upon. The fact was, it was an article in which our competition with France had ceased, and there was no injury in granting an easy importation to that which we would have at any rate. In no other article was there any thing very formidable in the rivalry of France. Glass would not be imported to any amount. In particular kinds of lace, indeed, they might have the advantage, but none which they would not enjoy independent of the treaty; and the clamours about millinery were vague and unmeaning, when, in addition to all these benefits, we included the richness of the country with which we were to trade: with its superior population of twenty millions to eight, and of course a proportionate consumption, together with its vicinity to us, and the advantages of quick and regular returns, who could hesitate for a moment to applaud the system, and look forward with ardour and impatience to its speedy ratification? The possession of so extensive and safe a market must improve our commerce, while the duties transferred from the hands of smugglers to their proper channel would benefit our revenue—the two sources of British opulence and British power.

Viewing the relative circumstances of the two countries then in this way, he saw no objection to the principle of the exchange of their respective commodities. He saw no objection to this, because he perceived and felt that our superiority in the tariff was manifest. The excellence of our manufactures was unrivalled, and in the operation must give the balance to England. But it was said, that the manufacturers dreaded the continuance of this superiority. They were alarmed at the idea of a competition with Ireland, and consequently they must be more under apprehensions at the idea of a rivalry with France. He always did think, and he must still continue to think, that the opinions of the manufacturers on this point were erroneous. They raised the clamour in respect to Ireland chiefly, he imagined, because they perceived no certain and positive advantage by the intercourse to counterbalance this precarious and uncertain evil. In this instance, their consent to the treaty did not proceed from a blind acquiescence, for they never would be blind to their inte

rest; but now that they saw so certain and so valuable an advantage to be reaped, the benefits being no longer doubtful, they were willing to hazard the probability of the injury.

Some gentlemen thought proper to contend, that no beneficial treaty could be formed between this country and France, because no such treaty had ever been formed, and because, on the contrary, commercial intercourses with her had always been injurious to England. This reasoning was completely fallacious, though it sounded largely. For, in the first place, we had not, during a very long series of years, experienced any commercial connection with France, and could not therefore form a rational estimate of its merits; and secondly, though it might be true that a commercial intercourse founded on the treaty of Utrecht would have been injurious, it did not follow that this would prove the same; for at that time the manufactures, in which we now excelled, had hardly existence, but were on the side of France instead of being against her. The tariff did not then, as now, comprehend all the articles in which we comparatively excelled, but in addition to the produce of France, which at all periods must be the same, she had the balance of manufactures also in her favour. At that period also the prejudices of our manufacturers against France were in their rage, and corresponded with the party violence of the day in the reprobation of the measure; but so far was the parliament from entertaining the opinion of no treaty being otherwise than detrimental, which could be made with France, that they went up with an address to Her Majesty, praying her to renew commercial negociations. with the court of France. It was not correctly stated, neither that we had invariably considered it as our policy to resist all connection with France. She had been more jealous of us than we of her – Prohibitions began on the part of France, and we only retaliated in our own defence. These parts of his subject he felt it difficult to drop, without again adverting to the effect of this treaty on our revenue, which would almost exceed credibility, though it would cause an average reduction of 50%. per cent. in every article in our book of rates; on French wines the

reduction would be 10,000l. per annum; on Portugal wines, 170,000l. should the Methuen treaty be continued; and, on brandy, a reduction of 20,000l. The surrender of revenue for great commercial purposes was a policy by no means unknown in the history of Great Britain, but here we enjoyed the extraordinary advantage of having them returned to us in a three-fold rate, by extending and legalizing the importation of the articles. When it was considered that the increase must exceed the concession which we made, it would no longer be an argument that we cannot afford this reduction. Increase by means of reduc tion, he was obliged to confess, appeared once a paradox, but experience had now convinced us that it was more than practicable.

The simple question for the committee to consider, was, Whether, if the situation of the two countries was changed in its relative aspect-if it was true, that at the treaty of Utrecht we had but little to send to France, and that we had now much to send them—that our manufactures were so confessedly superior as to dread no competition, and greatly to counterbalance the natural produce of France - we ought not to enter into the treaty; or whether there was some preposterous and inscrutable, as well as fixed and eternal, something between the two countries which must prevent them from ever forming any connection, or cherishing any species of amity? Having decided on this point, the next business of the committee was to see how far this treaty would affect their commercial treaties with other powers. This naturally led him to Portugal; and he must positively affirm, that there was nothing which prevented them from complying fully with the conditions of the Methuen treaty, if the British legislature should find it right, by the conduct of Portugal, to maintain the full force of that treaty. By enlarging their market for wine, they neither infringed on the markets of Portugal nor of Spain. It was not pretended even that the treaty could affect their connection with any other powers.

He contended, that it was not more necessary to view the effects of the treaty in its commercial operation, than as it might

1

have an influence on the revenue. There would undoubtedly be a very considerable reduction of duties. It was a question, however, whether this reduction would be attended with a proportionate loss to the revenue. On the subject of wines, it was certain that this reduction would not so operate; for if the Methuen treaty was to be preserved, and he certainly thought that nothing but the conduct of Portugal could make us harbour the idea of putting an end to it, there must be a defalcation from the subsisting duties on wine to the amount of 160 or 170,000l. a year. On brandy there must also be a loss, though a very small one, considering the probable increase of the legal importation-but there might be a diminution of the revenue to the amount of 20,000l. Taking this evil at the worst, a surrender of revenue for great commercial purposes was not contradictory to sound policy, nor to established practice. It was happy for the nation that this defalcation would make no difference, because it did not interfere with the plan of applying the surplus of the revenue to the payment of the debt.

Previous to an examination of the treaty in its political aspect, he begged leave to trespass upon the patience of the House, whilst he adverted to the report made to the general chamber of manufacturers a report, which would now form a part of his speech; but, however, he should be sorry and ashamed were the committee to mistake it as being actually a part of his speech. The House would, therefore, please to recollect, that this chamber of manufacturers had asked, "What laws must be repealed to make room for the French treaty ?" They needed not to suspend their opinions simply on this ground; they might have left the task of discovering these laws to parliament, unless they meant to take from them the trouble of legislation. The enumeration which they had made was singular. They had found out that the aliens' duty must be repealed. In confirmation of this, they had thought proper to observe, that besides the laws restraining exportation, there are many others which, in favour of our own manufactures, prohibit the importation of foreign goods, as the 4th Edward 4th, chap. 1. by which no cloths

wrought beyond sea, shall be brought into England, and set to sale. That the 3d Edward 4th, chap. 3d and 4th: The 1st of Richard 3d, chap. 12.: The 7th Elizabeth, chap. 7.: The 13th and 14th Charles 2d, chap. 13. contain a variety of prohibitions on the importation of a great number of articles in the woollen, iron, copper, and glass manufactures: every one of which laws must necessarily be repealed. And that it has also been proved by a law, 1st of Richard 3d, chap. 9th, and 32d Henry 8th, chap. 15. "That no alien shall sell by retail, nor take any lease of a house or shop to trade in," which must by this treaty also be repealed, as the permission to sell by retail is not (as was in the treaty of Utrecht) excepted. And they add, that it may be proper to remark, that any relaxation of the laws, to prevent the clandestine landing of goods, will have a worse effect upon our manufacturers, than even a direct importation upon certain duties; and that by the free approach allowed to French vessels upon the coast; and the time given by the treaty to make entries, and to correct them when made, an alteration of the custom-house laws (made as well for the protection of fair trade, as the collection of the revenue) must take place, from which they apprehend great mischiefs may ensue.

Mr. Pitt here remarked, that he believed a well-founded opinion prevailed in the learned profession, that the statutes of Richard III. and Henry VIII. imposing that odious duty, were in fact no longer in existence. If this were not so, he was sure at least that the gentlemen on the other side of the House, whose liberal principles he would always acknowledge, would not become advocates for the continuance of those odious penal statutes. In this enumeration also they talked of a vast number of articles which would be clandestinely imported and exportedof the encouragement to smuggling by the re-approach to our shores, although the re-approach was pointedly confined to ships driven by stress of weather, and the danger of alteration of entries-and that by taking off the old prohibitions, their wool, their fuller's earth, nay, their tools, utensils, and secrets, would be transmitted to the rival. He professed he could not divine