UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO
3 1822 01701 1842
0
^'
0
1
NRE
1
2
=^== o
>
0
LIB
4
7
3
=^=^=^ :3D
CILIT
2
i
Univ-..s,ty op
C\L!FORNlA
SAN DIEGO
J
me uriivERSir/ library
UNlVEi^SITf Of irur.iu.A, SAN DIEGt
lA JOLLA. CALIFORNIA
UNiVERSITYpFCAUFORN,^^
3 182201701 1842
/^.-- '
SPEECH
RIGHT HON. W. HUSKISSON
IN THE
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
THURSDAY, THE 23(1 OF FEBRUARY, 1826,
MR. ELLICE's motion FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE, TO
INQUIRE INTO AND EXAMINE THE STATEMENTS
CONTAINED IN THE VARIOUS PETITIONS
FROM PERSONS ENGAGED IN
THE SILK MANUFACTURE.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR J. HATCHARD & SON, PICCADILLY.
1826.
[ One Shilling and Sixpence. ]
LONDON:
HUNTED ItY COX AND BAYLIS, GREAT QUBEN-STBEET.
H
SPEECH,
4c. Sfc.
Mr. Ellice having moved, " That a Select Committee
" be appointed to inquire into and examine the state-
" ments, contained in the various petitions from persons
" engaged in the Silk Manufacture, and to report their
" opinion and observation thereon to the House :" and
Mr. John Williams having seconded the motion : —
Mr. HUSKISSON rose, and spoke, in substance, as
follows : —
Sir ; — Although the honourable member for Coventry,
who introduced the present motion, may be supposed to be
under the influence of suggestions and views, which have
been furnished to him by his constituents, and from other
sources out of doors, I am, nevertheless, ready to admit,
that that circumstance ought not to detract from the
weight, which is fairly due to the honourable member's
statements and arguments^in support of the motion which
he has submitted to the House.
But, Sir, however true this may be, as far as respects
the honourable member for Coventry, the same obser-
vation applies not, in the remotest degree, to the honour-
able and learned gentleman who has seconded the motion;
and who, acting, I must suppose, under the influence of a
connection, certainly not political, but the more binding,,
perhaps, as having been more recently formed, has
thought proper to take a wider range, and to indulge in a
higher tone of declamation : — or, it may be, that he looks
forward to the expectation of becoming the colleague
of the honourable mover; and, by his speech of this
evening, proposes to declare himself a joint suitor
A 2
4
with the honourable mover, for the future favours of the
good people of Coventry. Whatever may be the mo-
tives of the honourable and learned gentleman, I confess
that I have listened with the utmost astonishment to the
speech which he has just delivered.
Sir, in the course of that speech, the honourable and
learned gentleman repeatedly told us, that he was not
authorized to make certain statements — that he was not
at liberty to admit this, and to admit that. This, I pre-
sume, is a mode of expression, in which gentlemen of the
legal profession are wont to indulge, to mark that they
keep themselves within the strict limits of their briefs,
and that the doctrines which they advocate are those
prescribed to them by their instructions. However cus-
tomary and proper such language may be in the courts of
law, it certainly sounds new and striking in the mouth of
a member of this House.
With regard to the general tone of the honourable and
learned gentleman's speech — thevehemence of his declama-
tion, his unqualified censure, and his attempts at sarcasm, I
can, with perfect sincerity, assure the House, and the honour-
able and learned gentleman, that I entertain no sentiment
bordering upon anger, nor any other feeling, save one, in
which I am sure I carry with me the sympathy and con-
currence of all those who entertain sound and enlightened
views upon questions of this nature — a feeling of surprize
and regret, at finding that honourable and learned gentle-
man, now for the first time, launching forth his denun-
ciations and invectives against principles and measures,
which have received the support of men the most intel-
ligent and best informed, on both sides of this House, and
throughout Europe.
Having said thus much, I leave the honourable and
learned gentleman to the full enjoyment to be derived
from the new lights that have so suddenly broken in upon
him. I leave to him, and to his honourable friends around
him, to settle, among themselves, the taunts, the sneers, and
the sarcasms, which he has heaped upon their heads, as
the friends of those principles which are involved in the
present discussion — principles which it has been their
boast that they were the first to recommend, and of which
they have uniformly been the most eager advocates in this
House.
In whatever quarter the statements and arguments
of the honourable member for Coventry may have origi-
nated, they are entitled to the serious and attentive con-
sideration of the House ; more especially if derived from
individuals now suffering distress from want of employ-
ment, and who may have been led to believe, that that
want of employment has been caused by measures which
have been adopted by this House. This circumstance adds
to the difficulty in which I am placed, in rising to address
the House on the present occasion. In opposing the
proposed inquiry, I feel that I may be represented as
insensible or indifferent to the sufferings of those on whose
behalf it is called for.
Sir, the honourable and learned member for Lincoln
has, indeed, given countenance to this unjust imputation.
He has not only chosen to assert, that I am mistaken in
my views — -he has not scrupled to insinuate, that I am
without feeling for the distress now prevailing amongst the
manufacturing classes. [Mr. Williams here denied that
he had asserted any thing of the kind.] What, then.
Sir, did the honourable and learned gentleman mean by
his quotation ? To whom did he mean to apply the de-
scription of an " insensible and hard-hearted metaphy-
sician, exceeding the devil in point of malignity ?" — I
appeal to the judgment of the House, whether the lan-
guage made use of by the honourable and learned gen-
tleman, with reference to me, was not such as to point
to the inference, that I am that metaphysician lost to every
sentiment of humanity, and indifferent to every feeling,
6
beyond the successful enforcement of some favourite the-
ory, at whatever cost of pain and suffering to particular
bodies of my fellow creatures ? When the honourable and
learned gentleman allows himself to talk of " hard-hearted
metaphysicians, exceeding the devil in point of malignity,"
it is for him to reconcile such language with the general
tenour of his sentiments on other occasions; to explain, as
he best may, to those around him, whether they are in-
cluded in that insinuation ; — and it is for me to meet that
insinuation (as far as it was levelled at me) with those
feelings of utter scorn with which I now repel it.
Still, Sir, it sits heavily on my mind, that any indi-
vidual, or any body of individuals, should in any quarter
be impressed with the notion, that I, or any of my right
honourable colleagues, could be capable of that which has
been imputed to us ; and it is but perfectly natural that I
should feel anxious to shew, that my own conduct, and
that of my right honourable friends, has not been such as,
in some quarters, it has been represented to be.
The honourable member for Coventry, and the honour-
able and learned member for Lincoln, have, by some
strange perversion, argued the wliole case, as if I, and
those who act with me, were hastily and prematurely
pressing on some new, and till this evening, unheard-
of measure — as if we were attempting to enforce that
measure by all the influence of Government : instead of
which, we have proposed nothing, and are lying upon our
oars, quietly waiting for the going into effect of an Act of
Parliament, passed more than eighteen months ago, with
the unanimous concurrence of this House ; an act which
is now the law of the land ; and of the enactments of which,
all the parties concerned were as fully apprized on the
day when it first passed this House, as they can be at this
moment.
In the view which I take of the speech of the honour-
able member for Coventry, of whicli I do not com-
7
plain, and of the speech of the honourable and learned
member for Lincoln, of which I do complain, the greater
part of their arguments go to impugn those principles of
commercial policy, which, under the sanction of Par-
liament, have now prevailed in this country, for the
last two or three years ; — a policy, which has for its object
gradually to unfetter the commerce of the country, by the
removal of those oppressive prohibitions and inconvenient
restrictions, which had previously existed ; and to give
every facility and encouragement, consistent with vested
interests, to the extension of the skill, the capital, and
the industry of the people of England.
This, then, being the real drift of the argument espe-
cially brought forward by the honourable and learned gen-
tleman, it is, with reference to a much greater question,
that I find myself called upon to consider the present
motion. The point at issue is, not whether we shall
grant the Committee, but whether we shall re-establish
the prohibitory system ? If we re-establish it in one in-
stance, we shall very soon be called upon to do so in many
others. If we once tread back our steps, we shall not be
able, in this retrograde motion, to stop at that point from
which we first set out : — we must go further, and, ere long,
we should have in this country a system of commerce,
far more restrictive than that which was in force before
the late changes. Anxious as I am to persevere in our
present course, I say that, if we once depart from it, we
must at least be consistent in our new career ; and that, to
be consistent, we must impose restrictions and prohibi-
tions, far beyond those which have been lately removed.
The present question, therefore, is not simply the motion
before the House — but, neither more nor less than, whe-
ther a restrictive or an enlarged system of commercial
policy be the best for this country ?
In order to come to a Sound decision upon so impor-
tant a subject, it behoves the House to look back a little
8
to tlie course of events, and to bear in mind some ot" the
occurrences which have materially contributed to those
relaxations in the restrictive system, of which it is now
the fashion to complain.
With this view, I must ask the permission of the
House to call its attention to a Petition, presented to the
House in the month of May 1820, a period which, like
the present, was one of great difficulty and public distress.
The Petition is somewhat long, but, I assure the House,
that those honourable members, who may favour me with
their attention, will be well rewarded, by hearing sound
principles laid down, in the clearest language, not by
philosophers and unbending theorists — not by visionaries
and hard-hearted metaphysicians, with the feelings of
demons in their breasts — but by merchants and traders ;
men of the greatest practical experience in all that relates
to commerce. This Petition, Sir, is a document of no
ordinary interest. The House will see how decidedly
the Petitioners maintain the principles upon which his
Majesty's Government have acted ; and, when I have
done reading it, I am sure they will admit, that those
principles are therein expounded in words far more
apt and forcible than any which I can command. The
Petition, as I have already said, is not the exposition of
any speculative doctrine. It conveys to the House the
deliberate judgment of the Merchants and Traders of the
City pf London ; the result of their daily observation of
the evils inflicted upon the country, by the unnecessary
restrictions imposed upon their industry and pursuits.
The Petition states,— r
" That Foreign commerce is eminently conducive
to the wealth and prosperity of the country, by enabling
it to import the commodities for the production of which
the soil, climate, capital, and industry of other coun-
tries are best. calculated, and to export in payment those
articles for which its own situation is better adapted.
9
" That freedom from restraint is calculated to give
the utmost extension to foreign trade, and the best
direction to the capital and industry of the country.
" That the maxim of buying in the cheapest market,
and selling in the dearest, which regulates every mer-
chant in his individual dealings, is strictly applicable,
as the best rule for the trade of the whole nation.
" That a policy, founded on these principles, would
render the commerce of the world an interchange of
mutual advantages, and diffuse an increase of wealth
and enjoyments among the inhabitants of each state.
" That, unfortunately, a policy, the very reverse of
this, has been, and is more or less adopted and acted
upon by the Government of this and of every other
country; each trying to exclude the productions of other
countries, with the specious and well-meant design of
encouraging its own productions; thus inflicting on the
bulk of its subjects, who are consumers, the necessity of
submitting to privations in the quantity or quality of
commodities ; and thus rendering, what ought to be
the source of mutual benefits, and of harmony among
states, a constantly recurring occasion of jealousy and
hostility.
" That the prevailing prejudices in favour of the pro-
tective or restrictive system may be traced to the erro-
neous supposition, that every importation of foreign
commodities occasions a diminution or discouragement
of our own productions to the same extent ; whereas,
it may be clearly shown, that although the particular
description of production which could not stand against
unrestrained foreign competition would be discouraged ;
yet, as no importation could be continued for any
length of time without a corresponding exportation,
direct or indirect, there would be an encouragement
for the purpose of that exportation of some other pro-
duction, to which our situation might be better suited :
B
10
thus affording at least an equal, and probably a greater,
and certainly a moi'c beneficial employment to our own
capital and labour."
I will not trouble the House with reading the whole of
this valuable document. — {Loud cries of ^'■Read! read!")
1 will then, Sir, read the whole, for it is a most valuable
document ; and, indeed, so it was thought at the time, for
it is one of a few, if not the only one, which is given at
length in the published Reports of our proceedings.
" That of the numerous protective and prohibitory
duties of our commercial code, it may be proved, that
while all operate as a very heavy tax on the community
at large, very few are of any ultimate benefit to the
classes in whose favour they were originally instituted,
and none to the extent of the loss occasioned by them
to other classes.
" That among the other evils of the restrictive or
protective system, not the least is, that the artificial
protection of one branch of industry, or source of pro-
tection against foreign competition, is set up as a ground
of claim by other branches for similar protection ; so
that, if the reasoning upon which these restrictive
or prohibitory regulations are founded were followed
consistently, it would not stop short of excluding us
from all foreign commerce whatsoever.
" And, the same strain of argument, which, with cor-
responding prohibitions and protective duties, should
exclude us from foreign trade, might be brought forward
to justify the re-enactment of restrictions upon the
interchange of productions (unconnected with public
revenue) among the kingdoms composing the union, or
among the counties of the same kingdom.
" That an investigation of the effects of the restrictive
system at this time is peculiarly called for, as it may,
in the opinion of the petitioners, lead to a strong pre-
sumption, that the distress which now so generally
prrvnils is considerably aggravated by that system ;
11
and that some relief may be obtained by the ear-
liest practicable removal of such of the restraints, as
may be shown to be most injurious to the capital and
industry of the community, and to be attended with no
compensating benefit to the public revenue.
" That a declaration against the anti-commercial
principles of our restrictive system is of the more im-
portance at the present juncture, inasmuch as, in seve-
ral instances of recent occurrence, the merchants and
manufacturers in foreign states have assailed their res-
pective Governments with applications for further pro-
tective or prohibitory duties and regulations, urging
the example and authority of this country, against
which they are almost exclusively directed, as a sanction
for the policy of such measures : and certainly, if the
reasoning upon which our restrictions have been de-
fended is worth any thing, it will apply in behalf of
the regulations of foreign states against us ; they insist
upon our superioi'ity in capital and machinery, as we
do upon their comparative exemption from taxation,
and with equal foundation.
" That nothing; would more tend to counteract the
commercial hostility of foreign states, than the adop-
tion of a more enlightened and more conciliatory policy
on the part of this country.
" That although, as a matter of mere diplomacy, it
may sometimes answer to hold out the removal of
particular prohibitions on high duties, as depending
upon corresponding concessions by other states in our
favour, it does not follow, that we should maintain our
restrictions, in cases where the desired concessions on
their part cannot be obtained ; our restrictions would
not be the less prejudicial to our own capital and
industry', because other governments pei'sisted in pur-
suing impolitic regulations.
" That, upon the whole, the most liberal would
B 2
12
prove to be tlie most politic course on such oc-
casions.
" That, independent of the direct benefit to be de-
rived by this country on every occasion of such con-
cession or relaxation, a great incidental object would
be gained by the i-ecognition of a sound principle or
standard, to which all subsequent arrangements might
be referred; and by the salutary influence which a
promulgation of such just views, by the legislature and
by the nation at large, could not fail to have on the
policy of other states.
" That in thus declaring, as the petitioners do, their
conviction of the impolicy and injustice of the restrictive
system, and in desiring every practical relaxation of it,
they have in view only such parts of it as are not connect-
ed, or are only subordinately so, with the public reve-
nue ; as long as the necessity for the present amount of
revenue subsists, the petitioners cannot expect so im-
portant a branch of it as the Customs to be given up,
nor to be materially diminished, unless some substitute
less objectionable be suggested : but it is against every
restrictive regulation of trade not essential to the re-
venue, against all duties merely protective from foreign
competition, and against the excess of such duties as
are partly for the purpose of revenue and partly for
that of protection: that the prayer of the present Petition
is respectfully submitted to the wisdom of Parliament ;
the petitioners therefore humbly pray, that the House
will be pleased to take the subject into consideration,
■ and to adopt such measures as may be calculated to
give greater freedom to foreign commerce, and thereby
to increase the resources of the State."
It will be clear to all who have been at the trouble to
attend to the very able document w^hich I have just read,
that it embraces all the great principles of Commercial
PoUcy, upon which Parliament has since legislated.
13
Why do I lay so much stress upon this Petition?
For the purpose of shewing, first, that if the Government
have pursued this course, we have done so, not on the
recommendations of visionaries and theorists, but of
practical men of business : secondly, that the Merchants
of the City of London — the great mart of the commerce
and wealth of the country — felt convinced, in 1820, that
the distress of that period was greatly aggravated by
the narrow and short-sighted system of restrictions and
prohibitions which then prevailed; and that, in their judg-
ment, the alleviation, if not the cure of that distress, was
to be sought for in the removal of those restrictions and
prohibitions.
And, because we have followed up, cautiously and cir-
cumspectly, the recommendations of the mercantile com-
munity, are we to be told by men who know nothing of
commerce, that we are unfeeling projectors and metaphy-
sicians, insensible to the wants and the miseries of our fel-
low creatures ? If this be a just charge against us, what are
we to think of the parties who could sign, or of the mem-
ber who could present, such a petition as this? This morning
I took the trouble to look at the names of the merchants who
signed it ; and, the first signature I read is that of one of
the most distinguished of that class in the City of London ;
a gentleman who was many years ago Governor of the
Bank of England, who is now one of the Directors of that
establishment, and who was, for a long time, a valuable
member of this House ; a gentleman, who, in the best
sense of the word, is a practical man, and one whose con-
duct in private life would protect him (if any man
can be protected by his conduct) from the suspicion of
being a " wild and unfeeling theorist" — a " hard-hearted
metaphysician"—" alike indifferent to the wants and the
miseries of his fellow creatures" — I mean Mr. Samuel
Thornton. Ami, besides his name, the list contains the
names of others, who, like him, have been Governors
14
of the Bank of England ; of" several who are now in the
Direction of that great establishment; and of many who
hold the highest rank in the commercial world.
Let it not, however, be supposed, that I offer this
Petition to the House, in the way of an apology for my-
self and my right honourable colleagues — in the way of
extenuation of any thing which we may have done, to
excite the wrath of the honourable and learned member
for Lincoln. Sir, I think now, as I have always thought,
that our measures require no apology. I believe now, as
I have always believed, that they are calculated to pro-
mote the best interests of the people. I say now, as I
have always said, that those who, either by their speeches
in Parliament, or the exertions of their talents out of it,
have contributed to bring the people of England to look
with an eye of favour on the principles recommended in
this Petition, have done themselves the gi^eatest honour,
and the country an essential benefit.
If, however, I refrain from troubling the House with
apologies, where I feel that they are not required, neither
do I wish to claim for His Majesty's Government, any
participation in the merit of these measures, beyond what
really belongs to us. By a reference to many other
Petitions and proceedings of a like nature with those to
which I have already adverted, I could shew that, in all
these matters, the first impulse was not given by the
Government. We claim for ourselves no such credit.
The changes hitherto made have been the result of public
opinion, sanctioned by the concurrence of practical men,
and confirmed by the proceedings and inquiries of the
two Houses of Parliament. We did not create that
opinion : we did not anticipate it : we did not even
act upon it, until it was clearly and distinctly manifested.
And, in what we have done, we have not exceeded the
sober limits, prescribed by the authority of those, who, by
tlie habits and pursuits of their lives, were most competent
15
to form a sound judgment. But, when that judgment
was pronounced and recorded, it was our duty to act upon
it. From those who fill responsible situations, the
country has a right to expect, not that they should be
slow of conviction to important truths in matters of poli-
tical econom}'^ ; but that they should be cautious in deli-
berating, before they attempt to give them a practical
application. The goad, which is used to give increased
impetus to the machine, is an instrument more properly
placed in other hands : the care of Government should
rather be to regulate the drag, so as not to check the
advance, but to maintain a safe and steady progress to-
wards improvement.
Has this been the principle of our policy on the sub-
ject now under consideration ? Before I sit down, I
think I shall prove, Sir, that the system upon which his
Majesty's Government have acted, has uniformly been
guided by that principle. Need I remind the House,
how frequently, and with what asperity, we have been
charged, from the opposite Benches, with reluctance
and tardiness in carrying into execution, those principles
of an enlarged and enlightened policy, in matters of
Commerce, upon which all parties were said to be
agreed. Year after year, have we been urged, by the force
of public opinion out of doors, and by the earnest re-
monstrances of honourable members within, to adopt the
very measures, against which a senseless clamour is now
attempted to be excited.
Who were the first, and the most earnest, in sug-
gesting these measures — aye, and in wisliing to push
them to extremes — but some of those very persons whom
we now. find arrayed against us, and against those princi-
ples which they formerly supported ? By whom was the
Petition which I have just read to the House presented?
By whom was the prayer of it advocated?
After great note of preparation — after a formal notice
of wliat was about to come — this Petition, Sir, was brought
down, on the 8th of May 1820, by the Honourable
Member for Taunton,* whom I now see in his place. He
it was, Sir, who introduced it to the attention of the
House, in a long, but able and elaborate, speech ; too long
to be read by me now, as I have read the Petition;
although, by so doing, I should add a most luminous
commentary, in support of the doctrines of that Petition,
and should best shew, by what force of argument and
weight of authority, the honourable Member then con-
tended for those measures, which the House is now called
upon to condemn, and in which condemnation he himself
appears disposed to concur.
After mentioning the Petition, and the great respec-
tability of the gentlemen by whom it was signed ; and after
regretting, that " there was in the then circumstances
of public embarrassment much, to which no remedy could
be applied, at least, no Parliamentary remedy," the
honourable gentleman went on to say, that " the first
desideratum was such security and tranquillity in the
country, as would enable the possessor of capital to employ
it without apprehension."
The House will recollect, that the period at which
this Petition was laid upon our table, was one of great
public distress; and, in that respect, it but too much
resembled the present time. Now, however, though the
country is again visited with pecuniary pressure, and
though the labouring classes (many of them) are suffering
great privations from the want of employment, I feel
confident, that we shall not witness the same danger to
property, or the same disposition to violence, which at
tliat time prevailed in the manufacturing districts. I feel
confident, that the unfortunate individuals, who, in 1820,
allowed themselves to be misled by unprincipled agitators,
♦ Mr. Baiiii},'. See rarlianientary Debates, New Series, Vol. i. p. 165.
17
will recollect how much their sufferings were increased by
listening to pernicious counsels — counsels, which may pro-
long and aggravate, but which can, in no case, abridge or
relieve their privations — and that they will not, a second
time, lend a willing ear to those who would lead them on to
their destruction. I trust they will so conduct themselves
under their present difficulties, as to conciliate the re-
gard and sympathy of every other class, and to excite in
the bosoms of those, from whom alone they can expect
assistance, no other feelings than those of kindness and
benevolence.
Sir, after " security and tranquillity," the honourable
member for Taunton proceeded to say, that " the second
desideratum was, as great a Freedom of Trade, as was
compatible with other and important considerations." In
the opinion of the honourable member, at that time, a free
trade was the very essence of commercial prosperity ; and,
therefore, he pressed us to adopt, all at once, the system,
which we have since gradually introduced.
The honourable member then proceeded — as he has
since done, upon several occasions, and done, indeed, this
session — to tax my right honourable friend, the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer (who then filled the situation which
I now hold), and the other members of His Majesty's
Government, with apathy, and a total indifference to the
distressed state of the manufacturing districts. " So far
were they," said the honourable member, " from being
sensible of the necessity of some exertion, that they went
on, from year to year, trusting that the next year would
be spontaneously productive of some favourable change,
and, apparently, with very indistinct notions of what the
real condition of the country was. Whenever a question
arose between two classes of the community, Government,
without seeming to have any opinion of their own, stood
by, until they ascertained which party could give them the
most effectual support. If the House looked back to an
c
18
earlier period of tliose which were still our own times,
they would behold a different picture ; they would find
Mr. Pitt engaged in framing a Commercial Treaty ; and,
amidst difficulties of every description, boldly taking what-
ever steps appeared to him to be the best calculated to
advance our commercial prosperity. He wished that he
could see a little of the same spirit in the present day ;
but, instead of that, his Majesty's Ministers wei'e ba-
lancing one party against another, and trying how they
could keep their places from year to year ; neglecting, in
the meanwhile, all those great commercial and national
questions, to which their most lively attention ought to be
directed."
The honourable member for Taunton then went on to
say— and I perfectly agree with him — that, " the first
doctrine which the Petitioners wished to combat, was
that fallacious one which had, of late years, arisen, that
this country ought to subsist on its own produce ; that it
was wise, on the part of every country, to raise within
itself the produce requisite for its consumption." — " It
was really absurd to contend," continued the honour-
able member, " that if a country, by selling any arti-
cle of manufacture, could purchase the produce which
it might require, at one half the expense at which
that produce could be raised, it should nevertheless be
precluded from doing so."
This is unquestionably sound doctrine, and I readily
admit it. But, how is it to be reconciled with the
doctrine, which is now maintained by great authorities
out of doors, as that which ought to be the rule of our
commercial policy? According to these authorities, to
which we have now to add that of the honourable and
learned seconder of the present motion. Prohibition
is the only effectual protection to trade : — duties must
be imavailing for this purpose, because the influence
of soil and climate, the price of labour, the rate of tax-
19
ation, and other circumstances, are constantly varying
in different countries, and consequently, the scale of
protection would require to be varied from month to
month. But, what is the legitimate inference to be drawn
from this exclusive system? Can it be other than this —
that all interchange of their respective commodities, be-
tween different countries of the world, is a source of evil,
to the one or the other? — that each country must shut
itself up within itself, making the most of its own resources,
refusing all commerce with any other country, barbarously
content to suffer wants which this commerce might easily
supply, and to waste its own superfluous productions at
home ; because, to exchange them for the superfluities of
that other country, instead of being an exclusive advan-
tage to either party, would afford an equivalent benefit to
both. This is the short theory of Prohibitions, which
these sage declaimers against all theory, are so anxious to
recommend to the practical merchants of this country.
But, if this system be wise and just in itself; if, for the
reasons alleged in its support, it be necessary for the
protection of British industry, let us see to what it leads.
Can this country command labour, on the same terms as
Ireland ? Is the scale of taxation the same ? Are the
poor rates the same, in the two countries ? Is there any
country in Europe which, more than Ireland, differs from
Great Britain in these and many other particulars, affecting
their commercial relations ? Does it not follow, that, if we
admit the system of prohibitions, now recommended tons by
the honourable and learned member for Lincoln, we must
prohibit all commercial intercourse with Ireland — we must
revive those laws which forbade the manufactures, and
repelled the productions of her soil — we must sacrifice
the mutual benefits, which both parts of the empire
now derive from the unrestricted freedom of inter-
course— we must again revert to the prejudices of our
ancestors ?
20
And, for what ? — because, from prejudices certainly less
pardonable, if not from motives less sincere, than those
of our ancestors, a senseless clamour has recently been
raised, against the present system of our commercial po-
licy. I have no desire to disturb the partizans of the
opposite system, in the enjoyment of their favourite
theory. All I ask of them is, a similar forbearance to-
wards us. Let each system be fully and fairly tried.
For the sake of Freedom of Trade and Industry, and
for the sake of England, let England be the field of
trial for our system. For the sake of Prohibition and
Monopoly, let the system of our adversaries also be
fairly tried ; — only let the trial be made upon some other
country.
But, can Prohibition ever be tried under circum-
stances of greater favour, than it now experiences in
Spain? In that flourishing country, prohibition has
been carried to the very extreme. There, restriction has
been added to restriction — there, all the fruits of that
beautiful system are to be seen, not yet, perhaps, in full
maturity, but sufficiently mature, to enable every one to
judge of their qualities. Spain is the best sample of the
prohibitory system; the most perfect model of fallen great-
ness and of internal misery, of which modern civilization
affords an example — an example to be traced, not only
in the annihilation of her commerce and maritime power,
but, in her scanty revenue, in her bankrupt resources, in
the wretchedness of her population, and in her utter in-
significance among the great powers of the world. The
commercial policy of Spain is simply this — to admit
nothing from other countries — except what the smuggler
brings in. And the commercial wisdom of the honour-
able and learned seconder of the present motion is equal
to that of Spain.
I must now beg of the House to indulge me for a little*
while I endeavour to go through the detail of the spe-
21
cific measures recommended, in tlie Speech of the ho-
nourable member for Taunton, on presenting the London
Petition. It will be perceived, bow false and unfounded
are all those clamours, which have been heaped upon me
and my right honourable colleagues, for having vmneces-
sarily made those alterations in our system of Commer-
cial Policy, which, if I am to believe certain gentlemen,
have plunged this country into misery and ruin.
The honourable member for Taunton, who is so
great a practical authority, — the greatest, perhaps, this
country affords — did not content himself, in this speech,
with stating general principles. He referred to details;
and, as I have just observed, he proposed measures of
relief of a specific and particular nature. These pro-
positions the House, I hope, will permit me to go over,
one by one, in order to shew, that his Majesty's Govern-
ment have not been wanting in attention to the sugges-
gestions of the Merchants of the City of London, nor
backward in adopting their remedies, and recommending
them to the consideration of the House.
The ^rst measure pointed out, upon that occasion,
and recommended in the warmest terms, to the attention of
his Majesty's Ministers, for the relief of the country, was
" an alteration of the duty on the importation of Wool."
" What can be so absurd," said the Honourable Member,
" as a tax on the raw materials of our manufactures ?"
Accordingly, he urged the abolition of the duty on the
importation of Foreign Wool, dyeing drugs, and such
other articles as are used in the great manufactures of
this country. What, at that time, was our answer
to this proposition? Why, this — " We have no ob-
jection to take off the duty on the importation of
Foreign W^ool, provided you will consent to allow
the free exportation of British Wool." — " No," said
the Woollen Manufacturers, " take off the duty on
Foreign Wool, if you please ; but keep in force the law.
go
which prohibits the exportation of British Wool from
this country." To this proposal we would not agree.
We could not, upon any principle of justice, open
our markets to an untaxed article of foreign growth,
unless the manufacturer would concede his monopoly over
the like article of our own growth. After years and years
of struggle and conflict, we at last succeeded in con-
vincing our opponents, that the duty on Foreign Wool
might be taken off, and the prohibition to export British
Wool be repealed, without endangering their interests.
And what has been the result? Where is the ruin
that was so confidently predicted ? I own I am more
and more distrustful of the predictions of these practical
authorities. Instead of our manufactures being ruined —
instead of the fulfilment of the assurances, that all the
British Wool would be exported, to the utter destruction
of our manufacturers, and that from their destruction the
Foreign Wool would no longer be wanted in this country —
what has been the real effect of this measure ? Why, that
since the removal of the restrictions on the export, we
have sent abroad the amazing quantity of 100,000lbs.
weight of British Wool ; while, of Foreign Wool, we have
imported no less a quantity than 40,000,000 lbs. weight.
This, Sir, is not speculation. It is practice and result
against speculation. We removed the restrictive and
prohibitory duties, and the consequences were, that we
imported an excess of the foreign raw material, while
we exported, comparatively, none of native growth — be-
cause, we had a better market for it at home. Good or
bad, therefore, the first measure recommended to the
attention of his Majesty's Ministers by the honourable
member has been carried into complete effect.
The second measure proposed for our adoption, by the
honourable member for Taunton, was a general re-
vision of the Revenue Laws, with a view to their sim-
plification. The honourable member stated^and he
2.3
stated truly — that those laws were so numerous, bo
complicated, and so contradictory, that mercantile men
could not understand them — that they were at once a
great impediment to trade, and a source of vexation and
oppression to all who were engaged in it — that no man,
however innocent his intention, could escape their pe-
nalties ; that, therefore, it was the bounden duty of his
Majesty's Government to simplify and consolidate them.
The task was one of great magnitude and difficulty ;
but, we did not shrink from it. My right honourable
friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, devoted a great
deal of time and attention to the subject : but, I am free
to admit, that we never could have succeeded in our un-
dertaking, without the assistance of an official gentleman,
in the service of the Customs, a gentleman* of the most
imwearied diligence, and who is entitled, for his per-
severing exertions, and the benefit he has conferred on
the commercial world, to the lasting gratitude of the
country. Of the difficulties of the undertaking, the House
will be enabled to judge, when I state that there were
no fewer than five hundred statutes, relative to the Cus-
toms alone, to wade through ; independently of the
numerous enactments concerning Smuggling, Ware-
housing, the Plantations, &c. In the performance of
this duty, we had innumerable difficulties to encounter,
and battles without end to fight. And now, Sir, in one
little volume,f which I hold in my hand, are comprized
all the Laws at present in existence, on the subject of
the management and the revenue of the Customs, of
Navigation, of Smuggling, of Warehousing, and of our
Colonial Trade, compressed in so clear and yet so com-
prehensive a manner, that no man can possibly mistake
the meaning or the application of them. I do not
* J. D. Hume, Esq. Comptroller of His Majesty's Customs in the port of
London.
f Laws of the Customs, by J. D. Hume, Esq.
say this to boast of the successful result of our Labours.
It was the duty of Government to do what it has done. I
only adduce it to shew, that this, the second recommen-
dation of the honourable member, as the organ of the
Commercial world, has not been disregarded.
Then comes the third recommendation of the ho-
nourable member for Taunton ; namely, that we should
do away with Prohibitions altogether; and substitute, in
all cases, protecting for prohibitory duties. I will beg
leave to read a short extract from what I consider a
very accurate report of this part of the honourable mem-
ber's speech. " Another desirable step," said he, " would
be to do away totally prohibitions, as much as possible."
To be sure, Sir, it may be difficult to reconcile " totally,"
and " as much as possible ;" but, I have no doubt the ho-
nourable member's meaning was to express his thorough
detestation of the prohibitory principle. " Where," he
continues, " protection for particular manufactures is con-
sidered to be necessary, it ought to be in the form of duty,
and not in that of prohibition. Prohibitions had, no
doubt, seriously injured the Revenue, by the encourage-
ment which they gave to smuggling. The Customs had
fallen off a million and a half, in the course of the last
year. He was sure that a good deal of that defalcation
might be ascribed to Prohibitions."
I intreat the House to attend to what follows in the
Speech of the honourable member : — " Nothing could
be more absurd than to suppose, that any prohibition
would prevent the introduction of the articles which
were in demand. The fact was, that, at an advance
of twenty or twenty-five per cent., all light prohibited
articles might be had at our doors. He would not say
which sex was most to blame, but such was the fact."
Now, here we have the opinion of a practical man, who
had come to this conclusion, after collecting the best
evidence upon the subject, during his repeated visits to
25
Paris. Indeed, I cannot help thinking, that the honour-
able member had Silk, and nothing but Silk, in his view,
at the time when he made these allusions. The honour-
able member has long been a professor of those doctrines,
which he now reprobates me for upholding, as much as
he then censured the Government for not more readily
adopting. Even in the year 1817 — also a period of dis-
tress— I find the honourable member declaring to the
House, that, " in the article of Silk, smuggling was
carried on to a very great extent ; a proof of which was
to be found in the fact, that although silks were in much
greater use now than formerly, yet that the British
manufacturer was ruined." So that it appears. Sir,
that in the year 1817, the Silk manufacture, which, ac-
cording to the doctrines of the present day, can only
flourish under a system of prohibition, was, in that year,
in a state of ruin, owing to prohibition.
The stairnation and embarrassment of 1816 and 1817
were followed by a state of unusual commercial activity.
In like manner, the depression of 1822 and 1823 termi-
nated in the extraordinary spirit of speculation, which
marked the autumn of 1824, and the spring and summer
of 1825. It is not irrelevant to the present discussion to
compare these two periods, each commencing with com-
mercial distress, and each ending in over trading —
each marked, in its first stage, by a great contraction of
our paper circulation, and the accumulation of a vast
amount of <rold in the coffers of the Bank, and, in its
second, by a great expansion of our circulating credit,
and by the re-exportation of most of the gold which the
Bank had previously accumulated. This comparison,
whilst it connects itself with the question now under our
immediate consideration, is calculated to throw some
light on the equally important question of the Cur-
rency, which, at this moment, occupies so nuich of the
attention of Parliament and of the country.
D
At the beginning of the year 1817, " the Bank," as we
are informed by the Report of tlie Committee of 1819,
" possessed a larger amount of cash and bullion in their
coffers, than they had been in the possession of at any
former period since their establishment." With this accu-
mulation, they gave notice of a partial resumption of cash
payments, engaging to pay in gold all notes under £6.
From the beginning of 1817 till the month of July in that
year, the whole demand for gold coin, under this notice,
did not exceed £38,000 ; but, in consequence of a great
augmentation of Bank Paper in August 1817 (exceed-
ing, by upwards of three millions, the amount of the
corresponding month in the preceding year), and of a
like augmentation of country paper, the foreign Ex-
changes were turned against this country; and, from that
moment, the gold was withdrawn from the Bank with
much greater rapidity. In the course of the following
eighteen months, many millions of coin were thus put mto
circulation, without any corresponding diminution in the
amount of Bank notes ; — or rather, to speak more accu-
rately, these millions, as soon as they were taken from the
Bank, were sent to France, and other parts of the Conti-^
nent, till the treasure of the Bank was ver}' much reduced
at the beginning of 1819 ; and then the amount of their
notes was again contracted. This contraction was fol-
lowed by a great depression of commerce, and of prices,
in the subsequent years. During this depression, the Go-
vernment were frequently called upon, as they are now
called upon, to give relief, by an issue of commercial
Exchequer Bills; but our first object, then, was per-
manently to rcstoi'e — as our first object, now, is effectually
to secure — a system of casli payments ; the success of
which might have been endangered by this mode of relief.
So much for the first period, as far as relates to our
Currency.
In the first stage of the second period (1822, 1823, and
S7
a part of 1824), the Bank a<Tain accumulated an amount
of gold, greater even than what it possessed at the begin-
ning of 1817. Between September 1824 and November
1825, that gold was again taken out of the Bank, under
all the like circumstances of the foreign Exchanges being
against this country, antl with the like results as had
occurred in 1818. Again, notwithstanding the issue of
so many millions of coin, the amount of Bank notes and
of country paper was increased : again, these millions so
issued were, for the greatest part, exported ; and again,
in the autum of 1825, the Bank was driven to take precau-
tions, by contracting its circulation, in order to protect its
remaining treasure. What has since occurred is known
and felt by all.
So much for the Currency; now for tlie Trade.
In 1813, and 1817, during the first absorption of
treasure by the Bank, the amount of Silk imported was,
upon the average of the tv.o years, 1,150,807 lbs: — in
1818, during the first flight of our coin to the continent,
that importation v/as raised to 2,101,618 lbs., being an
increase of 81 per cent. — Of Sheep's Wool, the average
importation of the first two years was 11,416,853 lbs. : —
in the year 1818 alone the quantity was 26,405,486 lbs,
being an increase of 130 per cent. — Of Cotton Wool,
the average of the two fii'st years was 423,580 bales : — the
amount in 1818 was 660,580 bales, being an increase of
57 per cent.
Let us now compare the import of the same articles in
the years 1823 and 1824, with the import of 1825. It
will turn out as follows: — Silk, average import of 1823
and 1824, 2,780,600 lbs. :-importof 1825, 4,231,673 lbs.,
being an increase at the rate of 50 per cent. Sheep's
Wool, average import of 1823 and 1824, 19,225,306 lbs.:—
import of 1825, 38,705,682 lbs., being an increase at the
rate of 100 })er cent. Cotton Wool, average import of
1823 and 1824, 167,120,065 lbs. :— import of 1825,
n 2
^8
222,457,010 lbs., being an increase at the rate of 33 per
cent.*
I will not go more at length into this subject. It
would lead me too far away from other topics, growing
more immediately out of this debate, to which I have
still to advert; but, I have said enough to point out, to
those who take an interest in these matters, the intimate
relation that exists between our Currency and our Trade ;
to shew in what manner the expansion of our paper
circulation, combined with an unfavourable foreign Ex-
change, leads to overtrading, till overtrading again forces
a contraction of the currency : thus, producing those
alternations of extravagant excitement and of fearful
depression, which this country has so often experienced
of late years ; alternations, of which the consequences
are at once so dangerous to men of capital, so distressing
to the labourers who depend for employment on that
capital, and so subversive of those principles of security
to property, on which the prosperity of every com-
mercial state must ultimately rest.
The immediate inference which I draw from this com-
parison is, that the present stagnation in the Silk Trade
is more produced by the late alternation, than by any effect
of the Law which will come into operation next July.
To return. Sir, to the speech of the honourable mem-
ber for Taunton. The fourth point to which he called the
attention of Government, was, the state of the Navigation
Laws. The change which the honourable member re-
commended would, in fact, have amounted to the total
repeal of those Laws. He thought, " that no restriction
ought to be held on foreign ships importing into this
country, whether the produce was of their own, or any
other country." Accustomed to look on these laws as
' 'riiese Returns for the years 1823 and 1824, arc matle up from .lanuary
to January, and for 1825 from October 1824 to October 182.5 ; — the Return
to January 1 826 not being yet received.
the prop of our maritiine power, and to watcli witli a
jealous eye any encroachment upon tlieni, we could not
consent to this sweeping principle of innovation. On
the other hand, we professed ourselves ready to inquire,
how far some of their regulations, inconvenient to trade,
nn'ght be dispensed with, without prejudice to the higher
political objects, for which these Laws were originally
enacted. This inquiry was gone into with great care, by a
Committee, over the labours of which, my right honourable
friend, the Master of the Mint, presided ; and the result
has been that, by his zeal and diligence, several measures
have been introduced to the House, which have led to a
relaxation in those Laws, highly beneficial to the com-
merce of the country, and in no way injurious to our
strength as a maritime power. But the principle of
those Laws is still retained. In this instance, certainly,
we have not been able to go all the lengths recommended
by the practical men ; but, be it recollected, that the
charge, against which I am now upon my defence, is that
we are theorists.
The Jlfth point which was strongly recommended by
the honourable member for Taunton, was the removal of
the Transit Duties on German Linens, and some other
articles of foreign produce. At the very time that the
honourable member was pressing for this removal, he must
have been aware, that his Majesty's ministers were sensi-
ble of the impolicy of these restrictions, and that they
were desirous, not only to get rid of them, but also to
revise the whole system of Bounties and Drawbacks.
But he could not be ignorant of the complication of in-
terests, and the difficulty of detail, which we had to
encounter, in every stage of this undertaking. He could
not be ignorant of the prejudices, by which this system
was upheld. For the abatement of those prejudices, we
thought it more safe and more expedient, to trust to the
influence of time and reason, than, at all hazards, to en-
30
counter them at once by an act of power. This was our
theory in 1820; and, I am now liappy to add that, by
adhering to it, we have been completely successful. The
Transit Duties have been all removed ; and the system of
Bounties and Drawbacks has undergone an entire revi-
sion, and been remodelled on an improved plan.
To come to the sixth recommendation of the honour-
able member for Taunton. He told us, that " it was
of importance that we should alter our Commercial
Regulations with respect to France. It was desir-
able," added he, " that all restrictive regulations be-
tween the trade of England and France should be
removed; but, to do so, we must begin at home.
It would be unfair to attempt a negotiation for a com-
mercial intercourse, while we kept our ports shut
against them. Let it be considered, that it was not by a
restrictive system, that this country had grown to such a
pitch of greatness; but, on the contrary, that such a system
was a bar to that greatness. It was necessar}^ also to
remove an impression which our system of commerce had
made abroad. We were looked up to as the first com-
mercial nation in the world; and it was, therefore,
believed, that we had adopted our restrictive or pro-
tecting S3'stem, from a conviction of its beneficial effects
on our commerce. This impression it was our interest,
as well as our duty, to remove, by altering our Com-
mercial Regulations with foreign powers."
This advice of the honourable member for Taun-
ton, his Majesty's Government have also attended to.
What have we done in this case? We have " be-
gun at home." We have set an example to the nations
of the Continent. We have put an end to the restrictive
system affecting France, as far as we could put an end to
it. And, we have invited France to follow in our track,
by doing away with the obstacles existing on her part
to a greater freedom of trade. France has taken a first
31
step towards ])lacing the intercourse between tlie two
Goimlries upon a footing of greater facility. This is a
practical approximation, on her part, to the principle of
a more enlarged system of commerce ; a principle, equally
recognized by the most enlightened statesmen, and the
most leading merchants, of that country; a principle,
which cannot fail to make its way in France, as it hiis
made its way in this country, by discussion and inquiry,
and which, in proportion as it gains ground, will confer
advantages upon France, and, by her and our example,
furnish a salutary lesson to the rest of the world.
As I have adverted to this subject, I will beg leave
to say one word, as to the Convention of Navigation,
recently concluded between the two countries; upon
which a misconception appears to have gone abroad.
I allude to the Decree of the French Government against
the introduction of the produce of Asia, Africa, and
America, through this country, into France, for home con-
sumption. The Regulation of this Decree has been mis-
takenly considered, as the effect of a stipulation under
the Convention. This I beg leave to deny. The
Decree is an act of the French government, quite inde-
pendent of the Convention. It might, and probably
v/ould, have been passed, had no such Convention been
made between the two countries. A similar law was jno-
posed to the Chambers last year, and then only postponed.
It is a Regulation of which we have no right to complain,
and against M'hich we have no right to stipulate; because,
the like restriction exists in this country. That for which
we had a right to stipulate, and for which we have stipu-
lated, is, that if, in relaxation of this Decree, any of the
productions of Asia, Africa, or America, are admitted into
France for home consumption, from this country, they
shall be equally admitted, and upon the same duties, in
British as in French vessels.
I do not deny that, beyond what ib provided for by
32.
this Convention, much might be done to improve <the
coninierciul rektions of this country and France ; but,
the basis is laid down, and the contracting parties
liave expressly reserved to themselves " the power,
of making, by mutual consent, such relaxations in
the strict execution of the article, as they may think
useful to the respective interests of the two countries,
on the principle of mutual concessions, affording each
to the other reciprocal or equivalent advantages."
The development and further application of this prin-
ciple must be left to time, and to an improved state of
public opinion in France. But, I confidently appeal
to the House, and to the honourable member, to say,
whether the best course for doing away with prejudices
and unfavourable impressions on the Continent, would
be for us to retrace our steps ; to re-enact the old
prohibitions and restrictions ; and to exclude foreign
merchandize and foreign shipping, as we had formerly
done.
Seventhly, and lastly, the honourable member for Taun-
ton recommended to his Majesty's Government, " an
extension of our trade with British India." In answer
to this suggestion, it is only necessary for me to say,
that our attention has been incessantly directed towards
that desirabte object. We have left no steps untried, to
prevail on the East-India Company to consent to an
enlargement of the Private Trade. To a certain point
we have succeeded, though not to the extent of our
wishes. If all that the honourable member sought for
luis not been done, the fault is not ours : we have no
means of compelling the Company to comply with the
wishes of the merchants. The vested rights of that cor-
poration, have been conferred upon them by I'arliament ;
and, inconvenient or not, we are bound to respect those
rights, till the expiration of that period for which they
luive been jinintcd.
S3
These are the principal improvements which were
urged on the Government of the country, in the year
1820, by the honourable member for Taunton ; speaking —
be it always remembered — in the name, and on the behalf^
of the Merchants of London. To all of these sugges-
tions, I say, his Majesty's Ministers have attended. My
right honourable friend, the Chancellor of the Exchc^
quer, who then filled the situation which I now hold,
replied to the Speech of the honourable member, on
that occasion. He repelled the accusation of the honour-
able member, that the Government were insensible to
the sufferings of the people. He avowed his desire to
proceed in the course that was recommended ; but,
he, at the same time, represented the difficulties by
which his endeavours had, till then, been opposed. Did
the honourable member acknowledge himself satisfied
with the assurance and explanation of my right honour-
able friend ? By no means, Sir.
So eager was the honourable member for Taunton for the
immediate enforcement of these important changes, that he
concluded his reply to my right honourable friend, in the
following terms : " as to the Petition itself, the principles
which it contained had met with so unanimous a support,
that he wondered whence that opposition could come, by
which the right honourable the President of ihe Board of
Trade seemed to be deterred from attempting any reform of
our Commercial System ; and he could not help expressing
a hope, that, for the future, that right honourable gentle-
man would not listen entirely to the suggestions of others,
but, in treating the subject, would rely on his own excel-
lent understanding."
With this admonition, the debate closed. The recom-
mendations of the honourable member — the great autho-
rities from which they originated — convinced the Govern-
ment, that the time was come, when they might go for-
ward with measures, to which they had long before
£
avo\Tied a friendly disposition. The consequence was,' a
determination, on their part, to institute an inquiry before-
a Committee of this House, in order to ascertain, how far,
and by what course of proceeding, the steps recom-
mended, and any others founded upon the same princi-
ples, could be acted upon, for the general improvement of
the Commerce of the Country.
In the other House of Parliament, a Committee was
sitting, whose labours were directed to the same object.
This Committee had been appointed upon the motion of
a noble Marquis;'" who had, at all times, taken the
liveliest interest, in whatever relates to the Trade and
Commerce of the country ; and whose principles, in these
matters, unlike to the grasshopper on the Royal Ex-
change, do not veer about, with every change of the wind ;
or with every fluctuation in the speculations of those who
transact business in that Exchange.
One of the subjects which particularly engaged the at-
tention of the noble Marquis, and of the Committee over
which he presided, was, the state of the Silk Trade. They
heard evidence ; they called for papers ; and they examined
witnesses, from every quarter. What was the result of
their investigation ? Why, Sir, they state in their Report,
that, " it appears to the Committee, that there is no
l)ounds to Smuggling, under the prohibitive system ; and
that, in the opinion of the Committee, protecting duties
might, advantageously, be substituted for prohibitive
ones."
Such was the view taken by the Committee of the
House of Lords, in 1821. I will not detain the House, by
going at length into the course of inquiry, by which they
arrived at this conclusion. But, some attempt has been
made this night to undervalue the Evidence of two
merchants from the United States, who were examined
before the Committee ; and examined, be it recollected,
* The iNIaifjiiis of I,niis(lf)\vii.
35
upon oath. These two merchant* came to Europe, for
the purpose of purcliasing Silks. They first visited
France; and then they came to England. They could
be actuated by no other interest, than that of pro-
curing Silks on the cheapest terms.
And what was their evidence? On being asked,
as to the relative cost of the silks of France and the
silks of England, one of them said, that " he had bought
goods in France and in England ; and that the difference,
when the quality was equal, was from twenty to twenty-
five per cent." And the other said, that " the difference
did not exceed twenty per cent." But, both of them
stated, that, in the article of Silk Hosiery, price and
quality considered, they greatly preferred the English
manufacture to that of France.
The Report containing this evidence, recommended an
alteration of the Laws relative to the Silk Trade, by the
removal of the duty on the raw material, and of the
prohibition on wrought silks. Honourable members, how-
ever, are aware, that the House of Lords could not, from
the nature of the proposed change, initiate a measure,
to carry into effect the object of this Report.
Nothing further took place till the year 1823; whfin the
honourable member for the city of London,* came down
to this House with a Petition from the Master Manu-
facturers of Spital- Fields, praying for a repeal of what
is generally called, " the Spital-Fields' Act." This, as
the House well knows, was a law for i-egulating the
mode of working in that district ; and for enabling the
magistrates to fix the rate of wages to be given for each
description of work. In short, a most unfit law to remain
upon the Statute Book; but the professed object of
which was, to protect the Men against the exactions of
their Masters. The only possible excuse for having
ever passed such a law is, that, when it was passed,
« Mr. T. Wilsor..
e2
36
the Masters had a monopoly of the Silk manufacture in
this country.
I will tell the House wl^ I state this. A deputation
of the Weavers of Spital- Fields waited upon me, and my
right honourable friend, the other day. They are a
sincere^ well-meaning, and, certainly, a well-behaved body
of men. After hearing their representations, I was satis-
fied, that if I had put it to them, to make their choice
between the revival of the Spital-Fields Act, or of the
prohibitory system — if I had said to them, " You cannot
have both a Prohibition and the Spital-Fields Act, but
you may have either the one or the other — take your
choice !" — they would have instantly said, " Give us the
Spital-Fields Act, and let the prohibition go to the winds."
So much for practical feeling ; which is now urged in
opposition to what is called theory !
And here I must beg leave shortly to refer to the
doctrine laid down in the Petition presented in 1823, by
the honourable member for the City of London, to which
I have just alluded. The Petitioners state, "that with our
unlimited supply of Silk from our territories in India, we
might be independent of the rest of the world ; that with
our great command of capital, and the unrivalled skill of
our artizans, the manufacturers did not fear the competi-
tion of any foreigners : and that, with a Free Trade, Silk
would become, like Cotton, one of the staple manufac-
tures of the country."
I do not mean to accuse these Petitioners of making
this statement, in order to entrap the public, and to
induce the Parliament to take measures, which they knew
would involve their own manufacture in distress : but,
I have a right to refer to their Petition, as well as to the
more general Petition of the Merchants of London, to
shew, that the measures which his Majesty's Ministers
have taken, are neither the offspring of theory, nor mea-
sures which they carried in opposition to the prevailing
37
opinion of the country, or of the Trade. They
brought forward these measures, because they were con-
vinced that they were founded in sound policy; butJiot
till they were satisfied, that they would meet with the con-
currence and support of those who had a more immediate
interest in their result. So far was Government from
any precipitation in carrying them into effect, that it was
riot till the year 1824, that they determined to propose
the repeal of the duty on the raw material, and to permit
the importation of foreign manufactured Silk, subject to
a protecting duty. They were aware that, without taking
the duty off the raw material, they could not attempt
this improvement; but, as soon as my right honourable
friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was enabled, by
the flourishing state of the Finances, to reduce taxation,
he did not hesitate to remit this duty, as the necessary
preliminary to the removal of the prohibition.
From that moment, we lost the support of the ho-
nourable member for Taunton, to whom I have so often
alluded; and his voice was only heard in opposition
to measures, which he had so long been recommending
for our adoption.
My right honourable friend, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, having, on the 23d of February 1824, stated
generally to the House, what it was our intention to do ;
it fell to my lot, on the 8th of March, to open the
measure more in detail. Then it was that I heard, for
the first time, of the serious opposition which the pror
posed measure would receive from the honourable mein-
ber for Taunton. Then it was, that, seconded by the
honourable member for Coventry, who opened the
debate of this evening, he declared, that, by the end of
the two years, which I proposed to allow before the
prohibition should finally cease, the Silk trade would be
destroyed.
This delay I now consider to have been the greatest
38
error that v/as then committed, and the origin of our
present difficulty ; as far as this trade is concerned.
*' Those," said the honourable member for Taunton,
" who propose this new plan, are completely ruining the
Silk manufacture of England. The moment this plan is
promulgated, the great object of all who have capitals
embarked in the manufacture will be, to disentangle those
capitals; and those who have no capital, except their
labour, will be left to stimggle for themselves, and pro-
bably to perish, for want of employment."*
Such, in 1824, were the gloomy forebodings of the ho-
nourable member for Taunton. Experience has made me
rather obdurate to all such prophecies ; for, so many are
daily made by individuals whose fears are excited, or who,
when they suppose their particular interests to be at stake,
attempt to excite fear in others, that I must have aban-
doned every measure which I have brought forward for
improving our Commercial Policy, had I allowed myself
to be acted upon by such forebodings.
Last year, for instance, I received representations from
the Iron trade — day after day, and month after month :
but, I could not share in their alarms. I must state this
however, with one exception. There exists in this country
one considerable establishment, in which iron is smelted
by charcoal in great perfection, but at a heavy expence.
This Iron is held in equal estimation with the best from
Sweden ; but, there was reason to apprehend, that it could
not, vmder the reduced duty, maintain itself in competition
with the latter. The establishment in question belongs to
a most respectable and scientific gentleman, well known to
many members of this House, — Dr. Ainslie. Having heard
his statement, I told him that, although I could not
alter a general measure to meet one particular case, I
would endeavour to devise some other mode of relief, if
he should be overwhelmed by the competition.
* Parliamentary Debates, vol. x, p. 817.
And, wliatdoes the House think has been the result?
Sir, within the last fortnight, that respectable individual
has sent me word, through an honourable member of this
House, not only that his fears have not been realized, but
that my most sanguine hopes had been confirmed — that
his trade, in fact, had in no degree suffered by those very
measures, which he apprehended would have been fatal
to it; and that it was, upon the whole, in a very flourish-
ing state.
Let us now see how far the predictions of the honour-
able member for Taunton, and the honourable member
for Coventry, have been realized. These predictions were,
that the Silk Trade would be annihilated, in the course
of the two years allowed to the manufacturers to prepare
for the change.
The bill passed this House in the spring of 1824 ; and,
during the rest of that year, the Silk Trade went on
flourishing and increasing, in the face of this threatened
annihilation. In the spring of 1825, there prevailed a
degree of excitement — a spirit of speculation — an exten-
sion of demand in this manufacture — to a greater degree
than had ever been witnessed before, in almost any branch
of trade. It was in 1825, that so many new factories
were erected ; so many new mills set at work ; so many
new looms occupied. The old mills were not sufficient :
many new ones were raised ; the erection of each of
which, I am assured, did not cost less than fi'om £10,000
to £15,000 : and several of these new mills have not even
yet been roofed in.
Thus, at the very time when, to satisfy the predic-
tion of the honourable member for Taunton, this trade
should have been in a state of rapid decline, the manu-
facturers were building to an excess, that had never been
equalled in the periods of their greatest prosperity.
The honourable and learned member for Lincoln has
alluded to the present condition of the town of Maccles-
40
field. I know what misfortunes and bankruptcies hiive
occurred there, and I feel the deepest and most undis-»
sembled sorrow, for the sufferings of that population.
I am aware of their distressed state at this moment. But,
I cannot help thinking, that the honourable and learned
meiliber, in stating their situation, should also have stated
some of the circumstances which have aggravated, if
not created, their present difficulties ; for, certain it is, that
the spirit of speculation has, in that town, been carried
to the greatest extravagance. According to the last
census in 1821, the whole population of Macclesfield
amounted to 17,746 souls. Now, I will suppose that,
between that year and the year 1825, it increased to
20,000. What then, in tliat year, was the demand for
additional labour, in the Silk manufacture alone, of that
town ? I have seen, and many other gentlemen have no
doubt seen, in a Macclesfield newspaper, of the 19di of
February 1825, the following Advertisement: — " To
" Overseers, Guardians of the Poor, and Families
" desirous of settlino; in Macclesfield. Wanted imme-
" diately, from four to five thousand persons,' — (Loud
cries of hear, hear!) The House may well express
their surprize ; but, I beseech their attention to the des-
cription of persons required by this advertisement —
" from seven to twenty years of age" — so that the Silk
manufacturers were content to receive children of the
tender age of only seven years — " to be employed in the
" throwing and manufacturing of silk. The great increase
" of the trade having caused a great scarcity of Workmen,
" it is sjuggested, that this is a most favourable opportunity
" for persons with large families, and Overseers who wish
" to put out children" — [children of seven years of age !]
" as apprentices, to ensure them a comfortable livelihood.
" Application to be made, if by letter post paid, to the
" printer of this paper."
Humanity is not tlie least remarkable part of this
41
precious document ; and the House will not tail to ob-
serve, how admirably the cruelty of confining children of
seven years of age, to labour in a Silk mill, for twelve or
fifteen hours out of Ihe four-and-twenty, is tempered, by
the inducement to parents to provide for their families for
life. What sort of provision that has been, the present
wretched state of those helpless infants will best evince.
And here I cannot help observing, that, at the very time
such an invitation was sent forth to overseers and parents,
by the owners of Silk mills, this House was very properly
occupied in passing a bill, to prevent the Employment
of Children under nine years of age in cotton factories.
Very soon after this Advertisement, and before the
Mills were finished, in which these children were to be
immured, there appeared, I have been assured, another
Advertisement, nearly in the same extravagant style : —
" Wanted to be built immediately, one thousand houses !"
— -doubtless, to contain the five thousand new inhabitants.
Yet, all this took place in the year 1825 ; just one year,
according to the honourable member for Taunton, before
the Silk trade was to expire for ever. I ask, then, what
weight can be given to the predictions of those, who, in
the face of these striking facts, continue to assert, that the
Silk Trade of this country will be annihilated, before the
end of the next twelve months? Can any man wonder,
after such an enormous extent of speculation — after such
inhuman efforts to induce so many destitute children to
flock into the manufacturies — after such an influx of po-
pulation—can any man, I say, wonder — all branches of
this trade being now in a stagnant state — at most of these
newcomers being out of work at Macclesfield — or, at the
fact stated by the honourable and learned member for
Lincoln — his hair almost standing on end with horror —
" thjtt eleven orders for the removal of as many paupers,
had been made out in one week ?"
Under ordinary circumstances, it could scarcely have
F
42
been expected, that theSilk manufacture alone could have
formed an exception to the general re-action, which has
followed over-trading and speculation, in every other
branch of commerce; but, under the circumstances of pe-
culiar excitement, which 1 have now stated, it would,
indeed, have been matter of surprise, had it escaped its
full share of the common pressure.
Sir, I feel that, upon this occasion, a heavy burden is
imposed upon me. I feel that I have not only to defend
myself from the attack of the honourable member for
Lincoln, but to say something- in behalf of my right ho-
nourable colleagues; — something in vindication of the
House itself, for the course which they have pursued, in
the adoption of the system of Commercial Policy which
we recommended.
As the whole of that system has been so vigorously
attacked, 1 shall, I trust, be excused, if I touch, very
briefly, upon the proceedings of the last session of par-
liament : — when, in furtherance of that system, and with
the cordial concurrence of this House, I brought forward
measures of a more general nature, than the Silk Bill of
the preceding session ; inasmuch as they went to effect an
important, and more extensive change, in the Colonial, as
well as in the Commercial Policy of the country. The
Colonial part of the subject had not, I admit, been much
pressed upon his Majesty's Government, either by repre-
sentations in thisHouse,or in discussion out of doors. But,
there are occasions on which it is the duty of a vigilant
Government, instead of waiting for such pressure, to watch
the signs of the times, and to accommodate iheir policy
to those changes in the world, under the continued
operation of which, a blind adherence to our former
system would no longer be either safe or expedient.
Upon this principle, I shall be ready to vindicate the al-
terations, great as they are, in the policy of our Colonial
Commerce, whenever those alterations may be called in
43
question ; but as, hitherto, they have not been aUacked
in this House, and as they received the special approba-
tion of the honourable member for Taunton, I shall
now say no more upon that part of the subject.
With respect to the alterations in our general Commer-
cial system, however extensive in their application, what
were the objects which they embraced ? They went to the
removal of useless and inconvenient restrictions, to the do-
ing away of prohibitions, andtotheloweringof duties so ex-
cessive, as to be in fact prohibitory on the productions of
other countries — restrictions, prohibitions, and duties,
whichjwithout benefit, nay, highly mischievous to our-
selves, have produced all the evil effects, and given rise, in
other parts of the world, the retaliatory efforts of foreign
Governments, to put down 'the commerce of this country.
These were some of the bad consequences justly attri-
buted to our exclusive system, by the honourable member
for Taunton and the Merchants of London, in the Speech
and Petition to which I have so often referred.
And here I cannot but express my astonishment,
that gentlemen (I am now speaking of persons out of
doors)— who must be better informed — whose sincerity I
cannot doubt— but whose judgment, in this respect, seems
to be most unaccountably perverted, impute all the pre-
vailing distress, as well as the derangement in the fo-
reign Exchanges, which preceded, and, in a great degree,
produced that distress, to this lowering of excessive
duties, and removal of unnecessary prohibitions.
I have called for the production of a Paper, which
has not yet been printed, but which will, I hope, in the
course of twenty-four hours, be in the hands of every
honourable member — for the purpose of shewing, what
have been, during the last year, the actual Imports of
most of the principal articles, the duty on which has been
materially reduced. From this document, it will be
manifest, that, although there has been some increase of
f2
44.
import in must of those articles, in none has it been
carried to any great extent. In manufactured goods, —
Cottons, Woollens, Linens, &c. the increased import
of the whole does not exceed a few thousand pounds.
And yet, in opposition to this decisive evidence, there
are those, I understand, who have had dealings for
millions in foreign Loans, who, to facilitate the payments
of those Loans, and other financial operations of foreign
governments, have sent million after million of our gold
coin, drawn from the Bank of England, to the Bank of
Paris, and who, in the face of such gigantic operations,
the benefit of which to this country (whatever it may be
to themselves) it is difficult to conceive — have been
pleased to attribute the unfavourable state of the foreign
Exchanges, during the last summer and autumn, to the
commercial measures adopted by Parliament in the pre-
ceding session.
I 9m happy to say, that where the duties have been
lowered upon articles of consumption, the result has
hitherto fully borne me out in all !i;y anticipations. In
the six months which immediately followed the reduction
of the duty on Coffee, the cousiumption of that article
has nearly doubled, without occasioning any decrease
in the consumption of Tea. Li Wine, the duty upon
Avhich, we were told, ought not to have been reduced,
without some reciprocity to the productions of this coun-
try, the consumption has also increased in an equal degree.
And thus it will appear, that the same amount of revenue
has been attained by the Government from diminished
burthens ; thereby leaving greater means of comfort and
enjoyment to the people.
I come now ^o the real jet of the Silk question ;
and which — I say it with all due deference to the ho-
nourable mover and seconder of the present motion — has
not been, in the slightest degree, touched upon by either
ofthera.
45
It is admitted, on all bauds, that Silk is an article
which can be easily smuggled ; and, that it is now smug-
gled, to a very considerable extent, in spite of all the
preventive measures that have, from time to time, been
adopted. Now, the object of the British manufacturer
is, as much as possible, to shut out the competition of
his foreign rival. If smuggling could be prevented,
I would concede to him, that prohibition would be
most effectual to this object. But, if it cannot, what
is the advantage of prohibition, over a protecting duty of
SO per cent.? I say, of 30 per cent., because, I never yet
conversed with a single merchant or manufacturer, who
did not admit, that if a higher protecting duty were im-
posed, the supply of foreign Silk goods would be thrown
into the hands of the smuggler.
The question, then, looking at it practically, is this :—
In what degree is Prohibition better, as against smug-
gling, than a well regulated duty? — by which I mean, a
duty sufficient to protect the British manufacturer,
without being so high as to afford a premium to the
smuggler.
In the first place, it cannot be denied, that the feelings
of mankind are more likely to restrain them from com-
mitting a fraud, than from violating a Custom-House pro-
hibition. I anj sure it will be conceded to n)e, that many
honourable persons, who would nut, for any ter.iptation,
be parties to a contrivance to evade a tax, and thereby
to rob the public revenue, would feel very little scruple,
in wearing an article that is absolutely prohibited, and
the introduction of which is not in opposition to any
moral duty.
So far then, the argument, in support of the assertion,
that a prohibitory law is the best check upon smug-
gling, makes directly the other way, and is in favour of
protecting duties.
But the great, indeed the only, argument in favour of
46
Prohibition, ill preference to a protecting dutj', is this — that
after the forbidden goods have been landed in this country,
and wlien they are in the possession of individuals, even
for their own use or consumption, you may follow them
into private dwellings, nay, into the very pockets of the
wearers, and seize them upon their persons, in the
King's name, at the bare suggestion of any common
informer.
To what does this power of seizing and examining all
who may be suspected of possessing prohibited articles
amount? Sir, it amounts to this — that if any man — no
matter what may be his rank, be he the humblest peasant,
or the highest peer in the realm — be suspected of wearing,
or possessing, a Silk handkerchief of foreign manufacture,
he is liable to have it taken from his neck or his pocket,
and to have his house ransacked, from the gcrret to the
cellar, in quest of contraband articles. If, without such a
subsidiary regulation as this — a regulation which encou-
rages the worst passions, engenders the most appalling
perjury and crime, and which opens so wide a door either
to fraud and collusion, or to intimidation and personal
violence — prohibition cannot be sustained ; then, Sir, 1
say, in preference to such a system, let us, in God's
name, have a well- regulated duty.
And here 1 hope I maybe permitted to digress for one
moment, to ask, how a great constitutional lawyer — a
staunch advocate for the popular character of our con-
stitution— a zealous stickler for the inalienable rights of
the people — a watchful guardian of tiie sanctity of an
Englishman's private abode ; — how he could so entirely
discipline and subdue his warm and boasted feelings for
the Liberty of the Subject, as to pour forth the declama-
tory harangue, which we have heard this night from the
learned member for Lincoln, in favour of this system of
prohibition ?
But, even with the aid of this power of search and sei-
47
sure, is prohibition an effectual remedy against Smuggling?
I have lately taken some pains to ascertain the quantity flf
smuggled Silks, that has been seized, inland, throughout
the kingdom, during the last ten years : and 1 find,
that the whole does not exceed £5,000 a-year. I
have endeavoured, on the other hand, to get an ac-
count of the quantity of Silk goods actually smuggled
into this country. Any estimate of this quantity must
be very vague; but, I have been given to understand,
that the value of such goods as are regularly entered at
the Custom Houses of France, for exportation to this
country, is from £100,000 to £150,000 a-year ; and this,
of course, is exclusive of the far greater supply which
is poured in, tliroui'h all the channels of smuggling, with-
out being subjected to any entry, in fact, to such an ex-
tent is this illicit trade carried on, that there is scarcely a
haberdasher's shoo, in the smallest village of the king-
dom, in which prohibited Silks are not sold ; and that in
the face of day, and to a very considerable extent.
The honourable member for Coventry has mentioned
the Silk goods from India, as those against which any-
thing but prohibition would prove an unavailing protec-
tion. JNow, in my opinion, it is scarcely possible to con-
ceive a stronger case, than those very Silks furnish against
the honourable member's own argument. I believe it is
universally known, that a large quantity of Bandana
handkerchiefs are sold, every year, for exportation, by
the East-India Company. But, does any gentleman sup-
pose, that these Bandanas are sent to the continent, for the
purpose of remaining there ? No such thing ! They are
sold, at the Company's Sales, to the number of 800,000
or a million of handkerchiefs each year, at the rate of
about four shillings each. They are immediately shipped
off for Hamburgh, Antwerp, Rotterdam, Ostend, or
Guernsey — a;id, from thence, they nearly all, illicitly, find
their wav back to tliis country.
48
Mark, then, the effect of this beautiful System — this
system, so lauded by the learned member for Lincoln.
These Bandanas, which had previously been sold, for ex-
portation, at four shillings, are finally distributed, in
retail, to the people of England, at the rate of r.bout eight
shillings each ; and the result of their prohibition is to
levy upon the consumer a iax, and to give to those who
live by the evasion of your law a bounty, of four shillings
upon each handkerchief sold in this country.
That nearly all the Bandanas sold for exportation are
re-imported and used in this country, is a fact not de-
nied, even by those who are now most clamorous for pro-
hibition. In a printed Letter from a manufacturer of
Macclesfield to the Marquis of Lansdown, I find the fol-
lowing anecdote : " It is the custom, in the parterres of
the theatres in France, to secure the place, by tying a
pocket handkerchief on the seat. I had the curiosity, at
the Theatre Fran9ois, to notice the appearance of them ;
and, out of twenty-five, immediately around me, there was
not one Silk handkerchief." 1 should have little doubt,
if a similar custom prevailed in the pit of our theatre, that
this accurateobserverwould find most ofthe seats decorated
with handkerchiefs of prohibited Silk. Nay, Sir, ifstrangers
were,at this moment, ordered to withdraw from the gallery;
and every member were called upon (of course in secret
committee) to produce his handkerchief, with the under-
standing, that those who had not prohibited handkerchiefs
in their pockets were obliged to inform against those
who had — I am inclined to believe, that the informers
would be in a small majority. Upon every information
laid under this prohibitory law, the chances are, that the
informer and the constable have Bandanas round their
necks, and that the magistrate, who hears the charge, has
one in his pocket !
Upon the motion of this evening, then, we have to
make our choice between a moderate protecting duty.
49
which can he collected, and is likely to be availal)le ; and
the g;o\ug hack to the system of Prohibition, which I have
shewn to be productive of such mischievous consequences.
But, since the repeal of the old Law, a further difficulty
has occurred in respect to Prohibition. Two years ago,
when a piece of Si!k was seized as foreign, the British
manufacturer could, upon inspecting it, at once say, " I
know, and can prove, that this is not of the manufacture
of this kingdom." If asked, " What is ycur proof?"
he would reply, " The superior quality and workman-
ship of the article : it is quite impossible, that any
thing equal to it should have been manufactured in Eng-
land. It wants that stamp of slovenliness and indifference
to improvement, which is the sure characteristic of all
Silk goods made at home." This is a very natural an-
swer for Monopoly to make ; but, it comes with a bad
grace from a British manufacturer.
But, it may be asked, if excellence of fabric was, at
that time, the proof that the article was not British,
why is it not so still ? I shall give the best answer to
this question, by stating what has recently occurred.
Soon after the alteration of our Law, an extensive
French manufacturer removed from Lyons to this coun-
try. He brought with him his looms and his patterns.
Under his management and superintendence, two Esta-
blishments were formed, one in Spital-Fields, the other
at Manchester. At both of thes-e places he set weavers to
work; fully satisfied, that a duty ofSO percent, wouldafford
him sufficient protection. His improved methods — with
sorrow I state it — excited the jealousy, and drew down
upon him the persecution, of the English manufacturers.
They charged this industrious foreigner, boldly, and
rashly, and — as in the end it was proved — most unjustly,
with carrying on his trade here, merely as a cloak to
cover the smuggling of foreign manufactured goods. In
their mortification at his success, they even went the
a
50
length of charging- my honourable friend, the Secretary
of the Treasury, and the whole Board of Customs, with
being cognizant of the fact, and parties to this nefarious
scheme for ruining the Silk trade of England. Thi>j
accusation was not merely insinuated in whispers : it was
contained in a published Report, inserted in the newspa-
pers, and thus conveyed, from one end of the kingdom to
the other.
T'his was not to be endured. The Treasury determined
to sift the matter to the bottom. They knew that, neither
at the Board of Treasury, nor at the Board of Customs,
could any countenance or facility have been given to
Smuggling ; but, they thought it not impossible, that this
French house might have been guilty of the irregularities
imputed to them, and that these irregularities might have
been connived at by some of the inferior officers. The
accusers, therefore, were called upon to substantiate their
charge, and were distinctly told, that the inquiry should
be directed in whatever mode they might point out as
most effisctual. They said, the clearest proof would pro-
bably be found in the Books of the party accused, if they
could begot at. The Books could not, certai-inly, be in-
spected without his consent. Did he hesitate on this point?
So far from it, that his immediate reply was, — " You are
welcome to inspect all the Books of our house ; and, that
there may be no suspicion of garbling or concealment,
let an officer go with me instanter, and they shall all be
brought here" (to the Treasury) " in a hackney coach."
This was accordingly done. His books were subjected
to a rigid examination. Every transaction connected
with his business was found regular — the names of the
weavers employed by him, the work which they had in
hand, and their places of residence, were all duly entered.
Taking with them a plan of Spital-fields, and without the
possibility of previous notice or concert, proper persons
went round to the particular bouses, which these books
51
had pointed out ; and, in every instance, they found the
names of the men at work, and the goods upon which they
were working, to correspond with the entries ia the books.
All this was most satisfactory to the Treasury, and the
Customs. But, the accusers persevered in their charge.
They insisted, that the whole was a concerted plot; and
that many pieces of Silk in the warehouse of this fo-
reio-ner, which he asserted that he had manufactured
here, were, in truth, the productions of France.
The Treasury, in consequence, resolved to sift the mat-
ter still farther ; and again, it was left to the accusers to
point out the mode In order to prosecute the inquiry,
they selected from their own body, the person whom they
considered the most skilled in the knowledge requisite
for the detection of such articles as might be contraband.
And what, towards him, was the conduct of the party
accused ? *' Go to my warehouse," said the Frenchman,
'* turn overall my goods; select from among them what-
ever pieces you please ; and, on the proof of their being
of English or of French manufacture, let my guilt or in-
nocence be finally established."
The offer was accepted. The person employed by the
British manufacturers turned, over and over, several
hundred pieces of Silk ; and at length, after the whole
ordeal was passed, the Board of Customs made known
the result, in an official Report which they transmitted
to the Treasury. That Report I hold in my hand. What
is the substance of it ? Why, that thirty-seven pieces had
been selected by this agent of the accusers, as being,
beyond all doubt, of French manufacture. What follovv-
ed ? These thirty-seven pieces were seized, and the
Frenchman was put upon his proof, that they were made
in this country. How did he prove it ? By producing,
one after another, the very men, by whom every one of
these thirty-seven pieces had been made; who proved,
upon their oaths, in the most irrefragable manner, that
g2
52
every inch of these goods had been woven by themselves
— Where ? Not at Lyons — not in France — but in Spital-
fields and Manchester !
I have stated these facts with feelings, I own, border-
ing- on disgust. I cannot but think it humiliating, if
not discreditable, to my countrymen, that an unprotect-
ed Foreigner should have been maligned and persecuted,
instead of receiving countenance and encouragement, for
having transported his capital and skill to this country,
and for being the first to set the example of great and
su-ccessful improvement in our Silk manufacture.
But, how does this detail, into which 1 have entered,
bear upon the present argument ? It shews, in the clear-
est manner, that, if you continue to seize Silk goods, in
private-houses, in shops, or upon individuals, you have
now lost your former test, by which you could prove them
to be of foreign origin. The most expert judge of such
articles, it is now legally proved, cannot discriminate
between the British and the foreign manufacture. Pro-
hibition, therefore, has lost its only recommendation : it
retains no advantage over a well-regulated duty.
But, appeals have been made to our compassion ; and
our feelings have been alarmed by the statement, that
above 500,000 individuals are at present engaged in the
Silk trade, and that ruin must inevitably be entailed on
this large and meritorious class of the community, if the
old law be not restored.
Now, supposing the number of persons employed in
the Silk manufactury to amount to 500,000, — their wages,
I assume, cannot be less, one with another, than 10^. a
week for each per-on. I have been told, indeed, that a
considerable portion of this number are children, some of
whom do not receive more than Is. 6d. a week ; and,
for this pittance, the hours of work in the mills, when the
trade was brisk, I have been assured, were, from five in
the morning, till eight or nine at night.
53
If this be so, let us not talk of the difference in the
expence of labour, between this country and France.
Will it be said, that a French child cannot earn in the
Silk manufactury,one shilling and sixpence a week ; and
that, without working from fourteen to fifteen hours out
of the four-and-tvventy ? Certainly not. Supposing-,
however, the average earnings of these 300,000 persons —
(an exaggerated nutnber, I am convinced) — to be ten
shillings a-week, thirteen millions of money would
then be the annual amount of wages alone in this manu-
facture. To this are to be added, the interest on capital,
and the price of the raw material : so that, the value of
the goods sold could not be less than eighteen or twenty
millions sterling. This, however, I consider too high a
calculation. The Lords' Report estimates the whole
amount at only ten millions ; but, allowing for increased
consumption since 1821, it may, perhaps, be fairly rated
at twelve or fourteen millions, exclusive of the quantity
smuffsled in from the continent.
If, then, fourteen millions of Silk goods are about the
annual consumption of this kingdom, what would
happen, if, according to the predictions of the honour-
able member for Taunton, the British manufacture
should be annihilated after next July? We should
not, 1 take it for granted, consume a less quantity
of Silk goods : the only change would be, that we
should have them, as it is alleged, of a better quality,
and at a less price. But, all the goods so consumed
would, in this supposition, have paid a duty of thirty per
cent, on their importation ; and the produce of that duty,
consequently, would exceed four millions sterling. This
largesum would be levied, without, in the smallest degree,
abridging the comfort or enjoyment of any other class of
the community. It would bring with it no increase of
burthen upon the consumer of Silk goods, and conse-
quently no diminution of his means of consuming other
54
articles. It would simply be the premium of monopoly
transferred to the Exchequer ; and the capital, for which
this (tionopoly was created, would be set free, to give
employment to other branches of industry.
Such, certainly, would be the ultimate result, if the
speculative fears of the Silk Trade should be realized.
But, of such an issue, I am persuaded, there is no risk.
The whole consumption of Silk goods in France is not
equal to the consumption in England. Now, supposing,
when the Bill comes into operation, there should be a
greatly increased demand in this country for French Silks —
this new and additional demand would produce a cor-
responding advance in the price of the goods, and in
the wages of labour, in France. To a certain extent,
there may be such a demand, especially at the first
opening of the Trade ; but, I am convinced that,' with
the attention to economy which competition excites,
with our improved machinery, our industry and inge-
nuity, and perhaps with the lowered prices of labour
and the means of subsistence — a protecting duty of
thirty per cent, will be found to be sufficient.
The House is called upon, by the motion of the honour-
able member for Coventry, " to inquire." Has it never
inquired before ? Has the House of Lords entered into
no investigation ofthe subject ? And, did not that inves-
tigation take place at a period, when taxation and prices
were very considerably higher than at present ? The
country, too, at that time, was labouring under much
distress ; and the Silk manufacture was suffering its full
share of the existing difficulties. Was that inquiry
loosely conducted ? Certainly not. A noble Marquis*
presided over the labours of the Committee, alike dis-
tinguished for talent, for diligence, and for the soundness
of his views, on all subjects connected with the Com-
mercial Policy ofthe country. It was the opinion of that
* The Marquis of Lansdown.
55
Committee, after taking a mass of evidence on oath,
that a Duty of fifteen per cent, would be an adequate pro-
tection, instead of a duty of double that amount, under
which the experiment is now to be made.
I Iiave stated, too much at length, I fear, the
grounds on which it appears to me, that this House ought
not to entertain the present motion. This statement, I
feel, must have appeared unnecessary, to those who think
with me on the subject of our Commercial Policy ; and I
dare not hope, that it has made much impression on those
who are the declared advocates of the restrictive system :
— those who belong to the same school of political eco-
nomy as the honourable Baronet, the member for Staf-
fordshire. In his enmity to all improvement, he told us,
the other evening, that the ministers of the present day
were only fit to form a Council for the Island of Laputa.
Since this intimation of the honourable Baronet's wish
to see us banished to that island, I have turned in my own
mind, what recommendation I could take with me to that
land of philosophers. Not a Letter from the honourable
Baronet, I can assure him ; for he has given us to under-
stand, that in mind, at least, he belongs to the Brobdig-
nagian age of this country. But, I think I have hit upon
that which would infallibly make my fortune at Laputa ;
— I will tell the honourable Baronet what it is.
At the time of the great Bullion controversy in 1810-
1811, the main question in dispute turned upon, what was
the real Standard of our money. We wild Theorists said,
as our simple forefathers had always said before us, that
the standard was, and could be, nothing else than the
weight and fineness of the gold or silver in the coin of
the realm, according to the commands of the Sovereign,
specified in the indentures of the Mint. Had this defini-
tion been admitted by the practical men, there would at
once have been an end of the contested point — whether
our then Currency was or was not depreciated ? But,
56
for that very reason, this definition was denied, by all who
maintained the negative of that question. More than
a hundred pamphlets were published on that side, con-
taining as many different definitions of the standard.
Fifteen of these definitions, most in vogue at the tim?', I
have since retained, as a curiosity to laugh at : but, they
may now, perhaps, be turned to a more valuable purpose.
Of that number I only recollect three at this moment.
The first defined the standard to be, " the abstract pound
sterling." This had great success, till another practical
writer proved, that the standard was the " ideal unit."
These two practical standards were, however, finally
superseded by a third, of which the definition was,
" a sense of value in currency (paper), in reference to
commodities." This last standard was at once so perfectly
tangible, and clearly intelligible, that I consider it as the
parent of the famous Resolution of this House, by which
the question was to be finally set at rest.
Now, if 1 should take with me to Laputa, this little,
but invaluable, collection of Definitions, I have not the
slightest doubt, that my pretensions to have the whole
monetary system of that island placed under my direction—
to be Master of the Mint — Governor of the Bank — and Su-
perintendent of all the Country Banks — would be imme-
diately and generally admitted. It is true, we have had
no authentic account of the progrei^s of political science,
in that celebrated island, for about a century past; but, it
is scarcely to be imagined, that it can have been so rapid,
as to enable their greatest philosophers to challenge the
pre-eminence of these Definitions, on the score of abstrac-
tion, metaphysics, and absurdity : and, at any rate, if the
philosophers should cabal against me, the practical men
could not fail to be on mv side.
I am not aware. Sir, that I have omitted to notice any of
the objections, which have been urged against the impor-
tant changes, lately made by Parliament in our Commercial
57
System. That these changes are extensive, as well as
important, I readily admit. Whether they will work ul-
timately, for good, or for evil, it becomes not fallible
man to pronounce an over peremptory opinion. That
the expectation of those who proposed them, was, that
they would work for good, no man will do us the injustice
to deny. That, up to this hour, I am fortified in that ex-
pectation, by the deductions of reason in my own mind,
by the authority of all who are most competent to form a
dispassionate opinion upon the subject, by the bene-
ficial result of every thing which has hitherto been done,
for giving greater freedom to Commerce in this coun-
try, and by the experience of the opposite effect which
vexatious and unnecessary restraints are daily producing
in other countries — is what I can most solemnly affirm.
I make this declaration, I can assure you, Sir, in all
sincerity of heart, and, as far as I know myself, without
any mixture of false pride, or any mistaken feeling of
obstinate adherence to consistency. I am the more anx-
ious to make this declaration, in the face of the House,
and of the world, because, of late, I have been assailed,
and distressed, I will own, by ungenerous appeals to my
feelings, calling upon me to commune w ith my conscience
and my God, and to say, whether I am under no visitations
of compunction and remorse, at having thrown so many
persons out of bread, in the trial of a rasii experiment,
and in the pursuit of a hollow theory. Good God !
Sir, that man must have a heart of stone, who can
witness without sympathy and the greatest pain, the
distress, which now, unfortunately, exists in most of our
other great manufactures, as well as in that of Silk. But,
whilst I hope that 1 am not wanting in the duties and
feelings of a man — I have also a duty to perform as a
Minister. If immediate relief be, in a great degree, out
of our power, it the more becomes us, as the guardians of
all that is most valuable in civilized society, to trace the
H
58
Causes of the present calamities, and to prevent, if
possible, their recurrence. It is on this principle, that I
am anxious to put an end to a System of Currency, which
leads to ruinous fluctuations in trade, and in the price of
all commodities ; which, whether in excitement or de-
pression, is alike underminino- the sober habits, and
the moral feelings, of the community ; which confounds
honest industry with unprincipled gambling; which
injures the poor man in the earnings of his labour,
and takes fi'om the rich man all security in his property —
a System, which creates delusive hopes, only to terminate
in aggravated disappointments — of which, every succeed-
ing convulsion must add to our inability to bear it — and
of which the inevitable tendency is, to drive capital and
industry to other countries ; not in Europe only, but
even across the Atlantic. The growing dread of insta-
bility here, the growing assurance of increased sta-
bility in those countries, would ultimately produce
this transfer ; and, with it, the further transfer of the
rank and power, which England has hitherto maintained
among the nations of the world.
If I have ventured to intrude upon the House by any
allusion to my personal feelings, they will, I trust, make
some allowance for the provocation which I have re-
ceived. This is the only place in which I can properly
reply to the unmanly appeals which have been made to
me through other channels. Such appeals, however pain-
ful to receive, have no influence on my conduct ; nei-
ther can they detract from the sanguine hope which
I entertain of better prospects and increased hap-
piness for my country. I hailed with great delight, the
other evening, the assurance of the right honourable
member for Knaresborough,* that he saw nothing in
our present difficulties to create despondency or alarm.
In this sentiment I most entirely concur. The existing
* Mr. Tierney.
59
pressure may, for a short time, bear heavily upon the
springs of our prosperity ; but, if we pursue a temperate
course, there is nothing to fear, and every thing to hope,
for our future progress. With confidence I cling to that
cheering hope; and, without looking forward to a long
life, I trust that I shall witness its realization.
Whether in a public station, or in retirement, my
greatest happiness will be, to feel assured, that the power
and resources of this country have been increased, by
those measures of Commercial Policy, which it has fallen
to my lot to submit to Parliament.
That such will be their ultimate result is my firm and
conscientious conviction ; and, in that conviction, I claim
for those measures the continued support of this House.
THE END.
LONDON;
PRIMED BY COX AND BAYLIS, GREAT QUEEN SIHEET, HNCOL:<'s-INK FIELDS.
PARLIAMENTARY SPEECHES
PUBLISHKU BY
J. HATCHARD AND SON,
PICCADILLY.
1. SUBSTANCE of Two SPEECHES, delivered in the House of
Commons, on the 21st and 25th of March 1825, by the Right Hon.
WH.LIAM HUSKISSON, respecting the Colonial Policy and Fo-
reign Commerce of the Country. Price 3s.
2. SPEECH of the Right Hon. the EARL of LIVERPOOL in
the House of Lords, May 26th, 1820, on a Motion o( the Marquis
of Lansdown, " That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire
into the Means of extending and securing the Foreign Trade of this
Country." Price 2s.
3. SPEECH of the EARL of J.IVERPOOL, delivered in the
House of Lords, the 26th of February 1822, on the Subject of the
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS of the Country and the Financial
Measures proposed for its Relief, Price 2s. 6d.
4. SPEECH of the EARL of LIVERPOOL, in the House of
Lords, on the 14th April 1823, upon laying on the table of the House
by His Majesty's command certain Papers relative to the Negociation
at Verona, Paris, and Madrid, on the Differences which had arisen
between France and Spain. Price 2s.
5. SUBSTANCE of the SPEECH of the Right Hon. FREDERICK
ROBINSON, on moving the Resolution to bring in Two Bills for
regulating the Intercourse between the West Indies and other Parts
of the World. Price Is.
6. vSPEECH of the Right Hon. F. J. ROBINSON, Chancellor of
the Exchequer, delivered in the Couuiiittee of Ways and Means, on
the 21st of February 1823, on the Financial Situation of the
Country. Price 2s.
7. SPEECH of the Right Hon. F. ROBINSON, Chancellor of the
Exchequer, on the Financial Situation of the Country, delivered in a
Committee of the whole House, on the Four per Cent. Acts, the 33d
February 1 824. Price 2s. 6d,
8. SPEECH of the Right Hon. GEORGE CANNING, in the
House of Commons, 25th April 1822, on Lord J. Russell's Motion
for a Reform of Parliament, Price 2s. 6d.
'B.^36006
^^^
600{V-.>;
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
AA 001 120 473 2
Central University Library
University of California, San Diego
Please Note: This item is subject to recall.
Date Due
INN y. 0 1995
JAM 3 is
0139(7/93) UCSDLib.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11