The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-15 00:00:00

Itink a =') alt

LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1844.

In an article we published a few days since, on the
" Report of the Select Committee on British Ship-
ping," we alluded to the " degree" of protection which
some of the witnesses conceive it to be both necessary
d politic to extend to that interest, and to the opi-
nions entertained by others, of the inexpediency of
attempting to establish any such prOtection at all.
We,shall,hardly be considered to favour the principle
of -protection, who have so uniformly advocated the
establishment, to the fullest practicable extent, of free
bride in every department of commerce. Neverthe-
P*B, in order that we may not be misunderstood as to
the tenour of our former observations, it may be ne-
cessary to repeat the expression of our regret that the
British Government have not distinctly " protected"
:British shipping, by acting on a system of retaliatory
valley towards the shipping of all States, which, hav-
ing ,;entered " into reprocity treaties with us, have
Aishonourably. departed from the spirit of such
treattei, by exacting heavier tonnage and other duties
g)n "merchant-vessels in their ports, than we, in
vonfonnit3r • with these reciprocal stipulations,
lely: =oh their merchantmen in our ports. To
this- eVtent we are clearly of opinion that ab-
Atract principles should give way to practical exi-
gencies, when circumstances have intervened to
I les trb y the equal relations between the contracting
assumption of which those principles
parties, on the
belie been recognised and avowed by them. It seems
to be mere drivelling to go on, in the bona fide dis-
charge of our own part of these contracts, towards
states which have openly departed from, and still
vertinAciously persist in violating theirs, towards us.
1)n every principle of equity the contract has been
samulled and determined by their own act and deed.
The'AOtioa of a one-,sided reciprocity is a positive
anomaly; but to persist in it under an impression of
the necessity for doing so (even to the extending an
absoiiite premium to the gmping bad faith of the
other parties to such agreements), in order that the
abstract principle of "no protection" may be vindi-
cated, is a mere puerile pedantry. But is the case
we have put of this systematic violation of reciprocity
treaties an imaginary one ? Upon the question
whether' it be, or be not, depends the propriety or im-
propr.iety ;of establishing, with regard to British
shipping, and in respect of the circumstances which
our hypothesis Assumes, an exception to the geeeral
rule, that protection, in any branch of commerce, is
inexpedient."

.N9.v.v, in the evidence of Mr. STRAYER, a ship-
owner and ship-builder, of North Shields,
we find
ths following important ailswo-s to questions, which
fairly put this point in issue
fo
By Mr. WAsox—Cen you suggest any remedies
the improvement of The shipping ?—No great remedy
r
can I suggest. It is the opinion of every ship-owner
pith whom I have conversed, that any further relaxation
would tend to aggravate the evil ; therefore I do hope
tj.te Government will make a stand where they can.
Do you think that the principle of reciprccity is fairly
ear lied out P—No.
BT
t Mr. CuridAri—ln what respect ?--The salt trade