§ Mr. Huskissonmoved the third reading of this bill.
§ Sir M. W. Ridleyexpressed an opinion, that the duty of 10s., on payment of which the warehoused corn was to be admitted, was too high, and that it would act as a prohibition.
Mr. Wodehouseapprehended that much corn of the United States would be fraudulently imported, under the denomination of Canadian corn.
§ Mr. Huskissonobserved, that he had no objection to fix the duty at less than 10s., if the House should concur with any proposition to that effect. At the same time he did not believe that a duty to the amount of 10s. would prevent the corn from being brought into the market. He was satisfied that the owners of warehoused corn would not fail to bring it into the market before the next harvest, if they had an opportunity of doing so; because, if the corn in foreign ports should be imported, it would bring the price much lower than that which they could obtain for it now. With respect to what the hon. member for Norfolk had said about the importation of American corn, he believed his apprehensions to be without foundation. He had conversed with persons who were perfectly informed on the subject, and he found that, during the time when corn was at the highest price ever known in this country, there never was more than fifty thousand quarters of Canadian corn imported. The lowest price at which corn of the United States could be landed at Montreal, including the expence of carriage, the risk, and the duty, was from 20s. to 25s. In order, however, to allay the fears of those who dreaded the importation of American corn, he had no objection to say, that if, during five years, the average importation of what was called Canadian corn should exceed 100,000 quarters, he would take 591 that fact as evidence that there had been a fraudulent importation of American corn, and that it was necessary to adopt some measures to guard against it [hear].
§ Mr. H. Sumnerwished a clause to be introduced into the bill, to limit the importation of Canadian corn in any one to a hundred thousand quarters.
§ Sir E. Harveyapproved of the suggestion of the hon. member for Surrey.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer begged to remind those gentlemen who supposed that large quantities of American corn would be fraudulently introduced into the home market, that the measure before the House was intended for the benefit of the Canadians themselves, who would therefore have an interest in preventing such a proceeding. There were so many difficulties opposed to the fraudulent introduction of American corn, that he believed the thing was almost impracticable. In the first place, the corn must be brought from some port in Lake Champlain in an American ship, and be landed at Kingston, Montreal, or Quebec: it must then be put on board a British ship; for only in such a vessel could it be brought to this country from Canada: and, before all this could be done, it was necessary that perjury should be committed over and over again, and the vigilance of the Customhouse be defeated; which would be somewhat difficult, seeing that a cargo of corn was a bulky article, and not easily transported, particularly in a country like Canada, where the roads were not very favourable, and the points of communication hundreds of miles from each other. If gentlemen would study the geographical situation of the two countries, they would find that there was no ground for alarm.
§ Sir I. Coffinsaid, there was no ground to suppose that American corn could be fraudulently introduced into this country.
§ Sir J. Wrottesleydid not think the importation of American corn was so difficult as the right hon. gentleman had represented it to be.
Mr. W. Hortonsaid, that the inhabitants of Canada were as much interested in preventing the importation of American corn as the English farmers.
§ Mr. Sykesexpressed himself favourable to the lower rate. He would rather it should be 5s. or 7s. than 10s.
§ Sir E. Knatchbullcould not concur in either a high or low rate. He did not think any alteration in the Corn laws necessary.
§ Mr. Curwensaid, he did not think bonded corn would be brought into the market, except at the lower rate.
Mr. Whitmoresaid, he should be extremely glad, if the right hon. gentleman would concede the lower rate of duty. He agreed with the hon. member for Cumberland, that the bonded corn was not likely to come into the market at so high a duty as 10s. As to the amount of corn likely to be imported from the Canadas to this country, he believed the opinions which prevailed at the present moment to be most erroneous; since the average amount of wheat imported from the Canadas to this country did not exceed 23,000 quarters.
The bill was read a third time.
§ Mr. Huskissonsaid, that, with a view of removing all cause for alarm, and giving an adequate security against the fraudulent introduction of Canadian wheat, he should propose a clause, by way of rider, that there should be the same certificate of origin as in the case of sugar. This provision, which was found a sufficient security with respect to sugars, must be still more satisfactory in regard to so bulky an article as corn. With respect to the suggestion of the hon. member for Surrey, for limiting the quantity to 100,000 quarters, he should have no objection to adopt it, if he thought there was any probability that such a limitation would be necessary. If the increased importation should be so rapid as to give an average of so large an amount for five years, he should then consider that there was some evasion of the law, and the interposition of parliament would, under such circumstances, become necessary.
The clause was agreed to.
§ Sir M. W. Ridleymoved, as an amendment, that the duty on bonded corn be reduced from ten shillings to seven shillings.
Mr. Wodehousesupported the amendment. On behalf of the agriculturists, he was enabled to say, that they had no objection to the foreign corn being taken out of bond free of duty altogether.
§ Mr. Brightsupported the amendment, as the low duty was due to the holders of bonded corn, in compensation for the losses they had already sustained.
§ Mr. Huskissonsaid, he would most willingly concur in any thing which would relieve the importers of the bonded corn, who, he believed, had already lost con- 593 siderably by it; but he felt it his duty to resist this amendment on public grounds. The object of it was, to give a greater facility to the owners of this corn to bring it into the market; but this he had no doubt would be done under the present bill. If the price should get near, but not up to 80s., the holders of the bonded corn would bring it out, and would, no doubt, get a sale for it, not having the competition of any foreign corn; and if they saw that there was a chance of the price rising to 80s., and of the ports being opened, they would feel equally anxious to bring it before the great influx of foreign corn would deprive them of all hope of selling it. His adherence to the 10s. rather than a lower sum, was not from any consideration of revenue, but from motives of public expediency, which he had already explained to the House.
The amendment was negatived, and the bill passed.