The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-24 00:00:00

to blame, as far as the Bristol riots are con-
cerned, for not having provided such a powerful
military force as would be sure, by its very ap-
pearance, to overawe a mob, and impress theni
at once with the hopelessness of attempting re-
sistance. One of the most zealous of the Mi-
nisterial Papers justly made it part of the de-
fence of Colonel Brereton that his force was in-
stAcient to protect the public peace, without a
dreadful effusion of blood. A deputation from
Bristol had waited upon Lord 'Melbourne, in
the first instance, to apprize him of the appre-
hended disturbances. It appears from the de-
bates in Parliament that it was with his Lord-
ship's approval Sir CharlesWetherell went down
to preside at the Sessions ; and yet the paltry
force which was placed at the disposal of Colonel
Brereton was only sufficient to irritate an excited
populace, by placing before their eyes the armed
array, without the effective power, of a military
force. But, if the Government were to blame
in the first instance, the civil authorities have yet
to answer charges which have been loudly made,
and which have not yet led to any legal inquiry.
We said before, and we say again, that the
charges against the civil authorities, to whom
Government were to look for the preserva ion o!.
the public peace, ought to have been regularly in-
vestigated, before either Colonel Brereton, or
the poor and ignorant rioters, were placed at the
bar of criminal justice. But it is easier to hang
the humble and ignorant delinquents, whom Mr.
Justice Littledale called " deluded and mis-
guided men," than to inquire judicially into the
truth or falsehood of the must serious charges
made against men in higher station—although
upon the truth or falsehood of those charges
principally turns the question of the chief cri-
minal responsibility connected with the Bristol
riots.—Morning Herald.

TRADE with FRANCE and GREAT BRITAIN

(From the Times.)

The pamphlet entitled " Observations on the Trade be-
tween France and Great Britain," which we yesterday al-
luded to, has evidently been written by an English S•ates-
wan, or diplomatist, and translated into French, to facilitate
a liberal change in the commercial intercourse between the
two nation., by enliehtening public opinion, and removing
popular prejudice, in the quarter least intormed on great
questions of commercial policy. It hears, indeed, evident
marks of being written under the dictation of the English
Board of Trad-, in order to procure front France that
relaxation of her prohibitory system, of which we have
our,elves shown the first and most meritorious example.
Viewed in this light, these unambitious, unaffected " ob-
servation," acquire all the importance of a commercial State
paper._

And we may add, that no paper which has been made
the ba.is of changes iu the commercial relations of two
great c,untries, was ever drawn up in a more liberal spirit,
or indicated a better acquaintance with the principles con-
ducive to the interests of both.

Most of our readers are, perhaps, aware, that by cue.
tom-house prohibitions or restrictions on the part b .th of
France and this country. the interchange of commodities
between them is extremely limited, and that two great na-
tions, whose immediate proximity and mutual wants have
fitted them for an extensive trading intercourse, have had
fewer commercial relations than if they were situated if)
different hemispheres. Sin-•e the establishment of the ge-
neral pe,ce, when alf political obstacles to renewe3 inter-
course c aced, the anneal value of the exports and imports
between Fra ce and England has not es ceedel3,ooo 0001.
sterling. Thus, th • •wo most powerful kingdoms in the
world, with an eat, naive population—in the one of
30 000 000 fso and in the other of more than
26 000,000,—bot of them rich, cultivated, and luxuri-
ou., and iheref re alt un sing in the means of mutually
gratifying tl e dtiricial wants which civilization creates,—
wi h n view of each other's shores, and therefore affording
the readiest facilities to an expeditious communic,tion, and
cleap freightage,_possessing the greatest variety of na-
tural produci ins, or manufacturing industry, and there-
fore naturally rather customers than rivals,—the one with
extensive colonies, immense capital, and unrivalled manu-
facturing ingenuity,—the other entitled to boast of the
prodigal riches of its soil and the inventive ingenuity of its
inl,aliitanta,—these two most powerful States, we repeat,
o ti.ted to be commercially ben ficial to each other, have
hewer transactons with each other than with the empire of
Brazil, or the exhausted dominions of the Grand S ignor.
Much of tlis commercial alienation and this forfeiture
of mutual advantage has, of course, aris,n from political
jealoul, which was rather apt to be aggravated than al-
layed by immediate vicinity and equal pretension; but
much of it lik.•wise has been occasioned by ignorant jea-
lousy or selfi.h prejudice. To the latter the pamphlet be-
fore us applies the proper remedy. It does not propose a
commercial ire ity, in the formation of which the two
parties would be running a race of useless chicanery, and
in the operation of which both might always find subjects
of complaint or recrimination ; it merely suggests that
each of them should teview its own custom-house laws
for the purpo e of improving them so as to attain the
objects most conducive to its own interests, and proves
that by so doing it will promote the interests of both.
" The two nations," says the pamphlet, " should begin
by entirely abolishing their tariff of customs. In esta-
blishing new tariffs they ought only to keep in view their
own interests, without su jetting the details of these tariffs
either to diplomatic negotiations, or to private arrange-
ments. T
his first step is of the highest importance, both
because it is conformable to the rules of true legislation,
and because it would destroy the suspicious that the
parties were directed by selfishness or prejudice."
Such seems to be the sensible coarse which every Go-
vernment ought hereafter to pursue, in determining its
commercial relations. Commercial treaties, be they ad-
justed as liberally as they may, or be they ever so great an
improvement on a system of general exclusion, can never
give perfect satisfaction to both parties. A lurking sus-
picion will always exist, that the one has overreached the
other—that the advantage of the transaction is not per•
fectly reciprocal—and that something would be gained
by the establishment of new conditions. Besides, third
parties, who are excluded from the common arrangement,
are always dissatisfied with their treatment, and endea-
vour either to retaliate on one of these commercial allies,
or to embroil him with each other. A third disadvan-
tage is, that every interruption of commercial intercourse
hey war, or new alliances, renders a new arrangement ne-
cessary, and consequently exposes both parties to all the
evils of temporary uncertainty, and all the tricks of diplo-
matic negotiation.

The opposite system labours under no such disadvan-
vantages. By it every nation is supposed to form its own
tariff with a regard only to its own interests, without de-
manding from its neighbour or ally a dim'nution of duties
as an equivalent for any change which it proposes, consi-
dering it as a demonstrable truth that what is useful to one
country cannot be permanently injurious to another.

Starting from titis principle, we should say that there
ought to tie no duties, at filet imposed, or permanently
maintained, either to protect domestic produce and manu-
factures by the discouragement or prohibition of foreign,
whatever duties may be imposed for the purposes of re-
venue. The pamphlet before us proposes three funda-
mental rules on the subject. 1. That foreign articles,
consisting of the raw materials for manufacturing opera-
tions, should he free from all duties. 2. That foreign ar-
ticles, indispensable to life, should likewise be exempted
from duty. And 3 That foreign articles of luxury should
aw4obnyfehd,caiiotnl:outgnr‘ii
nsremoe:sn:u:tebeojrcneiola,cpintl)sper,e,telhbrastee, onhadteet.
oea:d:iolansetd,boi
,(iwntrgok.anr,x,,,wi Insonweooeotrddho,secl,oopfirfflernalmattxlri,yock,fia, category are,
inds,
all
flour, bread, fresh and salt meat, fish, rice, and salt. In
the third are comprehended all articles of foreign luxury
on which Government may require a tax, such as cloth,
wine, spirits, sugtr, coffee, tea, tobacco, jewellery, plate, or-
naments of gold or silver, watches, and household furni-
ture. The rules for the taxation of these articles appear
judicious, and are calculated to produce an effect among
Our neighbours, being partly recommended by our own
example. The author of the " Observations" gives it as
his Opinion that the duties on none of the latter articles
should exceed JO per cent. on their original value. The
pamphlet afterwards proceeds to develop the propositions
which we have announced in considerable detail, but we
have left ourselves no room for pursuing further the course
of its remarks.

Whether any portion of the French theoretic exclu-
sionists, or of the French manufacturers whose interests
aie supposed to depend upon exclusion, will be so con-
vinced by the rea%uning IS this pamphlet, or other
*Dollar works, as to permit their Government to relax
the gaining system, and to commence a more liberal
course of policy, we cannot lay. But we any mention.