FOREIGN TRADE OF THE COUNTRY.

HL Deb 26 May 1820 vol 1 cc546-99

The Marquis of Lansdowne

rose, in pursuance of the notice he had given, to move for a committee to inquire into the means of improving and extending the foreign trade of the country. So much did he feel the importance and magnitude of the subject, that he apprehended no sense of duty, however great, would have been sufficient to induce him to undertake bringing it forward, had he not entertained a well-founded hope of experiencing every indulgence from the House. Under the circumstances, however, in which he thought it necessary to propose to their lordships the appointment of a committee, he did not suppose that it could be necessary for him to say much to justify himself for having assumed that task. He certainly felt most strongly the Weight of the undertaking, and would have been glad to have seen it in the hands of any noble lord more able to do justice to it. Undoubtedly such a question would have been brought forward with much more effect by the members of his majesty's government, from the superior information which they of course possessed; but that course having been declined, he felt it an imperative duty, however incompetent to the task, to call their lordships attention to the subject, interesting and important as it was at all times, but more especially so at the present moment, when the best interests of the country Were so materially involved in the result. Several years had now passed away since the pressure of public distress engaged the attention of every friend to humanity and the country. That the noble lords opposite omitted to propose any measure of relief, was not, therefore, sufficient to excuse their lordships from attempting to inquire into the state of the evil, and to look for a remedy. Those threatening clouds which some years ago began to darken the horizon had gradually increased, and now wore a more dense, awful, and ominous aspect than ever. It was then impossible that their lordships could be justified in longer, ^abstaining from investigating the causes of the distress under which the country suffered. He felt it incumbent on him, seeing that no other person felt disposed to take up the subject, to propose an inquiry into the state of the foreign trade of the country; at the same time, in proposing that limited inquiry, he was far from wishing to throw any impediment in the way of any noble lord who might be disposed to institute an investigation into any other branch of the public distress. Still less did he mean to check any inclination to inquire into the expense of public establishments, or to urge that economy which was so necessary to the welfare of the country. But the latter were among the daily duties of their lordships, while the proposition he had to make related to a subject which less frequently called for their immediate attention. He meant to confine the proposition he had to make to the appointment of a committee on the foreign trade of the country. He had chosen this course, because he was convinced that any more extensive inquiry would only open an arena, into which every chivalrous political economist would hasten to take his stand; into which every theory would be introduced, and where every opposing interest would find an opportunity of combat. In any committee of general inquiry, useful discussion would be impracticable, endless contests would arise, and inquiries would be pursued without leading to any result. But, in limiting the proposal of investigation to one single but important object, he begged it might not be concluded that he had it in view to protect or promote the interest of any particular body in the country in preference to others. He certainly had no such intention, but, on the contrary, had limited his proposition to a subject which he conceived intimately connected with the interest of the whole country. But whatever course their lordships might determine to pursue, whether that of a limited or a general inquiry, if ever they were to entertain a design so unjust as that of favouring one interest or one body of the state, at the expense of any other, such a project would be impossible. So inseparably connected were the interests of society, so powerfully did the laws which Providence had imposed on those interests operate—for in: regulating the wants they also regulated the actions of men—that any partiality of this kind was impracticable. Whenever it should be attempted to raise up a barrier for any particular interest, it would soon be found that its effect would bed destroyed by the operation of the general interests of the community. Such a proceeding could only tend to bring on the body whom it was wished to favour increased humiliation and distrust. The experience of the last ten years could not be thrown away on their lordships and he trusted it would not on the country. In the year 1815 they had seen the distress of the agricultural body visited on the other interests of the community. They had afterwards found the distress of the manufacturing interest visited on the growers of corn and the raisers of every kind of agricultural produce. From these alternate visitations who could fail to see that the orders of nature had linked together all the interests of men in society, and that it was nothing less than the height of folly and madness to attempt to prop up any one class at the expense of another? It would ultimately appear that any class of persons whom it was attempted exclusively to benefit would find the injury which was thus done to other classes recoil with so much force upon themselves, that they would become glad to give up their exclusive privileges in order to derive a greater advantage from admitting their fellow-citizens to participate in the benefits to which they had before exclusively laid claim. It was not, therefore, for the benefit of any one class of persons exclusively, that his motion pointed; but to discover the means of benefitting all by a wise and judicious direction of the resources of the country in the channels of commercial activity and enterprise. He had formerly given his opinion on the corn laws, and would not now go into an inquiry which he thought already disposed of—namely, whether the agricultural interest was sufficiently protected. He could not, however, help observing that in looking at the petitions on the tabled the opinion that his country ought to be rendered independent of foreign corn seemed to be adopted in some of them. The petitioners wished for prices which would give them the advantage they possessed in time or war, but they ought to consider that the effect of the continued operation of high prices must be to leave no country open for export. What then would be the result of sudden depression? If an extraordinarily abundant harvest produced low prices, the farmer would be ruined, and the manufacturer would participate in his distress. The lesson of experience on this subject would not be forgotten by their lordships. In considering a part they would look to the whole, and would not allow themselves to be seduced by views of partial interests from devoting their attention to the effect of any measure which might be proposed operative on the general psosperity of the whole country. There were some speculative persons, who thought that this country would be more prosperous were it independent of manufactures, and that it would be desirable to establish its interest solely on the basis of agriculture. Without entering into the discussion of the question of the advantage or disadvantage of manufactures, it was sufficient to recollect that this was a subject on which the country had no longer a choice. Commerce and manufactures had made the country what it was, and by them it must be maintained in the rank to which it had been raised. No axiom was more true than this—that it was by growing what the territory of a country could grow most cheaply, and by receiving from other countries what it could not produce except at too great an expense, that the greatest degree of happiness was to be communicated to the greatest extent of population. No man could anticipate the loss of foreign commerce without at the same time contemplating such a pressure on a large portion of the population of the country as must inevitably produce the most deplorable distress. Whatever speculative opinion therefore might be entertained upon this point, it was utterly impossible for us now to go back and say we would sacrifice out commerce and our manufactures to our agriculture; for were it possible to suppose that we could resort to the unspeakable inhumanity of sacrificing 2,009,000 of people out of 12,000,000 for the sake of such a theory, no human tongue could describe, nor could any human mind conceive the distress the privations, and the miseries that such a sacrifice would bring even upon the remaining 10,000,000.—Whatever inquiry therefore was instituted, whatever measure might be adopted, their lordships must proceed upon the principle of protecting all those interests which had made the country a great agricultural, commercial, and manufacturing, nation. No one interest could be separated from the rest; for all the various classes of the community depended on each other; and it might be said of each, as the poet had finely said of man in society— He, like the generous vine, supported lives; The strength he gains is from th' embrace he gives. It was maintained, with regard to the commercial world, that the sooner trade rested on a level the better; but then, no small caution was required in order to arrive at this. Their lordships must not proceed rashly; the investigation into which he trusted they would enter required the greatest deliberation, for there were many difficulties to be overcome. He remembered to have heard an anecdote relative to a conversation between Dr. Adam Smith, and Mr. Burke, which was very applicable to the present subject. They happened to meet about the period when the judges had given a decision against forestalling, and Dr. Smith was expressing his indignation that the legislature had not immediately counteracted so baneful a decision by legalizing forestalling. Mr. Burke replied, "You, Dr. Smith, from your professor's chair, may send forth theories upon freedom of commerce as if you were lecturing upon pure mathematics; but legislators must proceed by slow degrees, impeded as they are in their course by the friction of interest and the friction of prejudice.' He knew their lordships would have much of prejudice to contend with in the course of their inquiry, and many interests to consider in connexion with the question of foreign commerce. He thought it therefore necessary to call their attention to the nature of the general distress which formed the ground for their investigation. Although he would not now enter into the discussion of the causes of that embarrassment and distress which extended more or less through every country in the globe. Suffice it to say, that either, as some contended, through the ambition of one individual, or as others said, through the errors of governments, or through a tide and current in the affairs of mankind, or perhaps with more probability, through a combination of parts of all these causes, long wars had been carried on, and, nations had expended a considerable, portion of their capital, instead of limiting their expenditure to their income. An artificial system had thus been established, and the consequence of this state of things was, that a numerous population had been called into existence by the great demand for labour. It was, however impossible that this expenditure could continue, but the population remained when the expenditure diminished; and this unemployed and Unproductive population, or in other words, the quantity of labour, beyond the demand for it, was the great cause of the existing distress. Those countries which, like Great Britain, from their financial system and their geographical situation, were enabled to expend most of their capital, and for a time to give encouragement to the greatest quantities of productive labour, had mortgaged, their revenues, and were in a situation to feel the general distress in a greater degree than poorer countries, which could not spend their capital. Such had been the effect produced by the great expenditure their lordships had witnessed. This he took to be the situation of the country, and it contained an answer to a question put to their lordships by the petitioners of Birmingham, why, when there was so much plenty in the land, so much distress was felt? The circumstances which he had mentioned must be kept in view when their lordships' attention was to be directed to find a remedy for the distress which he had described. The most obvious remedy was, to create a demand for our labour and our manufactures, and the most obvious mode of creating that demand was, to encourage and to extend for foreign trade by removing some of those restrictions by which it was shackled. In looking towards such a restrictions two things ought to be taken into consideration by their lordships: first necessity of raising a large revenue to meet the exigencies of the state, and secondly, the justice and expediency of consulting those interests Which were vested in our existing trade, on the faith of the continuance of the regulations under which it was now carried on. But although those considerations were not to be lost sight of—they ought not to prevent changes which higher interests and a wiser policy demanded. With the necessity of attending, to them, their lordships ought to recollect that the policy which they involved was a departure from that which was dictated by the soundest principles of political economy, and therefore ought to be limited to what the strict nature of the case required. They, ought, in short, to recollect that liberty of trade should be the rule, and restraint only the exception. On this principle he would arrange the different points which he meant to touch, and recommend the relaxations which it was his object to propose. The first point to which he should allude was not, perhaps, of any great practical importance—or one from the alteration of which any great expectation of relief could be fairly derived: it was the system of prohibition as it existed at present. Without entering into its operation on particular branches of trade, or specifying particular articles, he would venture to say that there ought to be no prohibitory duties, as such; for that it was evident that where a manufacture could not be carried on, or a production raised, but under the protection of a prohibitory duty, that manufacture or that produce could not be brought to market but at loss. In his opinion the name of strict prohibition might therefore in commerce be got rid of altogether, but he did not see the same objection to protecting duties, which, while they admitted of the introduction of commodities from abroad similar to those which we ourselves manufactured, placed them so much on a level as to allow a competition between them. The next point to which, he would advert was one of more practical and immediate importance, as it affected a principle on which the government of this country had long been carried any and in the observance of which it had, attained its present power, and greatness—he meant the principle of the navigation laws. The relaxation which he would propose in those laws was not of a nature, nor to an extent which ought to excite any jealousy in those who looked to them as one of the sources of our national security, nor indeed did he understand that the anticipation of it excited any alarm in the shipowners and other, whose interests were considered as so intimately connected with their with their strict maintenance. All the relaxation he would suggest would be to allow produce from all parts of Europe to be imported into this country without making it necessary that it should be so imported exclusively in English-built ships, or in ships belonging to the nation whence the produce came. At present a vessel which had taken part of its cargo in a French port and which afterwards had proceeded to a Flanders port for the remainder, could not enter a British port. All that he would propose would be to allow such a vessel to make good its assortment in different ports in Europe, and still to have the right of entering this country. He would make one exception to this relaxation of the navigation-laws—he would not allow the importation of colonial produce in this manner as that might deprive the shipping interest of this country of a very valuable portion of their trade. The third point to which he would advert was one of no inconsiderable importance in itself, and of still greater consequence from the principle which it involved—he meant an entire freedom of the transit trade. Such a change would tend to encourage the warehousing system, and would thus promote the desirable object of rendering our ports the dépôt of other foreign nations. Whatever brought the foreign merchant to this country, and made it a general mart—a dépôt for the merchandise of the world, which might be done consistently with the levying of a small duty, was valuable to our trade, and enriched the industrious population of our ports. Such freedom of transit allowed of the assortment in our ports of cargoes for foreign markets, and thus extended our trade in general. He was aware that the abolition of the transit duties was formerly opposed by those who wished to protect the linen trade of Ireland, and he willingly allowed that that trade deserved peculiar protection. A duty of 15 per cent, on the importation of foreign linens was, during the war, thought necessary to protect the linen manufactures of Ireland. No injury resulted from that arrangement while we engrossed the commerce of the world, while no vessel could sail without a British convoy, and while we could force out-own commodities into foreign markets in preference to others, for which there was a greater demand; but now the case was altered, and many, he understood that many even of those who were interested in the linen manufacture of Ireland had altered their former opinions on the sub- ject, and now thought a relaxation of the transit duty advisable. Indeed it could not be forgotten that this manufacture had flourished to as great an extent as ever before it was protected by any duty, but whatever was the policy of imposing that duty or continuing it during the war, the same reasons would not now justify its continuance. If We refused to admit German linen without the payment of a transit duty, the foreigner would rather go to Germany for the article; he would then either pay the duty which we imposed, or take a less valuable article as a substitute; and as linen might be a necessary article in the assortment of his cargo, this duty would drive him away altogether, even when desirous of obtaining other articles which our soil or industry could supply. He would readily admit that the linen manufacture of Ireland was entitled to every species of encouragement and protection; but he thought it was a subject upon which inquiry ought to take place, before that argument was permitted to operate against the general advantage. He now came to a fourth point, which involved important interests, and on which he was aware that a difference of opinion existed—he meant the state of the trade with the north of Europe, and the duties imposed on the importation of timber from that quarter. But first of all, before he touched on the policy of such duties, and the grounds on which their continuance, was defended, he must recall to the recollection of their lordships the circumstances in which they originated. These, high duties, then, were not imposed as, a part of our permanent colonial system nor were they imposed for the express advantage of the ship-owners, who now maintained that they had such an interest in their continuance. Neither, was any pledge given or hopes held out to the ship-owners at the time that the duties were imposed, that they were to be maintained for their benefit. On the contrary, they were told in distinct terms that the measure was expressly of a temporary nature, which must cease at no distance period; and that it must necessarily be brought under review in March next. The interests now vested in the timber-trade to our North American colonies grew, out of what was considered as a temporary arrangement, and had of course no security against a change which the general interests of the nation might require. It was easily to be conceived that the part of the shipping interest which was concerned in the importation of timber from Canada, did feel, and was justified in feeling, a strong reluctance to the removal of a tax, which, by allowing the country to obtain timber nearer home, would throw many vessels belonging to that respectable body out of employment. For that respectable body he wished to speak with becoming esteem and regard, and would say, that whatever predilection he might have for the general principle or freedom of trade, and in the employment of capital, he would admit that in some instances it might be necessary to depart from it, in order to favour the principle of navigation with British vessels; and therefore that he would not allow his partiality to lead him so far as to neglect the advantage and security which we derived from even an expensive navigation of British vessels. But it was one thing to agree to the justness of a principle properly restricted, and another to admit its unlimited operation; and nothing, it must be allowed, could be more detrimental to commerce than the imposing of a heavy duty on one of the most important raw materials that could be introduced into this country. And what was the reasoning of the ship-owners in their petition against an abolition of this duty? He should be sorry to misrepresent their arguments, and would therefore read the statement from their own petition, They represented that, from the length and difficulty of the voyage to North America, the larger part of the value of the timber, thence imported consisted of freight; that the American timber, being of an inferior quality to that from the Baltic required a protecting duty; and that the mere circumstance of the proximity of the northern ports of Europe, by enabling ships to repeat their voyages frequently in the course of a year, would reduce the number of British vessels employed in the timber-trade to one-third. What they said therefore was equivalent to this:—that whereas; it was expedient that they should be employed—and whereas they could not be so employed if they procured timber where it was cheapest and best—they there one should import it of the worst quality, and from the greatest distance. This was r the proposition the shipping interest propounded when the question was whether we should, import our timber from our own colonies or from the Baltic. And let their lordships consider what the article was that was thus to be raised in price, while it was deteriorated in quality. It was not an article of luxury, the price of which was of no importance. It was the raw material of our houses, of our bridges, of our canals, nay of our shipping itself. So inconsistent were the petitioners, that they asked parliament to continue duties which increased the expense of their own trade. A great part of the capital which they had vested in their business, and of the expense which they incurred was rendered necessary by the high price of the article which they thus wished to increase by heavy duties. But let the House observe to what consequences the principle laid down by the petitioners would go if carried to its extreme length, and applied to other branches of trade. Suppose it was stated by another class of persons that cotton was grown in the East Indies, that they were oar own colonies, and that the voyage was three times as long as to the West Indies, or to any other part of the world from which we might obtain it supply; he did not see on what, grounds those; could resist such a statement who argued that we ought to import our timber from Canada rather than from Norway. The voyage would have the: advantage of being thrice as long, and the article might be tripled in price. Their lordships would find it asserted in the petition from Newcastle, that if the shipowners had the whole of the carrying trade from the Baltic it would not be sufficient to employ one half of the shipping now engaged in the trade with Canada. This was another singular mode of reasoning. If a person were to make an offer to carry all the mails of this country, using twice the number of horses that were at present used, would that be considered as a recommendation of the new proposal? If their lordships did not lose sight of all principle, and allow that particular interests ought alone to be consulted, they must see that the general good would be better consulted! by the employment of our shipping in a general extension of our trade than in adding unnecessary expenses to one branch of it. The ship-owners could not certainly, in the event of an abolition of the duties, have employment for their vessels to the same extent; but as the imports from Russia and Prussia would increase, and as they would have nearly the whole of that trade the falling off might not be so great as they anticipated.—And with regard to the argument employed by them against renewing our intercourse with the north of Europe; namely, that those who supplied us with timber from that quarter would not receive British manufactures in return, it appeared to him futile and ungrounded. If they did not send direct for our: manufactures at home, they would send for them, to Leipsic and other fairs of Germany. Were not the Russian and Polish merchants purchasers there to a great amount? But he would never admit the principle, that a trade was not profitable, because we were obliged to carry it on with the precious metals, or that we ought to renounce it because our manufactures were not received by the foreign nation in return for its produce. Whatever we received must be paid for in the produce of our land and labour, directly or circuitously; and he was glad to have the noble earl's marked concurrence in this principle, We had had been long in the habit of sending out the precious metals to the East Indies; but we purchased the gold and silver thus exported with our manufactures sent to America. But the petitioners overlooked two points—the increase of the trade itself by the importation of cheaper and better materials, and the increase of the shipping consequent upon that. They had overlooked the fact, that if the raw material was better and cheaper, the shipping itself would be improved and, in all probability, more employed in the North of Europe. The whole subject would, however, be investigated by the committee, who would consider how much of the duty might be taken off the timber from the North, and what regulations might be adopted to reserve to Canada the supply of masts, for which its timber was peculiarly fitted. It deserved serious consideration how much more we paid for the timber from Canada than we should pay for that from the North of Europe. If the accounts he had received of the expense of importing from Canda were Correct, there was an increase of 30 per cent on the article, as, compared with the Baltic trade, accruing from the charges of freight and the original purchase. The additional sum imposed on this country by the duty, according to the average of imports, amounted to no less than 500,000l.; and on the port of London alone, in the course of the last three years, to 100,000l. He would now advert to another subject of great importance—the state of our trade with France, and particularly, in the article of wine. Their lordships must know that a duty of 143l. 18s. was imposed upon the tun of French, wine, while only 95l. was imposed upon Spanish and Portuguese wines. There had been a falling off in the duty in the; last year of 220,000l. Some specific arrangement might, he thought, he made with the French government upon this subject, to the advantage of our own manufactures. Whatever objection the French government might have to the adoption of a general commercial-treaty with this country, it could not be so indifferent to the interests of its subjects, as to refuse us an equivalent fop admitting their wines: on the same terms with those of Spain and Portugal. But even if no such arrangement could be obtained, even though the French government were not disposed at first to enter into any. specific treaty, the people would find their advantage in the intercourse; and although we might be obliged, in the first place, to pay in bullion, our manufactures would go abroad to other countries, to purchase that bullion. For a long course of time we had been exporting bullion to the East Indies, and we exported manufactures to America for the purpose of procuring it. He would repeat his conviction, that the French government could not be so indifferent to the interests of its subjects, as to refuse entering into a reciprocal arrangement upon this point, but even if it did, France, and not England, would become the sufferer. The consent of Portugal to any beneficial arrangement of this kind with France would not necessarily be required, as if we did not enforce our claim to send Portugal our woolens, they had no right to demand of us to take their wines. This, however, might be settled by a short negotiation. What he had said with regard; to the wines of France would apply likewise to its silks. He was aware that there was a poor and industrious body of manufacturers, whose interests must suffer by such an arrangement, and therefore he felt that it would be the duty of parliament to provide for the present generation by a large parliamentary grant. It was conformable, with every sound principle of justice to do so, when the interests of a particular class were sacrificed to the good of the whole. He had now gone through all the points of our trade with respect to Europe, and had imparted his views of the changes which he thought ought to be adopted. He now came to a subject which, with whatever difficulties it might be surrounded, had at least this advantage, that the adoption of the measure which he should recommend must materially relieve and benefit the shipping interest. It would be impossible for their lordships not to recollect, that from one of the largest, most fertile, and most populous portions of the globe, that immense space which lay between Africa and America, the general British merchant was excluded. From the time that he doubled Cape Horn, or the Cape of Good Hope, he found his commercial operations cramped, and his enterprise restrained; not by the nature of the country, for it was rich and adapted to commerce; not by the barbarism of the inhabitants, and their indisposition to trade, for they were numerous, industrious, possessing in a considerable degree the arts and inclinations of civilized life, and desirous to exchange their productions for ours; not by the difficulties of the seas, for by the trade-winds and the monsoons, navigation was rendered easy and secure to the commercial adventurer, but he was pursued, and all his schemes defeated, by the Statute book. It was this that restrained him from trading from one part to another without a licence. It was this which forbade him from trading in a vessel of a size the most convenient for his purpose. It was this which prevented him from dealing in one of the most valuable and lucrative articles of trade, viz.—tea. No one would suspect him of an inclination to speak disrespectfully of that great corporate body, the East-India Company; but he would say, that it traded under all the disadvantages to the country of a monopoly. He was convinced, from the interest which that body must feel in the national welfare, that they would not refuse to allow others to enjoy what they themselves were unable to enjoy; and this was all that he wanted to ground his proposition upon. The limitation under which the trade to the East Indies was carried on, prevented the employment of any vessel under five hundred tons in those latitudes; the effect of which was to prohibit such vessels as were best adapted to explore those extensive and promising regions from undertaking what they were best calculated to perform. If the private trade in the Indian seas were perfectly unrestricted, much smaller vessels might be employed; and many merchants would engage in it who could not fit out a ship of 500 tons burthen. There existed many nations perfectly accessible to smaller vessels, who were now never visited. They composed a population of upwards of 70,000,000; and it was impossible to calculate the benefit that might arise from allowing the experiment to be made as to what their wants consisted in, and how far they might be disposed to supply themselves from this country. So important indeed was the consideration of that subject, that he should beg leave to refer to their lordships a book of considerable research, the work of Mr. Cranford, which described the climate of those islanders to be salubrious, the soil fertile, the geographical situation favourable to commerce, abounding with ports and harbours capable of the most effective navigation, and yet lamented, and justly, that they were so little known. But not only was it the case with respect to those islands; the name might be said concerning the islands in the Indian Archipelago, which, according to that efficient officer, sir Stamford Raffles, were extremely civilised, though they did not present the same offer for commercial enterprise; still, however, it was the interest of this country to encourage a trade with them. He was well aware that all such trades must have slow and small beginnings; but he was also aware that it was in encouraging those slow and and small beginnings that the legislature of a country was best employed. He recollected a story, which, though it was not very dignified in itself deserved some notice from their lordships, since it had been put upon record by Dr. Franklin, as a complete illustration of the doctrine which he was then advancing. Dr. Franklin related that his wife, conceiving herself to be under obligation to a shipowner at Maytown, made a practice for some years of sending a cap annually to his daughter as a present. After this practice had lasted for some time, the Doctor stated that he accidentally met this ship-owner, in company with a farmer of the same town, in Philadelphia. The ship owner said to him, "A dear cap that was, friend," which you sent to us at Maytown. "How so?" replied the Doctor. "Why, since you sent it us, none of our young women will go out without one." The farmer who was the better political economist of the two, hereupon interrupted the ship-owner, and told him that he was only telling one side of the story; for he ought to have added, that it was only since those caps had been sent to May town that their young women had been accustomed to send mittens to Philadelphia, it being by the sale of their mittens that they were able to procure, the Philadelphia caps. This story he confessed was a trifle in itself; but it was upon trifles like these which acted on the minds of bold and enterprising men with a power which was more easily conceived than described, that the foundation of all those trades were laid, which the merchants of this country had carried, on with so much industry and success, and which he trusted that they would carry on with still greater industry and success when they were allowed to embark in them free from, those restrictions by which they had hitherto been shackled. Indeed when he considered the effects which had followed the opening of a free trade in the only quarter where it had yet been permitted, he could not for a moment doubt of the benefit which the commercial interests of the country would receive from the removal of those restrictions under which they had hitherto laboured. Their lordships would recollect, that six years ago, when the trade to the East Indies was not open, there was no independent British tonnage on the other side of the Cape of Good Hope. When the trade was opened, it was said by some, that it would be injurious to the British shipping; but how did the fact turn out: it appeared that the amount of the tonnage of vessels employed in the company's trade was twenty thousand tons, while that employed in the free trade amounted to sixty-one thousand, and who could say that it might not still increase? Was there any one among their lordships, seeing, as they all had seen, the rapid strides with which British commerce had advanced in that quarter of the globe, bold enough to say that the advantages of a free trade might not be carried still further even there, and might not be rendered productive of even still more important results? But, whilst upon this subject, there was another point which he wished to press upon the notice of their lordships, and which was this—that the free trade employed 4,720 British seamen, whilst the trade of the East India, company employed only 2,550. This fact particularly deserved their attention, because it displayed the benefits of a free trade, even in quarters where benefits were least of all to be expected. Whenever a free trade to other countries nearer home had been proposed, their lordships and the. country had been told that the opening of such trade would be highly inexpedient, because it would throw out of employment a certain number of British seamen; but, now that the trade was opened to the East Indies, it was proved that it not only did not throw any of them out of employment, but actually opened a field for the employment of an additional number of them. It-was true that in the vessels employed in the free trade there were only 7 men to every 100 tons, whereas, in the East India service, there were 20 men to the same quantity of tonnage; but did that circumstance prove any thing against a free trade, connected as they ought to connect it, with the fact, that the number of seamen engaged in that free trade was greater than the number engaged by the East India Company? It appeared to him to be a peculiar hardship upon our merchants that in countries where the British had established an unprecedented power, and where they exercised an uncontrolled dominion, an American should be at liberty to carry on a trade in which it was not allowed to an Englishman to engage. The trade to which he alluded, was that of tea, which he understood was more than eighty to one in favour of the American merchant; nor was this at all surprising, for he not only derived a benefit from the liberty which he possessed of assorting his cargo when1 and where he pleased, but also from the liberty which he enjoyed of supplying France, Holland, and other parts of the continent with that commodity, tea, which the East India Company did not choose to do themselves, and would not allow any of their fellow-countrymen to do for them. The consequence of this extraordinary state of things had been, that while the British trade at Canton had been stationary during the last thirteen years, the American trade had made most rapid increase, and indeed, during the last three years, had increased to a full third of its former value. He would next proceed to show to their lordships another point in which our commercial regulations gave an advantage to the American merchant trading in the eastern seas, which was not enjoyed by our own. Both must go to South America for bullion; and, for the sake of argument, he would suppose that Valparaiso was the port to which both went. The English merchant, after taking in his bullion, was obliged to return to England, and then could not set sail for India until he had refitted his ship. The American merchant, on the contrary, sailed directly from Valparaiso to his place of destination, disposed of one cargo, and took in another, almost before the English merchant was able to set sail a second time from England. Indeed, he had been informed, in the course of that morning, that at the present moment, certain Americans were fitting up vessels in the Thames in order to undertake a beneficial venture, which no Englishman could hazard with safety under the present regulations. Was it right that such a circumstance should be allowed to occur in this, which had been justly denominated the most commercial country in the world? Was it either right or expedient that that country should extend to Americans the privileges of a trade from which she excluded her own inhabitants, who were equally well, if not better calculated to carry it on, from their habits, their industry, and their spirit of enterprise? So fully was he convinced of the inexpediency of such a restriction, that nothing could induce him to believe that the East India company would not, if applied to, allow Englishmen to supply France, and Holland, and Germany, with tea from Canton as readily as it allowed the American merchant to do so. He looked upon this as the most beneficial of all the topics which he had yet urged, and it was the last of the commercial considerations which he had to suggest. He should next proceed, unwilling as he was to touch upon any political question, on an occasion when he had no wish to excite any political feeling, to say a few words upon certain subjects, which, though they were connected with the politics, were not less connected with the commerce, of the country. He was not prepared to say that the British government ought to exert its influence to procure the immediate independence of South America—by no means: but he was prepared to say that, considering the manner in which the trade of its subjects had increased at Buenos Ayres, where it was liable to no restriction, during the years 1810, 1811, and 1812—considering that since the latter of these periods it had even increased there to a twofold amount, and that similar results had taken place in every other part of that great continent, where British manufactures had been introduced, it was bound by every tie of feeling and of interest to cement the connexion which already subsisted between the inhabitants of the two countries, by the utmost good faith, kindness, and liberality. To cement that connexion would not be a difficult task for this country, as there was none better calculated to inspire the South Americans with sentiments of respect and affection. First, it was a maritime country, able to give them support and assistance whenever they should stand in need of it; secondly, if it repealed the restrictions with which it had guarded its commerce up to the present day, it would stand before them as a country ready to receive their produce on the most favourable terms, and seeking nothing else, in its relation with them than the happiness and prosperity of both parties. And why should they not repeal these restrictions? Their lordships, he was sure, were well aware that, in the year previous to the commencement of the unfortunate war which terminated in the establishment of American independence, our exports to the United States did not amount to more than 3,000,000l.; whereas at present they amounted to no less a sum than 30,000,000l. Was this great and amazing increase the result of restrictive laws and provisions? Certainly not; it was the result of the increased prosperity and population of those states, and of their becoming, in consequence of it, great consumers of our produce and manufactures. If such had been the case with North America, did not that very circumstance render it still more the interest of the British government to consolidate its friendship with those countries which were desirous of securing its friendship, which, under the odious government from which Spain had recently emancipated itself, had never been opened to us, and which, even under the government which had just succeeded to it, were not likely to be much more accessible? He must also strongly recommend to their lordships, the expediency of using conciliatory measures towards Ireland. If ever there was a people calculated to give employment to capital, and to become great consumers of manufactured goods, it was the people of Ireland. Every exertion made to conciliate them would be repaid a thousand times, and would be productive of great advantage, as there were no countries which, by their relative situation, were better calculated to produce beneficial results to our commercial interests than Ireland and South America. He was not sanguine enough to suppose, that either he or any man could propose an immediate remedy for the existing distress;—but, though he was not very sanguine in his expectations of immediate relief to the present distress of the country, he could not, with the feelings which he entertained regarding British enterprise, British skill, and British ingenuity, abandon the hope of ultimate relief, whilst there was any part of the globe unexplored, or only partially explored, to which our trade could penetrate. Our merchants, if they were now oppressed with the difficulties which he had before described, were not, however, deprived of that high character, that good faith, and that persevering industry, which had always distinguished them. In whatever part of the world they appeared they still maintained their ancient pre-eminence, and thus acquired, wherever they went, a preference over those of other nations. These were his grounds of hope; and on these he looked forward with confidence to the arrival of more favourable times, lie had now stated the object of his motion; all that he asked of their lordships was, to consult the genius of their country for that support which was so necessary to renew and invigorate its resources, and to apply to those principles for the preservation of their commerce to which they were indebted for its original prosperity. If their lordships granted a committee, he would go into it with no other spirit than that of doing cautiously what could be done to protect our best interests, and of making an effort to assist the commerce of Great Britain, at a period in which it was exposed to so much embarrassment and adversity. He could assure them, that he had not willingly brought the subject forward, but that it had forced itself through him upon the House, owing to the reluctance exhibited by his majesty's ministers to entertain it. The noble marquis concluded with moving, "That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Means of extending and securing the Foreign Trade of the Country."

The Earl of Liverpool*

rose and said: ^*From the original edition, printed for Hatchard and Son, Piccadilly. —My lords; I rise to address your lordships with peculiar satisfaction, after the very able and candid speech of the noble marquis who has just sat down;—a speech which I may say I have heard with the greatest pleasure. Agreeing as I do in the general principles which have been laid down by the noble marquis, and in. most of the points to which he has applied those principles, I feel no inclination to oppose the motion, although I certainly do not admit, in an equal degree with the noble marquis, the importance of some of the measures which he has recommended to your lordships' consideration.

The noble marquis has, in my opinion, very properly limited his motion to the consideration of our foreign trade, and of the best means of improving and extending it. It is only by such a limitation of our inquiry that it can be conducted with any prospect of an advantageous result. For, if the proposition were to embrace the wide range of the various interests of the country—agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial,—those interests would be brought into a conflict that must lead to interminable discussion; and, either nothing would be done, or whatever it might be proposed to do, would be postponed to an indefinite period.

At the same time it is impossible for me to consider the question with reference to our foreign trade only. It is impossible for me to take a view of the state of the country, with reference to our foreign trade, without also considering our internal trade. It is impossible for me to advert to the impracticability of doing many things, under the present circumstances of the country, which it might be very desirable to do, under other circumstances, without considering what is our domestic situation at this time. In entering on the present discussion, this observation appears to me to be very material—not with respect to the proposed inquiry, for that I have already declared appears to me to be very properly limited, but with a view to a thorough comprehension of the whole subject,—that we should consider why, although we acknowledge that there are other circumstances in our general situation which demand our serious attention, we should not extend that inquiry beyond the bounds of the noble marquis's motion. This is due in justice to myself, and to those with whom I have the honour to act. The interests connected with our foreign trade are highly important, but I should be deceiving your lordships and the country, were I to say that they are, the most important interests to the nation. When I look at the petitions which are pouring in upon us, not only from the merchants and ship-owners, but from the agriculturists and manufacturers throughout the kingdom, I feel bound to state the reasons, not only why I am not in favour of a more extensive inquiry than that proposed by the noble marquis, but why, in the official situation which I have the honour to hold, I did not myself propose such an inquiry.

Undoubtedly, if I were of opinion that a more general inquiry would be beneficial, I should have thought it my duty to recommend it to your lordships. I entirely agree with the noble marquis, that there can be no mistake so prejudicial, or so calculated to lead to unfortunate results, as to suppose, that the great interests of the country, the agricultural, the manufacturing, and the commercial interests, can ever justly be set at variance with each other.—I entirely agree with the noble marquis, that any attempt to legislate in favour of one of those interests, to the exclusion of the others, would be most destructive to the whole.—I entirely agree with the noble marquis, that they must stand or fall together; that the strength of the one will prove the strength of the others, and that the distress of the one will occasion the distress of the others. I cannot, therefore, but regret, that in any of the petitions which have been laid on your lordships table, there should appear a disposition to separate the interests of the one from the interests of the others, and to represent them as at variance, and as capable of being separately benefited. The more the subject is sifted and examined, the more I am convinced it will be found—that, as, on the one hand, the agriculture of the country is the basis of its power and wealth; so, on the other hand, agriculture would not be what it now is,—the fortunes of those who have profited by it, would not be what they now are, had not agriculture been fostered by manufactures and commerce, and received the most important advantages from the spirit and industry of those engaged in manufacturing and commercial pursuits.

This therefore is the proposition with which I must set out;—that all the great interests of the country are intimately and inseparably connected; and that while on the one hand, what is for the benefit of the one, must be beneficial to the rest; on the other hand, any attempt exclusively to favour the one, must be prejudicial to all With this general view of the subject, I feel that the principal points to which I ought to address myself, are, to endeavour to ascertain what is the actual situation of the country with regard to its internal as well as with regard to its foreign concerns; to endeavour to ascertain, from authentic documents, what is the condition of the various great interests to which I have already alluded; to probe the causes of the distress to which those interests are at present subject; and, lastly, to examine whether any, and, if any, what legislative measures can be adopted to relieve them.

There is one consideration, however, which I confess appears to me to be of the utmost importance at this time. With every disposition to do complete justice to the noble marquis's object, and agreeing in most of his positions, it nevertheless appears to me to be as essential that your lordships should decide what you will not do as that you should decide what you will do; for it is utterly impossible that the country can settle into the tranquil state so desirable, while men's minds are afloat, and kept in a state of perpetual ferment and uncertainty with respect to the line of proceeding that parliament may adopt. The sooner therefore that this is determined, the sooner will the various interests in society harmonize, the sooner will business be restored to its proper level, and the pursuits of industry assume an aspect of ascertained, if not of contented exertion.

The first point then to which I wish to draw your lordships attention is, the state of our internal commerce. It is material to consider whether the distressed state of that commerce has grown out of any diminution in our internal consumption, or has arisen from circumstances connected with our foreign trade. I trust, that I shall very shortly be able to satisfy the House, that there is no ground for believing that any part of the distress which pervades our internal commerce, has arisen from a reduction in the use of any of the great articles of consumption. I know but of one of those articles, the consumption of which has been materially reduced,—I mean that of wine.

I have taken some pains to ascertain the actual and comparative state of our home consumption; and in doing so, I have thought it better to look at the amount in quantity, rather than in value; the value being liable, from taxation and other causes, to fluctuate; while the quantity is a surer criterion, for determining the increase or the decrease of consumption.

I hold in my hand an account of the home consumption, during the last four years, of the principal articles, on which the duties of last year were imposed; which, if it be your lordships pleasure, I will lay on the table, or submit to a committee, should a committee be appointed.—The fair way of considering the subject is, to compare the average consumption or the three years, ending the 5th Aprils 1817, 1818 and 1819, with the actual consumption of the year ending the 5th April, 1820.—If we look at the article of tea (which, next to bread, is the article of most general use amongst all classes of the nation (we shall find that the average consumption of the years ending the 5th of April, 1817, 1818, and 1819, was 21,650,870 lbs., and that the consumption from the 5th of April, 1819, to the 5th of April, 1820, was 22,332,117 lbs., being some increase. In the article of coffee, the average consumption of the three years was 7,523,583 lbs., and the consumption of the last year, 7,358,856 lbs., being a small diminution. In the article of tobacco, the average consumption of the three years was 11,967,711 lbs., and the consumption of the last year, 11,175;917 lbs., being, I must admit, no inconsiderable diminution. In the article of malt, the average consumption of the three years, was 22,130,278 bushels, and the consumption of the last year 23,971,387 bushels, being an increase of above 1,800.000 bushels. In the article of spirits, the average consumption of the three years, was 5,173,755 gallons, and the consumption of the last year was 4,801,937 gallons, being a diminution of about 361,000 gallons. But then it is necessary to add, that during the last year the consumption of foreign spirits has been considerably greater than it was during the three preceding years, it is proper that I should observe to your lordships, that the whole of these accounts have reference to the consumption of Great Britain only.

In this view of the comparative consumption of the different periods which I have described, there can be no fallacy. It has been taken on the quantity of the articles consumed, as a more fair criterion than their official value; it has been taken with the view of comparing the actual consumption of the last year with the average consumption of the three years immediately preceding; and the result of that comparison is, that, during the last year there has not only been no diminution, but, on the contrary, some increase in the home consumption. The same may be said with regard to other articles respecting which it has not been practicable to obtain a return of the quantity consumed, but only of the amount of the duties. Upon those articles on which there has been no increase of taxation, and which are consumed by all classes of the community, such as candles, paper, hides, skins, soap, salt, bricks and tiles, &c. the result is the same as with respect to the articles which I before specified. In some, there has been a trifling decrease; in others, there has been an increase; but, on the whole, they confirm the general position, that in the internal consumption of the country there has been no diminution. This fact, as far as it goes, is a subject for unqualified satisfaction; since it shows that in our main resource, that in what depends on ourselves, there has been no falling off: whatever local distress may therefore exist in the country, this is a sure proof that our general wealth has not declined; for if such decline or defalcation had taken place to any extent, it must have been accompanied by a decrease in the use of the great articles of our domestic consumption.

Having considered the internal commerce of the country, I come now to the consideration of our foreign trade, and particularly of the exportation of British produce and manufactures. And here, I lament to say, a great falling off appears to have taken place in the last, as compared with the preceding year. The declared value of British and Irish produce and manufactures exported in the year 1818, amounted to 48,903,760l., the declared value of British and Irish produce and manufactures exported in the year 1819, amounted only to 37,939,506l.; being a diminution to the considerable amount of about eleven millions. But then it ought to be recollected, that the year 1818 was one of extraordinary exportation; and that great and over-strained efforts were made in that year in various branches of our industry and commerce, It will therefore be a fairer proceeding, if: we form our estimate of the diminution of; our foreign trade, by comparing the average exports of the three years, 1816, 1817, and 1818, with the actual exports of last year. It appears that the average exports of the years 1816, 1817, and 1818, amounted to 45,161,756l.; thus exhibiting a deficiency in the exports of last year, as compared with the average exports of the three preceding years, of about 7,220,000l. This is undoubtedly a great falling off:—and the question which naturally suggests itself is,—What are the branches in which this falling off has principally taken place? But before I proceed to that part of the subject, it is material that your lordships should consider what was the extent of our foreign trade, antecedently to the late war, and also during those years of the war in which it was most flourishing.

In stating these returns, I must refer to the official value of the exports, not to the declared value as in the returns I have just quoted; because the returns, according to the declared value, were not made up during the earlier part of this period. Prior to the French war, the foreign trade of this country was in its most flourishing condition, in the year 1792. The official value of all our exports in that year was 24,905,200l.; of which sum the British manufactures and produce amounted to 18,336,000l. In the years 1806, 1807, 1808, 1809, 1810, and 1811, which were the years of the war in which our foreign commerce was in its most flourishing state, the official value of our exports of British produce and manufactures, was—in the year ending the 5th of January, 1806, 25,000,000l. (I will, to save your lordships' time, state the sums in round numbers); in 1807, 27,000,000l.;—in 1808,25,190,000l.;—in 1809,26,000,000l.;—in 1810, 35,000,000l.; and in 1811, 34,900,000l. Those, as I have already observed, were the years of the war during which our foreign commerce was in the greatest activity. The official value of the exports, in the year ending the 5th January, 1820, was 35,625,673l. This, however, I only mention by way of showing that the diminution has not been below that which was formerly considered as a condition of the greatest prosperity;—admitting as I must that our foreign commerce has, during the last Year, suffered a very material diminution, when compared with the years immediately preceding.

The first question for our consideration is—In what branch of our foreign trade has this diminution principally taken place? It does not appear that there has been much diminution in our European trade. As compared with the average of the three preceding years, the diminution in our exports to the continent of Europe, during the last year, does not exceed 1,200,000l. Of this diminution, more than a half has occurred in the article of refined sugars; a trade which may be in a great measure considered as lost to us; as, since the opening of the West India colonies belonging to other states, and of the Brazils, in consequence of the restoration of peace, the continental countries have of course become less dependent upon this country for this article of consumption. The falling off in the export of British produce and manufactures to the continent, does not therefore exceed 600,000l. With respect to Ireland, I am happy to say that our trade with that country is increasing. One great branch of the diminution which our foreign commerce has experienced within the last year (and which was touched upon by the noble marquis in the course of his observations), is to be traced to the state of the East India market. For two or three preceding years, our trade with the East Indies had been pushed to an enormous extent;—to an extent which it was impossible that any rational man could expect would be permanent. The other, and the chief cause of the diminution, is the decrease of our trade with the United States of America. If your lordships compare the exports to the United States of America, during' the last year, with the exports during the preceding year, you will find that in all the great articles of our industry and commerce, the diminution has been a full half. In 1818, the exportation of cotton goods to the United States of America, amounted to 2,432,301l.—in 1819,it amounted only tol,109,138l.; being a falling off of 1,323,163l. The exports of glass, earthenware, hardware, and cutlery, which, in the year 1818, were 971,285l., were reduced in the year 1819 to 546,741l. The amount of woollen goods exported to the United Slates of America in 1818, was 3,160,106l.; in 1819, it dwindled down to 1,703,024l. In short, in all the great and leading branches of our manufactures, there was a falling off in our exports to the United States of America of a full half in the I amount, as compared with the last year; and of above 3,500,000l., as compared with the average of our exports during the last three years. I allow that there has been some diminution in our exports to the last Indies; but it is to the state of the American market that the great diminution which has occurred in the export of our produce and manufactures is principally, if not exclusive, attributable.

This leads me to the consideration of the cause of this diminution, and of the present condition of the United States of America. The noble marquis, in laying his grounds for the motion which he has submitted to your lordships, made several observations on the present state of trade in this county, the truth of which I am by no means disposed to deny. I am as ready as any man to acknowledge that certain branches of our trade are in a depressed state. The noble marquis also truly says, that distress is not confined to this country; but that it afflicts every country in Europe, and has even extended itself to America. The noble marquis also truly says, that this general distress is to be ascribed to the extraordinary I convulsions in Europe during the last twenty years; convulsions which unhinged all the natural relations between nation and nation, and even between man and man; convulsions which have produced the most extensive effects both on nations and individuals. Unquestionably, it was impossible but that the instability of property, the creation of fictitious capital, and all the other evils which arose during those convulsions, should operate in the production of great distress in every country, long after the re-establishment of peace should have caused the convulsions themselves to cease.—But the peculiar circumstance of the times—that to which I wish particularly to direct the attention of your lordships and of the whole kingdom is this,—that, great as the distress is in every country in Europe, (and certainly it prevails more or less in every country in Europe), it is, nevertheless, at the present moment greater in the United States of America than it is in any country in Europe. I desire any of your lordships, or any other individuals who may be disposed to ascribe the distress under which we at present labour, to our debt, to excessive taxation, to tithes, to the poor-rates, or to any cause of that nature, to look at the United States of America; and I think that they will then pause before they ascribe the distress which we, or any of the other countries of Europe are now suffering, exclusively or principally, to any or all the causes which I have mentioned.

My lords, there is no mystery in this. I have, on a former occasion, made some general observations on the subject. There is no mystery in the cause of the existing distress in the United States of America. That distress cannot proceed from any war in which the United States have been engaged; for, during the last thirty-five years, America has been at war only during two years. Nevertheless, she has felt the effect of the wars, which during the greatest part of that period have raged in every other quarter of the globe. But how has she felt it? During the whole of the late war, America was the principal neutral power. During a part of that war she was the only neutral power. She enjoyed the most extensive carrying trade. She supplied this country, and she supplied other countries with many articles, which, neither this country, nor other countries could at the time obtain elsewhere. What was the natural consequence? That America increased in wealth, in commerce, in arts, in population, in strength, more rapidly than any nation ever before increased, in the history of the world. In twenty years, the United States of America made a greater progress than the same nation, in the ordinary and natural course of affairs, could have accomplished in forty years. But now all the world is at peace. Every country, at leisure to attend to its own condition, is diligently cultivating its domestic arts and industry. The state of America, my lords, at this moment is not so much the effect of present positive distress, as of extraordinary past prosperity. She must retrograde to a certain point. It is the result of former advantages which America exclusively enjoyed, which she must now reimburse (if I may use the expression) until she has returned to that which is her natural condition. I am far from saying this invidiously.—On former occasions I have sufficiently shown my conviction, that there is no country more interested than England is, that the distress of America should cease, and that she should be enabled to continue that rapid progress which has been for a time interrupted; for, of all the powers on the face of the earth, America is the one whose increasing population and immense territory furnish the best prospect of a ready market for British produce and manufactures. Every man, therefore, who wishes prosperity to England, must wish prosperity to America. I have stated these facts, in order that the House may see the truth, and the whole truth on this important subject;—that it may not ascribe our distress to causes which it is not principally attributable; that it may be aware that we are only enduring a fate common to all; to that nation which has been at peace as well as to those nations which have been at war; to that country which has enjoyed the benefits of neutral traffic, as well as to those countries which have been deprived of it; to the United States of America, as well as to the various states of Europe. I have stated these facts to show, that the distress which has fallen, not upon one or two countries, but upon the whole world, is the result of those political convulsions, which it is not now the question, whether or not human policy and wisdom might have prevented; but the effects of which, it is the question, how far human policy and wisdom may mitigate? I have stated these facts to show, that I do not see any thing in our internal situation, up to the present hour, which exhibits a decrease in our domestic commerce and resources. I have stated these facts to show, that there is no ground to believe, that there has been any material diminution in our European trade; and that, if there has been any diminution in our Asiatic trade, it is the result of over-speculation, an evil which will naturally cure itself. I have stated these facts to show the nature of the distress at present existing, and that it can be remedied by time alone. If, my lords, we were to adopt any rash measure, for the purpose of satisfying a temporary clamour, the only effect of such a proceeding would be, to continue, if not to perpetuate the evil. In a question of this nature nothing can be more dangerous than to listen to the remonstrances and solicitations of parties likely to be affected by the measures they disapprove, or recommend. If the people of the world are poor, no legislative interposition can make them do that which they would do if they were rich. If the general pressure is so great that our manufacturers are limited in their sale, our manufacturers must wait with patience until the supply and the demand adjust themselves to each other. Above all, my lords, we must not attempt by artificial means to remedy distress, which such means are always calculated to aggravate and extend.

Having completed what I wished to say respecting the general state of the country, I come to that which is the more immediate subject of your lordships' consideration—a practical view of our situation with respect to foreign commerce. The noble marquis very properly grounded his motion on the general principle—(a general principle, which, however, he was too much of a statesman not to qualify)—of the great advantage resulting from unrestricted freedom of trade. Of the soundness of that general principle, I can entertain no doubt I can entertain no doubt of what would have been the great advantages to the civilized world, if the system of unrestricted trade had been acted upon by every nation, from the earliest period of its commercial intercourse with its neighbors. If to those advantages there could I have been any exceptions, I am persuaded that they would have been but few; and I am also persuaded, that the cases to which they would have referred, would not have been in themselves connected with the trade and commerce of England. But, my lords, we are now in a situation in which—I will not say, that a reference to the principle of unrestricted trade can be of no use, because such a reference may correct erroneous reasoning—but in which it is impossible for us, or for any country in the world, but the United States of America, to act unreservedly on that principle. The commercial regulations of the European world have been long established, and cannot suddenly be departed from.

And here I must be allowed to remark, that the only point in the noble marquis's speech in which he did not seem to me to bring the whole subject before your lordships, was, his abstaining from saying any thing of the state of our laws respecting agriculture, as those laws are connected with the very important subject of our foreign trade. If we look to the general principle of freedom of trade, let us at the same time look to the state of our laws as they regard agricultural produce. Let us look to our absolute prohibition of the importation of a great part of foreign agricultural produce, and our heavy restrictions on the remainder. Let us look to our corn laws; to our laws respecting the importation of cattle; to our laws regarding the exportation and importation of wool; in short, to all the laws for the protection of our own agricultural interest. Under the operation of these laws we cannot go to foreign countries on the principle of reciprocal advantage. I We will not receive their corn, or their cattle. With the exception of wine, and some other articles, we will not take what they most wish to give us. With what propriety may not those countries say to us,—"if you talk So big of the advantages of free commerce; if you value so highly the doctrines of your Adam Smith, shew your sincerity and your justice by the establishment of a reciprocal intercourse. Admit our agricultural produce, and we will admit your manufactures."—Your lordships know that it would be impossible to accede to such a proposition. We have risen to our present greatness under a different system. Some suppose that we have risen in consequence of that system. Others, of whom I am one, believe that we have risen in spite of that system. But whichever of these hypotheses be true, certain it is that we have risen under a very different system than that of free and unrestricted trade. It is utterly impossible, with our debt and taxation, even if they were but half then-existing amount, that we can suddenly adopt the system of free trade. To do so would be unhinge the whole property of the country; to make a change in the value of every man's possessions, and in none more so than in those of the agriculturist—the very basis of our opulence and power.

This brings me to a question which, though not immediately connected with the subject of the noble marquis's motion, has so great a. bearing upon it, that I should not discharge my duty on this occasion without adverting to it;—I mean the question of the corn laws. I was one of those who, in the year 1815, advocated the Corn bill. In common with all the supporters of that measure, I believed that it was expedient to grant an additional protection to the agriculturist. I thought that, after the peculiar situation of this country, during a war of twenty years, enjoying a monopoly in some branches of trade, although excluded from others; after the unlimited extent to which speculation in agriculture had been for many years carried, and considering the low comparative price of agricultural produce in most of the countries of Europe; the landed property of the country would be subjected to very considerable inconvenience and distress, if some further legislative protection were not afforded to it. I thought the Corn bill was advisable, with a view of preventing that convulsion in landed property, which a change from such a war to such a peace, might otherwise produce. On that ground, I supported the corn-bill. During the discussion of that question, I recollect that several persons were desirous of instituting a long previous inquiry; and that others, still more erroneously, wished to wait for two or three years, to see how things would turn out, before they meddled with the subject. At that time I told those who maintained the latter opinion, that it appeared to me to be a most mistaken one. What I recommended was—to pass the Corn bill (and thus to give a further, and under the circumstances I thought, a proper protection to agriculture); but I delivered it as my opinion, that if it was not passed then, it ought not to be passed at all; and upon this ground, which, whether it be wise or not, is at least intelligible—that I could conceive a case in which it might be expedient to give a further protection to the agriculturist, but that I was persuaded that the worst course which it was possible for the legislature to adopt, was, to hang the question up in doubt and uncertainty; that the consequence of not legislating at all, would be, I that rents would fall,—that a compromise would take place between the owners and occupiers of land,—that the landlord and the tenant would make a new bargain,—and that if, after all the distress incident to' such changes had passed away, a new Corn hill should be agreed to, it would be most unequal and unjust in its operation. I contended that parliament owed it to the interests of all—to the interests of the landlord,—to the interests of the tenant,—to the interests of the whole community—whether it decided, to legislate on the subject or not, at least to decide;—to adopt a steady course; to attend to all the circumstances of that eventful period^ and then to adhere with undeviating determination to whatever line of conduct its sense of public duty might prescribe.—Such would have been my feeling had the Corn bill been lost. In that case I would never again have promoted it Much more is it my feeling under existing circumstances, the corn-bill having been adopted. Whatever may be the distress under which agriculture labours, I am convinced that there are no such certain means of aggravating that distress as perpetually to tamper with it by the adoption of new measures and new laws. Whatever may be the system adopted, let it be adhered to. Let the farmer and the tenant, let the buyer and the seller, know that it will be adhered to; and they will soon come to some arrangement for their mutual advantage.

Having said so much on the general principle, I wish to say a few words on some of the particular propositions which have been made on this subject. The principle of protection of our corn laws has been considered by some of the petitioners to parliament as too refined; and it has been proposed to get rid of the existing system altogether, by the substitution of a fixed duty on the importation of foreign corn. A proposition such as this, is as absurd as it is unjust. The present system of our corn laws is, as I understand it, founded in theory at least on the just and equitable principle of, on the one hand, affording protection to the agriculturist (and through him to the rest of the community) against so extreme a low price as that at which it may be supposed he cannot be capable, with any profit, of raising the commodity; but, on the other hand, of allowing the consumer to resort to the foreign market, whenever the price of coin shall exceed a certain prescribed sum. But let your lordships consider for a moment what would be the effect in a country subject to occasional scarcity like this, if the existing system of protection were abolished, and a fixed duty, such as I have described, were substituted. If the price of corn were very low, that duty would afford no adequate protection to the agriculturist. If, on the contrary, the price of corn should be very high, your lordships will immediately perceive how injuriously a fixed duty would operate on the subsistence of the people. Should corn, for instance, rise to the price of a hundred and twenty, or a hundred and thirty shillings a quarter, at which price the quartern loaf would be at two shillings or half a crown, the poor man, under such circumstances, would be called upon to pay an addition in the shape of duty, to the amount of twenty, or forty, shillings a quarter! No man can rationally contemplate the adoption of such a proposition. It would be of no use to the farmer in times of plenty; and in times of scarcity it could have no effect; for what government would venture to enforce it upon the people? The minister, whoever he might be, would be forced to come down to parliament to propose to repeal it.

My lords, I have looked most anxiously to the manner in which the Corn bill has worked. Not, I confess, that (for the reasons I have already stated) it would have made any difference in my present opinion on the subject, if it had not worked as it has done. The importing price—the price to which wheat must rise in this country, before it is permitted to introduce foreign wheal—was fixed by the Corn bill at eighty shillings a quarter. I remember that during the progress of that bill in parliament, there was a good deal of discussion on the probable effect of fixing the importing price at that sum. Several of those who opposed the measure, declared that eighty shillings would, in consequence, be always the minimum; and that wheat would never be sold under that price in this country. We, on the contrary, who supported the measure, maintained that it would be much nearer the maximum. And what has been the result? That on the average of the five years which have elapsed, since the passing of the Corn bill, the price of wheat has been about seventy-eight shillings a quarter. It appears from the returns, that the average price of wheat from the 5th of January, 1815, to the 5th of January, 1820, has been seventy-eight shillings and five-pence a quarter; the average price of barley (the importing price of which was fixed at forty shillings) forty-two shillings and five-pence a quarter; and the average price of oats, twenty-eight shillings and four-pence a quarter. Even on this statement, I have a right to ask, whether there is any ground for contending that the Corn bill has not operated fairly for the agriculturists, and with the effect that was anticipated by its supporters? Undoubtedly, there have been high years, and there have been Tow years, in the course of the period to which I have alluded; but the average is what we must look to; and it is upon a price rather below that average, and certainly not above it, that every provident cultivator of the soil will make his calculation, in determining the rent and value of land, with reference to the growth of corn. But it is important, also, with a view to estimate the true operation of the Corn laws, to examine what has been their effect with regard to the importation of foreign corn for home consumption. From the account of the last five years, it appears that the quantity of foreign wheat and wheat flower imported has been 3,483,675 quarters. Of this quantity there are, at this moment, 324,546 quarters actually warehoused. Again, we must deduct 770,437 quarters, which have been re-exported; which leaves 2,388,692 quarters, as the amount of foreign corn that, during the period which I have described, has been really consumed in this country. Is it possible that the average of this quantity, amounting to 477,738 quarters, thrown annually into consumption, can have produced any distressing effect on the interests of agriculture? It is contended by some persons, that fraud exists in the taking of the averages. If this be so—which I by no means admit —it may be, and ought to be corrected. There is a power to correct it by the existing laws. If the parties who are interested in the subject, will only employ proper inspectors, taking care that they are properly remunerated, they have in their own hands the means of reforming this abuse, if it really exists. If the existing laws in this respect should be found insufficient, you may then come to parliament for new powers for this limited object. But I must decidedly object to any alteration in the principle of taking the averages. This subject was much considered in the year 1815, when it underwent ample discussion; arid the benefit of adhering to the system then established of taking the averages, ought not to be sacrificed on light grounds. The importing price of eighty shillings a quarter, was fixed in 1815, with reference to the existing mode of taking the averages; and I am persuaded that it would not be easy to devise a better mode. The former protecting price was sixty-six shillings, ascertained in the same mode. When, therefore, eighty shillings became the protecting price, it was a protection to be ascertained by the same criterion as the former price of sixty-six shillings; and I am convinced that great confusion would ensue, if the mode of taking the average, with the operation and effect of which parliament, at the time they so fixed the importing price at eighty shillings, were well acquainted, were now to be altered. I strongly recommend, therefore, that there should be no change in the principle of taking the average; but that, if any fraud exists in the administration of that mode, it should be corrected, as it may be corrected, by the existing laws, or even by new laws, if those that exist are not sufficient for the purpose. Some persons have objected to the introduction of the Welsh counties into the averages; but I am sure that their exclusion would be as often unfavourable, as beneficial to the English grower. On the whole, my lords, I am thoroughly persuaded that there are the strongest reasons why we should do nothing on the subject of the Corn laws, and that it is for the advantage even of the agricultural interest itself, that nothing should be done. My lords, I have dwelt long upon this topic, because it is one which has a bearing upon every other now under our consideration; and because it is of great moment, that the opinion of parliament upon it should be decided. But there is another subject of equal importance, upon which I feel it necessary to make a few remarks—I mean the state of our currency. I most strongly deprecate any alteration by parliament in the state of our currency, as it was last settled by the legislature. It is, I know, said by some that the effect of that arrangement has been injurious; and that it has considerably aggravated the public distress. With great respect for the individuals who entertain that notion, I must say, that I am I of a different opinion.—In the first place, I if any inference is drawn, to the discredit of that arrangement, or for the purpose of showing, that prices in general have declined in consequence of it, from the present price of corn, I will refer to the fact, that in the year 1815, the price of corn was lower than it is at present, while that of gold was 4l. 4s. the ounce, instead of 3l. 17s. 10½d. But, if the state; of our currency has affected one branch ' of our agricultural produce, it ought to have affected all branches of it; and yet I we find that the price of cattle, during the last year, was as high as at most former I periods, and as could be desired by the land-owner. I do not believe, therefore, I that the arrangements, with respect to our currency, have had the effect which some persons have imputed to them. But even if I believed that those arrangements had really had an effect so injurious, I would say, as I said on the last subject to which I called your lordships attention,—"You have done the tiling. The evil has been endured. You cannot retread your steps without incurring much greater dangers than those from which you wish to escape."—I will go further.—No man was a greater supporter of the restrictions on cash payments by the Bank of England, during the war, than myself. I supported the continuance of that measure, because I was persuaded that we could never have got through the arduous contest in which, we were engaged,—that we could never have made the mighty struggle, which we did make, without it. But, ray lords, I always considered, that the expediency of that measure was limited to the duration of the war, and its immediate consequences; and that on the restoration of peace, we ought, as soon as practicable, to return to the ancient system of metallic currency, or paper convertible on demand into coin. I acknowledge that I saw great difficulties in the way of that return; but it always appeared to me, that they were difficulties which a few years of peace would enable us to overcome. The facilities which the restriction gave us, were, unquestionably, accompanied by many evils. During the war, it was expedient to endure the evils, in consideration of the good; but in a time of peace they possess no such compensation. What, indeed, can the restriction in time of peace produce, but the creation and extension I of fictitious capital, and of an appearance of prosperous trade, without the reality; evils which, having already so deeply affected us, ought not to be permitted to recur? My lords, I am sanguine enough to believe that this country has in a great measure got over its difficulties:—1 am sanguine enough to believe, that the general distress will speedily be mitigated:—I am sanguine enough to believe, that our export trade will soon revive; and that our looms, and our spinning-jennies, and every other description of our machinery, will shortly be greatly employed. But that which I know alarms many men—and, men of great practical experience on these matters,—is, that we may be subject to the danger of a periodical; revulsion of the same nature every three or four years; and I am persuaded, that any recurrence to a system by which fictitious capitals might be again created and extended, must be attended with the most injurious consequences. The powers of machinery would Be again over-strained —the markets would be again glutted, and all those violent fluctuations, which have already produced so much misery, would again be experienced. I am, therefore, unequivocally of opinion, that, as on the question of the corn laws, there ought to be no alteration of our policy; so neither ought there to be any alteration of our policy on the subject of our currency. It seems tome to. be of the utmost, importance, that the public and the world should understand; that our own people, and that foreign nations, and foreign merchants, should understand, that we are acting on a fixed system, in order that they may know that to which they have to look, and that they may not entertain any apprehension, that we may be induced to tamper with our existing arrangements, for the purpose of meeting any occasional evil, or of pacifying the clamour of any particular class of the community.

I now come to the consideration of subjects more immediately connected with the noble marquis's motion. I have already stated what are the difficulties that stand in the way of adopting the general principles laid down in the petitions which have been presented to your lordships by the merchants of this country, of whom, however, it is but justice to say, that I do not imagine they have any notion that those principles can be acted upon to their full extent.—Although many of those individuals disapproved of the Corn bill at the time that it was proposed, yet, now that it has passed into a law, and that it has been so long in operation, I know that they do not think that it would be just or expedient to make any alteration in that system, for the sake of extending our trade. This is an admission which ought to be maturely weighed by the agriculturists. If those, who are most interested in the freedom and extension of commerce, are satisfied that the protection which agriculture receives, should remain as it is, surely the agriculturist ought not to desire any increase of that protection. But it is not to the corn laws alone that our system of protection has been confined. Protecting duties have been likewise imposed for the protection of several branches of our manufactures. Unquestionably, the principle of protection is carried as far in this country as in most other countries of the world; but it is a fallacy to suppose, that absolute freedom of trade can now be established. As it regards some articles, our present system may perhaps be relaxed without much inconvenience; but not as it regards all. I remember it was argued when the Corn bill was under discussion; that, with respect to some articles, time, and the change of circumstances, had rendered the system of protecting duties merely a nominal protection. This may be true, with reference to several branches of our manufactures; but it is not true with reference to others. The cotton manufacture, for instance, in which we have acquired so great a superiority over other nations, need not fear any thing from an abolition of all protection. I believe also—although the woollen manufacturers are not of that opinion—that if all the protecting laws which regard the woollen manufacture were to be repealed, no injurious effect would thereby be occasioned. But with respect to silk, that manufacture in this kingdom is so completely artificial, that any attempt to introduce the principles of free trade with reference to it, might put an end to it altogether. I allow that the silk manufacture is not natural to this country; I wish we had never had a silk manufactory; I allow that it is natural to France; I allow that it might have been better had each country adhered exclusively to that manufacture in which each is superior; and had the silks of France been exchanged for British cottons.—But I must look at things as they are; and when I consider the extent of capital, and the immense population (consisting I believe of above 50,000 persons) engaged in our silk manufacture, I can only say, that one of the few points in the noble marquis's speech in which I totally disagree with him, is the expediency, under existing circumstances, of holding out any idea that it would be possible to relinquish the silk manufacture, and to provide for those who live by it, by parliamentary enactment.

Whatever objections there may be to the continuance of the protecting system, I repeat that it is impossible altogether to relinquish it. I may regret that the system was ever commenced; but as I cannot recall that act, I must submit to the inconvenience by which it is attended, rather than expose the country to evils of much greater magnitude. Then, as to our linen manufacture, are your lordships aware of the effect which would be produced on the linen manufacture of Ireland, by a repeal of all the duties on the importation of foreign linen? When I contemplate the advantage which Ireland derives from her linen manufacture, I am startled at the suggestion of such a measure. I may regret, that those protecting duties which have brought about so artificial a state of commerce were originally imposed; but it is not because a thing has been wrongly done, that it may therefore be undone. The linen manufacture is too intimately blended and mixed up with the capital, and habits, and prejudices of the population of Ireland, to allow us to doubt that any measure subversive of it would destroy the peace and tranquillity of the most prosperous part of that country. I must pause, therefore, before I can consent to any alteration in our protecting system by which a great, immediate, and positive evil may be incurred, however clear and incontrovertible the general abstract principle on which that alteration may be recommended.

With regard to absolute prohibitions, I allow that it may be desirable to submit to the consideration of a committee the expediency of getting rid of such prohibitions,—at least, as nearly as possible. But I would not lead the public to suppose, that much benefit can be derived from the change; because, in many of the cases where the prohibition is abolished, protecting duties must be proposed of so high a description as to be almost tantamount to prohibition. Still, however, I admit that the moral effect of abolishing prohibition will be good. To prohibit by law the introduction of any article, which, after all, cannot be kept out of the country, has a very pernicious tendency. When an article is prohibited, there are many persons who deem it necessary to have it on that very account. When there are individuals in the country who do not mind what they pay for a prohibited article, there will always be others who will not mind what risk they run for the purpose of gratifying them; and it is unwise and unjustifiable on the part of the legislature to create so strong a temptation for the violation of the laws. I am therefore desirous that we should investigate the practicability of getting rid of the prohibitory system; because, I am persuaded that its abolition would be morally advantageous; although I am at the same time of opinion that it would be productive of no very material advantage as respects the increase of our manufactures and trade.

I proceed to some of the other propositions comprehended in the noble marquis's speech. To the general motion, I have already said that I entertain no objection whatever. I think the objects of that motion perfectly fair. The only difference between the noble marquis and myself is, that I do not set so high a value on the results which the noble marquis expects from the investigation, as he does. At the same time, for one, am most willing that we should see what can be done for the relief of our foreign trade; and, if we find that nothing can be done, distinctly to say so.

The first point, and in which I completely coincide with the noble marquis, is, the benefit that would follow such an extension of our warehousing system, as might make this country the general entrepôt of commerce. The policy of that system originated with Mr. Pitt; and it was always his plan to extend it, as rapidly indeed as it could be connected with arrangements which could give security to the revenue. The warehousing system, gradually growing to its present height, now forms a very important branch of our commerce: and I entirely agree with the noble marquis, that it would be wise to inquire how far it may admit of revision and extension. With respect to the transit duties, also, I agree with the noble marquis. I cannot see any grounds for their continuance, any more than I can for their having been originally imposed. I cannot discover any reason why goods should not come and go, free of duty; or, at most, with a very moderate impost; in order to make this country as great an emporium of commerce as possible. When, a few years ago, an attempt was made to get rid of these duties, that attempt was successfully resisted on grounds which were very fallacious; but even those fallacious grounds have since disappeared. At that time it was maintained that, as we were nearly the only carriers in the world, we had the power in our own hands; and that the rest of the world could get many goods only from us. In this argument there was then much of delusion. But our present situation is very different. We are no longer the exclusive carriers of Europe; and therefore I am at a loss to conceive on what principle the shipping interest of this country should not enjoy all the advantages which the shipping interest of any other country enjoys in the carrying trade.

Another point to which the noble marquis has called your lordships attention, is the duty on foreign timber. I can see no objection to referring the consideration of this subject to a committee; but I apprehend the noble marquis is a little mistaken in his view of the origin of these duties. There are a few circumstances connected with the history of them, which it may be necessary to recall to the recollection of the House, and of which I will take leave shortly to remind your lordships. When in the year 1809, we were shut out from all trade to the continent, and were likely to experience a great want of timber, which would of course have affected our general shipping interest, and which, as it respected our navy, became extremely alarming, the attention of government was naturally directed to the means of averting so serious a national calamity. Communications on the subject were in consequence had with several merchants; and they engaged, in consideration of a protecting duty which was promised to them, to embark their capital in the transport and carriage of American timber to this country. Such was the origin of the protecting duty. The duty was originally proposed, not for the purposes of revenue, but to induce certain merchants to embark in anew trade. It was, nevertheless, a temporary measure; and I perfectly agree with the noble marquis, that at the time of its adoption, any positive assurance of its continuance was refused. A subsequent duty was certainly laid on in the year 1815 (and I believe a smaller one before) for the purpose of revenue; and it is quite clear, that to the continuance of the duty so laid for revenue; the American merchant can have no claim whatever; but that it may be abrogated without difficulty. Two or three years ago, when strong representations on the subject were made to the board of trade, by the ship owners, for perpetuating the duty, their application was refused; and they were told, that after the 20th of March, 1821, the duties would be an open question for parliament to deal with, as in its wisdom it might think proper. The continuance of the duty, which was imposed for the purpose of revenue, the merchants have no right to expect; but as large capitals are embarked in the trade, it may be a question whether certain of the protecting duties should not be continued, at least for a further term. Without, however, giving any opinion as to the precise course which it is adviseable to pursue—whether the object can be best attained by partly lowering the duty on timber from the Baltic, or by imposing a countervailing duty on the timber from North America;—I entirely agree with the noble marquis, that the question is fully open to the consideration of parliament; and that it is one which ought to be submitted to the investigation of the committee, which the noble marquis proposes to appoint; by which I have no doubt it will be entered upon with a due regard to the interests of the parties more immediately concerned, as well as to the broader and more general interests of the country at large.

The next point of our foreign commerce which was adverted to by the noble marquis, is our trade in wine. I am perfectly aware that the treaty with Portugal, concluded at the commencement of the last century, and called the Methuen treaty, which, at the time of its conclusion was considered to be one of the greatest master-pieces and monuments of political wisdom, and which was negotiated by one of our most able statesmen, is now deemed to have been a departure from all the soundest principles of national policy. The object of that treaty was, the expectation, that, by the sacrifice of a third of our duties on the wines of Portugal, as compared with the wines of France, we should secure a more extensive, or at least a more secure, market for the sale of our woollen cloths. By a clause in the second article of that treaty, Portugal reserved to herself the right, if we at any time should discontinue the comparative abatement of our duties on Portugal wines, stipulated in the earlier part of the same article to prohibit the importation into Portugal of British woollen manufactures. Undoubtedly we have a right to terminate this arrangement. Whether or not it would be politic to risk the retaliation which Portugal might inflict, in the event of our equalizing the duties on French and Portugal wines, is another question. Before your lordships decide upon it, it will be expedient that you should see how matters stand at present; and what are the advantages which the adoption of any such measure would produce, to counterbalance even the temporary inconvenience and loss that our woollen and other manufacturers might sustain from it. And here I beg leave to make a few observations, with a view to correct a great misapprehension which seems to exist, as to the extent of the benefits derived by this country from the treaty of commerce concluded with France in the year 1787. I was not at that time a member of parliament; but, if I had been so, I must certainly have acquiesced in the expediency of that treaty. It appears to me to have been founded on just and fair principles of reciprocity. It is a curious circumstance, however, and one that demands our serious attention, that Mr. Pitt did not, at that period, propose to equalize the duties on foreign wines. He consented to a diminution of the duties on French wines; but then it was only in the proportion of two-thirds to a diminution of the duties on Portugal wines; so that the preference was still given to the latter. But let us see how this treaty of 1787, acted on the trade of this country. In the five years which elapsed from 1787 to 1792, under the operation of this commercial treaty with France, the annual average amount of the exports of British produce and manufactures to France was 718,695l. Our exports to Portugal, during the same period, amounted to 657,652l.: and to Spain, 623,340l. So that our exports to France, were only about 60,000l. greater in the same period, than our exports to Portugal, and not 100,000l. greater than our exports to Spain; which, considering the difference in the extent and population of the countries, was a very trifling superiority. At present there is also to be taken into our estimate, not only the question of our trade with Portugal, but that of our trade to the Brazils. The annual amount of British produce and manufactures, at present exported to Portugal and the Brazils, is not less than four millions sterling. It is a growing and improving trade, which it is highly desirable that we should cultivate. When I say this, I do not wish to give it as my opinion, that the course recommended by the noble marquis, is one that we ought not to adopt; I wish merely to suggest to your lordships the necessity of well considering, whether the additional commerce with France, which that course is calculated to secure, is likely to be, upon the whole, as beneficial to this country as the noble marquis anticipates. In many respects I agree with the noble marquis, that it would be better if we could remove the duties, provided we could obtain correspondent advantages. But, when I perceive; that on the subject of our manufactures, the greatest possible jealousy exists at this moment in the various countries of Europe, and particularly in France, I feel all the difficulties of the case, and the influence which that jealousy must necessarily have on our policy.

With regard to our commerce with the East Indies, that is a question which must be looked at in two points of view:—The first, in which I entirely agree with the noble marquis, as it respects the advantages to our carrying trade, and shipping interest; the second, on which I own I entertain considerable doubts, as it respects any probable increase in the exportation of our manufactures to that quarter of the world. On the latter head I certainly think it doubtful whether any alteration of the present system would prove serviceable. A number of merchants have tried the experiment of trading with the East Indies, some have succeeded, and many have failed. The superiority of British machinery, aided by British capital, over cheap manual labour, comparatively exempt from taxation, is such, that, as I am informed, British muslins are at this moment selling on the continent of India, for half the price of India muslins; notwithstanding the heavy charges of freight and other expenses in their transmission from this country. The prospect opened in consequence to our merchants in India has led to great efforts in trade;—to efforts which have been much too great. A chief cause of the falling off in our exports last year, as compared with our exports in former years, was, the amazing export to Asia, which took place in the year immediately preceding; by which the market was so over-stocked, that the consumption by no means kept pace with the supply; the consequence of which was, a deficiency in the returns, and a corresponding distress on the part of the manufacturers in this country.—I see no reason why, under the present system (for the trade to India is free) the export of British manufactures may not be extended as far as the demand will admit, and I am decidedly adverse to the policy on commercial principles of forcing the demand; the effect of such a measure soon recoils upon our manufactures, and the consequent distress more than counterbalances the former profits. As to China, the attempts to introduce British manufactures to any extent into that country have not proved equally satisfac- tory; and I confess, that when I consider the extreme jealousy which exists on this subject in the Chinese empire, I cannot entertain very sanguine hopes that the future attempts will be attended by any very great advantages. Although it is certainly true, that the direct private trade between this country and China, is prevented by the charter granted to the East India company; there is, nevertheless an extensive private trade carried on between India and China; and I understand that private traders are permitted to bring even tea to India, under licences granted by the resident government; which licences are never refused, on proper security being given.—I allow that this part of the question of our external commerce is extremely important, as it relates to our carrying trade, and shipping interest. In all that the noble marquis has said with respect to the advantage that would accrue to us from opening a direct trade between India, and every part of Europe, Asia, Africa, and America, I entirely concur. The powers necessary for opening such a trade were especially reserved in the charter granted to the East India company. It was originally intended to make this country the emporium of the trade between India and the North of Europe, and Malta the emporium of the Indian trade in the Mediterranean; but I have no hesitation in saying that, under the present circumstances of the world, I see no reason why any goods that may be legally imported from India, should not be so imported in British ships, direct, to any part of the world, without their first going either through this country or Malta; and a bill has been prepared to carry this object into effect. Of course, the tea trade and the direct trade with China, must be excepted, as they are matters of compact with the East India company, until an arrangement can be made for opening these trades under certain limitations with the company.

I have now gone through the various topics which I felt it my duty to submit to your lordships' consideration. In doing so, I have thought it necessary to take a wider view than the noble marquis took, of the circumstances and situation of the country. I do not say this with the slightest intention of imputing blame to the noble marquis. In my situation, as a member of his majesty's government, it appeared to be incumbent on me not to assent to the noble marquis's motion, without a general explanation of my opinions, not only on the points touched upon by him, but on every other point connected with this great and important subject. I have thought it due to myself, to the House, and to the country, to endeavour to explain the nature of our situation, both internally, and with respect to our commercial intercourse with foreign states; to endeavour to show what have been the causes of the distress which we are suffering; and to discover whether there are any means by which that distress may be remedied, or diminished. I have not attempted to conceal, nor will I attempt to conceal, that it appears to me, that from time and patience, our chief expectation of relief must be derived. I confess, that I do not think the measures recommended by the noble marquis, although important in themselves, will have any very extensive effect or operation. But I am sure they are worthy, at least, of a fair and deliberate consideration. I should be most unwilling, in times like these particularly, that projects of improvement, where no injury can arise from the experiment, should be lightly discarded: but I own that there is nothing which alarms me so much as a meddling disposition, on the part of the legislature, with reference to these subjects, upon insufficient grounds; a continual tampering with great questions; a change of regulation, session after session, to comply with temporary emergency, partial interests, or unreasonable clamour. I firmly believe that, on all commercial subjects, the fewer the laws the better. I am sorry to see so many on our Statute book; but the evil is not one of easy remedy. Some of those laws may, perhaps, be advantageously removed; and others maybe altered and amended; but the undertaking is one that will be attended with difficulty, and must be conducted with the greatest caution. In commerce, as in the ordinary relations of life, knowledge and the confidence derived from previous certainty, are the most advantageous guides; for, when even evils or inconveniences are ascertained, they may be met, and perhaps successfully combated. Experience proves that property and trade will adapt themselves, in time, even to mistaken and defective laws; but constant fluctuations in our legislation, on such subjects, can only be productive of disorder and ruin. If every year there is to be a change in our commercial laws, no man, or body of men, can know on what they are to rely. Under such a course of policy, neither the merchants of this country, nor those of foreign nations, will be able to confide in us; and our distresses, instead of being relieved, will be multiplied ten-fold.

The Earl of Lauderdale

began by complimenting the noble earl and the noble marquis on the able manner in which they had conducted this important discussion. He concurred in a great deal of what had fallen from both, but especially in what had been said by the noble earl on the subject of the corn laws: nothing could be more prejudicial to the agricultural interest than the annual revival and agitation of that question. His principal reason, however, for rising at present was, because, in some respects, he took a more consolitary view of the situation of the country than either of the noble lords—than even the noble earl, who had given, from authentic documents, such a cheering prospect of the trade of the kingdom, by which, it was evident that that trade had been diminished much less than was generally conceived. When he reflected on the causes operating to produce distress—on the exertions already made to repel the evil—and the small decrease of demand, he could not but entertain a sanguine hope that the deficiency would be supplied through the inquiries of the proposed committee. The noble earl had said, in one part of his speech, that but for the paper currency the war could not have been continued: perhaps not; and perhaps the evil of discontinuance would not have been so great as the noble earl imagined: certain it was, that no other human invention could, in the whole, have produced so much calamity as a paper currency. On this subject he could talk with the noble earl with considerable freedom, because, after the report of last year, in which the noble earl had heartily concurred, it was evident that they thought alike. He begged, therefore, to call the notice of the noble earl to a few figures which indisputably showed the state to which the paper currency had reduced the country; they were contained in some tables, printed in the year 1813, reaching a second edition soon afterwards, and uncontradicted from that time to the present. His lordship here detailed some of the items in these tables, arriving at the conclusion that, in consequence of a paper currency, the nation was now called upon to pay ten millions more annually than if specie payments had continued. Recollecting the increase of taxes in 1815, and the additional three millions imposed since the peace, he would venture to assert that since 1815 the country had been subjected in the whole to an increase of taxation to the extent of not less than seventeen millions. At the time the kingdom was burthened with this enormous load, peace arrived: for eight years Great Britain had been expending twenty-eight millions of her capital—the artificial demand for commodities was stopped at once, and an accumulated population was thrown out of employ. Still, however, she rose superior to all her difficulties, and this fact gave him so high a notion of the vigour and energy of the country, as to induce him to believe that she would, sooner than was imagined, recover her prosperous station among the powers of Europe. The agriculturist seemed to wish to make a separate cause against the manufacturer, which, if possible, must end in the ruin of both; but, in truth, distinction was out of the question—their interests were intimatety combined, and the House would not listen for a moment to any proposition to distinguish them, and to support the one at the expense of the other. He was sorry to find that this disposition to union did not prevail in the country so much as could be wished; and, in reference to the various petitions upon the table, he called the attention of the House to that of the city of London, contending that, properly analysed, it was nothing more nor less than a remonstrance against the corn-laws. As to commercial treaties with France, or any other power, it was nonsense to suppose that one country could obtain an advantage over another: at this moment France seemed actuated from some whimsical cause by a jealousy of Great Britain. The London petitioners did not wish to touch articles connected with the revenue; but all articles of trade were more or less so connected excepting corn; so that the corn-laws were the only object of their complaint. He could not help taking notice of one petition, asserting the principles of free trade; but it contained one clause, indicating a great deal of good sense, and an understanding of the real situation of the country. He alluded to the petition from Glasgow, in which it was said, that "this subject must be entered upon with great caution and prudence, and that no alteration of the laws affecting any branch of commerce should be attempted until after a full investigation of the particular case." The whole subject must be examined upon the merits of each particular case. The noble marqui3 had called the attention of the House to the opening of commerce in the China seas; and when the India bill was before parliament, he (lord Lauderdale) had been one of its strenuous opponents, because he thought that the inhabitants, with an income of half a crown a month, could never purchase enough of our manufactures to make it answer. He had been deceived; and glad he was to find that the demand was most important—that the natives, in the rainy season, gladly purchased our coarsest woollens; and on this account the subject well merited inquiry.—He wished to say a word or two upon the sinking fund, which was connected with this question: he should be most happy, if possible, to do away with it, as it was founded upon an absurd and injurious principle. Suppose it amounted to five millions a year, it was nothing more nor less than a forcible assumption of five millions of taxes to be converted into capital. Now, if this sum were not so forcibly applied, it might be employed by all who paid it in the purchase of manufactures, and at the present moment such an addition would be of incalculable advantage. The noble earl repeated the opinion he had given, that the nation would recover sooner than was generally imagined; and he supported it by a reference to the mode in which capital had been accumulated, and the natural desire to enjoy what we possessed. The country at large was not impoverished, though the distribution of property was different, and time would soon teach men how to apply what they had acquired. He was happy that his noble friend had brought forward this subject: he thought the inquiry would be productive of benefit; but if not, at least the nation would this night have had the benefit of a wide, profound, and, in some important respects, consolatory statement of its present situation and its future prospects.

Lord Ellenborough

perfectly concurred with his noble friend who made the present motion, that an extension of our foreign trade would be highly advantageous both to our agriculture and to our manufactures. He expressed the great satisfaction which he felt at having heard from the noble earl that it was his intention to support the present laws respecting agriculture; he was sure that they were necessary, and he was also sure that if any change were made in them at present, such change would inevitably lead to consequences dangerous to the constitution. With reference to tins subject he had listened with great pleasure to the prices of corn which had been quoted by the noble earl. He was persuaded that corn had maintained a much more uniform price since the bill for its protection, and he thought that a great blessing, as a constant oscillation between dearth and plenty, labour and laziness, the gin-shop and the poor-house, was to be greatly deprecated. Adverting to the last subject which he had named, he regretted that the poor laws had not beer, touched on by either of the noble lords. It was a most material feature of the national distress. Great difficulties undoubtedly surrounded the question. It had been his intention to offer to their lordships some proposition respecting it; bat after a good deal of consideration he had come to the conclusion that an advantageous arrangement could advantageously originate only in the other House, and could be successfully accomplished only by the interference of the ministers of the Crown. The system of the poor laws was so execrable, that he was convinced if we did not destroy it, it would destroy us. It demoralized the whole country. It destroyed that union of feeling and interest which ought always to subsist between the rich and the poor; it deprived the one class of the gratifications of charity, and the other class of those of gratitude. It led to general corruption and misery. It created a population, and at the same time it diminished their means of subsistence. Great as was his noble friend's experience, he must say that he differed from him as to cause of the distress and discontent in Europe. He quite agreed with his noble friend who had just sat down, that this country was really richer at the present moment than at the commencement of the late war. He believed that the same was the case in France. He was certain that it was so in Italy, and in some parts of Germany. The general distress he attributed, in a great measure, to the regulations that had taken place since the destruction of the French power. Most of the states on the continent had surrounded themselves as with walls of brass, to inhibit intercourse with other states. Intercourse was prohibited even in districts of the same state, as was the case in Austria and Sardinia. Thus, though the taxes on the people had been lightened, the severity of their condition had been increased. He believed that the discontent which pervaded most parts of Europe, and especially Germany, was more owing to commercial restrictions than to any theoretical doctrines on government; and that a free communication among them would do more to restore tranquillity than any other step that could be adopted. He objected to all attempts to frustrate the benevolent intention of Providence, which gave to various countries various wants in order to bring them together. He objected to it as anti-social. He objected to making commerce the means of barbarising instead of enlightening nations; he objected to it as destructive of the happiness of the whole world. Adverting to that part of the noble carl's speech, in which he observed that wine was the only and consequently the inefficient equivalent that foreign countries had to offer us in commerce, he remarked that the article of silks might be added to supply the deficiency. The same duty was now paid in Great Britain on Swedish deals, which were only 14 feet long, as was paid on Russian, which were 20 feet long. The Swedish deals were thus completely excluded. What was extraordinary too was, that in Ireland the Swedish deals were admitted, on payment of a graduated duty; and he was persuaded that great advantages might be obtained in negotiation with Sweden, merely by substituting at graduated duty, without any diminution of it. The state of the trade with France was, however, the most disgraceful to both countries. The two greatest civilized nations of the world, placed at a distance of scarcely twenty miles from each other, had contrived, by their artificial regulations, to reduce their commerce with each other to a mere nullity. From us France would take nothing but colonial produce, and from France we would only receive a few of the products of her soil. It was thus only that the accidental loss of her colonies by France had caused any commercial intercourse to be continued between the two countries. He looked forward to a reduction of the duties on French wines and silks, and on some of these articles of luxury which the French could manufacture better than we, with great satisfaction, as the most important benefits would be derived from the commencement of a free intercourse between the two countries. Had there been any objection to the motion, he should have entered at greater length into the subject; but he saw with the utmost pleasure that the inquiry was to be entered upon, as the House would at least see in what situation the country stood, and what it was practicable to do in alleviation of the present distress.

Lord Calthorpe

expressed the great satisfaction which he felt at the proceedings of that evening, and at the profound as well as candid manner in which the question had been treated, and the eloquent and statesman-like developement which had been made of the circumstances of the country. There were few circumstances which would tend more to persuade the people that they lived under a paternal government, than the proceedings of that night. As to the Corn bill, he was glad to find it proved that one of the parts of it that had been objected to, the mode of taking averages, contained in itself the principle of self-correction. The principles of freedom of trade, which be was happy to see so fully recognized, were of the utmost consequence; for though, in the present circumstances of the country, a free trade was unattainable, yet their task hereafter was to approximate to it. Considering the prejudices and interests which were opposed to the recognition of that principle, it was no small indication of the firmness and liberality of his majesty's ministers to have so fully conceded it.

The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed, consisting, among other peers, of the earls of Liverpool, Rosslyn, Darlington, Albemarle, Donoughmore, Lauderdale, Darnley and Bathurst, the dukes of Wellington and Athol, lords Clare arid Calthorpe.