The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-29 00:00:00

T II E

mining trade. The mining interest of Cornwall had
found out what would be the ultimale effect of this
measure if it passed, by the:recent large importations of
foreign ore. The result of this importation already
was that a fall of nearly twenty per cent. had occurred;
and this reduction had plunged the entire mining
interest into a state of great embarrassment, he
might almost say ruin. The c•lse of the miner was
different to that of the manufacturer. The manu-
facturer, if thrown out of work, could find employ-
ment elsewhere; hut the miner had no such resource—
he could only Lind employment at that sort of
labour in which he had been brought up, and only in
mining districts. He also confirmed the statement of
the Noble Lord (Lord Beranek), that the returns from
the Board of' Trade were erroneous. This was not a
question of free trade, but a question of employment of
the people. They might change their markets to Chili
or to Cuba, but would that change benefit the people in
England, or make up for the people who would be
thrown out of employment by the operation of this
measure? At present the trade in copper ore employed
20,000 tons of shipping, and it was owing to this trade
and the return freights of coal, &c., that the country
owed much of its prosperity. If the present duties were
removed the Cornish miners would be exposed to a great
source of competition which they had hitherto escaped.
By the change of 1842 the miners had derived no ad-
vantage whatever, but any benefit which had arisen
from the measure had gone to the shipowners. It was
urged that there was a necessity for a change in con-
sequence of a decrease in the importations, but that
decrease had only arisen from legislative causes. The
importation was for a time reduced, but the quantity
produced was the same. The duty, however, had not
operated against the importation, for, taking the ave-
rage of the last three years, the amount of ore imported
was as great as at any other similar period, so that the
data upon which this measure was founded were alto-
gether wrong. It had been said that there were smelt-
ing works at Hamburgh, but they could not affect the
English smelters, inasmuch as they had a duty of 155.
per ton to pay upon the coals. Then they had been told
of the smelting works of the United States, but in the'
United States they only smelted the rich ores of Cuba;
and the total amount of copper produced from the United
States smelting works did not exceed fifty tons a month.
Then with regard to France, the importation of copper
ore into that country did not exceed from 1,500 to 2,000
tons in the year. In fact, the English smelters ac-
knowledged that they had nothing to tear from foreign
competition. It had been said that there had been a
decrease in the quantity of copper smelted in England in
consequence of those duties, but he denied that such was
the case. The export of copper from England to France
had, for several ) ears past, shown an amount of increase
both in quantity and.in value. One of the great arguments
used in favour of the Government measure was, that the
continuance of the present system was against the prin-
ciples of free trade. He denied that such was the case.
The free-trade tariff of 1844 gave to many metallic
manufactures a protection of 10 per cent. The copper
miner, however, did not ask for such a protection; he
only asked for a protection of 6.1 per cent. The question
was, whether it would or would not advantage the manu-
facturers of Lancashire to lose 100,000 customers in Corn-
wall, in order to gain 50,000 customers in Cuba, each of
the Cornish customers being in the habit of purchasing
their manufactures to three times the amount of the
Cuban customer. The miners of Cornwall had hoped
that this question had been finally settled in 1844,
Upon the faith of that settlement large sums of money
had been invested in mining speculations in Cornwall,
and such being the case, he called upon the Government
not, on mere theoretical grounds, to disturb that ar-
rangement.
Mr. LABOUCHERE, considering that the question
had been fully discussed on the 17th April, in a very full
House, trusted that he might stand excused if. at that late
hour of the evening, he abstained from going at any
great length into the consideration of the question.—
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had found fault with
the Government for delaying the second reading of the
Bill to this late period of the session, and had said that
it' the discussion had been taken in a fuller House there
would have been less probability of the carrying of the
measure; but be would remind the Noble Lord that on
the 17th of April, in the middle of the session, this very
question had been discussed in a very full House, and
that, on a division, the principle of the measure had been
adopted by a majority of 102 who had voted in favour of
the measure, to 35 who had voted against it.—(Cheers.)
Hu believed it was not now necessary for him to waste
the time of the House by adducing arguments to prove that
which was now universally admitted—that it was always
good policy to reduce import duties on all raw materials
which entered into the great staple manufactures of the
country; and it would be a waste of time to adduce
arguments to show the advantage of being enabled to
Produce all brass and copper articles at a lower rate of
price than they could be produced for at present. In
1845 there were 56,000 tons of foreign copper ore im-
ported; in 1846 the amount fell to 50,900 tons, and in
1847 it was still further reduced to 47,900 tons. While
upon that point he would advert to what the Noble Lord
had said against the statistical department of the Board
of Trade, and that in no very measured language, to-
wards the very distinguished man who presided over
the statistical department of the Board—Mr.Fonblanque
—of whom the Noble Lord—from that unfortunate
habit he had—(lronical cheers, and counter cheers)—
whenever he happened to detect an error of any kind in
accounts—had spoken, not as a man who had fallen into
error, as most men, even the Noble Lord himself, were
liable to do, but as a sort of public delinquent who
could have no reason whatever for the mistake except
some discreditable motive. But the error, he believed,
admitted of a simple and satisfactory explanation. The
Noble Lord must remember that since the resolution
had passed upon which the Bill was founded a change
had taken place in the mode of taking the duty. It had
been taken the last three months, not upon the metal
contained in the ore, but upon the ore itself. The
Noble Lord had said ho supposed the amount of ore
upon which the duty was paid was given cor-
rectly—that though the amount of ore was correctly de-
scribed as having been charged, yet that it was inconsis-
tent with the amount of metal charged with duty as
taken from the ore. The explanation of the discre-
pancy would be found in the fact that for the last three
months the copper introduced in the shape of ore into
this country had been charged with duty solely upon
the ore, and not upon the metal contained in it; and the
Noble Lord would find that stated in the tables of the
Board of Trade, and therefore the duty charged upon
the metal could not have appeared in the returns. The
amount of ore appeared, but not the amount of duty
upon the metal, at least for the last three months. It
appears for the first three months, but not for the last

Lord G. BENTINCK—That is my case.
Mr. LABOUCHERE—The Noble Lord would not
have had the statistical department of the Board of Trade
state that it received—
Lord G. BENTINCK—You misrepresent me. I said
the quantity charged with duty; there is all the diffe-
rence between charged and received.
Mr. LABOUCHERE did not mean to misrepresent
the Noble Lord. But he would not detain the House
longer. He had said enough to prove that there was
really no ground for the unwarrantable attack which
the Noble Lord had made. He would not defend any
man whom he believed to be in the wrong, whether it
was an official at the Board of Trade, on anybody else.
But, as long as he had the honour to preside over that
or any other department of the public service, whenever
he heard any subordinate official attacked as he had that
night, he would do his best to defend him.
Lord G. BENTINCK—You have not succeeded to-
night.
Mr. LABOUCHERE proceeded to observe that the
Noble Lord and the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat
down had stated that the Bill would be all to the advan-
tage of a few smelters who had a monopoly of the smelt-
ing trade in this country; but they had confined their
attention to only a part of the Bill. They should have
considered the whole measure. Copper manufactures
were also allowed to be imported, and the consequence
was, the only real check that could be applied to the
smelting trade of this country was the competition with
smelters abroad, and such were the advantages possessed
for the smelting of copper in this country that he had
no doubt it would continue to be the great seat of the
smelting trade of the world. The admission of foreign
ore could not but be of advantage, from the mixture of
ores it would occasion, to those engaged in the trade,
while he was convinced that to the community at large
it would be fraught with great and permanent advan-

tage.
Mr. HENLEY said that the Noble Lord had accused
the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, and not merely any
subordinate; and, therefore, whatever error was alleged
was attributed not to Mr. Fonblanque, or any other per-
. __. .

son, but to the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, and now
let them see what kind of explanation the Right Hon.
Gentleman had offered. The Right Hon. Gentleman
said that at the time the resolution passed the copper
had not been assayed. But if a difference took place at
the time of the passing of the resoliition, some distinc-
tion ought to have been made in the quantity of copper
ore. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that since the
passing of the resolution the duty was charged not on
the copper, but on the coppor ore. Now, the printed
paper showed the copper ore for the whole six months;
and how could any one tell on which portion the duty
was charged and on which portion it was not charged?—
(Hear, hear.) How could any one distinguish, of the
27,0001., how much was charged one way and how much
the other? He might be told that he could find that out
by going back to the month of April. Possibly that
might be so, but it certainly was not a proper mode of
keeping accounts, for there was nothing to indicate that
any change had taken place in the mode of charging the
duty. On looking at the account in April, he found the
quantity of copper ore imported was 6,600 tons—nearly
1,300 tons of copper. In the next month the import was
27,000 tons, yielding the same amount of copper.
Mr. LABOUCHERE was understood to dissent.
Mr. HENLEY—The same amount of copper was
then printed.—(Hear.) It might or it might not be an
error, but it was at all events a clumsy way of keeping
the account, and did not show the true state of the case.
But suppose the present Bill should not pass, how would
the Right Hon. Gentleman charge the duty ?—(Hear,
hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had made a very
strange statement. He had rested the question alto-
gether on the ground of revenue, and had said that the
reason why the change did not take place before was
that the duty could not be spared. Now, he (Mr. Hen-
ley) should say that, since the year 1842, there never was
a time when the duty could be less spared.—(Hear.) But
that was not all. In the year 1842 the Right Hon.
Gentleman took a different view of the subject, and ar-
gued it on the price of copper abroad and the necessity
of preventing any injury to the mining interests of
Cornwall.—(Hear.) Would the Right Hon. Gentleman
Pretend to say that the mining interests of Cornwall were
now in a better state than they were at that time, or
rather, that they were not in greater jeopardy than they
were in the year 1842 ?—(Hear, hear.) The great ar-
gument of Hon. Gentlemen opposite in support of this
measure was, that copper would become cheaper to the