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

Ott 2aan.

LONDON :
MONDAY MORNING, SEPTEMBER 26, 1842.

'.!'he American tariff is exciting. the indignaa
i* auk of some journalists and manufacturers. '
1 ley regard England as an injured country, and
• mind revenge. They are sentimental or
Tr. tudlin in their resentment, and exclaim against
ingratitude as well as the injustice of the
1 "riiited States. Even homilies on the weakness
h* folly of mankind are served up, and the sil-
li of the free-trader is demonstrated-at once
b the conduct of the Congress. " No nation,"
! are fretfully told, " responds to the sacrifice
o: Great Britain,: Great things were expected
• •in the influence of our example, and the result
, .n utter failure." "Glorious reciprocity this. A
✓ Ile specimen of the blessings of one-sided free-
t :1.%" oul readers, we hope and believe, have not
• mipletely torgotton what happened during the
la session of Parliament, as to suppose with the
wy writers that Great Britain either then
• a move towards free-trade in respect of
A nerica, or that America has shown a want of
p :;itude and right feeling, as wall as a due ap-
t r* elation of her own sellainterest, in passing her
it' may be as well, however, to remind
tl :gym—the writers alluded to would be sorry not
.aave forgotten, as they would then want every
• vnse for their attempts •
to mislead the public
,t• what actually happened.
:he . first treat commercial measure brought
for aard laist session
as the Corn-law ; and it was
• earnestly impressed
on Sir R. PEEL and the
ari 'use, by Mr.
,Tuoaaa in Lay particular, and
of .er Hoti.,Members, that the great comparative
d 'ranee of America rendered ' •
the sliding scale
pt .7illiarly obnoxious to her. She could
never
• ry on any corn trade with this country, it was
to any extent under that scale, because the
• -.•ing averages rendered all such trade, with a
cc mtry so distant, peculiarly uncertain. An
om. er might be sent for a cargo of corn when
ti markets were rapidly rising, and before it
cc Lid be brought in great importations poured
in rem the neighbouring Continent, or from the
Lt Cc ports, might beat down the markets,
a:n ruin the importers. This view seems amply
co rimed by fleas. It appears, by the tables
p, b.ished by the .House of Commons, that the
tt ,a 1 quantity cif wheat imported into this
cc itry was, in 1537, 455,871 quarters; in Ib3B,
1, :,41,460 quarters; in 1839, 0,634.556 quarters;
at 1, in laaa, 1,903,a53
a quarters—while from
th • United States, that great country which
• supply twice as much
as we have imported
frc .a all the world, there
c only came, in 1837,
1:1C 555 cwt. of flour ; in 1838, .
quarters of
-•
.oat, and 19,550 cwt. or flour; in 1839, 3,76t3
q vrters of wheat, and 432,742 cwt. of flour
a e, in 1840, 73,055 quarters of wheat, and
9;
~1467 cwt. of flour. It was proved,
tl
aefbrea that our Corn-law, in conse-
q, .ence of the sliding:scale, was peculiarly and
er Thatically injurious to the United States, and
▪ attempts were made to alter the mode of
tr. 7.; 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 HOWTCK, there-
fore, said with great propriety on May 13, when
he moved his resolution relative to the differen-
tial duties.—

They had already passed one measure, which was
contrary to the principles, if not to the very letter, of
the reciprocity system. I-14 alluded to the Corn Im-
portation Act, the sliding scale of which operatedu4ustly
against distant countries. As that measure was calcu-
lated to injure the United States of America in their
trade with us, it was the more 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 opponent,
obliged to seek a market elsewhere than Eng-
land for his produce. But what was the new
blow aimed at the United States? Lord llowtcx
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 flowick, "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 :late 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 Canadi
of 2s. the barrel, on salt meat of 3s. per cwt., on
butter of Ss. 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 1831, 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 Parliathent 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 manufactures 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 must
rather lose than gain, for 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 used to supply us, througb: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 the Americans.
The evil, however, has now been mutually
inflicted, and our present business is to
consider the remedy. We would suggest
that England reverie 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.

It is generally understood in legal circles, that Mr.
Charles Phillips, the barrister, is to have a lucrative
appointment under the new Bankruptcy Act passed
in the last session.—Observer. [We are glad to hear
it, for no man deserves it better. such appointments
would do credit to any Government.—ED. Sun.]
Nearly 4,0001. have been already subscribed for the
monument to the memory of the late Thomas William
Coke, Earl of Leicester. Prominent amongst the
subscribers is Lord Wodehouse, the Lord Lieutenant of
Norfblk, for 501., who had all through life been op-
posed to the deceased Peer in politics.