Star.
London, England, 1824-03-06 00:00:00

'as if they bail not already sufficient on their hand.—
(Hear). And he then contended that this particular
trade ought to be exempt, from the operation of that
'principle. He would with to know Why the silk manu-
licturer, the grower of coin, orof wool, should be ex-
empt front the operation of a principle, the general ap-
plication of which was admitted by the Honourable
Member, and urged over and over again by the Gen-
tlemen opposite without any reference to the silk trade?
—(Hear, hear.) He denied that even if the result of
inquiry should be as stated in that Petition, that the silk
trade would be injured ; the House ought therefore to
stop short in pursuit of the general principle. Ile denied
that any rule of exemption for the silk trade could be
made, because the restrictions upon the corn trade were
not removed. , He believed the Hon. Gentleman was
as well aware of the truth of these assertions as he (Mr.
Canning) was. He was satisfied that the House was
right in the application of the general principle, and
the Honourable Gentleman might preach to all eternity
about a simultaneous application of that_principle ; but
if it could not be applied to any one branch of com-
merce until such a state of things should arise as to ren-
der it practicable to apply it at the same time to all
branches of commerce, there was pot the slightest
'chance of having it, ever applied—(Haar).
Mr. DENMAN agreed with the Right Honourable
Gentleman upon the general principles, and no man
would be more ready than he was to give them full ef-
fect when an opportunity should offer. .lle did not
think we ought to wait until the principle could be ap-
plied to all branches generally, neither was his Honour-
able Friend (Mr. Baring) of that opinion, as he was re-
presented to be by the Right Honourable Gentleman
(Mr. Canning); but the question here to be considered
was in what branch might an alteration be made with
the, least inconvenience or suffering of • any body of the
people ?* It was clear the duty on silk could not betaken
off without producing great alarm and distress. If the
question were to lay on any fresh duty,'he (Mr. Denman)
as the advocate of a free trade, would oppose such a duty,
but he thought he could spew other taxes which might be
taken off without producing •alarm and distress. There
were many taxes, the repeal of which would not meet a
dissentient voice in the empire; the Duty on Probates,
Legacies, Conveyancing, and the ad valorem duties, for
instance. Why not repeal the Window Tax ? Would
the repeal of that tax be objected to by any persons ex-
cept the Government ? The question was not here free
trade or no free trade, but what taxes might be taken
off to afford the greatest relief to the Public ; and be
was of opinion that the tax now proposed to be repealed
was not that tax.
• Mr. HUSKISSON—He felt convinced when the Ho-
nourable and Learned Gentleman rose that he did so
for the purpose -of adverting to the only part of the
speech of the Honourable Member for Taunton which
was left untouched by his Right Honourable Friend
(Mr. Canning). lie was satisfied that the Honourable
and Learned Gentleman would have expressed his plea-
sure at the repeal of what that Honourable and Learned
Gentleman was in the habit of terming unconstitutional
restraints—(Hear, hear.) He alluded to the repeal of
the prohibition, the repeal of that enormous power of
the Excise officer, who was at libeity to search the house
of any person whom he might suspect of having any
foreign silk : nay, lie might even take the piece of silk
out of the hands of the purchaser to ascertain the ma-
nufacture-of it. The only question between his Right
Honouralne Friend and the ,Member for Taunton was,
was this odious prohibition, as it had been often termed
by the Gentlemen opposite, to be continued or not?—
The Honourable Member stated as a reason for conti-
nuing this prohibition, that the price of labour was
higher in this country, than in any other country inEu-
rope. Was not the piice of labour in the manufacture
of every ether article as high as the price of labour in the
manufacture of silk ? It the price of labour was. iuffi,
cient to justify a prohibition, it would be sufficient to
justify a prohibition in every other branch of our corn-
inerce—(Hear, hear). It was astonishing that the acute
mind of the Honourable Member had discovered now,
for the first time, that the price of labour was higher in
this country than in France—(Hear). The Honourible
Member had said. that if the prohibition were taken off,
the difference in the price of labour would give such an
advantage to the French manufacturer as would cause
the ruin of the silk-manufacturer in England. He could
state, upon the authority of a French writer, who had
access to the necessary documents, that the annual ex-
port of silks from this country exceeded the export of
France. It the English manufacturer could meet the
French in a foreign market on even terms, would it be
contended that the English manufacturer, with •a pro-
tecting duty of 30 per cent. could not meet the French
manufacturer in the home market ? The Honourable
Member had said that the Government had not made
the proper inquiry, and that this measure had not the
sanction of the trade, with the exception of one indivi-
dual. He did not know to what individual lie alluded;
but he would say that the Goveinment of this country
would not, in his opinion, have done their duty if they
had not taken the earliest opportunity of removing (in
deference to the opinion of the Gentlemen opposite) the
shackles upon commerce. With regard to inquiry, he
would ask the Honourable Member,. did he never hear
of the inquiry which took place in the other House of
Put liament ? Did the Hon. Member never hear of the
report of the other House? In that report it was
stated ao be the ()pinion of the principal si'lk•manu-
facturers, that the whole system impeded the growth
and the progress of the silk trade; and that it pre-
vented capital from having the same chance in that
as in other trades. It Was upon that Report thatsthe
Government came td the r evolution of proposing an
alteration in the old system ;.but he must protest against
the statement that the Government, in making that
proposition, had taken either the silk trade or the House
by surprise. Whatever objections miglit exist now in
the minds of the silk-manufacturers, he would venture
to say, that if the restrictions should be removed, they
would be the first to rejoice.
Mr. DAVENPORT would oppose any alteration in
the present system of conducting the silk trade; and he
did so from a firm conviction that any alteration would
not only injure that trade, but would put an extinguisher
upon it altogether.
Mr. ELLICE—The Right Honourable Gentleman
bad asked where were Ministers to begin? To that he
would reply, begin upon that article in which your rival.
has not the best chance of competition. The silk trade
was not that in which our. rival had not the best chance
of competition. because the silk trade was not an Wu
trade bete, whilst the French had always excelled us in
that manufacture. The cotton trade was our owe, and
our machinery gave us an advantage uver any foreigi,
rival. He agreed with the Right Honourable Gentle.
man that all restrictions which impeded the free cur-
rency of trade ought Lobe taken off ; and he was grate-

-7't;r4.‘