The Sun.
London, England, 1847-09-20 00:00:00

SEPTEMBER 20, 184:7.

on the exchange will equalise the prices. Gentlemen,
I share this opinion, but this is an acknowledgment
that we do stand in need of some protection, and be
that protection direct or indirect, it is still a protec-
tion.---(Loud applause.) Protection has been accused
of causing commercial crises. I think this a mistake;
when all nations will produce in equal proportions,
and the more so, when stimulated by competi-
tion, do you think that it will be restricted to the
wants of consumption ? M. Duchataux then
opposed the division of international labour as laid
down by the free traders, as being likely to benefit
only a certain class. When speaking of England it has
been objected that I made no mention of poverty,
that running wound of the protective system. I did
not overlook it. Poverty is not the result of protec-
tion, but of an unequal division of riches ; and the
proof is evident, for side by side by that hideous mi-
sery we behold the most colossal wealth. It is a so-
cial, and not an economical question, and in no way
affects my assertions. After a speech which was lis-
tened to with the deepest attention, M. Duchataux
concluded by saying that the present moment was not
the right one for promulgating the doctrines of free
trade.

M. Blanqui rose to reply. Gentlemen, are you
aware what protection is ? It is a tax upont abour
for the profit of capital. And who have been con-
sulted on the question for the last twenty-five years?
The capitalists, the parties most interested in its ob-
servance. And they follow the old proverb, " L'ap-
petit vient en mangeant." When the linen industry
was established in France, they demanded a protec-
tive duty of 15 to 20 per cent., and would you believe
it, that I beheld lately petitions on the table of a Mi-
nister demanding an increased duty to exclude en-
tirely, if possible, foreign threads ? As regarded Spain,
he was of the opinion that she ought to cultivate her
rich lands and flocks, instead of endeavouring to corn-
pete as a manufacturing nation.
M. Dunoyer called upon M. Duchataux to reply
to the fact of Switzerland—which produces silks and
cotton tissues without any customs duties—to state
if he was of the opinion that the manufacturers that
now maintain themselves when paying a high duty
for raw material would he ruined when they could
procure them at much lower prices ? M. Dunoyer
quoted the Zollverein as an example where a reduc-
tion produced no perturbation.
M. Rittinghausen observed that a good deal had
been said about the Zollverein. It was not to be
overlooked that the Zollverein was a political as well
as a commercial association. In Germany we are
brethren—we are Germans all of us, we follow the
same path in our social system, we are not English
men, and we may demand protection against them,
without asking it against ourselves.
M. De Brouckere then left his seat amid loud ap-
plause, to reply to M. Rittinghausen. That Hon.
Gentleman had said, that produce consisted of two
facteurs, the material and the labour—if he had
said termes, it would have been more intelligible.
And what is the end of free trade but the gratuitous in-
terchange of one material for another ? Labour alone
will be paid for. Labour will be simplified, and everyone
will be enabled to enjoy everything at less cost. Labour
is a means, the object is enjoyment. The Honourable
President then quoted many examples to illustrate
his views on the subject; attributed the high price of
provisions attending thereon to the prohibitive duty
on grain, which ultimately turned to the detriment
of the revenue. Gentlemen, free trade brings low
prices; consumption will increase, and labour be in
greater demand. The labouring classes will gain
doubly; they will have more enjoyment for the same
labour, and an increase of prosperity from increased
labour.—(Loud cheers).)
M. Le Chevalier, an Artillery officer, was the next
to address the meeting, to the effect that produce was
not always paid by produce, and that the result was
often severely felt by the nation the less expert, as was
the case in France, especially in Alsace.
MM. Arrivabene and Horace Say replied respec
tively to M. Le Chevalier.
M. Duchataux again ascended the tribune to reply
to M. Dunoyer. He denied that the example of the
Zollverein was applicable to the rest of Europe, as the
difference between the German states was not such as
to cause a perturbation. He, however, allowed that
the present protective system was far from being
perfect, and that he should advocate a reform if na-
tional labour was respected. As regarded Switzer-
land it was universally known that manual labour was
much lower there than in Alsace,
M. Walowski said a few words in reply, and was
succeeded in the tribune by—
Professor David, of Copenhagen-4 said that gen-
tleman, the struggle will be severe at first, we have
hands to work with as well as to put in our pockets,
and competition will render us more laborious, and
it must not be overlooked that all nations have a pre-
ference for their own produce if they can obtain it.
This closed the discussion for the day.
The President then put to the vote :-
1. Whether free trade, far from rendering nations
tributaries of each other, did not rather draw them
closer to each other.

2. If free trade did not shield industry from the
sudden blows inflicted upon it by the restricted sys-
tem of prohibition.
The first motion was adopted with one dissentient
voice; the second with three dissentient voices.
The meeting then broke up.
To-morrow comes the great question of the influ-
ence of free trade on the labouring classes.
BRUSSELS, SEPT. 18.—This day's sitting was con-
secrated to the all-important question of the influence
of free trade upon the working classes—a question
which M. Walowski justly remarked yesterday de-
served a sitting to itself. It is only to be regretted
that many lost sight of the question proposed, to
enter into a more general discussion of the advantages
derivable from commercial freedom. M. Duchataux,
the intelligent defender of the principles of the pro-
tective system having left Brussels, the free-traders
had the course to themselves, and at the close of the
sitting the four questions under discussion, as stated
in my letter of yesterday, were unanimously voted,
with one solitary dissentient voice, that of M. Rit-
tinghausen, who, true to prohibition to the last, held
up his hand to oppose the unanimous vote of the
Congress.

The sitting was a most interesting one, and I re-
gret that I cannot render that justice to the eloquent
discourses of M. Walowski and the other speakers
which they deserve. An addition to the Congress
was made to-day in the person of Mr. Wilson, M.P.,
who, being announced by the President, was loudly
cheered.
The proceedings commenced this day by the read-
ing a letter from M. Ramon de la Sagra, a coun-
cillor of state, who had left Spain for the purpose of
attending the Congress, but was prevented from doing
so by unforeseen circumstances. The letter expressed
the sympathy felt in Spain for the principle of com-
mercial freedom. A proposition from Dr. Asher, of
Berlin, was then communicated, to expose within a
given time the practical results likely to be obtained
from the present congress.
The first speaker to-day was Mr. Brown, who
addressed the meeting in the English language. The
honourable gentleman was not very audible.
I scarcely know how to style the next orator, M.
Bergh, from the Rhenish Provinces. He commenced
by expressing his astonishment that the working
classes were not represented at the Congress. France,
he said, was represented by a Peer of the realm, the
English bourgeoisie (I quote his words) by Dr
Bowring, and the working classes had no one. Hav-
ing spent many years amongst them, he felt for them,
and always thought of them with pleasure and
affection.—(Applause.) They are an ill-used class
of society, and in England are not even treated as
human beings. The English manufacturer does not
even speak of them as such, but calls them hands.
He never says, " I have so many men," but " I
have so many hands." They are the pariahs of our
age, and I, who have traversed the narrow and
loathsome alleys and back courts of the great ma-
nufacturing towns of England, am aware of their
misery. I do not know whether this is to be laid at the
door of protection, but one thing I am certain of, that
protection is far too weak ever to ameliorate their
condition.—(Applause.) I myself am a free-trader,
and would not give a penny for a Protectionist—
(Laughter)—but I doubt if free trade will suffice to
ameliorate the condition of•the workmen. It is true
that free competition will reduce prices, that a reduc-
tion of prices will cause greater consumption, which
in its turn will favour production, and employment
will be more attainable; but free competition will
give birth to new inventions, many hands will be
thrown out of work, and the manufacturers will re-
duce wages to be able to stand the competition, and
the working classes will be as badly off as ever. Gen-
tlemen, I speak principally for the English workmen
—they are a neglected class, and it must not be sup-
posed that they were warm partisans of the League ;
they formed a body in themselves, they closed their
ranks, and they look up to their representatives in
Parliament, in the persons of Mr. buncombe and
Feargus O'Connor. It is a melancholy fact that at
the very time 40,0001. were voted for the royal house-
hold expenses, only 13,0001. were granted to relieve
the famishing thousands in the manufacturing dis-
tricts. M. Bergh concluded by pointing out the
active part the working classes had taken in the
French revolution, when, as soon as the great object
was attained, they were discarded. This was the

only part of his speech were he did not meet with
applause.
Dr. Bowring— -Gentlemen, I confidently assert that
the gentleman wrho has just sat down was never
chosen by the En,i dish working classes as their repre-
sentative. The. E. nglish workmen have their repre-
sentatives in Parliament who advocate their interests,
and who enjoy th!cir full confidence. In a few words
I shall now come. to the question under discussion,
avoiding vague generalities. I shall endeavour to,
prove to you ',that the practical effects of free trade
have ameliorate d the condition of the workmen. We
.seek to enable -e iorkmen to obtain high wages and low
prices, and these who have travelled with a view to
ascertain the of fects of free trade are well aware, like
myself, of the remarkable contrast that exists be-
tween Tuscany and the Hanseatic towns, for instance,
where a Tiber al commercial policy is in force, and
the less enlightened states of the Continent. Pro-
tectionists halve built their structure on a sandy
ground—we wish to erect ours upon a rock. Pro-
tection is the ,displacement of labour where the inte-
rests of a lae•ge majority are sacrificed to a small
minority. All amelioration is a displacement of capital.
Gentlemen, I was born in a town where the woollen
trade flourished, at Exeter, and am thoroughly ac-
quainted with all the wants and necessities of the
manufacturiu g classes, and studied all the relations of
this branch of commerce with foreign countries.
When steam. was first introduced, Exeter not being a
coal country, that trade diminished, but the workmen
found ether employment, the prosperity of Exeter in
no wise diminished, and the population of the city
has since gradually increased from 24,000 to 40,000
souls. It is the ensemble of the prosperity of a nation
which must be considered, and not particular interests.
All real national industry has nothing to fear. In
1825 the silk manufacturers demanded an increased
protective duty on silk ; we, on the contrary, de-
manded a reduction of that duty, and in 1832 we
obtained it. I was called a bad patriot—a French-
man—(Laughter and applause)—and was told that
I was bringing ruin on the country. I replied,
you sleep on the soft bed of protection; arouse
yourselves, get up and study, and put your hand
to the work; but they shook their head and
turned a deaf ear to my words. They soon, how-
ever, came to me for advice, and I told them to study;
they did so, and what was the result? At the present
day, though we import for 30,000,0001 b. of silk, we
export for 20,000,000, and this is a great result. The
displacement of capital is the representative of pro-
gress. The Hon. Gentleman quoted many other ex-
amples to illustrate the axiom. The same objections
were raised when coal was allowed to be exported ;
we were told that our soil and climate were not the
best, but that God had given us a source of wealth in
the bowels of the earth, and why should we not keep
it ? The result of the effects of free trade Jan this
article has again proved the fallacy of the arguments
in favour of protection. Dr. Bowring then announced
to the Congress the results of the importation into
England, in the first seven months of 1847, compared
with the first seven months of 1846, showing the im-
mense increase since the principles of free trade have
been put in practice. Amongst the many necessaries
of life quoted by Dr. Bowring, the following will
sufficiently illustrate the fact :—ln the first seven
months of 1846 the importation of sheep was 26,700 ;
in 1847 it had already risen to 51,000. Lard had
increased from 13,000 to 50,000 quintals. Butter,
from 136,000 to 176,000 quintals. The impor-
tation of coffee had increased 2,000,0001b5.--
from 20,000,0001b5. to 22,000,0001b5. Hams,
from 8,700 to 12,000. In sugar, the in-
crease is nearly one million of quintals. And what
better answer can be given to those who assert—who
dare to assert—that liberty of commerce has not suc-
ceeded ? In 1845 the fabrication of bricks was
12,000,000 ; in 1846, one milliard and seventy-three
thousand; in 1847 (ahlus.iir the period of seven
months), it was one milliard one hundred and twenty-
seven thousand, and the fabrication of bricks may be
regarded as a scale whereby to judge the increase of
population, and with that increase also the increase of
prosperity. Before sitting down, concluded Dr.
Bowring, I shall add one word more. I cannot share
the ideas of those who, being aware that they are ill,
put off the application of the remedy to another day.
Our motto on the standard of the League was, "Im-
mediate and total abolition of the corn-laws." We
never swerved. We asked it—we obtained it—im-
mediate and entire; and I hope that the present Con-
gress will demand the immediate and total abolition
of the protective system, that not a vestige of it may
remain.—(Prolonged applause.)
Mr. M'Adam, of Belfast, entered upon an econo-
mic view of the linen industry of the continent, of the
high duties which we maintained upon linen and
linen yarns, and of the effect of these duties upon the
amount of employment afforded to the working classes,
as well as the loss to the community. He urged the
propriety of considering linen yarn as a raw materia I,
as it is in the subsequent processes that so much la
hour is required, the spinning being so much sim-
plified by the use of machinery. These duties act on
the linen trade of a country in a twofold manner-
-Ist, they injure that branch of its manufactures whicl,
furnishes linens for export, and thus deprives it,
commerce of an article of exchange, causing at the
same time a diminution of employment to its manu-
facturing population, and a derangement of the ba-
lance of trade, to the advantage of the countries whose
productions it requires. 2d. They cause every
consumer of linen within the country to pay an extrl
price, and thus reduces the consumption by rendering
it impossible for the poorer classes to obtain as large
a quantity as they would otherwise do. He con-
ceived it to be advisable for each country to inquire
into its peculiar capabilities, its economical position,
and foreign relations, and to point out reasons for its
choice between protective duties and a free trade in
yarns. He then proceeded to a review of the
condition of the linen trade in France, Belgium, and
Germany, entering into the history and statistics of
each. France had imposed duties on British
yarns in 1842 amounting, in some cases to 40 per
cent., and had by this means created a number of
flax spinning-mills to the extent of about 360,000
spindles. The employment thus created gave a
means of livelihood, directly and indirectly, to about
35,000 individuals ' • but the increase in the price of
linens had reduced the exports of France. By the
returns from the Board of Customs, it appears that
last year 38 per cent. less yarns were imported than
in the foregoing year, but 53 per cent. more linens.
Hence employment was increased to that branch of
the trade which supports the smallest number, while
the employment in those operations which support
nine•tenths—viz., the weaving and bleaching—had
decreased. Reckoning the consumption of France as
seven yards of linen per head of the population
(Bowring), and calculating the cost as 4d. per yard
above the price it could be had for if imported free, it
appears that the French pay 98,000,000 f. per annum
extra for their linen. Taking the value of the spin-
ning machinery, building, &c., at 150 f. per spindle,
the entire sum vested in the trade in France appears
to be 54,000,000 of francs. He could not see why
the French nation should be taxed 98,000,0001. per
annum to maintain a trade in which not much more
than half that amount was vested as entire capital.
He urged that such duties had caused other industries
for which France is better adapted to suffer, and
entered into details as to the wine trade, which em-
ploys 3,000,000 of the French population. He
showed the consumption of wine in France to be
25 gallons per head per annum, while in England
it was only one-fifth of a gallon, the duty being 55. 6d.
The deputies of the south should reflect that the
maintenance, by France, of such duties on Bri▪ tish
manufactures had led to reprisals of this nature on the
main articles of her export. - With respect to Bel-
gium, he regretted the state
of the linen industry and
the destitution which prevailed in consequence among
the working classes. He maintained that the duties
imposed by Belgium in 1842, on yarns, had princi-
pally caused this state of things by raising the price
of linens, and injuring the export trade. Belgi▪
um
exported in linens, in 1838, to the value of 33,000,000 f.;
in 1842, it had fallen to 26,000,000 f.; and in 1846,
to 20,000,000 f. This was because British linens dis-
placed them in the foreign markets, by reason of their
cheapness. He condemned the policy of the Ministry
in imposing a duty on the export of tow, and showed
that such measures were hurtful to the agricultural
community, without benefiting the trade. Hand
labour is as cheap in Belgium as in the British isles,
and if the Belgians had as cheap yarns, they could
compete with our linens. The 4,000 operatives in the
Belgian spinning factories were protected, whilst the
entire linen industry of the country, maintaining
300,000 persons, was thus caused to languish. Heg
then glanced at the state of affairs in Germany, where
an obstinacy in the maintenance of hand spinning
had caused that country to lose the vent for her linens
in North and South America, where Irish linens had
now completely displaced them. The Zollverein
spoke of increasing the duties on linen yarns
and endeavouring to establish machine spinning.
He looked upon it that when a country was naturally
adapted to this industry it would flourish without
protection. That if it did not possess these natural
advantages, no protective duties could create them,
while their imposition did injury alike to the consu-
mers. the working classes employed in that branch of
industry„ and other kinds of production to which the
country was better adapted. He
_protection instancedand
the case
of Ireland, where under a system of