The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-21 00:00:00

gekt UAL

LONDON:
HT ITRSDAY MORNING, JULY 21, 1842.

e 5,1, It 1F
now upwards of sixty years since it was clearly
) .•4ellior istrate44. a British sage, and forcibly confirmed
54 ottl 9.a- American sage,
'on
that all bounties on particular
.nehes.of industry, all
prohibitions of particular corn-
qia3l7.odities, and all interference with commerce by legisla-
-4.11.0ak ii.very- injurious to society. So impressed was Dr.
liiaN with this, that he described an assembly of
men making laws for trade as the greatest fools on
.Since that period no man of talent or authority
es ;• .'ainsaid this important doctrine. On the contrary
4110-11 Y Writer of the least authority has confirmed the de-
stration'of SMITH and FRANKLIN. Every day's ex-
"
s
Peri
cote, too, since they forcibly drew attention to these
üb,•
hi 'eels, has stamped upon their doctrines the seal of the
h ;hest human wisdom. The practice of our Legislature
ii general has been to act on these doctrines, and to
; I.alit_thcir truth even while it did not conform to them
• a 114 be new restriction has in any case been productive
'client, every restriction removed has been found ad-
tie 1841_tageous. In, the whole compass of human knowledge
. would be difficult to find a theory more amply confirmed
• %els than has been that of Dr. SMITH.
To the astonishment of the world, however, the Par-
""aarent of England, in the year 1842, under the guid-
.:illec of a man who professes to be an advocate for free
*tra4lc, and to have been a friend of Mr. HUSKISSON, • has
blra:issed a great law, giving a bounty to one species of
ar, nsIIT, and protecting it from foreign competition,
as done this in spite of remonstrances. and in defi-
-412'" of experience. Sir ROBERT PEEL and the Parlia
'meat, in Isl 2, have, in the face of the world, disavowed
:the doctrines of SMITH, and practically proclaimed to all
mankind that it is the solemn conviction of our states-
that to enable our own agriculture to flourish a
bounty mast be given on the growth of corn, and the
Qgt olcult,jtrists must be guarded from the competition of
44reik-aers.
hat is the consequence ? France acts on the same
L 'iitltiple, and gives a bounty and protection to the
-"llinfacture of linen yarn. America and the American
,Thltl'e Prepared to follow the same example, and President
in'vetoeing the little tariff, professes himself an
it"rocate for higher Custom-house duties. Our own bad
ample is imitated to our injury. The Corn-law in-
Its, in fact, on our manufacturers a double penalty; it
enhances the price of their food, while it limits the quan-
'Vl and it closes against them, by its effects as an ex-
-411).131e, the markets of other countries.
• Those who have silently looked on as the ruinous Corn-
44'w have been enacted, which they might have stopped,
'2•l'e been instantly alarmed at tha legislation of France,
ticl have bestirred themselves at once to amend it. They
?,;k4,„14,..- kayo addressed memorials to our Government,.
`quest-mg interference in their favour. Her MAJESTY, s lli
: sisters, not at all abashed at the consequence of their own
5, foolish and wicked policy, have informed the linen-manu-
faetnrers that they have remonstrated with France about
ta' fiscal regulations, though the statesmen of England
have always rejected the interference of other Govern-
!,,ll;=4l„l4,!Tits with ours. Over the Government of France, the
-Trayers, the entreaties, and the tears of the linen-manu-
-4) llicturers will have no favourable influence. The ;ore
Ititf-fh'44lllty bee. and pray, the more the French will suppose
;I'''474 '.1,1t they themselves will be enriched by these new
duties, and the more obstinately they will cling to them.
iTt•
aih, Better would it be, therefore, for the linen-manufacturers
to reproach their own Government, which they can in-
-I.l4enee, and charge it with setting a bad example. Let
theta, insteading of troubling themselves about the-linen
q‘e 'duties in France, look to the corn and provision duties of
4 14,
,4-In gland ; let them insist on the Government repealing
4 ▪ than, and establishing free trade at home, before it ask:.
other Governments to remit its duties on our manufac-
cstilres- By doing so, they would more effectually coun•
aract the policy of France than by making direct appeals,
-11ich only harden it in its own folly.
—Already- the English manufacturers are able to com-
h.tC
With those of France in their markets, otherwise
duty would not be required. Now the abolition ot
47 Corn laws would enable our manufacturers to get
everything they use. even flax, cheaper than at present.
,
- „--"" with such a reduction of cost they might effectually
undersell the French manufacturers in spite of the high
duties- For the French Government to raise then:
higher would only increase the bounty on smuggling, as
dell
its injure the consumers and the revenue.
ofS'ine of our Contemporaries, forgetful we must say
r„ -the principles they espouse, on other occasions,
je°laltnend retaliatory duties on French produce ;
that is, the French try to stop our linen trade, and
uc'se writers would effectually help them, and stop our
Cutlery trade too. The manufacturers of linen yarn
are to Suffer from one bad law made across the Channel,
and a
fiiLiberal Contemporary would more certainly in-
et an injury on the drinker of French wine, and on all
4, 1 ean.ao. in the wine trade, ,by another bad law made at
, tstrninster. Supposing such a retaliatory law in-
peted on the French wine-grower, the evil of which our
„.1..n en Yarn spinners complain would not be lessened, and
1 :'e should malevolently imitate the very act we con-
i:'l-. It would effectually promote the object contem-
v'ltbY.the Drench legislator, and cut up by the roots

,~ _