The Sun.
London, England, 1860-08-07 00:00:00

the temperate and well-considered amendment which has
been proposed by the hon. member fer Hertfordshire.
(Cries of" Divide.")

Lord PALMERSTON—I entirely agree in the opinion
expressed by the right hon. gentleman that a division on
this question is not necessary, and I think it would be well

.•
avoided by those who sit on the other side of the house.
(Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman has urged me not
to adopt unnecessary and exaggerated opinions. Now,
undoubtedly, if I have the disposition to adopt such
opinions, I think that the course followed on the other side

has been such as to warn me to avoid the example set by
them ; for I think that not only have their opinions been
stated with unnecessary energy, and exaggerated ex-
tremely,
but, as I will beg leave to show, their opinions are
inconsistent with former opinions expressed by those very
gentlemen. The question before the house is whether we
will fulfil the conditions of a treaty concluded with a
foreign power, and whether we will, with regard to this
manufacture, apply the principles of free trade which has
been adopted by all sides of the house. (Hear, hear.) Now,
I really am surprised, I will not say at learned gentlemen,
because they are in the habit of using refined arguments,
and what is called splitting hairs aLd . finding difficulties
where unlearned men find none—l am not surprised that
learned gentlemen should be inclined to argue away the
7th article of the treaty, but that unlearned men who
look at the matter with plain common sense, look at words
according to their ordinary meaning, and at engagements
according to the spirit as well as the letter-4 am surprised
that gentlemen not belonging to the learned profession
should entertain any doubt as to the obvious intention of
the 7th article of the treaty. Nothing can be plainer. It
is stated in the article that the duty on merchandise coming
from France shall not exceed the excise duty levied on the
same articles produced in this country. What can be
clearer and more precise than that engagement ? It is said
that paper was not supposed to be included originally among
the provisions of the treaty; bat my right hon. friend has
explained how it happened that at that time it was antici-
pated that the excise duty would be repealed, and that the
article would not apply to paper. But when the course of
events prevented the duty from being repealed the 7th
article of the treaty came into operation. It is alleged that
the French Government,--not by treaty, but by diplomatic
communications—offered to do its utmost to change the law
in France with regard to the exportation of rags, and it is
said that because the French Government have failed in
their endeavours to procure that change, the English Go-
vernment' ought also to fail to carry into effect a solemn
engagement entered into between the two countries, and
ratified by the Sovereign of each. No •doutt the French
Government in the most handsome manner stated that if it *
was inconvenient for her Majesty's Government to carry
out the stipulation they would waive its execution for the
present, but is such handsome and liberal conduct to be met
by conduct diametrically opposite ? I cannot believe that
a British House of Commons can ever assent to such
course. The right hon. gentleman who had just addressed
the house had stated that conventions are to be signed
regulating the duties on iron and other things, and he says
we can, under those circumstances, readily postpone the
paper duty. But the right honourable gentleman is con-
fusing things totally different in their nature, be-
cause that which is the subject matter of the convention
is the conversion of duties ad valorem into specific duties,
and therefore that fact has no bearing whatever upon the
question under consideration. What has the house already
done in reference to the treaty ? It has unanimously voted
the address approving of the treaty and engaging to sup-
port the crown in the performance of its stipulations ; but
yet we are now called upon to evade indefinitely the execu-
tion of the engagements into which we have entered. It is
said to be a very trifling matter, but I should be glad to
learn if that was the light at which it was represented to the
carious gentlemen who have been called up from different
parts of the country, and even from foreign lands, to take
part in this unnecessary division. (Laughter and cheers.)
I will undertake that to them the matter was represented
in a very different light. I trust that the house will look
at the question in a plain, straightforward English manner,
and I have no doubt they will see that there is an obligation
and will take the earliest opportunity of fulfilling it. With
regard to the bearing upon this particular trade I must be
allowed to say that I really thought we were-all free-tradere-
I remember a time, not very far distant, when hon. gentle-
men on the other side of the house raised the standard of
protection, and that was the rallying cry of the party. But/
if I mistake not, in 1852 Lord Derby stated, when he dis-
solved Parliament, that ho referred the question of free
trade or protection to the decision of the country. When
the general election was over, Lord Derby and its Govern'
ment stated that they felt the country had decided in favour
of free trade, and that henceforward they adopted frankly
and fairly the principle of free trade. (Hear.) But now
this free-trading Parliament is called upon to break a treaty
for the sake of retaining a little fragment of protection in
one particular trade. My honourable friend the member
for Pontefract made an important statement to-night es
to the way in which the paper trade of this country beats
the paper manufacture of France from third markets,
in which no protection operates, and in which the/
start on fair and equal terms. By their superior
skill and the better article they manufacture, they gain the
predominance in third markets, to the exclusion of the
manufacture of France. That shows, even on the narrow
ground that protection may be wanted to foster a manufac-
ture which cannot stand on its own legs, that paper does
not want that protection. Even if you admitted the rile
that it was sound policy to make the consuming public buy
a dearer or a less good article merely that the persons who
manufacture that article should have a profit which they
would not otherwise gain—even if that false and exploded
principle were a good one; it would not apply, because it ill
demonstrated that the paper manufacturers of England are
capable of meeting all the difficulties of getting raw mate'
rial and competing successfully and' advantageortsll
with the foreign manufacturers. Therefore, whether ife
take it on the principle of the treaty or of free trade spa
protection, I have not heard a single argument which lull
any weight in it. lam pursuaded the House of Cemmorns
will feel that it is bound to maintain the honour of the
country by fulfilling our obligations, of the nature and es'
tent of which no reasonable man can doubt, and also that
they are too far advanced in the principles of free trade 0
retrace their steps now. To make this an exception tc'
that general rule, the application of which has tended °0
greatly to improve the industry and increase the prosperitY
of the country, would be a dereliction of the duty of the
House of Commons, and I cannot believe that by all th 4
ingenious arguments which have been used the house Wl'
be persuaded to do so. (Cheers.)
The house then divided :
For the resolution
For the amendment .. 233-33
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud and prolonged cheering.
The resolution was then agreedto.
The CHANCELLORof the EXCHEQUER then moved
" That in lieu of the duties of customs now charged on the
articles undermentioned, other duties of customs shall, 011
and after the 16th day of August, 1860, be charged there:
on importation • from countries other than' France it
Algeria. He presumed that as between the first andial
differencewhasads °EI simple
O a ly and
discussedso w e
1i
theunder
stood,
and thethe
committee
ject of free trade and protection, and the question of the
treaty, that the committee would go forward and take thi°
question at once.
Mr. PULLER did not think it necessary to make another
speech to-night, but there was an important distinction he'
tween the two resolutions, and all the arguments upon the
faith of the treaty had no application whatever to this reso"
lution as regarded the interests of that class of manufa°
turers whose case he had supported ; it was of vital iraPor
tance to them that this resolution should not be agreed to.
He therefore begged to move an amendment, "that, with-
out desiring to prejudice the question of a reduction sts
future period of the customs duty on books and paper, an%
committee does not think fit at present to assent to such
reduction."
Mr. DISRAELI could not support the amendment. The
question at issue in the first resolution was of great impor:
tance, and the house had well and fully discussed it. Thl:
resolution would, if carried, involve this country in gre4
trouble with those countries under the name of favoured
nations. The hon. gentleman must not, therefore, count
on his support if he went to a division.
Mr. NE WDEGATE supported the amendment. ifs
should not be doing his duty to his constituents if he did
not vote for it.
A division was called for, but the resolution being put
the amendment was withdraws, and it was agreed to with'
rateincreasingthe
on wine, from the Ist ':January, 1861, so as to adjust the
duties on the stronger kinds of wine to meet the late inereaie
on the duties on spirits. EXCHEQUERofdutyohchargeable
eau neat
After a few words from Mr. AYRTON, the resolution Wei
agreed to, and the house resumed.
The Refreshment-houses and Wine Licenses (Ireland)
Bill was read a third time and passed.
The second reading of the Plea on Indictments Bill ar°
moved by Mr. DENMAN, and agreed to.
The other orders of the day were disposed of, and the
house adjourned at half-past two.

[ADVERTISEMENT.] Pills and medicine invariably nr
gravate and perpetuate diseases; their annoyance, di.:
appointment, and expense may be avoided by penst"
in indifferent health sending only their address to
S. Barry, Esq., 77, Regent-street, W., London, and the/
will receive gratis and free by post the "INVALIDS' 00,
GUIDE," or Natural Restorer, without medicine or 06
pense, of perfect digestion, strong nerves, mound lungs, 411,
refreshing sleep, to the most enfeebled, insuring the remoi'.l_l!
of indigestion (dyspepsia), constipation, liver complaint.'
nausea, epilepsy, paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitatio¢
cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, flatulency, diarril.:
dysentery, biliousness, fevers, sore throws, catarrhs, COLd
noises in the ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, erupt-!, win
hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, acidity, Palo,
tation, heartburn; headache, despondency, cramps, WB4B .o
siiski' g, fits, bronchitig.—"Ungve,,t,,onally the safest (111,

LONDON : Printed and. Published by MURDO YOUI4a
,/
of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun aflice,No. 111
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the count/
Middlesex, Tuesday, August 7, 1860.