It is disgraceful that our MARINE is not directly represented in the British Parliament. Is it possible that every clown in England, who is owner of a few acres or miserable hovel, is carried to the poll,—and that our shipping interest, and brave seamen, to whom the rest of the nation is indebted “for all they have, and almost all they know,” are passed over—have not one direct representative—have not even one direct vote, and that their interest is totally neglected[33]? Will it be credited that our most sage legislators, as if on purpose to ruin our marine, have laid on a tax of L. 4 per load (above 1s. 7d. per solid foot) on oak-plank, and L. 2, 15s. per load on rough oak-timber, imported from other nations; which, as only a small part of what is (not of what would be) used, is so derived, at the same time that it raises the price of the whole[34] nearly 100 per cent., tends comparatively little to swell the revenue,—nearly the whole of the high monopoly price reverting to our landholders and our grateful Canadian {136} colony? As about a load (50 solid feet) of timber is required for the construction of a ton of trading shipping, this duty, together with the high duty on hemp, increases the cost of our vessels nearly L. 4 per register ton, independent of the higher price of building and sailing them, from other monopolies; and it is only from the very superior skill, honesty and industry of our seamen[35], that our shipping, since the peace, under this very great disadvantage, has been at all enabled to compete with foreign. At Shields and Newcastle a new merchant-vessel of oak, rigged and ready for sea, uncoppered, can be purchased for L. 10 per register ton. Were the price, by the removal of monopoly, reduced to L. 6 per ton, scarcely a foreign bottom, American excepted, would compete with British, in the carrying trade, or would enter a British port. Can it be believed that our very liberal late minister (Mr Huskisson), and our very non-liberal member for Newark (Mr Sadler), have both made a _full_ exposè of the distresses of our shipping interest, and not once have adverted to the _cause_ of this, and of the comparative decline of our naval preponderance—_the very high duty on the_ {137} _material_? Does our Government perceive the rapid strides which our rival brothers in America are making to surpass us in marine—and will it be so besotted as continue laws to the speedy fulfilment of this?