History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 3 (of 4)Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
History
History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 3 (of 4)
Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
Commerce -- History; Shipping -- History; Steam navigation -- History
Lord Winchelsea, a staunch Conservative, complained that the measure
had been carried by the votes of the bishops; and warned them of the
danger of carrying secular matters injurious to the best interests
of the country by their votes, as in that case England would wish to
see Convocation restored, and the bishops represented by a few of
their body. Lord Stanley and Lord Brougham satisfied themselves with
saying, “Non-content,” and inveighing against the Bill to the last. The
Marquess of Lansdowne replied; and the opposition Peers now withdrew in
a body, and the Bill was read a third time.
On the question “that the Bill do now pass,” the Bishop of Oxford
proposed to add a clause by way of rider declaring that “the said
privileges” should not extend to the ships of Spain or Brazil, or to
the ships of any foreign country, until the Queen should declare by
Order in Council that such governments had given full satisfaction
as to the fulfilment of the treaties respecting the suppression of
the slave-trade. The motion was resisted by Lord Howden in a very
argumentative speech, and rejected upon a division by—Non-contents, 23;
Contents, 9.
[Sidenote: Lord Stanley’s protest.]
The various reasons urged against the Bill for the repeal of the
Navigation Laws were briefly summed up by Lord Stanley in a protest
which he entered on the Journals of the House against the third
reading.[129] In this protest the great advantages we surrendered,
without any equivalent, were fully recited; and a dissent expressed,
because the Royal Navy was mainly dependent for its efficiency upon
the commercial marine, and the classes of the community connected
therewith. This Bill, he urged, by discouraging the employment of
British shipbuilders, ships, and seamen, tended directly to the
reduction of the commercial marine, and, thereby, to the diminution of
that naval strength which was the main foundation of the greatness of
this country, and the surest defence of its independence.
[Sidenote: Royal assent given June 26.]
But all remonstrances, denunciations, petitions, and protests were
disregarded. The Bill passed the House of Lords on the 12th June; and,
although a petition from the Shipowners[130] was presented to the Queen
by Sir George Grey praying her Majesty to withhold her approval of the
Bill, the Royal assent was given on the 26th of that month, and thus
the Navigation Laws of Great Britain, which had endured practically
unchallenged during two centuries, were almost utterly abrogated.
[Sidenote: Coasting trade thrown open, 1854.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account