ENGLISH BANQUET IN PARIS— THE QUESTION OF FREE TRADE.

Thames Star, Volume X, Issue 3146, 19 March 1879, Page 2

ENGLISH BANQUET IN PARIS— THE QUESTION OF FREE TRADE.

The annual banquet of the British Chamber of Commerce in Paris was held on Dec. 31 at the Cafe Biche, under the presidency of Mr Pilter. Forty^fire guests were present, including Sir Philip Cunliffe Owen. M. Leroy Beaulieu, Captain Harris, Mr Murray, &c. At the conclusion of the banquet, the Chairman proposed toasts in honor of Queen Victoria, Marshal MacMahon, and the Prince of Wales, all of which were receired with loud applause. The next health proposed was that of Sir Philip Owen, who in his

reply referred to the aid he had received from the British Chamber of Commerce in Paris in the organisation of the Ezhition, and declared that the Exhibition had served to cement the friendship of France and England, who would henceforth be able to appreciate each other.' In conclusion, Sir Philip said that the success of the English section of the Exhibition had been .in a great measure due to the efforts of the Prince of Wales.

Mr Murray, tire secretary of the Chamber of Commerce, next proposed"Free Trade." He admitted that the present crisis in England wast/of a serious character, and attacked productions of all kinds. This circumstance had created doubts as to the necessity of freetrade. The Dniled Statesj Austria, Italy, and Germany, were establishing protective duties, anAin England the new schoojkr were asking for compensatory duties qf.| 50 per cent, upon.,articles, of foreign 1 manufacture. Mr Murray proceeded to explain that the present state of' things was, in point of fact, different from/what it was formerly, when railways, steamboats, and = erery facility, vfor coUecting raw material were almost ftee" monopoly of ; England, Iwhoi o'wfe-0 oyer, had colonies which afforded an outlet for her productions. To-day matters wereideDtical every where* |bfar as regarded raw material and apparatus, • but on the other hand the conditions Were different. In England fifty-four hours^of work were performed pej week, JwherWi^ in foreign countries the hands worked for seventy-two hours, and besides that, the fifty-four hours of labourin. England were .... paid for at a higher rate than the seventy*? two in other countries. Then the restric- '*" tions with regard to labou» were creator in England than in France. These wete the causes which led.,to the commercial , crisis in England. In terminating his speech, Mr Murray pointed out the*neces>' ■ sity of turning attention to the education 7 of workmen. •,..;,,.,■„ M. Leroy Beaulieu alto spoke in favor of free bade. He contended that the present crisis in trade r^ras due to the series, of. ; wars, r with, their changes and' disasters, and to the growth of the armies of all nations since4B6o, and it #as'im> |/l possible to make free , tirade responsible for a crisis cf which it was merely the victim. The Powers were in a, state of mutual uncertainty and disquietude, bait there was no real cause for this., state of things. France had not been impoverished . by free trade; but, on the contrary, had gained by it. M. Beaulieu attacked Prince "Bismarck for having stated that < the burden of protective duties fe'l upba I the foreign producers; and not upon i!;e consumer at home. He conoluded by:r declaring that there was no need to det* ; pair of attaining commercial freedom^ which would triumph when peace^ was restored to Europe. That it was; which li; all must seek to obtain. Free trade mad*: slow progress, but it never receded. c,!,iv Mr Pollock, a member of the Chamber ;,- of Commerce, protested against free trade,, ; by which, he maintained, England gave j everything and received nothing., He insisted on the necessity of reciprocity, W without which free trade was an impbssu bility.—Home News. sol*