The Sun.
London, England, 1826-12-07 00:00:00

EMIGRATION.

Mr. MONTEITH presented a petition from save-
ral Assemblies of Maisons in and about Paisley, associated for the
object of facilitating their emigration to the, Colonies.—Ordered
to lie on the Table, and be printed.
COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mr. 3. WILLIAMS rose to put a question to the
Treasury Bench, whether it was the intention of Government to
originate any measure arising out of the late Report upon the
Court of Chancery ?
Mr. PEEL said, that Ministers would -avail them-
eselves of an opportunity in thepresent Session of expresaing them-
selves upon the Report

EXPORTATION OF MACHINERY.
Mr. H UME presented .a Petition from a large bot
d for an alteration of the Laws probi,
bitiniracgtiln-m
heiEexpakraoretati Pronoarg Machinery, The Honourable Member
said, that the Petition involved a principle of very great import-
ance to this Country. Herecolleeted the. Honourable Gentleman
at the bead of the Board of Trade having said, that he hoped the

day might soon arrive when the word Prohibition might be ez.
punged from our commercial systein. He (Mr. Hume) perfectly
agraed with the Honourable Gentleman, and appealed to him
whether it was right to continue Prohibitions with respect to
Machinery, when he was endeavouring to abolish that system
With regard to every other article of indhstry ? The object of the
Petitioners in presenting the ptesent Petition was, to obtain ,a
repeal of the la* *Bich prohibited them from eiporting the pro-
didee of their ingenuity and labour to the markets that would
afford the best remuneration. _ The Petitioners declared themselves

to he totally out of work, and in a state of absolute starvation ;
the British manufactures affording them no employment, and the

. -
foreign markets being shut against them by the prohibitory system
persevered in by Ministers. Every man was now allutVed to ex-
port the produce of his industry to where lie coidd find d purchasers
except the Unfortunate maker of machines. The consequence of
this teas, that the machinists of England were in a state of des-

titution, whilst their sufferings were increased by a knowledge
that it is in the power of Ministers, by opening their trade, to
relieve their distresses. Those who opposed the exportation of
machinery were only'like those who had opposed the opening of
every other trade, in order to augment their individual gains,
and to secure to themselves a monopoly. He might illus-
trate the truth of this by referring to many trades, but
particularly to the silk trade. The persons engaged in
that trade, had done every thing in their power to persuade
the country and the Government, that remov►ng the prohibitory
would ruin the whole silk trade of England. Ministers,
however, had persevered in their enlightened views, and so far
from the English silk manufacturers having been ruined, they
were even benetitted by the new system. The effect of the law
as it now stood, was to encourage the emigration of our most use-
ful machinists. No apprehension could be entertained of foreigners
being enabled to rival us in manufactures by obtaining our ma-
chinery, for it was in lurAworks that required the use of machi-
nery, in which our suppNes of coal, iron, our canals, and large
capital, gave us the advantage over foreign manufacturers.—
The law in its details was most absurd. Thus, he found by the
list, that whilst the exportation of even a screw was prohibited,
lathes, by which thousands of screws could be made, might he
legally exported. What rendered the absurdity greater was, that
the potter's lathe was the only lathe that could not be exported ;
when it was known that the French and Dresden porcelain ma-
nufacturers so far excelled ours, that there was no foreign demand
for our potter's lathe at all.
On the Question that the Petition be brought up,
Mr. HUSKISSON appealed to the Hon. Mem-
ber whether a question of such vast importance to the country
could with propriety be discussed at a period when thousands of
manufacturers were either out of employ, or but partially employ-
ed ? He assured the liOn. Member that if a Bill was to be in-
troduced, which had for its object the abolition of every restric-
tion upon the exportation of machinery, it would be productive of
the most serious alarm in the manufacturing districts, and would
give rise to the presentation of numerous Petitions from all parts
of the country to that House. Under such circumstances, then,
and particularly in the present state of the manufacturing interests,
he implored the Hon. MeMber not to agitate the question of the
exportation of machinery at this period.—(Hear, hear.)—He had
no objection to the petition being brought up and read, and, if ne-
cessary, printed; but he did not wish it to go forth to the public,
that the whole law with respect to the exportation of machinery
might be safely repealed.—(Hear.) _ . .

Mr. LitTLETON protested against the sweeping
doctrines laid down by the Hon. Member for Aberdeen. He (Mr.
Littleton) as a representative of a large manufacturing county,
knew that if such doctrines were to go abroad, and to be acted
upon by that House, the greatest alarm would be created in the
country. He meant nothing offensive to the Hon. Member for
Aberdeen, when he stated with confidence that the alarm exist-
ing among the manufacturing interests was not at all diminished
by their knowing the fact that that Hon. Member had taken the
lead upon this important question. There was not any one great
town, from Nottingham downward, that did not entertain alarm
at, and express a wish to be exempted from his measures relative
to trade.—(Hear, hear.)—That a Division of the law was neces-
sary was beyond all doubt, because, as it now stood, though the
exportation of certain machines was prohibited, yet it was much
doubted whether that law prevented the exportation of the same
machinery in parts. lie hoped the lion. Member would not fol-
low up the petition with any motion on this delicate and Important
subj!et... . .

Colonel TORRENS observed, that in every
science there were general principles, but no universal one. lie
was a decided advocate for free trade, but be felt that there were
exceptions which nuest to loe observed ; amongst these he consi-
dered the finer parts of our machinery as the most important.
If we could invent and construct machinery cheaper and better
than other nations, why, he asked, not avail ourselves of that su-
periority ?—why should we, by a mistaken policy, give it up or
ulnae it with others? This, he conceived, was one of the great
sources of the wealth of England, and he trusted that it would
not he lightly abandoned—(Hear, hear.)—We were now
in the sterm, and should keep every rope tight ; we should
let nothing go until fair weather .came round again—(hear,
hear.)

Sir H. PARNELL did not conceive that any
mischief could arise to nay branch of our irade or commerce by
the exportation of machinery of whatever description.
Mr. BARING thought that it would conduce
more to the economy of the time of the House if Hon. Members
would avoid meking long speeches upon presenting Petitions, and
reserve themselves until the specific questions to which such Peti-
tions related came properly under their consideration, It would,
in his opinion, be much better to adopt this course than to fatigue
the House, night after night, with arguments and disputations
without end. The opinions just delivered by the Hon. Member
for Aberdeen, he hail heard him repeat more than twenty times
before ; and he repeated, that he thought they would better suit a
dismission upon a specific measure. He was, however, pleased that
this discussion had taken place, as it had called forth a Gentleman,
whose talents promised to be a great addition to those who thought
with him (Mr. Baring) It had been for so long time the habit
to look upon any man as a Goth who dissented from the mo-
dern doctrine of political economy, that he could not help congra-
tulating the House upon the accession of the Hon. Member for
Ipswich (Col., Torrens), and he hoped to find that Hon. Member
coming forward more frequently upon his side of the question---
(Hear, bear.)—lf we were now driven to the question of an lin-
qualified exportation, or a total restriction of machinery, he, for
one, should prefer the latter. But we were nut driven to this
extremity, and the best course would be to appoint a proper
tribunal, who should have the power of deciding the articles
of machinery which might be exported, and those which were
prohibited.

Mr. WARBURTON said, that the argument of
the Hon. Member for Ipswich (Colonel Torrens) was founded
upon the assumption that we possessed a motropoly of the more
ingenious and complicated machinery used in our manufactures,
and‘tbut we had a right to enforce a continuance of that mono-
poly. He denied the fact that we possessed it. But even if we
had that monopoly, how could we hope to retain or enforce it ?
How could we prevent persons from copying the different models
of that machinery which were regularly published in our Ency-
clopaedias and other publications? The fact was, that by this
monopoly we were sacrificing a certain profit for an uncertain
gain. He trusted that no specific measure would be introduced
upon this subject, but that the regulation should be left as it was
at present with the Board of Trade. •
Mr. Secretary PEEL was sure that there existed
generally but one feeling as to the impropriety of introducing this
question at such a peried•of manufacturing depression and dis-
tress as the present. He confessed that he was not satisfied with
the Hon. Gentleman's iirgurrient relative to the drawings of ma-
chinery, published in our Encychpredias, for the last book of
that kind was published in 1821, since which many valuable im-
provements had been made in our machinery.
Mr. WARBURTON—Yes, but they are secrets.
Mr. Secretary PEEL—No doubt they were se-
crets ; +but were we not to profit by those secrets, and avail our-
selves of the advantages which they gave us over our neighbours?
—(Hear.)--With respect to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, he
thought that that Gentleman ought to be the last to make a
charge of inconsisteney_ upon any party. That Hon. Member
had, not very long since, by a variety of arguments, pointing out
the oppression and hardship under which the labouring classes
men upon the eatne footing, induced the House to repeal the
laboured, anti representing the necessity of placing masters and
Combination Laws. Well, they did so ; but, ere ten months
bad elapsed, they beeame wiser, and they found it necessary, not
absolutely to retrace their stem perhaps, but certainly to re-enact
a considerable portion of the old law.—(Hear, hear.)—As in me-
chanics it .was unfit to be governed by pure mathematical prin-
ciples only, without allowance for friction, and the weight of the
atmosphere, so, in political economy, it was fallacious to proceed
on theory only, without due regard to the particular circumstances
of the times.
Mr. BRIGHT observed, that the effect of particu-
lar systems of law war frequently over-rated, their real operation
being ascertained correctly, as soon as they were repealed. Such
had been the case with the Combination Laws ; and, as soon as the
Statutes forbidding the export of machinery were abrogated, it
might be found that they had materially contributed to the protee-

tion of the manufacturer. He trusted, that in the present Session, 1,
the true principles of philosophy would be better understood, and
more strictly observed, and that no sudden and rash change in the
existing law would be attempted.
The Petition was then then brought up, and read.
Mr, HUME availed himself of the question, that it
he laid upon the table) to Make a few remarks in reply.to what
had been advanced by several Members. He denied that he in-
tended to do any thing.hastily and intemperately ; and contended,
that such had not been his course with regard to the Combination
Laws. An attempt had been made by the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Peel) to cast upon him the odium of having recommended
the change in those laws, which change was subsequently aban-
doned. The fact, in the first place, was, that the change had not
been abandoned, but in its most essential parts had been preserved ;
and that change, if had, it had been recommended unanimously by
a Committee of 52 Members. Had he (Mr. Hume) stood alone
upon that subject, he should have been proud of the opinions
expressed in the Report. The proceedings of the subsequent
Committee had been a complete fudge, and nothing had been
established to shew that the first Committee was in error on
the general principles it had laid down. On the subject of the
Petition just laid upon the Table, it was in evidence before the
House, that in France the machinery employed in the cotton ma-
nufacture was quite equal to that made in England—the difference
being only, that in the former it cost perhaps forty or fifty per
cent, more than in the latter. This country enjoyed, therefore,
nothing like that monopoly contended for by the Honourable
Member for Ipswich. At present, while the exportation was
prohibited, foreign countries deprived us of the ablest hands, and
in a short time would need no assistance whatever. Precisely
this effect had been produced by the refusal of Government
to allow the export of coal. France and the Netherlands had
thereby been induced to depend upon their own resources,
and to raise their own- coal ; and they were now quite in-
dependent of supplies either from Great Britain or elsewhere...-.
To this conclusion he and many others had long ago come,
that it was most absurd to keep upon the Statute Book a mass Of
inconsistency, which produced the additional evil of encouraging
contraband trade.