Debates anti! Wrottellings hi Varliatnent.
THE NAVIGATION-LAWS.
In the House of Commons, on Monday, the first order of the day was the Committee of the whole House on "Navigation and Regulation of Ships and Seamen." On the motion that the "Speaker do leave the chair," an at- tempt was made to get a general statement of the Ministerial scheme before going into Committee. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON, Mr. Roars/so_x , Mr. BEERTES, and Mr. HUDSON, pressed for reasons why there should be any Committee at all; at least, they desired some indication of the,proposals which were to be made to the Committee. Mr. LABOUCRERE rejected the proposal, as irregular and inconvenient; and referred to the terms of his resolution for the indication required. Mr. HUDSON observed, that the re- solution bad been handed to two or three persons behind Mn Labonchere himself, but he had not had the courtesy to show it to the Opposition side. Mr. Tlioniewair reminded the House, that, according to its standing orders, any bill relating to trade, or alterations of the laws concerning trade, must originate in a resolution come to in a Committee of the whole House.
If honourable Members objected entirely to any the least alteration of the Na- vigation-laws—(" No, no! "from Mr. Hudson)—they might properly oppose the going into Committee. Many extensive shipowners agrd that certain existing regulations were most absurd—such as that which prohibited the produce of Asia, Africa, and America from being imported from Europe; but in order to get rid of that, the House must go into Committee. The following passage of the Speech at the opening of the session was read by the Clerk at the table, and referred to the Committee— "Her Majesty recommends to the consideration of Parliament the laws which regulate the navigation of the United Kingdom, with a view to ascertain whether any changes can be adopted, which, without danger to our maritime strength, may promote the commercial and colonial interests of the empire." The House then went into Committee; and Mr. LABOUCHERE made a speech tracing the history of the Navigation-laws, sketching their present provisions, explaining the case against their continuance, and indicating the changes to be proposed by the Government. In a brief exordium, Mr. Labouchere noticed the reverence with which English- men had regarded these laws, and the defences and eulogies which they had drawn from our greatest statesmen, historians, and philosophers. On the other hand, he quoted the eloquent wisdom of Burke to justify modifications of the laws "ac- cording to the change of times and the fluctuation of circumstances"; and re- minded the House of the great commercial and industrial changes in out own times which it had already been thought wise to make. In the reign of Richard the Second was passed the first Navigation-law in the English code. It enacted broadly, " that no subject of the King should ship any merchandise outwards or homewards in any but ships of the King's liegeance, on pain of forfeiting all the merchandise shipped." This act was found too strong, and was next year altered: foreign ships were allowed to take freights if English could not be found. Some years after, reasonable freight-charges, and later still, a tariff of maximum freight-charges, were enacted for ships going between England and the chief ports of Europe. A system of exclusive monopoly lasted, with mo- difications, to the time of Elizabeth, when a new principle entered the law—the principle of protection by differential duties. During Elizabeth's reign, this principle was adopted and acted upon throughout Europe, with but one excep- tion. Holland, by a system of unrestricted freedom—by making her marshes the home of every citizen of the world who chose to seek them—built up the most magnificent fabric of commercial greatness and political power that up to that time the world had ever seen. While in this reign our foreign trade was some- what opened, our coasting trade was for the first time made a close monopoly: the trade with our colonies, which then first grew important, was placed in the same position. With the Commonwealth commenced the system which attained full development in the Navigation Act of Charles the Second. That system was founded rather upon motives of state policy than maxims of trade; and was framed, firstly, in the hope of impeding the intercourse of the Royalists with their foreign allies, and secondly, in simple jealousy of the great carrying trade then enjoyed by the Dutch. Its principle was monopoly and exclusion; its end was to make the British empire self-supported and self-relying. Its leading features have subsisted to the present day; though many successive events have inter- fered with its grand aim, and gradually abridged its action. The first great breach in the system followed on the American war. A gre; colonial trade suddenly became a foreign trade when the independence of our Co- lonies was acknowledged. Any self-supporting poser till then enjoyed by the empire was destroyed; and in particular, the great intercolonial traffic which had subsisted till then between the United States and the West Indies was cut oft, Parliament was owoollling tf aeespt all the consequences of such changes: the in_ finenee of Mr. Pa felled him wain he, wisely and courageously, proposed to con. thine the commercial intercourse 4If the estranged countries on its former footing, Grievous embarrassments arose. No fewer than 15,000 slaves perished between 1780 and 1787, from want of the accustomed supplies of food from America, Palliatives were at last applied, and step by step a freer intercourse was allowed' It has been reserved for our own times to give to the British West India Islands a perfect freedom of access to the United States for supplies. Other important changes had been the admission of Ireland to the English trade, the establish- ment of free ports, the introduction of the warehousing system, and the recipro- city treaties of Mr. Huskisson. Lastly and recently, came the measure adopt, for enabling those inland countries which, by means of steam navigation and of rivers, can carry on an intercourse with the sea near to the mouths of those rivers, to use the ports which they approach as if they were ports of their own. Mr: Labouchere thought that no man who looked into results could fail to see that this last measure had made a breach in our navigation system which it is too late to repair, and which it will be exceedingly difficult to prevent becoming much wider.
The existing law on the subject is comprised in three statutes. One is the NIL_ vigation-law, properly so called—the 8th and 9th Victoria, chapter 88—which is a summary of the provisions of our Navigation-laws; the next is the act regulating the registration of British vessels, being the 8th and 9th Victoria, chapter 89. and the third is the statute for consolidating the laws relating to merchant sea- men and for keeping a registry of seamen, being the 7th and 8th Victoria, chapter 112. The Navigation-law enacts, with regard to our foreign trade, that certain enumerated European articles can only be imported in British ships, or in ships of the country from which the goods are exported, or of which the goods are the produce. Articles the produce of foreign Asia, Africa, and America, can only be imported direct from the producing country, in ships of that country, or in Bri- tish ships. With regard to our colonial trade, it is throughout the empire--ex- cept the trade between this country and India, which is open to certain foreigners under treaty—confined to the medium of British ships, and kept quite to our- selves. A British ship in the foreign trade must be navigated by a British mas- ter, and by a crew at least three-fourths of which are British seamen, and about one-sixth apprentices. The term British seaman excludes a Lancer. Further- more, a British ship must have been British-built, and must be British-owned. There is an anomalous legal rule, that a foreigner naturalized in Great Britain can become a British shipowner, while a foreigner naturalized in any of our Colo- nies cannot do so. As to the ships of our coasting trade, they must be wholly manned by British seamen. The conclusion that these laws require alteration is supported by considera- tions regarding the security equally of the colonial trade, the long voyage trade, and the carrying trade. With regard to the colonial trade, Mr. Labonchere thought it impossible to deny the claim of the Colonies, that restrictions origi- nally imposed on all for the good of all, and now removed from the Mother- country alone, should also be removed from the Colonies. Restrictions had ever been the leading colonial grievances. Mr. Huskisson even thought that they had more to do with the American war of separation than the question of taxation it- self. Historical research would support that opinion. Mr. Labonchere referred to the history of Bryan Edwards, replete with accounts of complaints and strug- gles about navigation restrictions. So at this day, remonstrances and complaints against the Navigation-laws come from all parts of our colonial possessions. On the 11th of July 1847, the Legislative Council and Assembly of Canada adopted a joint address to our Queen praying for the opening of the St. Lawrence to all nations, and the abolition of the Navigation-laws. The United States strive by every means to entice across their own territory the traffic from the great Western lakes to the seaboard; and further inducements than exist must be offered by the rival route of the St. Lawrence. Considering the parties and the circumstances, a mere important document than that address could hardly solicit the attention of Parliament. In a despatch dated 16th March 1847, Lord Elgin supported the address with these statesmanlike opinions—" It will probably-be urged in certain quarters, that the monopoly of the river navigation is essential to the maintenance of British- supremacy in this portion of North America, and that the authority of the Mother-country will be imperilled if the United States are permitted to share the privilege. It may well be doubted, however, whether these apprehensions are well founded. One of the most efficacious expedients for securing the allegiance of a high-spirited and enterprising people, is to convince them that their material interests will not be advanced by separation; and with respect to any disposition on the part of the United States to resort to a policy of aggression, I think it may safely be affirmed that nothing will be more likely to keep such a tendency in check than the knowledge that it will entail the de- struction of a flourishing trade in which the citizens of that country are largely engaged." Mr. Labouchere read an extract of a memorial to the Queen from the House of Assembly of Jamaica. The memorialists pointed to the singular natural ad- vantages possessed by Jamaica for becoming a great commercial depot, where as- sorted goods could be brought, and where merchants from Western Europe and Eastern Asia, and from North and South America, and the thousand islands of the great Gulf, could come to purchase and reexport. They argued, that good only could result to English commerce, both on land and afloat, from such a new mart; and they prayed for a relaxation of the Navigation-laws, and for the free opening of their ports. He read some extracts froma despatch dated January 1847, by Governor Harris, advocating for Trinidad a relaxation of the Navigation-laws. Governor Harris stated that such a course would originate a great direct com- merce between that island and France and Spain, in place of the restrained and indirect trade with these states now maintain through Martinique and the Spanish main. Looking to the peculiar qualifications of our West India Islands for becoming great entrepdts to the whole Western world, it was impossible to foretell the extension of commerce that might follow on their acquiring rights of unrestricted intercourse. He closed this branch of his subject with an anecdote of one of the greatest North American merchants. Mr. Gillespie, a Protectionist, and one who lamented the removal of the colonial preferential duties, lately came to the Board of Trade office, and stated, that if the Navigation-laws were not repealed—now that the preferential duties were taken off—he had made up his mind to abandon the West India trade. Mr. Labouchere could not but allow that the restrictions which would drive such merchants from the co- lonial trade were untenable by that majority of the House who refused to retrace their steps and reimpose the abolished differential duties. As to the long voyage trade, the law prohibited exportation from Europe of Aga- tic, African, and American produce, and compelled its importation in native or Bntish ships direetfrom the producing country. [On this division of his subject Mr. Labonchere adduced no illustrations which would be new to the readers of the Spectator. He had received information that Members of the Opposition were prepared to abandon some part of the Navigation-laws; and he suspected it Was this.] He remarked that the pecuniary mulct on actual trade which this branch of the law inflicted was a trifling matter compared with the national loss it occasioned by preventing trade from being carried on at all.
Then as to the security of the indirect or carrying trade, the question whether or not the carrying trade shall be retained no longer rests with us alone. Foreign nations have acquired new powers, and have given us no obscure intimations of new
Previous page
