The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-10 00:00:00

VENING, J UNE
_lO, 1848.

the depreciating estimate which the Noble Member for
Lynn sought to impress upon the House with reference
to the 11. n. Member's public services. Ile considered
that no reports in the library Of the House contained
more valuable matter than those of the Hon. and Learned
Member were replete with. As to the sneer of the
Noble Lord about the Hon. and Learned Member's pre-
, dietions,the Noble Lord, had he well considered the sub-
ject, would have fotind reason, in all probability, to be-
lieve that if the landed interest had assented in time to a
moderate fixed duty on corn, as an equivalent for con-
cessions on the part of foreign powers, that interest
might have secured that moderate deity, instead of hav-
ing been compelled to submit to no duty at all.—(Hear,
hear.) As to the distress of the country, great as it un- :
happily was, it would have been fearfully aggravated but
for the relaxations which the advocates of free-trade had
effected. —(Hear, bear.) The charges made by the
Noble Lord against Mr. Porter's statistics were alto-
gether unfounded; he (Mr. Hume) had given the subject
of those statistics his most careful attention, and he was
perfectly convinced of the accuracy of Mr. Porter's re-
turns. 'The Noble Lord asked, for what purpose was
this change proposed? It was proposed and supported
for the purpose of giving effect to those measures of free-
trade which had been with such difficulty carried, and
which required. for their full and satisfactory develop-
ment, the removal of the restrictions imposed by the
navigation-laws. The Noble Lord spoke of the loss to
the trade of this country of several hundred whaling ves-
sels. Was it free-trade which had driven these ships
from England to America? No; but the infinite re-
strictions which it was now proposed to remove.—
(Hear, hear.) Ile had every expectation, however,
that a large proportion of this trade, under the
change of system, would return to us.—(Hear.) One
ground on which our Protectionist shipowners set up a
claim to monopoly was the cost of shipbuilding; but it
was these same shipowners who had resisted a reduc-
tion in the timber duties. Another ground used to be
the cost of victualling; but this ground was now re-
moved, and our ships could be victualled as cheaply as
those of any other country. He avowed there was
scarcely any particular, since the recent changes in our
tariff, in which we were not as advantageously situated
as was the foreign shipowner, and there were many re-
spects in which we had decidedly superior facilities for
fitting out ships. The evidence of Sir James Stirling
had been spoken of as hasty, incomplete, and incorrect;
he had closely followed Sir James Stirling's evidence,
from a sole desire for information, and he felt bound to
declare his conviction that the entire of that evidence
was well-considered, judicious, and scrupulously accu-
rate in its details. It was to him a matter of great sur-
prise that burdened as English ship, were they had been
able to cols pete with foreigners. But once let the ex-
isting impediments be removed and the impulse given
to British enterprise—both commercial and maritime in-
dustry would be increased in a tenfold degree. For all
these reasons he should support the resolutions.
Admiral BOWLES thought that as an officer of the
navy he ought not to give a silent vote, but in what he
should say he would endeavour to be fair, and he should
confine himself to the naval part of the question. He
feared the House was legislating rashly, and that before
long the country would repent it. If the Govern-
ment merely proposed to lay the resolutions on the
table, and to allow time till next session to consider
them, he should have no objection. The same hasty in-
considerate course of legislation had been pursed in the
West India colonies, and the lamentable results were to
be seen in the report from the Committee that had
lately been laid on the table. With that example
before them the House ought to be cautious how they,
trusted the prophecies of the Government as to the na-
vigation-laws. The Hon. Member for Montrose had
praised the evidence of his Friend Sir James Stirling,
but with all respect for that Gallant Officer he (Admiral
Bowles) doubted if another officer could be found in the
navy to make the same statement. The two marine ser-
vices of the country were indissolubly bound up togethr.
Their interests—their source—were the same. Circum-
stances were greatly changed in respect to the mode of
manning the navy. Impressment was no longer available
for the purposes of manning the navy, and he very
much doubted whether any means existed, in case of
very sudden alarm, for procuring a supply of seamen.
It was, therefore, doubly incumbent on the House to
move cautiously in this direction. Why should a system,
also, which provided a reserve of 25,000 seamen—lie
meant the apprenticeship system—be abandoned? If
the navigation-laws were abolished, the Marine Society,
which rid the streets of London of thousands of vagrant
boys, and turned them to useful purposes, would be
done away with. The arguments respecting . thein-
creased wealth and prosperity, which were predicted to
flow from the new system of legislation were only so
many proofs that every consideration save that of mam-
mon was forgotten. The navy was only recovering it-
self from its state of depression, and he trusted that the
warnings which, as an old officer, he had offered to the
House "would not be' deemed out of place. Ile had seen
many of the glories of the past naval service, and he
hoped he should not live to see those glories dimmed or
obscured, as he feared they would be if the contemplated
changes were effected.
Mr. COBDEN said he should not follow the Noble
Lord in his arguments as to free-trade generally. He
and the Noble Lord started from two entirely different
points. The Noble Lord was for protecting the few at
the expense of the many, whilst he was not for taxing
any class at all. All he would say of free trade was
that the country was satisfied with it as far as it went,,
He did not say satisfied with the present state of com-
merce, but that was attributable to quite different
causes. The Legislature having dealt with free-trade
in corn, sugar, and other articles of first necessity, now
approached the shipping; and how, let him ask, could
the partial protection now given to this branch of in-
dustry be justified? It he had been strong in his argu-
ments against protection to corn, he was doubly so in
respect to ships. The agriculturists urged the excessive
burdens on land and on their productive resources. The
shipowner had no such burdens. The sailor got all his
articles of consumption duty free, and ships paid neither
county nor poor rates, nor assessed taxes. They
were, therefore, in a better condition to com-
pete with the foreigner than the English landowner.
But they must go into the principle of free-trade. What
did it mean ? If it meant anything, it was the impor-
tation of a larger quantity of commodities into the
country—corn, for instance. But they could not move
a quarter of corn from abroad without resorting to
shipping ; therefore, the increased importation of corn
must increase the number of ships. Then, again, it was
said that those who built the ships could not compete
with the foreigner in point of cheapness. But it had
been satisfactorily proved that taking quality for quality
a ship could be built and rigged more cheaply in Eng-
land than abroad. He did not speak of the American
ships which were on Lloyd's register for four years only,
but of such ships as stood their ground on the register
for 12 years. People talked of a ship as it, like
a box, it was made of wood only. Why when the wood
work of the ship was complete half the outlay only was
made. The rigging, sails, anchors, cables, and stores all
were to be added, and they were to be had at a far cheaper
rate in England than anywhere else. There was the
evidence of the inspector of Lloyd's at Sunderland
to refer to on this point, who stated that a ship could
be built of Dantzic oak and equipped cheaper at that
port than at Dantaic ; and when he was at that place
he had asked a merchant there if this was true which
he was informed was the case.—(Hear.) The question
of wages was another element to be taken into conside-
ration. The American workman got more wages. it
was true, but then he worked more hours, and his skill
was superior to the English artisan, therefore, though
ho got more money, the American shipbuilder did not
pay him more in ;proportion to the value of his work
than the English shipowner. It was also said, and truly
he believed, that the American ships performed their
voyages more quickly than English ones, and that the
English masters of vessels did not take so much care of
their cargoes as foreign shipmasters did. That certainly
did present a difficulty, but it was to be overcome. Let
him take into consideration the characters of the English
masters and the seamen of which so much had been
said and written. He could not say anything of his own
knowledge on this subject, but both Mr. G. F. Young
and the late Mr. Soames, had stated that English sea-
men were very disorderly, Mr. Brooker, the English
vice-consul at Cronstadt, who had resided at that port
for 59 years, also told him in September last, that in the
July previous he had no less than 61 squabbles between
masters and seamen of English vessels to settle in his
counting-house ; and he showed him a circular, issued
in July, 1847, by the governor of the town, warning the
English seamen against the consequences of their riotous,
drunken, and violent behaviour, and of the serious con-
sequences of striking a police soldier. Therefore it must
be taken for granted that Mr. Brooker had confirmed
the statements made respecting the cenduct of English
seamen in foreign ports. He had never accused that class
of being given to robbery, but the question was, were
they insubordinate and given to drink when in foreign
ports, and he believed they were. Was it therefore wise
to lavish compliments and praises on them in that House,
instead of telling them of their faults? From the evidence
he had read, he was led to believe that the English
seamen were more addicted to drink than the sailors in
the Mediterranean ports; that they were less qualified
in point of education and information than the seamen
of the northern ports, and that ist both these particulars
they were inferior to the American sailors. The best
way, therefore, to serve them was to tell them of their
faults, and so to amend them. But with all his faults
the British sailor was possessed of natural qualifications
which rendered him superior in the hour of danger or
difficulty to the seamen of other nations. His courage,
promptness, and presence of mind during a gale or
under unexpected circumstances, were such that if his
moral qualities could only be made to equal his mental
aud physical powers, he would be able to compete with
the best sailors of the best nations. He did not wish to
have protection removed from British shipping for the
purpose of reducing the wages of the sailors. Give them
the same qualities as were possessed by the Americans,
and they would make better voyages, and consequently
be cheaper at higher wages than they now were.
But the question the House had to consider was whe-
ther they would continue to lay a prohibition on the
carriage of commodities from foreign countries. The
manufacturers were entitled to get their supplies in the
cheapest way they could, whereas the operation ofthe
navigation-laws was to prohibit. the free importation
even of manure, for if bones or oilcake Caine in certain
vessels they were not allowed to enter English ports for
consumption. The farmers' friends ought, therefore, to
do away with these restrictions. He had, he confessed,
been much surprised by the Noble Lord's attack on his
friend Mr. Porter's statistics; for if there was one de-
partment in which the public had confidence it was in
that presided over by M. r. Porter, whose return, so
much cavilled at, was entitled to the utmost credit for its
accuracy. But the cause for this attack must be looked
for in the fact that no statistics could be found to favour
the protective system. He was prepared even to go so
, far as to say if the English ships cannot compete iu the

market with foreign ships let the latter have all the
trade. The chi iffiest market was the best. But let him
net be mistaken on t hi 4 point. I[e believed that Fee-
glishmen were better fitted to be sailors than any other
nation on earth. England v. as great in her IflaTlU'!lc-
turts, but she was greater in her maritime adventure.
What the camel was to the Arab of the desert, or the
hone to the Tartar, the ship was to the Englishman. It
had been urged that there were very few petitions in
favour of abolishing the navigation-laws. The same was
true of petitions in their favour, only J 5,000 having
petitioned out of 1,500,000 sailors who were to be
thrown out of bread by t heir abolition. The true rea-
son why petitions against the navigation-laws had not
been presented was, that those laws were included by
the millions who had petitioned for free•trade in that
policy.—(Hear, hear.) He should be glad to see a
Navigation Act passed as short as that made by
Lord Dalhousie for India, which consisted of four lines.
He, however, preferred the proposed measure to that
suggested by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Oxford, who wished to have one framed on the basis of
reciprocity. The Right Hon. Gentleman ought to re-
member that reciprocity was already promised on the
part of America and Prussia. Now, one word as to the
naval part of the question. lie heard with regret the
constant reference made to physical force arguments,
which were so much condemned when urged by the
working classes.—(oh, oh.) He must say he heard with
regret the boasting language respecting England's naval
supremacy. He must say that those boasts were gene-
rally uttered after dinner, and therefore they might be
the result of a little extra excitement.—(" Oh, i,h," and
groans.) The abolition of the navigation-laws would
not affect the naval condition of Great Britain. But
was this a time to be always singing " Rule Britannia."
(Laughter.) If Hon. Members opposite had served
with him upon the Committee on the army, navy, and
ordnance estimates, they would have a just sense of the
cost of that song.—(Hear.) His Right Hon. Friend the
member for Manchester (Mr. M. Gibson) had, in the
course of the discussion, been a good deal attacked fur
the sentiment with which he concluded his speech the
other night. In that sentiment he (Mr. Cobden) en-
tirely sympathised. His Right Hon. Friend had not
asserted, as had been supposed, that this country was
about to enter upon the millenium of universal peace ;
but be stated that they should treat wars as the normal
state of this country. His Right Hon. Friend had con-
tended, and he (Mr. Cobden) agreed with him, that this
country was in favour of peace ; and if this was doubted,
let but a word be said in this House to indicate that they
were going to war, and then the full force of pubic.
opinion against it would be felt.—(Hear, hear,) The
constant assertion of warlike maritime supremacy was
calculated to provoke kindred passions in other nations,
while, if Great Britain announced the doctrines of peace,
she would invoke similar sentiments from the rest of the
world. With this view he was anxious, while prepared
to maintain every just right for the English people, to
identify this nation with peace, and by removing the
obstacles which the navigation-laws presented to free
trade and freedom of intercourse between nations, to
blend nations together in interest, and thereby place one
of the most potential obstacles in the way of war.
Mr. DISRAELI said the Noble Lord the First
Minister of the Crown had been accustomed sometimes
to teach those who attempted to defend the cause of pro-
tection— a cause which he (Mr. Disraeli) and tho.,
near him had not yet deserted—that they were reason-
ing in a vicious circle. The Noble Lord had used to
say that if the interests they had formerly advocated
operated to the injury of another interest, that other
interest might, in its turn, by some exceptional legis-
lation, operate to the cost of its neighbours, and thus,
as the Noble Lord well expressed it, they were moving
in a vicious circle. Interest after interest had received
the advantages of exceptional legislation ; but the result
was that the multitude had been injured. The House
was now placed in a new vicious circle. In this debate
new interests had been attacked, and it was said that,
as every other interest had been injured, they
must go round the vicious circle, and that,
after having pursued a course of theoretical legisla-
tion, which had terminated in so much practical misery,
it would be against reason, justice, candour, and fairness,
not to deal out to every other interest the same merciful
interposition which had produced such beneficial results.
—(llear, hear, and laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman
who had just addressed the House (Mr. Cobden) had
been the principal author of the first vicious circle; but
for him that thesis would never have been adopted by a
Minister or accepted by a party—(Hear, hear)—and yet
at the end of two years the Hon. Gentleman had to-night
again to rise in his place and become the advocate of a
new vicious circle.—(Hear, hear.) Before, the Hon.
Gentleman had promised the House and the country
perpetual advantages—now he said that it was but just
that all should take their share in the universal disaster.
With regard to the unfortunate interest now under dis-
cussion before an assembly called together to,watch over the
interests and to guard the rights of Englishmen—with re-
gard to the new victim, he must say that if this question
involved an inquiry into the comparative expense of
building ships at Stettin and at Sunderland—he should
consider that he should himself be guilty of an act of the
utmost assumption if he offered an opinion on that sub-
ject. Though he had paid constant attention to the course
of the debate, he had studied with as much power of
abstraction as he could command the evidence which
had been offered to the two Houses of Parliament, and
still he felt if he offered an opinion as to the relative
prices of cordage and sailcloth it would be an act of ar-
rogance which he would not assume. He therefore left
all these deductions from the evidence to the lion. Mem-
ber for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden), for he thought
that even the House itself was not exactly a tribunal com-
petent to decide with satisfaction upon such a topic. In
such a matter the Hon. Member (Mr. Cobden) had ini-
incase advantages, because he was the friend of Mr.Brun-
ton, who had personal experience of the cost of building
ships at Stettin and at Sunderland, and had stated that he
had no fear of competition with the ports of the Baltic. lie
(Mr. Disraeli) bowed with great respect to the opinions
of that gentleman; but as he had been quoted, he (Mr.
Disraeli) must refer to an opinion expressed by Mr.
Brunton within the last few hours. At a meeting held
at the Exchange of Sunderland on the subject of the
navigation-laws, Mr. Brunton was the principal orator,
and had moved one of the resolutions adopted by the
meeting. In the course of his speech he attacked the
evidence given by a Mr. Wilso❑ (not the Hon. Member
for Westbury), upon whom he did not charge falsehood,
but adopted a milder term—(A laugh)—and then he
was pleased to state that the repeal of the navigation-
laws would reduce property thirty to forty per cent., and
would drive ship-building out of the country, and inflict
equal injury upon artisans, builders, and owners. lie
added that, by the co-operation of all, means would be
found to defeat the plan of the Government. Mr.
Brunton sat down amidst loud cheers, proposing a reso-
lution to the effect that, if the measure of the Govern-
ment was carried, it would be fatal to builders, owners,
and artisans, and calling upon all those favourable to
native industry to rally round those classes at the present
moment. He (Mr. Disraeli) thought it right that he
should thus furnish to the House the last opinion which
Mr. Brunton had given on this very subject. Be-
fore he (Mr. Disrraeli) entered upon the general ques-
tion, he could not help noticing some of the observations
made by the Hon. Member for the West Riding respect-
ing the commereial marine of this country. He had
heard with regret his remarks upon the character of the
seamen and captains. In all classes--in all modes of
employment—there must be some troublesome fellows,
from whose conduct it would be hard and unjust to judge
a whole race. It ought to be no evidence against the
system under which they were educated, and under
which they were employed. Now he (Mr. Disraeli)
had before him some evidence of the conduct of English-
men not employed on board ship, but in an institution
which was scarcely less inferior in national importance.
A gentleman well known to Hon. Members opposite—
Mr. John Brooks, of Manchester—had been examined
before the Navigation Committee, and, in answer to a
question put by the Hon. Member for Westmoreland
(Mr. Alderman Thompson), this witness seemed to
think that it was because crews were allowed to Consist
of one-fourth of foreigners and three-fourths of
British seamen they could not agree. But Mr.
Brooks, with more candour than the Honourable
Member for the West Riding, had spoken of his ma-
nagement of his men in Lancashire—that was to say his
own men employed in his own mill. Mr. Brooks was
well known to possess a knowledge of the Lancashire
character—indeed, he himself was remarkable in a
crowd.—(Laughter.) But, speakieg of the management
of his own men, he said, " I have fought several battles
with my men—there are some of them called flints,'
and some knobsticks'—(Loud laughter)—and I have
been obliged to have sixty soldiers and three officers in
my mill for nine months together to keep them in order,
for, when mixed together, the men would not agree."
-2(Elear, hear.) Now it would be quite as just for him
(Mr. Disraeli) to bring this evidence forward as a proof
against the character of the whole of the working ela&es
of the most favoured district of the country, as for the
Hon. Member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) to con-
demn the seamen in the commercial marine on the iso-
lated instances of undisciplined and unruly conduct
which might be alleged against portions of that body.
He, therefore, dismissed this part of the case. With re-
spect to the allegation, that the coasting trade would
be protected by the ignorance of the native tongue of
foreigners, he begged to state that no man was allowed
to command a Swedish or Norwegian ship who was not
master of the English language.—(Hear, hear.) The
question now before the House he understood to be a
proposition on the part of the Government to abrogate
en ancient national system with respect to navigation—
a system founded upon definite principles, and aiming
to arrive at definite ends; and if he could show that the
principles of that system were an actual advantage to
the country, and beneficient to the State, then the ques-
tion of the ability or inability of British shipbuilders to
enter into competition with foreigners was not au
element for argument on this occasion. He was
there to advocate the present system, which he main-
tained had worked with great advantage to the State,
and to do this he had but to make evident that the ar-
guments against that system were utterly unsubstantial
and fallacious.—(Hear.) In the first place, it had been
said that England was not protected in her export
trade, and therefore it was asked why it was necessary
she should be protected in her import trade? He denied
that this country competed with success with the fo-
reigner in the export trade. No Member for Liverpool,
or merchant of that town, would venture to assert this,
but, on the contrary, must admit that practically the
export trade was in the hands of foreigners.—(clear,
hear.) Every one knew that if a large order was given
from America for iron, they made it a condition that it
should be exported in American ships. Within a day
or two a large order had been given from the French
Government for coal; and it was a condition of the con-
tract that it should be exportedin French ships.—(Bear.)
He blamed not the American or French Governments
for this; but hearing it said that we were not protected
in the export trade, and yet competed with so much