§ Mr. Robinsonhad given notice last week of his intention to put a question to the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs relating to the commercial relations between Great Britain and Portugal. His reason for giving that notice was, that after the expiration of the treaty of Rio Janeiro on the 30th of April last, and before any new commercial relations had been entered into with Portugal, the Portuguese Government suddenly, and without notice, notwithstanding the assurance to Lord Howard de Walden, directed duties to be levied of twenty-nine per cent., instead of fifteen percent., in all the ports of the kingdom with the exception of Lisbon and Oporto. A vessel belonging to some friends of his (Mr. Robinson's) had called off the port Viana, thinking that the cargo would only be chargeable with a duty of fifteen per cent; but, being informed that it had been raised to twenty-nine per cent., it had proceeded to Oporto. This, certainly, was an extraordinary and unfriendly proceeding on the part of Portugal. He begged to ask the noble Viscount, what were the present commercial relations between this country and Portugal, for British merchants were not aware to what duties they were or were not liable?
§ Viscount Palmerstonreplied, that with regard to the particular case referred to by he hon. Gentleman, although he was not officially informed upon the subject, yet he believed that the additional duty imposed in the port of Viana had been laid on by the local authorities for local pur- 125 poses, and not in consequence of any order from the Court of Lisbon. At the same time, the treaty having expired, the Portuguese Government was at full liberty to make such changes in the duties as it thought expedient, and such would remain the case until a new treaty had been concluded. If, therefore, the duty had been raised from fifteen percent, to twenty-nine per cent., by order of the Government, this country could have no just ground of complaint. It was perfectly true that great inconvenience arose from the present uncertainty of our commercial relations with Portugal; but when the hon. Member asked for information, as to the probability of the signature of a new commercial treaty, all he could say in answer was, that negotiations for the purpose were in progress. He could not possibly inform the House what was the precise state of those negotiations. Two or three changes of Administration had occurred in Portugal; it was well known how such changes in this country retarded, or defeated, public business; and, in Portugal, the difficulty was greater than in England. He did not wish to conceal from the House that many persons in Portugal entertained very strong, but utterly unfounded prejudices, in favour of protecting duties, with a view to the fostering of their own particular manufactures. He trusted that these prejudices would not prevail so far as to impede the conclusion of a treaty between the two kingdoms, founded upon principles of just reciprocity and mutual liberality; but he could not too strongly impress upon Members, that if foreigners entertained prejudices on the subject, those prejudices had been sometimes too much encouraged by speeches made in that House upon foreign trade. When the Government of Great Britain urged upon foreign Governments the advantage of unrestricted commerce, subject only to such duties as were necessary for revenue, the answer had now and then been, "This is a very good doctrine for England, which by means of restrictive duties has attained her present enviable prosperity; but we shall pursue the same course of protection and prohibition, and when we have equalled England in prosperity, we will imitate her in liberality." It was in vain to tell such persons, that England had flourished, not by the aid of, but in spite of, protecting duties; and that her progress had been greatly retarded by the vicious 126 system of former times. As long, however, as persons in foreign countries unfortunately found their prejudices supported by language sometimes held in that House on those subjects, the difficulties of Government in persuading other countries to conclude commercial treaties upon liberal principles, would be considerably increased. He could assure the House, that no efforts had been, or should be wanting, to persuade the Government of Portugal to conclude a new treaty of commerce upon principles of just reciprocity; but if Portugal resorted to prohibition, it would remain for this country to consider whether that system should be retaliated on the produce of Portugal, and whether her wines and fruits should be subject to duties of the same description as she imposed on the woollens, cottons, and other manufactures of Great Britain.
§ Mr. Robinsonadded, that he had not wished to provoke a discussion; he understood the application of the observations of the noble Lord, and on Thursday next he hoped to have an opportunity of answering them. What he complained of was the breach of a positive engagement on the part of Portugal, for he held in his hand the copy of a letter from Lord Howard de Walden, in which due notice of any change in the duties was stated to have been promised by the Government of Lisbon. What had been done at Viana was without notice, and he should like to know what security merchants had for carrying on trade, if municipal bodies in different parts had the power to increase the duties? The noble Lord did not seem to know the facts of the case, or not to understand their application.
§ Viscount Palmerstonsaid, that although he was not officially informed that the duty at Viana had been increased from fifteen percent. to twenty-nine per cent, by the local authorities, he had good reason to believe that such was the case,