1824.] 



(.Jrcat Britain; <lie same reasoning 

 Mould have proliiMted the hatchet, or 

 the hammer, or tlie saw; they are all 

 ca|iahle nf i)ein<j used in such manufac- 

 lorirs. But several forein-ners have very 

 properly said, "You must, Mr. Gallo- 

 wa\, if you make the machines, ship 

 them; «c\vill not take the responsibility 

 of getting them out of England." It 

 will appear to the Committee, that it 

 cannot be worth the attention of any 

 engineer to receive an extensive order, 

 and then to run any hazard of having it 

 left upon his hands by the prohibitory 

 laws, and on that ground many valuable 

 orders have been refused. Machines 

 have been exported from remote parts 

 of (he country, where the article lias 

 never appeared before at their Custom- 

 houses, while in the metropolis it has 

 been prohibited. I received a consi- 

 •lerable order for (latting-mills, and also 

 for the rollers only ; I found it im|)os- 

 sible to get liiem out, and therefore re- 

 fused siicli valuable order. 



Has not the effect of the laws been 

 to force Fraiice and other countries to 

 establish tlic manufactories to make 

 those articles that might have been 

 «nadc by the people of England? — They 

 have no alternative but to create for 

 themselves what we denied them. 



Arc you able to state what particular 

 manufactories have been established 

 abroad, in consequence of the demand 

 lor machinery since the peace? — I, in 

 fact, know very little what was done 

 previously to 1818, because I never 

 visited France till that year, when I 

 was introduced with great readiness 

 into all the French manufactories : I 

 ^>tatcd who and what I was, and that I 

 <lid not wish to enter their manufacto- 

 ries surreptitiously; I always received 

 the most liberal introductions; there 

 never appeared to be the least conceal- 

 ment, either by the machine users or the 

 machine makers of France towards me: 

 they showed me every thing. At that 

 time I visited not less than twenty or 

 thirty manufactories that were employed 

 on machines of various classes ; and I 

 there saw in 1818 many of the very arti- 

 cles m;iking that I had refused to make 

 in 1810, in consequence of the prohibi- 

 tion, and made by the very individuals 

 who had u[iplicd to me: they had no 

 alternative; they were obliged either to 

 do without the machines, or create a 

 niannlactory for their fabrication. They 

 said, " iJere are similar machines to 

 those we wanted you to make; you will 

 laugh at Ihcm, wc have no doubt, from 

 3 



on Artlzansand Machinery. 323 



the rough way in which Ihcy are made : 

 that is our No. 1, that our No. 2, and 

 so on : we have gone on improving ;'* 

 and I saw ^hey had. 



In your opinion, if these laws Iiad not 

 existed, would any such manufactory 

 have been established in France? — I am 

 perfectly persuaded that there would 

 not, and for this plain reason, that their 

 machines were much inferior, and much 

 more expensive, than they could haves 

 been made here. In October last I 

 again visited France: I v^'as anxious to 

 see the public exposition in the Louvre, 

 and to learn what progress they had 

 really made, and that of course brought 

 me into contact with a considerable 

 quantity of French products, which I 

 carefully examined, and could not help 

 being slrnck with the great advantages 

 of such an exhibition to manufacturing 

 knowledge and industry. This brought 

 me in contact with many French manu- 

 facturers. 



Is it your opinion, that the effect of 

 the laws against the exportation of 

 British machinery, has been to i)roduco 

 a perfection in those branches in France? 

 — I think the operation of those laws 

 has made F' ranee a perfect mechanical 

 rival to us, and that we owe that rivalry 

 totally to the existence of those laws. 



Supposing that the best machinery 

 for cotton or silk we could make in this 

 country, had been permitted by law to 

 be sent to France, would they or would 

 they not have iiad greater facility in 

 rnanufacturin£r that article than they 

 have now, when they are obliged to 

 make use of a machine which, in many 

 instances, is inferior to what could be 

 made in this country? — I have seen a 

 considerable number of cotton machines 

 in F'rance, and I am quite sure that all 

 I have seen have been literally copied 

 from English machines, and that I have 

 a(.'tually seen English machines at work, 

 though prohibited by law ; and, in fact, 

 in Paris several makers of such ma- 

 chines, and particularly a Monsieur 

 Callas, a very able engineer, who is a 

 considerable maker of cotton- machines ; 

 and I never saw more complete ma- 

 chines, both in their mechanical con- 

 struction and in the onler and st}le of 

 their workmanshij), than he makes. 

 There is one thing which is manifestly 

 true, that, if they had been freely sup 

 plied witi 



Ell 



lish machinery, they 

 perliaps, as to quantity, would have 

 been in a condition to spin more cotton 

 than they arc at this moment in a condi- 

 tion uf doing, but then they would not 



have 



