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

1 LIVERPOOL

MECHANICS'
SCHOOLS.

INSTITUTION

THE HIGH SCHOOL, THE LOWER SCHOOL,
I
THE GIRLS' SCHOOL, THE INFANT SCHOOL, and
THE EVEN I sa-sctiooL,
ARE N Irk OPEN.
Pupils may be entered r the remainder of the half-year.
A Prospectus, contai • g particulars as to terms, &c., may be
had on application le Institution.

W. NICHOL, Secretary

31ount-strat February, 1853

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

We shall be happy, at all times, to receive communications
on subjects of local or general interest ; and if ourfriends
will be good enough to authenticate the same by their signa-
tures, for our own satisfaction, we shall feel obliged.

Eibtrpoot tanbarb,

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 OP 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 lucuhrations. 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 DritA Shipping open to
competition with foreigners; and all the foundation
oy his argument is the simple fact that during the
last year there has been a great increase in the ton-
nage employed. This be 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 stifficient 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 varioas points
touched upon by the reviewer; but a little more
than z•superficialexamination of his reply will show
that he has wandered from the ,question at issue,
and-really given-no answer at all.
Vpon the'qtrestion of Light-dues,iht 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 amities contributed' by the Corporation
.Of the Trinity House, which are exclusively for the
`benefit of -decayed mariners; '.and coolly suggests
that the ea:pense of maintaining light-houses should
be borne by the State, although they are for the
exclusive benefit of the "Shipping interest. But
while sech a proposition islaiked of as a relief to,
the ShiNing interest, it must not be 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 innur trade. in the ,question of passing-tolls;
Mr. `LTNDSA.Y is equAly unfortunate in his-objec-
tions; for, whatever may be the respective value rsf
Ramsgate and Dover'-as harbours of refuge, the
charge, as we stated' last week, is only one half-
penny a ton, and that, far from being ahurden
'upon the Shipowner, is repaid by the .owntrs(of

the 'cargo

'The objection to'-'the proposed alteration in•ehe
sysrtem of Pilotage; This Liberal champion of ,the
Conservative Minister disposes of try the ;simple
assertion that an outward Pilot would -make the re-
turn•voyage at a cheaper rate on the .ground.Of his
being on his way 'home. He, however, leaves- alto-
g-ether untouched the stronger objettioit Ihnt-such
wow& of competition in this important branch of
the, maritime service- would weaken, ilmot 'altoge-
ther .destroy, the maintenance of an efficient body of
Pilots in the outports,-which now forms such; a va-
luable aid t /

o vessels on homeward voyages. 'There
may-certainly he a ;raving in the east of tePilot, but
it Will prove a miserable economy when • a ship
with valuable freikiA may have to .ileperid-upon
the chance of meeting with a Pilot on his way 'twine.

The question of Saivage is disposed of with like
infelicity. He does not meet the arguments df the
Reviewer that the ,crew of a man-of-war are entitled
to he paid for services-rendered to a merchant-vessel
in diskess, 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 If. system is but a weak argument against
its fair and legitimate,usc, and yet upon this 'Mr.
LINDSAT. 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 allreorapensation in
cases of assistance rendered by a Royal ,ship- to a
merchant-'case]. We eon readily understand, apart
:from the promptings of humanity, the zeal -which
would animate the crew -of an ordinary -vessel-to
risk their livira in the attempt to rescue a ,ship -from
danger, in the largeness •of the reward Ivhich-is
aifaost certain-:;;o 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 ali.compensation for their services?
There is certainlya distinction-to be drawn between
the two cases ; bui, reward .should always follow
extra services, or they will be at test 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 °hoard ships-of-war, Mr.rLINDSAY stig-
matises as-"moonshine:;" but he would go a step
farther, anti deprive the men of theright they now
tv.ijoy 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 COMMQII to his class—and
would deprive the seamen of a privilege which, after

all, would only be resorted to in an extreme case.

His concluding remarks about manning the
Navy are dictated n 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 vesses with one-fourth foreigners,
yet not more than one-sixth, or even one-eighth a
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 senge 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—willbe 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 b 0 remedied by extending it to
British seamen.