DISTILLERY. After stating several other arguments in opposition to the proposed measure, the letter concludes by expressing a hope that the same influence which, in 1811, shielded the corn distillery from colonial interference will not now desert it. A letter to the right honourable the chancellor of the exchequer from the corn distillers in England, dated 30th May, 1825, and signed by twenty individuals, strongly protests against the permission to rectifiers to convert West India rum, or other colonial spirit, into English gin, as a measure threatening the English corn distillery with utter destruction. After adverting | AN ACCOUNT of the Total Number of Vessels to the benefits which the revenue has derived from the English distillery, the expense to which they had been recently put in remodelling their plants to adapt them to the new order of things, and the intention to allow rum to go to the rectifier at the entirely inadequate protecting duty to the distiller of 1s. 3d. per gallon, the letter proceeds: "Sir, you are aware that, in the London "market, rum can be had in abundant supply, "without duty, at from 1s. 3d. to 1s. 6d. per "gallon proof, and that, if to this be added "the 1s. 3d. of nominal protection, it would "still enable the rectifier to buy his rum, fit "for making into gin, at the low price of from "2s. 6d. to 2s. 9d. EAST COUNTRY DOCK. which entered the East Country Dock, in the 48 vessels The average tonnage of each vessel being 268 tons. EAST INDIA DOCKS. AN ACCOUNT of the total Tonnage of Private Trade and other Indiamen, not in the Service of the East India Company, which have entered the East India Docks in the Years 1823 and 1824; and a Statement of the Rates and Charges to which such Vessels and their Cargoes are subject in those Docks. Years. Number of Total tonnage. 75 36,139 89 38,773 1823. 1824. "Rum, we need scarcely mention, is manu"factured by the planter from an article form"ing the very refuse of his estates, and other"wise of little value. The use of this material, "although subject to the expense of freight, "and to a duty on importation into England, "is even denied to the English distiller. In "all matters with respect to his process, the "planter is totally unfettered and unrestricted "by government. His rum, when brought to "market, he may keep in warehouse for an “unlimited period, without payment of duty; "and, when it is taken out for consumption, "duty is charged only on the quantities re-loading ships built in the East Indies (called "maining in the casks, instead, as was formerly "the case, of the quantities ascertained by the "landing guage. The difference between that "mode and the present is well understood to "be worth at least three-pence per gallon in "favour of the proprietor. 66 "The corn distiller, on the other hand, at "the price of corn either now or in prospect, " is disabled from affording his spirits on terms at all similar to rum. Taking twenty gallons as the produce of one quarter, (and for this it "requires the use of good corn,) with 1s. 3d. 66 per gallon for yeast, coals, and other expenses "of manufacturing, the cost, without any profit "whatever to himself, would be 3s. 3d. When "the spirits are made entirely from malt, un"mixed with raw corn, such as are now made "and consumed in Scotland, it would be 1s. more, or 4s. 3d. per gallon." The charge for unloading the cargoes of private ships using the dock is now at the rate of ten shillings per ton, according to the register tonnage of the vessel; and the charge for un country ships), manned with not less than twothirds of their crews Lascars, is at the rate of eight shillings per ton; both these rates being subject to a deduction amounting to about one shilling per ton, in case the ship leaves the dock immediately after completing the delivery of her cargo. On the goods imported by the said ships a rate of two shillings per ton is charged in satisfaction of the use and convenience of the docks; and by the act 46 Geo. III. cap. 113, a further rate of two shillings per ton is anthorised to be taken for the wharfage of such goods as may be landed, and for loading the same in caravans for conveyance to the warehouses. The charge for loading a ship outwards is two shillings per ton on the register tonnage of the vessel. AN ACCOUNT shewing the total Number of Vessels, of every description, with their Tonnage, which entered the East India Docks in the Year 1824; with the average Tonnage of the Vessels. AN ACCOUNT shewing the Number of Ships, of the average burthen of 300 Tons, which the East India Docks are capable of containing at one time; the greatest Number of Vessels, with their Register Tonnage, which were loading or discharging at any one time in the Year 1824; and the Number of Vessels which were loading or discharging in the said Docks on the 5th of April, 1825. EXPORT OF TOOLS AND MACHINERY. | commerce and manufactures of this and other REPORT from the Select Committee of the House of Commons appointed to inquire into the State of the Law, and its Consequences, respecting the Exportation of Tools and Machinery. 66 With respect to the laws which forbid the exportation of tools and machinery, and their general inefficiency to accomplish the ends for which they were enacted, very conclusive evidence was given by Mr. Dean, the chairman of the board of customs, by several of the principal officers of the customs, and others. It is necessary, for the purpose of reporting "That your committee have examined evifully to the house on this subject, to advert to "dence respecting the export of machinery, the proceedings of the committee, appointed in" which will be found in the Appendix; but the last session" to inquire into the state of the " they are of opinion, that further inquiry and a "law in the United Kingdom, and its conse- 66 more complete investigation should take place quences, respecting artisans leaving the king-" before this important subject can be satis“ dom and residing abroad; also into the state "factorily decided on; and they therefore reof the law, and its consequences, respecting" commend that the consideration of this im“the exportation of tools and machinery; and "portant question should be resumed in the "into the state of the law and its effects, so far "next session of parliament." as relates to the combination of workmen and "others to raise wages, or to regulate their wages and hours of working; and to report "their opinion and observations thereon." From the minutes of evidence taken before that Committee, it appears that a considerable number of persons were examined respecting the exportation of tools and machinery, and the laws relating thereto, and that considerable apprehensions of evil from the repeal of the laws which forbid the exportation of tools and machinery were entertained by many persons engaged in the manufacture of cotton goods, lace, &c., and also by some manufacturers of machinery, whilst other manufacturers of machinery, persons of great experience and intelligence, were decidedly of opinion, that the prohibition to export tools and machines was beneficial to no one, and highly injurious to the It appears, that in consequence of some tools and machines being legally exportable, and others being altogether prohibited, and from the circumstance of new tools and machines being daily invented, and not prohibited by name in any act of parliament, it is extremely difficult, and frequently impossible, for the officers of the customs to decide upon what is and what is not prohibited to be exported. Every one of the officers examined by the committee proved the inadequacy of the laws for the purposes intended, and expressed their doubts as to the possibility of any law being rendered effi- knowledge, that the officers, two or three cient, while any tool or machine whatsoever " years ago, actually seized a quantity of ma was permitted to be exported. It was also chinery going to France, and some of that proved by several witnesses*, that considerable" machinery was sold at the custom-house, and quantities of prohibited machinery were ex- "bought, and sent there to the person after. ported; and the minutes of evidence accom- "wards in France who originally ordered it, panying this Report exhibit a system of smug- "and that transaction, I understand, took place gling carried on to a considerable extent. This last year; and I believe the government and system is safely carried on by the insurance of" the custom-house employed all due diligence, the machinery which is prohibited by law to be" but the plans of the shippers were so comexported; and there is reason to believe that, in " plete, that all the precaution and diligence of regard to the exportation of such prohibited" the custom-house went for nothing." machinery to France, the premium paid to the insurer does not much exceed the duty charged on the importation of such machinery into that country. Your committee cannot better express themselves on these subjects than by extracting a part of the evidence taken : "Could you at the present moment, if you "wished to export cotton or other machinery, "do so by paying the insurance ?-Yes, any "quantity; the greater the better. Evidence was given before the committee of 1824 +, and also before this committee, that a considerable portion of prohibited machinery consists of such ordinary and common parts and pieces of machines, applicable as well to machines which are not by law prohibited, as to those which are prohibited, so that it is difficult, if not nearly impossible, for any one to say that they are actually parts of a prohibited machine. Other machines, or parts of machines, may be disguised; many parts of prohibited machines are so small that they may be easily concealed, while other parts by being packed with tools that can be exported, and also by exporting them from different ports, may be so disposed of as to render detection impossible. "Then are you of opinion that the laws are "not effectual to prevent those articles that are "prohibited from being exported? They are "wholly inefficient, both as regards direct and "indirect exportation; the direct mode of send"ing out machinery in quantities I have stated; "There are vast numbers of packages," says "the indirect mode is accomplished by mixing the Mr. St. John, controlling searcher of the customs "prohibited with the unprohibited articles: it is in London, "which we open, where there are "worth any man's while to order a quantity of " parts of machinery packed with other iron "unprohibited machinery to get out a quantity" and steel articles from Birmingham, purposely "of prohibited, for under this mode it is very packed for deception; and it is almost an "difficult to separate prohibited from unpro-" impossibility for an officer to know whether "hibited machinery, and this never can be de- "they are or are not prohibited, being only "tected by custom-house officers. "Then while the exportation of machinery "and tools to any extent is allowed, it is im"possible to prevent the exportation of pro"hibited machinery ?-You never can prohibit 66 parts of machinery." To the same effect it is stated by Mr. Boyd, general-surveyor of the customs: "Out of a vast number of packages "exported, but a small proportion can be " opened at all; and in opening a proportion of those packages occasionally, they do discover something that is machinery; but it is always in detached pieces and in parts; large "machines cannot all be made up in one pack. "What is the highest rate of insurance for "age, and they have a great deal of difficulty in "the safe transit of goods illegally exported," telling whether those proportions belong to a "the highest that has come to your know." machine that is prohibited; and a great many every kind of machinery from going, while you permit any to go; it must either be "wholly open or wholly closed; there can be 66 no middle course. "ledge?—I think it is from 45 to 30 per pass in packages which are not opened he 66 cent, the large premium for small quantities;" "if I had 20,000l. worth to send, I should pay "30 per cent to any port in France; but for “1,000l. or 1,5007. perhaps 40 per cent would "be required: the reason is, that a vessel engaged in such commerce is subject to all the "inconveniences in taking 1,000l. worth that "it would for 20,0004., and the profit on small "quantities of machinery is not equivalent to "the increased price of insurance. 66 "Do you know how persons export prohi"bited machinery ?—I know of no other means "but those I have explained. A circumstance, "that is perhaps a little curious, came to my • Mr. Martineau, Galloway, and Mr. Maudslay. cause they cannot be opened. It is a very rare occurrence indeed to meet with prohibited machinery which appears so.” It is however asserted, by Mr. Ewart and Mr. Kennedy, that if the searchers at the customhouses were well instructed, that they might distinguish the prohibited from the unprohibited machinery, admitting at the same time, however, that it would be difficult to put the law rigidly into effect. Considerable discrepancies in the laws were also pointed out by the officers of the customs • Mr. Alexander Galloway. By Mr. Martineau, Mr. Bramah, Mr. Maahlay, and Mr. Galloway. and other witnesses: thus, presses of all sorts in | improvements. In order, however, to draw the metal, with or without the screw, are prohibited attention of the house more particularly to the tools, but the screw alone is not a prohibited present state of the law respecting the exportatool; and hence it follows that nothing belong- tion of tools and machinery, your committee ing to a press is prohibited, except the frame, have deemed it proper to put, in an Appendix to which is the least important part, and that too, their Report, the various clauses of the existing when sent in pieces, which it may be, is not statutes relating to this subject; the slightest considered a frame. In other cases tools and attention to which, in the opinion of your com.. machines are prohibited, but the tools to make mittee, will be sufficient to confirm the obser- . them are not generally prohibited. Lathes, with vations which they have thought proper to make the exception of potters' lathes, are not prohibited, upon them, and the recommendation with which be their power ever so great. Steam engines they have closed their Report. are not prohibited, and yet by means of steam engines and lathes, with other common tools allowed to be exported, almost every other tool and machine may be manufactured. The first act pointed out by the commissioners of the customs, as a rule for their conduct, is the 7th and 8th of William III. (1696), when the exportation of the new stocking frames (invented It was stated to the committee, that newly by William Lee, A.M. of Cambridge, about the invented machines in the iron or steel manu- year 1600) was first prohibited, being about 100 facture might generally be exported, but that years after their invention, and nearly 30 after those in the cotton, woollen, linen, or silk, if their introduction in France; and it will be known, would be prohibited; and all the gen- seen by sect. 9, that even the removal of these tlemen from the custom-house affirmed, that frames from place to place in England was prothe law was so defective, that, by a little con-hibited in all cases, unless due notice was given trivance, the facility of evading it was such, that to the company of framework-knitters in Lon“all the block machinery at Portsmouth might don. It is still illegal to remove any of these "be exported." stocking frames from one town or place to another, although it would be altogether impossible to give the notice required, or to obtain such leave, as the framework-knitters' company has ceased to exist for upwards of half a century. Much more might be stated from the evidence on this subject; but enough, it is hoped, has been brought forward to shew the inefficiency of the laws intended to prevent the exportation of machinery and tools; and it must be evident to every one, that laws that cannot be executed, and thereby become an incentive to fraud, ought either to be amended so as to render them efficient, or totally repealed. Another important part of the inquiry relates to the policy, in a political and commercial view, of prohibiting the exportation of tools and machinery upon the supposition that the laws could be rendered efficient to that end. And here your committee beg leave to observe, that at the times when the several laws were made which prohibit the exportation of tools and machinery, very erroneous notions were generally entertained in regard to commerce and manufactures. It was then a received opinion, that the liberty of exporting any thing that was likely to increase the commerce and manufactures of another country, would be injurious to those of the country from which the exportation was made; and hence arose those various enactments respecting trade, as well as those which prohibit the exportation of tools and machinery from the United Kingdom. The history of the acts which still remain on the statute book relating to the exportation of tools and machinery, would, if unfolded, shew both from the intervals of time which elapsed between the passing of these acts, and the perplexity which prevails in the enactments themselves as to what may or may not be exported, that no fixed principle was kept in view, but that they were dictated by a mistaken jealousy of permitting other nations to benefit by our It is also worthy of observation, that although, so early as the year 1497, woollen cloth was one of the greatest articles of exportation, and is so considered in a supplementary treaty of commerce concluded in that year between Henry VII. and the archduke Philip, sovereign of the Netherlands; and although that manufacture continued to be a staple of great importance to this country, arising partly perhaps from the quality of the wool, and partly from the improvements in our machinery, yet no legislative enactment was deemed necessary for its protection, as regarded the implements used, till the year 1750, when the 23d Geo. II. c. 13, was passed, in order to prohibit the exportation of the tools or utensils employed in its fabrication. An interval of more than half a century had thus elapsed, during which period no interference on the part of the legislature to prevent the exportation of any kind of tools appears to have taken place. In the same act, however, of 1750, prohibiting the exportation of tools or utensils used in the woollen trade, there is most unaccountably included a prohibition of the tools or utensils employed in the silk trade, although at that period the manufacture of silk in this country was still in its infancy, and the implements and tools in use in Great Britain were confessedly inferior to those on the continent. It will be in the recollection of the house, that one of the principal objections made in the last session of parliament to the importation of silk manufactures, was the alleged superiority in implements and tools possessed by the manu- the manufacture of any of those numerous facturers on the continent; a strong proof, in articles required for any other part of the world the opinion of your committee, of the folly of than the United Kingdom. prohibiting, by the act of 1750, what there could not be the smallest inducement to export, and of the total absence of any sound principles or correct data in the commercial legislation of that period. The 14th Geo. III., c. 71 (1774), the next act on the statute book, exhibits a similar inconsistency in prohibiting the tools and utensils used in the cotton and linen manufactures, or a mixture of either. It is well known that in France, Germany, and other parts of Europe, the linen trade had then arrived at a very high degree of perfection, and that, whatever precautions might have been deemed necessary in regard to our improvements in cotton machinery, no tool or utensil possessed by Great Britain at that period, for the manufacture of linen, could have been an object of importation on the continent. Your committee cannot pass over the act of the following year, 15th Geo. III., c. 5 (1775), without observing, that it permits the exportation of wool cards, or stock cards, and spinners' cards, to the British colonies in North America; because, says the act," the prohibition to export "them had proved extremely prejudicial to "great numbers of poor families in England." And your committee may be permitted to remark, that every prohibition of the same kind, if not followed by the same consequences, has at least been productive of no apparent benefit to any part of the community. Although actual injury to the industry of the country had thus become evident, in one branch, from restraining exportation, the legislature, in compliance with the application of several manufacturers, proceeded, by the 21st Geo. III., c. 37 (1781), in the spirit of former enactments, to forbid, not only the exportation of all tools, but also of all models and plans connected with the wool, cotton, linen, or silk manufactures, under a penalty of 2001. for each offence, and the forfeiture of all articles, so prohibited, if attempted to be exported. That act would appear, however, to have had a particular reference to the button and buckle trade, which the legislature seems to have been anxious to monopolise for this country, as almost every tool employed in their manufac ture (as will be seen in the Appendix) is espe cially designated; but the buckle trade may be said to have entirely ceased along with the fashion which gave it birth, notwithstanding these bolstering precautions. With respect to the button trade, great improvements have been made in those kinds used for home consumption; and though our manufacture of them is equal, if not superior, to any in Europe, yet it appears, by the evidence of Mr. Osler from Birmingham, that the fancy button trade is almost entirely lost to this country, notwithstanding the precautions of this act to retain it. From his statement, on the authority of Mr. Lesdam, one of the largest button manufacturers in Europe, it would appear that England at one period supplied France, Germany, Italy, and Switzer. land with buttons; and that in Birmingham alone 20,000 gross were made every week for the foreign market. The reasons assigned by Mr. Osler for the loss of that trade, partly ex. plain the cause; namely, that copper could be obtained on the continent at 60 per cent less than in England, owing to the protecting dut.es imposed in favour of the mining interests in Cornwall; and that the stamp duty on silver, and other charges, raised the price of the article so as to render competition with the French and other manufacturers utterly impossible: an additional proof, if any were required, that the low price of any article of equal quality, is a better security for an extended market than any legislative restriction on exportation of the tools employed in its manufacture. Your committee have deemed it proper to notice this act (25th Geo. III., c. 67) the more particularly, as being the most comprehensive and sweeping in its enactments against the exportation of tools, in order that the house may judge of the inconsiderate manner in which it must have been passed, as by the acts of the following year (26th Geo. III., c. 76 and 89) it is repealed, and another long list of exam tions, (inserted in the Appendix) enumerated, which render the law at present so complicated, that, exclusive of the difficulty of discriminat.ng the particular kinds of machinery, as stated in the evidence, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain what are and what are not A further prohibition took place in 1782, by the 22d Geo. III., c. 60, of all blocks, plates, engines, tools, &c. used in the calico, cotton, muslin or linen printing manufactures; and in 1785, by 25th Geo. III., c. 67, the iron and steel manufactures appear, for the first time, to have occupied the attention of the legislature, and a long list of tools and utensils, including, in fact, almost every tool or utensil that could be used "in repairing, working, finishing or completing "the iron and steel manufactures of this king-prohibited. “dom, by whatever name or names soever the It is deserving of notice, that by the 20th 66 same shall be called or known, now or at any Geo. III., c. 76 (1786), it is declared, that "* as "time hereafter, and also of any models or "the exportation of wool cards to North "plans of any such tool, utensil, or implement," " America had been beneficial to this country, under severe penalties, as if to prevent the in-" and as the allowing of a general exportation dustry of the country from being employed in" thereof to foreign parts will be highly service |