Eastern times. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1846-1857, 1851-09-04

According TO this Mr. Herries, the Englisl
stand no chance 1t all, by the Tide Of Amer
cans, On this free trade basis. He says that
"The effect Of the repeal of the navigation
laws had been IN the first year TO diminish 4
an enormous extent the employment of British
shipping and to augment that Of foreign; and
the result was 80 traceable to the cause he was
prepared to assign that it could not be regard
ed as an accidental Occurrences"
But we must quote once more from this Mr.
Herries, to get the summing up Of his griev-
ances. He adds =
"When America refused to give up hel
coasting trade, she knew we'll that she had OBJ.
tanned by the repeal of the navigation act, tina,
which she had long labored to obtain-viz
admission to the trade between this country
and her colonies-(hear, hear.) Every gov
eminent in this country previous to this had
| held that such privilege should not be grant
ed to any nation without distinct equivelant
though any equivelant that could have beer
given would still have been unequal to the
boon granted. The United States, however
had got this enormous advantage, to the cor
responding disadvantage Of this country (hear)
and she refused US equal admission to the ports
on her eastern territories. BY this refusal
America was now able to compete with US in
our India and China trade, possessing as she
did, the inestimable privilege of making the
round of trade from London to New York,
from New York to California, and thence to
China and India-(hear, hear.) Mr.. Hus-
klsson had always stated it to be unwise on
the part of this country TO encourage the
growth Of the mercantile marine of America,
and now we had the strongest proof of his sa-
gacliy on that point"
Some very interesting figures are also given
by Mr.. Young, another protectionist, in the
following compar;--..s, rHauo ny nIIn sad
he - 1850
g Now 10 compare the position of this coun-
try with America for the purpose of showing
the vast increase in the American tonnage, he
would take the state of both these mercantile
marines, first in 1915, at the end Of the war,
when the whole of the British shipping on the
register, was 1851 ,276 tons, and the Ameri-
can was 1868, 1877 tons and then in Decem-
Der of 1850, the whole of the tonnage belong
ing to Great Britain was 4 ,232 1862 tons, and
of that belonging to America on the 3Oth OF
June, 1850, the latest date to which the re-
turns had been made up, was 3,535,454 tons.
But the comparative advance of American ton
mage during the last four years was even more
remarkable for while the British tonnage,
which in 1916 was 3,SI7,1l2 tons, had ad-
vanced, in December, 1850, to ,232 1862 tons,
or 10 S-l0ths per cent. increase, the American
tonnage, which in 1916 was 9 1862 ,OS5 tons,
had advanced, in June, 1850, to 1856, 454
tons, or 81 9-l0ths per cent. increase, being, in
the case of America, an increase in four years
Of nearly million of tons. And the rate OF
increase had been still more during the las,
year, for the advance of British shipping was
Sc, 647 tons, while the American increase had
been POI ,439 tons so that if this went on al
the present rate of progression, in four years
the United States would have larger mer.
camille marine than Great Britain, considera-
ton that could not be too much pressed on her
majesty's Ministers"
One would think that the facts developed
above, might be considered and allotted their
due share of credit by those English scribblers
who are now employed in defaming and de-
tracing our country, for our alleged meagre
appearance at the Wold's fair exhibition
The arrogant and supercillious conduct of Eng
land, in this respect, merits but little notice,
we are aware, but it will be the most effectual-
ly silenced by developments like the above, in
which American prowess is acknowledged SO
SO unqualihiedly.