1828.] Mr. Huskisson's Colonial Trade Bill, 1825. 269 



inevitably create ; but it is the province of the bounties and duties inse- 

 parable from the colonial system as inevitably to destroy. Previously 

 to the years 1809-10, England was in the habit of obtaining from the 

 states of northern Europe the timber required for her consumption by 

 the exchange of her manufactures. About that period, one of the alarms, 

 the emptiness of which we have exposed, became very great namely, 

 that the then hostile position of those states was threatening the loss of 

 our timber supply ; and the idea accordingly originated of forcing from 

 our North American colonies the timber required for our consumption. 

 But as natural causes effectually precluded the American timber from 

 entering the British market at the same price as European, in order to 

 allure the investment of capital into this branch of production, it was 

 necessary to resort to artificial means of production to enable the colonial 

 and European timber to compete in that market upon equal terms. The 

 means adopted was the abolition of all duties upon the former, and the 

 subjection of the latter to various amounts of duties, which, by the thirty- 

 ninth of the late king, were consolidated into a duty of 3/. 5*. per load.* 

 It was said,' however, at the time, that this being a mere revenue act, 

 a part only of that duty would have been intended for protection of colo- 

 nial timber. We will take, therefore, the previous duty of 2/. 1*., which, 

 it was admitted, was laid on for that express purpose : 21. Is. then was 

 the bounty necessary for enabling colonial timber to compete in the mar- 

 ket with the timber of the north of Europe; and the result of its importa- 

 tion was to raise the price of all timber in the market to that amount. 

 Now, from an extract from official accounts (published in the report to 

 which we have alluded, p. 164), it appears that the imports into Great 

 Britain in the year 1819 (which is the last year given) of foreign and 

 colonial timber, amounted together to 369,929 loads. The increased 

 price, then, which, in the year 1819, this bounty effected upon the tim- 

 ber required for its consumption,, amounted to 758,354/. and a fraction. 

 Now, although it is impossible to estimate the precise amount of British 

 capital which would have gone abroad to aid in the cutting-down, prepa- 

 tion, and carriage of this timber, it is unquestionable that some propor- 

 tion, and, we suspect, a very large one, was so exported. But the 

 other productions, on which the industry of the community had been 

 previously engaged, still retaining their demand on the capital of the 

 country, it was evident, whatever was its amount, that proportion must 

 have been withdrawn from the manufacturers of those commodities 

 which had been previously the instruments of purchase of the European 

 timber. Consequently, had England continued as theretofore to purchase 

 her timber from the north of Europe, by devoting the requisite quantity 

 of capital to the cultivation of manufactures, instead of diverting it from 

 thence to force the production of timber from America, not only would 

 the proportion so diverted have produced a greater quantity of timber, 

 but in that article alone she would, in the year 1819, have saved the 

 whole 758,354/., and have had that amount of capital liberated to the 

 production of other commodities. Indeed, in the latter description of 

 mischief, the diminution of the purchasing powers of the community, 

 in other words, the forcing from it a larger proportion of its industry, 

 for the purchase of any given object of desire, than would otherwise be 

 necessary to obtain it, the colonial system amply abounds. We have 

 seen that, if the trade to the East- Indies were thrown open to the com- 



* Report of the Select Committee of Foreign Trade, 1821. 



