of Labrador, finding that the fishery there the master thought, that he had fulfilled could be carried on only under disadvan- his mission, and left the coast; having tageous circumstances, and understanding previously asked the captain of the French that they would not be permitted by the sloop of war for a copy of his instructions, French, who claimed an exclusive right of which was refused. He (Mr. Robinson), fishing on a part of the coast of Newfound- therefore, called on his Majesty's Governland under the treaties to which he had al- ment-for, on a question of national law, luded, to fish on that part of the coast, had the opinion of the Crown should be known thought it advisable to ascertain what he called on his Majesty's Government was the opinion of their own Government-and if the Government did not attend to on the question. A letter was, in con-his call, he must call on the House to sequence, written by the Chamber of Com-address his Majesty to take the proper merce at Newfoundland to the right hon. means for ascertaining what our rights Baronet, the member for Perthshire, who were under the existing treaties; and, was then his Majesty's Secretary of State having ascertained those rights, to mainfor the Colonial Department, requesting tain them. The subject was one of conto be informed whether or not the French siderable importance. All parties conhad really a right to the exclusive fishery curred in the value of the fisheries in on the coast in question. The answer question. America had, indeed, availed made to the Newfoundland Chamber of itself, to a great extent, and to our great Commerce, by the Colonial Office, was of prejudice, of our remissness. He cona very extraordinary nature, for it im- tended, that it behoved his Majesty's Goported that the exact extent of the right vernment to take such steps as should in question was not ascertained. Upon prevent British subjects from being any this the Chamber of Commerce in New- longer in doubt on the point. If that foundland, in June, 1830, fitted out a were not done,-if his Majesty's subjects vessel to go to that part of the coast were left in ignorance of the real state of the of Newfoundland on which the French case,-what was to prevent them, being claimed an exclusive right of fishery, and three to one in number, from going to the instructed the master of that vessel to in- French part of the coast, and compelling, sist upon his right to fish, but, at the by violence, the right to fish there? God same time, to avoid all hostile collision. forbid, that he should suggest any such It was but common justice to say, that proceeding; but it might by possibility the master of this vessel executed the occur. What reason could there be for commission intrusted to him with singular this reserve upon the subject on the part zeal and discretion. He proceeded to the of his Majesty's Government? He did French part of the coast, landed, and not suppose, that we were afraid of France. stuck up a notice of his intention to fish; For his part, he was convinced, that there upon which he was told, by the French was not a word in the treaties which conauthorities, that he had no right to do so, veyed to France the exclusive right of that the French had the exclusive right of fishing on the coast in question. fishing, and that, if he did not quit the only had they no right of exclusive poscoast peaceably, they must compel him session of the fishery, but the French by violence. The master, in order to were prohibited from remaining permafulfil his trust, served the French author-nently on the coast; and it was provided, ities with a protest against their proceed-that they should go from France to the ings. Just at this period a French sloop of sixteen guns arrived, the captain of which asked the master of the English vessel what business he had there; telling him, that he had no right to fish on that part of the coast, because the right of fishing upon it had been ceded to the French by treaty. The answer of the English master was, that he had been sent there to fish, and with orders not to leave the coast, unless compelled to do so. To this it was replied, that they must then compel him. Under these circumstances,

Not

fishery, and, at the end of the season, return to France. All that, in his opinion, the treaty secured to the French was, a concurrent right to fish with the English. On what grounds, therefore, the assumption rested he did not know. If on usage, he contended, that that was no ground, however long the usage might have been continued. If France had no right to the exclusive fishery, why allow her claim to it? Under any circumstances the time had arrived when the question ought to be completely set at rest. Even supposing

the Law Officers of the Crown decided I was in the Colonial Office, an application against his opinion, there would be some having been made to assert the rights of advantage in putting an end to the dis- the British fishermen by force, his answer cussion, and both French and British sub- was, that he thought it unadvisable to jects would know what the law was. He enter upon an assertion of the right, and would detain the House no longer, but that it would be better to leave the matter would move, "that an humble address be open to negotiation. He repeated these presented to his Majesty, praying that he things, merely to show the difficulty of would be graciously pleased to give direc- the case; and he recommended the hon. tions, that the opinion of the Law Officers Gentleman to withdraw his Motion, asof the Crown should be taken as to the suring him, that attention should be paid construction of the various treaties between to it; and that, whatever might be the Great Britain and France, relative to the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, right of exclusive fishing on our part of every effort should be made to conclude the coast of Newfoundland claimed by an amicable arrangement of the matter. France, so that the fact ought to be as- The hon. Member said, that the Americans certained, and instructions be given by exercised the right of fishing on the coast his Majesty's Government to protect the in question. If so, we ought certainly to British fishermen in the exercise of their enjoy the same privilege; for the Americans just rights and privileges." must claim on our right, as established by the treaty of 1783. As he was informed, however, the Americans sent a frigate to assert their right; but he must say, that he should be exceedingly sorry to employ force. After what he had stated, he trusted the hon. Gentleman would withdraw his Motion.

Mr. Poulett Thomson did not rise to oppose the Motion, but to express his hope, that the hon. Member would be induced to withdraw it; for although it might be expedient to take the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown on the subject, it was not necessary, and it might be inconvenient, to take it in the formal manner proposed by the hon. Member. He wished he could agree with the view of the subject taken by the hon. Gentleman, but, having attended to it at various times, and especially when the question was brought forward by his amiable and lamented friend Mr. Villiers, he was bound to say that, although he hoped we might be able to establish our claim, he had not the confidence in the subject which the hon. Member expressed. The hon. Member had referred to treaties, but he ought, also, to refer to the declarations by which those treaties were accompanied; for it was only by such a context that the matter could be determined. The House was probably aware, that this subject had been under the consideration of successive Governments in this country since the year 1783, and that various opinions had been entertained respecting it. Nay, on one occasion, two Members of an Administration, one in the other House, and one in the House of Commons, expressed opinions directly opposite to one another upon it. He mentioned this, to show that the subject was one involved in considerable difficulty. The opinion on which he confessed he should be disposed principally to rely, was that of Mr. Huskisson, to whom, during the short time that he

Mr. Robinson trusted, that his Majesty's Government would not allow the question to go on in a doubtful state for an indefinite period; for, although he deprecated a quarrel with France upon it, he was anxious that the matter should be ultimately settled. He trusted, therefore, that, before the next Session of Parliament, something might be done finally to settle the question.

Mr. Baring admitted, that it might be inexpedient to move formally for the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown on the subject. He must say, however, that the British fisheries, whether on the coast of Newfoundland or in the Channel, had not the attention paid to them which they formerly received; and they were in a very declining condition. Now, this was a very important consideration; the fisheries being highly valuable, not only as a branch of our trade, but as a nursery for our seamen. He could not help calling the particular attention of his Majesty's Government to the condition of the British fisheries on the coast of Guernsey and Jersey. In former times the interests of those fisheries had experienced the peculiar care of Government, and were considered among those interests which it was their especial duty to protect. He was sorry to say, that was not the case at

Motion withdrawn.

The

present, and that, while the French Go- | end to it by giving a year's notice, so that vernment were cherishing their fisheries it would expire on the 2nd of April. The everywhere with the greatest possible care, country had it now in its power, therefore, the British Government evinced an apathy to annul or repeal the Treaty, should it be with respect to our fisheries, which was injurious to the national welfare. He highly reprehensible. impugned the Act on which that Treaty was made, as unconstitutional, impolitic, and unjust. The Act had signally failed, which was proved in the distress of the shipping interest, caused in great part and aggravated in all by the Treaties concluded under that Act. The direct tenddency of those Treaties was, to discourage British shipping, and to injure the various classes connected with British shipping to such an extent, that to delay further the proposal for the Repeal of the Act, would be a direct neglect of duty, and injurious to the best interests of the country. The policy of our Navigation-laws was the encouragement of our shipping, which was sometimes effected at the expense of those connected with shipping, though counterbalanced by granting them certain privileges. first statute connected with the protection to British shipping was the first of Henry 7th., c. 8. It granted them exclusive privileges, but it said, that all mariners navigating them should be British. The fifth of Elizabeth excluded foreigners from our fisheries, the thirteenth from our coasting trade, and, in 1646, an Act was passed which excluded foreigners from our colonial trade. These and other Acts, embodied by Cromwell, and renewed and consolidated by the 12th of Charles 2nd., constituted what were called our Navigation-laws. The hon. member then quoted the authority of Sir Josiah Child, Dr. Adam Smith, Lord Wallace, Mr. Huskisson, and other eminent men, in favour of the principle and effect of the Navigation-laws. The right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, had, on May 7th, 1827, quoted the work of Sir Josiah Child, against the Navigation-laws. He was surprised at that, for he could state from a careful perusal of the book which he held in his hand, that there was not one word in it, from beginning to end, against those laws. He hoped, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman would be more particular in his quotations in future. [Mr. P. Thomson: I never quoted Sir Josiah Child.]-The right hon. Gentleman was so represented in Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, and an hon. friend of his told him, that he heard the right hon. Gentleman quote the work; but, of course, after

RECIPROCITY OF DUTIES ACT.] Mr. George F. Young rose to bring forward the Motion of which he had given notice, for leave for "a Bill to repeal the Act 4th George 4th, c. 77, commonly termed the Reciprocity of Duties' Act,' with the view of restoring to Parliament its constitutional control over all treaties with foreign Powers, involving the commercial interests of the British community." He could assure the House, that it was not his wish to occupy, by any Motion of a speculative character, that time which he fully admitted ought to be devoted as much as possible to practical measures. His object was purely practical; and if the House would give him its indulgence, he would endeavour to prove, that the Reciprocity of Duties Act, as it was called, ought not to remain longer on our Statute-book, that even the present session should not be allowed to pass without repealing it, which would afford a proof of the anxiety of Parliament to redress the grievances of the people. In urging this on the attention of the House, he would take up as little of their time as possible. He felt his own inadequacy to the task which he had undertaken; but though he did, he was urged to it by a sense of duty, from which it would be weakness or affectation to shrink. He had formed his opinions of this Act on long experience and careful inquiry; yet he owned, that he came to the task with a full confidence of his incapability to impress upon the House his own firm conviction of its injustice and impolicy. The subject had occupied the attention of the greatest orators, writers, and statesmen, of our times. The Reciprocity of Duties Act gave the Crown the power of contracting Treaties with foreign Powers, by which their vessels might be admitted in certain trades, and on certain conditions, to enter our ports on an equality with our own vessels. The first Treaty which was contracted under this Act, was that with Prussia, concluded on April 2nd, 1824, which was to continue in force for ten years; and, after that, either of the contracting parties might put an

was, to exclude foreign ships from those departments in which they were prohibited from engaging by the Navigation-laws, by affording a ready means of distinguishing such as were really British. Again, our foreign trade and our shipping had been made subservient to our home manufactures. In the 5th section of the Registry Act, it was enacted, that the registry should be restricted to ships which were wholly of the build of the United Kingdom. The 7th clause also limited the repairs of British ships in foreign countries to 20s. per ton. He held in his hand a list of articles of essential importance in ship-building, all of which were liable to heavy duties upon importation into this country. First of all, the ship itself was wholly prohibited-it must not be imported at all. Then there was a duty of fifty per cent on iron, thirty-three per cent on copper, fifty per cent on casks, forty-four per cent on sailcloth, 21. 15s. per load on oak timber, and so on. Live cattle were taxed; grain was pro

the right hon. Gentleman's denial, Hansard must be wrong. It was true, that the late Mr. Huskisson altered the Navigation-laws in several particulars, and he was a high authority. He had come frequently in contact with that eminent man, and, though he differed from him widely on this question, he could never doubt his vast extent of information, his profound judgment on all subjects connected with the trade and commerce of the country, and his anxious desire to promote what he conscientiously believed the interests of the country. Never could he join in the abuse which was poured upon that able Minister, and on the occurrence of the lamentable accident which deprived that Gentleman of life, he had deplored that event as one of the most serious losses which the shipowners could suffer. He thought Mr. Huskisson wrong; but that Gentleman had intellect to detect his error, manliness to avow it, and honesty enough to retrace his steps, when the conviction flashed upon his mind. He could have confided in the administra-hibited at a low price and protected at a tion of Mr. Huskisson, leaving events high one; fruit and vegetables paid a duty gradually to develope themselves. He varying from forty to fifty per cent ;-in wished that he could place the same con- one word, all the articles required by the fidence in those in whose hands the care shipowner to build and provision his of our commercial and maritime interest vessels paid a heavy duty. He did not was now reposed. His successors had complain of the imposition of those duties, grasped at the mantle of the prophet, which was founded on a wise policy, but expecting to imbibe also his inspiration, they increased the cost of ships and the but they had obtained only a worthless cost of navigation, and proved onerous in covering. The first object of our com- the pursuit in which he and others were mercial policy was, to rear a body of hardy engaged. In the pursuit of that policy, sailors for the defence of the country. the Legislature had justly extended to And it had accordingly, been provided by navigation certain protections. the Navigation Act, that every British coasting and colonial trade was confined registered ship should be navigated by a entirely to British ships. That protection crew, of which three-fourths, at least, were had been continued for the most part up to be British seamen; and, that every to the present hour, though some relaxaBritish registered ship engaged in the tions had been permitted, which had done coasting trade and fisheries, should be considerable injury to British navigation. navigated by a crew of which the whole The Navigation Act declared, that no was British. That, among other Acts, had goods or commodities whatever of the been consolidated last Session and formed growth, production, or manufacture of part of the 2 & 3 Will. 4th, cap. 54. No Asia, Africa, or America should be imBritish registered ship was suffered to ported into England, except in ships bedepart from a British port, without a crew longing to English subjects, and of which consisting of three-fourths natives of these the master and the greater number of the islands. The shipowners were compelled crew were also English. It also declared also to take on board a certain number of further, that no goods of the growth, apprentices in proportion to the tonnage. production, or manufacture of any country These enactments entailed on the ship-in Europe should be imported into Great owners great expense, owing to the high Britain, except in British ships, or in such rate of wages, and the high price of pro-ships as were the real property of the visions in this country. Another object people of the country or place in which

The