The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-24 00:00:00

ceempiedtbeirsaltention." Tire duties,- he raids must bo-frxed
bytbe uitaa, the eeperienced officers, put in 4eominunication
with those men praatireally engaged in the trade, and versed in
its details • and, accordingly, the present classifications and cal-
culations fa. fixing the duties hal been left to the officers and
these parties. The duty fixed was 15s. per cwt. on the average
value. If, however; the question before the House had been
the general duty, he must remind them that that question had
been before the House, and they had given their deliberate opi-
nion on it—an opinion contained- in • this Bill, and
that was that 15• per cent should be levied on the
average value. He would now come to the second point in the"
petition, the past experience of the petitioners, that the legis-
lation for the last twenty years had produced an alteration in
their trade, by givino an advantage to the foreign manufaca
turer, and thereby bringing ruin upon the home trade. It
would be in the recollection oft heir Lordships, that the language
used by the petitioners was the same, as that made use of by
those who opposed the progress of these measures, both in that
House and in the other. • These were in the habit of saying that
the effect of these measures wohid he, that the trade would be
destroyed, the capital would be withdrawn, and the trade would
enhhdisrqauwenstfilo.onm?
thelf tit, iirf
tehl
syei
lgskiol
trade
oamdwrnll
as. hdal ldfoa awd. :ief
stopped,tthhei toai
ideterminetf
tahlehdtopwoirtt
imports
of
the
raw
material had diminished, if the number a those employed in It.
had decreased; ilia! these had taken place, the worst l,bri red
propbecreshoafdthoecsecuprs-rretdi_es
the raw material had increased, if the menu- I
factures for the . home market had augmented,
had
rhed hear)- true.
Eltahte iftih imports of these of
if the exports had increased, then these statements about the
minions effects of this course were filse.—( Hear, hear.) He
would show that it was so from the returns which had been 1114
cn their Lordships' table, frora the period since the conelusimi
of the war up to 1844. He roust observe that the raw, ma-,
terial was divided into three descriptions, the raw Material
properly so called • the waste, the knubs and husks ; and the
thrown silk. (The Noble Earl was about to quote frotathe re-
turns when he was interrupted by a remark across the table
from Earl Stanhope.) The Noble Earl said he would attend
to the points which had been alluded to. It had been said that
in the returns on their Lordships' table the waste, knubs:, and
husks and the thrown sillk had been combined in the amount
given for the raw material. But he begged to observe that if by
means of science they could now manufacture articles from that
waste as good as they were able to manufacture in former years,
be saw no reason why the waste should be excluded
from the returns. But, in giving his quotation, he would
take no account of the waste, knubs, and husks, or the thrown
silk. The importations of the raw material for the ten years,
from 1814 to 1823, amounted to 15,2a0,0001b5. In the re-
turns for the years 1826, 1827; 1828,1829, an account of the
waste, knubs, and husks had been included but he would
make every reasonable allowance—iuch a deduction as must
satisfy the - Noble Earl (Stanhope). He would take the
amount given in these for the year preceding, and for that
which followed those he had mentioned, and making his cal-
culation on such data, deduct accordingly. For the ten years,
then, from 1824 to 1833, he found the gross amount
given for raw material imported,- Waste being included,
was 32,916,000 lbs. ; and making the deduction for
waste and • thrown silk, there would be left 31,55.3,000
lbs. In 1824, the great change was made, which re-
moved entirely the prohibition on foreign manufactures.
The increase for the next ten years was annually 1.521,000 lbs.i
ie the next year 3,500,000.1b5., then 3,742,000 lbs., and from
that it increased to 4,310,000 lbs., so that while in ten years
it had so increased, could their Lordships, with that fact staring
them in the face—could they, he repeated, believe the allega-
tion in the petition that the reduction in the duty had caused
ruin to the silk trade by- the introdtiction of the foreign
impert, when this great increase of the raw material had
followed that reduction. In 'the year 1845, there was an in-
crease of the import of the raw material amounting to 200 per
cent. over that of the import prior to the reduction of the
duty. Such, then, had been the increase of the raw
material as compared to the trade previously to 1824. Indeed,
for two hundred years prior to that year there was not a
system of high protection, but a moderate duty. With the
increase of the import of the raw material, the Noble Lord had
failed to prove that the reduction had been injurious to the
trade. It was well known that the price of the article silk
was a great restriction on the general use of the material. The
reduction of the duty enabled the great mass of the people to
wear silk dresses.—(" No," from Lord Stanley:) The Noble
Lord would surely admit that all servant women now wore silk
gowns—they wore them now the same as they wore cotton ones
twenty years ago. This was a proof that the reduction of duty
which had taken'place, did not injure the trade, but on the
contrary had greatly served it. It was well known that the
trade would very materially increase, but for the difficulty of a
supply cf the raw material. The china market was now open
to us, and from the supply of the raw -article from that
country there was every expectation of the trade increasing.
France was the great silk manufacturing country, and
was still able to outvie all other nations in the beauty of
that tabrie, but he hoped that it would not be for long—had
had 'an impartation of our manufactured article; and that spoke
most favourably of the prospect of our trade.--( Hear, hear.)
When their Lordships considered the allegations contained in
the petition, which complained that the trade in silk had been
destroyed, they would co well to remember that he had shown
the import of the raw material .to be three-fold, and that,
instead of the trade being injured, it was progressing.
--(Hear.) He was of opinion that the petitioners bad failed
to show that the trade had been destroyed, or even injured
ever so slightly, by the change which had taken place. He
had been told that the population of Spitalfields had materially
decreased. He did not deny that fact. But it should be re-
membered that the reduction of the population there had taken
place long before the reduction of the duty. This was occa-
sioned by.the Spitalfields Acts, which had pressed upon them
long ago. Those Acts had been done away with, and deputa-
tions had often waited upon him (Earl Dalhousie), since he
had the honour of being connected with the Government, for
the purpose of having the law re-enacted.—(Hear, hear.) The
Acts bound the employers to pay A certain price, and no more
nor less, and bound the employed to take no less, and demand
no more. This restriction upon the free exercise of labour
caused the Spitalfields weavers to take their labour into other
markets, where these Acts bad no effect, and thus it was the po-
pulation. of that place had decreased. They must not accept the
amount of work done as any conclusive evidence of the rate of
wages paid to the operatives. By the improvements in ma-
chinery, though as much might not be-paid for a given quantity
of silk wove, it did not follow that there might not be more
paid for the amount, of work done in the day than
there was before. If. because there had been a reduction of
wages paid to silk wearers they were to eone!od., Out the trail,:
cc as in a latiguithing and fading condition, they must consider
the same of all other branches of hand-lonm .eaving ; for in
every one of them a reduction had taken place.—( Hear,
hear.) AlLkinds of hard loom _weaving Inul-baan_afLeted in _a
similar manner. The report of the Commission appointed to
inquire into the condition of the hand-loom weavers, proved
that the distress an-1 reduction of wages among that body did
not arise from competition with foreign producers, but arose
from competition between the weavers of this country.—( Hear,
hear.) Hand-loom weaving was easily learned. They were
generally employed at home, and assisted by their families, and
the result of the competition among them was, that not only the
silk trade but all other branches into which hand-loom weaving
entered had been reduced in wages.—( Hear, hear.) The com-
petition of weavers with weavers was enormous, and
that was the cause of the reduction in their wages.
It was a case in which Parliament could not
apply a remedy, at least not by the exclusion of foreign com-
petition. The Noble Lord here read an extract from the re.
port of the Factory Inspectors of last year, to show that the
condition of those engaged in the silk trade had greatly im-
proved, and that the demand for labour had been very great.
In many instances a rise of wages bad taken place. He would
only advert to one point more. It was said that all this im-
provement had taken place under the old system, and was no
proof that the new one would work well. But he would in-
form their Lordships that they had been under the new sys-
tem for the last quarter of the year—that was, from the 16th
of March. By a Treasury order, on the resolutions passing
been
il ks dutywas free,take n
the House of Commons, the various articles in the tariff had
following would show. The following return of manu-
factured
and
contrasted with the imports of the corresponding months
Andfro whatm was
Custom the
tom
the
result?hoas The
in 1844 and 1845. In the four months of 1844,
-
the amount imported was in value 129,5001. ; in
the four months of 1845, 127,0001. ; while in the four months
since March 16, the amount was 158,000/.—(Hear, hear.)
This showed that, compared with last year, a considerable in-
crease had taken place. Now, let them take the importation
of raw silk during the same period :—in the four months of 1844
the quantity was 912,0001b5. ; in 1845, it was 1,617,0001 N. ;
and in the four months just ending, the amount was
1,916,00011e5. ; thus showing an increase from 912,0001b5, to
1,916,0: Olbs., or an increase of 100 per cent. ; and a far
greater increase than had taken place
in the importation of
manufactured silk. He would now speak of the effect of the
measure on " throwsters," or those who were engaged in form-
ing twisted silk and thread out of the raw material. A reduc-
tion on foreign, thrown silk was made last year, and strong re-
monstrances were made at the time. In the same returns from
which he had quoted, it appeared that from 1814 up to 1823,
the amount imported on the average was 369,0001b5.,
while for 1834 to 1840, the average was 2:5,000,
showing a reduction as compared with the former
period.—( Hear, hear.) In 1844, the total amount
of raw silk imported was four millions of pounds, while the
whole thrown silk brought in was 410,0C01b5.. The propor-
tion of thrown silk to raw silk imported was, therefore, 10
per cent. Now, let them compare that proportion with what
it was during the former period to which he referred, and they
would find it formerly was 23 per cent.—( Hear, hear.) The
relative quantites in 1844, 1845, and 1846 were, in the four
months to which he had previously referred, as follows :
Raw Silk, Thrown Silk.
1814 912,0001bs 135,0- °lbs.
157,0001b5.
1846 1,906,0001bs ..136,0001b5.
This shoived that the proportion of raw silk in 1846 to 1844, was
1,906,0001b5. to 912,0001bs.—an increase of 1,000 per cent.,
while the amount of thrown silk ,had actually decreased.—
( Hear, hear,) With respect to the parties engaged in the
silk trade, he would inform their Lordships that
there never wa a time when there was greater
prosperity or more full employment. —(Hear, hear.) ln
Spitalfields itself there had been a great improvement, and the
same had taken place throughout the country. A short time
ago he heard that a meeting of the silk-weavers in Spitalfields
had been held, and a resolution come to to solicit a rise of
wages. A gentleman had informed him that the rise in
wages had been solicited, and in many instances it had been
acceded to. This showed that the trade was in a healthy and
flourishing condition. He bad now tried to trace the progress
of this trade, and he had endeavoured to show that the mea-
sures which were said to be based on such fatal- and mis-
chievous principles, bad operated quite otherwise; that they
had stimulated industry—increased the demand for employ-
ment—extended the exports and enlarged the imports of the
country—and had generally improved the circumstances
of all parties concerned.—(Cheers, )
Lord STANLEY said, that after the speech lust delivered
by the Noble Lord, no one could doubt but that anything
could be proved by figures. The Noble Lord had; from his
access to doCuments and figures, derived information which
pro...treed an effect that he (Lord Stanley) was not surprised
at, andwbich, in the absence of the case counsel would have
presented on the other side, had that been permitted, he cer-
tainly did not hope to eittal in effect upon their Lordship.
His Hon. Friend had not established his case. He had at-
tempted to prove a ground for this great reduction of duty,
which they were now called upon to sanction. If his Hon.
Friend had proved anything, 'it *as that the silk trade at the
present moment was in a good condition—that the imports and
(Imes of silk were largely increasing. But if his Hon. Friend
.was going on to prove thm the present prosperity was owing to
the great alteratione which had taken place in consequence of
the principle (if tree trade, lie was wrong. Admitting, how •
ever, the fact of our being so , prosperous, and that this
enormous importation was now taking place, his Honourable
Friend went on to say that they should interfere with all this, and reduce the duties on the manufactured article, trust-
ing that he would not injure the producers of this country by
competition. First of all,- lie differed from his Noble
Friend as to the facts he had stated. He differed from the
facts he had adduced with regard to the prosperity of the silk
trade in 1824, and he differed from him, more especially as to
any facts he- had proved, for he had proved nothing.: The
effect of which he had spoken was not produced by the dimi-
nution of the duty on the raw article, for if they took off the
duty on the raw article they would see afterwards that a con-
siderable increase had taken place in the consumption of that
article. He was not surprised that, after the year 1824, a con-
siderable increase had taken place in the consumption of the
raw material in this county, but the increase did not take