Star.
London, England, 1824-02-24 00:00:00

R ~ ~~~

%•

~~.

..,.

a Mealore certain interests had grown
(onourable Gentleman would ndt say that un-
anstances ought that measure be rescinded.
the Committee, therefore; would be to do
ngs as would not require to be undone.
Coals was a very old one; it had existecU
If a century ; it had been increased at dig.-
_ its present amount, and ought not there,
dealt with all, at once. He felt it his duty,
consideration% not to deal with it so eaten-
- persons, whose Petitions theworthy Alder-
' had payed. Numerous Petitions which
presented various parts of the country
f the weight of the duty, and prayed for ite
if that duty was felt to press severely in
of the country, how much more grievous?
by the Citizens of London?—(licar).-
it was only 6s. per chaldron—in London,
He therefore felt it his duty to deal with,
respect to its aggrivated amount as ap-
ity of London, and to press upon the re-
the Committee-that there was an additional
paid upon all sea-borne coals brought to
itch no other part of the country was sub-
The Committee was also aware, that while
4d per chaldron was charged upon all sea-
imported into London, there was also a
the importation of inland coals, either by
o>r by the Thames. Therestriction arose
impteition of a duty of .10s. per chaldron,
realityearoulited to a complete prohibition. In
, brought m London by the Grand Junction
Canals, paid ts. 6d. per ton, which was more
to 91.4 d. per chaldron; and besides that
quantity of inland coals allowedao be ins-
* not exceed fifty thousand tons annually. He
conceive no possible excuse for continuing that re-
Yet the .coal.ownet and the ship-owner.
If yrat saddle us with a duty_ of 9s. 4d.
you must protect us against the rivalry
producer;" and he (the Chancellor of the
, could not, therefore, see the necessity
other than subject coals brought inland to
• duty. The Committee had heard of the
of the coal-owners and others to limit the
coals to London, Inordee to enhance the price.
fair that the proprietors of that description
should do as they pleased with it ; but, on
hand, it was equally fair that the consumes
the option to procure the article from ano-
The diminution he should propose, of
. chaldron on sea-borne coals imported into
would amount to about 200,0001. but, calcu-
' - increased consumption of the article, that
naturally ensue from itsadeereased price, he felt
king the diminution at only 100,0001. At
of his statement he had alluded to a sub-
be now wished to call the particular at-
Committee. There were, as Honourabio4
knew,_many branches of trade not only en-
duties, but by restrictions and absohlte
amongst others, was the importation of
law at present stood, the duty on fonts
, per pound—it had formerlybeen only Id.
to 6d. took place in 1819, and was not in•
:as a prohibition, but as an article of Revenue.
interested in the matter had been at that
told-r" You have no right to expect that
be continued so long as you require that
shall be confined to the consumption of this
if you demand the continuance of such
must consent that British wool shall be ex-
subject had been also brought before Par-
year. Meetings had been held in various
country to consider the subject; some per-
meetings were of opinion that to remove
31d be better than to remove the restriction
portaticin ; "but a decided majority of those
inte-
wool trade of this country was of opinion
ipromise would be better ; that the duty should
and the exportation permitted. He therefore
to propose a reduction of the duty upon
from sixpence to one penny, and topermit,l
Certain restrictions, the exportation of British
•move entirely the oaths and other impedi-
iich that trade was at present shackled, by
hoped that many of the evils arising out of
4ould be obviated. One consequence of the
regulations would be the extension of our
le in other parts of the world ; he could, there-
nothing but good that could result from the
`vise restrictions; and in 'proposing these be
the support of the House (Cheers).—
by the repeal of the duty on foreign wool
Aleut 550,0001. per annum. The next item
_ importance ;it referred to the propriety of
maintaining or repealing the duty upon silk. There was
duty upon the importation of raw silk, and a
prohibition on the importation of foreign menu-
silk; to the latter point he should in the first
apply himself, and would ask what benefit arm,
entry, looking at it with respect to our own
manufactures? There had existed in this
lately a decided conviction on the minds of the
political economists, and those best ac-
practically with trade, that the maintenance
live laws was impolitic—( Hear, hear !).-=
made some progress in the application of
of tfet trade, and were we now to stop
40, it was impossible; for if we did, we
with great justice, be accused by foreign
breach of faith. If restrictions were
iw-
States upon the importation of any article of
lanufaeture or produce' the Secretary of the'
Trade was beset with Petitions, which -re-'
him to remonstrate against such impositions;
insuer of the Ambassador a such Foreign
our Minister would be, that we imposed du-
e importation of the produce or the manufac-
lei:. countries ; to which our Ministers, being,
,eply, were obliged to retire confounded,for
no reason why a foreign country should not
ipnn us. If ever there was a moment at which
have restored to us the blessings of a free
emancipate ourselves from those ancient
and make a new start in the race of pro-
. . was the present—(Lood cheering). But,
Independently of these considerations, _ there were
Inds relating to, and intimately connected
•ommercial prosperity of the country, which
y demanded at our hands the revision of the
code, and removal of these prohibitory ract!
It struck at the root of trade. When in his
on that topic, the Honourable. Member for
last year, wielded his Bandana handkerchief
mte—( A langh)—when the Hon. Member nil-
, standard of sumggling,and blew hisatossin
ghicr)—there was not an Hon. Gentleman in
1:e who would not have been justified in seizing

'1

obrinuanee of
up ,be Armour:
. •
der no cittunast
lbe duty Of the
uoly such thins
ve Tax en Ca
for upwards of
fent times to i
fore lo.he dealt
for these cOnsid
orly as the pe
An presented,
bad been prese
complained of t
teduction ; but
• ,emote parts of
Vas it not felt
In the country i
Ott was 9s. 41
that tax with re
piled to the Cit
tollection of th
tax of :Ss. 6d. -1
louden, which
iecteilln•
A Any 'if .es. 4
borne toils at
restrictift (Intl
land carriage,
out of .the imF
',bids in seat;
fact, coals brot
or other Canali
abas equal to
,duty, the quar
Iported, most ne
,could conceive
.arriction. Yet
,oglit say, a
pet chaldron, y
of the inland p
lE:chequer) co
;for, doing tithes
„a moderate dut
• .combination of
.supply of coals
tit w.as'very fait
4 property she
the other hand,
.should have de
ither source;
'Ss 4d. per chi
>London, would
king on the it
would natural!
jestiffed in taki
op early part
ject, to which
tention of the
Gentlemen km
cumbered by
prohibitions ; a
wool. As the
wool was 6d. r
the increase to
tended to actin
The parties in
time (1819) to
the duty will
British wool sf
•country ; and
ditty,. you me
,ported." The s
hainent last ye
yam of the cc
sons at those
the duty wool
upon el portat
netted in the v
that a comproi
be reduced an
felt it his dot]
'foreign wool f
under certain
wool ; to reit
merits by whi
which he hop
the'system
proposed res
wool trade in
fore, see not};
repeal of the),
relied upon
—The loss b
would be all
was one of
maintaining
a high duty
• positive prol
tactured silk
instance app
to the count'
and foreign
country latel
most able
41(mi:tied pra
1 of restrictive
We have m
the doctrine
short? No,
might, watt
countries of
. • posed by St;
British maim
1- • Board of Tr
spired of hi
but the ans
Power to on
t ties on the it
tures of diei
unable tote
there was nc
retaliate upr
r we could h
trade, and
prejudices,
tperity, it
independent
other group
with the co
imperativell
Its;rictive c
meats, that
arguments
Aberdeen, I
in that H 0 u
furled that
it—(Lortght
ticAt 110Lue
•