The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-24 00:00:00

increase the supply, and they had done so to an
enormous extent, for in 1841 the import of timber from
the B iltic was 140,000 loads, while in 1847 it was from
220,000 to 440,000. Having said he had great difficulty
in detecting some broad and tangible shape in the Noble
Lord's charge, he would leave that subject, with the con-
viction that he was not entitled to assume the race was
one of ruin to British merchants, but, on the contrary,
of great advantage to the public, and of little loss, in.
deed to the commercial interests of the country. Then,
with regard to silk, the duty was altered by a reduction
of 2s. in the pound in 1842 on Indian silk. The Noble
Lord was busy on that evening drawing inferences from
matters of fact, and he was bound to say, as he already
said, that he ought not to take any particular period for
those inferences. lie had been endeavouring to show
there was decay in the trade, and he took the years 1846
and 1847 as compared with 1844 and 1845, when it was
moll known its prosperity was at its climax in the latter
years, notwithstanding that a most important alteration
took place in 1842.
Lord G. BENTINCK denied that he had done so. He
took two years of one period and compared them with
two of another.

Mr. GLADSTONE observed that no doubt the Noble
Lord was a judge of what he meant to say, but on his
words he (Mr. Gladstone) had a right to put a fair
conclusion. With respect to distress in Spitalfields, it
was to be considered whether that arose from the ma-
chinery in Manchester, or the existence of a rural silk
trade in Essex and Herefordshire. lie did not believe
however, that it was greater now than before, but at all
events it was not fairly traceable to free-trade measures,
and beside, the Noble Lord ought to recollect that that
House was not legislating for Spitalfields, but for the
entire United Kingdom.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble
Lord was undoubtedly correct when he said that greater
importation of silk took place in 1844, 1845, 1846, and
1847. But did he not know that the: two former
years were periods of unexampled prosperity, while the
two latter were without a parallel for distress ? In
every point of view his own statement was satisfactory.
He showed that it increased in every particular by en
average of the ten preceding years, and not by compar-
ing one period of prosperity with another. The Right
Hon. Gentleman having referred to the increase of the
imports of the raw materials as a proof that in-
creased employment was thus given to the people,
proceeded. Were they to have nothing purchased
Were they to introduce the wine-presses of France into
England, or the houses used in the manufacture of sugar
in the tropics ? The fallacy, in point of fact, was so
gross that no one could go through the streets, and see
the thousand examples placed before his eyes without
laughing at the absurdity of the Noble Lord's com-
mercial policy. lie (Mr. Gladstone) did not know
whether, in his peregrinations for commercial informa-
tion, he ever went up from the City to Lambeth in one
of those boats which carry passengers for a penny each
—(Laughter.) The movements of that vessel were
managed by five or six persons, and yet they carried six
or eight hundred persons in the course of an afternoon ;
would the Noble Lord be acting as a man of common
sense, or as a patriot, if he insisted, as in old times, that
they should be carried by the watermen, because forsooth
100 of theta would be engaged, instead of the five or six
who now managed the steamer !—(Laughter.) That
was the way in which the Noble Lord ought to scrutinize
those principles, from which he dated so much of the
distress of the people of England. He (Mr. Gladstone)
apprehended no evil consequences from any proceeding
of the Noble Lord ; he thought, without meaning him I
any offence, that the bit was in his mouth ; he believed
his opinions on commercial questions were not likely to
make the Parliament of Great Britain placelitself under
his guidance in matters of politicnl economy, which he
believed would bring this country to disgrace and
misery.
Mr. NEWDEGATE complained of the statements
put forward to the country by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man who had just sat down, and the lion. Member for
Westbury, and for his own part, believed that the
country was at that moment suffering severely. The
Hon. Gentleman, after referring to the quantity of silk
imported into this country between 1842 and 1847, for
the purpose of showing that the calculations on this
subject by the Right Hon. Member for Oxford Univer-
sity were founded in error, said that atter all, the con-
sequence arising from the present state of the silk trade,
was to reduce those engaged in it to the greatest desti
tution and the deepest distress. In his own district, if
it were not for the subscriptions of the gentry, the poor-
rates would have been unequal to the wants of the poor.
One thousand pounds were subscribed in Coventry for
the poor, and in seven weeks forty thousand loaves were
distributed amongst the working classes who were
thrown out of work owing to the present state of the
silk and ribbon trade. One of the consequences of this
state of things was, that the people were turning their
attention to politics. What was this but turning their
attention from trade to other matters, with the view of
discovering means to subvert the institutions of the
country. The free trade system had brought into the
country such a quantity of silk goods as was calculated
to paralyse the silk trade for years. He begged now to
draw the attention of the House to the depreciation of
our exports. The exports, generally, were depre-
ciated 17 per cent., and, in respect to silk goods, 34
per cent.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he found he had overstated
the case which he had put to the [louse. He forgot to
deduct the exports from the imports for the years 1846
and 1847, but he found that, taking the whole twelve
years, there was an increase in the quantity of raw and
thrown silk used in the country.
. Sir G. CLERK wished to say a few words on this
subject. He was anxious that every information should
be laid before the House, because he believed that the
more the principles of free trade were considered, the
more they would be found in accordance with the pros-
perity of the country. But it was said that the people
of Spitalfields and Coventry were in a state of distress.
Now was this the first time that distress was to be found
in these districts? The Noble Lord could find no parallel
for the distress of 1847, except that in 1826 in England,
and 1841 in Scotland. But this was before any altera-
tion-had taken place, in the policy of the country as re-
spected protection. The Bight Hon. Gentleman then
adverted to returns made by Captain Willis, from which
it appeared that the silk trade in Manchester was in
great activity. Ho was prepared to prove to the Noble
Lord (Bentinck) that in 1846 there was 4i- millions
of pounds of raw silk imported into this country, and
that in 1847 there was a very great falling off, to the
amount of no less than 60,0001b5. He also found that
there was a very great increase in the year 1844 in ma-
nufactured silk, for in 1844 it amounted to 700,0001bs.;
in 1845, to 714,0001193.; in 1846, to 808,0001bs.; and in
1847, to 907,0001b5.; which is an argument that cannot
be refuted. He would next refer to the losses sustained
by watchmakers, and the Government, by the importa-
tion of foreign watches, and was ready to show that the
watchmakers of this country memorialised the Treasury
in consequence of goOds of that description being im-
ported to the amount of 200,0001., which caused a re-
duction of 10 per cent. in the trade of the watchmakers
of this country. He then alluded to the manufacture in
the woollen trade, and argued that the Noble Lord (Lord
G. Bentinck) laboured under a very great hallucination.
lie should say that foreign disturbances did not in the
least tend to the benefit of this country by cutting off the
trade of foreign countries.
Mr. LA BOUCHERE said that he considered that the
measure introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
Peel) with respect to the corn-laws and other such mea-
sures were worthy of this House and this country, and
he felt assured that this country would be long proud of
such a measure. He then supported it, and as a private
Member was proud to have done so, and was therefore
strongly opposed to the motion of the Noble Lord (Lord
G. Bentinck). For with respect to raw silk imported
into this country he was prepared to prove that that
trade has very much increased; but it should be recol-
lected, on the other hand, that the export trade of
manufactured silk has also increased. The Noble Lord
(Lord G. Bentinck) should also know that there is a
diminution this year of 3,0001b5. of raw silk imported
into this country when compared with last year, which
must tend in some degree to the injury of the manufac
turing interest of this country. He should say, though he
was opposed to the motion as being unnecessary, that he
should not object to the returns demanded, but would
add, that the Government could not be answerable for
the accuracy of those returns.
Mr. M. GIBSON said that the first part of the even-
ing was employed in putting off the business of the
country to morrow, by engaging the House not to meet
then. He considered that the motion of his lion. Friend
(\tr. Hume) was worthy of attention. As a system of
policy, the Noble Lord should have made a substantive
motion, and have taken the sense of the House upon it,
instead of wasting time in discussing unopposed returns.
The Noble Lord might rely upon it, he would not be
considered as the friend of the people by endeavouring
to add to the price of the loaf, or sugar, or tea, and he
might tell him this, that such sympathy for their dis-
tress was sure to be regarded, not as the tears of their
friends, but as those of the crocodile. He could not be
called the friend of the people for that, neither could he
claim to be the friend of the farmer, if he endeavoured to
restore a monopoly now that he was exposed to the com-
petition of the foreigner.

Mr. HENRY said that he remembered well how the
Hon. Member for Manchester used, night after night,
to turn to the same subject of agitation, until he obtained
what he sought for, and, remembering that, ho felt sur-
prised to find that Hon. Member complaining of others
for doing the same thing. Ho did not, nor, indeed, could
he, deny that the Noble Lord the Member for King's
Lynn had a sympathy for the distress of the poor. yet
he said it was useless. Now, he could tell the Hon.
Member that they had their own conscientious opinions
on political matters, just as he had, and that they were
not to be repressed from uttering them by any such
means as he had chosen that evening to have re-
course to.

Lord G. BENTINCIC briefly explained, complaining
that his argument had been much misrepresented, or
much misunderstood, by the Right Honourable Member
fur Oxford. With regard to the observations of the
llonourable Gentleman, the Member for Oxford, he
confessed he was much surprised to hear him accuse
him of endear oaring to enhance the price of sugar,
when he had aimed, in particular, to take a halfpenny
off the duty on colonial sugar. The Right Honourable
Gentleman rose to stop a discussion, when the object
for which it had been commenced had been obtained.
Then it was that the Right Honourablo Gentleman
wasted the time of the House. lie was at a loss to ac-
count for his great dislike to Epsom Downs, unless it
arose from the circumstance, that he had been intro-
duced by Sir Thomas Gooch, as a most promising Pro-
tectionist representative for the county of Surrey; and
perhaps, too, he well knew what a choking hill there
was at Epsom for colts that were disposed to run jady.
—(Great laughter.) If it were at all inconvenient to
the Government, however, he could obtain the returns
from his own friends in the City, without troubling
them.
, The returns were then ordered.