, in rising to present a petition from "the Inhabitants of Calcutta against the Imposition of a Stamp Tax," said, that whether he considered the place from which the petition came, or the nature of the grievances of which it complained, he felt himself borne out in stating, that the petitioners possessed peculiar claims upon the attention of the House. In the first place, it related to a grievance in regard to the raising of money upon British subjects—a matter which was an object of the highest importance. In the second place, the petitioners were a large and respectable body of individuals, whose characters stood as high as those of any other class of persons in the British dominions, and who, from their present unrepresented condition, had peculiar claims upon the attention of the House. And, in the third place, it related to, and interested all, the Indian native inhabitants, and all the unplaced and unofficial European inhabitants of Calcutta, the capital of a territory containing eighty millions of inhabitants. The object of the petition was to complain of the Stamp-duty which had been imposed, by the regulations of the government of India, within the last fourteen months. The petitioners complained of this tax, as being illegal, impolitic, and unjust. With respect to the first ground of their complaints, he would say nothing. It had been already determined, by the Superior Court of Justice at Calcutta, that it was legal; and, if the petitioners disputed that judgment, they could appeal against it to the king in Council. With respect to the other objection, it related to the particular operation of the duty. It had been stated, that they did not contribute their full proportion to the public burthens; but the petitioners denied the assertion, and offered to prove, that while the inhabitants of Bengal paid at the rate of 5s. per head, the inhabitants of Calcutta paid at the rate of 10s. per head to the general taxes. The petitioners also complained of the injustice of the tax; and they alleged, that it was peculiarly oppressive, on account of the nature of the dealings amongst the inhabitants of Calcutta. They likewise complained, that this tax was a most expensive one, and that it cost forty-five per cent in its collection. That statement should also be inquired into; and if it appeared that this particular tax was more harassing than productive, the substitution of some other less objectionable tax, merited the serious consideration of the House.—The Stamp-duty was the grievance complained of in this instance: and though it might appear comparatively insignificant, they would find, by a reference to the history of their own country that the maintenance of a similar grievance was often attended with fatal results. He did not mean to impute blame to the authorities in India, or to the government at home; but the question was, whether the British inhabitants of India should be called upon to bear equal burthens, before they had equal privileges bestowed upon them. It was just matter of complaint, that disabilities were imposed in India upon no man but an Englishman or an European. What was the history of India? For a long time utterly neglected; at length forcing itself upon the attention of parliament; the subject suddenly taken up; debated for a few hours, in a few days, of a session; and in the end a bargain passed for the lease of this great empire for twenty years longer. In the interval, the perpetual appearance of impatience in parliament interdicting the most intrepid member in the House from bringing the subject under its consideration, until perhaps the very day before the settling day between the steward and the tenant; when, perhaps, some increase in the rent, or a new settlement, was agreed to. That was the history of the conduct of parliament towards India in the successive periods of 1773, 1783, 1794, and 1813. What could have been expected from such a system. Slow without deliberation, and sudden without vigour, when the subject came upon them, scarce a moment's time was devoted to it, and consideration, inquiry, and meditation, were left out of the question. In the two first periods which he had mentioned, too much of party and personal feeling had been mixed up with the subject, to allow parliament to come to a calm decision upon it. In 1794 and 1813, they were at the commencement and the termination of the most sanguinary war, in which this country had ever been engaged. Now, for the first time, the opportunity was approaching, when they could give to the subject due and dispassionate deliberation. But three years now remained, ere the period for that discussion would arrive, and when the House would be called upon to determine, whether the government of India should be continued as it at present stood, or whether it should be subjected to any changes or modifications—the defence of the restrictions of which the petitioners complained could only be grounded upon their necessity to the good government of India. And here he was driven to discuss the necessity of those restrictions to the good government of India. No British subject could go out to that vast British territory without a licence. It was the only part of the world from which English- men were excluded; with the exception of China and Japan. When a British subject arrived in India, he could not quit the capital of the province in which he resided, without a licence; and he was confined to the single spot to which he had obtained leave to go. Should he go to any other place he was liable to be seized, and carried back. Unless he had a licence, he could not leave the district in which he resided; nor could he maintain a civil action in defence of his own rights. He was incapable, too, of farming without a licence; nor could he, unless he possessed a licence, be a party to any publication. The last and most oppressive grievance of all was, that he was liable to be transported nineteen thousand miles from the seat of his fortune and his industry, and to the utter destruction of his worldly prospects. Here was a law imposing the punishment of banishment and confiscation without any previous trial; and, as a further aggravation of the grievance, no individual belonging to the vilest tribe in India, was liable to such oppressive punishment. He had a few words to say upon the interdiction imposed upon the press in India. In our West-Indian colonies, a free press was permitted to exist. Thus a freedom of discussion was confided to slaves, which was denied to the inhabitants of the East Indies. The freedom of political discussion was more necessary in India than in any other country in the world. It was the only way by which the inhabitants of that vast empire could make known their grievances. Had they a free press, it would waft their complaints "from Indies to the pole;"—it would bring this country nearer to India, and make us cognizant of every variation in the state of feeling in that country. What would the House think of a direct law, which prevented the introduction of skill and capital into this great dependency? By the law as it at present existed in India, manufacturing industry was impeded in every way. Yet the cultivation of indigo, in spite of the discouragement given to it, had added two millions annually to the wealth of this country. Here were ample grounds for investigation. The House should inquire into the system of restrictions and disabilities which he had mentioned, before it determined that the continuance of such a system was necessary for the well-being of things in India. It seemed to him that the system adopted for the government of so extended an empire was at variance with all the examples hitherto known in the history of nations and of governments. It was so contrary to the dictates of common sense and prudence, that it defied the most acute mind to comprehend it. He knew not that any investigation of the system could induce reasonable men to approve of it; but he was sure that nothing but the most rigid inquiry ought to satisfy any reasonable man in deciding on the fitness of a system which was at variance with the first principles of government. It would, he thought, be discovered, that it had arisen out of the circumstance of our having applied the maxims of factories, to the government of a great empire. It was on this ground that the East-India Company had acted. Interlopers excited the jealousy of a trading company, who feared that they might injure them in their commercial speculations, or hurt their interests with those petty tyrants before whom they trembled. But what were the three thousand persons who had, under the late relaxation, found their way to India, when placed in competition with the good government of an empire containing a population of many millions? Should he be told, that it was necessary to prevent Europeans from proceeding to India, in order that the natives might be protected from oppression? If that were said, he would ask, whether gentlemen had considered what was the situation of the great body of the Indian population? It was a country almost entirely without that middle class of people, which connected together the two extreme classes of society—the poor and the wealthy. Could any man say, that in the absence of such a class, the poor could be protected from oppression? Who was to protect the people, if any of the company's officers abused their power? There were, in India, no such guardians as a middle class—no such guardians as those persons who, embarked in trade and manufactures,—depending for success in business on peace and tranquillity,—looking to the security of personal property for the realization of future fortune; and who, being consequently deeply interested in the maintenance of order, would oppose any act that was likely to disturb it. If the natives wanted any set of men to protect them, let a body of Europeans be invited to that country to strengthen the, connexion; if they wished to make India invulnerable to the attacks of a foreign enemy, they ought to take the same course; and if they wished to reduce the expense of the government in India, that object would be best attained by peopling it with such persons as he had described. Therefore, he could not see any rational ground of apprehension, in allowing Europeans to proceed to India.—Another circumstance was very conspicuous in our Indian legislation; and it showed that this country felt all those fears which were inspired by the transactions that occurred in the latter part of the American war. The year 1784, when the war terminated, and 1793, when the charter was renewed, were not far distant; and, the legislature being alarmed at what had occurred in America, gave to India an independent community, consisting of men of a purely civil character;—one of the worst anomalies that could be imagined. There was another very striking point; namely, that no person had yet proposed to make the present government of India permanent. It had hitherto been always proposed as a lease for a term of years, and he did not expect, if he lived long enough to witness the discussions on the renewal of the charter, that any man would propose to make the present system permanent in India; neither did he believe that any man would propose to have the expense of one great country defrayed by locking up the commerce of another. These were things that might be proposed as temporary expedients; but which, he was convinced, would never be introduced as parts of a settled and permanent government.—But, let the House well consider what were the dangers of governing India by temporary expedients. Such a system tended to lower India in the estimation of the British public;—it tended to repel the attention of government and of the legislature from a dependency governed by principles different from those recognized in this country.—There were three objections made to the measure of 1813—a measure which was chiefly valuable for the experience it had afforded. In the first place, it was objected that the Company's government was a good government, and therefore that no alteration was necessary. Now, he at once admitted, that a government conducted by men educated as the members of a free state, and placed under the eyes of a metropolitan government like this, must possess a very great advantage over an Asiatic government. Such a government secured life and liberty—such a government secured peace and tranquillity—such a government was friendly to religious toleration. Indeed, when he left India, every religion was encouraged excepting only the Christian religion. The missionaries were not allowed to promulgate what they conceived to be a good and true doctrine; which, in his opinion, amounted to an infringement of religious liberty. There were two great measures of government which prevented the improvement of India. The first was, heavy and excessive taxation; the second, the shutting the doors of a fair ambition against the natives. Any relaxation of the expense of government—any decrease of taxation—any departure from the system of prohibition—would be attended with beneficial effects. He thought that the refusal of the aid of cheap native officers was impolitic. Those individuals remained in the country, and were more likely to give satisfaction to the inhabitants, than individuals of different habits and manners. Something might, in his opinion, be done to place the natives in inferior offices, with a view to their gradual improvement. He believed that something- had been done, in that respect, by his right hon. friend (Mr. Wynn); but, in effect, the grievance remained.—There were two other objections made in the year 1813 to the measure then proposed. They were told,—and told, by some of the most celebrated men who had been in India, that the Hindoos were a race whose wants never increased, and whose markets would never improve for the consumption of articles of British manufacture. It was likewise asserted, that the introduction of Europeans into India would disturb, if not destroy, the peace and tranquillity of the country. These were the objections stated at the bar of the House by various witnesses, and supported within the House by different members. But what was the fact? The first opinion, as to the Indian market being incapable of improvement, was belied by the most decisive evidence. During the seven last years of the monopoly of the trade of India, the average exports amounted annually to 1,200,000l. and the imports to 4,300,000l.; whereas, in the last seven years, from 1820 to the end of 1826, the average exports amounted to more than 4,000,000l. and the average imports to 6,800,000l. The House had been informed, that in consequence of the system of partial free trade introduced in 1813, three thousand persons had gone to India, and they had been originally warned, that the influx of that number of individuals would create confusion from one end of India to the other. What was the fact? Was there any instance of disturbance or confusion? None whatever. In reading the travels of Dr. Heber, the late excellent bishop of Calcutta, who had shed such a glorious light on the infant Protestant establishment in India, he found matter that led to a directly different conclusion. He had read that venerable individual's travels to different parts of India with much pleasure. Dr. Heber remarked, that English habits and feelings were making great progress all over India; and that many of the more ingenious articles of English industry were now to be found in countries where twenty years ago, the name of England was not heard or known. Dr. Heber had certainly said a few words against the indigo planters; but in that instance he seemed to rely on information which he had received, rather than to have been guided by his own experience. But he said emphatically, that more English inhabitants were desirable in India. That was Dr. Heber's unprejudiced opinion. So far, one of the objections to which he had alluded was completely contradicted by experience: the other was also contradicted, so far as the experiment which had been made would allow. There were at the time of the renewal of the charter, only two persons who dared to oppose the host of witnesses who predicted so many fatal consequences as the result of a free trade. The one was lord Grenville, to whom he only did bare justice when he said, that he combined the most comprehensive principles with the most minute and accurate knowledge,—a nobleman whose understanding was instructed and disciplined, without being narrowed or contracted, by the proceedings of former times,—a nobleman to whom the maxim of the ancient sage might well be applied, that he continued to learn as he grew old. With respect to the other individual, no tribute need to be paid to him beyond the mention of his name. He alluded to Mr. Rickards, who had been long in India, but who strongly advocated the principles of free trade. With that manliness and integrity, which belonged to his character, he predicted that the alarms which were spread abroad at the time would be found to be wholly groundless; and that prediction had been verified to the letter, The names of lord Grenville and Mr. Rickards stood alone—the principle which they maintained was adopted; but in a narrow and confined manner.—Now, the only question to which he entreated the attention of the House was this—whether it was not fit to begin, even now, to inquire into this subject,—to begin early, in order that they might proceed slowly,—to begin betimes, in order that they should no more make India a disgraceful prize in a scuffle between contending factions. He thought that if the House took up this petition, and a committee were appointed to inquire into the situation of the English population of India, the subject lay in so narrow a compass, that its consideration would not occupy much time. If they even found it impossible to do any thing in the matter at present, still their having noticed the subject, would be a pledge, that parliament intended to sift this question, in all its views and bearings. Besides, the committee might be usefully employed in drawing up an outline of inquiry, for a future and more extensive examination. He would move, "That this petition be referred to a Select Committee."

said, he could not help doubting whether his right hon. friend, if a select committee were appointed, would be able, in the slightest degree, to obtain the objects enumerated in his speech. The petition simply pointed out the objections which the petitioners entertained, with respect to the stamp regulations of Calcutta; and it called on the House to pass a declaratory act, denying the right of the government of India to frame such a regulation. That being the scope of the petition, he doubted whether a committee appointed to consider its prayer, could inquire into the various objects mentioned by his right hon. friend. He admitted, however, that the subjects introduced by his right hon. friend were well worthy the attentive consideration of the House; and he trusted that, at a proper time, due attention would be paid to them. He now wished to call the attention of the House to a particular point, which his right hon. friend seemed to think of no importance whatever. Now, he contended that, by a clause of the 53rd of George 3rd, the go- vernment had a right to impose this tax. The Supreme Court had decided, that the regulation was perfectly legal; and he was informed by his hon. friend, who was, when the act was drawn up, Secretary to the Board of Control, that this particular clause was introduced for the purpose of sanctioning duties of this very kind. The act was to be explained by its words; and, looking at them fairly, as well as considering the acknowledgment of his hon. friend, he thought that the construction which had been put upon those words in India was right. This tax was certainly less detrimental than many others; and, he must observe, that the East-India government had said, that from the pressure of the late wars upon their resources, they were unable to spare any portion of their revenue, and that, consequently, they were unable to remove this tax. He could not conceive on what principle it was said, that it was unjust that the inhabitants of Calcutta should be called upon to pay any portion of this tax, when it was recollected, that they went out well knowing that they were subject to the provisions of this act. But he would go into a more general consideration of the question. Most certainly he did not concur in the act of the 53rd of the late king. On the contrary, he was one of the few who were anxious that it should be limited to a shorter time, in order that a less remote opportunity might be given to the parliament of taking the state of India under their consideration, and of turning their attention to that most important topic, how extensive, or in how limited a degree, the trade of India should be thrown open. He heartily wished that the House had concurred with this view; but it had not: it had granted these powers to the East-India Company for twenty-one years, by an act which would not expire till 1834. Until that time, therefore, they were precluded from legislating on this subject.—What his right hon. friend had touched upon was, the absence of power of transmission to India, without previous application and licence; but this was one of the provisions of the act, which they could not fairly touch, until the charter had expired. It was one of the conditions on which the East India Company had made the bargain which existed between them and the public. At the same time, however, he could state, that since this act had passed, these permissions had become gradually extended. In 1825, the number of applications of persons wishing to go to India was nine hundred and forty-three. Of this number, the directors had complied with seven hundred and forty-three. Forty-one cases had come before the Board of Control, in which applications which had been refused by the directors were granted. There remained, therefore, one hundred and fifty-nine to whom permission had been refused. Now, great part of those who had experienced refusals had met with them because they were unable to show that they had any reasonable chance of obtaining a livelihood when they reached India, and who might, consequently, put the Company to the expense of supporting them. In many cases, too, it was wished to carry out European servants, and persons who were intended as clerks in mercantile houses. The principle on which many such applications were refused was this—that those situations were occupied by half castes, whom a system of policy, which he must call an unjust and mistaken one, had for a long time subjected to rigorous exclusions. From this fact, he thought it hard, that the Europeans should infringe this employment also, and establish a monopoly of this means of gaining an honest livelihood. Latterly, however, these restrictions had been departed from, and permission had been granted, on the application of any respectable house. In every instance in which it could be shown that there was a power of furnishing employment, licences had been given. But this was not all. Persons had gone out there in merchant vessels, who had not wished to return; and he might say, that there were full as many residing in India under the permission of the local government, as had gone from England under licences from the Directors and from the Board of Control. Such was the course which had been pursued.—He hoped there would be a much more extensive communication between Europeans and India; but he regretted to say, there must be a continuance of the same strict regulations. He held it absolutely necessary that the inhabitants of India should be protected. India must not be held solely as a means of wealth to England. They had a higher duty to perform, in providing for the security and happiness of the inhabitants. He wished that he could agree with his right hon. friend in what had fallen from him on the subject of the intercourse between the inhabitants of India and the Europeans. He was sorry to say, if he looked back to all history—if he investigated the character and conduct of his own countrymen—that he was obliged to come to this conclusion, that the more free the government was at home, the more persons who had been used to such a government held others who had not the happiness of enjoying the same privileges in contempt—the more they abused their feelings, and despised a condition which they ought rather to commiserate. Though this might not be a commonly-received doctrine, yet certainly he held it. He believed that if India were subject to persons who had been under a despotic government at home, they would be treated much better than by those who had enjoyed the blessings of a free government. In the minds of the latter, the condition of the people of India would be sure to generate contempt. Look at Sparta. Was there ever a more free government? Were there ever more severe masters than the Spartans? Look at Rome, and they would find the same thing to have been the case there. He perfectly concurred with his right hon. friend, that it was wise to blend the conquered and the conquerors; but the system which had been hitherto pursued would render the course pointed out by his right hon. friend extremely unsafe, until years of experience and preparation had undone the mischiefs that had already been effected. There existed strong prejudices—prejudices of colour, of religion, and of habits. He did not mean to argue, that habits of whatever kind must last for ever. Habits were the offspring of civilization and legislation; but what his right hon. friend wished to do must be effected gradually? It could not be done precipitately.—His right hon. friend had stated two great inconveniences which prevailed in India. The one was great taxation; the other, shutting the door to ambition. His right hon. friend appeared to think, that much might be done by employing a cheaper description of officers; but this he should be sorry to do; for, habituated as these persons had been for centuries to habits of corruption, he was convinced that the experiment would be dangerous. Much, however, might be done by the admission of natives, and thereby offering objects for their ambition. He differed altogether from those who thought that they could, never hops for impartial justice at the hands of the natives of India. It ought to be recollected, that no temptations to honest ambition and to the exercise of just impartiality had ever been held out to the natives. He hoped that the remissions in those restrictions and exclusions upon the native inhabitants of India, which had taken place within the last few years, would become more extensive; that the natives would receive employment in a greater degree; and that they would at length arrive at situations of trust and emolument. He believed that much had been effected by the government of sir T. Monro, and that other presidencies also had not been without improvements. He was certain, too, that there was no object nearer the heart of his noble friend who had lately been invested with the government of India, than the amelioration of the condition of the natives of India. He must submit to his right hon. friend if it be possible, on so limited a question as this of stamp regulations, to ingraft the general extensive question, of what restrictions were advisable on the commercial and other intercourse between this country and India. He had no wish that there should be any unnecessary postponement; but, by commencing the inquiry now, would they not be likely to fatigue the attention of the House and of the country, and thereby to injure the question? His idea was this—the charter would expire in 1834; and the year 1830 suggested itself to him as the time at which the inquiry should be instituted. This would give three years for inquiry and legislation, and one year for carrying into effect whatever regulations the parliament might think proper to impose. He could not agree, that any inquiry into the subject of this petition was necessary. If it were illegal, the petitioners might appeal to the Privy Council; where the highest legal authorities of the land would decide what the real construction of the act was. As to the policy of the measure, he thought the duty by no means unfair. It was a duty on commercial stamps imposed upon a rich society of merchants, and he knew of no fairer object of taxation.

said, he would make a few observations upon the concluding part of the right hon. gentleman's speech. The right hon. gentleman said, he thought the period too early for inquiry; but, if evidence was to be the rule on which that House was to proceed, the inquiry ought to be instituted at a time which would give opportunities of communication with India, and afterwards of candidly and dispassionately discussing that evidence. As to the argument which the right hon. gentleman had founded on equality, he surely could not have forgotten how different the rights of Englishmen were who lived beyond the ditch of Calcutta. However, he was free to confess that he did not think the legality of the tax worth talking about. He took the condition of the Indian community to be so important, that all technicalities ought to be waved when they came to investigate the complaints of that community. It had been said, that this was a narrow petition; but did it not complain that they were debarred from meeting together to petition against taxes, which they had no representatives to object to for them? Calcutta might be looked upon as the centre of a population of seventy or eighty millions. Its population was greater than that of Paris, and almost as great as that of London. Ought not the complaints of such an extensive community of natives and Europeans to be listened to with attention? The refusal of the government at Calcutta to allow the petitioners to assemble for the purpose of applying to that House, was the greatest instance of oppression he ever heard of. They did, however, meet in defiance of the threats which had been held out. All that the inhabitants of Calcutta asked was, not to be taxed without having an opportunity of being heard. The people of England had at least the semblance of this privilege, and why were not those of her colonies to be held entitled to it? In 1813, on the renewal of the Company's charter, one distinct provision had been, that the people of Calcutta should not be taxed unless with the approbation of the Board of Control and Board of Directors. If that provision had any meaning at all, it meant that the people of Calcutta should not have taxes imposed upon them without the right of appeal: and, on the part of the people of Calcutta, he claimed its fulfilment. The system pursued in India was a wrong one:—wrong, both as regarded ourselves at home, and the people abroad whom we governed. He happened to have in his possession a curious document, which contained the opinions expressed by our great enemy Buonaparte, upon the subject of colonial government. The words had been used by the empe- ror, in the course of a discussion upon French colonial affairs; and their tenor was as follows:—"With respect to foreign colonies, it is fit to govern them with energy; but there can be no energy where there is not justice. To this end it is necessary that the government at home should be informed of every thing that passes, and hear the statements of all parties aggrieved or concerned; for it is not sufficient merely to do that which is right; men must know that their claims are heard and their interests attended to; and this cannot be the case unless they feel that they have the power of making themselves heard. If the councils of a state were composed of angels or gods, who had the power of intuitively comprehending and deciding all questions rightly, it would signify nothing, unless the colonists were assured that their own statements and representations were heard and taken into consideration." He wished that the late right hon. Secretary for the Colonies had been still in his place, and in a condition to carry those golden principles into execution. But, what was the system now acted upon? It proceeded upon the very reverse of them, in all its bearings. The press was stifled; every means of communication were checked; and upon every question that arose in India, the rulers obstinately rejected all information, but that which reached them through their own official channels. The people of this country were no less interested than those of India in a reform of this state of affairs; and he fully agreed that it was not an hour too early to come even now to a consideration of the East-India Company's charter.

said, that no man could be more alive than he was to the propriety of doing every thing for our fellow-subjects in India which could be done for the people of this country, but complaints had been brought forward on the other side, which were void of reasonable foundation. It was difficult to make taxation palatable; and to the stamp duty considerable dislike appeared to be entertained. But many circumstances had been dwelt upon as grievances, which, in point of fact, could not be considered as taxes at all. For instance, lotteries could not be called a direct tax. But all that was gained by them the government laid out in cleansing and beautifying the city of Calcutta. The portage and harbourage dues also did not defray the expenses attendant upon the maintenance of the ports and harbours. Again, canal-tolls could not properly be considered as levies amounting to taxation; but the fact was, that these tolls did not pay the expense of keeping the canals in repair. It was said, that the tax thus levied was a poor pitiful tax, not producing more than 100,000l. per annum. Now, the less the contribution by these individuals, the less reason had they to complain; especially when it was recollected how extremely wealthy this capital of central India was. Yet, as it was said that the debt, contracted by reason of the Burmese war, was in amount 340,000l., the contribution of the inhabitants of Calcutta, forming nearly one third of that debt, could not be; considered unimportant. It was argued by the people of Calcutta, that they enjoyed nothing in right of their contribution in this instance. What! was it nothing that they were protected in peace and quietness, and in the enjoyment of unrestricted commerce with the natives and the other presidencies throughout that vast country? Such was the wealth that the parties now complaining had acquired under the present system, that about three years ago, six opulent mercantile houses united together, and invested not less than six millions of rupees in a speculation, connected with the Burmese war, from which they derived proportionate profits. To prove that what had been alleged as to the scale of duties being unfair, he would remind the House, that there was scarcely any duties imposed on imports higher than 5l. per cent, whilst in this country they; were frequently from 15l. to 33l. per cent. The article of spirits, on which a considerable profit accrued, was charged moderately; and even French brandy, on which here we paid 19s. per gallon, was subject only to a duty of 6d. Upon the whole, he would contend, that the people of Calcutta enjoyed under their present form of government such peace and protection, and so many inestimable advantages, that they had no reason to complain; and, as far as respected taxation, he saw so little reason to think that they ought not to be put on a footing with the natives, that he felt the right hon. gentleman had made out no case whatever.

said, he had long been resident amongst the British merchants in Calcutta, and was satisfied that no class of men possessed greater advantages, or had less to complain of, than those per- sons who were so loud in their complaints. With respect to the inconveniences, also, felt by others residing in the presidencies at a distance, the hon. member for Montrose had been misinformed. He had reason to believe that there was not an indigo planter, who was not possessed, in his own right, of land. They had heard allusions made to the supposed apprehension entertained by the directors, of the consequences of colonization. No such dread was entertained. Persons who were so disposed, and had capital, were allowed to go out with their families. The fact was, that India was fast becoming a colony.

said, that this was the case of petitioners who were merchants of Calcutta, complaining of certain duties imposed upon stamps, which they denounced as illegal and impolitic. As to the impolicy of those duties, he would remind the House, that the governor and council had actually, of late years, remitted several duties and taxes. The happiness of the people of Calcutta had gone hand in hand with their commercial wealth and prosperity. The complaints put forth by those who styled themselves the advocates of India, were extremely ill-founded. He contended for the legality of the impost which had been petitioned against, and vindicated generally the government of the East-India Company. There was no real impediment, he observed, to British settlers going out to India; for none able and willing to be of use there were refused the facilities of going out. The hon. member then proceeded to notice the demand for a free press, which he strenuously combatted, and concluded by expressing his determination to resist the motion before the House.

said, that rather than that nothing should be done, in consequence of the representations contained in the present petition, he would consent to the referring the whole matter to a committee; for if that reference were attended with no other good effect, it would at least let in light upon the affairs of India. It was therefore that he would, if his right hon. friend pressed the question to a division, certainly vote with him; at the same time, he fully agreed with those who thought that that was not the most convenient period of the session to enter upon questions of such magnitude. He differed altogether with those who thought that the legislature ought to postpone to an indefinite period the consideration of that most important question which arose out of the circumstances of the new settlers in India—their trade, laws, and general polity. At what particular time that inquiry should be commenced, he was not prepared to say; but the earliest time was unquestionably the best. Possibly the next session, or the one immediately after that, might be the most remote period to which such an inquiry could be postponed. That would bring them not far from the year 1833—a period likely to prove of the highest moment to the interests and happiness of the inhabitants of British India. As to the immediate question before the House, he did not feel disposed to deliver any opinion upon the legality of the impost of which the petitioners complained. If the authorities in India had acted illegally, the parties aggrieved had their remedy in a Court of Law. If the case were in some degree doubtful, a remedy by means of Courts of Law, was still within the reach of the suffering parties; and, finally, by means of the Courts of Appeal in this country, with a view to the settlement of the question. It was only in case it appeared to be so doubtful, that the Courts of Law could not decide it, that parliament should be moved to pass a declaratory act, for the purpose of putting an end to all uncertainty. The late President of the Board of Control had called the attention of the House to what he conceived to have been the intention of the legislature in passing the act under which these Stamp duties had been levied. If it were the intention of the framers of that act to authorise the several presidencies to impose taxes of that nature, an instance never came under his observation of a more unsuccessful attempt to convey in language the views or intentions of any legislative body. He would not say that the Court of Calcutta had come to an erroneous decision, but he did hope that, in the event of any future legislation upon that subject, an attempt would hi made to adopt language more clearly expressive of the intention of the legislature. The question which his right hon. friend had brought under the consideration of the House was nothing less than whether half a million of the inhabitants of India had or had not great reason to complain, and whether or not parliament would turn a deaf ear to their representations. He could not but express the satisfaction conveyed to his mind by the course which the present discussion had taken: and he looked with hope to the results of those deliberations which he anticipated when the House should grapple with that extensive subject. He did not conceive that a free press would be a panacea for the evils which afflicted India; but he did conceive that a free press existing in connexion with the privilege of public meetings and a free exercise of the right of petitioning, would tend greatly to alleviate no inconsiderable portion of those evils. It was extremely gratifying, in the present discussion, to observe that there were no extravagant prejudices to combat. It was gratifying likewise to observe the prevalence of those liberal and enlightened opinions, which left no apprehensions of danger, whenever the question came in a more ample form before the House. It was upon that account, that he thought there would be no risk in leaving the matter in the hands of his majesty's government until the ensuing session. At the same time, if his right hon. friend was determined to press the question to a division, he would not refuse his vote.

could not positively speak as to what he might have said sixteen years before, but he conscientiously believed that it was intended by the clause in question to give to the presidencies the power of taxation to as great an extent as possible, subject to the control of the directors. The right hon. gentleman had said, that not only the directors, but the government, had led them to believe, that an open trade was to be established with India. He could take on himself to say, having then filled the situation he had lately held, that this was not the opinion of either the directors or the government. It was not the opinion of lord Buckingham or Mr. Sullivan, or any of the members of the Board of Control: it was not the opinion of the humble individual who was then addressing them, nor was it the tendency of any advice he had ever given; and he might say, it would not be the tendency of any advice he might give in future, though the measures he should recommend, and hope to see carried into execution, would be to give liberal facilities to trade.

said, that of the policy of this tax, and of its justice he meant to say nothing. He had never read a petition more distinct in its objects, more clear in its premises, and more decisive in its prayer. The premises were, that this tax, and all this class of taxes were not legally imposed, and that the local government had no power to impose them. On these grounds, the petitioners prayed, that the House would pass a declaratory law, stating, that to impose them was illegal. This was the substance of the petition which his right hon. friend proposed to refer to a select committee; but, if the petitioners were right in their premises, this was not granting, but evading the prayer of their petition. He would say further, that if it were as clearly illegal to impose these taxes as the petitioners stated, there was no occasion to pass a declaratory law. If it were legal to impose this, or even if the legality were doubtful, it was not customary to refer questions of doubtful law to the decision of a committee. If, however, the tax was strictly legal, as in his opinion it was, there was no pretence for granting the prayer of the petition; and still less was there any ground for founding on that prayer any subsequent measure.

said, he was sure that every member had listened with satisfaction to the speech of the noble lord, who had, he believed, for the first time, at any considerable length, addressed the House. That noble lord had evinced a knowledge of his subject that did him the greatest honour; and he had also evinced an extent of information which might prove highly serviceable to his country. He hailed the expression of liberal sentiments which had that night been elicited, as an auspicious commencement of a series of discussions which, he trusted, would terminate in the adoption of a wise and beneficial system of government in India, in the hope that measures of relief, of wisdom, of sound policy, would not be hereafter resisted, he consented to withdraw his motion, and would content himself for the present with intimating an intention of bringing the situation of India before parliament in the course of next session.

wished to call the attention of the House to what the real nature of his motion was; because it had been much misunderstood, both in that House and out of it. With that view he must begin to state what the nature of it was not. It was not a general inquiry into the state of trade; nor did he mean to argue it as a commercial, but as an abstract naval question. He should do so, not because he thought that those whose cause he had advocated last year were less deserving of relief, but because, having failed last year, he would not presume to bring forward the same question so soon after he had been defeated. He was confident that the distress of those interests which he had then advocated was as great now as then; and that if there was any difference, it was that their distress was greater than before. The principal argument against him was, that there had been a redundancy of shipping which led to great speculation, and that speculation to great distress. Now, if he could prove that such redundancy did not exist, the inferences drawn from that redundancy must be abandoned.—He would now treat the subject as an abstract naval question, abstaining as much as possible from the commercial question. The first consideration that presented itself was, whether the shipping of this country had or had not decreased. In all former periods, the employment of ships and shipping had increased after war. Looking back to the period of 1763, he found there was no instance in that, or in any of the intermediate wars, up to the period of the last war, in which, taking an average of five years, the shipping had not annually increased after the war. But that had unfortunately ceased to be the case after the late war. He would prove, on the contrary, that the employment of shipping and men had annually diminished. In the year ending the 5th January, 1817, the returns were—

	Ships and Shipping.	Tonnage.	Seamen.
1817	25,864	2,078,400	178,000
1822	23,199	2,050,944	166,333

During that time there had been a considerable increase in the imports and exports to the amount of 8,000,000l. or 9,000,000l.—What he next wished to impress upon the attention of the House was, a comparison of the last two years, taking in the whole of the British empire, including the colonies. In the year ending5th January, 1827, the returns were—

	Ships and Snipping.	Tonnage.	Seamen.
1827	24,625	2,635,000	167,636
1828	23,195	2,460,500	151,415

That statement referred to the whole of the British empire; when that which formed the basis of her naval establishment was diminished, in the reverse proportion to the increase of her trade. It had been said on a former occasion, that if the interests of commerce and navigation should happen to clash, there was no doubt but that the preference should be given to navigation, as it was upon that that our existence as a naval power and the retention of our colonies must depend. He would next call the attention of the House to the statement in the returns, as it affected the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, not including the colonies. This statement was as follows:—

	Ships and Shipping.	Seamen.
1826	20,409	149,894
1827	19,035	130,494

It appeared from the above statement, that there was in the last of these years a diminution of one thousand four hundred and thirty-four ships, and nineteen thousand four hundred seamen. He should be told to look at the note tinder that statement, which stated that many of the vessels that remained on the list had long ceased to be in existence; but, when the ship was broken up, did they throw the men overboard? The argument of 1827 was, that the great quantity of shipping had led to speculation; but it was now stated as a fact, that the number of ships I was not so great as had been relied on in that argument. But he would ask why, if the number of ships had increased, was the number of men diminished? They had always multiplied at the rate of six men to one hundred tons, and they still took their statement on the old criterion; but, he would maintain, that there were not five men to one hundred tons, and that, upon the whole estimate, there was a decrease of upwards of forty thousand men. He would show that now there was not in general more than four men to one hundred tons, and never more than five. The statements, therefore, upon which government had gone must be incorrect. The error of the statement would appear distinctly on referring to the Sixpenny Duty Office. Every seaman employed, whether an apprentice or not, was obliged to pay 6d. a month towards the support of Greenwich hospital. Upon the arrival of any vessel in port, the captain was obliged to deliver upon oath a list of the crew, speci- fying the length of time that each had served. He knew of no better criterion than this. It appeared from the Sixpenny Duty Office, that they had only collected from a hundred and fifteen thousand, two hundred and seventy-four men. The calculation was, that every seaman on an average was employed eight months in die year, and paid 4s. duty; but it appeared from the return, that there was a reduction of 1,100l. or 1,200l. in the last year as compared with the former. Looking at all the accounts, it would be found that there was a diminution of from thirty thousand to forty thousand seamen since the war. It was a matter worthy of serious consideration, that while our shipping trade to the East Indies, and the trade of the colonies was increasing', our British shipping trade was rapidly declining. In 1816, just after the war, America had only ninety-one thousand tons of shipping engaged in her intercourse with this country. In 1826, it had increased to a hundred and eighty-five thousand tons. In 1816, our shipping engaged in the American trade amounted to forty-five thousand tons. In 1826, it was reduced to thirty-seven thousand tons; while, in the same time, the shipping of America has more than doubled. This was an important fact, and deserved serious attention; for there was little doubt, that if there should be a general war, America would be pitted against us. If they looked to the difference in the number of men employed, it would be found that there had been an increase in the number of seamen employed by America of sixteen thousand two hundred, while there had been a diminution in those employed in the shipping trade of the united kingdom of sixteen thousand four hundred. Thus, whatever was the state of the trade with the colonies and foreign countries, he found a most alarming diminution in the number of men in the shipping trade in the united kingdom; and, whatever might be said, it was a fact, that that which was the basis of our naval power was gradually diminishing. It was a fact which could not be denied, that considerable numbers of our men were employed in the shipping of America. He thought it was not too much to state them at twenty thousand. The reason of this preference among our men for the American service was, that the Americans gave much better wages. In fact, the losses sustained in the carrying trade by some of our ship-owners were such, that they were obliged to diminish the wages to the lowest possible scale. He would conclude with moving, "That it appears by the Navigation Statements contained in the annual Finance Accounts of the present year, now before this House, that there were registered for the British empire,

	ships or vesesls.	Tonnage.	Seamen.
1896	24,625	2,635,644	167,636
1827	23,195	2,460,500	151,415
being a diminution of	1,430	175,144	16,221

said, that if he did not follow the hon. general into detail in the statement which he had delivered to the House, it was not from any disrespect to him, or because he undervalued the importance of the subject; but because he considered the present period was too late in the session to enter upon the subject with the hope of any practical result. It was the intention of his right hon. colleague and himself to go into a full consideration of the subject during the recess. It was impossible that either he or his right hon. colleague could have sat so long in the House, and voted so often on these matters, without having formed an opinion upon them; but as members were sometimes impressed with opinions formed by party connexions, it was the intention of himself and his right hon. friend, the President of the Board of Trade, to take a review of, and to make up their minds on, the whole system of our trade and navigation, as if they had never before given an opinion upon them, and as if their minds were, as respected them, a sheet of blank paper. If he were to enter into any controversy on the question at present, it would, he conceived, interfere with that dispassionate view of the subject which it was their intention to take; and, therefore, instead of going now into a discussion, he would move the previous question. If the hon. general had made out a case, showing that the decay of our commercial marine was likely to have an immediate and injurious effect on the service of the royal navy, the House would be bound to act, but he had made out no such case. The course which he took of pledging the House to the consideration of the subject next year was one which could answer no practical effect.

said, that the right hon. gentleman, the Vice-president of the Board of Trade, had objected to the motion of the gallant general, that it offered no practical plan to the House. This, he conceived, was no answer to the motion. He contended, that the House was bound to entertain it. After the treatment which the shipowners had received last year, it was too much to say, that there was now no ground whatever for receiving the motion before them. But the right hon. gentleman had told them, that he and his colleague would give the subject their best attention during the recess, and would inquire whether the statement made was founded on fact. He was glad to hear this, as far as it went; but it should be recollected, that these were the assertions of men in office, who might not be in office next year. He appealed to the experience of the mutations in the government for the last eighteen months, whether much reliance could be placed on the declaration of a minister in one session, that he would take a certain course in the next. He would not go into any lengthened detail, but there were a few remarks which he felt it necessary to make. Instead of looking at the number of vessels employed, a better criterion of the state of our trade would be, to see what was the situation of the building trade, and whether the number of vessels built was on the increase or decline—whether steps were taken to supply the places of those which were going to decay. The ships already built were obliged to be used, at a profit or otherwise, to prevent their rotting in docks; but men did not build new ships, unless a prospect of employment was held out. Now, what was the state of ship-building in the last three years? In 1826, the number was one thousand five hundred and thirty-nine; in 1827, one thousand seven hundred and ninety; and in 1828, one thousand two hundred and eighty-five. It also appeared that in 182 5, the total num- ber of vessels registered in Great Britain, exclusive of Ireland, was twenty-two thousand seven hundred and eighty-three; in 1826, it was twenty-six thousand two hundred and thirty-four; and in 1827, the number amounted to twenty-one thousand, seven hundred and ninety—nine. Here was an apparent diminution; and in Ireland, there was likewise a considerable falling off, during the last year. In reference to the present subject, he might advert to what had been said upon the corn question, with respect to a protection; as the same principle was, in his opinion, applicable to either. They had inquired at what price the corn-growers would be able to produce their corn. Now, he would never admit, that one class of the community was entitled to a protection which would be denied to another. In such an inquiry they ought particularly to guard against being led away by looking to the number of vessels employed, while the number that had been built was not taken into their calculation. Those who had a property in the vessels employed were losing money every day. This question had been last year brought before the House under very disadvantageous circumstances; as it was imprudently mixed up with political considerations. Certain misguided friends of the measure had thought proper to throw out insinuations against a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Huskisson), which the ship-owners were far from imputing to him. The very utmost that the respectable portion of that body had ever attributed to the right hon. member, was a mistake of judgment. Thus far doing him justice, he would tell the House not to suffer themselves to be carried away by his eloquence, when he sought to prevail on them to refuse a consideration to such a subject. Government were prone to turn a willing ear to applications from other quarters, although they did not show the same favour in this instance. During the present session they had pronounced, that there was no ground for inquiry respecting the wool trade, and yet they had granted one. This they did, hoping to satisfy the landed interest, but the landed interest would never be satisfied. If the resolution should not be acceded to now, he trusted they would, next session, appoint a committee of inquiry. He must ever deprecate the bad policy of the reciprocity system. While the country was guided by this principle, the great states on the continent, and on the other side of the Atlantic, were pursuing a system of exclusion towards ourselves. Such was the ambition of America to gain a maritime ascendancy, that it was rare to see a British flag in the ports of the United States, how common soever their vessels now were in the harbours of Great Britain. In saying this, he was not actuated by any feeling of jealousy with respect to that country; but he thought we ought to have a paramount regard for the interests of our own. During the last discussion, he had heard much from the hon. member for Dover, that excited his surprise; but there was only a single assertion to which he was now inclined to advert. It had been said, that a vessel for British service could be built as cheaply in England as it could be abroad. This he distinctly denied; for a more unfounded allegation was never made within those walls. He had lately seen a letter mentioning, that an oak-built vessel had been launched at the port of Dantzic, which only, cost at the rate of 3l. per ton. The northern-built vessels were got up at one-third less than the expense of ours. In such a competition, this country, to use a familiar expression, must go to the wall. There was another singular anomaly in the system. Although it put a prohibition on the employment of foreign seamen in navigating our vessels, it at the same time admitted foreign vessels to compete with us at home. The ill effects of this policy, they would find it very difficult to repair. Was it not evident, that foreign ships coining into our ports must, pro tanto, displace so much of the British shipping interest, and consequently injure so much British capital? It was neither ingenuous nor just to lay hold of the Scarborough petition, which happened to be erroneous in its details, and of a few other statements a little exaggerated, as specimens of the representations made by the body in general from whence they came. The motion was not intended to mislead the House, but to lead to a fair and candid inquiry into a question in which a vast amount of property was involved.

remarked, that this was the first time he had ever heard a regular speech in reply to a Debate that had taken place twelve months ago. It had also afforded him some surprise to hear from the right hon. gentleman, that it was the intention of government to establish a full examination into the question during the recess; but whatever satisfaction this might give to the gallant mover of the proposition, he felt convinced that the government would not consent to any alteration. The present policy was certainly united with the name of his right hon. friend (Mr. Huskisson); but he could not admit, that it remained for government to pursue an opposite course, when he recollected that all his right hon. friend's operations had taken place under the sanction of almost all the present members of the cabinet; nor had any policy ever been more examined into, discussed, and sanctioned by that House; and therefore, though he was glad that the right hon. gentleman, and those other gentlemen, whose innocent minds were blank sheets of paper; though he was happy that these simple-hearted persons intended to examine the subject, in order that they might have a great field for consideration through the summer, he could not but feel sure, that the examination would end in a confirmation of the principles of his right hon. friend. Thinking, therefore, as he did, that this policy had already received the sanction of the government, and of the House, he did not feel that he was now called upon to enter into the general principles of the question; and, indeed, he should be doing an injustice to that policy, were he, on the present occasion, to enter into a discussion on those principles. He should, therefore, confine himself to the question now before the House; and he would confess that it appeared to him, from the shape of the present motion, that it was a renewal of those efforts which had so often been made to persuade the House, that his right hon. friend had failed in his project; and he must confess, that, notwithstanding this was the evening of wonders, he had never heard a more extraordinary proposition. He, for one, was at a loss to conceive how that House had been wanting in deference to the shipowners; for, although the House had not adopted what the shipowners happened to think the most expedient, he did not see that that was any reason for saying, that they had not been treated with a proper deference, or that they were crumbling into dust, to the entire overthrow of the British navy. Nor was it the least extraordinary part of the matter, that, although all this mischief was existing, the hon. gentleman, who spoke last, was quite content to wait till the next session of parliament before any thing was done; though, to be sure, it was perfectly consistent with a speech that was such a triumphant answer to what had taken place last year. But what, after all, was the case that had been made out by the gallant general? It appeared from the accounts on the table, that the number of the registered vessels was diminished; and, according to the right hon. gentleman, this was to be a subject of inquiry in the cabinet; but if the gallant general would only take the trouble to look to the foot of that account, he would find the explanation he wished to have. Supposing, after all, that this committee was granted, what would it have to report next session, even though the gallant general himself should bring it in? It would be, "this committee does report that, according to the Registry Act, requiring the ships to be entered de novo, there has been a visible diminution in the amount of tonnage." But though this might be apparent, he denied that it was by any means certain that there was a real decrease; and, besides, it was perfectly consistent, that there should be an apparent decrease, while the fact might be that there was a real increase. The question then was, whether, having last year considered the subject, and having decided that it was not a fit one for the appointment of the committee, there was any thing new in the state of the question to justify such a measure? He thought that there certainly was not. He thought that they were very far from having any just ground of alarm for the state of British navigation or the maritime interest. But before he adverted to some of the conclusions which had been arrived at by the hon. gentleman, he would allude to the reason why there might be an apparent diminution in the quantity of shipping, without its involving any real diminution. The Registry Act of the 26th Geo. 3rd was that under which British ships were registered. By the 6th of Geo. 4th, it was enacted, that no register was of any avail, unless it was made either under the 4th or the 6th of Geo. 4th. There was no danger of any censure attaching to the department to which this registering belonged, because he knew that the office was discharged in a most efficient manner; but, at the same time, it was well known, that no Registry Act could meet all the fluctuations of the maritime commerce of this great country; this registry, therefore, was not to be depended on, except so far as it applied to the same men that had been entered. But, if there could be no censure attached to the department itself, neither could there, in his opinion, be any attached to his right hon. friend. And, after all, what was it that had made this diminution apparent? Surely not the sagacity or discovery of any hon. member, but that very act of parliament which had been introduced by his right hon. friend himself. But although this registry was made de novo, it was, after all, fallacious to a certain degree; because it was found impossible to rectify the register in sufficient time to make the proper return; hereafter, however, inquiries, at the close of every three years, were to be sent round to all the ports requiring returns; and the consequence would be, that they would have at least a triennial obituary of the men employed in British shipping. It was true, that his right hon. friend last year, had rested his arguments on the inaccuracies that had crept into the statements about British navigation; but he had not so much as made an allusion to the number of registered vessels on which the gallant general had founded so much of his argument. His right hon. friend had proceeded entirely on other criteria: the real criterion of the question was, what was the actual employment of the ships? So that, even if they had an accurate account of the number of ships, it would still be fallacious; for they would not be able to tell how far they were employed, or whether one-half or two-thirds of them were lying idle in dock.—Another object that they ought to have in view was, to ascertain the activity of their commerce, and its degree of competition with foreign commerce. Now, proceeding on the gallant general's own statement, it would appear, that of British ships which had come in from foreign ports, the tonnage in 1825, was two millions one hundred and forty-three thousand; in 1826, one million nine hundred and fifty thousand; and in 1827, two millions and eighty-six thousand: while the tonnage of foreign ships under the same circumstances, was, in 1826, six hundred and ninety-four thousand, and in 1827, seven hundred and fifty-one thousand. But, above all things, the gallant general appeared to have been struck with the diminution of the human race. His object ap- peared to be, that more men should be employed than were necessary to do the work, seeking, as it were, to multiply the number of superfluous workmen.—A complaint had been made, that the number of men employed in our shipping had diminished, while that of persons employed in foreign shipping had increased. He would now make a statement, that would not only show that complaint to be unfounded, but that would actually prove that there had been an increase in both; and that it was greater in favour of this country than of other nations.

Great Britain.
Years.	British.	Foreign.
1825	162,614	48,943
1826	151,327	37,137
1827	165,548	41,508

	Ireland.		Total.
	British.	Foreign.	British.	Foreign.
1825,	65,921.	3,779.	228,535	52,722
1826,	73,301	2,701	224,628	39,838
1827,	71,913	2,028	237,461	43,536

This statement exhibited an increase of British seamen employed in 1827, as compared with 1825, of eight thousand nine hundred and twenty-six; and as compared with 1826 of twelve thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight. Thus, while there was an increase with respect to British seamen, there was a decrease in foreign seamen, employed in 1827, as compared with 1825, of nine thousand one hundred and eighty-six, and the increase in 1827, as compared with 1826, was only three thousand six hundred and ninety-eight. The result of these calculations stood thus:—British increase 1827, twelve thousand eight hundred and thirty-three; foreign increase 1827, three thousand six hundred and ninety-eight, as compared with 1826.—After these statements, where was the argument of the gallant general, that the shipping interest of Great Britain was in a state of depression. It was true, that the shipping trade had suffered a depression, but that depression could be traced, not to the want of employment, but to the want of profit on the part of the ship-owners. He agreed with the gallant general as to a depression in the shipping interest; but ho differed entirely with him as to the cause of that depression. It was no doubt, natural for the shipping interest to complain of their decreased profits; but what branch of our trade or manufacture had not suffered a similar decline. In looking at the shipping concerns of Great Britain, unfavourable inferences ought not to be drawn, because partial depressions might be shown at particular periods. The right hon. gentleman then read a statement of the total number of vessels, with the amount of their tonnage, and the number of men employed in navigating them, that entered inwards and cleared outwards, from and to all parts of the world, in 1814, and in the subsequent years of 1825,1826, and 1827, from which it appeared, that the tonnage in 1827, as compared with the tonnage of 1826, had increased nearly seventy-two thousand tons. In the above statement Ireland was included as a foreign country. The following was a list of the amount of all foreign and British tonnage entered inwards, exclusive of Ireland, from 1825 to 1827 inclusive:—

	British.	Foreign.
	Tons.	Tons.
1825	2,027,469	892,601
1826	1,796,250	643,922
1827	1,972,780	715,824

Thus it would appear, that there was an increase of nearly two hundred thousand tons in favour of the latter year. His right hon. friend (Mr. Huskisson) had been accused by the gallant general of taking only single years for his comparisons; but his right hon. friend had taken the average of 1814 to 1823 inclusive, and then from 1824 to 1826.—The right hon. gentleman then proceeded to quote from the speech of Mr. Huskisson in 1827, on the state of the shipping interest, the average amount of tonnage of British and foreign shipping upon an average of five years, from 1814 to 1818 inclusive. The increase of British shipping in 1826, as compared with the above average, was four hundred and thirty-two thousand seven hundred and twelve tons, and of foreign, one hundred and three thousand nine hundred and sixty tons. The excess of British above foreign being three hundred and twenty-eight thousand seven hundred and fifty-two tons. The right hon. gentleman proceeded to read extracts from the report of the committee appointed in 1821, showing that the shipping interest had no occasion to complain. One material part of the present question he had nearly omitted: he meant the coasting trade: Tons. In the year 1823 it amounted to 7,899,602

—	1824	—	8,101,337
—	1825	—	8,300,756
—	1826	—	8,368,812
—	1827	—	8,186,701

Thus it would appear, that the coasting trade, although slightly diminished during the last year, was progressively improving. He now begged to call the attention of the House to the following statement of the amount of tonnage which entered and cleared coastwise at the several ports in Ireland for the three last years, ending 5th January:—

	Inwards.		Outwards.
	Vessels.	Tonnage	Vessels.	Tonnage.
1826	2,974.	107,455	2,939	82,976
1827	2,882	97,443	3,203	102,575
1828	3,052	141,093	3,046	129,053

By these statements the House would perceive the wonderful difference between the tonnage of England and Ireland. He thought it was a debt of gratitude due to the latter country to devise some means to increase her maritime commerce. Before he closed his observations, he would say something with regard to the trade of London. It had been said, that the proceedings of last year had destroyed that trade; but the following accounts would show the incorrectness of that statement. In 1824, the tonnage of British ships engaged in the trade of London was six hundred and seven thousand; in 1825, seven hundred and fifty-eight thousand; in 1826, six hundred and seventy-five thousand; and in 1827, seven hundred and sixty-nine thousand; and the number of vessels was three thousand three hundred and eighty-nine in 1825, and about four thousand in 1827, showing a large increase over the great trading year 1825. There had likewise been an increase of the tonnage of foreign vessels engaged in the London trade. In 1824, the tonnage of foreign ships trading to the port of London was two hundred and sixty-four thousand; in 1825, three hundred thousand; in 1826, two hundred and fifteen thousand; and in 1827, two hundred and ninety-one thousand. The tonnage of vessels from the Hans towns was the next subject he should allude to; and he should do so because it was said, that our errors with regard to free trade had thrown overwhelming advantages into their hands, at the expense of this country. In 1825, the tonnage of their ships trading to this country, was forty-four thousand; in 1826, twenty-nine thousand; and in 1827, twenty-two thousand; so much for the truth of that complaint. The same remark might be made with respect to the tonnage of the ships from Prussia into this country, which, in 1825, amounted to one hundred and seventy-six thousand; in 1826, to one hundred and twelve thousand; and in 1827, to one hundred and six thousand. The number of ships of all nations that had passed the Sound in 1826 was eleven thousand; and that number increased in 1827 to thirteen thousand; but of that increase the proportion of the increase on British ships was thirty-seven per cent, while that of foreign ships was only eight per cent. He asked whether, under these circumstances, he was not justified in saying, that this country had nothing to fear from a competition with foreign nations? The country which possessed the vast resources of Great Britain, not only in a maritime, but an agricultural and manufacturing point of view, need not be under any apprehension from foreign competition. The more the subject was investigated, the more would the result show, that the shipping interest of Great Britain was far from being in that state which the gallant general had described.

said, he would not attempt to follow the right hon. gentleman through the very complicated statement which he had just made. He must say, however, that he was still incredulous on many points; and representing as he did a large county, which was so closely connected with the shipping interest, he should feel it his duty to make a few observations in reply to them. Notwithstanding the arguments of the right hon. gentleman, it was an appalling prospect for himself, and those with whom he was connected, to see their property daily depreciated, and no remuneration for the expenditure of their capital. Was it then wonderful if he clung to the faintest hope, that some remedies might be devised to check the growing evil, in order that those who had, for centuries past, considered themselves under the protection of the government might be restored to something like their former state of prosperity. The shipowners believed their distress to be mainly owing to the competition with foreign vessels, which they were unable to keep up. The charge for freight was now so low, that some protection was absolutely neces- sary. He was not opposed to liberal commercial regulations, but he thought there should be some relaxation from those lately established.

denied the expressions attributed to him by the hon. member for Worcester. What he had, on a former occasion, said was, not that British ships could be built, but that they could be sailed in competition with foreign shipping. This arose from their greater durability, their cheaper insurance, and the other palpable advantages which were known to belong to them. As a proof of this superiority, he need only refer to the report of the committee on foreign trade. Now, how did the fact stand, as to the comparative business of the British and foreign shipping in the general trade of this country? There had been, as the return of British shipping showed, an increase between the years 1827 and 1824, of five hundred and fifty-six thousand tons, and of thirty-four thousand four hundred and sixty-six men, and a decrease of the foreign to the extent of seven thousand, seven hundred and forty-eight tons, and of one thousand four hundred and ten men. And this comparative increase in favour of this country, was observable in the first year of the operation of the new measures, which were said to have inflicted so much evil. There had been, at the same time, a great increase of shipbuilding in the colonies; still he denied in toto the peculiar depression, upon which so much stress had been laid. He admitted, indeed, that the profits in the shipping trade were much reduced; but he denied that the reduction was in a greater proportion than that of the other branches of general trade. Let any body look at the list of comparative prices, and this would be obvious. In 1825, the price of Jamaica coffee was 91s., at present it was 71s. During the same period cotton had fallen from 1s. 6¼d. to 7½d., tobacco from 3¾d. to 2⅛d., olive oil from 54s. to 43s., British iron, per ton, from 15l. to 8l. 17s. 6d. lead from 29l. 10s. to 18l., tin from 101s. to 76s. hemp from 43l. to 38l., Dantzic timber from 5l. 15s. to 4l. 15s.; so that the diminution in the price of shipping had not sunk below its relative proportion. With respect to freights, in 1825, when the highest price was held out, owing to the chance of a short supply of all the commodities of the country, and a desire to speculate in obtaining the requisite substitute, the regular freight for clean hemp from the Baltic was 60s. a ton, at present it was 45s.; of tallow it had fallen from 40s. to 28s., thus preserving the same proportion to the level of other articles. If the shipping, then, had not sunk, as had been asserted, but increased,—if the coasting trade gave employment to nine million of tons—if the fisheries employed forty-thousand—the colonial eight hundred and twenty-two thousand tons—the foreign trade two million, eight hundred and sixty thousand—if, in fact, the general employment of British shipping was eleven million, nine hundred and forty eight thousand tons, how could such a comparatively trifling competition as seven hundred thousand foreign tonnage be said so to have affected them? Then, the hon. member had said, that the ship-owners were peculiarly entitled to relief, from the meekness with which they had borne their depression, and the utter absence of all reproach against the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Huskisson) whose measures were said to have wrought this painful change. What! was the payment last year of 200l. from that body for a pamphlet, which did not contain one half so much argument, as it did abuse, no reproach of the right hon. gentleman? Was the exhibition in the metropolis, of a sort of general hoisting of flags, at the right hon. gentleman's resignation nothing? He could not treat with sufficient contempt the authors of these attempts at triumph, or with sufficient pity the deluded instruments made use of on the occasion? For what was this flag hoisting? A poor boatman, when he had put the question to him, simply replied-" Because of a gemmen going out who won't let us live." He would now say a word or two in reference to what had fallen from the Vice-president of the Board of Trade. That right hon. gentleman had told them, that he and the right hon. gentleman at the head of that Board would go into the inquiry next session, with the same impartiality as if their minds were sheets of blank paper. He confessed he heard this statement with dismay. If they were to have the whole of the great question again agitated an unheard of degree of suffering and private distress and inconvenience would be produced. If all those great questions were again to be entered into by those who did not understand them, and were disqualified for the task, the country would continue open to the most alarming fluctuations and changes.

said, that at that late hour of the night he would not trespass long upon the attention of the House. In the preceding session he had stated at large his views and principles in reference to this important question; and it would be quite impossible for him to add any thing to the lucid statement of facts which his right hon. friend had laid before the House upon this almost exhausted subject. The hon. member for Dover had expressed his indignant feelings at the treatment which he (Mr. Huskisson) had received from certain parties. He could assure the House, that such treatment had in no degree disturbed the tranquillity of his feelings, and if they had paid but 200l. to the writer of the scurrilous pamphlet alluded to, he would only say that they had measured their liberality by the low rates of freights. He would own that he had been rather startled by the first statement of the gallant general. The gallant general had commenced by stating, that he was about to discuss—what? an abstract naval question, with a collateral view to commerce. He must acknowledge that his gallant friend had well performed his promise—if by "abstract" he had meant a view of the subject, leaving out all the facts of the case—and he had treated the collateral part of the question with quite as little reserve. The gallant general had argued upon what he seemed to consider an apparent deficiency, or falling off, in the tonnage of the country, and in the number of seamen; and his proposition was, that next session they should inquire into a subject which had been already fully and satisfactorily explained. In the year 1825, he had felt it his duty to consolidate ail the complicated and various acts relating to shipping; and by one provision then made, it was ordered, that all ships on coming into port should be registered upon the oath of the captain. The old Registry act, the 26th of the late king, did not provide for the ships which might be lost at sea, or otherwise destroyed: their registries still remained; but when he came to remodel the registries in the year 1827, it was plain that those ships which were no longer in existence could not be registered de novo. Therefore, all the shipping which had been lost or destroyed, from the year 1774 to 1827 were omitted in the new registry list. Thereupon the gallant general called upon him to account for the apparent diminution in shipping between 1826 and 1827. Why, the same thing would have happened, if the remodelling of the Registry act had taken place in 1814, or in any other year. But his gallant friend inquired, what had become of the seamen? In reply to this question he would state, that about a century and a half ago this House granted a land-tax to the Crown, and tax commissioners were appointed by king William in every county for its collection. These collectors were appointed only for the year; and it appeared, that each year the county members returned to government the names of a number of gentlemen qualified to fill the office. From the period of king William, to the present time, this law had continued unchanged, when at this moment a bill for that purpose was passing through the House; and it was found necessary to append to that bill all the names of all the commissioners who had been appointed, and of all the persons who had been recommended by the several county members from the time of king William to the present. The bill in that state had been already read a third time; it was a mass of such magnitude, that the other bills on the table would appear but as mere shreds before it; and, indeed, he should not be the person to move that it should be carried to the Lords by any one member of that House. Now, if any one proposed to take out of that bill the names of all those persons who were unquestionably dead—such as those appointed in the reigns of king William, queen Anne, king George 1st. 2nd. and 3rd.,—his gallant friend would probably stare at the diminished bill, and ask "What had become of all the commissioners?" His gallant friend had admitted, that there was an increase in trade, but he complained, that the expense in the men and shipping, by which the trade was carried on, had decreased. What, then, was the manifest object of his inquiry? That the shipping should be employed at higher rates,—that the country should be put to greater expense, and that thus all competition with foreign countries should be prevented ! His gallant friend had complained, that by the aid of steam-packets, vessels were enabled often a fortnight sooner to get to sea, and that British vessels often made two voyages in one sea- son to the Baltic. His gallant friend ought at once to pass a law to put down steam-packets, and to prevent vessels making more than one voyage in the year to the Baltic. There was an agent in London at present for all the shipping belonging to the north-cast coast of England. That gentleman was Mr. Richmond, one who had closely attended to the interests which it was his duty to watch over; and in a letter which he had received from that gentleman this morning, there was the following sentence:—"It is not from want of employment that we complain; we have more of that than ever there was. Owing to the consumption of our noble and wealthy country, I am convinced that the importations of the year 1827 have exceeded those of the far-famed year 1825." This showed that the shipping interest were in no want of employment. He would admit, that the shipping interests, as well as the other interests of this country, had latterly made but small profits; but that was owing to general causes, which all must admit, while they deplored their existence. The shipping interests complained, on the one hand, and so did the farmers and manufacturers on the other. It had been over and over again asked, whether under the present system, British shipping could stand a fair competition with the ships of other nations. He would answer that question by a statement which had been put into his hands by one of the members for the city of London. The ports of Brazil were free ports; audit appeared that the trade of Brazil, between Brazil and Europe, owing to the wart of shipping in Brazil, must be carried on, either by European ships, or by those of the United States. One article of Brazilian produce was sugar. It could not be brought to England on account of the high prohibitory duties. A great portion of it was exported to Trieste, and the other portion to Hamburgh. Twenty-eight vessels sailed from Bahia in the last year laden with sugar to Trieste; and of these, four were Austrian; two were Swedes; one Russian; the remaining twenty-one were English. Forty-eight ships sailed to Hamburgh from Bahia during the last year; of these, twelve belonged to Hamburgh; two were Germans; one Dutchman; one Swede; one Russian; and twenty-three of them were English. Thus out of seventy-five vessels which carried on the trade of the Brazils with Eu- rope, about fifty were English. His right hon. friend, the Vice-president of the Board of Trade, had declared, that his own mind, and that of his right hon. colleague, were blank upon this subject. He did not think, however, that they were persons likely to adopt any change in the general policy of this country, which had been introduced within the last eight years by his two noble friends, in the other House, and himself. He was sure that the Vice-president of the Board of Trade was animated by such liberal feelings, that when he examined into the present system, he would come to the determination of maintaining and supporting it. That system had the approval of the present Secretary of the Home Department, of every member of lord Liverpool's government, and of lord Liverpool himself. He was anxious that it should go forth to foreign nations, that this country would not retrograde from that system. All he would ask was, let the system have fair play. If the blessings of peace could be continued, he was sure that, under that system, commerce, and all the interests connected with commerce, would flourish. A charge had been made elsewhere by one who, because he had been a diplomatist, assumed the wisdom of a statesman against this country for recognizing the independence of the South American States. It was a tardy wisdom which came in with its advice when, fortunately, it was impossible to prevent the establishment of the independence of those extensive countries. Those states had, unfortunately, occupied the relation of belligerents with one another, and some infractions of the law of nations had been committed. But had such infractions never been committed by this and other civilized countries in a state of war? Why, Old Spain herself had sinned fifty times as much in that way, as the countries that had been freed from her yoke. There had not been one case of irregularity committed by those belligerents on British commerce, which had not been made the subject of remonstrance. Those states, when they became more settled and tranquil, he was convinced would add increased wealth to the commerce of this country, and be, in every way, productive of the greatest advantages to England. He hoped that the present commercial system would have fair play, and he would stake his reputation on its success.

recommended his gallant friend to withdraw the motion.

said, he was anxious on the part of his majesty's government, to disclaim the opinions which had been, in some degree imputed to them, by his right hon. friend the member for Inverness, and more strongly by the hon. member for Dover. The hon. member for Dover seemed to think, from something which had fallen from the Vice-president of the Board of Trade, that government intended to abandon the principles, with respect to navigation and trade, which they had acted on previously to the late separation; but his right hon. friend, the member for Liverpool, had fairly answered the hon. member for Dover, when he asked, how it was possible that government could abandon those principles, when so many members of the administration were the very individuals under whose auspices those principles were first promulgated. He could sincerely say, on the part of those members of the administration and of himself, that there never was the slightest disposition to abandon those principles. Time was only wanting to show how decidedly and unequivocally they would be followed up.

disapproved of the motion. Indeed, it was one by no means calculated to give satisfaction to the ship-owners themselves. If persisted in, he should therefore vote against it.

said, he would not press the motion to a division; and one reason which principally induced him not to do so, was the advanced period of the session.