HC Deb 09 March 1860 vol 157 cc237-41
MR. HALIBURTON

stated that in the early part of the evening he had presented a petition from a number of merchants connected with North America, praying that an alteration might be made in the differential duties on shipping. They were extremely anxious to be informed at what time this subject would be taken up, and he should therefore be glad to know from the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he proposed to proceed to the consideration of this subject. Those gentlemen felt that they had been taken very much by surprise, as they had no means of communicating with their fellow traders on the other side of the Atlantic, with regard to a matter in which they were so materially interested. British colonial merchants had no representative in that House, there was no person charged with the interests of a particular colony, or of the colonies generally; and be therefore wished to ask—though in doing so he was not acting at their request—whether there would be any objection to allow British North Americans to be heard at the bar of the House on a question which was of such great importance, and which they alleged would extinguish the trade of these colonies. He would not detain the House, which he knew was anxious to proceed to the consideration of other subjects, by alluding to the details of the petition; but when the trade of an entire province like that of New Brunswick would be prostrated by the alteration contemplated by the Government, when Canada would be deprived of the means of purchasing and paying for British manufactures by the export of her timber, it was, perhaps, a question of quite as much importance as the shrubs in the Park and the gravel walks for cows. He had a very great repugnance to put this question at all. The petitioners felt, as everybody else must have done, the very contemptuous nature of the answer given the other evening by the right hon. Gentleman on this subject, and it was certainly not of a description to encourage a renewal of the inquiry. He did not stand up to defend British North America—he was not her representative, but merely that of an humble borough in England; but when a question put on behalf of 3,000,000 of unrepresented people, as to whether their exports might be admitted into a neighbouring kingdom under the late treaty, was answered by the taunt that they were already too free, or they would be better off—that the Emperor of the French had his colonies under control, and if the British Government had the bridle and bit on her colonies, they might have been served as well as the French—he did not think it was an answer such as they had a right to expect. They were told in the same breath that they had taxed British Manufactures. He did not defend this course—nor, perhaps, would they thank him for doing so, for they owed no allegiance to that House, although they did to Her Majesty; they w re an independent, intelligent, loyal people; they had rights of their own and knew how to maintain them; and they would not thank him if he were to apologize for the fiscal arrangements which they had made. They had taxed British manufactures—they bad taxed the manu- factures and imports from every country in the world, and placed them on the same footing, They had not adopted the free-trade principles of the Government of this country, nor were they to be taunted for it; they had as much right to their opinion as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had to the one-sided free-trade which he had introduced into this country. The sneer, therefore, with which that answer had been given had sunk deeply into the minds of those gentlemen now temporarily domiciled at Liverpool for their own business purposes; and he should be ashamed of them, and ashamed to acknowledge himself a colonist, if they would put up with the superciliousness of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with the neglect of Parliament, or with injustice from any Power on the face of the earth. It was at least to be expected that when men put a civil question, that question should be civilly answered.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

The hon. Gentleman has closed with a most moderate proposition, that those who put civil questions should receive civil answers; but I am bound to say, if the answer now to be made to him were to depend on the application of his own principle, there might be some doubt as to how far it would be incumbent on me to adopt the rule to which he has referred. The hon. Gentleman spoke of my superciliousness, my taunts, my sneers, my contemptuous answer, and I really was at a loss to imagine what answer of mine the hon. Gentleman referred to; but as the hon. Gentleman went on to give what I will not call a description, but what I will frankly term, in his presence, a gross caricature of an answer which had proceeded from me, I was enabled at once to identify it, and to perceive the total error under which the hon. Gentleman labours with regard to its character. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman heard that answer; I am not sure whether he was in the House at the time.

MR. HALIBURTON

I heard it accurately; it was in answer to a Question that I put myself.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

All I can say is, if the answer was given in Committee, and if the hon. Gentleman thought I had been guilty of a very gross error in making a contemptuous reply to a question involving the interests of great or of small numbers of British subjects—it does not signify which—the hon. Gentleman would have done much better to reprehend me there and then—to give me, if I had done wrong, an opportunity of confessing my error, and of vindicating myself in the eyes of those in whom he takes such interest, rather than to return home, "nurse his wrath to keep it warm," and then come down to the House, and, under the plea of putting a question, which he says he is very unwilling to put, to take the opportunity of making charges against me which I hope are not justified by the manner in which I generally endeavour to discharge my duties in this House, and which, I must say, if they were justified, would undoubtedly convict me of the grossest culpability, and make me deserving of far severer punishment than I have just now received from the hon. Gentleman. I have only to apologize to the House for having noticed this matter. The hon. Gentleman's question, if I understand it, is, whether an opportunity will be given for a discussion on the timber duties, and likewise whether Her Majesty's Government will be disposed to delay the decision on that subject until the colonists of British North America can be heard at the bar of the House. [Mr. HALIBUBTON: No, no!] With respect to the first branch of the question, there has been every desire to give opportunities for discussion, and my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury, in compliance with the appeal made to him, postponed the discussion on the timber duties, in order that any Gentleman who might be so disposed might, if he pleased, enter into that discussion; on the day to which it was adjourned he attended in his place, and I was ready to come down to the House if any question had arisen; but there was no person who was disposed to raise a debate; and that is the Report which the hon. Gentleman will have to make to the British colonists of the vigilance with which he has attended to their interests. If any disposition is now felt to debate that question, Her Majesty's Government will take care to make arrangements for the purpose, and that in some stage of the measure opportunities shall be given to Members for expressing their views. With regard to the proposal of hearing parties at the bar, I believe it is entirely without precedent in the history of modern legislation; no such demands have been made by others much more directly interested, and having more pretensions to a distinct locus standi than the colonists of British North America can on this question be strictly said to possess. And therefore I do not think it would be wise (o create a precedent which, I believe, would be productive of great delays, and attended with inextricable confusion. I am far from complaining of the hon. Gentleman for giving the frankest utterance to what he regards as the ruinous consequences of the reduction of the timber duties; that is a conscientious feeling on his part, and he is perfectly right to claim whatever opportunities he thinks fit for giving expression to those opinions. For my own part, they, perhaps, make less impression on me; for it is not now for the first time that I hear them. In 1842, and at subsequent periods, I have so often received the most solemn warnings that in consequence of the reduction of the differential duties on foreign timber total and absolute ruin was about to fall on the colonies of British North America, which are now more flourishing than over, that it is natural I should have become utterly impervious, and that these threats should not find entrance into my mind, notwithstanding (hat they appear to have got their seat in that of the hon. Gentleman.

MR. HALIBURTON

explained that he had not asked the right hon. Gentleman to delay the discussion on the subject of the timber duties until the colonists of British North America could be heard at the bar. He only asked whether those who were now in this country and were interested in the matter would be afforded that opportunity. Perhaps this very misapprehension had given rise to the slur which was conveyed on the first occasion.