(During the session of 1835 a committee of the House of Commons was appointed to inquire into the operation of the existing duties on timber. Having examined several witnesses, the committee agreed to the following resolutions :- 1. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that the present mode of taking the duties on deals is susceptible of improvement, and that this committee would recommend that a mode be adopted which shall approach more nearly to a payment according to the contents of the deals. 2. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that the difference of duty of 45s., now imposed by law upon timber the produce of Europe, as compared with timber the produce of our North American colonies, is too great, and may be reduced. 3. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that, having a due regard to the interests which have been created in the British North American colonies by the system hitherto pursued, and to the representations of the shipping interest, a reduction of the protective duty, not exceeding 15s. per load, appears to them to be a fair arrangement. 4. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that such reduction be made, so far as may be consistent with the interests of the revenue, without any augmentation on the duty on colonial timber. 5. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that, in any alteration made, such alteration should not affect the shipments made in the year 1836. 6. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that there should be an uniform mode of taking the duty on deals throughout the United Kingdom. The adoption of these resolutions would be a material improvement. Still, however, they fall far short of what the public exigencies require. An ample supply of the best and cheapest timber being, if not absolutely indispensable, of the utmost possible importance to a manufacturing nation, possessed of a large mercantile and warlike navy, it should be about the very last article on which duties should be imposed. But, if a tax must, on the principle of quocunque modo rem, be laid on timber, it is surely unnecessary to say that it should be laid equally on all timber imported; or that, if a distinction be made, it ought plainly to be in favour of the best, and not of the worst, article. But, for several years past, our policy, if we may so call it, has been exactly the reverse of this. We have laid high discriminating duties on the superior and cheaper timber of the north of Europe, to force the importation of a dearer and comparatively bad article from our North American possessions! Even supposing the suggestion of the committee were adopted, there would still be a discriminating duty of 30s. a load charged on the superior timber of the north of Europe over that which is laid on inferior timber from North America. The folly of thus enhancing the cost, and deteriorating the quality, of so important an article as timber, is the greater, seeing that it is by no means clear that our North American possessions derive any real advantage from the timber trade; at all events, it is certain that they do not gain by it more than a very small part of the loss it entails on us; and any injury that might be done them by the equalisation of the timber duties, would be more than made up by the repeal of the discriminating duties that are at present charged on most articles of foreign produce imported into the colonies; duties which, without being productive of revenue, are the source of much irritation and disgust. The shipowners would sustain more injury from an equalisation of the timber duties than any one else. But we have shown (vol. ii. p. 639.) that, even as regards them, the inconvenience would not be very considerable. But, whatever it might be, it would be fully obviated by allowing them a bounty of 30s. or 40s. on the conveyance of emigrants to Quebec; a measure of the policy of which we are on this, as well as on other grounds fully persuaded.-(See Dict. in loc. cit.) Statement showing the Importation and Consumption of Timber in the United Kingdom, for the Fifteen Years ending the 1st of February, 1839: Statement showing the Stock and Prices Current of Timber, in the United Kingdom, for the last Fifteen Years, ending the 1st of February, 1839. Statement of the Cargoes of Timber, &c., imported into the United Kingdom from British America and the Baltic, for the Eighteen Years ending the 1st of February, 1839. 0 2 11-2 007 0 2 7 0 0 11 0 0 51 0 0 64 0 4 4 0 5 04 5 0 18 10 0 00 83 0 2 17 O 2 5 0 2 00 004 147 10 0 16 15 0 8 15 0 0 0 84 0 1 6 TIMBER TRADE. Having, in separate articles, described those species of timber most in demand in this country, we mean to confine ourselves in this article to a few remarks on the policy of the regulations under which the trade in timber is conducted. I. Importance of a cheap Supply of Timber.-It is surely unnecessary to enter into any lengthened statements on this head. If there be one article more than another with which it is of primary importance that a great commercial nation like England should be abun dantly supplied on the lowest possible terms, that article is timber. Owing to the deficiency of our home supplies, most of the timber, with the exception of oak, required for building ships and houses; and most part, also, of that employed in the construction of machinery; is imported from abroad. Any individual acquainted with the purposes to which timber is applied, but ignorant of our peculiar policy with respect to it, would never, certainly, imagine that such an article could be made the subject of oppressive duties, and of still more oppressive preferences. Timber is not to be looked at in the same light as most other commodities. It is against all principle to impose duties on materials intended to be subsequently manufactured; but timber is the raw material of the most important of all manufactures— that of the instruments of production! Suppose it were proposed to lay a heavy tax on ships, wagons, looms, or workshops when completed, would not such a monstrous proposal be universally scouted? And yet this is what is really done. The finished articles are not, indeed, directly taxed; but the principal material of which they are made, and without which they could not be constructed, is burdened with an exorbitant duty! To dwell on the absurdity of such a tax would be worse than useless. Of all things essential to the prosperity of manufacturing industry, improved and cheap machinery is the most indispensable. Most individuals amongst us are ready enough to ridicule the contradictory conduct of the French government, who, at the very moment that they are endeavouring to bolster up a manufacturing interest, lay enormous duties on foreign iron, and thus double or treble the price of some of the most important manufacturing implements. Timber is, however, of quite as much importance in this respect as iron; and our conduct in burdening it with exorbitant duties partakes as largely of the felo-de-se character as that of our neighbours! Indeed, as will be immediately seen, it is decidedly less defensible. Some plausible, though inconclusive, reasonings might be urged in defence of duties on iron and timber, were they imposed for the sake of revenue: but even this poor apology for financial ignorance and rapacity cannot be set up in defence of the iron duties of France or the timber duties of England. The former, however, are the least objectionable; they were imposed, and are still kept up, to encourage the production of iron in France: whereas the duties on timber in England have been imposed for the sake, principally, of promoting the lumber trade of Canada, and of forcing the employment of a few thousand additional tons of shipping! We do not sacrifice the goose for the sake of the golden eggs, but for the sake of the offal she has picked up. 2. Origin and Operation of the discriminating Duty in favour of American Timber.— The practice of encouraging the importation of the timber of Canada and our other possessions in North America, in preference to that of foreign countries, is but of recent growth. It took its rise during the administration of Mr. Vansittart, and bears in every part the impress of his favourite policy. The events that took place in 1808 having seriously affected our previous relations with the Baltic powers, a deficiency in the accustomed supply of timber began to be apprehended; and the ship owners and Canada merchants naturally enough availed themselves of this circumstance, to excite the fears of the ministry, and to induce them to change the fair and liberal system on which the trade in timber had been conducted down to that time, by granting extraordinary encouragement to its importation from Canada. Even as a temporary expedient, applicable to a peculiar emergency, the policy of giving any such encouragement is extremely doubtful. Supposing timber not to have been any longer obtainable from the north of Europe, its price would have risen, and it would, of course, have been imported from Canada, the United States, or wherever it could be had, without any interference on the part of government. But, in 1809, a large addition was made to the duties previously charged on timber from the north of Europe, at the same time that those previously charged on timber from Canada and our other possessions in America were almost entirely repealed; and in the very next year (1810), the duties thus imposed on Baltic timber were doubled! Nor did the increase of duties on such timber stop even here. In 1813, after Napoleon's disastrous campaign in Russia, and when the free navigation of the Baltic had been restored, 25 per cent. were added to the duties on European timber! The increase of the revenue was pleaded as a pretext for this measure; but we believe it was really intended to augment the preference in favour of Canada timber; for how could it be supposed that an increase of the duties on an article imported from a particular quarter of the world, that was already taxed up to the very highest point, could add any thing considerable to the revenue, when a convertible article might be imported from another quarter duty free? The various duties laid on European timber amounted, when consolidated by the act 59 Geo. 3. c. 52., to 31. 5s. per load. Admitting, for the moment, that the peculiar and unprecedented aspect of things in 1808 and 1809 warranted the giving of some preference to the importation of timber from Canada, such preference should plainly have ceased in 1813. So long as the communication with the bridge is interrupted, we may be forced to use a boat to cross the river; but when the communication is again opened, and when there is not the remotest chance of its future interruption, it would be a singular absurdity to refuse to resume the use of the bridge, and to continue the costly and inconvenient practice of being ferried over! This, however, is exactly what we have done in the case of the Canada trade. Because a fortuitous combination of circumstances obliged us, upon one occasion, to import inferior timber at a comparatively high price, we resolved to continue the practice in all time to come! The history of commerce affords no parallel display of gratuitous folly. The absurdity of this conduct will appear still more striking, if we reflect for a moment on the peculiar situation of the countries in the north of Europe. The nations round the Baltic have made little progress in manufacturing industry. They abound in valuable raw products; but they are wholly destitute of the finer species of manufactured commodities, and of colonies. Nor have they any real inducement to attempt supplying themselves directly with the former, or to establish the latter. Their iron and copper mines, their vast forests, and their immense tracts of fertile and hitherto unoccupied land, afford far more ready and advantageous investments for their deficient capital, than could be found in manufactures or foreign trade. Russia and Prussia have, indeed, been tempted, by our corn and timber laws, to exclude some species of manufactured goods; but it is not possible that they should succeed in materially limiting our exports to them, provided we do not second their efforts by refusing to admit their products. Of all the countries in the world, there is obviously none which has so many facilities for carrying on an advantageous trade with the North as Great Britain. We have a surplus of all those products of which Russia, Prussia, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway stand most in need; and, on the other hand, they have a surplus of many of those of which we are comparatively destitute. The immense traffic we carry on with the Baltic does not, therefore, depend in any considerable degree on artificial or accidental circumstances. It does not rest on the wretched foundation of Custom-house regulations or discriminating duties, but on the gratification of mutual wants and desires. It has been justly remarked by the Marquis Garnier, the excellent translator of the "Wealth of Nations," that no inconsiderable portion of the increased power and wealth of England may be traced to the growing opulence of Russia. But the Russian empire is yet only in the infancy of civilisation; she must continue for a very long period to advance in the career of improvement, and it will be our own fault if we do not reap still greater advantages from her progress. Such is the nature of that commerce against which the discriminating duties on timber from the north of Europe aimed a severe blow! In 1809, when this system began, 428,000 tons of British shipping entered inwards from the Baltic. In 1814, the year after the 25 per cent. of additional duty had been imposed on Baltic timber, and when all the ports of that sea were open to our ships, only 242,000 tons of British shipping entered inwards,-being little more than the half of what it amounted to when the system began. In 1816, the British shipping entered inwards from the Baltic amounted to 181,000 tons. It was materially augmented in 1818 and 1819, in consequence of the failure of the crops in this country in 1817 and 1818; but even in 1819 the entries inwards were 55,000 tons under what they had been 10 years before! By diminishing our imports from the northern nations, the high discriminating duty on timber necessarily diminished our exports to them in the same proportion. The following extract from the evidence of Mr. Edward Patzcker, a merchant of Memel, given before the committee of the House of Commons on the foreign trade of the country, in 1821, shows the effect that the increased duties on timber had on the commerce with Prussia: "Has there been a great alteration in the timber trade between Memel and this country of late years?"-"Since the war, a great alteration; before the war we used to have 950 to 1,000 English ships in 1 year, and since the war we have had from 200 to 300 only." "When you talk of 900 ships, do you mean 900 ships trading between Great Britain and Memel?"— "Yes." "Do you mean that number of cargoes were loaded in the year for England ?"-"Yes." "How many cargoes were loaded for Great Britain during the last year (1820) ?"-" About 270 or 280 cargoes; there have not been more." "To what cause do you attribute that diminution in the trade?"-" To the high duties in England: for formerly the duties were only 16s. and some pence; now they are 31. 5s. in a British, and 31. 8s. in a foreign ship." "Has that diminished trade in timber produced a great alteration in the circumstances of the people of Prussia?"-" Yes: for it is the only trade which we can carry on; wheat and all the rest of our articles cannot be brought here; timber is the only one that can be brought, and the trade from Poland has very much ceased in consequence of the diminished demand for it; the people cannot sell their goods, and we cannot take such quantities of timber as we used to do; and, therefore, they cannot take English goods from us." "If such an alteration was to take place in the duties on timber in this country, as to give the Prussians a larger share of the trade than they at present enjoy, do you think that would produce increased friendly feelings on the part of the people of your country to the people of this country?"—"It would. They would certainly take far more goods from hence, as they could get better rid of them. The Poles, also, would take more of them."-(Report, 9th of March, 1821, p. 107.) The effect that the increased duties had on the trade with Norway and Sweden, aggravated as they in some degree were by an absurd method of charging the duty on deals, was still more striking and extraordinary. These countries had few products, except timber and iron, to exchange for our commodities; and as neither of these could be advantageously imported into England under the new system, the trade with them almost entirely ceased; and they were reluctantly compelled to resort to the markets of France and Holland for the articles they had formerly imported from us. In proof of this, we may mention, that the exports to Sweden, which had amounted in 1814 to 511,818., declined in 1819 to 46,6567.; and the exports to Norway, which had in 1815 amounted to 199,9027., amounted in 1819 to only 64,7411.*—(Lords' Report on the Foreign Trade of the Country, 3d of July, 1820, p. 34.) This extraordinary falling off in so very important a branch of our commerce having been established beyond all question by the evidence taken before the committees now referred to, an approach to a better system was made in 1821, when the duty on timber from the north of Europe was reduced from 31. 5s. to 21. 15s. per load, at the same time that a duty of 10s. per load was laid on timber from British America. This, however, was a comparatively inefficient measure. It was stated, to be sure, at the time, that the 21. 5s. per load of excess of duty that was thus continued on Baltic timber over that laid on timber imported from Canada, was not more than enough to balance the higher prime cost, the greater freight, and other charges consequent upon the importation of the latter; and that it would, there * Even at present, the official value of the total exports, including colonial produce, from the United Kingdom to Sweden, does not exceed 160,000l. a year. Our exports of all sorts in Norway amount to about 150,000l. a year, while our imports hardly amount to 85,000l. In fact, were it not that Norway finds means of paying us by drafts on Holland, into which her produce is admitted, she could import almost nothing from England. The injury done to our commerce with these two nations, by our heavy discriminating duties on the principal equivalent they have to give in exchange for commodities brought from abroad, was placed in a very striking point of view by Lord Althorp, in the debate on the timber duties, the 18th of March, 1831. VOL. II.-3 H fore, be in future indifferent to a merchant whether he imported timber from Memel or Miramichi! In point of fact, however, the discriminating duty continued in favour of Canada timber has been far too high to allow of this equalisation being effected. So much so is this the case, that there have been instances of ships loading with timber in the north of Europe, carrying that timber to Canada, and then bringing it to England as Canada timber; the difference of duty being about sufficient to indemnify the enormous expense of this roundabout voyage! We do not mean to say that this has been a common practice; but what are we to think of a commercial regulation that admits of such an adventure being undertaken with any prospect of success? Admitting, however, that the duty had been adjusted so as to have had the anticipated effect, could any thing be more preposterous and absurd than to impose it on such a principle? There are mines of coal in New Holland; but what should we think, were an attempt made to impose such duties on coals from Newcastle as should render it indifferent to a London merchant whether he imported a cargo of coal from the Tyne or Botany Bay? Now, the case of the timber duties is, in point of principle, precisely the same. We may obtain timber from countries so near at hand that our ships may make 3, 4, 5, and even 6 voyages a year to them;* and we refuse to admit it unless loaded with a duty that raises its price to a level with what is brought from the other side of the Atlantic-a voyage which our ships cannot, at most, perform above twice a year! The following official account shows the extent to which the system of preference has been carried : An Account of the Rates of Duty payable in Great Britain on the Principal Articles of Wood. each 080 8 26 2 15 0 4 0 0 L. 3. d. 0 15 0 15 0 6 0 1 040 0 10 0 0 15 0 44 0 0 Deal ends, under 6 feet long, and not ex- 12 inches in diameter or upwards, Fir, 8 inches square or upwards, per load do. So long as the foreigner can lay his finger on such a Table as this, it will not be easy to convince him that our commercial system has lost so much of its exclusive character as it really has done during the last few years. Having set such an example to the Russians and Prussians, need we wonder at their having attempted to shut several of our peculiar productions out of their markets? Could we expect that they were to follow our precepts rather than our practice? 3. Comparative Quality of Baltic and Canada Timber.-Had the timber of Canada been decidedly superior to that of the north of Europe, something might have been found to say in favour of the discriminating duty: for it might have been contended, with some show of reason, that it was of the utmost consequence, considering the application of timber to ship and house building, and other important purposes, to prevent the importation of an inferior species, even though it might be cheaper. But the system we have adopted is of a totally different character. We have not attempted to shut out an article which, though cheap, is inferior; but have committed the twofold absurdity of shutting out one that is at once cheap and superior! The committee of the House of Lords observe, in their First Report on the Foreign * According to the evidence of Mr. J. D. Powles, an extensive ship and insurance broker, ships can make six voyages from Norway, 3 or 4 from Prussia, and 2 from Russia, in a season.-(Common Report, p. 89.) |