The Sun.
London, England, 1828-07-11 00:00:00

CUSTOMS' BILL.

The House went into a Committee on the Cus-
toms' Bill. A conversation took place, in which
Mr. T. P. COURTLNAY, Mr. P. THOMSON, and
Mr. C. GRANT took a part; but the Hon. Members
spoke in so low a tone, as to be altopther inaudible
in the gallery.
On the clause for continuing the present duty on
Manufactured Silk imported into this country,
Mr. P. THOMSON urged upon the Govern-
ment the necessity of doing what they could to
abolish smuggling, by reducing the duties on im-
ported articles. He thought that the East Ind 4:.
Company ought not to be placed under the disad-
vantages under which it at present laboured; and
from the difficulty of levying with accuracy the pre-
sent rated duties on silk, and the injustice which the
owner often suffered on that account, he should-
propoe as an amendment that an ad valorem duty
of 30 per cent. be taken on all silks imported from
the East Indies. This would be no loss to the
.Revenue, and a great benefit to those engaged in
shipping goods.
Mr. C. FERGUS SON supported the amendment.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON also concurred with
the amendment.

Mr. C. GRANT had intended, on bringing in
the Bill which the Right Hon. Gentleman- now in-
troduced, to have taken out the existing clause, and
to have inserted one of the kind now proposed by
the Hon. Member for Dover. The present rated
duty was calculated at 30 per cent., and Govern-
ment had been at great trouble to form the scale;
but on the whole, the apportionment was not ac-
curate, since in some of the East India silks the
duty ran from 45 to 65 per cent. He should ven-
ture to suggest that the Amendment should extend
to silks of all kinds

Mr. FUER was opposed to the Amendment.

tnat
SlTlUggllng naa neen mmimsnea; to
the contrary, it was carried on in the silk trade to is
great an extent as ever. The main point of tie
question was the amount of the. duty. If it wis
fixed at that rate Which
,wtittld.lie a protecticin to
the home trade, foreigners would Undersell it Ur
smuggling; and if it was. fixed:below, that rate, it
would be no nrOteetion.--4Hear.,).-
Mr. C. GRANT said, that after the confession
co generously made by the Hon. Gentleman, per-
haps he would agree- that 25 or even 20 per cent.
would be a better security both for the trade and
for the revenue, than any higher rate. As to
smuggling, he believed it did "exist to a certain
extent; but it was deereating,, aild it would be still
further decreased by reducing-the duty.
Mr. TRANT remarked that,: at.the present rate,-
the duty operated quite oppressively on India piods;
though he believed 'it was quite unintentionally fixed
so high.
Mr. HUMS thought it 'extraordinary that this
country should continue to treat India as a foreign
State. Considering the difficulties . which all com-
mercial men connected with that country were suf-
fering, he. hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman
would have turned his attention to this subject.
Mr. BRIGHT opposed the Amendment. -
Mr. FERGUSSON said, that all the Members
knew that this Amendment would only do what the
original Act intended to have done. By that Act
it was intended that the silk goods of India should
not be charged with a higher rate of duty than Ms
now proposed ; but it bad been proved by calcula-
tions that they were charged at a much higher rate.
It was unjust that India should be treated worse
than a foreign country.- -
Mr. P. THOMSON said, that the people of In-
dia expected that this alteration' would take place of
course, on the expiration of the existing Act in Oc-
tober next, after which.they understood their goods
would come into this country:at.3o per cent. The
present scale of duty had only been framed on the
plea that the CustorOwnse officers.were ignorant of
• the real .Value of these goods; and until. they be-
came acquainted with it, this scale was framed in
order that 30 per cent. might --be- properly taken.
He was sure this statement would, satisfy 'the Hon.
Member for Bristol, that no act of injustice was in-
tended. This was not a measure of alteration, but
of correction.
Mr. BRIGHT contended, that this was an at-
tempt to alter the existing law, and should not have
been made without previous notice to the home
manufacturer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
agreed that it was particularly unfortunate this Bill
was brought in at so late a period of the Session,
but the delay was owing to - circumstances well
known to the House. It involved important inte-
rests both in India and in this country; and be was
fully aware that the feeling was extremely strong in
both countries, and that whatever course Parlia-
.

ment might take, they must in some degree disap-
point the expectations of one party or the other.
He agreed with his Hon. Friend the Member for
Bristol; that merchants abroad had no ground of
legitimate presumption that the existing Act would
be permitted to expire. He could not pledge him-
self to any course that would admit East
.India
goods at the rate of duties 'suggested by the Hon.
Member for Dover. lie. shoutd feel bound, there-
fore, to giVethe home manufacturers -the advantage
of his vote for the continuation of these duties.
Mr. MABERLY trusted the House would feel
the necessity of being governed by some fixed prin-
ciple; 3() per cent.had.been stated as the 212Mrintlint
On no account, therefore,. could he agree with the
Right Hon. Gentleman upholding a tax beyond
that rate for the protection of the home manufac-
turer.

The . CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said the Hon. Gentleman waa arguing upon a prin-
ciple which he _knew did not apply to this question.
The Hiin. Gentleman .linew that the Bill originally
intrUduCed imposed an ad valorem duty of 30 per
cent„ but afterwards a rated duty was substituted
higher than 30 per cent.
Mr. C. GRANT—Yes, but that effect was not
intended. •

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
knew not what the intention of the scale was ; but
the obviotis effect of it was a considerable accession
of ditty. This was not a .
~
question of principle, but
••
of expediency. _ _ . _ _

Mr. C. G-.13.4.1\T denied that in making,tbo, tran
sition.froinihe ad 74do.rius duty, of 30 per cent. to
the rated scale, the duty had been intentionally in-
creased, or, that knowingly, the increase had been
ad:flitted. . We had no such intention, said the
Right Hon. Gentleman, or consciousness. Our in-

teti-tion was to adjust the-scale on the rate of 30 per.
cent; and as far as we did deviate, it.was uncon-'
sciously. The Right Men. Gentleman stated that:
'he supported the Amendment because there was an.
uncontested case made out that a duty of 60, and
`66 per cent. was imposed, when it was intended:
that it should not exceed 30 per cent.
After some observations by Mr. COURTENAY and
Mr. FYLERI, the Committee divided. The numbers
on each side were 26.

Sir ALEXANDER GRANT, the Chairman of
the Committee, gave his vote for the amendment,
which was therefore carried.

A second division took place while we were
,ab-
sent from the gallery, but we do not know what
was the question. The numbers were again pre-
cisely the same, and Sir A. GRANT had again the
casting vote.

Mr. HUME complained of the injustice of levy-
ing a duty of 20 per cent. on India shawls, while
the same article was admitted into that country from
England at a duty of 2i per cent. He moved,
therefore, with a view to reduce the duty, that the
mention of shawls should be omitted.
Mr. COURTENAY admitted the. facts stated
by the Hon. Gentleman, but denied the advisable-
ness of the redaction.

The• amendment was then withdrawn; and the
several other clauses being agreed to, the report was
ordered to be brought up to-morrow,

CUSTOMS' ACTS (DUTIES ON SUGAR.)

• The House then waist into a Committee; for the
purpose of taking into further consideration _the
postponed Resolution relative to the Dtities on
Sugar; namely, to admit sugar for the purposes,..of
refining, at a duty of 29 shillings.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
observed, that it was only an experimental measure.
.for a year.
• The Resolution' was then agreed, to; and the
House having resumed, the Report was ordered to
be'reeei-,.ed to-morrow.

BUTTER TRADE (IRELAND) BILL.
The Butter Trade (Ireland) Bill went through a
Commit tee in which it received several Amendments.
The Report'was received, and ordered to be taken
into further consideration on Monday; and the Bill,
as amended, was ordered to be printed.

REPEAL OF THE DEAD WEIGHT.
The House.then resolved itself into a Committee
• on the Military and Naval Pension Act.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, that the measure commonly called the Dead
Weight had been under discussion in the Finance
Committee, and there it was no longer argued that
it was useful. In 1821, the great pressure on the
finances of the country made the Government
anxious to find out any means to relieve it. •it was
accordingly proposed to obtain this relief by creating
an annuity ►which should spread the charge over a
space of 45 years. He did not wish to enter into
any discussion of that arrangement, but the result
of the Finance Committee's inquiries were to re-
com►nend the removal of the measure as too com-
plicated, and as introducing confusion into the ac-
counts. He should more, as a Resolution, that
leave be given to bring in a Bill for repealing the Act
passed in the third year of the King, relating to the
Naval and Military Pensions, and for providing for
the payment thereof.
Mr. HUME heard this motion with great sur-
prise. It bad already cost the country a large sum;
and before it would expire, it would cost the coun-