The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-02 00:00:00

as the Hon. Member for Middlesex could wish, in endea-
vouring to satisfy the individuals engaged in this trade,
not only that the Government was willing to pay every
attention to their wishes, but that if it was found neces-
sary to adopt a line of conduct different from their feelings,
it was not to be done till the fullest inquiry into the sub-
ject bad taken place.
Colonel DAVIES said, that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, had, in his speech, laid down such irresistible grounds
for the reference of this subject,'as well as the glove trade,
to a Committee, that he thought he could not do better
than move, after the present question was disposed of, that
the state of the glove trade be referred to the same
Committee.
Mr. POULETT THONISON, although he had agreed,
on the part of Government, to the appointment of this
Committee on the silk trade, felt anxious to unite in the
Committee a further inquiry. He should therefore move
as an amendment to the motion of his Noble Friend, to
leave out all the words after the word " appoint," for the
purpose of inserting these words, " to examine into the
state of the silk trade, and to inquire what effect had been
produced by a change in the laws since 1824, and whether
any and what legislative measure might be deemed ad-
visable to promote the sillc trade, as well as for checking
the smuggling of silk manufactures."
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN thought the Right Hon.
Gentleman had not put the question fairly to the House.
The plain simple question was, " are these particular
traders in distress, or are they tint ?" He thought the
Right Hon. Gentleman had defeated his own argument,
for when he had said that within the last three years the
increase of the importation of the raw material had
amounted to 3,500,0001., and that, because there had been
an increased importation that trade must be flourishing, he
ought rather to have looked for an increased consumption,
for he maintained that with an increased population, and
with the advantage of expensive machinery, the consump-
tion must have increased if the trade had been thriving.
What was the fact, admitting that the trade had in-
creased ? Why, that distress had increased also, and
since the year 1826 the wages of a weaver had fallen
from I Is. to ss. per week. It had, however, been
stated that the trade was thriving in Manchester, but on the
authority of a letter he had received from a most extensive
silk.throwster there, a Mr. Hoyle, the reverse was the case.
His informant stated, that official facts would not satisfy
the trade, for there were a starving population of labourers
filling the workhouses at the present moment. There was
another fact be must mention, which was, that the export
in the fancy trade, formerly 3,0001., was now only 250/.
He could not agree with many of the points stated by the
Right Hon. Gentleman, and he would ask the House why,
when there were hands enough to employ in the manufac-
tories, should the manufactures of France be admitted, and
thereby heat down the workmen of this country into the
worst state of poverty. If he chose to enter upon the
doctrine of free trade, he could show the House that the
exports had fallen off since 1817, to the enormous amount
of 9,000,000/. per annum, and that though the official
value might have increased 4,000,000/., the real value
had decreased 2,000,000/. The subject had been brought
before the Pat liatnent in 1766 by the Spitalfields weavers,
and he ventured to assert that at that period there was not
one-hundredth part of the smuggling that was now carried
on. He ti used that Government would consider the sub-

ject fairly, and determine upon making such alterations in
the excise laws as would put an end to a system so perni-
cious to the trade of the country.
Mr. G. R. ROBINSON was much surprised with the
speech of the Right Hon. Vice-President of the Board of
Trade, who had commenced by arguing that the peti-
tioners had no grounds on which to rest their claims, and
vet lie concluded by acquiescing in the appointment of a
Committer. He (Mr. Robinson) could not but complai❑
of the refusal of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the other
night, to grant a similar inquiry for his constituents, with
respect to the state of the glove trade, denying that any
distress existed, and yet now, while the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman denied that any distress existed amongst the silk
weavers, he grants them a Committee to inquire into the
state of their trade, and the cause of their distress.
Mr. P. THOMSON explained. He did not deny that
distress exited.

Mr. ROBINSON was glad the Right Hon. Gentleman
and himself were no longer at issue. But it had been
charged that the traders of this country had brought dis-
tress upon themselves by an imprudent trading, but what
had been the language of the Right Hon. Gentleman i❑
1825 ? The amount of bis speech at that period was a
call upon traders to bring into action their best energies
against foreign competitors, and if they failed i❑ their
efforts, to come to this House for relief. The Right Hon.
Gentleman now •aid they had not used these energies, but
had given up their trade to foreign competitors. The
amount of it, however, was this, that the traders were
compelled to embark in trades that were unprofitable,
because they had no other means of existence. The lan-
guage of the petition was the language of the lion. Mem-
ber for Thetford, in 1825, who had then said, " that if
the people could not be maintained by employment, the
country must maintai❑ them, for it had degraded and de-
moralized the population, and had extended the feelings of
discontent and dissatisfaction, which had given rise to the
cry for Reform in Parliament." I❑ this sentiment he
(Mr. Robinson), though a supporter of the Reform Bill on
principle, acquiesced. He thought that when a foreign na-
tion was pursuing a competition with so much energy, if
the Committee could devise no other means of relieving
the distress affecting the manufacturers of this country,
recourse must be had, in spite of principle, to prohibition

once more.
Mr. WILBRAHAM could bear testimony to the distress
which affected Macclesfield and other parts of the country
with which he was connected. He held in his hand a
statement of the rate of wages in former years, to which
he felt it his duty to call the attention of the House. In
1825, in Macclesfield, the rate of wages of the weaver was
16s. 711. per week, and in 1826 it fell to Is. 9d. In 1824,
in the silk-throwing branch, there were employed 276 per-
sons at 111. per week ; and in 1828 the number employed
were reduced to 129 persons, at an average of ss. 3d. per
week. That the distress had increased was shown by this
statement, and was corroborated by the fact that in 1825
the poor rates amounted to 4,0001., and in in 1826 they
were increased to 7,8001., nearly double the amount of the
preceding year.
Mr. G. BANKES had given notice of a motion con-
nected with this subject, on account of a great smuggling
transaction that had recently come to light, and also with
reference to the statement of the Right Hon. the Vice-
President of the Board of Trade, that not a dozen pair of
gloves were smuggled into this country in the course of a
year. His motion would have extended, not merely to
the present subject, but to others, where protection was
withdrawn from our own manufactures, and facilities were
granted to the foreign trader. He was no party to the
incorporation of the words now proposed by the Right
Hon. Gentleman, as an improvement of the motion of the
Noble Lord ; and he was inclined to believe that it would
create some disappointment amongst those individuals who
were interested in the question. The present motion did
not embrace the whole of the matters which his motion
would have brought under the consideration of the House ;
and it would not therefore preclude him from bringing
forward his proposition at such time as he might think
fit. The great and only object of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman seemed to be, a desire to protect the manufac-
turers from the effects of smuggling. But if that were
so, why did he admit a compromise in the great smuggling
case which had lately been discovered? With reference
to that subject, he would ask the Attorney-General,
whether the statement contained in the memorial of
Messrs. Leaf and Co. to the Treasury (which statement
he should read) were true or not? It was set forth
in that document, " That your memorialists having
found that the only mode by which proof of the duties
having been paid was refused to them, agreed to pay
20,0001. on the express terms and conditions, that
their goods should be restored to them, and that all
legal proceedings against them should cease. That the
latter part of this proposition was at first opposed, but was
ultimately agreed to, on your memorialists insisting to
proceed to trial, and their goods were in consequence re-
stored to them." Now he wished to know whether this
was true,—whether, in a case where, if the witnesses were
to be believed, conviction must inevitably have ensued,
the smuggled goods had been given up, were thrown into
the market, and were now selling in London, at the very
season when such articles must come most decidedly in
competilion with fabrics of British manufacture? The
Right Hon. Gentleman had studiously avoided one branch
of the trade, that of Coventry, which was most depressed,
been a gradual,
and his selection of the five years before 1824, and five
r.t. There hail
years after 1526, leaving out the intermediate years, did
not support his argument.
steady, and progressive increase of the silk trade up to
1826, but from that period the decrease was manifest.
Mr. KEARSLEY condemned the whole of the pro-
ceedings of Ministers with respect to the silk trade. The
Right Hon. Gentleman might have saved himself the
trouble of making a long speech, which would not con-
vince any person, and have contented himself with de-
claring that the interests of the manufactures were
" fructifying" in the pockets of the Administration.—
(Laughter.) He believed that there was not a merchant
in the metropolis who placed the least confidence in such a
noodle and doodle Administration." (Great laughter.)
I Sir. HAYWOOD was of opinion that the distress
which prevailed in some of the districts where the silk
manufacture was carried on did not proceed from foreign