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
an 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
no 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
underwrittenoak-built Prussian ships, standing, for seven
years, A 1, at Lloyd's, at a rate of 12 guineas per cent.
`or 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-
sured 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 fur
bath English and foreign ships?
Me. Young did not think that letter shook his opinion
at 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. Mitchell—And would you still adhere to yoer
termer evidence regarding the price of Baltic timber
being 1003. per load, when we are informed, on the
authority of Parliamentary returns, that the average
prices of Baltic timber were, for 1841 and 1842, 1029.;
for 1843, 104 s. ; for 1844, 745. ; for 1845, 795. ; and for
1846, 865.?
Mr. Young—l know nothing about the average prices.
I can 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.
Mr. Hume wished Mr. Young to read this statement,
but 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
case 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
the period between 1815 and 1824, because a few years
before 1824 it was• discovered that a considerable num-
ber of ships were borne on the registration books that
had ceased 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
regerd to the increase since then, he thought there was
a great fallacy involved in it, as every voyage of a
steamer 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.
Mr. Ricardo—Perhaps it. is, if taken to show the
effective strength of the country ; but it is surely a fair
mode of showing how much of the carrying trade is in
our hands.
Mr. Young—But foreigners have chiefly sailing-
vessels, 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
sailing-ship would be ranked as 48,000 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 nary, but also because, however
unpopular 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 ef 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 former
still retained a protection—he would give no opinion
whether or not it was an adequate protection—on the
cost of importing such a bulky article as corn, which
amounted on an average, he thought, to 8s per quarter.
But in the case of competition with foreign ships, there
would be no such protection, but rather'a direct bounty
to foreign ships to come here, in the shape of the freights
they would 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
expense would be thrown upon the country in providing
naval artisans who had more than once within his recol-
lection been drafted from private dockyards to supply
the wants of the public.
The Chairman—Are you aware, Mr. Young, that
more than one foreign ship of war has been built in
England?

Mr. Young—l am aware of one built for Mexico,
which has no facilities for ship-building.
The Chairman —No, but we have built one for
Austria.
Mr. Young—l am not aware of that.
The Chairman—But I have been all over her myself.
By Mr. Rieardo—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 expense and at all
hazards. He thought that the practice of 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-
men of the Tyne, who were the most intelligent of their
class, that with proper treatment they would not object
even to compulsory service for a limited period. His
own opinion, however, was, that it was unnecessary to
man the navy altogether with able seamen ; because as
a great part of those on board were only required for
the purposes of warfare, he thought that a supply of
naval marines might be secured for that purpose, who
would answer equally well when they had got K hat
sailors called their sea legs.- He should doubt Sir James
Stirling's estimate of only 1,000 merchant seamen being
now in the naval service, at least he knew that seamen
were continually volunteering into the navy from his
ships, and other owners made the same complaint. He
thought the great advantage of foreign shipowners over
English was the advantages they possessed in cheapness
of material and the cheapness of labour.
The Committee then adjourned till Tuesday next.