The Sun.
London, England, 1826-10-05 00:00:00

rutursil
I d Aif • •
L Ur, t)t,IOI3IPP 11).h.
1 0),

submitted to by other countries; ,and this period arrived
when first our American Colonies, began to feel their
strength.
" If the proceedings of the Government of this country, (says
Ileakisson): after the peace of 1763, be closely examined,
we eta find that many of the causes which ten years afterwards
led to the unfortunate rapture with our Colonies, may be traced
to our unreasonable attempts to imilOrce, in their moat rigid and
exclusive application; our Colonial and Navigatiou System.
Every complaint, every petition, every remonstrance, against the
oppressive.tendency and vexatious
consequences of that system,
`on the part of the inhabitants of New England—every temperate
effort made by them to obtain some slight relaxation of her tram-_
me's, that shackled their disposition to engage in Commercial
enterprize,--were only met on the part of the British Goveru-
ment, by a constant succession of new laws, enforcing still snore
restrictive- regulations, framed in a vita of still more vexatious
interference. One instance of the elutracter of that legislation
will be sufficient ; and I give it as a slight specimen of the Coin-
menial jealousy which prevailed in our Collodi, in reference
both to the Colonic.* and to Ireland. I—p; 10.
The instance given
,by Mr. Huskissomie -eery striking: A
ship front our American possessions, laden with their produce,-
W:11, stranded on the,coast of Ireland. It naturally he sup-
posed that the cargo was lauded and the chip repaired in that
country; no such thing, the law compelled the owners to send
another _English ship from .England fur the purpose of bringing
away the:cargo : ----a'cargo, which riot improbably, might then
he wanted in • the. Irish market, and.which was perhaps, destined
to be ultimately consumed there, afterhaviug been trans-shipped
in a port of that country, landed in '• an English port, and again
reshipped to Ireland. This is a sample of the real grievances
under which'our American Colonies laboured."—p. 11. •
After the establishment of peace between this Country and
America, the Government of the United States turned against us
the saint system which we bad enforced against the Colonies and
the rest. of the world. But the Americans went more boldly te
work, and far exceeded us hi the policy of restrictions. "It was
resolved in the g.ineral Cougrew io 1.;•8:, this all forsign ships
trading to kutetica, should pay half which oat siterwsrds
raised ix, a &Air, per rot, stint. beyond what %;,40, haiil lee ustionsi
Adis; and, Mrther; tinst goats imported it, Mreilgo donild
pay a ditty of- Its Per •cont., over and above what was demand-
able., oa the. Name description of goods imported 45 A Oteciean
vessela.......p. 14. ' '•
V!ti,Jpue plans were proposed in this country, in -the imps of
counteracting the designs of the American Government, but all
without russet. After a 'wig struggle, we, found ourselves at last
obliged most reluctantly, to adopt the syatem of reciprocity. This
we adopted, 'ea the .only wise and safe policy, in the year Isl
having liar above twenty year:; made a full trial of the opposite
cotirse,--that of trying to counteract their restrictions, and pre-
serving our own. The printiPle 'of reciprocity is " equality of
all charges upon the ships belonging to either country ih the rota
ottheotlier ; and alike equality of duty upon all articles, the pro-
'thaetion the one country imported into the other, whether such
importation be made in the chips of the one or the other."
In this place it will be convenient to mention another important
alteration, of our ,system, which was necessary in consequence of the
conduct of the Americans towards our West India Coloniesses4 site-
ration, it is to be observed,vuade long bilfeTeistiyisf those ;messily
introduced:by Mr. Iluskislion, which are the subject of the peti-
tion in question. After the peace with' America had been concluded,
the English Government allowed its West Indian Colonies to
trade directly with the United States iu British shipping. This
it permitted, from a regard as well to the interest of the mother
country, as for the welfare of the Colonies. But the Government
of America would not permit a trade to be carried on, in which
only British shipping was to he employed; end entirely prohibited
the exportation, in British ships, of all articles fur the me of our.
Colonies. In order to avert the threatened inconvenieoce, and at
the same time to avoid-any positive alteration of our navigation
laws, the British Government had recourse to another expedient.
A sort-of open mart or fair was established, at some halfway plaee
between the Coast of America and the Nest Indies, to which the
ships of the United States came, and whim the respective parties
interchanged commodities. But the Government of the United
States, again interfered, and prohibited their ships from this trade.
After' a sUspension of intercourse had continued fur some time,
Parliament, in the year 1822, passed an Act, by which American
ships were allowed to trade directly between the United States and
our-Colonies in the West Indies and North America.p. 50.
This is another striking instance, in which, after an ineffectual
struggle of above 90 years to maintain the system of our navigation
laws in its ancient tiger, we found ourselves 'under the necessity
of making an alteration, front a regard to the joint interest of this
country and her Coloniee.
The English Government acted towards Ireland in the same
spirit of commercial jealousy as towards the American Colonies.
This policy was as dangerous to this country as it was illiberal
and oppressive to the sister kingdom., But the Irish would not
tamely bear loch a grievance for ever; they did what every people
of any spirit must be expected to do. At the moment when Eng-
land was in danger, while we were deep in the contest with
Americus, they seized the opportunity to assert and maintain their
just rights, which had been so long withheld from them. " Ire-
land refused any• longer to bold her industry 'and trade subject to
our system of exclusion. ,To the Parlietneut and volunteer. of
Ireland we had to capitulate. If the capitulation was mortifying
to the pride of Enghutd, fortunately it neither compromised our
honour, nor involved any concession beyond what, was strictly a
debt of justice to Ireland. The benefits of our commercial am . _

navigation system were, extended to her. r' She was permitted to
trade direct to our colonies, and placed Father wpm the footjpg of
of a partner than that of a dependant, in the concerns of a Britiah
Empire."—_p. 12.

" Another alteration in our navigation system, in favour of
rellind,' has been recently adopted, which' certainly ought not to
have been ao long delayed, This alteration consists in putting the
trade between. (rent Britain and Ireland oprin the footing of a
coasting trade. Every one must perceive that from the time at least
of the union of the two countries, it was desirable that their inte-
rests and commercial system should be identified as touch as Pos-
sible. From ,that period it was absurd to consider the commercial
intercourse with Ireland as a part of our foreign trade, and to sub-
act the shipping employed in it to the restrictive regulations and
gher charges of that trade. "_p. go,
" These were not the only deviations from the ancient rules of
our navigation system. The revolutions which have occurred in
the political,state of the world, in our time, have rendered other
changes indispensable. There has grown up Over the continent
of America, a situation of affairs similar to that which the United
States presented after their separation from the mother country.
This change, from a colonial to an independent existence, neces-
sarily draws after it, in each particular case, the applk:ation of the
in 1808, the house of
new rule, which: unavoidably grew out of the independence of the
United States. The first application of that rule occurred in re-
spect Great Britain had no choice but
to Brazil. From the moment when,
Braganze tranaferred the, eeat, of empire to Brazil, that country virtually ceased to be a colony- Great
otot
Baprimplyn:kitehoEuugritepoeuatnoifwlEncuirio)lvese!Qaptbdetrumerpe and navigation
ports, upon the
admit Portuguese ship-
ping, and' since the separation of Portugal and Brasil, Brazilian
ahipping, coining from that country into our
same footing as the ships of any other independent nation, Thi,,
principle has been extended, from time to time, as new States
have risen up in America."—P. 28*
14nwitc and in the
end must: have proved ineffectual.
c)fTthheis State,noeutitry.
A different line of policy would have been
llihn:idniserpo.ica
oeillwripnegoinhiimpperincigal,
szrii;ei,mbpyosgrainsact,einrg.
tewaxieci:eusresainiriiacoltulivsoneatoutaguepnocoonutotraghtehesthitrilpi
manifested by the Aiiiiistils of those States
shim wily frequently
in the course of the discussion which took ~.1
, reeca between them and the English Qavernment. In there views we have not ae-
,the other
.
quiescea ; nor, on other hand, 'have we comnronliselfallY of
the acknowledged principles of maritime law, %die we have
explicitly refused to listen' tp any such emnprorniee, we have
'disarmed all suspicion, by frankly declaring, that
we sought no
exclusive advantages for Britialt ships or British trade, and that
the principle of our intercourse with the New Stateit)' Its with the
Old States, would be that of a fair and equal recirrocity,_p 111,
Having traced the alterations iP our navigation lysie' I fit re 'u , . ,
America,
1.'.. sun the governments on Ate (mu cohtlnculs "ot
America, let us now consider' what has been the line of policy
adopted by this country towards Prussia and the Northern 141ari-
time States. In 1829 the Prussian Government, by an order of the
Cabinet, increased its port charges on vessels belonging to coun-
tries between which and Prussia no reciprocity bad been #l--

treaties, and which did not treat Prussian ship and their ear-
goes as advantageously as their own. This port charge was im-
posed professedly fur the encouragement of their home shipping,
and front a regard to the interest of the ship owners, who were
in a deplorable state, in fact, almost ruined. It was doubtless
also intended as a measure of retaliation, for the difference of im-
port duty charged in this country bet Ween goods arriving in Bri-
tish and foreigu vessels. Prussia bad previously made arrange-
ments with Holland, Denmark, and America, for establishing such
a reciprocity, and the object of the new regulation was, to in-
duce England toenter into similar arrange' ments.lf the order of the
Cabinet had been carried into effect, it must necessarily have opa-
rated to the great prejudice Of our ship-owners, and must ulti-
mately have had the effect of driving from the Prussian ports all
the carrying trade then in the possession of British vessels. Iu
this state of things the English Government immediately commu-
nicated on the subject with the Prussian Minister in this country.
"'I myself," said Mr. Huskieson, " bad a conference with the
Prussian Minister at this court, anti I well recollect the substance
of his reply to me You have,' said he, set us the example,
by your port' and light.eharges, and by your discriminating
du-
ties on Prussian ships ; and we have not gone far beyond the li-
mits of that example. ' Hitherto we have 'Confined the increase
of our port and tonnage chrges to ships only ; but it is the in-
tention of my Govermnent next year (end of this he /hewed the
written proof) to, imitate you still amore closely, by innumiug dis-
criminating dutieS on 'the goods imported in your ships. Our ob-
ject is a jitsrprotection to our own navigation, and so long as the
measure of our protection dues not exceed that which is afl'orded
in your ports to British ships, We cannot see with what reason
you can complain.' Against such a reply," coutiuued Mr. IluSs
kisson, " what 'remonstrance could we in fairness make to the
Prussian Government. The result was, that England agreed to
an amicable negociation with the' Prussian Government, upon the
principle of our treaty with the United States, and similar con-
ventions, for similar reasons, were entered into with Denmark
sod Sweden."--p. 36-43.
We might have addressed ourselves, it may be said by some.
to the friendh feelings of that goveretneet ;- -sip might boo,
pleaded long n,age in support of cur discriminating anti", ;
inicthi'llsve urged the mak swages v. hich Prussis derived from ber
11'111, WI( • Appeals like those were tint 6.,getetiiii ti r
air, t,ssiun ; bin they, were of little avail agsimu d. 1'3,1 ststeil by
the Prussia', Cousttl—that " the Pressisit .hip °worts were 311
going to p. 43. , Will it be said, that it was our duty to re-
taliate by increasing our own port charges? In other words, were
we to adopt a system of commercial hostility, which, if acted upon
ou both sides, would have ended. in reciprocal prohibition? Such
conrsC would have beee most impolitic in every point Of viewi,
The reasoning of Mr. ilinikisson upon this subject, appears to be
perfectly satistSetory and unanswerable. It will he mate conve-,
nient to give the substance of his arguments in the n-inch.
England has freely granted to the free Hanseatic Towns of
Hamburgh, Bremen, anti Lubeck, what had been hefitre coin;
mtmicated to the rest of the world. Surely 110 man Of sense
or feeling will blame the English Government for 'not *dotting
against those little States restrictions, which hail been relaxed in
all other instances, and which those States themselves, if so dispos-
ed, miglktiltavc easily counteracted.
tiremustanges; which haVe led to these alterations, it will
be remembered, have riot been of our seeking. It was our first
wish, as it was our interest, to keep in our hands as much ae pos.
sihle of the traffic on the sea, and to raise our own shipping while
we kept down that of other states. Immediately that Anierica,
became independent, site turned our system against us. For a
long course of years we refused to relax, and endeavoured to
counteract her designs. We made the experiment fully; end with
a perseverance truly English, tried the question, whether reci-
procity of privation und prohibition is better or worse than reci-
procity Of interest and advantage. Thu result was sueli as might
have been expected. lteeiprocity of gain was proved to be pre-
ferable to reciprocity of loss. America having. led the way, other
powers followed the smote course oil the earliest opportunity.
—Thus, in truth, the arrangements, which have been made,
may lie said to he the necessary result of the present condition of
Europe.

" li, my opinion," said Mr. Iluskisson, " the wisest policy for
this country was to leave the question at rest as long as possible,
This' wait the policnairsued, until the matter was taken up, net
by us, but by the United States of America, and in succession by
other Powers.. In that state of things, and after the arrangements
which we entered into with those Powers, acting upon the neces-
sity of the case, I felt that it would be better to make Mir laws
square with our practice; better as one general rule,--,first, to
tender, to all nations, alike and indiscriminately, equal facilities of
commerce and navigation, and equal inducement* to visit the
ports of this country with their merchandiie, either ler our owp
consumption, or in the way of transit (entrept) to other parts of
the world :—secondly, to aboliali all discriminating dutieit affect.
ing differently the like productions of foreign countries, and, in
lieu thereof, to establish one uniform tariff for the whole :,,,,.and
thirdly, to reduce that tariff to the lowest degree, Colleillteta, its
each particular article, with the two legitimate objects of all
duties—either the collection of the necessary public revenue, or
the protection requisite for the maintemusce of our own internal
industry. These are the principles, according to which our new
book of rates has been formed, And the consolidation of ottr in-
numerable, and; in many instances, inconsistent and contradictor.
laws of customs been etleeted."—p: 49.
" In all cases ill which exclusion is within mu. reaeli,--in this
coasting trade—in the Wm-lee—in the trade between this cont.
try and our foreign possessions--a strict pionetioly is still retained
for the Pritisli ship-owner. This is maintained and enformd,
not for his special advantage, but for the public interest. It is
the duty, hoWever, as it boa been ever the policy, of the Govern.
meat to secure to the ship-owner every legitimate protection in
the trade of this country with other Maritime Countries. But ii
Any brand, of that trade should be interfered with, either hy new
regulations,in those countries, or by the establishllt44 of territo-
ries, which Were once Cotonies, into an inAependent State, how-
ever the circumstances Islay he regretted Cs affecting our . ancina navigation 'mein, it may not be in the power of the
LtlositaMent
to overlye those eiretunitances. In such a state of Ilihigs, our
policy %nit be, at the same time that we r%ain tie moch as pos•
sible the important principles of that system, to adapt it to the
change of our situation, azul to the altered situation m which WP
stand- With reference to nit parties with which we have to
p. 55.

_ .„
" After this statement of the ailviations which have been made
in our system of navigation laws, it will be convenient now to ad-
vert to the specific' grounds of complaint set forth in the petition.
Some of them involve matters of fact, and are therefore capable of
being determined with certainty. Others relate to questions of
policy, and depend upon general reasoning, it the principled of
gond sense. hash of these shall be taken in order,

.. .
' ° First, the Petitioners' complain that Our shipping interest has
been, and is at this time; in a rapid state of decline. As to this
complaint, let us e*nnine into facts, In 1792, one of the most
prosperous ! years the cotintry 'has ever known,
.—.the year imme-
diately preceding the breaking out of that war, in which we were
called upon to make such immense efforts to maintain osr naval
superlwity,-,the number of registimi shipe in the several parts
of the ,British Empire was 10,079; the amount of their tonnage
1,540,145 tons. lit the present year, that is
.to say, in the year
ships way 24,174, and the. amount of their ' tonnage £,642,216
ending the slst of December, 1826, the number of registered
there has been, oince the condus;(l:4;
tons; shewing an increase of one-third in the number of ship*,
and' of two-fifths in the tonnage, , within that period. M the
close of the last war, in 1815, the number of our registered yew,
was 24,860, end the amount of their tonnage 1,68,1,276
..„. s
.. attribute it to
tlAttaP,al7rl,la' ttliewerst:elf9tSere'httboautr shipping of 68G vessels, d --- Qf
tons.—p. 21.
the point to be considered. 11te petitioners woldd e--1./ears, la
the alterations recently
, :, The cause of this rilielcardeeasien,
state :00 'fact* in eupporsoof their allegatior. - sybteut ; but they
for believing, that a very sinfi , Thre ia good rea,„„
to be referred to thv alteration, in iroportion of this decrease tin
twin
that
the
.deam.
%mai hav_
.question ; and it is almost (-tr.;
n.re et.
e been very considerably at '.
if the ttn,c4slt reArictions imposed I, -t" ..: ~,-. ' /
y the nay/aunts act oteA ue#n I
still enlorqdi .
00,f:k6.
N8::::::::,:vithi.a.:Ii iv
a9,06:0

•
" 1 sa
pOttsl.eripg flue _taatase, we oluth tot to !brim that the
tittliatiOn at this country in the return Of le general peace in 181 5,
was in many respeets most materially altered, The commercial
marine in the year 181!), rely far exceeded thelleillailli of the coun-
try ; and though no alteration whatever had been made in the navi-
gation laws, a derreate in the shipping was the natural conaec

I

tittence