House of Commons
Wednesday, July 1, 1812.
Petition of Silk Manufacturers Respecting the Renewal of the East India Company's Charter.]
A Petition of several silk manufacturers was presented and read; setting forth,
"That, at a time when unfortunate circumstances have deprived the petitioners for a series of years, of the regular supplies of the raw materials which they used to draw from the continent of Europe, they have anxiously looked up to the exertions of the East India Company in order to draw from India those resources which that country could in a great measure afford, and which are absolutely necessary to the preservation of the silk manufactory in this country; and that although the court of directors of the East India Company have uniformly professed to be sensible of the great importance of the silk manufactory in a national point of view, and consequently of the necessity of encouraging in India the extended culture and improvement of the raw material for the purpose of encreasing its consumption at home, not only the result of their exertions has not been such as the petitioners had reason to anticipate, but their importation of raw silks since the year 1807, when first the petitioners began to be deprived of the regular supplies they used to draw from the continent of Europe, has fallen very short of what it used to be in those years which afforded them a copious supply of Italian silks; and that it is, therefore, with the utmost surprize and concern, that the petitioners observe the following proposal made to his Majesty's ministers by the court of directors, "That it being desirable, as well for the public as for the Company, that the quality of silk grown in India should not be deteriorated, it is submitted that this article be confined to the Company;" and that the experience of the petitioners enable them to assert, that motives of private interest alone, and an absolute disregard of those public grounds on which the court of directors professes to act, could have suggested the proposal above recited, inasmuch as the improvement introduced in the silk factories in India was not derived from the local knowledge and skill of the servants of the East India Company, but from the information and assistance afforded them by individuals who had obtained an accurate knowledge of the manner in which raw silks are prepared in the southern part of Europe; and that, in corroboration of the petitioners' statement, and in direct contradiction of the claim preferred by the East India Company, the best raw silk imported from India was first reeled in and obtained from a free factory; and that the same causes which have hitherto deprived the silk manufacturers of a regular supply of raw silks from India are likely to operate constantly to their detriment under the management of the East India Company; and, among others the uncertainty of adequate funds being always secured for that purpose, those which ought to have been reserved for the silk investments having frequently been diverted, whenever a temporary pressure has been felt in other departments; and that from the foregoing facts, and from their general experience, the petitioners are convinced, that, so long as they are dependent on the East India Company for the necessary supplies of the raw material, so long must they expect to suffer from continued scarcity and disappointment; and that the petitioners can have no hope of the improvement of which Bengal silks are susceptible being attained under the management of the East India Company, the individuals appointed to superintend that branch of trade being selected in conformity to regulations in no respect compatible with a perfect knowledge of the qualities of silks required for the silk manufactory in this country; and that nothing but the liberty afforded to individuals, possessed of such knowledge, to pursue uncontrolled such measures as may be best calculated to promote the object in view, can support the petitioners in the hope of obtaining, at some future time, a regular supply of Bengal silks ultimately adequate in quantity and quality to supersede, in a great measure, the necessity of having recourse to foreign nations for a supply of the raw material, without which the silk manufactory cannot be preserved in this country; and that the petitioners throw themselves on the justice of the House, confident that the great importance of the silk manufactory will not be overlooked in the discussions which are to determine the abandonment or the renewal of the East India Company's Charter."
Ordered to lie upon the table.
Excise Duties Bill—Leather Tax
begged that the third reading of this Bill might be postponed till to-morrow, the parties interested being in the very act of instructing their representatives to oppose it.
could not consent to any delay, but moved that the Bill be now read a third time.
begged of the right hon. gentleman to hesitate before he passed a Bill, which went to affect, in a very severe degree, 80,000 persons in this city, and 800,000 persons in the country. A tax on starch, a tax on bread, or a tax on cattle would be objected to. What was this but a tax on cattle? A tax on leather was a tax on machinery, on every implement used in husbandry, and on the shoes of all farmers servants. Pro tanto, it went to raise the price of bread. It was in the nature of a poll tax, and went to affect every man in our army and navy, to the number of about 800,000, each of whom consumed from two to six pairs of shoes every year. Was this the way to raise taxes? This was taxing government with one hand, to pay it with the other. It was the Chancellor of the Exchequer taxing the Secretary of War. He gave notice that he should, early next session, bring forward a motion on the subject of the property tax, as it was made to affect farmers, conceiving that tax, in the way in which it affected them, as being inconsistent with sound policy, morality, and justice.
, in answer to the observations which had fallen from several gentlemen in respect to the tax on hides, stated, that measures were adopted for relieving the tanner from what he thought was a hardship, in being taxed for the stock in hand: the relief so given would comprise the quantity of hides in process of tanning, and not the raw material untouched; because it would be a most injurious mode of proceeding towards the public, to allow the tanners to put half a million of money into their pockets, by extending the relief to the whole of the stock in hand. In many places the trade had eighteen months stock, in others they had only five months. He should be wanting in his duty to the public, if he were to concede their demands, wholly and without limitation. No doubt the price of the commodity to the consumer would be raised; he hoped not too much. If the tanners next session could make a case sufficient to call upon parliament for further relief, unquestionably it would be granted. There were some other benefits to be afforded to the trader. He should propose to give an increase of drawback on articles exported in a manufacturing state.
A long conversation afterwards took place on the question that the Bill be read a third time, when
suggested the propriety of reserving the opposition till the schedule applicable to the tax in question came to be considered.
The Bill was accordingly read a third time, On the schedule applicable to the Tax on Leather, the House divided—for the Clause 86, Against it 78; Majority 8.—The House again divided on a question, that the further discussion of the Bill be adjourned till to-morrow. For the Adjournment 64, Against it 81; Majority 17.—The Bill was then passed.
Penitentiary House
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply,
moved, that a sum of 30,000l. should be granted to his Majesty, towards building a Penitentiary House. In submitting this motion to the committee, he stated, that the whole expence of the intended Penitentiary House was estimated at 260,000l. From the nature of the plan, however, the building was to be divided into six parts, each of which would be built separately; so that, with the sum now proposed to be voted, he hoped considerable progress would be made by next year towards building a wall to encircle the intended space within which the prison was to be, and towards building one of those parts.
acceded to the propriety of building a Penitentiary House, but objected to the enormous expence at which it was to be accomplished.
not alone strongly reprobated the expenditure of such a sum as 30,000l. at this particular crisis, but objected to the system of Penitentiary Houses altogether, which, he was convinced would ultimately prove to be nothing but seminaries for vice.
took that opportunity of entering into a defence of the system adopted towards the prisoners in Cold-Bath-fields prison, which he said he knew, from ocular demonstration, to be of the most admirable description. This he was induced to do from some observations which had fallen from an hon. baronet (sir F. Burdett) on a former night.
said, that the principle of building Penitentiary Houses had been approved by the House, who had passed laws upon the subject long since. He admitted that the estimate of the expence of the proposed building was very enormous, but he begged to assure the House that economy should be most studiously consulted, and that if the expence could be lessened, it certainly should.
spoke in favour of the motion. He detailed a calculated proportion of crime in England and Scotland, which he said was ten to one less in Scotland than in this country. This he ascribed to the prevalence of education, which generated habits of reflection.
supported the motion, both on the ground of economy, and the moral use of penitentiaries.
said, that at a time when the taxes were so grievous, and so much discontent prevailed, the House should be cautious how they sanctioned such a motion. He wished the experiment of education to be tried on the poor, which he thought would be more efficacious and less expensive, than the proposed establishments.
said, that he had just given a reluctant consent to the leather tax on the ground of necessity, and thought the present a very inauspicious moment to ask for so large a grant. The plan appeared to him a very expensive one.
merely wished to state his concurrence in opinion with the hon. gentleman who spoke last on the subject of this estimate. He was not disposed to question the general policy of this institution, which, if the country were placed in a different situation, it might be very desirable to establish; but, in the present state of our finances, not only all useless expences must be avoided, but all, which though useful, were not absolutely necessary; and he should therefore feel it his duty to take the sense of the committee as to the propriety of this grant.
The Committee then divided; For the Grant 41, Against it 7; Majority 34.