Sitting of 18 July 1828

AMERICAN TARIFFS.
Mr. Huskisson
1769
said, that in submitting the motion of which he had given notice, nothing could be further from his intention than to elicit from the government any premature disclosure of their views and sentiments, in reference to the conduct of the United States, bearing on the commerce and industry of this country; though he felt it necessary to take some notice of, he would not say the intention, but the tendency of the acts which had lately been passed by the legislature of the United States, which he considered mainly detrimental to their own interests, and calculated to injure the commerce of this country, in 1815, soon after the termination of the unfortunate war with the United States, a convention of commerce was entered into between the two countries for four years. The principle on which it was framed was very short and simple. It was one of those treaties which had been since so much abused, under the name of reciprocity treaties. It was the model on which other treaties were subsequently constructed. The principle of the convention was, that all articles of produce, trade, or manufactures, should be received in either country, on the payment of duties as low as were paid on the same articles by any other country, and that there should be no discriminating duty, with respect to the ships in which they were imported. This convention was concluded in 1818, for ten years, and expired in October of the present year. When this convention was first made, the wise policy of the United States was, to impose no other duties on articles imported for the consumption of the population, than were required to raise an adequate revenue for the purposes of the state. The duties on the woollens of this country did not exceed fifteen per cent.; on hardware they were lower, and on cotton goods lower still. In 1823, whilst the convention was still binding on both countries, they, strange to say, adopted a change in their tariff, imposing much higher duties on those articles which they considered the great staples of our manufacture. Hardware was taxed thirty and forty per cent.; cotton about the same; and, as if to give a proof of their intention deliberately to violate the existing convention, they raised the duty on rolled iron one half higher than that on hammered iron, thus taxing even our improvements in machinery. Upon a remonstrance from this country, the executive
1770
government admitted, much to its credit, that no such increase of duty ought to be imposed, or any duty laid on, in reference to the expedition with which it was framed. Subsequently, an attempt was made to induce us again to enter into a commercial convention for another term of ten years. He had been the person charged with arranging the renewal of the convention; and in the course of the discussion, he had taken two objections to the renewal. The first, that as the congress had taken this course with the iron, there was nothing to prevent it doing the same with the other articles of our exports to the United States; for instance, cotton goods—that, in fact, if at all admitted, the principle would go to deprive us of all the benefit of our improvement in machinery. The second objection was, that the scale of duties on other articles had been attempted to be increased in 1824, in 1825, and 1826, and only rejected by the casting vote of the president. He, therefore, proposed, that the parties should, in a new convention, not be bound to a term of ten years, but conclude a convention determinate at any period, provided twelve months were given by either party. This convention, leaving the two countries comparatively unfettered, was concluded last August. Whilst iron, cotton, and hardware, were rendered liable to duties which almost amounted to a prohibition, being the staples of this country, the productions of other countries were, in the same proportion, lowered, evidently showing an intention to injure, if not ruin, the extensive trade carrying on by this country in articles of its own manufacture.—The fatal vote of this year was carried by as small a majority as it was lost by in the preceding year. And the best-informed Americans candidly confessed that they felt this conduct to be extremely unwise and impolitic. Be that as it might, each country had a right to do in this respect as it liked, and we had no right to complain. He for one made no remonstrance as to the principle; but we had the remedy within ourselves. He was, however, not disposed to enter on a war of restrictions or prohibitions. He deeply regretted what had been done in this respect; yet a man must be blind to the interests of this country who should consent to deprive government of the means of promptly meeting the effect of such restrictive measures by corresponding regulations. It was not consistent with the dignity of a

1771
great commercial nation like this, to affect not to feel the impediments thrown in the way of its commerce. If we were to take raw materials for our manufactures from the United States, we should ensure for our own articles, when manufactured from those materials, an equally favourable reception in the market as they experienced in other countries. Whilst we were dependent on that country for the raw material, were the Americans to be independent of our manufactured goods, of which they had till now required so large a supply? It was the more manly course, both to assert the character and protect the commerce of this country, to protest against such a course. There were two descriptions of articles imported into this country. The first class, such as tobacco, rice, and turpentine, were articles not essential to our commerce or manufactures, but merely of consumption. We could, he was satisfied, soon be abundantly supplied with tobacco from the East Indies, by prudent inducements held out to its improved cultivation. The rice of India would soon (indeed it was already doing so) usurp the place, in our list of imports, which that of Carolina had done. In other articles the same change would soon be observed. With reference to cotton, that raw article so essential in our great staple trade, it was only necessary to give its culture in India the same encouragement which the indigo trade had obtained, to ensure its cultivation with equal success. The result would soon be, that the cotton of India would supplant the cotton of the western world, as the indigo of India already excelled that of Guatimala, to which it was formerly so much inferior.—Unless we asserted our dignity and protected our interests, what would be thought of our apathy by the people of Brazil, who admitted all our articles of manufacture upon a payment of only 15 per cent? What could we with consistency say to India, which was compelled to receive all our exports at a duty of 2½ per cent, and had scarcely any staple, wherewith to repay itself in the way of commerce with us? What, in fact, could be our answer to the states of South America? This was an important consideration. But there was another; which was, that if the United States drove us to countries for a supply now almost all their own, we should see that supply brought to this country in, English
1772
bottoms and thus employing English industry, instead of employing American ships and seamen, and under the American flag. It was become a question of too great importance to be any longer overlooked by any government anxious to protect its commerce from the palpable attempt to exclude the produce of English industry from the market of the United States.—But, was it to be supposed, that the effort could be crowned with success; and, was it not right to infer, that if, circumstanced as our provinces in Canada were, if so large a country as the United States were prohibited from obtaining a legitimate supply, human industry and ingenuity would devise means of obtaining, at a cheap rate, and without duty at all, that which was so superior in manufacture to any other they could obtain? He should deeply regret if things turned into such an illicit channel; as it could hardly fail to increase the rivalry between the states bordering on the line of demarcation in North America, and possibly be productive of hostile feeling, and frequent personal rencontres. Strengthened as government had felt itself by ail these concurrent encouragements, it would not have become it to have acted otherwise than it had done, with respect to the commercial convention last concluded. It appeared to him, that the people of the United States had been led into an error, and induced to believe that we should have regarded all this with comparative apathy, as coming from themselves, because this country had been so uniformly moderate and forbearing with an infant and rising state, connected with us so intimately by community of language and a common origin. He thought that the present extent of our trade with America did honour to the spirit of enterprise in both countries; but if America should persevere in the system disclosed in the tariff of this year, the day might yet come, when the commerce between her and this country might become as restricted and as insignificant, as that between us and France. The commerce of America with this country amounted to more than one half of the whole of her commercial transactions with the rest of the world. But our dealings with America, though conducted on such an extensive scale, did not amount to one-sixth of our general commerce. He would leave it to those who had an interest in the prosperity of that country,

1773
to say, whether they would risk the loss of more than half her trade, in the vain endeavour to impede us in one-sixth of ours. The rapid increase of the cotton trade between America and this country was a proof not only of the general prosperity of both, but of the increased comforts possessed by every class of our population. In 1817 and 1818, one half of the cotton manufactured in this country was consumed at home. As the quantity of the raw material had doubled in the course of ten years, the inference was obvious, that the quantity of manufactured cotton had more than doubled. That was a great improvement in so short a period; and it was the more important, as it indicated a corresponding increase in the comforts of the people. He hailed it as an evidence of the advantages which a long peace was calculated to diffuse over the face of the earth. In the whole of the civilized world the comforts and advantages of society were rapidly increasing. He rejoiced to think that they were increasing in other countries as well as our own; for, as they increased, the wants of those countries would increase, and with the wants the commerce, and with the commerce that beneficial intercourse which it must be the wish of every man to cultivate and encourage. If the United States, by a fatal policy, should persevere in shutting out our commerce from her ports it was absurd to suppose that she could annihilate that portion of our commerce. All she could do was to alter its course—to send us into other ports of the same continent, to send us into Asia, and into the vast islands of the Asiatic seas. To follow up the subject still further, he would say, that those who laboured, with so much useless industry, in the inquiry concerning the low price of English wool, were mistaken if they supposed that it was any proof of declining prosperity.—The wool-trade had decreased, because the cotton trade had increased. They were articles in competition with each other; and nothing could tend so much to raise the price of wool, as raising the price of American cotton. It was a satisfaction to know, that the trade in foreign wool had increased; and as it was not accompanied with a corresponding increase in the export, it was decisive of an increase in the comforts of the people.—The idea of laying an additional tax on foreign wool would be a species of mad-
1774
ness, only equal to that which America would exhibit, by persevering in the system disclosed in the late tariff. On looking at the fourth report of the Finance Committee, they would find, that a great increase had taken place in the comforts, as well as in the productive power, of the industrious classes. It was with regret that he should make any allusion to the differences between this country and America in the year 1825. But, what had occurred at that period between the United States and the British colonies and the West Indies? He had then proposed an act, throwing open the trade of those colonies, upon certain conditions, to other nations. The United States, however, so far from acting upon a principle of reciprocity, had imposed restrictions upon British shipping entering their ports, which amounted to a complete exclusion. For one long year this country had patiently—he had almost said too patiently—submitted to the regulation, without adopting any retaliatory measure. At the end of that period, his majesty was advised to issue an order in council prohibiting the intercourse between America and our West-India possessions.—The intercourse was interdicted; and then came America, with a tardy proposal, accepting the terms which, up to the moment of the prohibition, this country had offered to her in vain. The advice for the issuing of that order in council was given with reluctance: but if they must again be driven to measures unfriendly to commercial intercourse, it became them to persist in it with firmness. With respect to the present tariff, he would say to ministers, "do not be hasty to determine; look at the various bearings of the question, with a view to your interests, your character, and your trade."—Rut if, after such deliberation, they were forced to adopt a course of retaliation, all he would enjoin them was, that when once they had adopted the course, they should adhere to it with firmness. He would say, proceed with circumspection, but remember that there are limits to forbearance itself; because, as new interests grew up, the difficulties increased in the way of altering the system; so that they were bound in common policy to take care that the time should not be too long contracted, nor the difficulties allowed to grow too great, before they proceeded to legislate in the spirit which might be

1775
rendered necessary. The right hon. gentleman concluded by moving, for copies of the tariff of the present year, and of the tariff of 1824.
Mr. Humethought it would be much better, that government should not pay the least attention to the weak and ungenerous policy adopted, in this instance, by the United States, but leave it to fall by its own weakness. It was only a few years ago that we acted upon the same principle ourselves. One tiling rankled strongly in the breast of the Americans; and that was, our policy of excluding her staple trade, corn, from the ports of this country. He agreed in thinking, that for every pound which this country would lose by the operation of the tariff, America herself would lose five. If America persisted in her foolish plan, no doubt this country would soon find other connexions; and he was glad to hear an allusion made to the commerce of the Asiatic seas, which it would be so much the interest of Great Britain to cultivate. He differed, however, in thinking, that if the resolution to adopt retaliatory measures were once taken, it should be persisted in. The question would still arise, whether it would be to our advantage to adopt such a course.—For his own part, he was the enemy of all monopolies and restrictions.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, he had not the least objection to the motion of his right hon. friend, as the production of the papers would tend to elucidate the question with which they were connected. The hon. gentleman who had just sat down had attempted to defend the last tariff, as a measure of retaliation. But it would be a most extraordinary proceeding indeed, if America should think fit to adopt measures of retaliation, at the very moment when we had relaxed the severity of our Corn-laws. Those documents appeared to him the most conclusive proofs of the impolicy of the tariff; and he was disposed to expect, from the good sense of America, that she would regard it in the same light. The right hon. gentleman had suggested that they should look out for new sources of commerce; but in doing so, it might be necessary to hold out new inducements to the countries with which that commerce was sought to be established. This would render the retracing their steps the more difficult at a future period; and therefore it should render them the more slow in resorting to such a step. His right hon.
1776
friend might rest assured, that government would consider the subject in the spirit of conciliation; but though he agreed in many of the observations which had fallen from the hon. gentleman opposite, he was not prepared to go the length of admitting that even the perseverance of America should not drive us to the adoption of any retaliatory measures. It was with no unfriendly voice, that he would say, that the policy on which America was now acting was founded in error, and that before long she would be convinced that she had mistaken her own interest.
After a few words from Mr. Trant, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Attwood, and Mr. C. Grant, the motion was agreed to.

CORPORATE FUNDS.
Mr. Hudson Gurneysaid, that if the right hon. the Secretary for the Home Department did not, early next session, bring forward some measure to prevent the misapplication of Corporate Funds, he should himself feel it his duty to do so. If nothing was done to check the growing evil, the House would have petitions sent up from every great town in the kingdom, in such language as would make them be heard.—The hon. gentleman afterwards gave notice, that he would next session move for leave to bring in a bill "for more effectually to prevent the misapplication of Corporate Funds to Election purposes in such Cities and Boroughs as return Members to Parliament, where the Right of Election is in freemen, freeholders or inhabitants."