The Sun.
London, England, 1842-09-26 00:00:00

ti z 1

LONDON:
MONDAY MORNING. SEPTEMBER 26, 1842.

The American tariff Is exciting the indigna-
tion of some journalists and manufacturers.
They regard England as an injured country, and
demand revenge. They are sentimental or
maudlin in their resentment, and exclaim against
the ingratitude as well as the injustice of the
United States. Even homilies on the weakness
and folly of mankind are served up, and the sil-
liness of the free-trader is demonstrated at once
by the conduct of the Congress. "No nation,"
we are fretfully told, " responds to the sacrifice
of Great Britain. Great things were expected
from the influence of our example, and the result
is an utter failure." "Glorious reciprocity this. A
noble specimen of the blessings of one-sided f; et: -
_trade." Our re.:ders, we hope and believe, have not
so completely torg;otton what happened during' the
-last session co: Parliament, as to suppose with the
Tory writers that Great Britain either then
made a move towards free-trade in respect of
America, or that America has shown a want of
gratitude and right feeling, as well as a due ap-
preciation of her own self-interest, in passing her
tariff. It may be as well, however, to remind
theni—the writers alluded to would be sorry not
to have forgotten, as they would then want every
excuse for their attempts to mislead the public
—of what actually happened.
The first great
forward last session commercial measure brought
was the Corn-law; and it was
then earnestly impressed on Sir R. PEEL and the
House, by Mr. THORN
ELEY in particular, and
other Hon. Members, that the ()Teat comparative
distance of America rendered the sliding scale
peculiarly obnoxious to her. She could never
carry on any corn trade with this country, it was
said, to any extent under that scale, beeaue the
varying averages rendered all such trade, with a
country so distant, peculiarly uncertain. An
order might be sent for a cargo of corn wheal
the markets were rapidly rising, andbefore it
could be brought in great importations poured
in from the neighbouring Continent, or from the
Baltic ports, might beat down the markets,
and ruin the importers. This view seems amply
confirmed by facts. It appears, by the tables
published by the House of Commons, that the
total quantity of wheat imported into this
country was, in 1837, 455,871 quarters ; in 1838,
1,241,400 quarters; in 1839, 2,634,666 quarters;
and, in 1840, 1,993,383 quarters—while from
the United States, that great country which
could supply twice as much as we have imported
from all the world, there only came, in 1837,
130 cwt. of flour; in 1838, 555 quarters of
wheat, and 19,550 cwt. of flour; in 1839, 3,760
quarters of wheat, and 432,742 cwt. of flour;
and, in 1840, el
73,655 quart •
s of wheat, and
984,467 cwt. of flour. It was
therefore, that our Corn-law, in proved,
conse-
quence of the sliding:scale, was peculiarly and
emphatically injurious to the United States, and
two attempts were made to alter the mode of
takirig the averages, or collecting :the duties, so

~ ~~-,

as to render the operation of the law, if possible,
equal for the most distant and the nearest coun-
tries. Both were rejected. Lord Howrcx, there-
fore, said with great propriety on May 13, when
he moved his resolution relative to the differen-
tial d u ties.—

They had already passed one measure, which was
contrary to the principles, if not to the very letter, of
the reciprocity system. He alluded to the Corn Im-
portation Act, the sliding scale of which op eratedunflistly
against distant countries. As that measure was calcu-
lated to injure the United States of America in their
trade with us, it was the snore particularly necessary
in any other changes they made to avoid inflicting on
them any new blow of the same kind.
The new Corn-law, therefore, justly as the
Americans might hope to see "that odious law
abolished, from a regard to our own interests, was
a blow at the trade of the United States. It
struck down many well-founded expectations,
and converted many an American, willing to be
a commercial friend, into a commercial opponents
obliged to seek a market elsewhere than Eng-
land for his produce. But what was the new
blow aimed at the United States? Lord Howtcx
shall explain, and we will afterwards show that,
in other respects, our new regulations have given
a blow to America, of which their tariff, that has
hit the English manufacturers so hard, is only
the rebound.

" .Now, in the very first schedule of the amended
tariff," said Lord Howick, " a new protective duty
was to be granted to the colonies in the article of
provisions, which would materially affect our trade
with America. In salted provisions he believed it
possible that a considerable trade might grow up be-
tween this country and America. Was it, then, wise
or politic in the present state of public opinion in both
countries, to grant our colonies the right of sending us
salted provisions at one-fourth of the duty paid on the
article when imported from foreign countries ?"
" Cheese and butter now paid at the same rate when
imported from our colonies, as when imported from
abroad." " But under the proposed tariff the duties
were to be reduced to one-fourth the duty on foreign,
as regarded those articles of consumption when im-
ported from our own colonies."
Precisely as by this new scheme of differential
duties, we bestowed advantages on the colonies,
so have the Americans, by their tariff, bestowed
advantages on their Lowell manufacturers. If
we blame the Americans let us also blame Sir R.
PEEL for setting them this bad example. But
this part of the tariff, as it affects the United
States, can only be duly appreciated in conjunc-
tion with another measure passed last session,
the Colonial Customs' Act. If there had been
no other duties than the new differential duties.
the United States might have sent their butter
and cheese through Canada to England as Cana-
dian produce, just as they have sent a consider-
able quantity of American timber. The Colonial
Customs' Act, for the first' time, imposed a duty
on American flour when imported into Canada
of 2s. the barrel, on salt meat of 3s. per cwt., on
butter of Bs. per cwt., on cheese ss. per cwt.
Now these and several other duties were imposed
last session on American produce, and imposed
in practice exclusively on that, not by name, but
in fact.

" By the present system," said Mr. Labouchere on
the 15th of April, " the article of wheat flour and
cured provisions were allowed to cross the borders of
the United States into Canada without paying any
duty whatever. That principle was adopted by the
House in 1631, on a full consideration of the ques-
tion." Under the plan of Lord Sydenham, which
was now the law, salted provisions were imported into
Canada from the United States free, as far as the Im-
perial Parliament was concerned. Government now
proposed a duty of 30 per cent. on salted provisions
and cured meat."

In spite of Mr. LABOUCHERE, Government per-
sisted in inflicting this new blow on the trade
with the United States, and from the consequence
of its acts we are now suffering.
It always appeared to us that the most promi-
nent feature in the new tariff was a desire to
check the increase of trade with America. The
duty on its staple export, cotton, though the re-
duction of it would have been of infinite advan-
tage to our manufacturers, was obstinately main-
tained, when great reductions were made in other
articles, at its old rate. It is just possible that the
United States might import coarse articles of ma-
nufactured cotton into this country, but not pro-
bable that it will import linen. But
" The cotton manufacturers of our colonies," said
Lord Howick, " was protected, and the linen was not.
There was no less a difference than 50 per cent.
between the amount of duty chargeable on cotton
manufactures coming from our colonies, and on those
coming from foreign countries, while on the duty on
linen manufacture there was no difference."

In practice, at least, that is a blow aimed at
the American cotton manufacture, not asked
for by our own cotton manufacturers. By the
most noted reductions in our duties, such
as those on live cattle, the Americans roust
rather lose than gain, tbr they cannot send us
live cattle, and the importation of them from the
Continent will beat down the price of the salted
meat which the Americans can send. Again,
the Americans are to supply us, through Canada
with much timber, and the alteration in our
timber duties, made with a view to restore the
Baltic trade, which improper duties had de-
stroyed, and with a view to prevent England
becoming wholly dependent on America
for timber, was not advantageous to the United
States. From the alterations made in our tariff,
which is not favourable to the United States from
the Colonial Customs' Act, which imposed new
duties on American produce, and from our new
system of differential duties, which conferred ad-
vantages on our colonies, as contradistinguished
from the United States, we conclude that the
measures of last session were very injurious to
American trade, and we believe that they were
intended to be injurious. It would be advisable
for our writers to look closely and attentively at
home before they reproach theArnericans. The evil

. -
has now been mutually inflicted, and our present
business is to consider the remedy. We would
suggest that England reverses her own practices
instead of extending and enforcing them by new
duties. The abolition of the duty on raw cotton
or wool, and on all the materials, dye-stuffs,
&c., used in manufacture, together with the abo-
lition of the food taxes, would enable our manu-
facturers to work so cheaply as to undersell the
Americans in their own market. That would be
a noble revenge, and certain to be successful.

We congratulate the community, and in par-
ticular we congratulate the labouring classes,
that men in high places—that the leading or-
gans of public sentiment, are beginning to open
their hearts and understanding, to the important
fact that the poverty and discontent of the la-
bouring classes are endangering the peace and
happiness of all classes, and require to be imme-
diately remedied. The Times of Saturday morning
has an article in which this doctrine is clearly
and manfully laid down. " What," it says, "is
really the rising political evil which so many
appear dimly to apprehend, and so few distinctly
to realize and grapple with ? Is it not this—
that property and labour are beginning to array
themselves against each other ? Is the labourer
as well off as his labour deserves ? Is 75., Bs.,
or even 9s. Sd. a week (a price which a Man-
chester employer takes to himself some credit
for giving, and which exceeds the wages of
many agricultural counties) a satisfactory remu-
neration for 72 hours of toil ? Is not the per-
ception of this stinging fact the real source of
that discontent of which we have so lately seen
a startling ebullition ? Does not the disaffection
derive its force from the truth of this complaint?"
There is a full justification for disaffection ; there
too is the condemnation of the present boasted
system.; for our Contemporary admits that
the agricultural labourers are worse off
than manufacturing labourers. But while the
Times clearly sees the mighty evil, it can find no
trle.onml e daydefeopr.sieta. t
e.
Ed
,'• it
be dealt with by a tax or aipttrasorpaiyff.el;ivwaairrieiiccineloctraistnoe
scarcely be repealed by Act of Parliament."
Reflect, reader, what does this amount to? Evils
cannot be cured by law, passions cannot be put
down by Parliament. The Times proclaims,
where the good of the labouring classes is
concerned, the impotency
of legislation.
They will say, if it cannot protect us
from the avarice of the upper classes, why
does it pretend to provideforeverypasratucof,
society? The fact is, Acts of Parliament

tion, nourish, and consecrate the avarice of the
landowners, the avarice of the priesthood, and
the avarice of certain classes of capitalists; they
cause the evil, and will not allow of that being
counteracted by freedom in the other classes.
There is no rooting out of the heart the love of
wealth, and what the Legislature ought to do is
to give it free play in all classes; then
would the avarice of the landlords, the
avarice of the priests, and the avarice of the ca-
pitalists, be corrected by the avarice of the other
classes. The higgling of the market, in markets
perfectly free, would soon bring the upper
classes to a due sense of the importance of setting
a better and a very different example from their
present conduct.

We do not, like the Times, despair of finding a
remedy for this untoward and threatening state
of things, which arises from the working classes
being deprived of their thir share of the benefits
of society. They want more food, more clothing,
better dwellings, and better furniture; wants that
ought to be encouraged and ought to be gratified.
Food is freely offered them from all parts of the
world, but the law prevents them from get-
ting it; and, having plenty of food other
comforts could be obtained as matters of
course. Abolish the Corn-law, therefore, and let
the bellies of the people be filled, and their
hearts will cease to be discontented. In aspiring
after something better, individuals will improve
society. For a commercial community, com-
mercial freedom is the first requisite; let us have
that, and political freedom, with moral regene-
ration, will speedily follow.

A singular exhibition took place on Friday in
the Central Criminal Court, on the trial of a man
sixty years of age, charged with three offences—
attempting to stab a policeman, obstructing him
in his duty, and committing a common assault;
yet, though the net was spread so wide, he would
have escaped from his prosecutors but for the
interference of the RECORDER. The Jury, after
hearing the evidence of two-policemen, the only
witnesses examined, returned a verdict of Not
Guilty, when the Judge, adverting to the dif-
ferent charges, requested them to re-consider
their verdict, and added, " if you disbelieve the
evidence altogether, you will do right to acquit
the prisoner." One of the Jury immediately
said, " I do not believe the evidence ;" yet the
RECORDER again requested them to re-consider
their verdict, and they at last found the prisoner
guilty of a common assault. Here a Juror de-
clares, on his oath, that he does not believe the
policeman, but on being pressed to look at the
evidence a second time, be votes against his con-
viction, and consequently adjudges a man to
punishment whom he believes innocent. Such
vacillating conduct is highly reprehensible, but
at the same time we think the Juror was
not the only person to blame, for he had in fact
acquitted the prisoner, and it was the duty of
the Judge, after the return of the whole Jury,
and after this statement on oath, to have dis-
missed the case. On looking at the evidence in
this trial, and also to the second indictment
against the same individual, we are strongly dis-
posed to consider this convicted prisoner entirely
innocent. He had committed no offence, even
according to the showing of the witnesses,
till he and the policeman were pushed down
together, when he naturally imagined that
the policeman was the aggressor, and be-
lieving that he was in imminent danger, for
he exclaimed " I am fighting for my life,"
he prepared to defend himself. If he had
attempted to stab the policeman the case
would have been different; but, like the Jury, we
have great doubts on that point, and where
such doubts exist the prisoner is entitled to an
acquittal.

The Graham's Town Journal of the 30th of
June copies from the Zuid Africain, the Dutch
journal at the Cape of Good Hope, a manifesto
of the Boers of Port Natal in answer to the
proclamation of the British Government declar-
ing them to be British subjects. This manifesto
bears date the 21st of February, 1842, and is re-
markable for the deep moral and religious feeling
which pervades it. After protesting against any
attempt to reduce them from the dignity of a free
people, they observe—" We wish it may be well
understood that we do not intend to give offence,
to reproach, or to give reason for any warlike
acts, as it is our hearty wish and desire to live in
peace with all men, and that nothing should
induce us to take up arms to shed human blood,
except the conviction that we cannot avoid it, or
when the protection of our property (which we
have so dearly obtained), and of our very ex-
istence, shall require, or also when we find that
might and not right is exercised towards us. 'We
know that there isa GoD who is the rulerof heaven
and earth, and who has the power, and is willing
to protect the injured, though weaker, against
oppressors. In HIM we put our trust and the
justice of our cause; and should it be HIS will that
a total destruction be brought down upon us, our
wives and children, and everything we have or
possess, we will, with due submission, acknow-
ledge to have deserved it from Him, but not
from men. We are aware of the power
of Great Britain, and it is not oar object
to defy that Power;
,but at the same time
we cannot allow that might instead of right
should triumph, without having employed all our
means to oppose it." Such sentiments as these
cannot fail to make a very deep impression upon
the moral-minded people of this country. The
Boers proceed to declare that the decrees of the
English Government, and the maladministra-
tion of the colony, alone forced them to
penetrate the wilderness, and entrust themselves
to the savageness of an African desert. They
had in vain implored from the English Go-
vernment a system of representation, the most

sacred and highly-prized of British civic rights,
and for which Englishmen are ready to shed
their blood. The British authorities permitted
them to emigrate—allowed them to settle at Port
Natal, and to proclaim their independence, with-

out a word of remonstrance. They had to defend
themselves against the savages, who murdered 600
of them ; yet, though aware of their condition, the

. _
British Government never offered the shadow
of protection. They had learned, they observed,
with pain that they had been represented as wild,
uncultivated men, who were tired of all civil and
ecclesiastical laws, and desired to live an unbri-
dled life, after the promptings of their fancy.
Although only simple peasants, to whom it was
not permitted to take part in public affairs in
their native land, yet they had succeeded in
founding a government which was entitled to pub-
lic confidence and respect. The document
goes on to say, that their town is built in

the most regular manner, and is improv-
ing every day, and the cultivation of the whole
country around it is constantly advancing ;
they have erected a spacious place of worship to
GOD, and the education of their children is
firmly established the warlike Zoolahs who

ived around them had been frustrated in all

their hostile attempts, and at present take up
arms only at long intervals. Already two mis-
sionaries were busy amongst those tribes under
the emigrants' protection, and there was reason

to believe that their civilisation would advance
more rapidly than that of the Caffres on the
frontiers of the colony. All this had been
effected under great difficulties, and they im-
plored his Excellency not to overturn all their
hopes of future prosperity. Already agents
were busy among the Caffres, stating
that if they desired to join the English
the flocks of the emigrants should become

their spoil. They could not say that his Excel-
lency authorised such proceedings; they only
knew that they were taking place. Could the
civilised world blame them if, under' such cir-
cumstances, and when so inhumanly persecuted,
they should risk every thing for the preservation
of life ? In conclusion, they protest against their
town being taken possession of, as the proclama-
tion threatened; and declared that from that day
they did not consider themselves responsible
before GOD, before their consciences, and before
men, for the consequences of such an act.
The document is signed by " Jcacanw Pat-
Now, President of the Popular Council," " J.