AN ADDRESS 
 
 ELECTORS OF THE SEA-PORTS 
 
 UNITED KINGDOM 
 
 NAVIGATION LAWS •. 
 
 THEm DUTIES AT THIS CRITICAL JUNCTURE. 
 
 BY THE AUTHOR OF “SHIPS & RAILWAYS.’ 
 
 SOUTH SHIELDS: 
 
 PRINTED BY HENRY HEIVISON, 53, THRUT STREET. 
 
 1847. 
 
TO THE 
 
 ELECTORS OF THE SEA-PORTS 
 
 THE UNITED KINGDOM. 
 
 The time is rapidly approaching when the destinies 
 of Britain will again be placed in the hands of the 
 Electors. 
 
 It is as solemn and critical a period as ever dawned 
 upon them. 
 
 These great destinies are involved in her Naval 
 Power. 
 
 There is no era in her history, in which being weak 
 at sea, she was great in commerce, in colonies, and 
 in prosperity. 
 
 At such times she was nationally weak: and when 
 lowest, her commerce was ruined, her territories in¬ 
 vaded, her towns bombarded, and her very Capital 
 insulted. Behold her in this perilous position in the 
 seventeenth century, after a long suspended operation 
 
of the Maritime Laws, and before the great maritime 
 charter —^the Navigation Laws of the commonwealth 
 had produced their effects ! Behold the Dutch, pos¬ 
 sessing the whole carrying trade of Europe, and its 
 consequence, masters at sea, fighting with success at 
 the time of the Great Louis, the combined Fleets of 
 England and France—rich, prosperous, and powerful, 
 and England humbled! Behold Britain’s Empire— 
 the Empire of the world, depending twice within the 
 last century on a single naval battle, and her supre¬ 
 macy at sea: once under Eodney ; and again, when 
 Napoleon sought with 200,000 French troops flushed 
 with European conquest to lay your country in 
 rains ! Strong in her Navy, the homes of England 
 were unpolluted,—her territories undesecrated,—her 
 liberties uninvaded. Strong in her Navy, as the 
 sagacious TaUyrand observed, the combined strength 
 of Europe could not injure her,—“ They might assem¬ 
 ble in millions on the shores of the Channel, but there 
 would be the limits of their enmity ; their fleets are 
 ready to pounce upon, to disperse and destroy them 
 —there lies England!s strength!’ As Napoleon’s bitter 
 experience proclaimed at St. Helena,—“ Let England 
 maintain the Empire of the Seas, and she may dictate 
 terms to the world.” 
 
 This Empire of the Seas depends upon the extent 
 of her Commercial Marine. 
 
 Its scene of operations is " the Seamen’s nm’sery, 
 camp, and preparatory battle field.” The maritime 
 practices and principles that have guided England 
 
5 
 
 since Alfred’s lime, for 1000 years, so far developed this 
 naval Empire in Canute’s reign as, by the common con¬ 
 sent of nations, to elevate England to be the protector of 
 the seas;—to ivhoseflag all ships lowered their colours. 
 
 The principles of this greatness were embodied in 
 a legislative Act in Richard II’s time, 500 years ago,* 
 chiefly intended to counteract the effects of the Charta 
 Mercatoria of Edward I, which had inundated 
 the Country with Foreign Merchants and Foreign 
 Ships. This Act of Richard formed the basis of all 
 the future Navigation Laws, which have been only 
 modiflcations of it. Here is the spirit:—by it no 
 British subject could embark merchandise in ang but a 
 British Ship, the greater part of whose crew must be 
 British subjects, under forfeiture of Ship and Cargo. 
 
 But twelve years after a relaxation of it was intro¬ 
 duced by the fatal proviso, that if the owners of Eng¬ 
 lish Ships did not take reasonable gains for the freight 
 of the same, then Foreign Ships might be employed,^ 
 
 This relaxation, combined with the turmoil of the 
 civil wars, reduced British Shipping so low that in 
 little more than 50 years, when Edward IV invaded 
 France, Charles the Bold was obliged to lend him 
 Ships to transport his army : and by its operation in 
 80 years when Richmond invaded England he did it 
 in 40 Foreign Ships, and Richard III was not able to 
 muster a fleet of suiScient force to encounter him. 
 
 - 5 Richard n. 
 t 17 Eichai'd II, o. 0, 
 
6 
 
 and thereby lost his crown. Henry VII, however, no 
 sooner seized the sceptre than, seeing the errors of his 
 predecessors, he caused, in his very first Parliament, a 
 representation to he made that “the great minishment 
 and decay of the Navy” were such that “this noble 
 realm, -ndthin short process of time, would not he of 
 ability and power to defend itself.” The Laws of 
 Kichard were therefore amended and strengthened by 
 Henry VII ;* * * § which again were strongly reinforced 
 by Henry Vlll.-j- on the grounds that the Merchants 
 neglected the Nations good for their own immediate 
 good, Ig shipping in Foreign Vessels, and that, there¬ 
 fore, “the navy and multitude of ships had been of 
 late marvellously impaired.” 
 
 Here is the experience of a remote antiquity. 
 
 Let us gather more. These laws being relaxed in 
 Edward VTs reign, in five years brought a reduction 
 of the Navy to half its former force.J 
 
 Scarcely, however, had the wise Elizabeth ascen¬ 
 ded the throne, when the old policy was resumed and 
 reinvigorated. 
 
 She charged the increased duties as for aliens’ 
 goods on all British merchandise shipped in Foreign 
 hottoms.§ Contrary to the existing policy she al- 
 
 * 1 Henry VII, c. 8. 
 
 IHenry-^HI, c. 10. 
 
 7 Henry VH, c. 8. 
 t 32 Henry Vin, c. 14 
 
 I Report of the Commission, 1618, in Chamock, II, 246. 
 
 § EUzaheth, c. 1, and Elizabeth, c. 5, **An Act touching politic consti¬ 
 
 tutions for the maintainance of the Navy/* 
 
7 
 
 lowed exportations of fish and herrings in British 
 Vessels, to the then great fish consuming countries of 
 Catholic Europe; and so deeply impressed was she 
 with the necessity that her Navy should he strong, 
 that for it, she even changed the habits of her People; 
 and almost despoticly interfered with their domestic 
 arrangements to sustain it. She issued a Proclama¬ 
 tion that each family in England should every week 
 observe two fish days, Wednesdays and Saturdays, to 
 employ and increase her Seamen. 
 
 This was “ meant politically,” as the act declares, 
 “ and not for any superstition to be maintained in the 
 choice of meats,” She reaped the advantage of her 
 politic arrangements and foresight in the glorious 
 defeat of the Spanish Armada, and in the safety of 
 her crown and people. 
 
 The Parliament of the Commonwealth, in 1651, 
 with the iron republican Cromwell, finding from the 
 relaxation of the maritime laws under the Stuarts 
 the Commercial Marine almost annihilated, and the 
 Navy gi-eatly decreased, concentrated their spirit and 
 principles in a single Act, deservedly called the Mari¬ 
 time Charter. The silken and courtly Charles, though 
 hating and destroying even the memory, as far as 
 possible, of his predecessors’ Acts, yet carefully pre¬ 
 served this Act, and strengthened it,*—be this record¬ 
 ed to the honour of his patriotism and intelligence. 
 There must have been something great and wise in it 
 
 12 Charles n. 
 
8 
 
 that could concentrate upon it the deep regards of 
 beings so hostile and discordant. 
 
 These Laws continued in their main principles to 
 regulate and encourage the commercial marine, with 
 one or two exemplary exceptions, immediately to he 
 named, till the Act 3rd and 4th William IV, entitled, 
 “A71 Act for the eiicouragei^mit of British Shipping 
 mid Navigation," which consolidated them; itself 
 being modified in some points by the 8th and 9th 
 Victoria, chap. 88. 
 
 These Laws run like golden threads throngh the 
 pages of the history and policy of England from the re¬ 
 motest time, reflecting her glory and power the more 
 brightly when most observed, and obscuring them 
 when neglected. They have guided, uninterrupt¬ 
 edly, our Maritime Policy for the last 200 years. 
 By them England was enabled to raise at a critical 
 juncture 120,000 seamen, and to fight in the giant 
 war, for her political existence, the battles of Copen¬ 
 hagen, Camperdown, St. Vincent, Trafalgar, and the 
 Nile,—covering her with glory, and encompassing 
 her with strength. 
 
 These Laws originating in your insular position, 
 sanctioned by the ■u'isest statesmen in all ages, hal¬ 
 lowed by time, and productive of such brilliant results, 
 is it your will to repeal ? No! Then why do you 
 not adopt measures to protect and perpetuate them % 
 You are too remiss—^too neglectful of the Palladium 
 of your Country, her interests, and honour. Your 
 children, if not yourselves, may have to sustain the 
 
9 
 
 weight of the errors of the present generation, if it 
 do not crush them. The England of the future, it is 
 too probable, will sink under the acts of England of 
 the present—while no enemy could have reached her. 
 You are sacredly bound to bequeath her to posterity, 
 as strong in power, as great in civilization and glory, 
 as from your great fathers she was bequeathed to you. 
 
 If you will not listen to the deep voice of history, 
 teaching wisdom by experience ; hear at least the 
 rebound of your own acts, and learn. 
 
 The present generation is cognizant of, and has 
 allowed relaxations in, the Maritime Code, and what 
 have been the consequences '?• 
 
 In 20 years, from 1786 to 1806, the relaxation in 
 favour of the United States brought down our ton¬ 
 nage inioards from that country, from 36,875 tons 
 to 11,347 tons; and outwards, from 39,651 tons, to 
 8,731 tons, a reduction of tivo-thirds inwards, and 
 greatly over three-fourths outwards. While, by a 
 similar relaxation, British tonnage from the United 
 States to our West India Islands was reduced in 10 
 years, (from 1794 to 1804) from 86,010 tons, to 
 7,629 tons, or more than ten-elevenths; which ought 
 iustead to have been increasing from the increasing 
 wants of a larger population. There is a lesson in 
 these facts which will be clearly understood by wise 
 men. 
 
 See others, so marked, so well defined as the effects 
 of relaxation by the Eeciprocity Treaties, that the 
 most obtuse mind cannot fail to comprehend them. 
 
10 
 
 however wrapt in fancied wisdom hy tlie vulgar and 
 superficial cant of the would-be philosophers of the day. 
 
 Take a few leading statistics of the last thirty years 
 from 1815 to 1845, twenty of these years the ship¬ 
 ping under the operation of the Reciprocity Treaties. 
 
 1815. 1845. 
 
 Population. 17,956,503 .... 26,831,652 
 
 Wool. 43,816,966a3... 76 828,1521bs. 
 
 Tea. 29,345,699165... 51,057,9301bs. 
 
 1825. 
 
 Sngar. 440,871 ,S72Ibs.. . 650,863,4721bs. 
 
 Cotton . 228,005,29libs... 721,523,7121bs. 
 
 1815. 
 
 British Shipping . 2,447,831 tons. 3,123,180 tons. 
 
 Foreign Shipping cleared 
 
 inwards. 656,271 tons. 1,301,950 tons, 
 
 United States Shipping.. 1,368,127 tons. 2,280,095 tons. 
 
 It appears, then, that your Populalion, and of 
 
 coarse its wants, increased in this period .. 50 per cent. 
 
 Wool. 75,t „ 
 
 Tea . 72t- „ 
 
 Sngar . 47 § „ 
 
 Cotton, in 20 years. 216^ ,, 
 
 The United States tonnage. 66^ „ 
 
 The Foreign entries, nearly doubled. 98j „ 
 
 While the British tonnage increased only. 27i „ 
 
 If the Reciprocity relaxations he not the cause of 
 checking British tonnage, almost bringing it to a 
 stand still, of only 1 per cent, increase annually, 
 while all around it show so great an increase, (the 
 Foreign tonnage more than three times that of Bri¬ 
 tish,) what, we would ask, may be the cause ? 
 
 Should the same relative ratio of increase go on 
 for thirty years more, and the effects will be, the ma- 
 
11 
 
 ritime strength of Britain and America, ceeteris pari¬ 
 bus, luill be equal. 
 
 A hostile combination may then be made that 
 might annihilate your power, and all your depen¬ 
 dencies. 
 
 Take another set of facts. 
 
 Four years after the Reciprocity Treaty with Prussia, our ton¬ 
 nage increased with that country only.... 6| per cent. 
 
 While the tonnage of Prussia increased. 105 „ 
 
 With Denmark under the Reciprocity Treaty, 
 
 British tonnage increased. 69g „ 
 
 While Danish increased. 703 ,, 
 
 With Germany, British Shipping increased un¬ 
 der Treaty . 37 
 
 While German Shipping increased. 307 „ 
 
 With Swedeti, under the Reciprocity Treaty, 
 
 British tonnage decreased . 41 „ 
 
 While the Swedish tonnage increased . SO „ 
 
 With Norway, under the Treaty, British ton¬ 
 nage decreased . 55^ „ 
 
 While Norwegian tonnage increased. 13j „ 
 
 And at the same time our exports fell to every one of 
 these countries. But let us go on. 
 
 The Eeciprocity treaties apply chiefly to the coun¬ 
 tries of the Baltic. On an average of 1824 and 1825, 
 there passed the Sound, the era of the commencement 
 of the Reciprocity treaties, 
 
 British Ships, Foreign Ships, 
 
 4,363. 7,476. 
 
 And on an average of 1843 and 1844, after not quite 
 twenty years of the operation of these Treaties, there 
 passed the Sound 
 
 British Ships, 
 
 3,969. 
 
 Foreign Ships, 
 12,164. 
 
12 
 
 Shewing the British Commercial Marine to the 
 
 Baltic decreased . 394 Ships. 
 
 While the Foreign increased . 4688 „ 
 
 under the influences of these Treaties. 
 
 Is it possible to have clearer, or more startling 
 facts on the subject,—pointing to a course of utter 
 ruin to our Commercial Marine, if further subjected 
 to the same baneful influences ? 
 
 But how is this ? Can British Ships not compete 
 with Foreign P No —7 iot in cheapness of carriage. 
 But in construction, capabilitg, and in the daring shill 
 and industrg of their Seamen ? Yes—they infinitely 
 surpass them. Let us see the reasons for the only 
 superiority of Foreign Ships— Cheapness. 
 
 The people of Britain do not live like foreigners, 
 their magnificent physical powers originate not more 
 from their highly developed race, as the best com¬ 
 binations of the continental tribes, than from their 
 systematic good feeding. Many of the continental na¬ 
 tions, and their Seamen, seldom enjoy animal food; 
 their state of living is inferior and less abundant; 
 while our seamen enjoy animal food daily, often twice 
 a day, and abundance nourishes their magnificent 
 frames. This habit and disposition pervade every 
 class of British people. The crews of British Ships 
 consequently do not cost less than Is. per day each jnan 
 for provisions ; while Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, 
 Eussians, Prussians, and even French, cost little more 
 than 6d. per day each man. A British crew of ten 
 hands will consequently cost for food £618210 0 a year 
 while a Foreign crew will cost only about ^91 5 0. 
 
13 
 
 The wages at the same time, and from the same cause, 
 are proportionally greater in British than in Foreign 
 Vessels. The families of the crews of the former 
 require greater and more expensive supplies than those 
 of the latter; for this high labour price enters into 
 all that may he produced in Britain, enhancing their 
 cost. The same British Ship, with its captain at .£8, 
 its mate at £5, and its men at £62 5 0 per month, 
 will pay in wages, at least, ^330 per annum; while 
 the Foreign Ship, with its captain from £64 to £5, its 
 mate from <£2 to £3, and its men from .FI 5 0 to 
 £61 10 0 per month, will not exceed £6190 per an¬ 
 num ; giving an advantage on these two items alone, 
 provisions, and wages, of £6231 per annum to the 
 foreigner, in a vessel of about 280 tons. 
 
 The capital employed in British Vessels greatly 
 exceeds that in Foreign Vessels, which is another 
 element in relative cheapness. 
 
 A First-Class, Twelve-years, Brilish SMp (at 
 Lloyd’s,) of London, Liverpool, Glasgow, 
 and Sunderland, will not, on an average, 
 
 cost loss than.£17 10 per ton. 
 
 While a United States’ Ship of the same de¬ 
 scription costs. 14 10 „ 
 
 Holland . 14 0 
 
 France. 13 10 „ 
 
 Denmark and Norway . 12 0 „ 
 
 Bremen and Sweden ... 11 0 „ 
 
 Prussia . 9 10 
 
 Finland^. 8 10 „ 
 
 ' See Evidence before Commons Committee, of 1847, on Navigation Laws. 
 
14 
 
 Consequently the freight that would pay the British 
 Ship 5 per cent, on its capital, omitting even the dif¬ 
 ference in favour of the Foreigner in the items of pro¬ 
 visions and wages, would pay the United States ship 
 6j per cent., the Dutch 6|, the French 6J, the 
 Danish and Nonvegian 7f, the Bremen and Swedish 
 9, the Prussian 9^, and the Finlander 10_^ per cent, 
 enabling the whole of these Foreign Yessels, in an 
 unchecked competition, by the advantage of capital 
 alone, to reduce the average freights to so low a rate 
 as to press the British Ship out of employment—su¬ 
 perceding her. 
 
 While a Foreign Ship is in the freight market the 
 British Ship will not procure employment, from the 
 higher price she will of necessity have to demand. 
 Thus, while the British in the year will be making on 5 
 voyages, 25 per cent., the F oreign Ship will he making 
 from 31J per cent, up to 54| per cent., the lowest, 
 half the value of his vessel. But take in addition 
 the difference of expense for provisions and wages, 
 .£231, and make the deductions for repairs, insu¬ 
 rances, and wear and tear, and say the British Ship 
 cleared 5 per cent, in the year, whieh on an average of 
 years she seldom exceeds, the French will be clearing 
 12| per cent., the Prussian 18, and the Russian 19? 
 per cent. How easy then to press the 5 per cent, out of 
 existence that keep the British Ship afloat, and these 
 Foreign Vessels still enjoy enriching profits. The 
 thing is as clear as a mathematical demonstration. 
 The British Ship must as certainly disappear as effects 
 
15 
 
 follow causes, as soon as tlie Navigation Laws are 
 repealed, and the Foreigner has had time to accept 
 the boon. What is to save British Shipping ? Is 
 not the purpose of the repeal to introduce the cheap 
 vessel of the Foreigner ? If it be not that, what is 
 it ? If these laws do not sustain, as of old, British 
 Ships and Seamen, and they can sail as cheaply as 
 Foreigners, then these laws do not enhance the 
 prices, and there is no necessity for the purpose of 
 those so violently opposed to them, to repeal them, 
 and let in Foreign competition. 
 
 But if these Laws do sustain British Ships and 
 Seamen, then, by introducing Foreign Ships by their 
 repeal, you destroy to that amount British Ships. 
 Already British Shipping is subjected to the compe¬ 
 tition of the other interests of the country, which are 
 now exposed to, and ruled by Foreign prices to a great 
 extent, and did the shipping trade rise to exorbitant 
 profits, it would be immediately inundated from these 
 competing interests. But this is not so, because the 
 reduced position of British Ships will not sustain 
 further reduction either from the introduction of more 
 British capital, or of Foreign competition. 
 
 That un-English Committee of an unpatriotic 
 House of Commons need not waste the public time 
 and patience, in an affected solemn Inquiry whether 
 Foreign Ships can sail more cheaply than British, 
 and whether the operation of the Navigation Laws is 
 to protect British Shipping from ruinous Foreign com¬ 
 petition. We admit it—it cannot he denied —we 
 have made out their case for them. 
 
16 
 
 But with the difference of price you have reared 
 160,000 British Seamen,—an impregnable barrier 
 around your country;—lohich is well worth the money. 
 
 There cannot be a doubt that the Foreigner can 
 destroy British Shipping. It is the basis on 'which 
 the British Maritime Code has been erected. The 
 stronger the case that Committee makes out, the 
 stronger the case for British Shipping. The easier 
 that a Foreigner can undersell and destroy a British 
 Ship, the stronger the necessity for protecting the 
 British Ship. It has been reserved for this wise age 
 solemnly to doubt this axiom of our insular position. 
 
 But perhaps that philosophic Committee means to 
 assert, that the Commercial Marine is nothing to the 
 Country or the Navy. AU history tells them they 
 are in error—facts proclaim it—the common sense of 
 the people avouches it—^nay, the very House of Com¬ 
 mons, which in a weak moment generated this Com¬ 
 mittee, thus powerfully confirms it:—“ Whereas the 
 prosperity, strength, and safety of the United King¬ 
 dom and her Majesty's Dominions do greatly depend 
 on a large, constant, and ready supply of Seamen, and 
 it is therefore expedient to promote the increase of the 
 number of Seamen, and to afford them all due encou¬ 
 ragement and protection.”* 
 
 Do the prosperity, strength, and safety of the 
 United Kingdom, and her Majesty’s Dominions de- 
 
 • Angnst, 1844. Pieamble of “An Act to consolidate the Laws relat¬ 
 ing to Merchant Seamen, and for keeping a Registry of Seamen.” 
 
17 
 
 pend now, in 1847, less on “ a large, constant, and 
 ready supply of seamen” than they did in 1844? In 
 what is their position changed ? Nothing, hut in this. 
 A small conclave of greedy politicians, traitors in their 
 acts, whatever their intentions, are desirous, under 
 the semblance of a philosophy, which on this point its 
 founder denounces, to destroy that great source of 
 " the prosperity, strength, and safety” of the British 
 empire, that they may the more freely pander to the 
 insatiable lust for wealth, that is producing disease in 
 the whole body politic; and that House of Commons, 
 which enunciated so true a declaration has lent itself 
 for the moment, to the criminal proceeding, and madly 
 made war on the best interests of the country. 
 Previous to the last false step, and since its magni¬ 
 ficent preamble, that House of Commons, in its sec¬ 
 tional Committees, has reiterated its noble spirit. 
 
 The Select Committee on the Merchant Seamen s 
 Bill reports, that a comprehensive measure was ne¬ 
 cessary “to hold out to seamen additional induce¬ 
 ments to remain in the service of their Countri/." 
 
 Such as stock fish, black bread, rusk, train oil, and 
 sour krout, with twenty-five shillings a month wages 
 for their families. 
 
 The Tidal Harbours Commission, aaain. reports in 
 a similar spirit:—“We would, therefore, strongly 
 urge such assistance, not only on economical, but on 
 political grounds of the highest importance to the ma¬ 
 ritime interests of the Kingdom, as the Coasting Trade 
 has ever been the best nursery for the hardy race of 
 
18 
 
 Seamen, who have so ably maintained the honour and 
 ■power of this Country." 
 
 Sensible and wise men! they are preparing the in¬ 
 troduction of Foreign Ships and Foreign Crews to 
 assist that “hardy race of seamen” to maintain "the 
 honour and power of the Country.” 
 
 Since which, the Committee on Light Houses adds: 
 “ That from the evidence before the Committee, the 
 Coasting Trade which has, beyond all other Trades, 
 afforded to the Navy the largest supply of the hardiest 
 of our Seamen, is likely to decrease, unless Parlia¬ 
 ment shall adopt timely measures to protect it." Let 
 the Coasting Trade rejoice, and prepare to increase 
 for the “ timely measures” are at hand “ to protect 
 it.” The repeal of the Navigation Laws. Which 
 when accomplished, will bring all the cheap rovers 
 on the ocean to increase and “ protect it.” Sagacious 
 legislators! 
 
 Throughout all these Parliamentary declarations 
 stands forth the principle that the Commercial Marine 
 is the strength and safety of the Country. Then, 
 destroying it, is destroying that strength and safety. 
 The preservation of the Coasting Trade will not be 
 enough, besides, it would be inconsistent to select 
 particular descriptions of voyages for foreign competi¬ 
 tion and close it to others. This unyielding princi¬ 
 ple, so much discanted on, if the protection of the 
 Country is not admitted to overrule it, must be 
 equally applied to all. 
 
 The Coasting Trade possesses only 45,000 Seamen, 
 
19 
 
 the best and hardiest in the world, certainly, Uuu mat 
 is not the moiety of what would be required in a great 
 and sudden war. In thirty years, with the present 
 ratio of progression, the United States, hy their 
 protective Navigation Laws, will have 160,000 Sea 
 men in their Commercial Marine. How if a war 
 with that Country, conjoined with any other naval 
 power, break out in a few years, and your own 
 discarded Seamen at the enemies’ guns'? Where will 
 the strength and safety of the Country he then P 
 You had a sample of it in the last American War. 
 Even within the memory of man, in 1779, a union of 
 the French and Spanish Fleets drove the British 
 Navy from the seas; Sir Charles Hardy and the 
 Channel Fleet were obliged to run to port, “ and the 
 enemy’s flag rode triumphantly on the British Coast,” 
 as Smollet expresses it. Then, as during the whole 
 of the last war, and as now, the ever-ready Seamen 
 of the Commercial Marine retrieved this dishonour, 
 and secured the Country’s integrity. Then, as now, 
 our only national safety. 
 
 Even at this moment, with the 100,000 Seamen of 
 the United States, and a preponderating European 
 hostility, they are dangerous competitors. Away, 
 then, with such folly as the repeal of the Navigation 
 Laws, the reduction of the British Commercial Ma¬ 
 rine, and its substitution hy the cheap foreigner :— 
 it is nothing less than insanity. 
 
 Adam Smith, whom you profess to honour as the 
 great apostle of Free Trade, forbids it. In Book IV, 
 
20 
 
 ch. II of his Wealth of Nations, he solemnly an¬ 
 nounces to you,— “As defence is of much more impor¬ 
 tance than opulence the Act of Navigation is perhaps 
 the wisest of all the commercial regulations of Eng¬ 
 land.” 
 
 If the Act of Navigation he “ the wisest of all the 
 commercial regulations of England,” what must he 
 those men that would repeal it‘? We can eat foreign 
 com and wear foreign cloth, hut we cannot defend 
 Britain hy Foreign SaUors. The Romans before tried 
 mercenaries and lost their country. Nor can seamen 
 he made in an instant—they must he grown from their 
 infancy. The French and Russians do so— and fail 
 in the great material of a Navy. The Commercial 
 Marine is the sole means of production of hardy and 
 experienced Seamen—and they are the Navy—not 
 our Ships. 
 
 Defence is not only of more importance than opu¬ 
 lence, hut it is all important; for hy it not only is 
 opulence secured its enjoyment, hut the state its ex¬ 
 istence. Whenever defence is lost, opulence can no 
 longer exist, its very abundance will bring in upon it 
 speedy destmction. Of all defences for Britain, the 
 best and cheapest is a peaceful Commercial Marine; 
 it never sleeps: it is always ready; and it sentinels 
 the land while pouring upon its country abun¬ 
 dance and wealth, and it diffuses over the world 
 the advantages of civilization and the arts, and the 
 principles of liberty. It can never encroach upon 
 the public liber-ties,—it can easily be concentrated in 
 
21 
 
 armed fleets,—and it keeps far off tke terrible scenes 
 of war. It is the bond of connexion with your outly¬ 
 ing Colonies—the cement of your colossal empire— 
 and the very soul of your national existence. 
 
 Electors! The Navigation Laws, which secure to 
 British Vessels the Coasting Trade, the British Eu¬ 
 ropean Carrying Trade, except produce of their res¬ 
 pective countries, which may he brought in their 
 own ships; the Colonial Carrying Trade, and that 
 of Asia, Africa, and America, with exceptions that 
 modify, hut do not destroy, the maiu object of these 
 Laws,-—whose spirit has been the source of your 
 Commercial Marine, and the strength of Britain for 
 many ages; these Laws they are seeking in a hostile 
 Parliamentary Committee to repeal, and to supersede 
 British Ships by Foreign Vessels. 
 
 Electors! In this great crisis the destinies of 
 your Country, to a great extent, are in your hands. 
 It becomes the constituencies of Sea-Ports especially 
 not to flinch now from their duties. It is a fortunate 
 dispensation of Providence that the Country is at so 
 critical a juncture, placed again at its own disposal. 
 It depends upon the constituencies to return such 
 English-hearted men to Parliament, as will protect the 
 national honour and safety, by securing the Commer¬ 
 cial Marine, from destruction. No Sea-Port should 
 return a man who is not firm in his support of the 
 maritime system of Britain—the system of ages— 
 the system of prosperity and strength, which has 
 developed and protected a richer and greater Empire 
 
22 
 
 than before these times the world ever saw. It were 
 treason to itself, and its country, for a Sea-Port not 
 to sustain this system to the utmost. Shipowners, 
 Sailors, and Shipwrights, it is especially your ques¬ 
 tion ; hut it is also that of your country; for through 
 yon its enemies are about to strike a mortal blow at 
 its existence. 
 
 Every Sea-port can not only secure its own mem¬ 
 bers, supporters of our national maritime system, but 
 it may influence, if it cannot command, an adherence 
 to this system, of every member of its respective 
 county. The numerous county electors of large 
 and populous sea-ports hold in their hands the repre¬ 
 sentation of their counties. A finn union on this 
 great common object is the only thing needed. The 
 distinction of parties should be sunk—the voice of 
 factions hushed before the deep voice of your Country 
 calling for your assistance. It depends upon you 
 whether your country shall continue in its career of 
 greatness. Failing your duties now, your children, 
 if not yourselves, will be plunged into national diffi¬ 
 culties that will in their time be too late to avert, and 
 win eventually overwhelm them. 
 
 The integrity of the Country broken up—the Em¬ 
 pire in fragments—and her great name, that rever¬ 
 berates and rules around the globe, will be only a 
 memory or a record—and other greater and wiser 
 people, taught by your fatal example, will arise in 
 your stead. This is no ordinary contest—no party 
 coirflict—^but the struggle of a great nation for her 
 
23 
 
 safety and independence, her glory, and her strength. 
 Let us bury every party consideration at so sacred a 
 moment, and let us unite with a firm determination 
 of acting for one common glorious object—and that 
 object our Country. 
 
 Let us invoke the spirit that has animated the Sea- 
 service of Britain in every age. Let us, inspired by 
 it, meet the treacherous enemy with the same reso¬ 
 lution with which the men of that service always 
 met your foes—and a similar triumph will he yours. 
 
 Let us fight for it which has always fought for us. 
 
 The genius of your Country calls to you from the 
 deep—the voice of ten centuries rolls over the land, 
 and rouses it to the struggle. 
 
 In this battle “England expects that emvg man 
 will do his dtitg." 
 
 By doing so, a national victory, more important 
 and pei-manent than that of the greatest naval battle 
 ever won, will be achieved. 
 
 It is the battle of your Country. 
 
 Be united and determined and victory is yours. 
 
 FINIS.