right of
independent Members to bring before the House any question
which they considered to require investigation. He did not
think the House should refuse to accede to the present motion,
because it was not brought forward by a Minister of the Crown.
If the Committee were appointed and submitted their re-
port, then it would be for the Government to con-
sider whether they should take its recommendations
in whole or in part, and act upon them. He did not
think, therefore, he would be acting right in opposing the
appointment of the present Select Committee.—( Hear. )
Lord G. BENTINCK differed altogether from the Right
Hon. Gentleman, and concurred with the Noble Lord the
Member for Liverpool. He did no, because he thought on
the present question, affecting so greatly their national policy,
her Majesty's Government should net permit it to be sent up
stairs to a Select Committee, especially when the proposer and
seconder of the motion had compared the large and important
commercial interests of the country to pedlars with packhorses,
and that trade in shipping should be as free as trace in shoes.
—( Hear, hear.) If that wa. the spirit in which a great in-
quiry was to be conducted, it must be clear to the Govern-
ment, to the House, and the shipping interest of the country.
that the animus of taus inquiry could be d ff..rent to th t
which actuated the Committee of 1e44. That Committer
did not inquire into the operation or policy of the navigation
laws, but merely the state of the commercial marine of the
country, with the view as to the best measures to
encourage the shipping interests. The object of the Hon.
Member for the Potteries, on the other hand, was to weaken
the shipping interests of the country—to gr'nd down the ship-
wrights of London from 6s. a•day to 3s. 6th. And in doing so
he would lead them to believe that 'the effect of repealing the
corn-laws would be something in effect, to the resolution of the
Irish soldier, who spent 2a. 6d. out of 61 a day. They were
old that the effect would be to dimirosn the rate of freights.
10s. a ton; whereas they were only 7.. 6d. at the
present time.—( Hear, hear.) These were the view,
which the Honourable Member for the Potteries brought
to the inquiry. They had also been told th .t through the
operation of the navigation laws this c untry had lost the
British colonies. To that he (Lord Geo. tientiock) would
answer, that history was mistaken if that event had not arisen
from the imposition of a tax on tea by the Parliament of this
country.—( Hear, hear.) They had likewise been informed
that Portugal had lost the Brazils through the operation of the
navigation laws.
Mr. RICARDO—No, no, I did not say so.

After a few words from Sir W. JAMES,
Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that It was his intention to give
his support to the proposition of the Hon. Member. The ques-
tion was, whether there should not be an inquiry into the ope-
ration of the Navigation Laws, and whether there should not
be an opportunity given of ascertaining whether the
maintenance of them as they at present existed,
would really be for the interest of commerce and manufactures,
and also whether or not the maintenance of these laws were
necessary for the purpose of securing the maritime defence of
the country. The Government, he considered, might consent
to this inquiry, without pledging themselves as supporting or
assenting to the views of any Hon. Member. The inquiry was
proposed by an individual Member of Parliament, and be (Sir
R. Peel) apprehended that those who assented to the inquiry
were not in any respect bound by the sentiments of that Hon.
Member. The Committee were not bound to give effect to
any preconceived opinions, but simply to examine and inquire
into all the various bearings of this question. It had been re-
marked in the course of the debate, that the navigation laws
had existed for two hundred years, and that they had their
origin in the time of the Protectorate. He (Sir R. Peel) ap-
prehended that they had lasted much longer; he apprehended
that the navigation laws were simultaneous with maritime
enterprises. But he would not stop to examine into the
their antiquity. They had been compelled already to relax
these laws, not on theoretical principles, bat because they felt
it necessary for positive reasons to do so. In 1815 the naviga-
tion laws had been relaxed, not OR any speculative notions, but
because America was determined to introduce the principle of
this country, and to levy a duty not only on their ships, but
also upon their manufactured goods. In point of fact, the
only point in (nestion was, whether they would give a prefer-
en-e to this amount in the American market, or whether they
would relax these laws for the purpose of extending their centi-
me teal relations with the United States? It was a simple
question between the exclusion of that commerce from the
American markets er the relaxation of the navigation laws.
A4ain, when Mr. Huskisson modified these laws in 1824, it
was not from any theoretical principle he acted, but
hesause Prussia was imitating the example of the United States.
Ttiey would find, in the speech of Mr. Huskissou on that oca
cision, a full mil .na•itin on the subject of the treaty with
Prussia. Prussia coinplaaed fria. her vessels .ere subjected
rtoettnal;ye
bdyis.st,:lvb;et,ettaig.ng.e.. in British p .rts, and she was about to
British vessels to the same disadvan-
tages in the ports of Prussia, and she was determined not to
stop there ; she would go still further, for she would also sub-
ject British goods to higher rates. It was from fear of the
operation of those laws on British commerce that Mr: Hus-
ks'oh felt it his duty to admit Prussian vessels to greater pri-
viesees in ti,e fort of Great Britain ; and these privileges
were afterwards extended to Norway and Sweden and other
countries. It would be Mr the Committee to inquire whether
the recent changes in their commercial policy would not render
other changes in these laws necessary. He did hope that
this House would take care that the Committee was
so constitut“d that in any conclusion it might come to, it would
by its deliberate and dispassionate investigations, secute for
itself the respect of Parliament, and the confidence of the
country.
Mr. HUDSON said that it was his intention to give his
as,

vote against the inquiry. He believed that any alteration in
these laws would be injurious alike to the commercial and
maritime interes's of the country. He belie's, d that it would
be particularly injurious to the seamen, and. b,lieving' this,
he was averse to any agitation of the question. He should,
therefore, vote against any inquiry.
Mr. HUTT said it had never been the practice of this Hon ;e
to confide an inquiry of this description to. Aie flo'yernment.
He could not conceive that her • Majesty's Ministers Would op-
pose the proposition, for he remembered that he hi a former
session was permitted to have a Corrimittee to inquire into one
of the most important laws of the cointrp—to have an
inquiry into the Act of Settlt;ment ,itself._ :Now, he
might quote the opinion of Mr. ;Burke_, and" that had
been given in favour of this inquiry. donsider that
this was a subject on which the interests el, the 'conntry were
to be sacrificed, or that the whole of its propertylWas depen-
dent on the navigation laws. He •di'd• hot think that the pro-
perty of this country depended on the 7th and gth of Victories
chapter 38. He did net think that.this House would interfere
to prevent an inquiry into the navigation-lawi.. He did think
that the effect, if his inquiry were refused, would be to pre..
vent the progress of civilisation, and that it would therefore be
wiser to institute the inquiry.--(Divide, divide.)
Mr. DISRAELI was anxious, before the House came to a
division, that the House should rightly understand what was
the feeling of the gentlemen on his side of the House with
regard to this inquiry. He believed that there was no feeling
on this side of the House to prevent the inquiry on the other
side of the House. The question before them was not whether
the House should make any permanent alteration in the navi-
gation laws, and there was nothing in the feeling on that side
of the House to prevent that inquiry. The feeling was not
against any necessity to go into inquiry, but whether in the
present position of affairs it was advisable or. not. The
gentleman en his side of the House was not indisposed
to go into this inquiry—(Loud laughter)—but the real
question before the House was whether this should be a_per-
manent or only a temporary measure. The Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel) had made a very plau-
sible statement, and grounded upon it an equally plausible
scheme.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) thought that
this was a very proper reason why an investigation should be
instituted by the House of Commons, and he did think that
the time had come when this investigation should be made,
and he thought that the doctrine which had been propounded
was a very dangerous doctrine. The reply which he would
make to that doctrine was, that it would be unwise to institute
this Committee, unless it was to investigate the whole of the
circumstances, and how far their results would affect the whole
of the commercial interests of the country, especially when
they proposed to make such treat changes. The real question
or as whether they should make this change only tor temporary
pu poses, or for permanent pur, oses ; and this was nut only a
commercial but also a constitutional question. The measures
proposed by Mr. Haskissen were not only speculativ
measures, but were intended to be of a permanent chat-
racier. The question before them, therefore, was not
so much whether the investiga ion should take place or whe•
riser it should riot, hut whet: er :hes sheia,d be bound by this
tiecnion to a petunowni measui e ? It should be recollected
that this was no new subject—tile- this was tint an occasion'on
which they needed interdiation, or of the native of which they
were illsinf.mined; and be was surprised that it had not been
taken in.o cnsideration by the Government before, and that-it
had not Ueen trequeotly made the subject of consideration in
the Cabinet G.uricil. It. was not a.question whether this 'or
that Ministry should remain in riwer, and lie thought that it
was The duty to. ;tie Government to make the investiga-
tion sought tor. He would ask the House whether
ibis was a question, the alteration of which was to
be permanent, or whet her this was only to be
a temporary , auspens on of the navigation !awl?
and he did not think, that et the beginning of
suil a question as this should be proposed.
but under the cirininstaoces, +hey had this consolatiJo, that
howl-ver it w,a concluded, it could not affect the state of the
country. But the p, qu-stion was nor as to the state Of
the navigation laws, but whether they should be only tempi-
rartly altered, or whether there should be a permanent &ill,-
boo, and he contended that this was not so muchdapar I ques-
tion as one for the Prime Minister of State, ae.
ed He would
Government under him. He (Mr. Disrati)id
make this observation before the
ss
Senses
matter of inquiry for
oet
anxiousor the
to
again repeat that this was not so much
the House as rhe Ministry ef the

Lord GEO. BENTINCK—There was no doubt that the
Hon. Member at all events attributed the loss of the Brazils
to the colonial system, by which she had not been allowed to
trade with other countries than Portugal. That was a position
to which he (Lord George Bentinck) could not accede. For
these reasons, he would take the same course as the Noble
Lord the Member for Liverpool, and resist the inquiry.
Lord SANDON said he did not intend to oppose the
motion.
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said, then he must have
mistaken the intention of the Noble Lord, for be believed he
had intimated that he would resist the motion altogether. The
0 present
niod
tedooufb histt
inquiry.thba t
back
that
Hon. Member for Hull (Mr. Hutt) had endeavouredhetowocuistee
the members on this (the Protectionists)
e re supportedopp sea the
to Committee
m i trt, :et .
• in, but he (Lord George Bentincl.)
hithertoang oani nsGtentuiopposingersmu oe
nd .
had
dee
yiaittotrioen wouldt. i
resist
seTi
sohtret
every boat he had sailed
could trust those friends by whom he was surrounded, and had
laws.they opposed
This
seemed
e(i present
to be motionth epobnel:
no doub., that acting on the principles of consistency they had
qoewestion was one which only Mr. MITCHELL said, it appeared the Noble Lord who
rhaeenother turned on
of 1844, because they had agreed to it, and it proceeded from
could b.!
settled by an inquiry, and the present time was
had just
rodponwsenr,
and
dd
could do so with perfect safety. A
deal of e when they
great had been said
about freights, but his opinion was that they
materially affected by a repeal of the
reason,cethiapuel themselves,
the• fl• hvees
Now,wnavigationhi
thele n
would not be
principal benefit would be to check iii
,navigaticn laws. The
was a great demand for shipping 01 freights when there
hear.) While on this
subject
that the reason why our he must remark,
fully compete with those
of ships could not success-
inefficiency of the captains.foreign countri S, V 4, the
He had seen letters from
He had repeated proofs of this.
abroad about charting ships, and ex-
pressing a desire to have
any ships but French or English.
The fault was not •in the ships
of th;. country, which were as
.‘d as thoso ~i
sheicsonderw friends

a private member of ie
Crown. It was not a subject 013
on. It was an old su
bp. which
t"onethe w
hHouseeh
had required
been
con_
sidered d he thought that the gentle
sidered for two hundred years, an
on his side of the House had only to assume the position
tran
oei astif
ytheir conduct, and they might have the argument
of- the
on ourable Gentleman who proposed this committee.
This was a matter which, of all others, was of a constitutional
character, and one which, of all others, ought to be out of the
power of the Government, and one, at least, on which they
ought to have the opinion of the Government. He did not
think that this was the moment for discussing the question of
the navigation laws, but they ought to take the question on its
merits.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the Hon. Gentleman had
stated the case very fairly to the House, and had declared that
the question was not whether the House would agree to an alter-
ation of the navigation laws whether permanent or tem-
porary, but whether they would consent to inquiry. That was
the question before the House. The Hon. Gentleman, and
those who acted with him, were not indisposed to inquiry, but
they were indisposed to permanent alteration. They agreed
with him that an alteration was now necessary, and all that his
Hon. Friend desired was, that the consent of the House
should be given to that inquiry. The Hon. Gentleman agreed
that those laws should be inquired into, that they were not a
fixed part of the constitution, and yet he seemed disinclined to
consent to an alteration of these laws. He had referred to the
opinion of Mr. Huskisson, and for years that statesman had
consented to make an alteration of these laws, and the Hors.
Gentleman himself stated, he proposed no alteration of the
laws, and he (Lord J. Russell) felt assured that there was no
serious intention to oppose the Bill, and he himself thought
that no better occasion could be taken for a general revision of
these laws, nor could the subject be taken up under better cir-
cumstances than the present.
Mr. DISRAELI did not ehict to the alteration of the law,
but only to the constitutional alteration.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—True, it was a constitutional
question, and this inquiry might add to an amendment of
'II, constitutional law ; could any time be better than the

of inquiry into the sitbject, but ill.
~grteulturat eta,
,*.e.l) 11'12 the nit.titi,Pti,m. or The repeal of
wh' •'.
A Committee was obtained in the a 'awl"
had
iwen Tliat inquiry ►was tienie.., a.;. I.Le pecit, it C.,,orge ,as so e g a g.eat inar,s of important bu-
ear 1814, which sat during
found that the agricultural interest suffered materially I moured, because of the defective character of the captains. sineis to bring before Parliament, he thought this was the best
the whole of that session. The inquiry was not completed, from its refusal. The Noble Member for Newark went He believed great injury had been done to the colonies and
(time to introduce a modification of those laws. He thought
and in the session of 1845 it was re. •t d It might be r
re-appointed. e . •
-ifectF of the Corn.,

-
out into the same lobby with Mr. Cobden ;he hopel that he the navigation laws, and an inquiry into their operation would
would, upon that occasion, follow his own example. Since the . elicit many important facts.—{Hear, hear.
alteration in the navigat;en laws by Mr. Huskisson, the Baltic ' Captain HARRIS was of opinion that
those on his side of
trade had greatly increased. Where. formerly ' there were ' the House were strong enough to have the Committee so con-
thirty Swedish ships, there were now one hundred and twenty ; stituted as to have a fair inquiry if it were thought necessary
and where there had been eighty Prussian ships, there for the welfare of the country. But before they consented to
were now two hundred, and twentyd-two. There was ne ad- ' such a committee they must have good reason given for its
a
ditional advantage in free trade
that is, one nation does necessity; not such illustrations as had been given by the pro-
not exclusively advance its own interest by it but has the satis• poser of the motion, about pedlars and free trade.
faction of seeing the whole European community munity prosper. The cost of building ships in the Thames was some 131. or 14/.
That portion of the British shipping from which restriction had a ton, while in Dantzic it amounted only to 51. 7s. 6d. It
been removed had flourished in a much greater proportion than could not, therefore, be expected that they could cope with
the other.
them unless their co was in some degree protected. It
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said that
atthe gentlemen who : would not be necessary tomerce remind the House, that these laws
u
sought the inquiry had already made their minds to an al- I were instituted by a Republican' Government; they were
teration, or, at least, a modification of thehinsavigation laws. ' established by Cromwell, sanctioned by the Rump Parliament,
The Hon. Member for Montrose expressed
fully, as he always did. He had told them thatehPein
wanted
nntenr
nno- 'and
roprcoocnitsyolitAlactetd
pab!smChtahreleslegthiselatsnecreovridt.hey IwnerelBml6odifitehde
inquiry whatever; that his mind was made u• as tno their
h in. in 1824, and consolidated in 1833. There was one point eon-
expediency. H iamented friend, Mr. Som''es
deuce, stated that in the last twenty years British' niannrigise evi-in anteteetnetcliownit hofthtiisresuiihjoecots.oti; which he vitihsehegdotoo.ctiaolnl thofe particularsopplying
creased 42i per cent., while foreign tonnage
as macreafsed , men for the service of the country. It_had been put forward
272 per cent (Hear, hear.) Now that
protection.
, with great justice by the shipowners, that if they did
which proved the absolute necessity of
withwith
the
eresntaryxigtiaotniosn
which fettered The Hon. Member had said that the average amouut of Britiseh. i awayawayftehtteeyredmethstema;laethdeye
tonnage entered during the course of last year amounted to mustineot doof away with the restrictions on the employ-
mf,,iiiihreiti.g:ini ennrs.po.e7ds.
T; they
ia„ s must
11.. n fotrake„raywhany
eight millions of tons; that of course including steam ships
engaged in the coasting trade. He hail raised an hypothesis revrierior
hundred
te form an ergument upon), that there muo he A I, a a t th, ton.; t,-e '
merchates and commerce of this country of toe par ton eeen , li,TYl,t th' ' 4"l` ,rat': 'P '''"P, "0 it they did so, they
tri
tu
to;! r, ~. + h,,,.. your g men who wished to be-
What was the fact? If they took the average rate of toe inn their career roe-tenant service. Perhaps he might
freight of all the coasting trade of the United Kingdom, it did he allowed to quote the example of a man tp whom they were
not amount to Ina. per ton. The country could not, therefore, attaineomed to look
to the
as a thorough seaman and a
sacrifice four millions per annum in its shipping. The Hon. patriot—he referred" immortal Nelson. When he
Member for Durham knew very well that on bringing, noels was on the West India
of his
in command of a
from Newcastle to London the freight was only 7s. 61. per ship, he disobeyed the orders
he
chi. superior, and that was no
ton, and that was an advance upon the old rate of freight. joke in the naval service; 1 , ,
wa,und that the Americans had
The Han. Member for Montrose said that the sv seen of the menoneleed the tin& .;
..i.
h:ti Indies.
_and although he
navigation laws was injunous to the whole shipping interest, had the lawyers agaias, ann.
5 he, . res. nation with him, and
and he in vain atten pted to prove that assertion Fits Hon. by the enforcement of these la v
and cone
Frieed was quite aware that in Canada, New Brunswick, Neva ferred the supe i‘trity on the Britt:ham"' his
poi"
Scotia, and Prince Edward Island a vast amount. of tonnage serve and extend this trail,. that thy should retain It
' was
tol"-
ethaaidn these laws.
was built every year, and every one of the ships so built was en- { The Dutch. in the rime of the Protectorate, a monopoly
titled to the benefit of these laws, and he conceived that a great 1 of the carrying trade upon the high seas,
and it was for the
injustice would be done to the already much injured colonies ! purpose of competing with them that these laws were first en.
in North America, if they attempted to destroy the effect of I acted. The Hon. Metnber for Stoke-upon Trent had in.
the laws. The same argument applied to the East Indies; formed the House, that by the operation of these laws they
acrd the only colony which he was aware of that had a right to had lost the Canadas. He need not tell the Hon. Member
complain of these laws were the West India Islands, but they that if the: Canadas were lost to this country, it was only
carried on a beneficial trade with America, and took all their in consequence of the laws affecting their produce, which had
timber in exchange for their sugar. With regard to the Corn- passed the Legislature last session. For these reasons he could
mittee of 1844, a gentleman, whose name had been men- not support the motion for inquiry.
tinned by the Hon. Member for:Stoke (Mr. G. F. Young), who Mr. WA WN felt that it would be for the interest of the
when he was asked as to the state of navigation in this coun- country to grant the inquiry. There was one question con-
try, said that since the year 1810, British shipping had fallen nected with it, which the Government ought to take upon its
25 per cent. ; and that was in consequence of an efficient sys- own responsibility, and that was the case of the British sailor.
tern not having been carried out., If the Government was of If their trade should decrease, and the British seamen should
opinion that any alteration in the navigation laws was neces- he forced into the service of other countries, he should like to
vary, why did they not come forward boldly at once, and not know where they were to find men to ma n the navy in a tiffie
keep this vast interest in a state of suspense. of war. He would support the motion for inquiry, as no harm
facts of the case placed
Mr. BRIGHT said that great difference of opinion seemed would accrue from having the real
be-
to exist on this subject, many Gentlemen confidently holdire fore them.