The Sun.
London, England, 1857-06-05 00:00:00

ment of the commerce of the country had been left to
merchants it would never have made any progress ; and
that if the shipowners, for instance, had had the mana-
gsment of the Board of Trade, the navigation laws would
never have been repealed until he if the markets of the
world bad been lost. The hon. gentleman had correctly
stated that of late years the constitution of the Board of
Trade had been altered. Formerly it was consulted by
all departments of the Government; and although it still
remained to a, great extent a consulting body, many of its
previous duties had been swept away. The other day he
had to refer a Consolidation Commercial Code from Malta
to the Board of Trade, as it was importanthe shouldhave
the best opinions on the important matters it involved. He
mentioned this as an illustration of the duty which still
devolved upon that department of the Government. So
far from admitting the principle advocated by the hon.
gentleman, he held to the opinion he had already ex-
pressed—that the Board of Trade should be manaleed by
persons entirely unconnected with commerce, and who,
therefore, in that respect, would be entirely above sus-
picion. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman passed a high
compliment upon Mr. Cardwell in reference to the per-
formance of )his duties at the Board of Trade ; and ex-
pressed his regret that he was not at present a member
of the house. With regard to the complaints of the hon.
gentleman that the Board of Trade reported upon pri-
vate bills, he was somewhat astonished at it, for he had
always heard it spoken of as a most valuable and im-
portant function of the Board of Trade to report to com-
mittees on private bills on behalf of the public, who, in
too many instances, on such occasions, were unrepre-
sented. The hon. gentleman could hardly intend, espe-
cially under the circumstances of the present session, to
press a motion for a select committee to inquire into a
question which the house itself could much more satis-
factorily deal with. (Hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM could not reconcile it to his sense of
duty to give a silent vote upon this question. He had no
official experience of the particular office to which this
debate referred, but in the language of Mr. Burke, he
had observed the operation of the Board of Trade " on
and off" for a period of 40 years, being the whole period
that he had had the honour to hold a seat in the house.
He had observed the functions of the board in question
as discharged by men of the highest talent. (Hear.) He
was surprised that the hon. gentleman should be the per-
, son to bring forward such a motion, when he could not
take a step in the city which he represented without
having brought to his attention the memory of that dis-
tinguished gentleman, his predecessor in the representa-
tion of that city—(applause)---who presided over the
the Board of Trade with an efficiency that entitled him
to the gratitude of his country. (Cheers.) He could
not go into the Exchange without seeing the statue of
that gentleman, with an inscription which declared the
great benefits he had conferred upon the city of Liver-
pool. (Hear.) Nor could be behold the docks, which re-
ceive into their bosom the produce of the world, without
being reminded that they were the work of Mr. Huskis-
son. (Cheers.) The Custom-house, again, was considered
at the time it was erected to be too large, but his fore-
sight perceived (what bad been verified by the result)
that it would be inadequate to the growing requirements
of the trade of Liverpool. (Hear.) He could not enter
the cemetery where Mr. Huskisson lay buried without
being reminded what shade we we are, and Ida' shadows
are the objects we contend for, and yet it was the hon.
member for Liverpool that had made the appeal to this
house which they had just heard. The hon.gentleman, in
saying that the operation of the board was not satisfac-
tory, did not confine himself to the present moment. He
paid some compliments to the noble lord who presided
over that board, but he (Sir J. Graham) would not ad-
dress the language of flattery to that noble lord ; he must
s ty that many men of even greater talents had filled that
post. He was afraid to weary the house, but he felt
bound to bear testimony to the good service the Board of
Trade had done to the country. After the long observa-
tion he bad had of its operation he should like to detail
what were the services it had rendered to the State
within his memory. He considered that the period from
1820 to 1830 was the real commencement of the battle
which terminated In the adoption of sound commerce and
economical principles, the Waterloo of free trade, and
Mr. Huskisson was its champion. (Cheers.) The Board
of Trade, in his humble opinion, bad been the pioneer of
sound principles ; it had cleared the bush, prepared the
soil, and sown the good seed, which bad multiplied a
hundredfold. (Applause.) He was grieved to see how the
errors and slips of great men were constantly brought for-
ward, and their great servicee forg,otten. Truly such men's
faults were written upon tablets of brass, and their good
deeds on the face of the water. (Cheers.) Nothing could
be conceived more disastrous than the want of fuel in
particular portions of the country. These islands were
blessed with an abundant supply of fuel, but there were
partidular districts in which there was a deficiency, and
in 1820 there was a duty of 9.e. 6d. per cbaldron on sea-
borne coal, passing through the coal districts to the less
fortunate parts of the country. At the instance of Mr.
Huskisson that duty was diminished, and afterwards, at
the instance of Mr. P. Thompson, it was entirely remit-
ted. Again, he thought nothing was more prejudicial
than the system of bounties upon exports. As late as
1829 there was a bounty of no less than 300,0001, on
goods exported to Ireland, but in 1830 that vicious sys
tern was repudiated, and the bounties were remitted,
upon which an immense spring took place in the trade of
Ireland. In 1819 it was supposed by Chancellors of the
Exchequer that articles of large consumption mi4ht be
heavily taxed with the certainty of advantage to the re-
venue; and in that year the duty on coffee was raised at
the instance of Mr. Vansittart from 61. to ls. on the lb.
In 1824 Mr. Huskisson persuaded the Government to
try the experiment of a reduction of the duty to 6 1.,
when the imports increased in four years from 7,995,000
to 22,740,000 lbs, and from this reduction of the taxation
by 50 per cent. there was a gain to the revenue of 20 per
cent. Ile would not dwell upon the question of naviea-
tion, in respect to which Mr. Huskisson had been one
of the most earnest advoca'es of a relaxation of those
laws as early as 1825, and had brought about various
changes, not as much as he desired, but laying the foun-
dation, both in argument and practice, for the progress
which it had been the fortune of the noble lord to pursue
in 1850. Tate great battle was fought by Mr. Huskisson
The battle field chosen in 1826 was the question of the
duties on silk. On one side it was contended that native
industry ought to be protected, while the principal argu-
ment on the other side turned on the salutary effects of
competition. The arguments on both sides were well
stated in two speeches to which he should call the atten-
tion of the house. He did not know whether the hon.
member for Coventry was in his place, but in those days
ho was one of the great advocates of protection. He
then stated that in the city of Coventry there were 9,700
looms, 7,500 of which were in the hands of operative
weavers, and were worked by manual labour as well as
by machinery, and were engaged in the manufacture of
ribbon'. These looms were of the worst possible con-
struction. An improved loom was in use in France,
by which live times as much silk could be turned out,
with the same amount of labour as by the English
looms. In Germany, too, there was an improved manu-
facture, by which one man could produce in the same
time 43 times as much as the English manufacturer ;
and " How," the hon. gentleman asked, " could the
English operative maintain such a competition."
fLaughter.) Mr. Huskisson's answer summed up in a
few sentences everything that could be tersely and beau-
tifully said, in reply to this argument. He said that
monopoly had produced, it was always sure to produce,
indifference with regard to improvement, and that use-
ful zeal which gave life to industry, fostered ingenuity,
and incited to unceasing efforts to produce the most
results from a given amount of material,, was extin-
guished. The prohibitive system left us behind our
neighbours in the arts of production, and this was a
proof of its chilling aad becalming effects, when no eeniue
was called into action. An indolent security was the
natural result of of restrictive regulations. If the same
system had continued, c itton would have been as sub-
ordinate to woollen manufacture as it was junior in in-
troduction, (Hear.) The right hon. baronet then
referred to Mr. M`Cullagh, who bad stated that since
the removal of the prohibitive duties on silk, the manu-
facture had made more progress than during the pre-
ceding century. The disparity between our manufac-
ture and that of France had been abated in respect to
most articles, and in a few we were decidedly in ,ad-
vance of that country. On the other side, goods were
now exported to France to the amount of upwards of
2.00,000/, (Hear, hear.) He must observe that there
was still a duty upon silk, notwithstanding the battle
that had been fought (and this was about the only
anomaly in our system) of 25 to 30 per cent. He might
mention other articles, such as timber, the duties on
which had been much reduced at the instance of his
right hon. friend the member for the University of Ox-
ford, in 1842, and of the Colonial Secretary in 1851,
but he could not pass over one article, in respect to
which the principle of Mr. Huskisson had signally
triumphed, the article of wool. In 1826 the foreign
article was absolutely prohibited, and the export duty
on the manufactured article was very heavy. It was 6d.
per pound, or about 25 per cent. The duty on the raw
material was reduced by Mr. Huskisson, and the export
duty nearly repealed. The price of home-grown wool
never was so high as in the present year—(Hear, hear)
—the home grown having all the advantage of the in-
crease in price. ([fear, hear.) He might point out
what in 1845 was done at the instance of the Board of
Trade, when our tariffs were revised. Our tariff pre-
vious to that time included 420 articles. At that tine
the duty on all raw materials was removed ; all prohi-
bitive duties were exchanged for protective, and all pro•
tective duties were much reduced to a standard not ex-
ceeding 10 per cent. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member
for Liverpool said they could learn nothing from the
Board of Trade. Had the hon. member studied the
statistical abstract issued by that board I For his part
he thought a more important document had never been
issued by any department. From that abstract it ap-
peared, for instance, in respect to silk, on which the
first experiment was tried, that the quantity of the raw
material imported in 1842, when the effect of the ame-
lioration was only just beginning to be felt, was
3,5.31,000 pounds, and in 1856 it had risen to 7,383,000
pounds. (Hear, hear.) The quantity of Wool imported
in 1812 was 45,881,000 lbs. and in 1856 it had risen to
116,211,000 lbs. (Hear.) The quantity of flax in 1842
was 1,145,0001'03. and in 1356 it had risen to 1,697,000
Pounds. Tbo declared value of the silk imported in
1812 was 590,0001., and in 1356 it was 2 966 0001. Of
the wool, in 1842, 5,185,0001. - and in 1856, 9,530,0001;
()lclthh:Dthe p
linen, in 1842, 2,346,0001. ; and in 1356,
4'896,°00/. (A lau •'e ) Then let them consider what
had
effectp of the repeal of the navigation laws.
It bad been predicted that it would ruin British ship-
ping, that it would diminish the number of British
sailors,ttbat it woulibeefatal to the ships and to the
men ; that it would
destroy England, and that it wouldis,roy
manhe commercial superiority
bear upon our naval supre-
macy in the most adverse
nee. (Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) What were the facts? y, that in 1850, when
17,892, and
tonnage 18506 f it t had
e hes
the change was made, the number of registered British
sailing and steam vessel; wasear 1)7,
risen to 19,207. (Hear, h
yeezels in 1850 was 3,167,000 ; and in 1856 it had risen