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

Board of 'Conittiol had &Toed in opinleas with the
Court of Directors; but he believed there was no case
in which an objection had been persevered in where the
Person applying to go out to India had a reasonable
hope-of obtaining a livelihood.
Mr. HALDINIAND said, the case he alluded to had
occurred within the last three months. The party ap-
plying was named Brownrigg, Whom the house of
Messrs. Farmer and Co. were anxious to have out in
India. The answer of the Directors Was, that there
were many young men competent to clerkships already
at Calcutta nut of employments
Mr. WYNN explained, that from the nature of the
Company's charter, the natives and half castes were by
law entitled to be employed as clerks in the counting-
houses of European firms in Calcutta. Unless the
whole system of Indian po:icy were about to be altered
they must still be eligible. This person was only going
out as clerk, and was liable to be.. dismissed the 'day
after his landing. The objection was therefore well
founded, since it might happen that this young man
might be thus thrown on the world, and become charge-
able to the East India Company.
Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE contended, that the
system proposed to be acted upon by the Right Hon.
Gentleman was impracticable and contrary to the best
interests of the country. It was absurd to say that no
trade ought to be carried on which would not maintain it-
self, because many such trades had been fostered by Go-
vernment and provided employ meat for thousands. With
the immense debt we had, it was impossible to carry on a
free trade in cotton, woollen, or silken articles. Eng-
land had always been an artificial country. This was
a position which not even the Honourable Member for
Taunton could deny in his counting-house or his private
study. Though he entertained the highest respect for
the deceased author of these liberal doctrines (Mr. Ri-
cardo), yet he felt that,whenever that intelligent per-
son committed his thoughts to the Press there was dis-
cernible contradiction on contradiction. The Honour-
able Member who represented the silk interest in that
House was himself at a loss to digest the proposition.
As for a flee trade in corn, he would ask the House,
when the agricultural-interest was loaded with the ex-
cessive poor and parish rates, county rates, and other
rates, in contemplation by his Noble Friend near him
and the. Chancellor of the Exchequer, together with the
expensive rate of the rearing and growth of corn, whe-
ther it was passible they, or any one out of doors, could
imagine the agriculturists could live under a system of
a free trade in corn? lie had asked a protecting duty
of 23 per cent. cow 201. per cent. was demanded for
silk ; in fact all and each must be protected. At the
same time he must pay he should be sorry that • corn
should be higher in price than it was at the present day.
Live and let live was his motto. In conclusion he would
observe that he believed the best popularity that Minis-
ters could procure would be by the partial further re-
peal,
if not total repeal, of the Assessed Taxes.

Mr. EVANS could not understand the distinction
that had been attempted to be drawn as to the effect of
reducing the duties on materials of manufacture. He,
could easily conceive that a diminution of duties might
in some cases be more beneficially felt than a reduction
of direct taxation, because the former created a corre-
sponding activity.
Mr. BROWNLOW said he had been informed the
House would soon have before it a Petition for the non-
repeal of the Union Duties. In fact, Irish cotton goods
had been imported into this country lately, and sold as
Manchester cotton.

Mr. 13ARING observed, that the ,case as between
England and Ireland was very different from the case
as between England and its Colonies abroad. He. would
go to the extent of supposing a free trade in raw com-
modities, and a free transit trade,. only as far as this
country obtained something as a reciprocity. If they
proceeded on a principle of free trade to this extent,
they would proceed on a great mistake with respect to
the state of the world. The moment a free trade was
opened, ganchester would send her cotton goods, and
Stafford her pottery, to France; but Lyons would un-
doubtedly send her silks here. It would be quite dif•
ferent if the opening of trade was completely recipro-
cal. The Right Honourable Gentleman the Secretary
for the Home Department asked why the question
of labour did not shew itself in cotton as Well as silk
The reason was, that the cotton got immediately into
the machine, without much previous preparation. Silk
was not so susceptible of being worked by machinery.
There was no exportation of silk from this country, ex-
cept of India silk and silk stockings. They had no',
' manufacture of French or Italian silk. He gave his
Majesty's Ministers credit for their financial measures.
Their conduct was marked by a desire to promote the
real interests of the country, not to catch at temporary
popularity. In the present case, however, he thought
the opposition was well founded. ' This he did not say
merely in concurrence with the wishes of his constitu-
ents, for he would support no view of this or any other
question-which he firmly believed to be ill founded.
After a few words from Mr. DAVENPORT, in support
of the petition. it was ordered to be printed.