The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-12 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION.

MANCHESTER CHAMBER Ok'

COMMERCE

A special general meeting of the Manchester Chamber
Commerce was convened yesterday morning, for the
-pose of receiving a Report of the Directors, on the in-
effeAs of restrictions on trade, and the necessity
immediate changes in our commercial policy, arising
of the Report and evidence of.the Select Committee
the House of Commons on Import Duties during the .
't Session of Parliament.
The meeting was announced for eleven o'clock, at which
to there was a good attendance of members.
A. B. SMITH, Esq., President of the Chamber, occu-
ni the Chair. After reading the advertisement an-
tncing the meeting, and the *edit proposed by it, the
airman said that the question of restrictions on trade
A on:: of national importance. Hitherto, the efforts of
st Board had been neutralized by the want of attention
the part of Parliament, which, during the last three
four years, had been engaged entirely in party
ugg 1 ea. The deficiency in the revenue, however, was
ely to cause something to be done on the part of Par-
nent to remove those restricsions, as there was no
sr way of making up that deficiency but by encourag-
: and extending trade. There was one point in the Re-
which had been omitted—the great encouragement
14.11 restrictions on tradegave to smugg,ling, by which ho-
it traders were often injured, and the revenue robbed of a
ge amount which would otherwise be obtaine3. He
not know how,i under these circumstances, we, calling
&elves a Christ an country, coul maintain our present
-tractions ; and he did hope, that as there was a serious
ticiency in the revenue, Parliament would he induced to
se seine steps by which these restrictions would be re-
lied.. He would not detain them by any further obser-
rims, but would call on the Secretary to read the Report.
The SECRETARY then read the following Report :
The growing importance of finding such new and enlarged
• irkets for the sale of our productions "as shall give the
I lens of subsistence to this industrious community. and sup-
. 1 a profitable field of employment for our capitalists," was
,aser- ted to in the Report to the Annual Meeting of the Cham-
s.r Est year. This question has since engaged a large share
the attention of the Board ; and the publication in August
.11 ot" the valuable report and evidence taken before the Corn-
Igoe of the House of Commons, on " Import Duties," pre-
^ its such a body of facts confirming the views so frequently
.pressed by this Chamber, and exhibiting, in so strong a
-ht, the injurious effects of restrictions on trade, that the
• lard have deemed it to be their duty to call the special often-
, 41 of the Chamber to a subject so deeply involving the future
Hare of our commerce and manufactures.
Before proceeding to the consideration of those reforms in
.r commercial system, which have now become essential to
a full development of? our national resources, it may be in-
mating to the Chamber, and satisfactory to those who have
a übts of the policy of further change., briefly to review those
lieh hive been already made, in order to ascertain how far
e partial adoption of free trade affords encouragement to
*fry it out to the fullest extent.
Ito first step in the march of commercial reform was made
Ari 1814, when the monopoly of the East India Company was
rtially relaxed, by permitting private individuals to trade
th the Presidencies of Madras, Calcutta, and Bombay, and
e port of Penang (the monopoly of the trade to China was
~'ntihued to the East India Company until 1834). The re-
' Its of this partial opening of the trade demonstrated the fal-y of the fearful forebodings of ruin by the East India Corn-
! my, as will be seen by the following comparative statement
• the increase of exports from Great Britain to India and
• :

i otal value in 1814 (during monopoly) ...£1,874,690
itto' „ „ 1833 (after 19 years of partial free trade) 3,495,301
...itto „ „ 1839 (5 years after the East India Com-
pany trade monopoly was entirely abolished) 5,600,576
In 1815, the first inroad was made upon our famous naviga-
;lan laws, which, for nearly 200 years, had been referred to
a , monuments of hurwan wisdom, and the foundation of our
teal and commercial greatness. By these laws, all foreign
4* 'oduce imported irito Great Britain, except in a British ship
, anned by a majority of British seamen, was subjected to high
',tcriminating d' sties imposed upon both the foreign ship and
• e cargo. The United States of America, equally anxious to
A ter America n navigation, had adopted similar laws. The
• feet of these mutual restrictions upon the trade of the two
nintries we s, that it became necessary to have two sets of
, ips emplo' ied ; that was to have British vessels to bring home
iserican ?produce, and American ships to convey our produce
• etrat coy .ntry, each beineoblieed to leave its own pert in ballast.
The los 3 attending such a system' produced in both countries
• desire to abandon these mischievous restrictions, and by a
a eaty imi 1315 the ships of both countries were placed recipro-
e tly area an equal footing.
He' V nation of our restrictive system, on the part of foreign
min .tries, at length alarmed our Government ; and in 1823,
Al Reciprocity of Duties Bill, being an extension to all coma-
* i. es inclined to adopt it of the reciprocity treaty with the
' - nited States in 1815, was brought forward by Mr. Huskisson.
Pais innovation was vigorously opposed by the shipowners, who
reilicted that it would throw the carrying trade into the hands
r foreigners. The employment of British shipping in our fo-
.r.gn trade, however, instead of being diminished by this mea-
,i 41e, has already mere than doubled, as will be seen by the
' llowiiag official statement of the tonnage of British vessels en-
_wed and cleared from the ports of the United Kingdom.
Inwards. Outwards.
to the year 1815 1,372,108 tons 1,39,61t8 tons
In the year 1839 3,101,650 3,096,611
In 1824 l'ar. Huskisson brought forward a Bill for the alte-
Ation of the, laws relating to the silk trade, by which the abso-
.ef.fa prohibition of all articles of foreign manufactured silks, was
..weed, and an ad valorem duty of 30 per cent. on their im-
' tiatiot.sobstituted. The duty on raw silk was reduced from
,-. s- 6d- to Id. per lb. ; and on thrown s,lk from 14s. Bd. to
.4 ites 'nary ins from Is. 6d. to 3s. 6d. per lb.
Toe measure wa: strongly opposed by the malority of the silk
anufacturers, and their organs in Parliament predicted that,
• y the end of two years, which it was proposed to allow be-
' 1 :o the prohibition should finally cease, the silk trade would
A ; deeAroyed."
The groundleesness of these apprehens'ons is shown by the
A pid jrogress of the silk trade since 1824. The average con-
il.paption a raw and thrown silk, in the ten years preceding
t '24. under the protective system, was 1,940,9021b5. per an-
h.tl rill, while the average consumption of the twelve years f01.11,-ing
.11,-ing 1824, under the partial free trade system, wa54,164,444
c. per annum. The imports of raw and thrown silk had in-
lowed, in 1839, to 5,020,034 lbs., and the exports of silk ma-.
ei'actures, in that year, amounted to 863,118/., in 'declared
. alze, of which 56400/. in value, were exported to France.
Mr. Hrskisson followed up the alteration in the sik trade,
le ilbxt year (1825), by layng before Parliament his cele-
.. eated evaosition. of the colonial, commercial, and shipping
iliey of 'le co'antry, and bringing forward three important
oasurea. rile first—relating to 4 further extension of free-
* )in; in the system of our commercial policy in respect to our
- .1
-miles. •Necond—The substitution of duties fcr prohibition
.1 ' foreign 7 nanufactures, and the reduction of duties payable on
.w mater'als used in our manufactures Third—Relief to
~ ,ipping it derest and navigation. The extent of the alterations
• the prw,ious restrictive system may be estimated by a few of
e leadir,g items.
The duty on per cent.
Woo Ceps of from 50 to 674 was reduced to 15 per cent, ad val.
Cdpt, ons s. ..... .. 50 to 75
Linens.. 4O to 180
...0s
~
Earth.i•tiwitte ... 75 .. .........
Iron ......
Coin e r
oli'm Cil
i Jv es 'previously prohibited were admitted at a duty of SO per cent.
"` The result of the alterations," said Mr. Huskisson, in
s 'Aging forward the above measures, " which I have now
• aced to the Committee, will bethis—that upon foreign menu-
, -Aured article= generally where the duty is imposed to protect
,i- own manufactures, and not for the purpose of collecting
' venue, that duty will in no instance exceed 30 per cent. If
• ~e article be not manufactured much cheaper or better
; mood tha nat home, such a duty is ample for protection. If
..3 he manufactured so much cheaper or so much better abroad
to rend, -r 30 pry cent. insufficient, my answer is, first, that
• ;rester protection is only a premium to the smuggler ; and,
,:oridly, that there is no wisdom in attempting to bolster up a
impetition which this degree of protection will not sustain."
At the same time that the protective duties on manufac-
tree were reduced to the maximum of 30 per cent. the
a, -ties on all raw materials of manufacture were also reduced.
'he wisdom of these measures has been proved by the in- ,
~, -ease in every branch of manufactures, the prosperity of which
• e previously supposed to depend upon the fostering care of
,unties and protection.
The Linen Trade is a remarkable example that the only
• al and effectual legislative encouragement which the menu-
„ ;tura has received, has been the reduction of the import
ties on flax and hemp, and the relinquishing the absurd at-
opts to ;twee the growth of these products at home.
Previously to 1825 the Linen manufacture was protected by
,`;tied amountir.g from 40 to 180 per cent., and for upwards of
' century bo•anties on the exportation of linen to foreign
aotries ward granted, which only expired in 1830. In 1609 the
unty, tilth.ough then very much reduced, amounted to about
0,0001-4 e to nearly one seventh part of the real or declared value
the Ihien exported that year. Although the bounty afforded
. arming of supplying foreign countries with linens for less
ill they cost, like all other monopolies, it rendered those en-
led in the manufacture indifferent to improvement, and the
ale continued to languish. Air. Huskisson reduced the
' t'ate, which on dressed flax was 101. 14s. 6d. per cwt., and
O
.undressed flax sd. to 4d per cwt. upon both, and this has
`ten subsequently reduced to the nominal
thani deuntyteorfprlised.
apnedr cwt
9r wooer was the trade unshackled
.. 8 directaxl to it; the increase of the Lininaeas
Linen manufacture
oufartuhree
the
Dundee has been even more rapid than
4ton manufacture at Manchester ; and in 1833 the exports
linen C rom that port were as great as those from all Ireland.
The P.rticle of Wool affords one of the strongest arguments
a pruce the wisdom of Mr. Huskissen's policy. A duty o.
f
6d.
• e: pound upon foreign Wool was imposed by Mr. Vansi itta. t
1 1819, which amounted to about 50 per cent. upon the price
"'la eousiderable quantity of the Wool imported, the effect of
'.:'ash was to destroy . a large portion of our manufactures,
'such reeprired an admixture of British and foreign Wool, and
brine; Freat distress and ruin upon the Woollen manufactur-
' ~,. It is a most remarkable fact, that the price of British
* "'al, instead of advancing from the high and prohibitory
6 411 imposed on foreign Wool, continued to decline, until at
Vt./ Led a lower price than had been known for a century.
The revival and subsequent progress of the Woollen menu-
' ture alder the reduction of the duty on the raw material.
'..na 6d. to ld.per lb. by Mr. Huskisson in 1825, exceeded
43 most sanguine expectations.
-vie imports of foreign Wool in 1820, the year
after the duty of 6d. per lb. was imposed, were 9,775,6051b5.
Vter the reduction of the duty to ld. per lb. in
1825, the imports gradually increased, and in
1839 they reached
The benefits of the reduction of the duty on foreign Wool
"we not confined to the Woollen manufacturer, the British
4,1431 grower eijually shared the advantage. Notwithstanding
01 s enormous increase in the imports of foreign Wool, the
v aes of:British Wool recovered from their previous depression,
4 i have since maintained higher rates than during Mr. Van-
: art's protective system.
Whatever doubts and fears may have been originally enter-
fed of the results of the great changes effected by Mr. Hus-
l'aen, in our restrictive commercial policy, the complete suc-
-4 . which, without a single exceptions has attended his men_
et ea, is decisive of the wisdom of the course pursued. The
ars of alarmists and monopolists have been dissipated by the
il amnion of all their predictions. Trade is proved beyond
e, possibility of controversy to' have declined in eve!), case
• ; ore protected, and to have increased and flourished, in pro-
l'rtion to its approximation to perfect freedom.
It is matter of astonishment, with such facts before us, and
t an age of boasted intelligence, that there should remain on
0 r statute book a single remnant of the monopoly system
-Cal experience has proved tobe so injurious to the national
fifare ; yet protections still, exist, which monopolists. of the
went day maintain with .
e-3guipetinations of ruin fromequal
th tenacity, and with the same
in the
• the meriopoliits '
. Our commercial leg,islation
:1-trized, general, oreenitablea
~!:,- ye and to manufaetgres
days
oefiri%.aibolition, that were uttered
Mr, Huskisson.
Tars to he founded en no re-
` s , tl:altrFonriel.es' public Thine
terurelestlaritellduoirwens
oefnprioteectnlitairfdactures exceed
. gu
gc„:43
nt.);
the
avowed uty on foreign
.41::in no eal&wa_op:oe
, per cent:fa-rift tiiihrp o duty
ses
..-6)_ ze.,
-144 L ...... object vy as to std- 1