The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-07-05 00:00:00

MEETING OF ROPEMAKERS.-LAST
NIGHT.

A numerous meeting of the ropemakers of this town
was held last night at their club-room, Low-hill, for the
purpose of receiving the report of the deputation appointed
to confer with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the
subject of the proposed reduction of duty on foreign
cordage.
The PRESIDENT of the Association briefly introduced the
objects of the meeting, and called upon Mr. Rowett to
move the first resolution, and to explain his mission to the
government on behalf of the association.
Mr. Wm. RowETT was warmly greeted on rising, and
proceeded to address the meeting at considerable length,
calling to their recollection the election of Messrs. Turner
and Mackenzie last year ; in which he took with them
considerable interest, and for which he had been held up
to the public as a briber and corrupter of the honest free-
men and voters of the borough. He had been for many
months dragged before the public by slanders only to be
conceived by Radicals, who were themselves guilty of
the foul and disgraceful conduct of which they charged
him. And at the inquiry before the Committee of the
House of Commons, they had elicited from two or three
of the men he was then addressing the full amount of the
crime (if it could be so called) that had been so shame-
fully magnified ;—for all that this tribunal could, by the
utmost ingenuity, wring out of these men was, that he
had paid them a day's pay for a hard day's work ; and he
challenged the meeting to say whether he had ever done
more than to direct that such rope-makers as were
out of employment (without reference to their being
voters) should be employed in carrying flags. These, and
these men only, did he pay ; and he grieved to find radical
morals had fallen so low as to believe it corrupt, dis-
honourable, and dishonest to pay a poor man for his hard
day's work. Out of his own mouth (they had published
to the world) they would convict him ; and, after keeping
him three weeks at the door of the committee-room, they
dare not place him before the committee, though he from
dayito day begged to be examined, that he might, on his
oath, wipe off the foul calumnies they had heaped upon
him. But the result of this inquiry required us to fight
the battle over again—to the disgrace of a parliamentary
committee, it must be stated ; and he was sure the rope-
makers would do their duty. lie had been entrusted
with their petition to parliament, and had taken an active
part in the deputation they had sent to confer with the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the result of which would
show how necessary it is for the interests of their class to
be represented in the House of Commons. By the cor-
respondence he would read to them they would see how
unfairly and unjustly they had been treated by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The following correspondence was then read :-
2 Manchester Buildings, Westminster, 31st May, 1853.

Sra,-:-The deputation of ropemakers from LiverpOOl enter-
tain strong opinions on the subject of the repeal of the duty
on foreign rope and rope yarn, and, according to
,y our re-
quest, beg now to state some of the reasons for their alarm.
The present duty of 6s. per cwt. on foreign yarn secures to
the ropemakers of this country the labour of spinning rope
yarn, the repeal of which will, in their humble opinion, inevi-
tably transfer that labour to the serfs of Russia, who can on
the spot—where the raw material is grown—spin the best yarn
for about eightpence per cwt., and in that form can land it in
this country at one-third less cost of freight than the raw ma-
terial. Now, a very small. portion of rope yarn consumed in
this country is made by spinning machinery, and even that at
a greater cost than what is made in Russia by hand labour ;
and it is admitted on all hands that hand-spun yarn is the
best. The British ropemaker gets from 2s. 6d. to 3s. 6d. per
cwt. for spinning yarn, which now at full work is barely a
living price ; but, on the average, the ropemakers are not over
two-thirds of their time employed. Therefore, the deputation
humbly submits that, if the legislature repeals thepresent
import duty on yarn, putting this class of labour in competi-
tion with the serfs of Russia—utter destruction to their class
must inevitably be the consequence, they and their families
driven to pauperism, and the country deprived of that class of
artisans in times of need and danger. They are now in a con-
siderable degree contributing to the exchequer, which Russian
labour cannot do ; and, though it must be admitted that the
shipping interest would reap a partial and brief advantage
from the reduction in price, it must be admitted also that they
have never sought from Parliament such remission of duty,
knowing as they do, that so soon as the rope-yarn spinners of
this country are annihilated,—as they most certainly would be,
—the prices would be as high as at the present moment ; and
it would then be found that we had been legislating for the
serfs of Russia, to the destruction of our own people, without
a corresponding advantage that now superficially appears.
The same arguments may be used with reference to the duty
on cordage, which would, if repealed, destroy a large portion
of the capital now invested in machinery and rope-making
establishments, which contribute largely to Her Majesty's
Exchequer both from, or as property and income ; for it is
admitted on all hands,—yea, it is the avowed object—to obtain
rope from foreign countries, because it can be done cheaper
and, seeing the threatened danger both to their families and
the state, the ropemakers feel it a paramount duty to wait
upon you with the hope of averting the danger, assured that
it will have your best consideration.
I am, Sir, your most obedient servant,
WILLIAM ROWETT,
One of the Deputation.
To the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, Her Majesty's

Chancellor of the ExcheqUer,

Do wning4treet, 4th June, 1853.
SlR,—The Chancellor of the I.xchequer desires me to inform
you, that he has carefully perused your letter of the 31st ult.,
but he regrets to say that he does not think the reasons therein
stated would justify Her Majesty's Government in making any
alteration in, or withdrawing the proposal which has been sub-
mitted to Parliament, respecting the duty upon cordage and
Foreign rope. 1 am, Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
William Rowett, Esq. lt. W. WILBRA HAM.

2, Manchester Buildings, June 6, 1853,
The Hight Hon. W. E. Gladstone.

Si rt,.LI have only now received your secretary's note of the
4th inst., and cannot but regret the deputation was not per-
mitted an interview with you prior to the question of the re-
peal of duty on foreign rope and hemp yarn being settled—
as it was on Friday night last,—l may add to the great disap-
pointment of the deputation, who had waited several days
expecting your appointment to meet them, relying on the
fullest consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on
a question involving the entire living of one important class
in the country.

My statement, to which your secretary refers, was a mere in-
troduction to the objections to the repeal of this duty, which
the deputation was prepared to lay before you. lam sorry a
better result of a petition to the House of Commons, and a de-
putation to the Chancellor of the Exchequer cannot be reported
to the Ropemakers of Liverpool, and I am,
_

, ,
Your most obedient humble servant,
Wm. ROWETT.
Downing-street, Junc 7, 1553.
Sia,—l have received and read with much regret your letter
of the 6th.

In the first place, I must apologise to you for never having
observed that you were already in London. I wrote to you
under the belief that until an arrangement had been made for
an appointment, you would not quit home.
I must say neat, that I did not understand your letter of
May 31st, as repeating the request for an interview with me;
and when I answered it, perceiving that the arguments used in
it INere, All of them, of tt uhture yyhtch the !limo of commous

uni
li
es
fthe colraisnsleys d a"1 na
t sot rei
reject, I thought the best course I could take was to aecl,_,_trj
pnpt ee rdt aoi , f
protection
evrc•thi
oi which
requiresindeed
themjustice_tev;
you at once that, upon these arguments, the Government cuw
neither withdraw nor modify their proposal. +aka off
I well remember when, in 1842, the high duty was •-•
cordage, and the rate of 6s. substituted. I received deputa..,l°l4
composedof the most respectable men in London, who
me, and who themselves believed, and, as they thougtt,del7A
strated, that, if the 6s. duty was established, not anotherr;
of cordage ever w3uld be made in England—all must co
from Russia. The change took effect. 'I he quantity of
cordage admitted in 1552 was two tons: while the qtr,V.o,
hemp and jute admitted in the four Months ending otrou.
1853, to be made into British goods, is from six to seven,
sand tons,—of which the hemp alone is about one.halP. h di.
I am much concerned to rind that the answer wnic:',eoll
rected to be written to you on the 3d of June, did ne.lysttS
you until yesterday. At the same time I should add, ',,
Mr. Mitchell, M.P., had said in his place that he meant ..'reto
cuss the question of cordage, I inferred that the trade ifc'e the
communication with him ; and as he did not 01V;ittari.
change, I also inferred that they meant to make no OfT°l,lloi
Finally, I have only to say that even now the law
changed, and that if you think you have reasons to:: tbeft.
which are likely to indispose Parliament to change 'Aityoll
can be no reason why you should not state them. fe/tts
would, I think, only waste your labour in showing t".tbese,
cost of freight on
tollte raw material ; and such points e 2, bpi.
Sir, if they were e admitted as valid, we must trave'cortr.
over all the ground we have trodden, and re-enact the
laws. I remain, Sir,

Mr. W. Rowett,

Yo.ur obedient servant, TOO'
W. E. GLADs-

2, Manchester Buildings, Westminster, Sth June, 1553'
The Right Honourable W. E. Gladstone. deeaot,
Sin,—l have received your favour of yesterday, and by P-4
regret that you misunderstood the request first made _liogl
Turner, M.P., and then by myself, that the deputation
have an interview with you. fioet
By your secretary's note of the 30th ult., he distinctlY.-00,
stood the deputation was here; and after being here*Totte,
have returned to Liverpool. They would hare put the., DSIF,
practically before you, which I venture to think WotliV
had some weight with you, and the House of Common,* ~
it had been put to the house by yourself.
In the absence of the deputation? I will endeavour to pogstigill
matter in such a shape as will satisfy them, without vl
the principles of the present system of legislation. ertr_
Now my last letter went to show, that if the 60. Poor
duty, charged upon rope yarn, be taken off, the labour_ikppe?
ning yarn would inevitably be given to the serfs of ItOra,
cause they can make the best hand-spun yarn at about pfd
cwt., which cannot be made here under 2s. 6d. to 38%49-
cwt., (for such is the difference of wages between the lalpl
small seaports); the 6s. duty, therefore, absolutely Pei.
any import of foreign yarn, with profit' to the imPe':4
pointed out also the public advantage in preserving
ur artizan for times or need and danger, when the
England may again require their aid—and that they,,al;cof,
contributing their might to the state,which Russian sew,*
not do—and there could be no public advantage in for.„il
class of men and their families to inevitable pauper/71
misery, or those who can, perchance, afford it, to leafed/1
native land in disgust to live in a foreign country. I Pl.Ol
each class have a distinct right to theadrantages of leg.!,doe
acd not that any class should be sacrificed to what is IW"
to be the great public good.
As you observe, "my arguments were of a nature vi„-10,4
House of Commons uniformly declines to entertain, and vie
indeed, justice to the classes already stripped of protecti
quires them to reject."
I am fully sensible of the position the house is unbarPJf
in this respect. I, however, give the house credit ford ,0r:
to do what is just, and to distribute the burdens of the
equitably. This is all I ask. But if it should be foontiol:f
as we go on stripping class after class of protection,
are unwarrantably giving away our children's bread to le
ers, whose own government should have the responslU'weP
caring for them, we are generous before we are just"-
violating the highest of all principles.
re r 4
I 111 aware the popular notion is, that foreign ships dr,
sold in this market free of duty, and invited also to. 0",
carrying business, and therefore to meet such competl'„oidi
must have every article connected with shipping at the
est rate, duty free. I shall not trouble you with follovlt
the result to which such legislation must carry us ;•,}?uefell.,
will permit me to say, the Corn-law, to which your now oil,
is not a specimen, as it is supposed generally to he,ofto
same principle; the Is. duty involves not the principle
repeal of any duty, but implies a small duty to be ge"„00,
machinery for collecting being always ready for being 0,1,91
on a larger scale whenever needed. Taking the Cot ties
then, as the pattern, I may reasonably ask a reconsidert
the rope and hemp yarn duty; for it must be admitted;
total repeal of that duty is not essential to preserve the Pr's?
of free trade as applied to corn and many other articles *
eer
not name.
W
In the year 1842 to which you allude I was largely ipasol
in the cordage trade, but certainly did not participate„o„
alarm you say was then entertained by that class in l'oft,s
I was confident then as I am now that a duty of 6s. per,
yarn is ample protection to the spinner; and as to lay
the cordage, which is done by steam power and inach..epfeA
presume, in both countries,at perhaps no great diffe,airi
cost, except with reference to the manual labour ri; ill
which is considerable; but, in addition to this, tiotflool
and taxes alone on the making of rope in this cool
to
the large seaports is fully 28. per cwt., which in Itils!'olif„,l
amount to about 6d. per cwt. Still there are reasolo4l,
duty on rope may be reduced to 2s. per cwt., and °
sufficient protection to that part of the trade. • !Or tO
Ist. The great bulk of cordage is ordered in certail!sible.d,
and sizes, so various that it is almost iinMepin,,,
keep a stock of foreign cordage to meet suchWU
2nd. Russian tar is not the best with which to tar:icr-
3rd. Ships' standing rigging is best fitted to its place de
newly made. tbe tPll°
Now, these points alone out of many are protection tol,loo
so far as they go, but they do not apply to the poorr_di
spin the yarn. The Russians may spin the yarn and e/;105,-,

this comitry untarred, ready for being applied to AnY„-aloi
shape of rigging, as well as to inland purposes, of wbio,'er to
quantity is consumed, arid which have nothing what°
with the shipping interest.
L hope I have made it clear that though 2s. duty on relificitel
be sufficient protection, the same duty on lienip-Yarn'ita4
no protection whatever. It follows that if the entire
6s. be taken off both rope and yarn, the manufacturer
rope is protected by the three reasons l'have given,
s'l
poor spinner is exposed to the whole evil.
not have equal protection—why should he not have.c.;jo;
handed justice from our legislators? Unless distin
this kind, involving a spirit of fair play in the race
lrlill
neighbours, be fairly considered. class after class T.ooo°
And why she u.do,
alienated from their country, and_dire must be the effects
or later—whatever may be the form the effect may take.
Men who have sorvoti a lawful lon Ili to a t, tidy, itnoP;
faith with the laws of their country have brought their
the same trade, cannot with indifference look on and seeipi::l4
employers protected in their business by circumstance%
by Customs' duty, whilst they and their families are e'..„00.,
to utter ruin by the same law, without a shadow of circuTtrol,
tial protection, or a friend in power who will really sou
consider their position. fectlf!
I have shewn, I Lope, though very feebly and imPerositil
that this is aot so much the master ropemaker's case.DeOU
the poor labouring spinner; and as the power to serve
in your own hand, I sincerely hope and trust the sub]ietl
have your further consideration„ and the remedy be aPcf,atel;
1 may lastly add that I grant the entire effect of the noce.tnfi
plated repeal of duty may not be fully developed at.„„1011"
for a year or two, but the ultimate effect must inevtau"
the total repeal of the duty, as I have predicted.
lan Sir,
Your most obedient humble servennt'woffi
WILLIAM r, A

side,
r
The Chancellor of the Exchequer. ---
c
P.S.-1 herewith take the liberty of sending you a
sool„ge,
of the food upon which the Russian serfs live—this,
colt
water, constitutes their every meal almost withOutholli,
Hence the cost of their labour, and the utter inaposo"if.
our people to compete with them.

0 et
Dotening-street, June 1 '0
10.
Six,-1 am directed by the Chancellor of the ExcTjuKoti
acknowledge the favour of your communication date Se
and to inform you that he is so far satisfied to be in 13;.battoor
of the explanatory details which your letter contains `coiSA,
confirm hint in the impression to which your former tirei;re
nication had given rise, viz. that the arguments wliicliage,..µl,
ployed against the abolition of the duty on corn1011t(
arguments which, if adopted and applied to that articled{
in consistency,. necessitate a return on the part
coil°
Majesty's Government to the commercial policy of this
anterior to the year 1542.

1 have the honour to be. Sir, .411tfe
Your faithful ser,-..t,,
Mr. Wm. Rowett. FRANCIS .
This, he said, was enough to rouse their deteroiii;g9P.;
to unite their warmest efforts to send Alessrs• Pujec
and Liddell to parliament by a larger and more frAl
phant majority than they had on the last occasioo%lirii
had been grossly insulted and maligned by the i'ei
section of the reformers, who had brought so V.170110t
and unnecessarily all the labour of another elect:o.4u
them ; and the depth of their disgust and coat% IS,
such conduct must be shown by their zeal in ti.,Pdeate,
constitutional cause of Conservatism. He colic' ill
moving that a committee be appointed to watch. bt :401
rests of the ropemakers, and to confer with Oil
other towns for that purpose.
Mr. EVEttETT seconded the ny)ti-

vqls-410$'

,on wnic- A
ported by Mr. BRAKILL, and carried with great cP4 3e)4
aord
Thanks were then voted to Mr. Rowett for bi° 'J OS,
in attending to watch their interests in Loudon, i'1309 0'
a similar compliment to the chairman,. Which
acknowledged, the meeting separated.