The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-17 00:00:00

been made in regard to coal he felt bound to say that he had
found, in private conversations with many persons, a consi-
derable fear and jealousy against that portion of the treaty.
This fact marked the great sensitiveness of the public mind
upon any question which might affect the naval power of
Britain; but he trusted the able explanation given by the
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs would rectify all mis-
understanding on the subject. The duty which had been
put on coal in the year 1812 turned out a disastrous and
almost a discreditable failure as regarded revenue purposes,
and during the whole time it was imposed his noble friend
(Earl Grey) had been the strenuous opponent of that duty,
and had successfully shown it was wrong in principle and
imposed material restrictions upon an important trade. he
1845 the duty was withdrawn by Sir R. Peel, who, in doing
so, said that he thought it was an important principle to lay
down, that with regard to exports there should be no duty
established. With regard to the question of prohibition
altogether, in case of war, it had been already stated that in
truth the only effect of this clause of the treaty was to put
France in precisely the same relation to us with regard to the
export of coal that all other European nations now were, and
be (the noble duke) apprehended it would have no other
effect whatever. With respect to the case of contemplated
war, which had also been referred to, he must say the tone
of this discussion had shown that mile lords were not
aware of the enormous interests of this country which de-
pended on the export of coal. In 1842, when. Sir Robert
Peel put the ear ort duty on coal, our export of coal to the
vrhole world fell short of a million and a half tons. What
had been the increase of that trade since the duty was taken
off? Our export of coal to the whole world now, instead
of being one million and a half tone, was very little short of
seven million tons, nearly £3,000,e00 sterling. He thought
this was not a trade which any Government would dare to
interfere with, except under circumstances of extreme poli-
tical danger. in such a case we should of course be justi="
fled in taking any measures which would avail for our own protectien. It was not merely the coal-owners and pro-
ducers who were interested in this export trade, there was
also the British shipping. (Hear.) He hoped the house
and the public would see that except so far as this clause
was open to all the abstract objections which might be
taken to the other clauses of the treaty, it was one about
which there need be no public alarm or anxiety whatever.
He rather looked on this clause as one of considerable im-
portance, taking into consideration the general objects of
the trade Noble lords had talked about coal as if it were
only used for the purpose of war, but it was much more
valuable for manufacturing and other commercial pur-
poses—(hear, hear)—and nothing could be more desirable
than that a great interest should rise up in 'France depen-
dent on England for coal. We should then, as regarded
the export of coal, have relations with France approaching
to the same which now existed between the English people
and the United States as regarded the article of cotton.
He was convinced that the fact of the people of this
country depending so much on the supply of Ameri-
can cotton, and the American people depending so much on
British manufactures was one of the most powerful causes in
operation to prevent causeless irritation expanding into a
state of war, and he could not but think the treaty under
discussion would be followed by the growth of a better feel-
ing between this country and France. (Hear.)
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said that he believed
the reason why commercial treaties were objected to by Sir
Robert Peel and by the best friends of political economy
was, that they tied our hands; and he, for one, should cer-
tainly object to our entering into engagements by which
our hands would be tied for ten years. He would not enter
into the general questions concerned in the present treaty,
but he must say there were two articles in it which involved
matters of the deepest importance. In the first case France
declared that over and above these duties she maintained
her right to levy any differential duties she chose upon
English shipping entering French ports. He thought that
when we were giving up so much to France great exertions
ought to be made to alter those stringent laws to which our
shipping interest so much objected. He also objected to
Art. 11, which he thought was vague and unsatisfactory in
its wording. Coal in time of peace was a necessary element
fn all manufactures, but in time of war it was a munition
of war as much as gunpowder. It was true that during
the late war some doubts existed whether coal could fairly
be considered a munition of war, but last year had shown
that the whole of the naval marine of any country must be
entirely dependent on coal. The noble duke had said that
the great bond of peace would be to make France depen-
dent on Englaad for coal ; but for the purposes of manu-
factures Belgian coal was as good as English coal, and the
latter only became of its greater importance for purposes
of war. (Hear, hear.) Suppoeing we were about to go to
war with Russia. She possessed no coal of her own, and
was therefore entirely dependent on foreign countries for a
supply. By Article 11 of the treaty France would be entitled
to take our coal wherever she pleased, and we could not
prevent her. French ships might come to Swansea and
get the Welsh coal, and go to Prussian ports, from whence
tho article could easily be conveyed by railway into Russia.
What he principally objected to was our entering into a po-
sitive engagement, from which we could not escape, no
matter what the emergency might he. He thought it was
against all sound policy for us, with our eyes open, to fetter
ourselves with an engagement which could not be beneficial
to any British interest, or even beneficial to any French in-
terest, except in case of war. He trusted the Govemanzent

would take these matters into their serious consiaration.

Earl GRANVILLE said it was perfectly clear and obvi-
ous that no government of this country would, within the
next 10 years, propose an export duty on coal, It was quits
clear that this was a peace treaty, which would be at once
superseded the momedt war was declared. In the Russian
war we had prohibited the exportation of coals to all coun-
tries north of Dantzic, although these countries had most
favoured nation treaties. If France went to war within; and.
required our coals, it would be our right to prevent her get-
ting them, on the ground that they were munitions of war.
Besides, did any noble lord think that a rich country like
France would leave herself at the commencement of a war
without a plentiful supply of coal ? She could get coal from
Belgium, and her director general of mines, a man of great
scientific attainments, had recently reported his opinion that
plenty of steam coal might be got at home. With regard to
the troaty generally, it was quite according to the principles
of the late Sir R. Peel, and if it were wrong he would ra-
ther err with such men as Sir R. Peel than agree with
either of the noble lords.

The Earl of AIRLIE, inai-eply, pointed out that the con-
cession given to France respecting coal was absolute, and
doubted whether there was any reasonable prospect of a
supply of coal in that country.
Motion agreed to.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock:
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a second time :—Hayling
Railways and Harbour; Dublin Corporation Water; and
Leeds Township.
Several private bills were read a first time.
PETITIONS.
_

Several petitions were presented against church rates,
flogging in the army and navy, and from ladies against
legalising marriage with a. deceased wife's sister.:

HOP DUTIES.
Mr. MUNDY gavo notice of his intention to ask the
Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is intended to take
off the duty immediately on hops, or whether it was in-
tended to allow the advantages of the bonding to continue ?