British colony. Accordingly, a proclamation of the Governor, in December 1811, offered great encouragement to the growth of wine at the Cape of Good Hope ;* and by an act of 1813, (53 G. III. c. 84,) Cape wines were admitted into the United Kingdom at a third of the duty on Spanish and Portuguese wines. With this protection, the produce rose in ten years from 859,195 to 2,249,910 imperial gallons, (or 7335 to 19,230 leggers.) The importation of Cape wines into the United Kingdom, in the year ended 5th January 1845, was 423,336 gallons; while that of French wines was only 725,308. The duty on Cape wine is 2s. 9d. a gallon, on other wines 5s. 6d.

The British West India Islands have long enjoyed a preference in our market for their sugar. During the existence of slavery, the sugar produced in our islands was equal to the demand of the mother country, and the discrimination had not much effect. But since the emancipation of the slaves, the supply of sugar has fallen off, and the exclusion of foreign sugar has begun to operate. The quantity of sugar imported from the British West Indies into the United Kingdom, was 4,103,800 cwts. in 1831, and 2,508,910 cwts. in 1842. In 1836 the duty on colonial sugar was 36s. a cwt., on foreign sugar 63s. Since that time, the duty on colonial sugar has been reduced, and a discrimination founded on a new principle has been introduced. Under the act of last year, the duties stand thus, until the 5th of July 1846.

Brown sugar, the produce of a British possession,
Do. Foreign, not the produce of slave labour,
Do. Foreign, the produce of slave labour,

RUM is likewise admitted at a discriminating duty of nine shillings per gallon, while the duty on foreign spirits has been 22s. 6d., which the tariff-act of this session reduces to 15s. The excise duty on spirits made in England is 7s. 10d. a gallon.

COFFEE imported from foreign countries is now subject to a duty of 6d. per lb.; if imported from British possessions, to a duty of 4d. Previously, this discrimination had been as great as Is. 3d. and 6d., with a duty of 9d. for coffee imported from any British possession within the limits of the East India Company's charter, not being the produce thereof. Under this regulation a singular practice arose. As the Cape of Good Hope was within the limits of the East India Company's Charter, large quantities of coffee were sent to it from Brazil, Cuba, and other foreign countries, in order to be 'colonialized,' (as it was

* See Montgomery Martin, British Colonial Library, vol. iii. p. 236.

called,) and then imported into England; in other words, in order, by this circuitous navigation, to obtain the benefit of the lower rate of duty. The quantities of coffee imported from the Cape, and admitted for home consumption in the two years, 1830 and 1842, stand thus:

This costly system of smuggling, (similar to that mentioned above with respect to timber,) was suppressed in 1842, by rendering foreign coffee so imported liable to the high duty. The discrimination has, moreover, been since mitigated, and amounts now only to 2d. per lb.*

A very different feeling, with respect to the encouragement of colonial coffee, prevailed in the reign of Charles II. The Lord Keeper Guilford, being consulted by the government in 1679, as to the legality of coffee-houses, gave it as his opinion, that as the coffee-houses are nurseries of idleness and pragma'ticalness, and hinder the consumption of our native provisions, they may be treated as common nuisances.' A proclamation was accordingly issued for shutting up all coffee-houses, and forbidding the sale of coffee in the metropolis; but it led to so much complaint, especially among persons connected with the foreign and colonial trade, that it was soon recalled.†

CORN was admitted from the British possessions in North America at a discriminating duty, by the 31 Geo. III. c. 30. passed in 1791. This act imposed a simple sliding-scale of duties, consisting of only three degrees; viz., a high duty of 24s. 3d. per quarter, and two low duties of 2s. 6d., and 6d. per quarter. By the arrangement of this scale, a small preference was given to North American corn, as will appear from the following Table :

*On the coffee duties, see Porter's Progress of the Nation, vol. ii. p. 118; vol. iii. p. 42.

+ See Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, vol. iii. p. 455.

The act of 44 Geo, III. c. 108, (1804,) made this scale more prohibitory, by raising the points at which importation began, and at which the low duty came into operation, but maintained about the same proportions between foreign and North American corn. Ireland, with respect to the duties on corn, remained subject to the same regulations as the North American colonies up to 1806; in which year an act was passed placing its corntrade on the footing of a coasting trade. On the 15th of June 1813, Sir H. Parnell moved certain resolutions on the cornlaws, stating at the same time, that the corn-law Report of that year was intended to render the United Kingdom independent of the Continent for the supply of corn, and to lower prices. One of these resolutions (No. 8) was to the effect, that corn the growth or produce of Quebec, or the other British colonies in North America, might be imported into the United Kingdom without duty. This proposition was not adopted; but in the corn-law act of 1815, wheat from a British colony in North America was admitted when the price was 67s. per quarter, whereas foreign wheat was not admitted until the price reached 80s. (55 Geo. III. c. 26, s. 6.) By the act of 1822, the prices at which North American and foreign wheat could be imported were respectively reduced to 59s. and 70s. (3 Geo. IV. c. 60, s. 5.) In 1825, an act was passed (for a year, and until the end of the then next session of Parliament) by which wheat could be imported into the United Kingdom, from British possessions in North America, without restriction as to price, at a fixed duty of 5s. per quarter,* (6 Geo. IV. c. 64.) Up to this time the discriminating duty in favour of colonial wheat had been confined to the North American colonies. By the act of 1828, wheat imported from any British possession in North America, or elsewhere out of Europe, was admitted at a nominal duty of 6d. when the price was at or above 67s. a quarter; when below 67s. at a fixed duty of 5s. (9 Geo. IV. c. 60.) This duty was rendered still more favourable to the colonial producer by the act of 5 Vict. c. 14, (1842,) which converted the fixed duty of 5s. into a sliding-scale varying from 5s. to Is., the nominal duty beginning when the price was 58s. With respect to Canadian wheat, this limited scale was repealed, and a fixed duty of 1s. substituted, by the 6 and 7 Vict. c. 29, (1843.) Prior to the passing of the latter act, the Canada legislature imposed a duty of 3s. a quarter upon foreign wheat imported

* As to the unfounded alarm created among the agriculturists by this Bill, see the speech of Mr F. Robinson, 8th March 1827.-16 Hansard, p. 1055.

into Canada. The quantity of wheat imported from Canada into the United Kingdom has never been large; in 1844 it amounted to 235,591 quarters. By the measure of this session, all corn imported from British colonies out of Europe is immediately admitted at a nominal duty.

We have likewise extracted from our Customs Tariff, as it stands after the amendments of the present Session, the articles, not hitherto mentioned, which are subject to discriminating duties, for the protection of imports from British colonies and possessions. We have, in order to exhibit the scale of protection afforded, divided these articles into eight classes; showing the different proportions of the duty on the foreign, to the duty on the colonial import.

From these examples, it appears that, since the end of the last century, there has been a prevailing disposition to give to colonial produce a preference in the market of the mother country. During the war, this disposition was strengthened by a sincere though mistaken fear of commercial dependence, and a belief that the hostility of Napoleon would be able to close the Continent permanently against us. Its principal source, however, was a desire to afford encouragement to colonial industry; and, by this bounty, to attach the colonies more firmly to the parent state. The latter policy has seemed the more prudent, inasmuch as England, since the American war, has been disinclined to grant the same popular institutions to its colonies as were conceded to the early settlements in North America and the West Indies. Recent acquisitions, such as Trinidad, St Lucie, the Cape of Good Hope, the Mauritius, Malta, and Ceylon; and recent colonies, as those in Australia, have not received houses of assembly. It seems, therefore, to have been thought, that for the want of free local institutions, some compensation might be afforded by the grant of commercial privileges, advantageous to the colony, and detrimental to the mother country.

Having given this outline of the system pursued by England with respect to its colonial trade, we will proceed to consider whether this country would be justified in making colonial protection an exception to the general principle of commercial freedom; and in retaining, for the supposed benefit of colonial industry, a system of monopoly which it renounces in behalf of its own producers.

For this purpose, we must begin by ascertaining the view which is to be taken of the advantages derivable, in the present circumstances of the United Kingdom and the world, from the possession of dependent colonies.

The colonies and dependencies of England yield no tribute or revenue to the paramount state. No payments are made by any of our colonies into the British Exchequer. Instead of lightening our fiscal burdens, they are sources of expense. Their protection against actual or apprehended attacks is costly. A large part of our military and naval expenditure is incurred on their account. The late hostilities in Afghanistan, China,

*

Some of these discriminations were introduced by the tariff of 1842. See the debate on Lord Howick's motion, House of Commons, 13th May 1842.-(63 Hansard, 512-49.)