The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-28 00:00:00

trtning

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1546

The Lords met at Five o'clock, and adjourned almost
immediately after, having transacted no business of any
public importance.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.

Several petitions were presented.

About half-past four o'clock his Royal Highness
Prince ALBERT, accompanied by the Earl of JERSEY,
entered the House, and took his seat under the gallery,
immediately behind the Sergeant-at-Arms.
Shortly afterwards his Royal Highness the Duke of
CAMBRIDGE entered the House, and took his place by the
side of Prince ALBERT.

Immediately after the Duke of CAMBRIDGE had
entered the House,

Mr. M. PHILLIPS, amidst loud cheering, presented the
great Manchester petition, praying for the total and im-
mediate repeal of the corn-laws.
On the motion that the order of the day for the
House resolving itself into Committee on the paragraph of
Her Majesty's Speech relating to commercial policy be

read,

Mr. MILES trusted that ample time would be given to
the House to state its opinion on the subject.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said his statement would be rather
a commercial statement than a financial one. He would
not call on the house to come to any decision. He
would not wish any opinion on the plan until after the
lapse of some days. _ .

The House then resolved itself into Committee, and

Sir R. PEEL rose to explain to the House the mea-
sures which the Government proposed fur their adop
tion, in order to carry out the recommendation which
had just been read in regard to commercial policy.
Whatever might be the opinion ultimately formed
with regard to the merits of the proposal of
the Government, he was sure that the vast import-
ance of the interests concerned would secure to him a
patient and indulgent hearing. He was about to review
the duties applying to many articles, the produce of other
countries. He proceeded on the as ,umption that
the repeal of protective and prohibitive duties
was good, that abstractedly those duties were bad in
principle, and that it was necessary to show special
cause fur their maintenance. He agreed, that during
the last three years there had been increased pro-
duction and increased consumption, concurrent with
the repeal of prohibitive and the reduction of protective
duties. The course he should pursue had been sanctioned
by the House, and it was perfectly consistent to follow
out that course. He maintained, however, that in
the adoption of good principles they should not
be regariless of meriting public credit, nor
should they forget the recommendation that no loss
should be inflicted on any class of her Majesty's sub-
jects. He wished the house to deal deliberately and
dispassionately with his proposal. Perchance he was
about to meddle with so many interests, that all might
unite to oppose him, and when the question came
forward for discussion, it might be met by a notice that
protection to domestic industry was a good object, and
ought to be persevered in. It might be that those who
dissented from his scheme in part might be dis-
posed to support it as a whole, in order
to bring the present conflict to an equitable termination.
The principle of the relaxation of protective duties he
was not about to apply to any particular interest.
He was not about to call upon the agriculturists
to relinquish protection, and continue it to others.
Confident that his principle was a wise one, he called
upon all protectionists to relinquish their protection.
The principle of the new tariff bad been to lower all
duties to about 20 per cent. ad valorem—that was in 1842.
In subsequent years the principle had been still further
carried out. The duty on the raw material of manufac-
tures had been relinquished, and therefore he was en-
titled to call upon the manufacturer to relinquish his
protection. He proposed to continue to act on the prin-
ciples which that House had sanctioned, and to remove
the duties from those articles of raw material still
subject to it. These were only tallow and timber. Tallow
was largely used in important manufactures, and he pro-
posed to reduce the duty levied upon tallow. The
present duty was 3s. 2d. per cwt., and he pro--
posed, in order to encourage Russia in her libe-
ral policy, that Englund should, without stipulation,
reduce the duty from 3s. 2d. to Is. ad. With regard to
timber : Colonial timber was admitted at a nominal
duty, and as they were about to affect domestic interests,
they had a right to effect a reduction in the timber duties;
and he was anxious the consumer should reap the advan-
tage of the reduction, and therefore he proposed to make
it gradually. On an early day, after there had been an
opportunity of stating the details of the subject, the in-
tention of the Government should be made public
with regard to the reduction of the timber
duties. These were reductions, not repeals, and
with those exceptions he hardly knew any raw
materials which were subject to duty. He, there-
fore, called on the manufacturers to give that proof
of the sincerity of their convictions of the impolicy
of protective duties by relinquishing the protections.
He asked the manufacturers of woollen, linen, and
cotton, to set the example of relinquishing their pro-
tection. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Dorsetshire—
and he trusted that no political differences would inter-
rupt their private friendship—had expressed a hope that
small interests would not be interfered with. He in-
tended to interfere with great interests, and to meddle
as little as possible with small ones. Manufactured
cottons formerly were subject to a duty of 10 per
cent. He proposed it should be imported duty free,
without restriction. The duty on manufactured cottons,
which was now 20 per cent., he proposed to reduce to 10
per cent. Tie was the more anxious that the manufac-
turers should assent to this, because they had set the
example by asking for protection. Adam Smith stated that
it was not the agriculturists but the manufacturers that had
commenced the system of monopoly. " Country gentle-
men and farmers," said Adam s3aith" , were least actuated
by the wretched spirit of monopoly.—(A laugh.) Pro.
tection was first pressed on the Legislature by the trading
interests, and, therefore, they should first relinquish it.
With regard to linens and woollens, he proposed that
they also should relinquish protection, and he doubted
not but that the skill of the country would beat foreigners.
Woollen goods were subject to a duty of 20 per cent. He
proposed to reduce it to to per cent ou linens as well as
on cottons and woollens ; that the aperser sorts should
come in duty free, and that in regard to the
finer sorts the reduction of duty should be
reduced to one-half of its present amount.
With
r.,:::ect to silk, he thought that they should apply,
but make a great reduction. They
not the same sysL.7l'
t to many articles. was pro-
had a duty which in respL
n to domestic
hibitory, and it was considered a proteeLL
industry. It was no such thing, for there were how: :n
Paris which would guarantee the delivery of the goods
in London at one-half the duty. They would, by a re-
duction of that duty, encourage a lawful traffic instead
of an unlawful one. There were many articles of silk
on which the duty was more than 30 pei• cent, as, for
instance, on crape and other articles of manufacture.
He proposed a new arrangement of those duties, and
that the general rule should be to levy a duty ad valo-
rem, in no case exceeding 15 per cent. Then with re-
gard to paper, the duty was ls. per square yard, without
distinction of quality. He proposed to reduce that duty