§ Mr. Eden rose to move for a return of the British and foreign ships employed in the British trade for the last three years; he said 683 he had been induced to make such a motion, as he thought, if it could be complied with, the house would be enabled to judge how far the shipping interest had been affected by the measures of the late administration. He was sure the house would be convinced, as he was, that notwithstanding the contrary assertions of his majesty's ministers, the British ships had increased 1–6th in the course of the last year, while the foreign vessels had diminished in nearly the same proportion. Of the serious accusations advanced against the late ministers, the chief source (as alledged by those who made them) was the American Intercourse act, which, to use the very words of the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Rose) "did for our enemies what they could not do for themselves"; if that was the case, he wondered that ministers had not before now availed themselves of the opportunity their present situations gave them, of repealing an act of such dangerous consequences, and restoring the British navy to its original footing, or as Robespierre was known to have said, "to starve the colonies, rather than give up an iota of their principles." The late ministers had been charged with having made fatal concessions to the neutral flags; he trusted, however, that those who had succeeded them would not, by any rash or precipitate measures, hurry us into those evils such concessions were so well calculated to prevent; he trusted their rashness would not end in a rupture with America. In 1801, the Russian Convention was concluded upon, by which Russia gave up the treaty of 1756. Did the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer intend to carry into office with him those sentiments which in opposition made him despise all commercial advantages however extensive or important, which were to be held through neutral flags? He hoped he did not, and from the silence of the right. hon. gentleman and his colleagues, upon the American Intercourse act, he was inclined to believe that in this respect that right hon. gent. fortunately for the country, had abandoned those principles, which while out of power directed his opposition to this measure. He wished the house to examine attentively these accounts, which he now moved for; they would enable the house to form a just estimate of the accusation which had been thrown upon the late ministry, for neglect of the shipping interest; so far from having suffered from the measures adopted by the late ministers, he would take upon him to assert, that for the last year the number of British ships had increased in a proportion unexampled for the 684 same time in any former war, notwithstanding the diminution that must naturally arise out of the high rates of insurance during a continuance of hostilities. He concluded with moving, That there be laid before the House an Account of British and Foreign Shipping employed in the British trade for the last three years, ending 5th of January, 1807; shewing the number of vessels, tons, and men, entered inwards and cleared outwards, in each year.
§ Mr. Rose said, he had no objection to the motion, but could not see what object it could answer. As to the number of British vessels in the British Trade, it was not possible for the late ministers, during their short stay in office, to have diminished it in any considerable proportion. As to the American Intercourse bill, he had no hesitation in repeating what he had when out of office stated to the house, that he thought it an act big with the worst consequences to our West India trade. A right hon. friend of his had been asked yesterday, whether it was intended to propose the repeal of this act? Did it follow, that because the measure might be objected to on its being proposed, that after its adoption it ought to be repealed? It was a different thing to oppose a law before it was made, and to repeal it when made. While the bill alluded to was pending, he thought it would be highly mischievous; in that opinion he was confirmed. It gave the Americans such advantages, that the British shipping were almost driven out of the trade. He had been lately applied to, by an agent of Jamaica, for a convoy to secure the little trade carrying on there in British bottoms, but he thought the advantages on the side of the Americans, as to cheapness of insurance, number of vessels, and shortness of distance, too great for the British vessels to rival them in that trade. He had however, no objection to the motion of the hon. gent. though he felt it difficult to discover what object could be attained by it, and thought it by no means justifiable to throw out any hint or disrespectful insinuations against such a weighty and respectable body as the shipping interest of this country.
§ Lord Howick thought the observations made by the right hon. gent. who had just sat down, the most extraordinary he had ever heard; was it to be believed, that there was a man in that house who could so far have mistaken his hon. friend who had made this motion, as to infer from what had fallen from him in support of it, any thing like contempt towards the shipping interest? His hon. friend, in the speech he had made, 685 had evinced a knowledge of the subject now before the house, utterly irreconcilable with any sentiment towards the shipping interest, but that of respect. At the same time he professed to entertain the same sentiments for that body, it certainly did appear, that they were induced, under the influence of erroneous apprehensions, to petition that house against measures which were not of the nature that respectable body were led to believe; they were not productive of the consequences that certain persons were desirous of attributing to them; in this respect they were certainly misled by various reports, insidiously set on foot and industriously propagated, and the house knew well how great bodies might for a time be misled by insinuations disseminated in that way. But what particularly induced him now to trespass on the indulgence of the house was, what had fallen from the right hon. gent. That right hon. gent. had been bold enough to declare that he believed the American Intercourse act had been productive of the most injurious consequences to the British trade in the West Indies, and after so stating, the right hon. gent. avowed that he had no intention of moving for the repeal of an act he thought so injurious; but there was even a shorter process—the repeal might not be necessary. If he understood the act, it was this, a bill to empower the king in council to permit an Intercourse, &c. which, therefore, implied the right of withholding that permission; consequently all that ministers had to do, if they really thought this measure attended with such danger, was to suspend the intercourse: but if they should hesitate to do that, he did not know how to reconcile their professions with their practice. The right hon. gent. complained of the evils which have caused the decline of our trade, compared with that of the Americans in that quarter; would the right hon. gent. take upon him to say, that all those evils have sprung up within the last 12 months, or had they not existed for the last 14 years? and if they had been accumulating within that period, was it fair or candid to attribute them to a cause so foreign from them, for the mere pretence of justifying his friends by attempting to criminate their predecessors? All the reasons that existed then, for a more vigorous Order of Council, existed still; the famous decree of the 21st of Nov. was now, as then, in full force against our commerce, and the power of the French government to enforce it, was as strong as ever. God grant that power was not now 686 alarmingly greater! Why then not substitute for that order of council, which had been thought so weak and futile, another of more vigour, and able to effect all that the present ministers, when in opposition, had said that it ought to effect?
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he rose merely to observe upon the candour with which the hon. mover had charged him with rashness and precipitancy, in adopting measures which had not yet been adopted. He repeated what he had before said upon the order in council, and thought that if the decree of the 21st of Nov. had been then more firmly met by his majesty's then ministers, such firmness would have been productive of the best possible results; but it did not at all follow, though he then condemned that order, that now, under different circumstances, and at such a distance of time, he should be bound to advise its being entirely abandoned; he should, however, assent to the motion.
§ Sir C. Price vindicated the shipping interest.
§ Lord H. Petty said, that the hon. baronet must have totally misconceived his hon. friend, if he understood him to have said any thing disrespectful of the shipping interest; as to the petitions that had been, day after day, presented to that house, in the course of the late parliament, he should not say by what misrepresentations that body had been induced to present them, but this he would say, that that body had but partially acted, for certain he was that a great part of the shipping interest had nothing to do in presenting such petitions: but what he rose to notice, was the extraordinary ground taken by the right hon. chancellor of the exchequer; that gentleman would now abstain, forsooth, from more vigorous measures, in order that he might not incur the charges of rashness and precipitancy; and what had been the answer of the same right hon. gent. to the statements of his hon. friend? it was contended, that all the benefits resulting within the last year to the shipping interest, by which the number of British ships in the British trade had been increased in so considerable a proportion, that all those benefits could not within the short space of a year be attributed to the late ministers, because in so short a time they could have done no considerable harm, while it had been at the same time contended, that all the evils ailedged to have arisen out of the intercourse act, were to be attributed to the late ministers within the same short year. With what candour 687 the right hon. gent. could refer to the late ministers the evils that had been accumulating for the last 14 years, and deny to the same men the merit of the good effects of their own measures within a year, he left it to the house to determine.
§ Lord Castlereagh contended that the policy of the present question, as affecting the order of council, was widely different from what presented itself to the late ministers.
§ Lord Temple observed, that the order of council was issued after the Treaty with America.
§ Mr. Secretary Canning denied that ministers were bound to look to the order of council under the circumstances existing when it was issued, but under present circumstances. At the same time, he had no hesitation in declaring, that he thought that order partook of all the bad qualities of half measures, attended with all the inconveniences of strong measures, without being productive of any of their good consequences.
§ Mr. Whitbread recapitulated the arguments advanced by his noble friend (lord Howick), and concluded with saying, that he seldom knew any good consequences to arise from the over-strained violence of blustering politicians.
§ Mr. Canning, in explanation, said, that he was not aware of having deviated from the question; but at all events he should rather appear in the character of an injudicious adviser than in that of a blundering accuser.
§ Dr. Laurence contended, that the present ministers were pledged to repeal the act, which in opposition they had argued, and still professed, to be destructive to the British trade in the West Indies. All that was in their power to do the late ministers had done, as far as related to the altering or abolishing, what, when out of power, they had condemned. They had not been idle in plucking up the numberless thorns and briars from the bed of roses they had been placed in—the measure was under consideration, was not dependent upon circumstances, it was the same now as five months ago, and therefore it was a mere pretence for ministers to say, that though they condemned it five months ago, it was not now expedient to abolish it. There was no way of proving to the house they were sincere in their opposition to it, but by repealing it at once. They professed it to be dangerous, they denounced it as injurious to British commerce, that its operation had done mischief, and continued to do mischief, and yet they did not think it right to repeal, or even 688 temporarily to suspend it. And all who presumed to complain of such satisfactory explanation, and self-evident consistency, were to be derided as "blundering accusers." But, continued the learned doctor, these polite terms, as applied to my hon. friend (Mr. Whitbread) are intended, I suppose, to convey something beyond the present question. The man who was impeached by this house, as a public peculator, had been acquitted, it would seem, not because of his own innocence, but on account of the "blundering" manner in which the accusations, however grounded, were preferred against him; was this to go abroad to the public? we all know the right hon. secretary's love for an epigram; but if this was meant to be in point, it was as cruel a blunder at the expence of the accused, as the most blundering accuser could be guilty of.
§ Mr. M. Montague said, he thought that instead of waging this war of words about a measure which had already passed into a law, and that as his majesty's present ministers had not had sufficient time to determine as to their future conduct in relation to it, the house would do much better to pass on to the many very important matters which awaited their consideration.—The motion was then agreed to.