The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-04-28 00:00:00

TUESDAY MORNING, APRIL 28, 1846.

The Manchester Guardian, we observe, is angry
with us, because in wit last •we accused him of a
little unfairness in confining himself, whilst com-
paring the consumption- of British manufactured
goods by our North Arrierican colOnies with that of
the aggregate consumption by foreign markets, to
the year 1843—one in which the industry and ca-
pital of these colonies were notoriously labouring
under the paralizing effect of the Free Trade mea-
sures, levelled against them during the preceding
year. Our contemporary-excuses himself by stat-
ing that the parliamentary return from which he
took his data only caMe down to 1843. What of
that ? It was still obviously unfair to found any ar-
gument upon such a return, unless he had honestly
informed the public that. the effect of the measure of
the preceding year, exposing the timber trade of
Canada to competition. with the Baltic, and lessen-
ing the protection upon Canadian wheat in the Bri-
tish market, had diminished the power of that colony
to consume our fabrics.. This it is clear was the
case, and will be the case in an increased degree as
the result of the present measures. It is a corollary
recognized by every free trader, that when we cease
to purchase from any particular country we dimi-
nish its ability to purchase from ourselves in return.
The colonist •)f British America takes from us in
manufactures the full amount of the produce—grain
or timber—which we import from him. Transfer
our demand 'for such grain- or timber to the fo-
reigner, and we by no means receive from him the
equivalent amount of purchases from us in return.
Thus we handed over to 'the Markets of the Baltic
in 1842, the supply of this country with its timber.
From a pamphlet just published by 'Messrs. Whit-
taker and Company, entitled, " Our Free Trade
Policy examined, with respect to its real bearing ty-
ros Native Industry, our Colonial System, and the
Institutions, and ultimate destinies of the Nation,"
we find it stated that we took last year of foreign
timber 642,000 loads against 351,000 loads in 1841.
We know that upon that timber the duty which we
remitted went almost entirely into the pocket of the
foreign grower, and the foreign shipowner. Yet
what a vastly increased amount of the staples of
Manchester manufacture did 'the countries of the
Baltic take from us. We give from the pamphlet
referred to above the exports of plain cottons and
printed cottons to these countries in 1843, when the
reduction of duty in their favour was made, and in
1845, when the increasing ability and disposition to
consume ought to have mandested itself.

PLAIN COTTONS.
Countries. • 1543. 1844 1841.
Denmark .. yds. 444,377 839,366 467,912
Prussia
Russia - . 901.985 823,577
Sweden & Norway. „ 710,458 886,993 755,941
PRINTED COTTONS.
Denmark yds. -542,665 395,803 285,064
Prussia
Russia . „ 60,651 231,779 160,908
Sweden & Norway. ~ 603.031 585,385 519,674
There is certainly no very encouraging sign of reci-
procity here. These countries have not even taken
from us an increase in :proportion to the increased
price which we have put.into the pockets of their
people, leaving the • increased amount of their pro-
duce totally out of the question.
The Guardian remarks, in reply to our observa-
tions, and, we presume, imagines that he turns the
tables very adroitly, as follows :
_ __

" It was, of course, to be fully expected that, after the'
very small export of 1843, the stocks of British manufac-
tures in British North America would be exhausted, and
that during the following year toe exports would exceed
an average, which appears to have.been the fact. But, if
we srld the exports of the two }Cars together, we shall find
that they exhibit a falling-off as compared with the gene-
ral average from 1839 to 1814. The average of those
years, as stated by Mr. Buchanan himself, is £2,666,374
whilst the average of the two years 1843-4, is only
.£2.411,035 ; exhibiting a falling-off of more than
£250,000 ; whilst the general export trade of the country
to those puts of the world in which we have no exclusive
privileges or protecting duties in our favour shows a very
large increase. This fact is quite sufficient to prove our
original position, that English manufacturers have no rea-
son to apprehend a loss of their trade from the establish-
ment of a perfectly free commerce between the colonies
and all the rest of the world."
Again, be it observed, he sticks to this year 1843,
thus reducing the average of 1843 and 1844 below
that of the years from 1839 to 1844. • What does
he prove, however, beyond the faCt that when we
strike heavy blows and great discouragements
against colonial industry we depress the rate of
colonial consumption of our fabrics ? We imported
less Canadian timber, &c., in 1843 than in preceding
years. Her purchases from us decreased in propor-
tion. The demand for her timber, in 1844, was
greater than in the preceding year; and she increased
her purchases from us. Is this a fact sufficient to
prove the Guardian's position, " that English manu-
facturers have no reason to apprehend a loss of their
trade from the establishment of a perfectly free
commerce between the colonies and all the rest of
the world ?" Why, it shows, precisely the reverse.
It shows-that the mere movement towards free trade,
in 1842 and 1843, took more than a million sterling
from the consumption of British manufactures in
British America, whilst we have shewn that it added
nothing to the consumption of those markets whose
produce we took instead of the produce of these
colonies. What "a perfectly free commerce" will
bring about, we need not go very far to enquire.
For the satisfaction of the Guardian, with tespeet
to the correctness of the data from which we quoted,
we may state that they are contained, and were, no
doubt, taken by Mr. M'Culloch from Returns, part
14, section A, of Revenue and Commerce, pre-
sented to both Houses of Parliament by command
of her Majesty—one of the usual blue books com-
piled by the board of trade. That they are not
compiled to favour views adverse to the doctrine of
free trade, we know full well. If they err, they do
so in a contrary direction, in somewhat of the same
way as the return whose absurd incorrectness was
eo ludicrously exposed, and admitted in the House
of Commons, the other evening, by the premier
himself.

The stringent effect of the proposed measures of
Sir Robert Peel, for proninting the winding up of
railway projects, has not only carried dismay amongst
the promoters and oflici•dh of tilos,: of an unsound
character, who would gladly be permitted to hold on
a little longer by their present pay, and v;read the
exposures to which it may possibly subject them,
but is seriously alarming those interested in the fate
of really valuable lines. There are difficulties in its
working which will test the strength of the very
best; and we have very little hesitation in predicting
that its result will be the extinction of nineteen-
twentieths of those which, a few months ago, were
put forward at most imposing premiums, but have
of late been wofully deficient in vitality.
That as regards the latter; such a result will be a
public benefit, there can be little doubt. It will re-
lease, and direct into the Usual channels of business
enterprise, vast masses of capital, improvidently
locked up in no very secure keeping. But it will
effect more than this, if the good sense of the public
and of shareholders interested in good lines will
look after their own interests and exercise even
ordinary discretion. It has not been intended; it is
not necessary for the preservation of the community;
it is not desirable that we should have a general
sweep of all new schemes from the market, and that
the large amount of capital expended upon the pre-
paration of legitimate schemes for Parliament should
be sacrificed, and the benefits derivable from their
formation should be deferred for years to come.
The legitimate result of the measure ought to be
to ensure the position and prospects of sound
schemes, and to !protect both the community and
individuals from such unnecessary sacrifice. De-
stroy the weeds and the good plants may thrive.
Remove the pressure upon the money market,
created by the mad projection of worthless under-
takings, and the capital released will enable bona
fide undertakings to get their heads above water,
and, if not to regain the inflated value which,
in our temporary madness, we set upon them, at
least to recover from the absurd depression, into
which undiscriminating panic has sent them.
It will have been observed, that, as one effect of