pray that the House will be pleased to take the premises into its most favourable consideration, and afford such relief, by the issue of Exchequer-bills or otherwise, as in its wisdom may seem meet." Ordered to be printed. SILK TRADE.] After various petitions against the importation of Foreign silks, from persons engaged in the silk manufacture, had been presented to the House, Mr. Ellice rose, and spoke, in substance, as follows:- I am sure, Sir, it is unnecessary to preface the statement which it will be my duty to submit to the House, in support of the motion of which I have given notice, by an appeal to its patience and indulgence. The numerous petitions on the table from every branch of our Silk manufacture would be at all times entitled to our serious and deliberate attention; and how ever much I may feel my own inability to do justice to the case of the petitioners, I am greatly supported by the general sympathy that exists for their distresses, and the anxiety that prevails in all quarters, to grant any relief that may be compatible with other paramount considerations, and interests. Whatever difference of opinion may exist as to the cause of their present distress, there is unfortunately no want of proof of its intensity, and the severity with which it bears on a large class of the population: and it is from a conviction, that it is the duty of parliament to accede to the prayer of the petitioners for further inquiry, before we decide on adopting the alterations, which the right hon. the president of the Board of Trade has given notice it is his intention to propose, in the laws affecting this manufacture, that I am induced to press their representations on the House. Before proceeding to the merits or details of this question, I wish, in the first place, to advert to some accusations that have been thrown out against me, in previous debates, as being willing to take the first opportunity of deserting, from some supposed pressure from without, those principles which have lately characterized our legislation affecting the general commerce of the country, and of which I have always professed myself a supporter and advocate. I might appeal to the right hon. gentleman opposite, for his testimony of the sincerity of these professions, and he must, at least, admit there has been no want of zeal on my part, either in the committee up stairs from which these measures emanated, or in my place in this House, in endeavouring to remove the prejudices opposed to us, or in giving such assistance as I was capable of affording, to those plans of reform, and amelioration in our foreign trade, which have reflected so much honour upon his administration, and conferred such benefit on the public interests. After the country had emerged from the late arduous and protracted war, during which our commerce, while labouring under all the disadvantages of a vicious system of regulations and restrictions, had been carried to an unexampled height, by the success of our navy, and by the almost entire destruction of the foreign trade of the rest of the world, a full and minute examination into the merits of that system, became essentially necessary, that every advantage might be given to our merchants and manufacturers, in the competition they were to expect on the return of peace. To the proceedings of the committee appointed to inquire into this subject, the opposition of interested parties was of course to be expected. The cry of "let well alone," incessantly urged against what were called rash experiments and inconsiderate innovations, assailed us from all quarters. We were not told, however, bythose who raised this cry,what other means, than the removal of the prohibitions and restrictions impeding the free course of our foreign trade, they proposed, to maintain our commercial superiority, which had grown up under a monopoly, when that monopoly had ceased to exist. But while every reasonable man agreed with the right hon. gentleman, as to the justice of his principles, and expediency of their immediate adoption, in all cases where great injury would not result to considerable classes, and even to individuals, from establishments having been formed and protected by an opposite policy, the greatest caution was yet essentially necessary in their application to the complicated interests of many essential branches of our commerce. The first direction in which we had to look for immediate competition was in our navigation and foreign trade, and I have given my unqualified support to all the measures of the right hon. gentleman, to encourage and extend these main sources of our national prosperity and security. The next object, though not second in importance, was, to endea on equal terms, a competition with manufacturing rivals in other countries? But, Sir, you must first place it on that equality. The public burthens must be reduced, and free permission given to exchange the produce of its industry for that of its neighbours, on terms of fair reciprocity. Without these advantages, every step taken by the right hon. gentleman for the partial application of his principles may be detrimental. If he will take the trouble to inquire, he will find even our own colonies in America supplied with some articles of manufacture from the United States; that the woollen ma nufacturers in Silesia and Germany are treading fast upon us; that an active com petition is rising in every quarter; and he can have no doubt of the vast superiority of the French and Swiss, in the manufacture now under our consideration. With the right hon. gentleman, I say, "freedom of trade," and that the removal of shackles and restrictions is the best and only adequate policy to meet the exigencies of our altered situation. My ob. your by degrees, and with the most de- who can doubt its ability to maintain, liberate care, to apply the same principles to the various branches of our internal industry; and here I differ materially with the right hon. gentleman as to the course he has pursued. Although I have always admitted, to their utmost extent, the difficulties Government must have to contend with, in carrying into full effect the act of 1819, for the reformation and adjustment of the currency, and in proposing to parliament the repeal, or amendment of the Corn laws: still these should have been their first measures, and preceded any attempt to remove protections, by which particular branches of our manufactures, and especially those most connected with our export trade, had been fostered and encouraged. If parliament had not, to satisfy the landed interest in 1822, shrunk from a firm perseverance in the bill of 1819, for the restoration of cash payments, prices would have been gradually reduced to nearly a level with those of other countries, whose circumstances are in any respect analogous to our own. Moderate and steady prices would have enabled the right hon. gentle-jections are only, that he begins where man to deal with greater facility with the Corn laws, and a more equal and steady demand and remuneration for labour might have followed. The next step should have been a revision of the principles and system of our taxation. We should have endeavoured to relieve the productive industry of the country, by removing all duties, and taxes bearing particularly upon it, substituting in their place, taxes upon the wealthier and unproductive parts of society. It is unnecessary, with reference to the present discussion, to enter into the question of the partial bearing of particular taxes on different classes of our own community; but, surely, no doubt can exist as to their effects on the cost of the production of those commodities, for which we depend upon a foreign consumption. I do not mean, Sir, to state, that nothing has been done in this respect, or that which has been done ought not to be taken as an earnest of the determination of the right hon. gentleman to persevere in the general application of his principles to our whole system: no person is indeed more anxious than I am, that this, for his own credit, should be the result of his unremitted labours in the office he so ably fills. With our superior capital, the acknowledged and increasing intelligence, energy, and industry of our population, he ought to end; that the course he has pursued may oblige him to retrace his steps in particular cases, and that in the conflict of interests this may occasion, the country may lose the 'benefits that would result from a cautious adaptation of these measures, successively, to different interests, and from a steady perse→ verance in them. Nor, Sir, is there a single objection urged in the petitions on your table, against the principles of free trade. The petitioners only pray, "the House will inquire, whether there are not grounds for suspending, for a season, and at this particular crisis, the operation of partial experiments, affecting their interests, which, if unaccompanied by other measures, may aggravate their present distress, and, in their opinion, expose every branch of the silk manufacture of this country to the greatest peril." In the first place, Sir, the petitioners complain, that the act of 1824, for finally removing the prohibition against the importation of foreign silks in July next, was passed without sufficient inquiry, or information, as to the consequences that must ensue from so sudden an alteration. No department of our internal trade has probably occupied so much of the time or attention of the legislature as this manufacture, since its first introduc continent, were two American merchants, who estimated the difference at about 30 per cent, or at least found a difference to that extent in the purchase of silk manufactures for the supply of their own market. I do not deny, Sir, that much good has resulted, that the public and the petitioners themselves have largely benefitted by the spur applied by the apprehension of this threatened competition, and that our manufacture has improved beyond precedent in the last two years. This was to be expected from the repeal of the duties on the raw material; but much is also to be ascribed to the more general intercourse, and greater means of procuring information as to the management and mode of conducting the trade in France. The petitioners now only pray, "for a little time for further inquiry, and improvement, before you determine to expose them incautiously to danger, which may be either much diminished, or entirely removed, by the delay of one or two years more. They desire to communicate to the House better, and more direct evidence on all those points, than could have been procured by the former committee; to submit to your consideration much important knowledge, as to the state of machinery, means of supply, and charges on the manufacture in France, and, above all, to direct your earnest attention to the still more interesting view of this case, as connected with our Indian and China trade.” tion and establishment in this country. Upon reference to your Journals, numerous instances will be found, of the appointment of committees, consisting always of the most distinguished members of this House, to inquire into, and report upon, different measures of regulation and protection, proposed, from time to time, for its improvement and advancement. I will not stop to inquire whether the means so devised were those best adapted to the attainment of the end in view. They at least prove the anxiety and solicitude of Government and Parliament to give every encouragement that could be suggested to the application of capital and industry to a new species of manufacture, in which we had to contend with the superior skill and experience of other countries, where it had been previously established, and carried to a high state of perfection. It had been described with justice, in some respects, as an exotic plant, but certainly it was the only extensive branch of manufacturing industry, in which our great political, and commercial rivals, had attained, and I am afraid still maintain, an admitted superiority. It had been reared gradually in this country, under the encouragement of a strict monopoly; to the protection of which monopoly the petitioners ascribe its progressive prosperity, and the important station it was found to occupy among our staple manufactures, on the return of peace. On the appointment of the committees of both Houses, on Fo. reign Trade in 1821, this case, as involving the consideration of one of the most extensive of our existing monopolies, was the first taken up by the committee of the Lords. Evidence was gone into, and considerable information obtained; and the present law, founded on their lordships' report, was the result of that inquiry. The petitioners then offered all the opposition in their power to the projected alteration, but were at last bribed into an unwilling acquiescence by the two years allowed them for preparation, and the expectation held out, that other measures would be adopted, before the expiration of that period, to place them, in respect to taxes, and the price of provisions, on an equality with their French and Swiss rivals. But still they warned the legislature, they were proceeding on slender evidence, to justify such hasty and important changes." The only witnesses examined on the comparative expense of manufacturing in this country, and the VOL. XIV. Having stated the general objects of the petitioners, and the grounds on which I feel myself justified to press upon them the consideration of the House, I will proceed, Sir, to lay before you such further details and information, as, I trust, will induce the House, at least to refer the whole subject again to a select committee. The petitions on the table are from every branch of this important manu. facture, and from persons whose interests, in many respects, are opposed to each other. Still all coincide in regarding precipitate alterations with apprehension and dismay. The throwster, the dyer, the manufacturer of broad and narrow silks, have each their case: and, although I fear I shall trespass on the time of the House, I must endeavour to state the objections they respectively urge, to what they conceive a rash, and dangerous interference with the growing improvement, and prosperity of their trade. The Throwster complains, in the first 3 B instance, and with reason, looking only to his separate interest, of the sudden and unexpected reduction, in the duty on the importation of foreign thrown silk. This had been settled in 1824, at 7s. 6d. per pound, as a fair protection; and, although it was evident so high a duty would be found ultimately incompatible with justice to the manufacturer, when all restriction was removed from the importation of foreign goods, still, the trade was little prepared for the sudden reduction of a third, by order of the Treasury, without notice, and without the previous sanction of parliament. The House, too, should recollect the precise moment chosen for this alteration; when all manufacturing industry was paralyzed, and this trade was in a state of the greatest depression, the warehouses being overloaded with immense stocks of goods, for which there was no demand, and to the loss on which, occasioned by other causes, this reduction of duty was superadded. What justification could the right hon. gentleman urge for this measure, or more particularly for its infliction on the trade at such a moment? Or, how are persons in business to conduct their affairs, if government be to exercise a discretionary power of this description, according to their caprice, without due notice, and without considering the sacrifices entailed by such material changes on individuals? It may be true, that a reduction of the duty at a proper season was indispensable, and that general notice had been given to the throwsters, that at some time or other, government would be obliged to propose it to parliament; but certainly they have good cause of complaint against the right hon. gentleman, if their statements are correct, and I hope he will satisfy the House better than he has hitherto been able to satisfy the petitioners of the paramount necessity for this sudden alteration. With the exception however of the manner and time, I agree entirely with the right hon. gentleman as to the principle and policy of a reduction; but, in fairness to the manufacturers, if these measures should be persevered in, reduction must be carried still further; and then let us examine the representation the throwster makes of his case. In the first place, he cannot, or oùght not to complain of the inferiority of his skill and machinery. On the contrary, I find no where in these petitions any allegations of this description. His complaint is confined principally" to the price of labour," which is the gravamen of the whole case. While this exists, he asserts, and desires to prove, "that the remaining protection is totally insufficient, that the capital invested in mills, and machinery will be entirely annihilated, and that the apprentices he has employed will be thrown on the parishes, to add at this crisis to their burthens." Are these statements admitted or not? and if denied, would it be an impolitic course, in the present feverish times, to expose the exaggerations imputed to them, by examination before a committee? Then comes the petition of the Dyers, who have also fair cause of complaint against the right hon. gentleman, not for his sins of commission, but of omission in their case. While he applies his principles of free trade, in permitting the importation of foreign goods, he forgets to remove the oppressive duties on various articles used in dyeing, and which put all chance of fair competition out of the question. Two principal articles used by dyers are soap and barilla. On the importation of the former, for be it observed we are now discussing the merits of free trade, not those of the excise revenue, a duty of 47. 10s. per cent is levied, being at least twice the value of the commodity, and amounting to an absolute prohibition. On barilla, an extravagant duty is specially imposed, for the protection of the coarser article of kelp, raised on the northern counties of Scotland, and defended on this especial ground by the vice president of the Board of Trade, the zealous advocate of his Highland constituents. On several other drugs, a list of which I hold in my hand, and which it is unnecessary to enumerate, the duties are equally indefensible. But I can have no doubt the right hon. gentleman, seeing of how little importance these duties can be to the revenue, yet of how much consequence to this branch of the trade, and to the success of his general measures, will prevail with the chancellor of the Exchequer to relinquish them altogether. The Dyers, like the throwsters, maintain, that their skill, and such machinery as they require, are quite equal to such as the French employ. The climates of Italy, Switzerland, and France, may be more favourable for particular details of their operations, but these are comparatively unimportant; and French workmen brought to this country, to assist in improving their colours, and other processes in dyeing, have admitted their own inferiority to English workmen, in many essential points. But, Sir, let the petitioners speak for themselves, and the right hon. gentleman, at least, will not find fault with the grounds and principles on which they rest their opposition to his proceedings. They say, in the petition now on your table, "Your petitioners would not for a moment feel alarm about competition, if their burthens were less heavy, if Englishmen were, in point of expense, placed on a footing with the foreigner; for your petitioners have no hesitation in saying, that in point of industry, and for ingenuity and colours in the art of dyeing, they do not fear competition with any nation upon earth. But, while every article of life bears so extravagant a disproportion between England and other nations, your petitioners humbly submit, that the Operative of this country is not in a condition equal to meet those fearful odds that are to be hereafter brought against us." It is unnecessary to add one word to this expression of the feelings and opinions of these petitioners. The right hon. gentleman will find in it the whole essence of the question under our consideration. I come now, Sir, to the more numerous petitions on your table, from persons of all classes and conditions employed in the manufacture of broad silks and ribbons, and who have hitherto enjoyed a monopoly of the supply of those articles in our home market. adopt the bill of 1824, by the unhesitating confidence then expressed by certain manufacturers of Manchester, of their ability even to compete at that time with the foreign manufacturer. Among the petitions on the table, praying you will arrest the progress of these measures, is one of considerable weight and ability, from these same persons engaged in the manufacture at Manchester, and their arguments, which I will not repeat, in favour of caution and inquiry, are entitled to the greatest consideration. Nor will I go into all the calculations that have been made from actual purchases of goods in France, and comparisons of their quality with that of others manufactured in this country. It is only necessary to refer the House to the printed papers circulated by the committee of manufactures at Weavers Hall, and by that most respectable and able gentleman Mr. Doxat on this subject. Some of these statements make the cost of manufacturing plain goods in this country 44 per cent above that in France, and considerably more on figured and fancy articles. If this be true, how is such a difference to be accounted for, and if it be not an exaggeration, and the difference cannot be reduced, of what use is a duty of 30 per cent, leaving still an advantage of 14 per cent to the foreigner, on the lowest quality of his manufacture? But if the case is so with respect to French goods, how infinitely do we find it aggravated when a comparison is made with Indian and Chinese silks? At the last sale at the India House, goods of this description invariably sold for less than the price of raw silk, added to the duty and expense of throwing; and this with the prospect of the ports opening for their admission to home consumption in July. Would 30 per cent in this case be sufficient, or was it possible, with any chance of being able fairly to The material points for examination by a committee, as connected with the broad trade, are, whether the proposed duty of 30 per cent is a fair and sufficient protection, when the monopoly is destroyed, and whether there is a reasonable probability of our being able to enforce so high a duty, when the great impediment to smuggling transactions, the power of seizing foreign goods under the present prohibition, when exposed for sale, is given up. Although I may differ ulti-collect it, to impose a greater duty? But mately with the opinions of the petitioners on both points, I think the statements they now make, and the evidence they are prepared to adduce in support of them, entitled to the most serious and deliberate attention of this House. I have before said, the principal evidence on which the former committee proceeded, was that of two American merchants, who had some experience of the relative cost of silk goods in France and in this country; and the House was further encouraged to other considerations arise from this statement. One of the great objects of the right hon. gentleman was so to encourage this manufacture, as to lead us to hope for an extension of it by an export trade. To the direct imports from India and China, have been added others from America, where no market could be found, even at low prices, for Indian and Chinese silks. What hope, then, can we have of selling similar goods to a profit, which cost 50 or 70 percent higher? And this remark ap |