The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-01 00:00:00

of Canada.—( Hear, hear.) -But the fact was. what we had
' been importing from Canada was: not Canadian wheat and
flour, but the produce of thosi, vast adjoining districts of the
United States—( Hear, hear)—the corn from which, coming
into Canada, and being there ground into flour, acquired
the a aracter of Canadian flour.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The rionourable Gentleman argued that we were bound to give
every facility and encouragement to those persons who, emi-
grating from the United Kingdom, settled in our Colonial pos-
sessions. But the fact was, as regarded Canada, the lion.
Gentleman would find that if he had consulted the agricultu-
rists of that settlement, they would tell him that the present
footing between Canadaand thel4nted States called for no such
regulation • and, in fact, the farmeri of Canada would depre-
cate the lion. Gentleman's intended kindness. What was the
fact of the relations between Canada and the United States ?
The United States imposed on Canadian flour and corn com-
ing into them a duty of is or Is. 3d. a bushel, being about Bs.
or 10s. a quarter ; whereas those commodities were allowed
to come from the United States into Canada duty free.
It would be unjust to allow such importation under the appa-
rently plausible pretence of encouraging Canadian agriculture,
and to relax the duty on the importation of flour from Canada
without taking security that we should not be inundated with
American wheat passing as Canadian flour. He believed it
was generally allowed that if an alteration were to take place
in the law in Canada, and that if. the Canadian legislature
were to impose restrictions upon the importation of
wheat into that colony, so as to secure the agiieultural
interest of this country from the competition of American
wheat under the denomination of Canadian flour, then the
case would be altered. But if they refused to set free
the trade in American wheat directly, surely they would not
co that indirectly which they refused to do directly. He thought
the agricultural interest was not unreasonable, not in opposing
the importation of Canadian wheat, but in opposing the im-
portation of American wheat under the denomination of
Canadian wheat.

Mr. LABOUCHERE did not pretend to have any very
exact information on the subject, but he could not help smpect-
log that the Noble Lord had greatly exaggerated the real state
of the case, when he described a'l the flour imported into this

country as Canadian flour, as being the pr;duce of Ame.
rican wheat. He believed" that a certificate was re-
, qnired on importation, showing not only that the Hoar was
ground in Canada. but that the wheat from which it was
ground was Canadian produce also. Ile would admit that
it was impossible to form any system so stringent as to pre-
vent absolutely s - eli practices from taking place ; but he (Mr.
Labouchere) dal not think they had taken place nearly to
such an extent as the Noble Lord seemed to imagine,
and he trusted the House would not deprive the colonies
of the advantages they had hitherto enjoyed. He had no
doubt that when th; Canadians found it to their advantage to
send their flour here, they sent the whole of their produce to
this country, and imported their own supplies from the
United States across the frontier. ' That was precisely what
took place on a small scale in the Channel Islands,
The Channel Islands were permitted to import their produce
duty free into this country, and he believed it was well
known that the Guernsey and the Jersey people never con-
sumed a grain of Guernsey or Jersey corn, but sent the whole
of their produce to England, and imported their own
supplies from France. He (Mr. Labouchere) did not

pretend to any very accurate knowledge on the subject, but be
could not bat suspect that the Noble Lord was not quite accurate
in representing the Canadian trade in flour to this country as a
mere transit trade. 1 here was one .o•her subject to which he
would allude, which although net exactly before the House, yet
was so intimately connected with the subject under discussion,
that he could not help alluding to it. He trusted that if it
was intended to legislate on the subject of the importation of
corn or flour from the United States into Canada, the legislal

:ion on that ►ubject would be left to the Canadian iegislatui:e. If
they chose to impose a differential duty the British Government
would certainly be right in confirming it ; but it was a subject
which the British Parliament certainly ought not to meddle.
He should be glad, before giving his vote, to 11, at' some explana-
tion from the Vice-President of the Beard of Trade on the

subject.
>lr. GLADSTONE thought that it was agreed on all
hands that it would be improper to suffer American
produce to be imported 'as the produce of Canada,
The question to be decided was whether the flour imported
was the produce of the United States or of Canada. If the
Right Hon. Gentleman would look to returns of the imports
during the last three years of flour and grain from Canada, he
would perceive that the greatest part of the flour im-
ported recently, must have been manufactured- from
.wheat, the produce of the United Sta'es of America.
From 1828 to 1839 the annual amount of flour imported from
Canada underwent little alteration.. In 1839 the quantity of
floor imported from Canada was 44,009 cwt. ; in 1840 it was
380000 cwt., atAl in 1841 it had risen to 682,000 cwt., be-
sides 64,000 quarters of wheat. Now, making all allowances for
the improvement of agriculture in Canada, it must be evident
that such an increase cou'al riot be accounted for, except on
the supposition that at least four-fi ths of the importation must
have been the produce of the,United States. He t, as afraid
he had misled the Right Hon. Gentleman by what he bad
stated the other evening, on the subject of the certificates. He
considered that according to the clause in the Act, a certificate
was required that the flour was not ground in Canada, but
that it was the produce of Canadian wheat. It appeared how-
ever, on reference to the Custom-house documents, that Ame-
rican grain ground in Canada was legally and practically
hell as entitled to importation as Canadian flour.
There was ne doubt whatever of that. In point of fact, then
the Canadian Act had not made any miraculous spring, but
what it exported in 1839, was the grain of the United States.
No one Gould suppose that American grain was carried all over
the country, avid was substituted in all the districts of Canada
for Canadian grain, but there was no question that American
grain did cross the border and was shipped over to this country.
They were now about to propose a duty of 2s. a barrel on the
importation of flour fom America. They had brought for-
ward this motion, with neither a British or a Canadian object ;
the reference to Great Britain was altogether trivial and re-
mote, and he did not think it would have been worth
while for England to pass such an Act, but it was
relative to nrercolonial trade. and justice to all our colonies.
Canada -had at present the privilege .of charging the duty on
flour and exporting it, and our other colonies were compelled
to purchase corn from Canada; take Newfoundland
for example. Was it not most unjust that the
consumer in Newfoundland should be prevented from going
to the cheapest place for his flour; in other words, that he
should be comp 41ed to go to Canada for his flour, when he
could get it. much cheaper in the United States. It was to
prevent such a state of things as this that they proposed to lay
a duty of 2s. on th importation of American flour into Ca-
n ida He thought they should either equalize the tax
on importation of corn in all the coloni2v, or else
abolish it alt. Tether. The state of that law, therefore, would
be to place a duty of 2s. on the importation of corn into all
the Colonies of 'North America. Canada was the only one
exempt at present. ss. was the duty in the other colonies, it
was now proposed to reduce the duty in all to 2s.
Mr. LABOUCHERE having briefly explained, said he
wished to know which of the British Colonies would be
benefited by the prop;sed measure. Canada took no flour
from any other country but the United States. By putting
a duty on American flour, they were protecting no produce
whatever of the manufactures. It appeared to him, and he did
not make use of the term out of any disrespect —to be done in
a spirit of malevolence; every other colony had some duty on
imports, and it was too bad to leave Canada out.
After listening very attentively to the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite with great attention, and though he was always re-
markably clear in his statements, yet he (Mr. Labouchcre) was
utterly unable to reconcile them ; he hoped that the
Government would reconsider that question, for they
must see, if they did reconsider it, that it could
effectuate no good whatever; a more unwarrantable,
foolish, or absurd Mot never was imposed.—(Cheers from the
Opposition.) He trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman, if he
could find no other better reasons than those he stated to
maintain the propthition of the Government, would not stain
the Statute-b sok with such a measure.—( Hear.)
Mr. GLADSTONE said the astonishment expressed by the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite appeared to be so great, that
he could not resist saying a word with reference to it. The
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) asked upon what
principle this measure had been brought forward ? The Go-
vernment intended to do the same—the very thing which the
Right Hon. Gentleman himself (Mr. Labouchere) had done
last year when he was passing his Bill with reference to East
India rum.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman then gave a privilege to purchasers of
East India rum in another market.—( Hear, hear.) He pro-
posed a prohibition upon the importation of rum into
the East India markets. That article was prohibited
there. Now, it was precisely upon the same principle
that Canada claims, as an exporting country the privi-
lege of other exporting markets; that they should
not be subjected to prohibitions, but to a moderate tax.
What he (Mr. Gladstone) meant by saying that this was not a
British object was, that it was not-exactly connected with the
British markets. The object of the Government was to do
justice to Canada and to all parties interested.
Mr. C. BULLER asked, how could this measure be upon
'be same principle as that of his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. La-
oouchere)? In what colony was it that the Right Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) proposed to put on a duty upon
Canadian corn, to give a fair chance to the importation
of American corn? The Right. Hon. Gent.'s ( Mr. Gladstone's)
statements were quite at variance with his magniloquenee
at the beginning. It appeared that he found one colony better
off than another, and he told the House he was determined to
place both on the same footing.—( A laugh.) He would now
apply another argument. The quantity of flour and corn im-
ported amounted to 593,0,0 quarters, or 43,000 quarters per
annum, and the price, according to their own ri.turns, was
'rote 50s. to 52a. The freight to ,England from Montreal could
not be less than 133., so that the price was 635. or 655. in this
country. It therefore appeared to him, that placing any duty
on Canada produce was quite nugatory, because it could not
come int&the market without any duty at all.—( Hear, hear.)
They might make the most of Canada fur the purposes of
trade, but Canada would make returns, and they had already
put a duty of 5 per cent. on. Britiah manufacture+. Surely,
an importation of 43,000 quarters at a rate of 635. or 659.
would not ruin the agricultnrists, and they might get their
duty of 5 per cent. taken off their manufactures —( Hear.)
He would suggest to the Honourable Member not to

press his motion to a division at that late hour of the night,
because a question of so much impnrtance ought not to be so
disposed of, and the best course, in his opinion, to be pursued,
would be to put it off till the House went into Committee on
the Bill, and thus he by that means would he giving the Go-
vernment an opportunity to do away with a substantial in..
justice.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. S. WORTLEY rose for the purpose of expres.iog his
concurrence with what had fallen from the Noble Lord near
him. He considered it fair to take steps to make that privilege
in favour of Canada, as being one of their own colonies, and
that if they did not so act, they would be conferring an advan-
tage on America, which deserved no such airantage at their
hands. He did not consider the reasons given by the Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite valid or substantial.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the resolution 135
For the amendment

Majority in favour of the resolution......-97
The remainder of the scale was then agreed to.
The scale of duties upon rye, peas, anibeans, was agreed to.
In answer to a question from Air. II AWES,
Sir R. PEEL said :hat, in his opinion, it would be better
to discuss the averages when the Bill was in Cominiree. It
would then be perfectly open to the lion. Member, after the
list of the towns had been laid before the House, to move that
the whole of them should be omitted if he thought prt per.
Mr. BARCLAY had no objection to this Bill being pro-
ceeded with, if he should have an opportunity of pressing his
amendment in Committee.
Mr. C. BULL Ett—The rrason why he proposed the course
he was about to suggest was, that a great many Members of
this side of the House had quitted it, under the impression
that there would have been an adjournment of the discussion.
lie would propose that they, should agree to the resolution
now, leaving them quite at liberty to take ary course they
might th nk expedteht.—(Hear, hear. )
After a short conversation between Sir R. PEEL and Mr.
HAwEs, the resolution was agreed to.
Colonel SIBTHORP left it to the decision of the House
whether he should go en with his resolution or not.
Sir IL PEEL suggested that the Speaker should state whe-
ther it would be consistent with the forms of the House for his
Gallant Friend to move his resolution in Committee on the Bill.
The SPEAKER said, if the resolution would have tre effect
of increasing the duty on corn, it could not l e.
Colonel SIBTHORP then withdrew his resolution for the
present.
Sir V. BLAKE then rose to move that corn should be