The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-02-08 00:00:00

TUESDAY MORNING, FEB. 8, 1853.

THE SHIPPING INTEREST AND THE
QUARTERLY REVIEW.

MR. LINDSAY'S LETTER.

WE called attention last week to an article in the
Quarterly Review, commenting upon that portion
of the late Budget which referred more immediately
to the proposed relief of the Shipping Interests.
The defence of the EX-CHANCELLOR OF THE
EXCHEQUER has since been taken up by Mr. W. S.
LINDSAY, a Shipowner who has been disappointed
in his Parliamentary aspirations; and his attack on
the Quarterly writer has been endorsed by The
Times, in that anti• Conservative spirit which cha-
racterises most of its lucubrations. The key to
Mr. LINDSAY'S elaborate letter may be found in
his great anxiety to laud that portion of the Free-
trade policy which left British Shipping open to
competition with foreigners ; and all the foundation
of his argument is the simple fact that during the
last year there has been a great increase in the ton-
nage employed. This he attributes, in his party
zeal, to the repeal of the Navigation Laws ; whereas,
if he had been as candid as he is confident, he
might have seen sufficient cause in the immense
impetus to emigration, owing solely to the discove-
ries of the gold fields in Australia, and indebted in
no way to the changes in our commercial policy.
He proceeds to argue upon the various points
touched upon by the reviewer; but a little more
than a superficial examination of his reply will show
that he has wandered from the question at issue,
and really given no answer at all.

Upon the question of Light-dues, he leaves out of
view that the proposed relief was from the interest
paid for the purchase of private lights, which it was
shown has been reduced to a very small sum,—and
from the charities contributed by the Corporation
of the Trinity House, which are exclusively for the
benefit of decayed mariners; and coolly suggests
that the expense of maintaining light-houses should
be borne by the State, although they are for the
exclusive benefit of the Shipping interest. But
while such a proposition is talked of as a relief to
the Shipping interest, it must not he forgotten that
it can prove no compensation to British Shipowners
for the repeal of the Navigation Laws, as it would
be shared equally by foreign Shipowners who take
part in our trade. In the question of passing tolls,
Mr. LINDSAY is equally unfortunate in his objec-
tions ; for, whatever may be the respective value of
Ramsgate and Dover as harbours of refuge, the
charge, as we stated last week, is only one half-
penny a ton, and that, so far from being a burden
upon the Shipowner, is repaid by the owners of
the cargo.

The objection to the proposed alteration in the
system of Pilotage, this Liberal champion of the
Conservative Minister disposes of by the simple
assertion that an outward Pilot would make the re-
tureVoyage at a cheaper rate on the ground of his
being on his way home. He, however, leaves alto-
gether untouched the stronger objection that such
a mode of competition in this important branch of
the maritime service would weaken, if not altoge-
ther destroy, the maintenance of an efficient body of
Pilots in the outports, which now forms such a va-
luable aid to vessels on homeward voyages. There
may certainly be a saving in the cost of a Pilot, but
it will prove a miserable economy when a ship
with a valuable freight may have to depend upon
the chance of meeting with a Pilot on his way home.
The question of Salvage is disposed of with like
infelicity. He does not meet the arguments of the
Reviewer that the crew of a man-of-war are entitled
to be paid for services rendered to a merchant-vessel
in distress, which are extra from their ordinary
duties, but cites certain instances in which he
alleges sums of money disproportionate to the ser-
vices rendered were demanded and paid. The
abuse of a system is but a weak argument against
its fair and legitimate use, and yet upon this Mr.
LINDSAY appears to rely in order to sustain his at-
tack upon the Quarterly Reviewer. Let us, how-
ever, look upon the probable, or rather possible,
effect upon the abolition of all'compensation in
cases of assistance rendered by a Royal ship to a
merchant-vessel. We can readily understand, apart
from the promptings of humanity, the zeal which
would animate the crew of an ordinary vessel to
risk their lives in the attempt to rescue a ship from
danger, in the largeness of the reward which is
almost certain to follow their success. But can we
expect the same anxiety to encounter the hazard
which ordinarily attends such enterprises in the
seamen of the Royal Navy, if the law should de-
prive them of all compensation for their services ?
There is certainly a distinction to be drawn between
the two cases ; but reward should always follow
extra services, or they will be at best but grudgingly
performed, and perhaps refused altogether when
most needed.

That part of Mr. DISRAELI'S statement which
proposed a remedy for the Shipowner for sailors
taken on board ships-of-war, Mr. LINDSAY stig-
matises as " moonshine ;" but he would go a step
farther, and deprive the men of the right they now
enjoy of leaving the merchant-ship for the Royal
Navy. He writes in the true spirit of a Shipowner
who has no regard to any other interest than his
own—a quality not common to his class—and
would deprive the seamen of a privilege which, after
all, would only he resorted to in an extreme case.

His concluding 'remarks about manning the
Navy are dictated in the same spirit of selfish mo-
nopoly which he professes to decry in every other
class. He admits that though Shipowners have the
right to man their vessels with one-fourth foreigners,
yet not more than one-sixth, or even one-eighth of
the seamen employed belong to other countries.
Notwithstanding this, he would open the door to
the indiscriminate employment of Danes, Swedes,
and Germans, in order that British seamen may be
brought to a due sense of the benefits of competi-
tion, and be driven to enter the Royal Navy from
their being less required in the Merchant service.
The whole tenour of Mr. LINDSAY'S appeal seems
based upon the assumption that the activity of the
Shipping Trade—which is mainly, if not solely,
owing to emigration—will be of permanent duration ;
and still further, he claims for his own class advan-
tages at the expense of the class dependent upon
it. In this respect he has shown neither judgment
nor justice, and would have been more usefully
employed, if he had devoted the great experience
for which he claims credit to devise some means by
which the prosperity of the Shipping Interest should
have been placed on a more permanent basis.
Apart from the emigration mania, which has proved
a temporary relief, the British Shipowner has been
placed in unfair rivalry with :the cheaper built and
cheaper manned ships of foreigners, and the in-
justice will not be remedied by extending it to
British seamen,