The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-25 00:00:00

colonies. In the year 1842, 1,550 vessels cleared the ports
with 540,000 tonnage ; in 1844, the tonnage was 789,000, and
the number of vessels cleared was 2,284. This did not rest
upon his own statement. A Committee had been
appointed for the last year in which a question of a similar
nature as the present was raised. One of the witnesses,
a perscn much connected with the shipping trade, had stated
that the benefit to the shipping interest by the operation of the
tariff made a difference in favour of the British shipping, in
their competition with the foreigner, Equal to 30 per cent. He
was asked, with reference to the prices of freight, if 38s. or 40s.
was sufficient remuneration, his reply was, that if they would
insure him 385., he would contract to supply the country with
any amount of tonnage. Another objection which had been
raised was, that the.shipowners found it difficult to maintain a
competition which would remunerate them for their outlay, in
consequence of the very expensive materials used in the con-
struction of their ships. Ship-building a short time since cost
more than it would do at present, in consequence of the re-
duction of duty on timber. It had been stated that Baltic
timber was necessary for the construction of a twelve years'
ship ; but he seemed to forget, that having once obtained this
material, the value of the ship was thereby greatly enhanced.
If he (the Chancellor of the ExChequer) could compare
great things w ith small, he could compare this class of
shipowners with those innkeepers on the Great North
Read, whose business had fallen away in consequence of the
diversion of the traffic by the railroads. It had also been urged
that by adopting the present measures we should injure Canada
—that country which we had flattered so before; for said Hon.
members, are you not going to admit foreign corn into this
country, and will not that be a breach of your compact made
with them ? He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) stood up
for the importance of supporting the colonies of this country,
and of doing everything likely to conduce to their ultima e
benefit.—( Hear, hear.) They had no right however to com-
plain, if fur a general benefit we introduced competition with
those upon the same terms as with the mother country. Ir
Canada complained, their answer would be that she stood upon
the same tooting as the mother country, and therefore she had
no right to complain. Another favourite argument which had
been used in the discussion of this question—a favourite mode
when argument cannot be readily produced, is to draw some
very extravagant picture of its effecr. If free trade, said they,
is to be adopted, we must have free trade in all things—the
duty must be taken off tea, coffee, and all other commodities:
Ile (the Clincellor of the Exchequer) did not, however,
adopt extreme opinions on this question, either on one side or
the other ; he considered that it was impossible in any financial
position to avoid in some measure a system of protective duties.
When he advocated free trade, he did it under the considera-
tion that it was necessary for the purposes of revenue—for the
preservation of the public morals and the public safety—that
some restrictive eluties should be retained. He did not conceive
that in so doing he was at ail deprecating a system of free
trade. He viewed this question in the same light as he would
the question of civil liberty. In that case it was necessary for
the preservation of the public safety and morals that there
should be some restrictive and prohibitory laws. Other argu-
ments have been adduced to prove that the repeal of the corn-
laws would materially affect the conditon of the agricultural
labourer. They have supposed that by .the introduction of
competition with the agriculture of other countries we were
likely to be overwhelmed by foreign agriculture produce. This
question had been ably argued in the course of the debate.
He would not trouble the House with the recapitu-
lation of those arguments, but he would merely
call the earnest attention of the House to two cases
which these experiments had been tried, and he would give
the result of those experiments, and he would shew the ad-
vantages which it afforded to the country. In the reign of
Charles 11. the agricultural interests of this country seemed to
have entertained opinions similar to these professed by indi-
viduals in connexion with the agricultural interest at the
present day, and they were also deeply affected by the imports
of articles which came into competition with them. In the
preamble to an Act passed in that reign it was stated, that
whereas certain lands of an inferior quality in this country
cannot be so well employed as in fattening cattle, therefore be
it enacted, that no cattle shall be imported, and those per-
sons who shall at any time import or cause to be imported any
cattle from that country into England shall be subject to cer-
tain penalties which it was not necessary for him to read.
At that period it was curious to refer to the arguments which
which were used for the purpose of giving to this country as
entire and complete monopoly. The historian tells them that
there were great and general murmurs at that time, complain-
ing of the great injury sustained by the agriculturists of that
country in consequence of the importation of cattle, which
were bred in Ireland with scarcely any trouble and expense;
and if some enactment did not take place, the breeding of
cattle in England would be given over, and thereby the rents
would be decreased, whilst the rent in Ireland would rise to a
considerable extent, and this could only be avoided by an Act
of Parliament." Sonic members of the agriculturists of that
time, Lord Clarendon tells them, complained that they had
not " land bad enough to breed cattle upon," and that ap-
peared to be the case in many counties. However, in the face
of those Hon. Members, the Bill was carried through the
Ilonse, limiting the importation of cattle. In the House of
Lords, the resolution was carried with all expedition, and it
was curious the Duke of Buckingham was at the head of those
who favoured the Bill with most marvellous concern.—
(Loud laughter.) When that measure passed, about seven
years afterwards, a most distinguished man in that
country, writing to the Lard Lieutenant, said " That
the cattle which were brought over from the Irish
soil would in future be brought from Rouen and Lisbon,"
The expectation of that Bill, that it would keep up the rent of
laud in England, was proved by those who were most capable
of judging that it had not in the slightest degree that effect.
There was another case which proved the great value of admit-
ting a competition with them. It was perfectly well known
that up to the period of the union Ireland was treated as a
foreign country ; and that since then, the importation of corn
and cattle were freely admitted ; and notwithstanding the value
of agricultural commodities considerably increased, up to the
period of 1841. After the union, a free intercourse was es-
tablished between that country and Ireland, and the corn of
Ireland was freely admitted into the market of England in
competition with their own corn. It must be borne in mind
that at that particular period the quantity of corn grown
in England was proportionate with the population—( Hear
hear)—lreland then sent large quantities of corn to this coun-
try for home consumption to so great an extent that it am-
mounted to one million quarters per annum, for
the maintenance of the population of England.
That importation graduaily increased until it amounted
to three million; and tour millions quarters annually. If lhooe
persons used the argument that the importation of corn
would ruin the agriculturists of Engl ind, what would they Fay
of that tact when the admission of corn from Ireland was
permitted into England. If they could sustain the introduction
of agricultural produce from Ireland at a period when their
population was not more than fifteen millions without injury,
what danger had they now to fear with the increased improve-
ment in agricultural knowledge, and with an increased popu•
laii_n in the United Kingdom, amounting to twenty-seven
millions ? Why, from the date of the union, they may date
the great improvement which had taken place in agricultural
science in that country. They found that in the very year
that the free admissions of Irish corn took place, there were a
greater number of Bills passed through that House connected
with agricultural improvements than on any former occasion.
--(Hear, hear.) They also found that the gentlemen of Eng-
land paid greater attention to the improvement of agri-
culture than they were ever known to do before.
They found too that the price of corn in England
was not reduced by the importation which had taken place ;
but, on the contrary, agricultural prosperity was growing from
year to year. If, therefore, as he said before, that large quan-
tities of Irish corn were imported, without finding any possible
effect, but when they found on the contrary, that competition
led to permanent improvements, how could they argue that a
small introduction of corn from the Continent could produce
those disastrous effects which he had heard so often stated?
But there was another remarkable circumstance in connexion
with these two parts of the United Kingdom, Great Britain and
Ireland. Which of the two countries was agriculture most
advantageous to—Great Britain or Ireland ? No man present,
he believed, would deny that the agriculture of Ireland, com-
pared with the agriculture of England, was deficient in an ex-
treme degree. How then would competition act with the two
countries ? The corn pro hicers in England brought to their
aid exertions, intelligence, and energy, but in Ireland agriculture
remained little better that, it was many years ago, for corryeti-
lion was not known there, and the want of agricultural enterpri,e
proved an injury to them, which was not telt in England. It
was said by an Hon. Member that that measure ,vonld prove
injurious to the people of Ireland. Why, he (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) was sure, that his lion. Friend would feel that
' the same results would take place its that country which
eaeopet.tioa had created in England. The measure was far
from decreasing the value of property in that country. The
stimulus that would ba given to trade there, by increased de-
m tut!, would produce in that country, as it had in England, the
effete of giving employment in agriculture, and also from the
establishment of manufactures, which were so much required
in Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) It had been stated, and it had
been truly stated, by his Noble Friend, that the markets of
this country were open to the world. If there was any prin-
ciple better understood, it was for the most part that a home
market was necessary for the. agricultural produce of that
country. So far from causing injury, that measure would
create employment in the increased competition that would take
place in the extended commercial intercourse which such a
measure would create. He would confine himself to another
tist•pic. He had heard, during a great portion of that debate,
i fferent arguments used with respect to the inconsistency of
public men —(Loud ironical cheers.) He was an advocate
for consistency—(Similar cheers.) But does that consistency
consist in adhering to principles which varied with the altered
state of society?--( Hear, hear, and cheers from the free
traders.) If in any one measure they adopted the principles of
f
ree trade, there was no good reason why they might not be
adopted in auothee, at a subsequent period; and ha would like
to know what gentleman was there in that House who had not,
at
..esome time or other changed the opinions which he held?
kt knew none who had not to some extent, changed their
InitaciPles with respect to those'laws. Were the Hon. Gentle-
opposed to the measure, themselves agreed as to what
course shell b pursued ?—( Hear, hear.) Were they pre-
Pplasresidngt° omfaltnhtosaie: the principles which were entertained at the
to be laws? and were they prepared to say that
those leas ought t
permanent in the country ?—(Cheers. )
When they were pre
can be effected withPgrreeadt to show him a time when the repeal
hoe
to the great body of the
community, then he
the Hon. Gentlemen show 1:1 prepared to join them ; or would
ta,.time when re,istance to the
repeal of the corre law vitvoeurl! e tended with less danger or
threatened with a great calamity
chance of success ? They
in consequence of the failure of the
that
bound to look forward to the effects which Potato Cr°P, and they were
Afani!durethwo-uasolikielliys
to produce in the produce of future
had produced
Hon. Friend the Member for Stalfeoard"shir
different
from his garden a fine potato, grown from onee of the diseased
raeesuml te sn.
roots, yet there were other experiments madels
on a more extensive scale, which lead to very
He had seen accounts from North Anaerica, whereret
had now prevailed for thre consecutive years, and he found id
ethsatt
in the present year the failure in several parts of that country
was fully equal to that which prevailed in many districts in
Ireland.—( Hear.) What happened in other countries might
also happen in their own, and it was right that they should
not forego the opportunity of providing beforehand a supply
which would be able to protect them from the effects of such a
calamity. They should also recollect that a failure in the
crops had very generally prevailed upon the Continent, and
they mast naturally infer that they would experience a diffi-
culty in obtaining a sufficient supply, rather than that they
should be inundated with corn, as some Members have imagined.
Did the House ever consider that the produce of 120,000 acres
of wheat, were year by year required to support the growing
population of the country, and did not that circumstance alone
prove the necessity of making provision is time for the want
which must press upon the couotry.—(Hear, hear.) He,
therefore, thought in a time of general distress and disaffection,
by repealing the corn-laws, they would effectually
provide for the happiness and comfort of the people.
—( Hear, hear, cheers and counter cheers;) He was extremely
sorry that in the course of that debate so many of his Hon.
Friends should have expressed themselves in terms of strong
disapprobation of the course pursued by her Majesty's Minis-
ters.—( Hear, hear.) He regretted that those for whom he
es 1:
iet.eret alned the sincerest respect, should have expressed them-
hastily, not merely with respect to the measures of the
Government, but also with respect to the personal conduct of
his Right Hon. Friends.—(
retort those expres
Dahl'
Hear, hear.) He did not intend to
lions, but his Right Hon. Friend, the Member
for the University of
(Mr. Shaw) male a speech
which contained far more eloquentrl declamation than it did ar-
gument. He stated a principle, which he (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) cordially concurred in, viz , that it was
Member to maintain that course
the duty of an independent.