The Sun.
London, England, 1834-06-06 00:00:00

BANKRUPTS,

WILLIAM KEY, linen-draper, lsleworth, Middlesex,
to surrender June 19, at half-past twelve, and July 19, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Jones, Size-lane,
Bucklersbury ; Graham, official assignee, Copthall-build-
ings.

.I,k:IIES NEW3IAN, jun., corn-factor, Mark-lane,
June 17, at one, and July 18, at eleven, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Groom, Abchurch-lane, official assignee ;
Atkins, Poultry.

FR.iNCI§IIIETFORD, mealtrian, Bath, June 14, at
eleven, and July IS, at one, at the Christopher Inn,
Bath. Cook, Bath.

BARON DAVIES, clothes-dealer, Manchester, June
20, at ten, and July 18, at two, at the Commissioners'
Rooms, Manchester. Seddon, Manchester ; Johnson and
Wetherall, Temple, London.
THOMAS TURKINGTON and THOMAS WIN-
LAW, tin-plate workers, Leeds, June 18, and July 18, at
twelve, at the Commercial-buildings, Leeds. Battye,
Fisher, and Sudlow, Chancery-lane; Hargreaves, Leeds.
THOMAS BARKER, tanner, Sutton Saint Edmunds,
Liecoln, June 17, and July 18, at eleven, at the Peacock
Inn, Boston. Bonner, Spalding ; Williams, Verulani-
buildings, Gray's Inn.
SAMUEL PRUJEANE WRIGHT, painting-brush-
manufacturer, Christopher-street, Hatton-garden, June
16, at one, and July 18, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Bolton, Austin-friars; Waithman, Basinghall-
street. official assignee.
JOHN WATSON, music-dealer, Calthorp-street,
Grey's Inn-road, June 13, at twelve, and July 18, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Green, King's
Arms-yard, Coleman-street, official assignee; Hudson,
King-street, Cheapside.
FRANCES PRITCHARD, upholsterer, Bath, June
113, and July 18, at eleven, at the White Hart Inn, Bath.
Frowd, Essex-street, Strand, London ; Cruttwell and
Sons, Bath.

RICHARD GORE, merchant, Liverpool, June 18,
and July 18, at eleven, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liver-
pool. Hampson, Manchester ; Holden, Liverpool ; and
Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bedford-row, London.
WILLIAM ALEXANDER OHMANN and JAMES
COLQUHOUN KEMP, merchants, Liverpool, June 18,
at one, and July 18, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Li-
verpool. Alawdsley, Doran's-lane, Lord-street, Liverpool ;
Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bedford-row, London.
JOsEPH LAWLESS, commission-agent, Manchester,
June 17, at one, and July 18, at ten, at the Commis-
sioner's-rooms, Manchester. Makinson, Market-street,
Manchester ; Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bedford-
row, London.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The house sat at four o'clock, for the purpose of
proceeding with the further consideration of the War-
wick Borough Bill.
Several witnesses were examined upon tue bill, and
at five o'clock the further examination of witnesses
was adjourned to Tuesday week.
The Earl of ELDON presented several petitions
against the admission of the dissenters to the Univer-
sities, and in favoui of the established church, from
parishes in the counties of Gloucester, Suffolk, and
Cambridge.
Lord KEN YON presented petitions from parishes
in Shropshire, against the abolition of church rates and
other concessions to the dissenters.

Earl BROWNLOW presented petitions from pa-
rishes in Leicestershire, in favour of the established
church. .

The Bishop of LONDON presented between 80
and 90 petitions from parishes in Essex and Middle-
sex, against the separation of church and state.
The Bishop of WINC HE STE R presented several
petitions from parishes in Hampshire, against the ad-
mission of dissenters to the universities, and the sepa-
ration of church and state ; also a petition from Cam-
berwell, signed by between 2,000 and 3,000 persons,
for the prevention of Sunday trading.
Lord FOLE Y presented petitions from the Dis-
senters of Bewdley, praying for relief.
The Earl of ABERDEEN presented petitions
from parishes in Aberdeen, in favour of the Esta-
blished Church.

Several private bills were forwarded a stage.
Several private bills were brought up from the
Commons by Mr. James Ewing, Viscount Gore, and
others.

Petitions against the use of climbing boys were
presented by Lord Suffield and the Bishop of Bath
and Wells.

On the motion of the Earl of ROSEBERRY,
the additional Churches (Scotland) Bill passed
through a committee, and was reported with a few
verbal amendments. The House Duty Repeal Bill
also went through a committee of the whole house and
was reported without any amendment—to be read a
third time on Monday.
The Marquis of LANDSDOWNE presented pe-
titions from Stanfield and several other parishes
in Wiltshire against the separation of church and
state—also petitions from Grimsby and Swansea,
praying for a redress of the grievances under which
Dissenters labour.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE said before the
house proceeded to the order of the day, he was
anxious to ask a question of the noble earl opposite
(Grey) upon a subject that he had expected would

~ , '\

have been taken up by some noble lorNmore able to
do it justice than lie was. He wanted to know Whether
the administration was now formed, and upon
what principles ? To that explanation he considered
their lordships entitled ; and therefore it was that
he, seeing no one else had done so, Was induced
then to put the question. The administration
was now either framed, or it was not ; if it
was, then every one was well aware that it
was formed upon principles of entire hostility to,
and subversion of, the established church of the coun-
try. ( Hear, hear.) That proposition was fully
proved by the secession of those members of the
late aliMmistratiOn who had done themselves so
much honour in withdrawing from a government
which had determined to act in a manner that would
draw upon them the maledictions of the entire count
try. If such was the case, then their lordships
would not fail to perceive that a strange and
most anomalous state of things would instantly
arise. Their lordships would all remember a speech
which had been delivered by his most gracious Ma-
jesty to the Reverend Bench of Bishops ; it was a
speech which ' every one exulted in, and which
it was impossible too much to eulogize ; in
fact, it was such a speech as was to be:expected from
the mouth of so worthy and exalted a sire. ( Hear.)
That speech proved that his Majesty was as firmly
attached to the religious institutions of the country
as he ever was, and as much so as some others seemed
to be its enemies. Then they had on the one side an
administratien formed upon principles of injury
and persecution to the Cchurch of England, while
On the otner hand (and he thanked God for it)
they had the King as determined to uphold that
glorious institution to the very utmost of his power.
( Slight cheering.) As the case stood in that
most anomalous state, he felt himself bound
to call upon the noble earl ( Grey) to afford
that house and the country generally some explanation
of it—they were entitled to know the real principles
of those who were now in power, and he therefore now
asked them whether they meant to violate the consti-
tution—to call upon the King—
Earl. FIT ZW IL L I AM rose to order, and after
same time was allowed to proceed. He said he wished
to submit to the consideration of some of their lord-
ships, who had more experience of their forms than he
had, whether the noble duke was speaking in a strain
at all, or nearly conformable with those forms.
The noble duke had promised not to make a
speech, but to put what he had to say in the form
of a question, but the noble duke had made a
speech, and had asked whether the admininistration
that was about to be formed was prepared to call
on his Majesty to violate his conscience. ( Hear.)
In a former part of his speech the noble duke had, as
it appeared to him, rather intruded upon that principle,
which held that the name of his Majesty was not to
be introduced in debate. (Loud cries of " Hear,
hear.") Those two prssages of the noble duke's
speech to which he had alluded appeared to him to
make it a matter of grave consideration whe-
ther such a strain of addressing their lordships
was quite consistent with their orders, which it was
desirable to preserve for the purpose of maintaining
the freedom and independence of debate in that house.
Lord KEN YON said the noble earl opposite, for
the purpose for which he had addressed the house, ap-
peared to have risen at the wrong time, because
he had not risen when the name of the Sovereign was
mentioned, but only when the noble duke had called on
his Majesty's ministers to state what course they
intended in future to pursue. (Cries of " Hear,
hear.") Nnthing could be more proper than to
call upon his Majesty's ministers to explain to the
house whether the gronnds upon which they intended
to proceed were such as would make it unfit for the
house to place eonfidence in them.
Earl FITZWILLIAM—I beg to express my
gratitude to the noble lord opposite for his sanc-
tion to the course which I took. ( Loud cries of " Hear,
hear," and laughter.)
Lord KEN YON— No, no ; I did no such thing.
(Cries of " Order, order," and " Hear, hear," from
the opposition. benches.)
Earl FITZ WILLIAM—Then I am sure the noble
lord will not go the length of saying this, that if it
would have been right for me to have called
the noble duke to order, while he was actually
making use of the King's name, that I could
not be very wrong in telling him of it as soon as he
had begun the next sentence. ( Hear, hear. )
The Duke of NEWCA ST LE—I am perfectly
aware that his Majesty's name ought not to be introduced
in debate in this house ( Hear, hear) ; and it would
be proper if,-in measures that are introduced into this
house, the King's name was not made an improper
use of. (" Hear, hear," from the Opposition benches.)
but on this occasion I think I am bound to make use
of the King's name, because it is absolutely neces-
sary for the protection of the King that his name
should be -used ; and I beg to ask whether
it is the intention of his Majesty's government to in-
duce his Majesty to forswear his most solemn oath.
(Loud cries of " Order, order," and cheers from the
Conservatives.)
Earl GREY said, I certainly never can refuse the
privilege to any noble lord of putting a question to
his Majesty's ministers, nor shall I ever be unwilling
to answer such question when properly addressed.
I must however think upon the present occasion that
both the question put is a very strange one,
and the ground upon which it is put not less
so. The noble duke first sets out with
assuming that there is a discrepency. existing between
the declaration of his Majesty's ministers and the con-
stitution of his Majesty's administration. With respect
to the declaration alluded to I can say nothing,
not having advised his Majesty upon that occasion,
being in no ways responsible for that declara-
tion, not knowing by whom it was reported,
nor on what authority it rests ; but this I
can say, that if that speech declares his Ma-
jesty's determination to uphold the church. I
am eertain that it expressed truly the feel-
ings and determination of his Majesty upon that
important question. (Hear, hear, hear.) Give
me leave farther to say that as to the inference
which the noble duke appears to draw from
what premisses I know not, that there is in the
constitution of the present Administration something at
variance with the determination of his Majesty to uphold
the church, I must give to that the most positive con-
tradiction. The noble lord refers to the secession of
some members of the administration. Nobody regrets,
both upon personal and public grounds, that secesion.
more than I do, but I am sure, on leaving his Ma-
jesty's Councils, upon grounds which they in their
conscience, in honour, and in duty felt themselves com-
pelled to act, will give me credit, equally, for a sincere
desire with themselves to uphold the security of the
Protestant church. (Cheers.) More than this I
will not say npon the present occasion, as pro-
bably we shall soon have—possibly in the course
of this very ;night, an o portuaity of going more
into the circumstances which are connected with it ;
but I must protest, distinctly and decidedly, against
any interpretation which that noble duke may put upon
the changes which have unfortunately taken place in
his Majesty's councils, that may lead to the con-
clusion, that there is, in those who may remain in
his Majesty's councils, any other than a sincere
desire to maintain, by such means as they may think
best for the purpose, the purity, the efficiency, the
dignity, and the usefulness of the esttablished church.
The manner in which the question has been introduced
I do not think is proper. He has called upon me
to answer,this singular question, so singular that
I believe it has not before come into the mind of
any man to put,—" Is the administration founded
upon the principle of forcing his Majesty's con-
science ?" Is it possible that the noble duke has
thought upon the subject; and is it possible
there can be any but one answer to it? ( Hear,
hear, hear.) He may condemn the measures of
his Majesty's Ministers as loudly as he pleases,
but can he entertain the idea that any man here ever
had, or ever would attempt, to put the slightest
restraint upon his Majesty's conscience ? If any man
had proposed anything in opposition to what his Ma-
jesty deemed to be his duty, as the Sovereign and
father of his people, such a man could not remain for
one moment in his office as an adviser of the Crown.
( Hear, hear, hear.) Having said thus much
in answer to the question of the noble lord, I am
ready to meet any charge which the noble duke or
any other peer may be prepared to bring against me,
and if his Majesty's ministers are unworthy of the
royal confidence, the proper course for the noble duke
to take will be to move an address to his Majesty to
remove them. ( Cheers.)
The Duke of GLOUCESTER presented petitions
from several non-residents of the Universities of Cam-
bridge and Oxford against the claims of the dissenters.
The E arl of WICKLOW said, in bringing for-
ward his motion his should not detain the house long,
knowing the anxiety which prevailed not to hear his
sentiments, but those of others in reply to such obser-
vations as he might offer. If any apology was due
It was due to that country of which he had the honour

of being a representative, that he had not had an op..
portonity of asking the noble lord for an explanation,
which might have the effect of allaying the fears
entertained by the friends of the established church,
not only in Ireland but in England. (Hear.) He
did not bring forward this question out of hostility
to the_ministry, because he had always been desirous
of supp4ting their measures, and ha had no intention
to add to the embarrassments in which they were
already involved. He thought he perceived a system
of carrying on the Government in Ireland with more
impartiality towards that country, and more energy in
the Government itself. (Cries of " Hear, hear.")
He had, however, been most lamentably deceived.

(LIFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at twenty-five
minutes past five.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

A message from the V Lords announced that their
lordships had agreed to the Navy Pay Bill, the
Bill relative to Friendly Societies, and 'several
other bills. Their lordships also requested that that
house would be pleased to allow William Tooke, Esq.,
to attend a select committee of their lordships, ap_
pointed to inquire into and regulate the practice of
sweeping chimneys.
On the motion of Mr. BYNG, the Staines' Bridge
Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. E WART presented a petition from the mer-
chants of Liverpool against the Court of Passage Bill.
Petitions against the Poor Laws' Amendment Bill
were presented by Mr. William Brougham, from St.
George's, Southwark ; by Mr. Shaw Lefevre, from
Basingstoke ; by Mr. Strutt, from Derby: by Mr.
Hawkins, from Newport, Isle of Wight ; by Mr.
Charles Tyrell, from Hackney ; by Lord Ebrington,
from Witherington ; and by Mr. Gisborne, from the
neighbourhood of Derby.
On the. motion of Mr. HE ATHCOTE, returns
were ordered of the amount of exports and imports of
flour, meal, &c., in the islands of Guernsey, Jersey;
and Man.

Mr. P. THOMPSON, in answer to a question
from Mr. A. Baring, said, that cases of imputed fraud
respecting the importation of corn from the islands
of Guernsey and Jersey had been enquired into,
and be had from received the custom-house
officers of those islands their opinions stating that
they had no grounds for supposing that
frauds of that description had been committed. He
would further inquire into the subject.
Mr. FINCH gave notice that he would move an
amendment to the motion of the hon. and learned
member for Tipperary on Tuesday next, respecting the
Irish church.

Lord A LTH ORP, in answer to a question from
Mr. Goulburn, said, that if the house had no
objection, he would propose that the house should
sit on committee on the poor laws at the morning
sittings on Monday and Friday next week.
Upon the motion of the same noble lord for the
house to resolve itself into a committee upon the
Poor Laws' Amendment Bill.

Mr. COBBETT rose, and was left speaking.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 5.

The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a peti-
tion from West Bromley, praying for protection to the
Established Church.

The Earl of H ADDINGT ON said the principle
of the bill was good, but the details were capable of
great improvement. It was a most reasonable
thing that those who took upon themselves the
additional expense of erecting new churches should
possess the right of nominating their pastor ; but he
did not see the necessity of passing an act of such an
universal character as this. That, however, was a
question which could be better argued in committee,
and therefore he would not oppose the second reading.
The Duke of HAMILTON said no one could
more cordially agree with the principle of the bill
than himself. It was most desirable, that where there
was a disposition on the' part of the public to erect
new places of worship at their own expense, every
facility should be afforded to them. He should not
oppose the second reading, but would reserve to him-
self the opportunity of diseussina, particular points in
committee. _ _ _

After some observations from the Bishop of LON-
DON, the Earl of HAUDINOTON, and the Marquis df
BUTS, the bill was read a second time, and ordered to
be committed to morrow.

The house then proceeded with the further exami-
nation of witnesses on the Warwick Borough Bill, and
adjourned at a quarter past nine o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 5.

The SPEAKER resumed the chair at twenty-five
minutes past five.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
A message from the Lords announced that their
lordships had agreed to the Merthyr Tidvil Small
Debts, the Wisbeach Improvement, the Gloucester
Gas, and other bills.
Mr. Alderman WOOD brought in a Bill to Amend
the 2d Will. IV., for granting certain powers to the
General Steam Navigation Company, and a Bill to
provide for the better execution of the office of Con-
stable in the City of London and its Liberties, which
were severally read a first time.
On the motion of Lord GRANVILLE SOMER-
SET, the Bridgewater and Taunton Canal Bill was
read a third time and passed.
Lord HOWICK brought up a copy of the report
of the commission appointed to inquire into the state
of religious instruction in Ireland, which was ordered
to be laid on the table.
COUNTY SURVEYORS (IRELAND).
Mr. F. O'CONNO R said that a few nights ago he
had asked a question of the right hon. the Secretary for
Ireland relative to the appointment of county surveyors
under the New Grand Jury Act. He understood that
the appointments were in many instances most ob-
jectionable, and that there never was such a system of
extensive jobbing known in Ireland.
Mr. LITTL ETON could assure the house that the
statement was quite unfounded, and he was satisfied that
no more competent persons couldbe selected than those
who had been appointed. The surveyors were taken
from three different classes, and no persons had been
appointed from the second class until the whole of the
first class had been exhausted. He would repeat, that
there was not a shadow of ground for the insinuation.
Mr. F. O'C ONN 0 R said he would lay such evi-
dence before the house as would satisfy it of the cor-
rectness of his information.
Mr. LITTLETON said if it was possible for the
hon. member to procure a copy of the examination to
which the candidates had been subjected, he would be
satisfied that the most competent persons had been
selected.
Mr. CHAPMAN asked .a question relative to the
stamp duty upon contracts for county work.
Mr. LITTLETON said he understood that the
commissioners recommended that the contracts should
be exempted from stamp duty.
Sir R. PEEL put a question to Lord Althorp,
but the noise was so great that he was very indis-
tinctly heard in the gallery ; as we caught it, it related to
the Irish Commutation Bill. He was apprehensive
from the late period at which the session had now ar-
rived, without any thing having yet been done as to that
measure, that the session would be allowed to pass
away without any thing effectual whatever being done.
He would be more than sorry for this, because he had
himself intended, when the noble lord brought for-
ward his measure, to express his views upon it. and to
submit a voluntary proposition of tithe commutation,
not at all, however, as a rival, or in opposition to the
noble lord's.

Lord ALTHO RP was understood to say that it
was his intention to proceed with the measure,
that at present he could not name a day, but that
the house should have previous notice of it.
Mr. BARING, in a very low and indistinct tone,
put a question upon the subject of the treaty between
France and England respecting the affairs of Portugal,
and wished to know whether it was intended that the
terms of that treaty should be laid upon the table.
Lord ALTHO RP said it was, but that some delay
in doing so was occasioned from some formal infor-
malities in the preamble.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL gave notice, that
on Thursday, the 19th of June, he should move for
leave to bring in certain bills, among which would be
a bill for amending the law between debtor and cre-
ditor, a bill for rendering uniform all acts relating to
the laws of real and personal property, a bill to faci-
litate the enfranchisement of copyholds. and also a bill
to bring all lands in England and Wales into free and
copyhold tenure.

NEWFOUNDLAND FISHERIES.
Mr. ROBINSON rose to move that an bumble
address be presented to his Majesty respecting the
rights of British subjects to prosecute the fisheries
on the coast of Newfoundland, and in all the bays,

harbours, and rivers thereof. (Hear.) He had
thought it right thus to change the form of his motion,
and expected to obtain his Majesty's pleasure that the
law officers of the crown should give their opinion upon
the boundaries of those fisheries, so that British sub-
jects might know the extent to which they might safely
proceed in this important branch of trade. He would
endeavour to put the house into possession as shortly
as possible of the grounds on which his motion rested.
He would ask whether it was not incumbent on France,
as they claimed an exclusive right in these fisheries,
to show that the right had been ceded to them
by treaties ( Hear, hear) ; for otherwise, as the
sovereignty was in the British Crown, and had
never been ceded, it was the duty of France to esta-
blish the right they claimed. The French Government
had always shown itself anxious to promote their fishe-
ries, as might be seen from what had lately occurred
in the channel, where they carried several British ships
into port, in consequence of their encroaching upon the
isheries of the French coast. He did not want the
British government to go so far—he only wanted
to be enabled to know what rights the British fisher-
men had. It was the opinion of the late Mr. Villiers,
a gentleman very well acquainted with this subject, that
the government of this country had never waved
their rights to these fisheries, though it had been the
policy of former governments of both France and
England to discourage all collision upon the coast of
Newfoundland. Both governments concurred in
fixing certain boundaries for the fishermen of each, but
the fish failing on the part allotted to the British, and
there being no other resource than the coast of Labra-
dor, it became important to know whether this country
had a concurrent right with France on the whole of the
coast. The chamber of commerce of Newfoundland
applied to the colonial secretary, Sir J. Mur-
ray, to know whether such were really the case,
and that right hon. gentleman replied that the govern-
ment did not know what were the precise rights of the
two nations. Upon this the Chamber of Commerce
in Newfoundland, in June, 1830, fitted out a vessel to
ego to that part of the coast of Newfoundland on which
the French claimed an exclusive right of fishery, and
instructed the master of that vessel to insist upon his
right to fish, but, at the same time, to avoid all hos-
tile collision. It was but common justice to say that
the master of this vessel executed the commission in-
trusted to him with singular zeal and discretion. He
proceeded to the French part of the coast, landed,
and stuck up a notice of his intention to fish ; upon
which he was told by the French authorities that he
had no right to do so, that the French had the exclu-
sive right of fishing, and that if he did not quit the
coast peaceably, they must compel him by violence.
The master, in order to fulfil his trust, served the
French authorities with a protest against their pro-
ceedings. Just at this period a French sloop of 16
guns arrived, the captain of which asked the master of
the English vessel what business he had there ; telling
him that he had no right to fish on that part of the
coast, because the right of fishing upon it had been
ceded to the French by treaty. The answer of the
English master was, that he had been sent there to
fish, and with orders not to leave the coast, unless com-
pelled to do so. To this it was replied, that they must
then compel him. Under these circumstances the
master thought that he had fulfilled his mission, and
left the coast ; having previously asked the captain of
the French sloop of war for a copy of his instructions,
which was refused. He ( Mr. Robinson) therefore
called on his Majesty's government, and not on the
House of Commons—for on a question of national law
the opinion of the crown should be known—he called
on his Majesty's government to require the house to
address his Majesty, to take proper means for ascer-
taining what our rights were under the existing treaties,
and having ascertained those rights, to maintain them.
The subject was one of considerable importance. All
parties concurred in the value of the fisheries in ques-
tion. America had, indeed, availed itself, to a great
extent, and to our great prejudice, of our remissness.
He contended, that it behoved his Majesty's govern-
ment to take such steps as should prevent British sub-
jects from being any longer in doubt on the point. If
that were not done, if his Majesty's subjects were left
in ignorance of the real state of the case. what was to
prevent them, being three to one in number, from going
to the French part of the coast, and compelling, by
violence, the right to fish there ? God forbid that he
should suggest any such proceeding ; but it might by
possibility occur. What reason could there be for this
reserve upon the subject on the part of his Majesty's
government ? Were we upon such terms with France
that our government could not venture -to give any
opinion respecting it? He did not suppose that we
were afraid of France. What was to prevent our
ascertaining from competent authorities the real con-
struction of the treaties, and then promulgating
it ? His Majesty's government had allowed the usur-
pation to go on by disusing the right. For his part,
he was convinced that there was not a word in the
treaties which conveyed to France the exclusive right
of fishing on the coast in question. Not only had
they no right of exclusive possession of the fishery,
but the French were prohibited from remaining per-
manently on the coast ; and it was provided that they
should go from France to the fishery, and at the end
of the season return to France. All that, in his
opinion, the treaty secured to the French was, a con-
current right to fish with the English. On what
grounds, therefore, the assumption rested he did not
know. If on usage, he contended that that was no
ground, however long the usage might have been
continued. If France had no right to the exclusive
fishery, why allow her claim to it? Under any cir-
cumstances the time had arrived when the question
I ought to be completely set at rest. Even supposing
the Law Officers of the Crown decided against his
( Mr. Robinson's) opinion, there would be this ad-
vantage, that there would be an end of the discussion,
and that both French and British subjects would know
what the law was. He would detain the house no
longer, but would move "that an humble address be
presented to his Majesty, praying that he would be
graciously pleased to give directions that the opinion
of the Law Officers of the Crown should be taken as
to the construction of the various Treaties between
Great Britain and France relative to the right of ex-
clusive fishing on our part of the coast of Newfound-
land claimed by France, so that the fact ought to be
ascertained, and instructions be given by his Ma-
jesty's Government to protect the British fisher-
men in the exercise of their just rights and privileges."
Mr. P. TH OM SON did not rise for the purpose
of opposing the motion, but merely to suggest grounds
upon which he hoped the hon. member would see the
propriety of withdrawing it; for although it might be
expedient to take the opinion of the Law Officers of
the Crown on the subject, it was not necessary, and it
might be inconvenient, to take it in the formal manner
proposed by the hon. member. He wished he could
agree with the view of the subject taken by the hon.
gentleman, but having attended to it at various times,
and especially when the question was brought forward
by his amiable and lamented, friend Mr. Villiers, he
was bound to say that, although he hoped we might
be able to establish our claim, he had not the confi-
dence in the subject which the hon. member expressed.
The hon. member had referred to treaties, but he ought
also to refer to the declarations by which those trea-
ties were accompanied ; for it was only by such a con-
text that the matter could be determined. The house
I was probably aware that this subject had been under
the consideration of successive Governments in this
country since the year 1783, and that various opinions
had been entertained respecting it. Nay, on one oc-
casion two members of an Administration, one in the
other house and one in the House of Commons, ex-
pressed opinions directly opposite to one another upon
it. He mentioned this to show that the subject was
one involved in considerable difficulty. The opinion
on which he confessed he should be disposed princi-
pally to rely was that of Mr. Iluskisson, to whom,
during the short time that he was in the Colonial Of-
fice, an application was made to assert the rights of
the British fishermen by force, and his answer was,
that he thought it inadvisable to enter upon an asser-
tion of the right, and that it would be better to leave
the matter open to negotiation. He repeated these
things, merely to show the difficulty of the case ; and
he recommended the hon. gentleman to withdraw his
motion, assuring him that attention should be paid to
it, and that whatever might be the opinion of the Law
Officers of the Crown, every effort should be made to
conclude an amicable arrangement of the matter. The
hon. member said that the Americans exercised the
right of fishing on the coast in question. If so, we
ought certainly to enjoy the same privilege ; for the
Americans must claim on our right, as established by
the treaty of 1783. As he was informed, however,
the Americans sent a frigate to assert their right,
which frigate, after looking at a French frigate on the
coast, sailed away. After what he had stated, he
trusted that the hon. gentleman would withdraw his
motion.

Mr. ROBINSON observed that, circumstanced as he
was, the most advisable course which he could pursue was
certainly not to press his motion. He trusted, however,
that his Majesty's government would not allow the ques-
tion to go on in a doubtful state for an indefinite period, but

that before the next session of Parliament something might '
be done finally to settle the question.
Mr. BARING must say that the British fisheries, whe-
ther on the coast of Newfoundland or in the Channel, had
not the attention paid to them which they formerly re-
ceived ; the consequence of which was that they were in a
very declining condition. He could not help calling
the particular attention of his Majesty'§ government
to the condition of the British fisheries on the
coast of Guernsey and Jersey. In former times the
interests of those fisheries had always experienced the pe-
culiar care of government, and were considered among
those interests which it was their especial duty to protect.
He was sorry to say that was not the case at present, and
that while the French government were cherishing their
fisheries everywhere with the greatest possible care, the
British government evinced an apathy with respect to the
fisheries of this country, which, in his opinion, was highly
reprehensible.
Mr. TOWER adverted to the extensive labours of the
committee which had formerly been appointed on this sub-
ject, and hoped that the result of those labours would not
be thrown away. Before the next session of parliament,
he trusted some decisive measure would be adopted, or
that if it were not so, the question would be taken up by
some influential member. He perfectly concurred in the
opinion of the hon. gentleman who had just spoken, as to
the neglect which his Majesty's government had mani-
fested with respect to the British fisheries on the coasts of
Guernsey and Jersey.
Mr. P. THOMSON wished to say a few words in ex-
planation. He denied that no steps had been taken in
consequence of the report of the committee to which the
hon. gentleman who had just sat down had alluded. On
the contrary, endeavours had been made to bring the
question to an amicable conclusion. By that committee,
however, it must be remembered that no civilians had been
examined.

......
Lord PALMERSTON said, that not only had a nego-
tiation been entered into with the French government on
the subject, but certain limits had been fixed upon for
the fisheries between the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey
and the French coast. Those limits were as well known
to the fishermen as any boundaries that it was possibl • to
conceive. He was sorry to say, however, that in most
cases in which the English fishermen had been seized by
-the French authorities, they were trespassing beyond the
line to which they ought to have confined.thomselves.
Colonel EVANS observed that the English fishermen
should be allowed to have larger boats, which would enable
them to cope with the boats of France when they met
with them.

Mr. BARING said, the complaint was, that the poor
English fishermen who went to fish, and who were driven
by a gale of wind beyond the French boundary, were
seized and carried ashore, while the French fishermen,
under similar circumstances of stress of weather. were
allowed to come into our harbours, and were protected.
Lord PALMERSTON expressed his belief that the
complaints to which the hon. gentleman alluded were in
general very unfounded.
RECIPROCITY ACTS.

Mr. AGLIONBY, and other Hon. Members, presented
petitions from Glasgow, from Exeter, &c., against the Re-
ciprocity Acts.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG presented petitions from North
Shields, London, Cardiff, Tynemouth, Newcastle, &c., to
the same effect.
Mr. YOUNG then proceeded to address the house.
In 1823, the act of Parliament called the Reciprocity of
Duties Act was passed, and under this authority there
were, in the following year, many commercial treaties made
with different States. The first of these treaties was with
Prussia, and it was signed on the 2d of April, 1824, the
condition as to duration being, that it should last for ten
years certain, and until the expiration of a twelvemonths'
notice to be given at any time after such lapse of ten
years by either of the contracting parties. His object in
bringing the subject before the house at this particular
period would at once be apparent. ( dear.) The ten years
had just expired, and if, therefore, those tvho made
that treaty, or supported the act under which it was
made, had by this time found that their expectations of
mutual benefit had not been realized, if they wished to re-
trace their steps, they had the opportunity afforded to them
at once of doing so. He always looked upon the principle
of the act as most impolitic, but he could now go further
and state, that where he had been told benefits were to
accrue, evils had been the result ; that the distress of the
shipping interest had been greatly aggravated by it ; and
that those treaties which were originated by it had greatly
discouraged the domestic shipowner, and been of most
material advantage to the foreign one. He did not deny
that the early national policy of England afforded no pro-
tection, by means of exclusive privileges, to the ship-
ping of the country. Until the reign of Edward the
Third, commerce was free in all its operations. From that
time, it continued for many years to be subjected to rapid
transitions—to protection—to restriction—to neglect. In
the first year of Henry the Eighth, protection was extended
to the mariners of Britain ; and in the time of Elizabeth,
those salutary laws were enacted in favour of the shipping
interest, which might be expected from a monarch of such
clear views, surrounded by minis ers of such masculine
understandings. In 1651, the act passed which, as after-
wards confirmed by the 13th and 14th of Charles the
Second, formed what had ever since been known as the
navigation laws of this country. To the wisdom of that
code he would bring the testimony of men, than whom
none could be found who better understood their country's
interests, or were more zealous in promoting them. To be
Sure, he could find one exception in the right hon gentle-
man opposite—the Vice-President; or, perhaps, more cor-
rectly speaking, the President of the Board of Trade—who
denounced these laws as prejudicial in their character, and
unfavourable to the commercial interests of this country.
The right hon. gentleman had brought forward Sir Josiah
Childs in support of his opinion ; but he (Mr. Young)
pledged himself that not one word could be found in that
writer of any such tendency, and would therefore advise
the right hon. gentleman, when he next quoted such an
erudite author, to do it correctly.
Mr. P. TIIO3ISON—I never quoted him at all.
Mr. YOUNG—Then, indeed, you have been strangely
misrepresented. It is so in Hansard.
Mr. THOMSON—I never quoted him. I have been
misrepresented.
Mr. YOUNG resumed. He now came to touch upon
some parts of the policy of the late Mr. Huskisson : and, as
this was the first opportunity that had occurred of explain-
ing some misrepresentations which were abroad in refer-
ence to his onduct towards that much-lamented gentle-
man, he hoped the house would grant him a moment's
indulgence. It had often been his fate to differ with Mr.
Huskisson ; but this circumstance had never caused any
diminution in the respect which he ever felt for his per-
sonal character, or in the admiration which he entertained
fir his extensive information and profound judgment. Nor
did he ever for a moment doubt the sincerity of that con-
viction which induced him to persevere in a policy which,
however much he condemned, he was satisfied that
lamented gentleman in his heart believed would work for
the future greatness and happiness of his country. ( Hear. )
He ever regarded his character as one involving the attri-
butes of a real statesman—wrong, certainly, in his prin-
ciples—but of that vigorous intellect, that, had life been
permitted him, would ere this have detected his error, and
of that manly spirit that would instantly have acknow-
ledged it. He therefore had waited patiently, content
with the natural development of events, and waiting the
results of experience. But the prophet was gone ; and,
though his successors had grasped at his mantle, he feared
they had only succeeded in obtaining the outer and worth-
lhat garment. The spirit had soared above. The hon.
gentleman then proceeded to explain various laws as
to the regulation of vessels —that they should be navigated
by an English commander—manned by a certain num-
ber of English seamen—that a certain number of appren-
tices should be on board, in proportion to the hands—that
edy of
no vessels should be repaired in foreign ports to a greater
amount than 201. per t n—and then proceeded to shots
the high amount of duties which the- shipowners had to
pay before they could start their ship—the machine which
they had to
35
owoprekr‘c ve,tnht...; Casks were suctbj to
requisites a
to dutya duty
50 per cent. ; sails
.to a duty of 30 per cent. ; copper of
from
of 21. 15s. per load ; live cattle were prohibited from being
purchased at low prices, the duties being from 50 to 60
per cent. ; and so on with almost every thing which was
essential to the shipowners' business. He did not com-
plain of duties being laid on these different articles—far
from it ; all he complained of was the onerous effect—the
unfairly onerous effect which they had on their pursuits.
( Hear, hear.) He only asked them to put their burdens
equally—to be just in their distribution. In pursuance of
this principle of justice, the legislature had in former times
enacted certain protecting measures—that the coasting and
colliery trade should be exclusively carried on in British
bottoms—that no merchandise either of Asia, Africa, or
America should be imported into England in any but Eng-
lish-built ships, and that no European merchandise should
be imported in foreign ships, except such as should be
brought directly from the original place of its' growth or
manufacture. On these restrictions there had been
material relaxations, which being coupled with the
alterations in harbourage dues, and other imposts by
which the British shipowner was also indirectly bene-
fited, had given the foreigner a decided and un-
warrantable advantage. These dues were also abolished
by treaties made under the Reciprocity of Duties Act, and
it was a point not unworthy the consideration of the house,
that the alterations had been somewhat costly to t he coins-
try, the reductions having been made good from the conso-
lidated fund. The amount paid for this purpose since the
year 1825 was no less in round numbers than 261,0001.
During the last session of Parliament, an act was passed,
authorising the Government to pay to the corporation of
London the sum of 160,0001. by way of reimbursement for
the repeal of what are called the package and scavage dues.
He (Mr. Young) should not at all impugn that measure if
those dues had been perpetual—if they were sure to be
collected in time to come ; but a large portion of them
were contingent on the continuance of the Reciprocity
Act, and the treaties formed under it, which he really
remain
the sense of the country would not allow.toZ
re-
pealedlong upon our statute-book. If, therefore. Part"'
ad rchased the
wculd before long—they would find th.ey_b
had d a laroe sum
right in fee to levy duties--that they h Pal
this act—as he did not doubt they oulth do, and

of money for a perpetuity which was no perpetuity at all.
The hoe. gentleman then went en at considerable length
to describe the nature and effect of what were called
the discriminating duties, and contended that they only
followed out the old course of national policy. But
these were done away with—other new principles were
put into operation by Mr. Hiiskissont and the British
shipowners, being incapacitated by hiimeaiiirbs, were told
they must work on—there was to be free and open trade
with the cheapest nations of the world, and if they could
not compete with them, they must give up or slow their
trade to lapse into the hands of their rivals.
(Hear, hear.)
i The eigenses of navigation had been greatly increased by
these disqualifying enactments—of this there could be no
• doubt. lf, however, any one was sceptical upon the point,
I
I let him refer to that volume of evidence to which he had
before referred, and it was impossible for him not to be-
lieve the strong and concurrent testimony on that point.
To show further the serials disadvantages which the ship'
ownef in this, a dear country, had to encounter with tne
shipowner of foreign cheap states, he would state tlia in
the building of vessels in the North of Europe and Eng-
land, the difference was as 12/. and 81. per ton. English
sailors received from 40s. to 50s. per month for wag"--
generally speaking, full 50s. ; foreign states only paid them
about 255. ; thus, in this instance alone, having an advan-
tage over us of 100 per cent. In provisions the foreigner
had a very great advantage, not only from the smaller cost
of production, but from the habits and mode of living of
the sailor. He thought it the height of injustice to take
asa anxious
e burdens.as not
to
I FI.
N
away their protection, and expose them to such competi.
tion as this. But this was not all, for they were subject
to heavy taxes that fairly entitled them to the same protec-
tion which was granted to other interests that were exposed
to peculiar
eearwy would
house.ldnam (
name a feHwe,arth.
)ougchalin_le.
could enumerate many, but haying much to go throng"'
he was
dles were subject to a duty of 120 per cent. ; tallow, 100
per cent. ; tea, 100 per cent. ,• manufactured skins, " rr
cent. ; hats, 50 per cent. ; and on more important artic es,
such as cotton goods, 10 per cent. ; muslins, 15 per cent. ;
silks, 30 per cent. ; and linens, 40 per cent. In the 6th
of George the Fourth, which contained a schedule of pro-
hibitions on importations, there was an important clause
which recited that they were imposed, not for the sake of
the revenue, but for the due encouragenient of British
navigation. It was rather anomalous that in the act
passed last session to consolidate the Customs, this decla-
ratory clause was entirely omitted, and he must take that
opportunity of stating that there were many other altera-
tions, and some f them of an thing but slight imfroportance.
But he would for a moment revert to the point m which
he had aiverged, and see what were the duties payable on
minerals. The duty on copper ore was 150 per cent. ; 'r
lead, twenty-five shillings per ton ; on manufactured chala,
twenty shillings per ton ; on tin ore, twenty shillings Fel.
ton, and on iron, twenty-five shillings per ton ; s° taxdid
indeed were all articles, that even the childrento 's t°Yd i
not escape. Now he would challenge any one finn
I the whole range of English industry any branch so wholly:
so completely unprotected as the shipping interest. (Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.") They annoyed them every way
—they left them not merely defenceless, but completely at
the mercy of others—they impoverished them—they
crippled them in their native resources—they destroyed
their energies--and having thus treated thin—having
thus incapacitated them, they turned them out to compete
with the foreigner. (Hear.)
They could not do it—they
had tried it
as long as they could—they had stood the
ground
as well as they could, and fought on from year
to year, but all in vain. (Cheers.) They might still for a
while turn a deaf ear to their complaints, but it would be
only for a while, for the subject would press itself forwarde
;
it would force itself on their attention, speaking in a voic
of thunder. (Hear, hear.) He presented this alternative
to them. Let them be consistent, and let them be just
si.;
either repeal the Reciprocity Act, or place them in the -
tuation in which they formerly stood, by giving the
equivalent for the disqualification to which they had beeno,_
subjected. The hon. gentleman then proceeded teeV:
a speech of Mr. Huskisson, a
and dwelt particulatiited,
passage wherein that right hon. gentleman had u
compete'n
that where commerce and navigation came into an
tion, commerce should yield to navigation. That evaa,„.
admission most important, which, coupled with whaot _ lei,e
lowed, should weigh particularly on the attention f tn.
f the
tleman were to do much to benefit the navieation 0 cal
care, and for which he introduced so many house. Concessions in the mind of that right hon. gen
country, which seemed so much to be undo' his ece'x..
ledge
would n
tensive changes. Now he (Mr. Young)
we Le on
himself to prove that our meeting foreiers, as,
ilin our
the reciprocity principle, granting them everytm
agreturn,
power and depending on their good faith for
rcantile
had, instead of benefiting, nearly ruined the me, , in
navy of England. Foreign nations had not eels. al
in
their obduracy toe ards us, as promised, brit ladeent
every instance increased the duties to a fearful
n__
against us. The speech made by Mr. Huskisson
.O,±
the iutroduct.on of his measure went on to declar°
that. if such relaxa ion did not take ploce this colt!'"
try would be b nind to retaliate. Relax they did note
and where was the retaliation? Nowhtrre 10 any cong"
derable extent, and the evil was gaining ground, without
tinAmeans being had recourse to to step its progress. Arne"
and such
rica, the sight hon. gentleman had declared, would increase
her tariff, unless England would modify her system. The
modification had taken place, but had the tariff decrea 01?
Sad experience had told it had not. It was also said the
United Netherlands, and eel bin countries in GermanY,
would reduce their duties if we first set them the example.;
we generously did so, but ten per cent. duty on English
goods followed from 1826, and after three years sq_expe.s
rienee, we were bound to retaliate upon them. 1 H
This was the first falsification of the oft boasted r crieplire
city system upon which Mr. Huskisson had so inuc2, anish
when introducing his bills. Then as to the 4,
d more
trade. Would that trade be found to be conducte
favourably than the rest towards us? Would the
Spa-
niards,edo-
form the exception in our favour? Let their cm._
duct answer his question. They were like the rest, iinel
tigatingly hostile towards us ; and he could state afact
which had come under his personal knowledge, which
Spanish and English vessels had
licy to our disadvantage.
one alongside the
been loading in the Thames together, .
Peninsula'
other, freighted for the same port in the Pene
e,
e.
goods were brought across the decks of the r riga
might be taken as a fair proof of the workings of their po•
Lsh vessels to the Spanish ones, and ship
Ilene',
board for thrice the freight given to the e Pone
vessels ; and why ? Because Spanish vessels were n 0
applied to for the discriminatiug duties levied Jef 47.ade
ships. (Hear.) The President of the Boar(' '
had been made cognizant of this ; but he :ithstand-
only temporary, whereas it was continuing, Fran", from
ing its great injustice towards our interests•
extent of her
her position in Europe, and from the great .
re such as
commerce, should not be overlooked in an inn.
e did be-
he sought to introduce by his thus appearing as
_...,d vil-
fore the house. The report of Messrs. Bowring ail
in every
Tiers, the commissioners sent to that country, vbaesteration
gentleman's hands, and furnished a body l"
ofr, thigut report
that could not be too highly appreciated. I houre Pnr
th, se principles of policy which our Gallic neigh rnieepre-
sued were clearly laid down, and subject to P
°ose truths
s ntation. It stated in a most edifying manner t .
„rowel
watch the French considered ought to be the great' 4eiee
of their conduct. They said that was the richest neeee
that exported more and imported less ; and in coneln ehet
they trebled the duty on English manufactures. ''' .14
tO ''-' ?
hadrincot
holding out the right hand of friendship promised Was tO
Was that the expensive system of commerce that teens?
meet us in our intercourse with neighbouring na.„ her
France was our neighbour, but her ke sem was all„,;.;rcial
own favour. She did not extend the hand of c°ln'-heree•
fellowehip to a country within sight of her own s
twee
( Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman proceeded to
hoped
sidered it
furtlilr from the report ; and in taking leave of n
the gentlemen who represented the agriculturalitin.'_t_uie4
in that house would not be displeased at his einee_rilepo,
thus to facts which were germain to their i " ~
(Hear, hear, hear.) Haying long s•
tender his apologies for detaining the househ ars he
_,.)
but Prussia could not be over cooked. (Hear, ,
teneiand
That country, for which England hardotincee s
he change,
which principally contributed
t°
jid other German states
against which he complained—
siihieenat endeav ouring to esta-
were actually at the present
1 nrxclusion of English goods.
Wish a cordon for the total
exclusion
consummation, WO
(Hear. ) This, to
themaial friends (Laughter) with thet"
looked upon by our Gerien e
h article of salt, the princiea'
greatest satisfactione.ountry,
was conveyed but in triflin!
export from this
bottoms in fact, Prussian vesse 4e
quantities in English proceeded so far,
ohe nni-i
oly and therefore all for Prussi '
salt was a ravel mono pi
~
.itwas
for Englis i interests. As to America'
ossile
and nothing
bad been said that it would be found in'eP egold
true that it . .
ff
to carry the tariff int c ect. The tari
'ff had, "e to
t bee"
admit, been modified; but of what benefit had that
clan°
England ? It had not been for England that theoseeerenees
bad taken place : they only resulted from theist to had the entire trade, because in Prussia the vendingan°
corn- °
between the southern and northern states• oppoeietet°
nearer home : the town of Stadt on the Elbe,o eur .mmile.'
were obliged to pay a duty equal to
Hamburg, although in Hanover, and subjeeseis posing le
freght,
who was King of Hanover—all English,
while the vessels of Hamburg were l'enci Ytnnuage, so much
hear.)ng
Notwithstanding the increas ;
iorat.ngt aned iiirtihe
boasted of, British vessels were deter- l WWl' new
that high character which they formerly
a heel corny-
un ould
foreign market. Our foreign trade h
es, but he rf who
tively ruined. These were serivoiudsenc II:. roe
en
-f
g_ tlernen jot,
substantiate them, and by the.. .
t system. (Hear. ) FKs
were in favour of the reeiKracteVe the shipping interest' uiLl
then, as to the distresse°e". body of evidence that c° 0,
would read for the boos,
Honourablegentleman then Pre
, The ion ,ock ~
not be dispniee• the testimony of Messrs. Bates, "a 01
ceeded to Dublin),
Spence of ( Sunderland), Richincteet,
Astle of (
Anderson ( f South Shields), and V-
the
North Shields), o to f
which strongly corroborated his views. Next,
.10
nee o
fall in freights, the hon. gentleman read the evidefer
Messrs. Carter, Henderson, Nichol, Gray, Kirkin* de-
lay, Larkin, Lines, and James Aiken, which goe ,0050
tails respecting the low average prices for the eo°l,,,e'etlre
of goods. The third point maintained by the hone r-eoae:
man was the astounding loss of capital vese!_ted,:ertef °-
within the last few years ; and in support of ow --
liev:eneratirpet.
(Heal:,

I

brought forward the evidence of Messrs. Nichol,
te4l.Y, end Nelson ; the former gtntleman having stated,
el since 1825, four vessels in the Indian trade ha:l to his
Rowledge sunk their capital. Mr: Barry had also stated
that fr ights were not at present insured, and that one-
Itterth of the entire tonnage of the country was mortgaged.
li
'''as a strong fact, acid those who were connected with
e
'llgieei of shipli well knew it, that there was
ship a
single instance of a man who mortgaged hisbeing
thawed to redeem it. This was a corroborative proof of
present depressed condition of the ship-owners. The
test document to which he should refer was one of eon-
stlorabl importance, as it impuened the accuracy of the
ratliamentary documents on which so many arguments
Fete based, and from which so many important conclu-
:','As w.re deduced. The official returns stated that the
I)Ping of the empire amounted, in 1817, to 2,664,936
',Rs, and ten years afterwards the amount was stated at
2460,500. That was a considerable reduction. That di-
r'3oution resulted from the circumstance that the Custom-
-Ise had no means of correctly ascertaining the tonnage
~,
ii
ships that were lost. They obtained the best evidence
,at it was possible to procure, and then they struck off
keh a number as they believed to have been lost. It
might be readily supposed that there was great difficulty
ascertaining the number, and, accordingly, the returns
tsuld not be very accurate. The following statement would
it °nee show that :--In 1827, when the new registry act,
:hips
by Mr. Huskisson, came into operation, all the
4'l3s in the kingdom were registered de novo, and then it
IPeared that 346,966 tons which were registered, had no
existence. (Hear, hear.) That large number was there-
I enee.
'ro struck off at one fell swoop. That was the cause of
1,7 reduce
ond number of ships to which he had referred.
"5 h. member stated that the annual loss of shipping
'440114130,000 tons, and declared that the t onnage in 1832
tee upwards ce. 40,000 tons less than 1827. It wtimeas cnsi-
Vably less than at the time of the war, or at tlie o
that
*0;r• Huskisson made his statement of the flourishing state
, the shipping interests. The actual tonnage was now re-
duced (and he pledged himself to the accuracy of the state-
ment) ~, 2,433,0e1. American tonnage was great ly increas-
-4r4, are i therefore we had the worst to fear from the rivalry
of
d the nited States, when our naval resources continued
e •
mn.
tie:liing. America had shipping to the amount of
'44,, e than two-thirds of what we had engaged in trade;
1 that, too, notwithstanding our extensive colonial pos-
e'si°,ls. The hon. member proceeded to show that cur
eign trade had not increased. He then read returniof the
rihsh and foreign-ships entered in wards in 1817, 18'24,
bllBBl. These returns, he said, showed the aggregate.
h our tonnage in foreign trade with the four northern no.=
nal who were our most formdable rivals—Sweden, Nor-
way, and Prussia, with the United States and other
kset • s t -hich he add d the British fisheries. In le re s, .o w
0717 the amoun: of the Bri ish tonnage greatly exceeded
„'''lt of the foreign tannage: From 1817 to 1824, the ton-
‘l,lge of the British shipping exceeded that of the foreign
'llPp:ng by 22 per cent. But in the seven years ssubse-
quentto 1824 the amount of the tonnage of foreign ships
atereil inwards exceed 'd that of the British ships by 83
brcent. In 1832 ;he foreign tonnage exceeded the Bri-
-0111 by 213 per cent. The next document to which the
ej• member refereed was the list of British ships which
t 7 Passed the Sound. This list Mr. Huskisson referred
„e as a satisfactory evidence of the state of BrAish trade
t-O its fluctuations. Mr. Huskissot , at the time he made
i: statement, gave returns for the live years preceding
at in which he spoke. They showed that during the
stage of those five years, the British shipping formed
Blarg assed the prope
Sound . ortion—one-
He held inf the whole tonnage
at phis hand a list of the
thrttish shipping which passed the Sound during the last
three years, 1831, 1832, and 1333, and it appeared from
'ene that while the tonnage of British shipping had in-
t.teased 6 per cent., the foreign shipping had increased 26
ter cent He felt. it his duty to make special reference to
Ileressia, Lecause he knew that. Prussia had taken a promi-
°t Part in justification of that course of policy which
elii• Iluskisson stated compelled him to adopt the measures
, 'eh he did. The returns which he should read gave the
~adage
value of the exports to and front Prussia, and the
Page of ships entered inwards. The house would
:Ige from those returns whether the anticipations bad
trot borne out of the commercial advantages to be derived
fitted
the concessions made to foreign states. They exhi-
gted a complete falsification of the statements that British
rade had nothing to fear from those concessions, and that
~,en if British navigation suffered, British commerce
err be benefitted in a greater proportion. During the
el; Years that preceded the reciprocity system, our exports
,' ritssia exceeded our imports from Prussia very consi-
derably. The hon. member having shown this by reading
: Calculations, stated, that our imports from Prussia
Ile gradually diminishing in those four years. In
„"4,5 the official value of our imports from Prussia
~...a, 109,934/. The moment the reciprocity system
"stne into operation, the state of things was changed
!Itost alarmingly. In 1824 we imported from Prussia
"bs'3 the amount of 151,824/. more than we exported
37n Prussia. In 1831 we imported from Prussia
th'-'6O/. more than we exported. This showed that
o.° beneficial results which had been expected did not take
tegee- The hon. gentleman then read the returns relating
wl.the Brsh and foreign ships trading with Prussia,
troicti showed a large increase of the foreign, and a.` de-
tease of the British. The next paper which he read con-
(17;irle(l the returns of the population of the United King-
o lo l'``2l and 1331, when the census took place, the
vial value of imports and of tonnage. In 1821 the po-
w
`ation was 21 millions, and in 1831 24 millions in round
34nbers, which exhibited an increase of three millions, or
i!lc4 per cent. The value of imports had increased from
11`..,:=1 to 1831 at the rate of 61% per cent. Our rivals
ee at the same time employed an increased number of
"iPs. We had, however, been cajoled, and our fears had
eti sent to sleep by declarations of the extreme prospe-
rity of our trade, which were now controverted by his sta-
tistical statements. Thetactics had hitherto been to lump
together imports, exports, and tonnage; and as they in-
tr.eased, we were told that our fears were vain. The re-
%irocity advocates pointed not only to the increase of the
L4lPorts into the United Kingdom, but to that of the ton-
age which entered inwards. That tonnage had increased
Percent., and this was observed upon as a most re-
tee'Kahle and cheering increase. But if there had been
e -Yierease of navigation, he wished to know how much
7,e40 fallen to the share of the British shipowners, and how
.144
tt to the foreign shipowners. (Hear, hear.) Now,
eta the returns which he possessed, he found that,
'4° 1821 to 1831, the foreign tonnage had con-
ef'erably the advantage of the British. - The honourable
'll4.e!Aber expatiated at some length upon this part
..!. the subject, and showed by his calculations that, in con-
7Plence of the competition to which we were exposed
with the chief Northern 1 ations, British trade had. in-
eleased in. a very small proportion, when compared with
the large increase of foreign trade. He really felt ashamed
at trespassing upon the house to so great a length, but the
lOportance of the subject warranted him in so doing. He
"44 another document to read to the house, giving returns
the total foreign trade between 1817 and 1831. This
e" a most important illustration of the subject and he
:41,1 have been exceedingly sorry if he had omitted it.
he n°o. member then read the returns, from which it
ara'ed that the British tonnage in those fourteen years
. deerei ased 24 per cent., while the foreign tonnage had
itherease(l 345 er cent. The returns also showed, that in
rs
reittrhade With') Prussia. there was an as erage increase of
Is ships about 6% per cent., while the increase in the
foreignin the shipping was equal to 105 per cent. The decrease
he British imports of Prussia in the same period was 37
A' cent. The returns relative to the trade of Norway ex-
,,!,bited the same unfavourable results to British shipping.
et_lle returns showed, with regard to the trade with Ger-
nthy, that the increase of British shies was 37 per cent.,
while the foreign trade had increased 30i per cent. The im-
Ports into Germany had decreased 20 per cent. The returns
Of the total trade with Sweden, Denmark, and Norway ex-
hibited a decrease of British ships at the rate of 13 per
.!.erit. while the Foreign shipping increased 210 per cent.
Let, then, the advocates ofethe reciprocity system lay these
facts to their hearts, and consider whether the time had
!'ul.arrived when it was absolutely necessary to review that
i,1,1t7 which had been the cause of such considerable ruin.
e last statistical document with which he should trouble
L'the house would corroborate the statements which he had
Ineeade, and would justify him in drawing the most melan-
-11 inference It wes a return, showing unanswerably
the deterioration which had taken place in the quality of
British
ressur:43 (Hear, hear), arising from the extraordinary
; upon the shipowners, which prevented them from
they out that expenditure upon them which Bth one time
were enabled to do ; so that note only were ey with-
ottt the power of building them as soundly as before, but
the
were unable to preserve them in that excellent state
of repair which formerly- gave them the preference in the
nisrkets. That
losing, and by manpreference he knew many were rapidly
lamentable fact. 6„
tleael been entirely lost. This was a
anthder hand, foreigndshipping,n' was
tincreasing both in quality
fr:j.,uahnttity, akn apdy su-
rseding us in the genera
the hon. member then read -mar ets7of the world.
returns relative to the de-
terioration of British shipping. InlBl9,entered n Lloyd's of capital, or the best, ships ' the proportiond sbooks
Was at the rate of 44 per cent. In 1831, it appeared that
Rene
had fallen to 33 per cent. The next class of ships
treore termed good ships, which were insufficiently stored,
by r 4 the circumstance of the shipowners having no funds
thewbieh they could fit out their ships more efficiently. In
Year 1819, there were 163 of this class of ships, and in
;3.3}, they had increased to 635. Thus this class of indif-
!rent ships hadhear.) The second
quadrupled. (Hear,
lass of indifferently stored ships had been doubled in num-
ber since 1819. Otships out of repair,. - and so stated in the
ktre were
and in the year
_l4l in the first period he had referred to,
22d. Thus it appe
itgil they had increased to the number of
had decreased in nuamrtd, that while the best class of ships
had greatly increased_
ear, the number of inefficient vessels
(Hear, hear.) '
rhe hoTe quadrupled and some doubled.
evidence of .Mr. Tr: ill' ,;seen member then referred
session upon the subject, toof last
before the committee .
laid to show the inability of themembersship.
bear out what he had stated,
l'essels in repair. Hon. owners to keep therr
tish commerce had not been benefited
dld now see that I -
by the measure adopted in 1824, when at all ( Hear,. hear)
t'ae passed. He thought he had the Reciprocity Act.
demonstrated the extreme
, 4'Pressed state of British shipping, He protested against

the rank and anomalous injustice which had been committed
on the shipowner. Let see house be consistent. Let them
take one of two courses. liestore to him protection, while
they continued their yes; . iet:ces upon him ; or if they de-
clined to do that, take cd restrictions ( Hear), and
leave him unfettered, and enalile him to meet in some
degree the competition to which they had doo:ned him.
When that question came distinctly before the hotist
he would be fully prepared to meet it. He was not then
called upon to state what his individual opinion was, but
he asked hon. gentlemen to put it home to themselves
whether they were prepared to make such alterations—to
repeal the Registry Act. He did not want them to give
farthing reductions. Not only must the timber duty be
repealed, but they must give liberty to the ship-owner to
import his ship. 'the manufacturer might import his imple-
ments, the agriculturist might import his tools. Let him
import his ship. That was in the same situation. The
ship was his tool. But he believed in his conscience that
the house dared not do that. He called upon the gentry
of England to be politic as well as just. It had too
long been the practice, and the shipowners had been the
victims of that practice, to take the weakest interest ( Hear,
hear)—one incapable of defence—and make it suffer for
the benefit of others. The enactment of the corn laws had
established the principle for which he contended in this
discussion ; he only called on the house to place the ship-
owners in the same position that the land-owners and far-
mers were placed in regard to protection, and he would
be contented. ( Hear, hear.) He made this proposition
in anticipation of the objection which the right hon.
President., he was sure, would make, that such a proposi-
tion would involve the repeal of the corn laws. He (Mr.
Young) was aware of the objection, and he was satisfied
that such would necessarily be the result, but still he ven-
tured to ask the support of the house in favour of his mo-
tion. He admitted that the right hon. gentleman at the
head of the Board of Trade had done as much as lay in his
power to support. the ship-owners under the operation of
that act. He did so by the insertion of a clause the year
before last, taking out. of the operation of the measure the
articles of beef and pork, together with flour and bread, which
in fact included almost the whole of the articles com-
plained of under the head of provisions. But no sooner
had that measure been passed than intimation was given of
a plan by which those articles, if not intended for home
consumption, might be carried in foreign ships on the
sane terms with snips of this country ; and the result was
the issuing of a Treasury order in actual contravention of
the law of the land, which, in fact, to the present
Mllll, nt, required an a.t of indemni yto his Majssty's
ministers, in order to relieve them of the sesponsibility
they had incurred by it. In short, after the passing of an
Act of Parliament for the benefit of the shipowners of
Great Britain, this order of council was passed, which took
away from them the whole kernel, while it only gave them
the husk. It took away all but pepper, mustard, and salt. It
was right to say, that the shipowners were aware of the
boon accorded to them by the act introduced by the right
hir. gentleman ; still they had suffered by the policy on
which the system was founded, and he hoped, therefore,
that he should have the support of the house in endea-
vouring to obtain a repeal of the act. He would ask what
benefit this country had acquired by this act? What had
been the effect of it ? He would tell the house, that under
that act the Crown had been enabled to lay taxes on the
country to the amount of 263,000/. (Hear, hear.) He
merely wished this country to show a liberal example,
which it might be expected would be followed by other
countries ; but let the liberality not be all on one side,
while all the advantage was on the other. He would con-
clude by merely moving, that the act Geo. IV. cap. 77,
commonly called the Reciprocity Act, be repealed.
Mr. POULETT THwisoN felt assured, that from
what had passed that evening, the hon. gentleman who
had brought forward the motion would allow, that on all
sides of the house, however much the gentlemen who sat
on his (Mr. P. Thomson's) side might differ from the sen-
timents advanced by the hon. member, the subject had
received the most earnest and respectful attention. The
hon. member would not deny, indeed he would be among
the first to admit, that the great and important interests
which formed the foundation of our national defence, as
well as of out national wealth and stability, had received
at the hands of the house their full share of consideration.
No one felt more strongly or more deeply interested than
himself in the prosperity of those classes whose interests
the hon. gentleman had supported, and he knew not that
he had much to say in complaint of the hon. member's
argument. The only thing was, he would not say he had
not defined, but he had so closely defined the object of his
motion, that it did seem strange, that on so narrow a field
he should have been able to touch upon so great a variety
of topics ; and though he professed to have the shipping
interests only in view, that he should have entered into all
the operations of that act. He would enter but briefly
into the arguments of the hon. member, and he thought
the house would be the less disposed to find fault with him
for doing so, inasmuch as the arguments of the hon. mem-
ber were completely at variance with documentary evi-
dence he could produce. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gen-
tleman had concluded by saying, that all he asked the
house for was, to repeal the Reciprocity Act. Why, if the
Reciprocity Act were repealed to-moreow, and the crown
were deprived of the power of imposing restrictions on
such countries as refuse to admit our productions on lasi
terms, would the wish of the hon. member be effected ?
There was a time when the Customs' book of this country
was loaded with distinctive duties, but dir. Huskisson suc-
ceeded in sweeping away those distinctive duties ; and now
none, if any, operated to the disadvantage of any nation.
He doubted, however, if the hon. memter would not be
sorry to see this Act repealed, as it allowed the crown to
do away with the restrictive duties on ships of a foreign
country, which admitted our ships on the same terms as
their own into their harbours, and imposed duties on the
goods of a foreign country where equality did not exist
with respect to these circumstances. But the hon. gen-
tleman by his motion would remove that power which the
crown did possess, which it did exercise, and with the re-
moval of that power would take away the great means of
forcing other nations to maintain flieir commercial rela-
tions on terms of equality and reciprocity with us. (Hear,
hear, and cries of " Order," and " Bar.") If it were re-
pealed, it would be impossible for the crown to impose ad-
ditional duties where it might be necessary. How stood
the ease ? We had treaties of reciprocity with about eight
different nations. In most cases the repeal of the Act to
which the hon. gentleman objected would have little in-
fluence. With two small states, Oldenburgh and Meek-
lenburgh, we had no such treaties, and our commercial in-
tercourse with them was regulated by the orders in coun-
cil ; so that even if the hon. member carried his motion,
its operation would only affect Oldenburgh and Mecklen-
burgh. (Hear, hear.) He was much astonished when he
heard the hon. member maintain that there was no reci-
procity in our treaties of reciprocity with other nations,
and he would cite, to dislodge him from his position, the
instance of France. (" Hear, hear," and " Hear" from
Air. Young.) In 1823 we had no treaty of navigation
with France, and equitable terms were offered for the ad-
justment of our marine relations. But France refused the
offer, and imposed higher dues upon our shipping. The
English Government, accordingly, issued an order that
distinctive duties should be affixed on French shipping—
higher dues, differential duties ; and what was the result ?
Four years afterwards, in 1827, a convention was entered
into, of which the principle was, and a very fair principle
it was too, that the duty should be regulated by the ton-
nage. (Hear, hear.) But the French complained, and
with some reason, that their ships were charged with light
duties, and subjected to other local imposts, which they on
their parts never imposed, and on these grounds kept up
the duty at 31. 50c., which had been subsequently reduced
to If. 50c. Even this he (Mr. P. Thomson) thought
too high, and he had received by the mail of that day in-
formation that they had reduced the scale of dues to one
franc (Hear, hear), which, he believed, taking all things
into consideration, was the fairest possible rate that could
be levied. (Cheers.) He thought, therefore, the hon.
gentleman might perceive there was some advantage in
this act, since .we. were thus enabled to say to foreign
countries;—" If yo 4 won't relieve our ships, depend upon
it we won't relieve yours."
Mr. G. F. YOUNG, in a very low tone of voice, said
a few words across the table, which did not reach us.
Mr. P. THOMSON proceeded. The hon. gentle-
man denied that France wos in a state of reciprocity with
us as regarded dues. Did he not know that ? Let him
g,o into a port of France (Hear, hear, from Mr. Young)
(Hear, from the same hon. member),
eadhrci tssa
set roaee:ded_
wouldf i
w- ship,
beethodirisrffe,,ceroteu.nntt.iryf,,iit.aheneadincheaseferwoomofuosldtphafieinrndchowalhnatbtreiehesne,
hcilthhaar
alluded to, with reference to the state of our
relations with that country. Take away theeiommercial
govern-
ment the power of coercing states to meet us on
field, and ,pain, as a country consuming our productions,
fair
would be almost lost to us ; but he hoped that the ons,
improv-
ing aspect of affairs in that country would lead to a better
state of things. Looking to the lion. member's motion
only, he should be somewhat at a loss to discover his real
aim, but it was evident that his object was to attack
tae reciprocity system altogether. Now he knew the
feeling which influenced that honourab!e gentleman on
principle on which the system
of subject, but the
of reciprocity was grounded appeared to him (Mr. I'.
Thomson) so clear, that he was surprised to perceive by the
cheers which followed certainportions of the hon. member's
speech that he did not stand alone in his opposition.
e
But let the hon. member be ever so much opposed to
liberal commercial policy on internal questions, he should
b, ware of following the same path, where foreign Intel ests
were concerned. He could not repeat the last words of
the hon. member's speech, but t.ieir puri,oes was, " Give
us protection. Throw its shield over every interest. Guard
the particular industry of every individual from any inter-
ference by foreign competition, and then one state of hap-
piness and comfort will unavoidably follow." The hon.
member might feel these sentiments on any isolated branch
of domestic or foreign production, wine, cotton, oil, and
all the various articles which our habits or necessities de-
manded. We might return to hips, and haws, and acorns
(Hear, hear), or build a wall of brass around our country
—we might exclude all the means of enjoyment, all the
accessories of luxury; this we might do—we might main-
tam the colonial and the coastmg trade ; here we had a
monopoly, but a foreign trade must be carried on within a
foreign country, and if we imposed differential dues on their