The Sun.
London, England, 1860-01-30 00:00:00

~.kL L . Li.l t

i ,4;

,f.EE TRADE IN .?E.A.ATE. •

The original articles ix the Paris journals are
not of great importance, that presenting most inte-
rest being in the Debats and slowing the general
effects of reduced duties on various articles of con-

sumption. Referring to the well-known law of
political economy that the principle of competi-
tion, when applied with prudence, measures, and
opportuneness, has invariably been productiva
of good results for the movement of labour and of
business, our contemporary gives some examples to
prove the correctness of the rule in question. One
of its most striking instances is the state of the silk
trade in England before 1825 and at present. Pre-
viously to that year but comparatively little silk
was worked up in the United Kingdom, and the
trade was protected by prohibition. But in 1852 the
Government then resolved to remove the pro-
hibition affecting foreign silk and substituted for it
high duties. Great was the alarm expressed by
English manufacturers, who affirmed that their
complete ruin must be the inevitable consequence
of the measure. Such however was 'not by any
means the ease, as is demonstrated by our contem-
porary in these terms :
" The average quantity of silk used in the Eng-
lish manufactories had up to that time kept at
about 1,000,000 kilogrammes. Six years after the
removal of the prohibition, the average reached
1,695,171 kilogs., so that the manufacture certainly
had not fallen off. In 1835, the duty on silk was
again reduced, and in another six years the manu-
factures rose to 2,470 175 kilogs. That is not all:;
in 1845 a fresh reduction took place, and from that
period to 1856 the consumption increased to
3,143,786 kilogs. Finally, in 1857, it reached
4,860,000 kilos., that is to say, five times the quan-
tity of that which existed when the manufacture
was protected by prohibition. This appears very
remarkable, and the English manufacturers who
were to have been all ruined by the removal of the
prohibition, appear to be now in a good state. It
is in like manner that the reform of the corn laws
destroyed English agriculture, the ruin of which
was predicted in Parliament ; and that the encou-
ragement given in France to beet-root sugar de-
stroyed the production of her colonies. It was thus,
also, that the reduction of the import duty on cattle
was followed by an invasion of foreign oxen, pre-
dicted by an illustrious marshal, who declared in
the Tribune that he should prefer seeing an invasion.
of Cossacks; aul, lankly, It was this that the re-
duction of the duties on rough castings, in 1853,
caused torrents of the English article to flow into
France, the average import in that year being from
25,000 to 26,000 tons, and in 1859, 26,000 tons."
Another instance adduced by the Debats is that of
coffee, as showing not only the increase in the con-
sumption arising. from lower duties, but the vast
diminution in price. It says :
" In 1825, the English Parliament authorised
a reduction in the duty on coffee, and the con-
sumption, which in 1823-24 averaged 3,800,000
kilos., had increased in 1833-34 to 10,500,000
kilos. The revenue lost nothing, for the receipts
on that article rose from 10,600,000 f. to more
than 15,000,000 f.; and as to the price, which before
the reduction was from 144 f. to 260 f., according to
quality, it rose immediately to from 183 f. to 284 f.
This rise in price was not permanent, for otherwise
the reduction of the duty would have defeated the
object intended, for the price afterwards gradually
came down to 105 fr. and 213 fr. The consumption of
coffee in England now amounts to nearly 17,000,000
kilos. Another cause has effectually assiated in this
increase, and that is the progressive reductions
made in the duty on sugar, which in 30 years have
brought up the consumption in England from
180,000,000 kilos. to 432,000,000 kilos. In France
the consumption is 200,000,000 kilos." As a
further proof of the advantages of free
competition, the writer points to the state of
the wool trade in France, and shows that from
1834 to 1858 the exports of woollen manufactured
goods have increased from 27 millions of francs to
156. "Should we," he asks most pertinently,
" have arrived at such results had we maintained
our former high duties on the article P" All the
experience of these latter years gives a decided ne-
gative to the question.
Very few of the Paris journals remark on the late
discussion in the English Parliament on the Address
to the Queen. The Debuts, however, constitutes
an exception, making some rather sharp observa-
tions on the language of Mr. Disraeli, whom it
accuses of the very gravest fault in a statesman—
ignorance of the subject on which he speaks. It
may be as well to remind our readers that the
Tory party, not being able with any consistency to
openly oppose the foreign policy of the Palmerston
Cabinet, endeavours to effect its purpose by a sort
of side-wind, and so attacks the commercial treaty
with France. The great argument brought for-
. ward against that arrangement is, that no neces-
sity exists for its completion, and that it infringes
the principles of liberty which form the theoretical
basis of all commercial policy in Great Britain.
The leader of the Opposition in the House of Com-
mons having assigned such reasons for objecting to
the treaty, is thus spoken of by the Paris journal
"Mr. Disraeli made a singular mistake in de-
claring that a treaty was not at all necessary in
order to change the commercial policy of France.
Mr. Disraeli's argument, betray astonishing ignor-
anCe of French institutions, as Lord Palmerston
found no difficulty in showing. Mr. Disraeli
stated that a law was presented to the Legislative
Body in 1856 to inaugurate a new commercial
policy in France ; that the law did not pass 'no
doubt owing to the advanced period of the session,'
but that the Government, after consulting the
councils-general, had engaged to put the new sys-
tem in vigour in 1861. Mr. Disraeli, 'therefore,
asks why the English Government consented to
sign a treaty of commerce, since the engagement of
the French Government for 1861 came to the same
thing. What have you gained br this infraction
of principles and by this treaty ?' exclaims Mr,
Disraeli. It is evident that the hon. gentleman has
fallen into the serious error of supposing that the
declaration of the French Government, which post-
poned the project of reforming the commercial code
till 1861, was equivalent to a law. In 1861, as in
1856, the intentions of the French Government can
only become law with the assent of the Legislative
Body ; it is therefore that important formality
hick Mr. Disraeli does not take into account,
either because be is not aware that the consent of
the Legislative Body is necessary to the enactment
of laws, or because he wrongly supposes that the
Legislative Body can in no case withhold its con-
sent. But Lord Palmerston, who seems much better
versed in our institutions than any other member
of the English Parliament, stated the real facts of
the case, and clearly proved the absolute necessity
of this treaty of commerce, which appeared so use-
less to Mr. Disraeli:—' It certainly is true that it
is not desirable that this country should enter into
conventions and engagements with other countries
respecting tariffs and customs duties. But in the
present instance, there are peculiar circumstances
connected with the French Constitution and sys-
tem of legislation which prevented us from obtain-
ing from France that security for future arrange-
ments which it was essential we should obtain,
unless the transaction assumed the character of a
convention between the two Governments. It
is an exceptional arrangement, and not to be judged
of by the general principle on which matters of this
kind should be conducted.' It is manifest from
this explanation that the English Government has
endeavoured to conciliate the circumstances of the
French Government, which could not effect this
reform otherwise than by a treaty of commerce,
with the English institutions, which do not allow
so ',important an act to escape the control and
sanction of Parliament."
To further elucidate the point thus explained
by the English Minister, we subjoin the article
of the constitution (San. 14, 1852) which regulates
the question :
" Art 6. The President of the Republic is the
Head of the State ; he commands the land and sea
forces, declares war, makes treaties of peace, alli-
ance, and commerce."
Art 3 of the Senatus Consultum, modifying
`he Constitution after the proclamation of the Ern-

pire, says :
" Treaties of commerce made in virtue of Art.
6 of the Constitution have the force of laws for

the modifications of the tariff therein stipulateair'
Under the title of" Le 89 du Travail," the Pays
publishes a long article on the advantages which
the commercial treaty is likely to confer on the
working classes in France. After showing that
during the last sixty years much has been effected
for the comfort of the lower portions of the popu•
lotion, the writer points t• the fact that in the
country districts a great amelioration is still
called for. As the new organisation of labour will
have the effect of reducing the cost of wearing
apparel, the working classes must of necessity
profit by that improvement, as well as by the re-
duction in the cost of several of the most ordinary
articles of consumption. The writer then refers
to the conditions required for effecting the proposed
modification in the commercial duties,. and says ;
" Three things were necessary, without reckon-
ing the intelligence and liberalism of the Imperial
policy, in order to undertake usefully the great
economic reforms set forth in the Emperor's letter
--a favourable state of the finances, peace, and
institutions which would allow the Sovereign to
y
me
anner,
theocaut nl
pushingi
finances
nedrraeo:ptocae
ne
shnn
add
tvehben
wee
leftt l
hny igl of opposing interests. Without
publice
theinr e
budget
worksaie goodving i
insnsutegaaciant
equilibrium,
„ el thexcb
torrffi
au.
eomte awiwns
houa
iorrl
and cotton from considerable duties. Without peace,
the sacrifices made b 7 the treasury would not And
in an increase of agricultural and commercial acti-

s 71.
:(
,-;;;„. 0 •

c 3• t'

vity and improved consumption, the necessary com-
pensatiens. Lastly, with a constitution like that
which ruled France from 1815 to 1851. the Sove-
reign would have been obliged to make the reforms '
subordinate to the appreciation and to the consent
of the very interests which they are precisely in-
tended to interfere with."
The writer then proceeds to show, when habits
have become inveterate, it is most difficult to change
them and get useful reforms introduced
" The Chambers of Commcrce when consulted by
Louis XVI. in 1857 on the utility of rculo jug we
internal enstom-houses which isolated the different
proVinees, and burdened national productions with
enormous duties, declared by a majority in favour
of their maintenance. The Parliament of Paris
itself, when an edict was presented to -it for esta-
blishing an equity of taxation for all classes of citi-
zens, refused to enregister it, as being unjust. The
consequence was that there was a riot among the
Parisians and blood was shed in supporting the
Parliament against the King. Under the Govern-
ment of July, the Chamber of Deputies several times
voted the reduction of the interest on Rents, but
the Chamber of Peers always rejected it. It is that o-
fore very natural that the branches of industry
which monopolise the national market should pro-
test against the introduction, even with differential
duties, of foreign merchandise ; and if the constitu-
tion had not given to the Sovereign the power of
concluding the treaty of commerce with England,
the interests which it affects, however slightly,
would have opposed probably insurmountable ob-
stacles."